Other Translations: Deutsch , Srpski
From: ,
Dīgha Nikāya 9 Long Discourses 9
Poṭṭhapādasutta With Poṭṭhapāda
1. Poṭṭhapādaparibbājakavatthu 1. On the Wanderer Poṭṭhapāda
Evaṁ me sutaṁ—So I have heard.
ekaṁ samayaṁ bhagavā sāvatthiyaṁ viharati jetavane anāthapiṇḍikassa ārāme. At one time the Buddha was staying near Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery.
Tena kho pana samayena poṭṭhapādo paribbājako samayappavādake tindukācīre ekasālake mallikāya ārāme paṭivasati mahatiyā paribbājakaparisāya saddhiṁ tiṁsamattehi paribbājakasatehi. Now at that time the wanderer Poṭṭhapāda was residing together with three hundred wanderers in Mallikā’s single-halled monastery for philosophical debates, hedged by pale-moon ebony trees. Poṭṭhapāda appears only here; he was named for a month of the lunar calendar (August/September). | Mallikā was the chief queen of Pasenadi, and her hall is mentioned in a similar context at MN 78:1.3. The commentary explains that the brahmins, Jains, and others would assemble there to “debate their beliefs” (samayaṁ pavadanti). Evidently the monastery grounds had accommodation for many ascetics of different beliefs, but only “one hall” where they would gather for debate. We hear many times of such debates, but here we catch a glimpse of a place that was set up to facilitate them. For -ācīra, read in the sense of “boundary, hedge” (commentary: timbarūrukkhapantiyā parikkhittattā; cf. Sanskrit prācīra, “enclosure, hedge, fence, wall”).
Atha kho bhagavā pubbaṇhasamayaṁ nivāsetvā pattacīvaramādāya sāvatthiṁ piṇḍāya pāvisi. Then the Buddha robed up in the morning and, taking his bowl and robe, entered Sāvatthī for alms.
Atha kho bhagavato etadahosi: Then it occurred to him,
“atippago kho tāva sāvatthiyaṁ piṇḍāya carituṁ. “It’s too early to wander for alms in Sāvatthī. According to the commentary, when he approached the vicinity of the city gate, he decided to check the position of the sun and noticed that it was too early to enter. The commentary and sub-commentary explain that it only sounds like the Buddha was in doubt, for Buddhas deliberate before deciding on a course of action.
Yannūnāhaṁ yena samayappavādako tindukācīro ekasālako mallikāya ārāmo, yena poṭṭhapādo paribbājako tenupasaṅkameyyan”ti. Why don’t I go to Mallikā’s monastery to visit the wanderer Poṭṭhapāda?” This can be understood as answering the criticism voiced in DN 8:22.2, that the Buddha was afraid to speak in an assembly.
Atha kho bhagavā yena samayappavādako tindukācīro ekasālako mallikāya ārāmo tenupasaṅkami. So that’s what he did.
Tena kho pana samayena poṭṭhapādo paribbājako mahatiyā paribbājakaparisāya saddhiṁ nisinno hoti unnādiniyā uccāsaddamahāsaddāya anekavihitaṁ tiracchānakathaṁ kathentiyā. Now at that time, Poṭṭhapāda was sitting together with a large assembly of wanderers making an uproar, a colossal racket. They engaged in all kinds of low talk, such as In contrast with the silence of the Buddha’s community at DN 2:10.7.
Seyyathidaṁ—rājakathaṁ corakathaṁ mahāmattakathaṁ senākathaṁ bhayakathaṁ yuddhakathaṁ annakathaṁ pānakathaṁ vatthakathaṁ sayanakathaṁ mālākathaṁ gandhakathaṁ ñātikathaṁ yānakathaṁ gāmakathaṁ nigamakathaṁ nagarakathaṁ janapadakathaṁ itthikathaṁ sūrakathaṁ visikhākathaṁ kumbhaṭṭhānakathaṁ pubbapetakathaṁ nānattakathaṁ lokakkhāyikaṁ samuddakkhāyikaṁ itibhavābhavakathaṁ iti vā. talk about kings, bandits, and chief ministers; talk about armies, threats, and wars; talk about food, drink, clothes, and beds; talk about garlands and fragrances; talk about family, vehicles, villages, towns, cities, and countries; talk about women and heroes; talk at the street market and the place for water pots; talk about the departed; motley talk; tales of land and sea; and talk about being reborn in this or that place.
Addasā kho poṭṭhapādo paribbājako bhagavantaṁ dūratova āgacchantaṁ; Poṭṭhapāda saw the Buddha coming off in the distance,
disvāna sakaṁ parisaṁ saṇṭhapesi: and hushed his own assembly,
“appasaddā bhonto hontu, mā bhonto saddamakattha. “Be quiet, good fellows, don’t make a sound.
Ayaṁ samaṇo gotamo āgacchati. Here comes the ascetic Gotama.
Appasaddakāmo kho so āyasmā appasaddassa vaṇṇavādī. The venerable likes quiet and praises quiet.
Appeva nāma appasaddaṁ parisaṁ viditvā upasaṅkamitabbaṁ maññeyyā”ti. Hopefully if he sees that our assembly is quiet he’ll see fit to approach.” The Buddha encourages quiet for the sake of mental development; Poṭṭhapāda does it for the sake of reputation.
Evaṁ vutte, te paribbājakā tuṇhī ahesuṁ. Then those wanderers fell silent.
Atha kho bhagavā yena poṭṭhapādo paribbājako tenupasaṅkami. Then the Buddha approached Poṭṭhapāda,
Atha kho poṭṭhapādo paribbājako bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: who said to him,
“etu kho, bhante, bhagavā. “Let the Blessed One come, sir! Poṭṭhapāda’s address is almost overly deferential.
Svāgataṁ, bhante, bhagavato. Welcome to the Blessed One, sir!
Cirassaṁ kho, bhante, bhagavā imaṁ pariyāyamakāsi, yadidaṁ idhāgamanāya. It’s been a long time since you took the opportunity to come here.
Nisīdatu, bhante, bhagavā, idaṁ āsanaṁ paññattan”ti. Please, sir, sit down, here, a seat is ready.”
Nisīdi bhagavā paññatte āsane. The Buddha sat down on the seat spread out,
Poṭṭhapādopi kho paribbājako aññataraṁ nīcaṁ āsanaṁ gahetvā ekamantaṁ nisīdi. while Poṭṭhapāda took a low seat and sat to one side.
Ekamantaṁ nisinnaṁ kho poṭṭhapādaṁ paribbājakaṁ bhagavā etadavoca: The Buddha said to him,
“kāya nuttha, poṭṭhapāda, etarahi kathāya sannisinnā, kā ca pana vo antarākathā vippakatā”ti? “Poṭṭhapāda, what were you sitting talking about just now? What conversation was left unfinished?” Always polite, the Buddha begins by showing an interest in them.
1.1. Abhisaññānirodhakathā 1.1. On the Cessation of Perception
Evaṁ vutte, poṭṭhapādo paribbājako bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: When he said this, the wanderer Poṭṭhapāda said to the Buddha,
“tiṭṭhatesā, bhante, kathā, yāya mayaṁ etarahi kathāya sannisinnā. “Sir, leave aside what we were sitting talking about just now.
Nesā, bhante, kathā bhagavato dullabhā bhavissati pacchāpi savanāya. It won’t be hard for you to hear about that later.
Purimāni, bhante, divasāni purimatarāni, nānātitthiyānaṁ samaṇabrāhmaṇānaṁ kotūhalasālāya sannisinnānaṁ sannipatitānaṁ abhisaññānirodhe kathā udapādi: Sir, a few days ago several ascetics and brahmins who follow various other religions were sitting together at the debating hall, and a discussion about the cessation of perception came up among them: Abhisaññā does not appear elsewhere. Here the prefix abhi- means not “higher”, but rather “about, concerning”. Compare abhidhamma at MN 32:8.6: dve bhikkhū abhidhammakathaṁ kathenti (“two mendicants engage in discussion about the teaching”); also abhivinaya at AN 3.140:4.4. The commentary here says abhi- is a mere particle, so it need not be translated.
‘kathaṁ nu kho, bho, abhisaññānirodho hotī’ti? ‘How does the cessation of perception happen?’ This discussion appears to have been directly sparked by the difficult passage in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 2.4.12 and 4.5.13. The sage Yājñavalkya, teaching his wife Maitreyī, says that the true Self is a sheer mass of “consciousness” (vijñāna, Pali viññāṇa), which is “great, endless, infinite reality”. After realizing this, he says, there is no “perception” (saṁjñā, Pali saññā), a statement that bewilders even the wise Maitreyī. He explains that only in an apparent state of duality (dvaitamiva) do the separate functions of sense consciousness operate. When all is realized as the Self, how, he asks, can one know that owing to which all this is known? He is implicitly distinguishing between viññāna as “infinite” (= vi-) knowing and saññā as “constrained” (saṁ-) knowing. Yājñavalkya says the separate Self emerges with these elements and vanishes with them (etebhyo bhūtebhyaḥ samutthāya tānyevānu vinaśyati), but he does not explain how or why this happens, which is the question the theorists here attempt to address.
Tatrekacce evamāhaṁsu: Some of them said:
‘ahetū appaccayā purisassa saññā uppajjantipi nirujjhantipi. ‘A person’s perceptions arise and cease without cause or reason. Here perception is not identified with the “person” (purisa), but rather belongs to them (cf. etaṁ mama, “this is mine”). In the discussion to follow, the Buddha only directly addresses this theory, while the remainder are included by inference.
Yasmiṁ samaye uppajjanti, saññī tasmiṁ samaye hoti. When they arise, you become percipient.
Yasmiṁ samaye nirujjhanti, asaññī tasmiṁ samaye hotī’ti. When they cease, you become non-percipient.’
Ittheke abhisaññānirodhaṁ paññapenti. That’s how some describe the cessation of perception.
Tamañño evamāha: But someone else says:
‘na kho pana metaṁ, bho, evaṁ bhavissati. ‘That’s not how it is, good fellows! This idiom is also at SN 47.19:1.10.
Saññā hi, bho, purisassa attā. Perception is a person’s self, The self is defined as perception (eso me attā), one of the five aggregates. Compare the various theories of the self and perception at DN 1:2.38.0.
Sā ca kho upetipi apetipi. which enters and departs.
Yasmiṁ samaye upeti, saññī tasmiṁ samaye hoti. When it enters, you become percipient.
Yasmiṁ samaye apeti, asaññī tasmiṁ samaye hotī’ti. When it departs, you become non-percipient.’ Implying that at such times a person lacks a “self”. This is perhaps related to Yājñavalkya’s: “That man, when born, acquiring a body, is connected with ills (the bodily organs); and when he dies, departing, he discards those ills” (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.3.8).
Ittheke abhisaññānirodhaṁ paññapenti. That’s how some describe the cessation of perception.
Tamañño evamāha: But someone else says:
‘na kho pana metaṁ, bho, evaṁ bhavissati. ‘That’s not how it is, good fellows!
Santi hi, bho, samaṇabrāhmaṇā mahiddhikā mahānubhāvā. There are ascetics and brahmins of great power and might. The commentary says these were devotees of āthabbaṇa, i.e the practices preserved in the Atharvaveda. This “fourth Veda” is mentioned only once by name in the early Pali (Snp 4.14:13.1), where, as here, it is associated with the performance of magic and the casting of spells. The commentary fairly drips with contempt: “Allegedly, the Āthabbaṇa practitioners cast a spell, showing a creature’s head as if cut off, or their hand as if cut off, or as if dead. Then they show them back to normal; imagining so, they say, ‘From cessation they have arisen.’”
Te imassa purisassa saññaṁ upakaḍḍhantipi apakaḍḍhantipi. They insert and extract a person’s perception. See DN 29:16.20 for upakaḍḍhati and apakaḍḍhati in this sense.
Yasmiṁ samaye upakaḍḍhanti, saññī tasmiṁ samaye hoti. When they insert it, you become percipient.
Yasmiṁ samaye apakaḍḍhanti, asaññī tasmiṁ samaye hotī’ti. When they extract it, you become non-percipient.’
Ittheke abhisaññānirodhaṁ paññapenti. That’s how some describe the cessation of perception.
Tamañño evamāha: But someone else says:
‘na kho pana metaṁ, bho, evaṁ bhavissati. ‘That’s not how it is, good fellows!
Santi hi, bho, devatā mahiddhikā mahānubhāvā. There are deities of great power and might.
Tā imassa purisassa saññaṁ upakaḍḍhantipi apakaḍḍhantipi. They insert and extract a person’s perception.
Yasmiṁ samaye upakaḍḍhanti, saññī tasmiṁ samaye hoti. When they insert it, you become percipient.
Yasmiṁ samaye apakaḍḍhanti, asaññī tasmiṁ samaye hotī’ti. When they extract it, you become non-percipient.’
Ittheke abhisaññānirodhaṁ paññapenti. That’s how some describe the cessation of perception.
Tassa mayhaṁ, bhante, bhagavantaṁyeva ārabbha sati udapādi: That reminded me of the Buddha:
‘aho nūna bhagavā, aho nūna sugato, yo imesaṁ dhammānaṁ sukusalo’ti. ‘Surely it must be the Blessed One, the Holy One who is so very skilled in such matters.’
Bhagavā, bhante, kusalo, bhagavā pakataññū abhisaññānirodhassa. The Buddha is skilled and well-versed concerning the cessation of perception. Pakataññū is not elsewhere attested in the suttas, but it is found in the Vinaya, for example at Bu Pc 72:1.8.
Kathaṁ nu kho, bhante, abhisaññānirodho hotī”ti? How does the cessation of perception happen?”
1.2. Sahetukasaññuppādanirodhakathā 1.2. Perception Arises With a Cause
“Tatra, poṭṭhapāda, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā evamāhaṁsu: “Regarding this, Poṭṭhapāda, those ascetics and brahmins who say that
‘ahetū appaccayā purisassa saññā uppajjantipi nirujjhantipī’ti, āditova tesaṁ aparaddhaṁ. a person’s perceptions arise and cease without cause or reason are wrong from the start.
Taṁ kissa hetu? Why is that?
Sahetū hi, poṭṭhapāda, sappaccayā purisassa saññā uppajjantipi nirujjhantipi. Because a person’s perceptions arise and cease with cause and reason.
Sikkhā ekā saññā uppajjati, sikkhā ekā saññā nirujjhati. With training, certain perceptions arise and certain perceptions cease. Here the Buddha argues that, since it is possible to change the nature of one’s own mind through practice, such changes cannot be random.
Kā ca sikkhā”ti? Bhagavā avoca. And what is that training?” said the Buddha. It is unusual to add “said the Buddha” (bhagavā avoca) in such a context. Normally, once a speaker starts, the text does not insert extra tags identifying the speaker without a reason, such as an interruption for a question.
“Idha, poṭṭhapāda, tathāgato loke uppajjati arahaṁ, sammāsambuddho …pe… “It’s when a Realized One arises in the world, perfected, a fully awakened Buddha …
Evaṁ kho, poṭṭhapāda, bhikkhu sīlasampanno hoti That’s how a mendicant is accomplished in ethics. … Sinhalese manuscripts, followed by PTS, include the paragraphs on the metaphor of the king’s security (DN 2:63.1) and on guarding the sense doors here.
…pe…
tassime pañcanīvaraṇe pahīne attani samanupassato pāmojjaṁ jāyati, pamuditassa pīti jāyati, pītimanassa kāyo passambhati, passaddhakāyo sukhaṁ vedeti, sukhino cittaṁ samādhiyati. Seeing that the hindrances have been given up in them, joy springs up. Being joyful, rapture springs up. When the mind is full of rapture, the body becomes tranquil. When the body is tranquil, they feel bliss. And when blissful, the mind becomes immersed.
So vivicceva kāmehi, vivicca akusalehi dhammehi, savitakkaṁ savicāraṁ vivekajaṁ pītisukhaṁ paṭhamaṁ jhānaṁ upasampajja viharati. Quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities, they enter and remain in the first absorption, which has the rapture and bliss born of seclusion, while placing the mind and keeping it connected.
Tassa yā purimā kāmasaññā, sā nirujjhati. The sensual perception that they had previously ceases. Progress through the jhānas is explained in terms of the refining of perceptions.
Vivekajapītisukhasukhumasaccasaññā tasmiṁ samaye hoti, vivekajapītisukhasukhumasaccasaññīyeva tasmiṁ samaye hoti. At that time they have a subtle and true perception of the rapture and bliss born of seclusion. “Subtle and true” is sukhumasacca, a term that appears only here.
Evampi sikkhā ekā saññā uppajjati, sikkhā ekā saññā nirujjhati. That’s how, with training, certain perceptions arise and certain perceptions cease.
Ayaṁ sikkhā”ti bhagavā avoca. And this is that training,” said the Buddha.
“Puna caparaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, bhikkhu vitakkavicārānaṁ vūpasamā ajjhattaṁ sampasādanaṁ cetaso ekodibhāvaṁ avitakkaṁ avicāraṁ samādhijaṁ pītisukhaṁ dutiyaṁ jhānaṁ upasampajja viharati. “Furthermore, as the placing of the mind and keeping it connected are stilled, a mendicant enters and remains in the second absorption, which has the rapture and bliss born of immersion, with internal clarity and mind at one, without placing the mind and keeping it connected.
Tassa yā purimā vivekajapītisukhasukhumasaccasaññā, sā nirujjhati. The subtle and true perception of the rapture and bliss born of seclusion that they had previously ceases.
Samādhijapītisukhasukhumasaccasaññā tasmiṁ samaye hoti, samādhijapītisukhasukhumasaccasaññīyeva tasmiṁ samaye hoti. At that time they have a subtle and true perception of the rapture and bliss born of immersion.
Evampi sikkhā ekā saññā uppajjati, sikkhā ekā saññā nirujjhati. That’s how, with training, certain perceptions arise and certain perceptions cease.
Ayampi sikkhā”ti bhagavā avoca. And this is that training,” said the Buddha.
“Puna caparaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, bhikkhu pītiyā ca virāgā upekkhako ca viharati sato ca sampajāno, sukhañca kāyena paṭisaṁvedeti, yaṁ taṁ ariyā ācikkhanti: ‘upekkhako satimā sukhavihārī’ti, tatiyaṁ jhānaṁ upasampajja viharati. “Furthermore, with the fading away of rapture, a mendicant enters and remains in the third absorption, where they meditate with equanimity, mindful and aware, experiencing for themselves the bliss of which the noble ones declare, ‘Equanimous and mindful, one meditates in bliss.’
Tassa yā purimā samādhijapītisukhasukhumasaccasaññā, sā nirujjhati. The subtle and true perception of the rapture and bliss born of immersion that they had previously ceases.
Upekkhāsukhasukhumasaccasaññā tasmiṁ samaye hoti, upekkhāsukhasukhumasaccasaññīyeva tasmiṁ samaye hoti. At that time they have a subtle and true perception of bliss with equanimity.
Evampi sikkhā ekā saññā uppajjati, sikkhā ekā saññā nirujjhati. That’s how, with training, certain perceptions arise and certain perceptions cease.
Ayampi sikkhā”ti bhagavā avoca. And this is that training,” said the Buddha.
“Puna caparaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, bhikkhu sukhassa ca pahānā dukkhassa ca pahānā pubbeva somanassadomanassānaṁ atthaṅgamā adukkhamasukhaṁ upekkhāsatipārisuddhiṁ catutthaṁ jhānaṁ upasampajja viharati. “Furthermore, with the giving up of pleasure and pain and the disappearance of former happiness and sadness, a mendicant enters and remains in the fourth absorption, without pleasure or pain, with pure equanimity and mindfulness.
Tassa yā purimā upekkhāsukhasukhumasaccasaññā, sā nirujjhati. The subtle and true perception of bliss with equanimity that they had previously ceases.
Adukkhamasukhasukhumasaccasaññā tasmiṁ samaye hoti, adukkhamasukhasukhumasaccasaññīyeva tasmiṁ samaye hoti. At that time they have a subtle and true perception of neutral feeling.
Evampi sikkhā ekā saññā uppajjati, sikkhā ekā saññā nirujjhati. That’s how, with training, certain perceptions arise and certain perceptions cease.
Ayampi sikkhā”ti bhagavā avoca. And this is that training,” said the Buddha.
“Puna caparaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, bhikkhu sabbaso rūpasaññānaṁ samatikkamā paṭighasaññānaṁ atthaṅgamā nānattasaññānaṁ amanasikārā ‘ananto ākāso’ti ākāsānañcāyatanaṁ upasampajja viharati. “Furthermore, a mendicant, going totally beyond perceptions of form, with the disappearance of perceptions of impingement, not focusing on perceptions of diversity, aware that ‘space is infinite’, enters and remains in the dimension of infinite space. We have encountered the “formless attainments” (arūpasamāpatti) before, where they formed a refined basis for attachment to self (DN 1:3.13.4). Here they appear as part of the gradual refinement of consciousness through the cessation of increasingly subtle perceptions.
Tassa yā purimā rūpasaññā, sā nirujjhati. The perception of luminous form that they had previously ceases. This is the vision of light that later came to be called a “sign” (nimitta). In the first four jhānas this persists as a “subtle” (sukhuma) reflection or echo of the “substantial” (olārika) material basis of meditation, such as the breath or the parts of the body. Even though it is a purely mental phenomenon, it is still “form” (rūpa) since it has physical properties like light or extension.
Ākāsānañcāyatanasukhumasaccasaññā tasmiṁ samaye hoti, ākāsānañcāyatanasukhumasaccasaññīyeva tasmiṁ samaye hoti. At that time they have a subtle and true perception of the dimension of infinite space. The “light” (obhāsa) of jhāna grows from “limited” (paritta) to “limitless” (appamāṇa, MN 128:29.1). Then the perception of even this limitless light vanishes, leaving only infinite space.
Evampi sikkhā ekā saññā uppajjati, sikkhā ekā saññā nirujjhati. That’s how, with training, certain perceptions arise and certain perceptions cease.
Ayampi sikkhā”ti bhagavā avoca. And this is that training,” said the Buddha.
“Puna caparaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, bhikkhu sabbaso ākāsānañcāyatanaṁ samatikkamma ‘anantaṁ viññāṇan’ti viññāṇañcāyatanaṁ upasampajja viharati. “Furthermore, a mendicant, going totally beyond the dimension of infinite space, aware that ‘consciousness is infinite’, enters and remains in the dimension of infinite consciousness. Perception of infinite space fades away leaving only the infinite consciousness that is aware.
Tassa yā purimā ākāsānañcāyatanasukhumasaccasaññā, sā nirujjhati. The subtle and true perception of the dimension of infinite space that they had previously ceases.
Viññāṇañcāyatanasukhumasaccasaññā tasmiṁ samaye hoti, viññāṇañcāyatanasukhumasaccasaññīyeva tasmiṁ samaye hoti. At that time they have a subtle and true perception of the dimension of infinite consciousness.
Evampi sikkhā ekā saññā uppajjati, sikkhā ekā saññā nirujjhati. That’s how, with training, certain perceptions arise and certain perceptions cease.
Ayampi sikkhā”ti bhagavā avoca. And this is that training,” said the Buddha.
“Puna caparaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, bhikkhu sabbaso viññāṇañcāyatanaṁ samatikkamma ‘natthi kiñcī’ti ākiñcaññāyatanaṁ upasampajja viharati. “Furthermore, a mendicant, going totally beyond the dimension of infinite consciousness, aware that ‘there is nothing at all’, enters and remains in the dimension of nothingness. The meditator is no longer even aware of infinite consciousness, but of the even vaster nothingness.
Tassa yā purimā viññāṇañcāyatanasukhumasaccasaññā, sā nirujjhati. The subtle and true perception of the dimension of infinite consciousness that they had previously ceases.
Ākiñcaññāyatanasukhumasaccasaññā tasmiṁ samaye hoti, ākiñcaññāyatanasukhumasaccasaññīyeva tasmiṁ samaye hoti. At that time they have a subtle and true perception of the dimension of nothingness.
Evampi sikkhā ekā saññā uppajjati, sikkhā ekā saññā nirujjhati. That’s how, with training, certain perceptions arise and certain perceptions cease. The last of the four formless attainments is the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. Since this, by definition, lies beyond the scope of perception, it is not included here.
Ayampi sikkhā”ti bhagavā avoca. And this is that training,” said the Buddha.
“Yato kho, poṭṭhapāda, bhikkhu idha sakasaññī hoti, so tato amutra tato amutra anupubbena saññaggaṁ phusati. “Poṭṭhapāda, from the time a mendicant here takes charge of their own perception, they proceed from one stage to the next, progressively reaching the peak of perception. For sakasaññī (“takes charge of their own perception”), see Bu Pj 2:6.2.2. One relevant factor in determining whether an object has been stolen is if the accused “perceives it as their own”. Here it means that the meditator understands that they can evolve their own perceptions through meditation.
Tassa saññagge ṭhitassa evaṁ hoti: Standing on the peak of perception they think,
‘cetayamānassa me pāpiyo, acetayamānassa me seyyo. ‘Intentionality is bad for me, it’s better to be free of it.
Ahañceva kho pana ceteyyaṁ, abhisaṅkhareyyaṁ, imā ca me saññā nirujjheyyuṁ, aññā ca oḷārikā saññā uppajjeyyuṁ; For if I were to intend and choose, these perceptions would cease in me, and other coarser perceptions would arise. “Intend and choose” is ceteyyaṁ abhisaṅkhareyyaṁ (1st singular optative). These synonyms are used in the sense of a subtle sense of will or intentionality that underlies such attainments (MN 52:14.3) and which must be let go lest they generate rebirth (MN 140:22.10).
yannūnāhaṁ na ceva ceteyyaṁ na ca abhisaṅkhareyyan’ti. Why don’t I neither make a choice nor form an intention?’
So na ceva ceteti, na ca abhisaṅkharoti. They neither make a choice nor form an intention.
Tassa acetayato anabhisaṅkharoto tā ceva saññā nirujjhanti, aññā ca oḷārikā saññā na uppajjanti. Those perceptions cease in them, and other coarser perceptions don’t arise.
So nirodhaṁ phusati. They touch cessation.
Evaṁ kho, poṭṭhapāda, anupubbābhisaññānirodhasampajānasamāpatti hoti. And that, Poṭṭhapāda, is how the progressive cessation of perception is attained with awareness. Compare with “progressive cessation” (AN 9.31), “progressive tranquilizing of conditions” (SN 36.15), “progressive meditations” (AN 9.32), etc. | “Awareness” is sampajāna, which we have encountered previously as “situational awareness” in daily activities, or as the “awareness” in the third jhāna. Here it refers to a reflective capacity to understand the nature of deep meditation in terms of causality. The term was adopted by Patañjalī, who defined saṁprajñātasamādhi in a way that is clearly drawn from the Buddhist definition of jhāna. It is attained with vitakka, vicāra, ānanda (“bliss”), and āsmitā. According to the commentary, this last term is “experience of the one self” (ekātmikā saṁvid) and so is probably adapted from the Buddhist factor of ekaggatā. (Yogasūtra 1.17).
Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, poṭṭhapāda, What do you think, Poṭṭhapāda?
api nu te ito pubbe evarūpā anupubbābhisaññānirodhasampajānasamāpatti sutapubbā”ti? Have you ever heard of this before?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante. “No, sir. Taking the kernel of Yājñavalkya’s theory of the cessation of limited perception, the Buddha has expanded it in psychological and practical detail, while leaving out the metaphysical assumption of the Self.
Evaṁ kho ahaṁ, bhante, bhagavato bhāsitaṁ ājānāmi: This is how I understand what the Buddha said: Poṭṭhapāda shows the Buddha that he has been paying attention. Notice how it is culturally assumed that it is possible to retain and repeat the exact content of the teaching.
‘yato kho, poṭṭhapāda, bhikkhu idha sakasaññī hoti, so tato amutra tato amutra anupubbena saññaggaṁ phusati, ‘From the time a mendicant here takes charge of their own perception, they proceed from one stage to the next, progressively reaching the peak of perception.
tassa saññagge ṭhitassa evaṁ hoti: Standing on the peak of perception they think,
“cetayamānassa me pāpiyo, acetayamānassa me seyyo. “Intentionality is bad for me, it’s better to be free of it.
Ahañceva kho pana ceteyyaṁ abhisaṅkhareyyaṁ, imā ca me saññā nirujjheyyuṁ, aññā ca oḷārikā saññā uppajjeyyuṁ; For if I were to intend and choose, these perceptions would cease in me, and other coarser perceptions would arise.
yannūnāhaṁ na ceva ceteyyaṁ, na ca abhisaṅkhareyyan”ti. Why don’t I neither make a choice nor form an intention?”
So na ceva ceteti, na cābhisaṅkharoti, tassa acetayato anabhisaṅkharoto tā ceva saññā nirujjhanti, aññā ca oḷārikā saññā na uppajjanti. Those perceptions cease in them, and other coarser perceptions don’t arise.
So nirodhaṁ phusati. They touch cessation.
Evaṁ kho, poṭṭhapāda, anupubbābhisaññānirodhasampajānasamāpatti hotī’”ti. And that is how the progressive cessation of perception is attained with awareness.’”
“Evaṁ, poṭṭhapādā”ti. “That’s right, Poṭṭhapāda.”
“Ekaññeva nu kho, bhante, bhagavā saññaggaṁ paññapeti, udāhu puthūpi saññagge paññapetī”ti? “Does the Buddha describe just one peak of perception, or many?”
“Ekampi kho ahaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, saññaggaṁ paññapemi, puthūpi saññagge paññapemī”ti. “I describe the peak of perception as both one and many.”
“Yathā kathaṁ pana, bhante, bhagavā ekampi saññaggaṁ paññapeti, puthūpi saññagge paññapetī”ti? “But sir, how do you describe it as one peak and as many?”
“Yathā yathā kho, poṭṭhapāda, nirodhaṁ phusati tathā tathāhaṁ saññaggaṁ paññapemi. “I describe the peak of perception according to the specific manner in which one touches cessation. The meaning of this is not clear to me. It might mean that insight can be developed based on any of the stages of meditation, so for that person their peak of perception is different to another’s. The commentary says that it refers to different meditation subjects, or simply to different occasions of meditation.
Evaṁ kho ahaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, ekampi saññaggaṁ paññapemi, puthūpi saññagge paññapemī”ti. That’s how I describe the peak of perception as both one and many.”
“Saññā nu kho, bhante, paṭhamaṁ uppajjati, pacchā ñāṇaṁ, udāhu ñāṇaṁ paṭhamaṁ uppajjati, pacchā saññā, udāhu saññā ca ñāṇañca apubbaṁ acarimaṁ uppajjantī”ti? “But sir, does perception arise first and knowledge afterwards? Or does knowledge arise first and perception afterwards? Or do they both arise at the same time?” Poṭṭhapāda’s distinction between “perception” (saññā) and “knowledge” (ñāṇa) echoes Yājñavalkya’s distinction between “perception” (saṁjā) and “consciousness” (vijñāna, or in the repeated passage at 4.5.13, prajñāna).
“Saññā kho, poṭṭhapāda, paṭhamaṁ uppajjati, pacchā ñāṇaṁ, saññuppādā ca pana ñāṇuppādo hoti. “Perception arises first and knowledge afterwards. The arising of perception leads to the arising of knowledge. Perception has been described in terms of the progress through more refined meditations (samādhi). Only then does the “knowledge” (ñāṇa) of insight arise.
So evaṁ pajānāti: They understand,
‘idappaccayā kira me ñāṇaṁ udapādī’ti. ‘My knowledge arose from a specific condition.’ The term “specific condition” (idappaccayā) is well known from dependent origination (eg. SN 12.20:2.3), where it applies to the general situation of ongoing existence in transmigration. When developing insight, a meditator takes their own meditation experience as their primary locus. This is then generalized to an understanding of the nature of conscious existence.
Iminā kho etaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, pariyāyena veditabbaṁ—That is a way to understand how
yathā saññā paṭhamaṁ uppajjati, pacchā ñāṇaṁ, saññuppādā ca pana ñāṇuppādo hotī”ti. perception arises first and knowledge afterwards; that the arising of perception leads to the arising of knowledge.”
1.3. Saññāattakathā 1.3. Perception and the Self
“Saññā nu kho, bhante, purisassa attā, udāhu aññā saññā añño attā”ti? “Sir, is perception a person’s self, or are perception and self different things?” This draws from the initial presentation of different theories of the person and perception (DN 9:6.4).
“Kaṁ pana tvaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, attānaṁ paccesī”ti? “But Poṭṭhapāda, do you believe in a self?” “Believe” is paccesi, literally “fall back on”. It implies that an idea is something one relies on or takes as fundamental. The Buddha wants to know where Poṭṭhapāda stands before exploring this topic.
“Oḷārikaṁ kho ahaṁ, bhante, attānaṁ paccemi rūpiṁ cātumahābhūtikaṁ kabaḷīkārāhārabhakkhan”ti. “I believe in a solid self, sir, which is formed, made up of the four principal states, and consumes edible food.” Despite his previous questions about perception and the self, Poṭṭhapāda takes his stand on a purely materialist view, identifying the “self” with the organic “substantial” body.
“Oḷāriko ca hi te, poṭṭhapāda, attā abhavissa rūpī cātumahābhūtiko kabaḷīkārāhārabhakkho. Evaṁ santaṁ kho te, poṭṭhapāda, aññāva saññā bhavissati añño attā. “Suppose there was such a solid self, Poṭṭhapāda. In that case, perception would be one thing, the self another. Again, the Buddha does not rush to tell Poṭṭhapāda he is right or wrong, but rather draws out the implications of his statement.
Tadamināpetaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, pariyāyena veditabbaṁ yathā aññāva saññā bhavissati añño attā. Here is another way to understand how perception and self are different things.
Tiṭṭhateva sāyaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, oḷāriko attā rūpī cātumahābhūtiko kabaḷīkārāhārabhakkho, atha imassa purisassa aññā ca saññā uppajjanti, aññā ca saññā nirujjhanti. So long as that solid self remains, still some perceptions arise in a person and others cease. Here tiṭṭhateva is not “leaving aside”, but “remains”. Compare the similar construction at MN 107:13.1.
Iminā kho etaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, pariyāyena veditabbaṁ yathā aññāva saññā bhavissati añño attā”ti. That is a way to understand how perception and self are different things.”
“Manomayaṁ kho ahaṁ, bhante, attānaṁ paccemi sabbaṅgapaccaṅgiṁ ahīnindriyan”ti. “Sir, I believe in a mind-made self which is whole in its major and minor limbs, not deficient in any faculty.” This is the “subtle” (sukhuma) body, corresponding with the form experienced in the four jhānas. All manuscripts appear to be missing the expected rūpī in this passage, but it occurs in the corresponding passage on “reincarnation” below.
“Manomayo ca hi te, poṭṭhapāda, attā abhavissa sabbaṅgapaccaṅgī ahīnindriyo, evaṁ santampi kho te, poṭṭhapāda, aññāva saññā bhavissati añño attā. “Suppose there was such a mind-made self, Poṭṭhapāda. In that case, perception would be one thing, the self another.
Tadamināpetaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, pariyāyena veditabbaṁ yathā aññāva saññā bhavissati añño attā. Here is another way to understand how perception and self are different things.
Tiṭṭhateva sāyaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, manomayo attā sabbaṅgapaccaṅgī ahīnindriyo, atha imassa purisassa aññā ca saññā uppajjanti, aññā ca saññā nirujjhanti. So long as that mind-made self remains, still some perceptions arise in a person and others cease.
Imināpi kho etaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, pariyāyena veditabbaṁ yathā aññāva saññā bhavissati añño attā”ti. That too is a way to understand how perception and self are different things.”
“Arūpiṁ kho ahaṁ, bhante, attānaṁ paccemi saññāmayan”ti. “Sir, I believe in a formless self which is made of perception.” This identifies the self as that which is experienced in the formless attainments. Poṭṭhapāda is simply cycling through possible self theories without really thinking through the implications.
“Arūpī ca hi te, poṭṭhapāda, attā abhavissa saññāmayo, evaṁ santampi kho te, poṭṭhapāda, aññāva saññā bhavissati añño attā. “Suppose there was such a formless self, Poṭṭhapāda. In that case, perception would be one thing, the self another.
Tadamināpetaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, pariyāyena veditabbaṁ yathā aññāva saññā bhavissati añño attā. Here is another way to understand how perception and self are different things.
Tiṭṭhateva sāyaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, arūpī attā saññāmayo, atha imassa purisassa aññā ca saññā uppajjanti, aññā ca saññā nirujjhanti. So long as that formless self remains, still some perceptions arise in a person and others cease.
Imināpi kho etaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, pariyāyena veditabbaṁ yathā aññāva saññā bhavissati añño attā”ti. That too is a way to understand how perception and self are different things.”
“Sakkā panetaṁ, bhante, mayā ñātuṁ: “But, sir, am I able to know whether Poṭṭhapāda can only attest a belief in various theories and still does not know how to assess them for himself.
‘saññā purisassa attā’ti vā ‘aññāva saññā añño attā’ti vā”ti? perception is a person’s self, or whether perception and self are different things?”
“Dujjānaṁ kho etaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, tayā aññadiṭṭhikena aññakhantikena aññarucikena aññatrāyogena aññatrācariyakena: “It’s hard for you to understand this, since you have a different view, creed, and belief, and another discipline and denomination.”
‘saññā purisassa attā’ti vā, ‘aññāva saññā añño attāti’ vā”ti.
“Sacetaṁ, bhante, mayā dujjānaṁ aññadiṭṭhikena aññakhantikena aññarucikena aññatrāyogena aññatrācariyakena: “Well, if that’s the case, sir,
‘saññā purisassa attā’ti vā, ‘aññāva saññā añño attā’ti vā;
kiṁ pana, bhante, ‘sassato loko, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’”ti? then what do you make of this: ‘The cosmos is eternal. This is the only truth, anything else is futile’?” This is the famous list of ten “undeclared points”, which are found throughout the suttas (eg. MN 25:10.21, MN 63:2.3, MN 72:3.1, and the whole of SN 44). They seem to have functioned as a kind of checklist by which philosophers could be evaluated and classified. | The word loka occurs in a number of senses, but here it refers to the entire “cosmos” of countless worlds.
“Abyākataṁ kho etaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, mayā: “This has not been declared by me, Poṭṭhapāda.”
‘sassato loko, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’”ti.
“Kiṁ pana, bhante, ‘asassato loko, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’”ti? “Then what do you make of this: ‘The cosmos is not eternal. This is the only truth, anything else is futile’?”
“Etampi kho, poṭṭhapāda, mayā abyākataṁ: “This too has not been declared by me.”
‘asassato loko, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’”ti.
“Kiṁ pana, bhante, ‘antavā loko …pe… “Then what do you make of this: ‘The cosmos is finite …’ …
‘anantavā loko … ‘The cosmos is infinite …’ …
‘taṁ jīvaṁ taṁ sarīraṁ … ‘The soul and the body are one and the same …’ …
‘aññaṁ jīvaṁ aññaṁ sarīraṁ … ‘The soul is one thing, the body another …’ …
‘hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā … ‘A realized one still exists after death …’ …
‘na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā … ‘A realized one no longer exists after death …’ …
‘hoti ca na ca hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā … ‘A realized one both still exists and no longer exists after death …’ …
‘neva hoti na na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’”ti? ‘A realized one neither still exists nor no longer exists after death. This is the only truth, anything else is futile’?”
“Etampi kho, poṭṭhapāda, mayā abyākataṁ: “This too has not been declared by me.”
‘neva hoti na na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’”ti.
“Kasmā panetaṁ, bhante, bhagavatā abyākatan”ti? “Why haven’t these things been declared by the Buddha?”
“Na hetaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, atthasaṁhitaṁ na dhammasaṁhitaṁ nādibrahmacariyakaṁ, na nibbidāya na virāgāya na nirodhāya na upasamāya na abhiññāya na sambodhāya na nibbānāya saṁvattati, “Because they’re not beneficial or relevant to the fundamentals of the spiritual life. They don’t lead to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment.
tasmā etaṁ mayā abyākatan”ti. That’s why I haven’t declared them.”
“Kiṁ pana, bhante, bhagavatā byākatan”ti? “Then what has been declared by the Buddha?”
“Idaṁ dukkhanti kho, poṭṭhapāda, mayā byākataṁ. Ayaṁ dukkhasamudayoti kho, poṭṭhapāda, mayā byākataṁ. Ayaṁ dukkhanirodhoti kho, poṭṭhapāda, mayā byākataṁ. Ayaṁ dukkhanirodhagāminī paṭipadāti kho, poṭṭhapāda, mayā byākatan”ti. “I have declared this: ‘This is suffering’ … ‘This is the origin of suffering’ … ‘This is the cessation of suffering’ … ‘This is the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering’.”
“Kasmā panetaṁ, bhante, bhagavatā byākatan”ti? “Why have these things been declared by the Buddha?”
“Etañhi, poṭṭhapāda, atthasaṁhitaṁ, etaṁ dhammasaṁhitaṁ, etaṁ ādibrahmacariyakaṁ, etaṁ nibbidāya virāgāya nirodhāya upasamāya abhiññāya sambodhāya nibbānāya saṁvattati; “Because they are beneficial and relevant to the fundamentals of the spiritual life. They lead to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment.
tasmā etaṁ mayā byākatan”ti. That’s why I have declared them.”
“Evametaṁ, bhagavā, evametaṁ, sugata. “That’s so true, Blessed One! That’s so true, Holy One!
Yassadāni, bhante, bhagavā kālaṁ maññatī”ti. Please, sir, go at your convenience.”
Atha kho bhagavā uṭṭhāyāsanā pakkāmi. Then the Buddha rose from his seat and left.
Atha kho te paribbājakā acirapakkantassa bhagavato poṭṭhapādaṁ paribbājakaṁ samantato vācā sannitodakena sañjhabbharimakaṁsu: Soon after the Buddha left, those wanderers beset Poṭṭhapāda on all sides with sneering and jeering. This phrase recurs at SN 21.9:1.4 and AN 3.64:11.1, with some variant readings.
“evameva panāyaṁ bhavaṁ poṭṭhapādo yaññadeva samaṇo gotamo bhāsati, taṁ tadevassa abbhanumodati: “No matter what the ascetic Gotama says, Poṭṭhapāda agrees with him:
‘evametaṁ, bhagavā, evametaṁ, sugatā’ti. ‘That’s so true, Blessed One! That’s so true, Holy One!’
Na kho pana mayaṁ kiñci samaṇassa gotamassa ekaṁsikaṁ dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāma: We understand that the ascetic Gotama didn’t give any categorical teaching at all regarding whether the cosmos is eternal and so on.”
‘sassato loko’ti vā, ‘asassato loko’ti vā, ‘antavā loko’ti vā, ‘anantavā loko’ti vā, ‘taṁ jīvaṁ taṁ sarīran’ti vā, ‘aññaṁ jīvaṁ aññaṁ sarīran’ti vā, ‘hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’ti vā, ‘na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’ti vā, ‘hoti ca na ca hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’ti vā, ‘neva hoti na na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’ti vā”ti.
Evaṁ vutte, poṭṭhapādo paribbājako te paribbājake etadavoca: When they said this, Poṭṭhapāda said to them,
“ahampi kho, bho, na kiñci samaṇassa gotamassa ekaṁsikaṁ dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāmi: “I too understand that the ascetic Gotama didn’t give any categorical teaching at all regarding whether the cosmos is eternal and so on.
‘sassato loko’ti vā, ‘asassato loko’ti vā …pe…
‘neva hoti na na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’ti vā;
api ca samaṇo gotamo bhūtaṁ tacchaṁ tathaṁ paṭipadaṁ paññapeti dhammaṭṭhitataṁ dhammaniyāmataṁ. Nevertheless, the practice that he describes is true, real, and accurate. It is the regularity of natural principles, the surety of natural principles.
Bhūtaṁ kho pana tacchaṁ tathaṁ paṭipadaṁ paññapentassa dhammaṭṭhitataṁ dhammaniyāmataṁ, kathañhi nāma mādiso viññū samaṇassa gotamassa subhāsitaṁ subhāsitato nābbhanumodeyyā”ti? So how on earth could a sensible person such as I not agree that what was well spoken by the ascetic Gotama was in fact well spoken?”
2. Cittahatthisāriputtapoṭṭhapādavatthu 2. On Citta Hatthisāriputta
Atha kho dvīhatīhassa accayena citto ca hatthisāriputto poṭṭhapādo ca paribbājako yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkamiṁsu; upasaṅkamitvā citto hatthisāriputto bhagavantaṁ abhivādetvā ekamantaṁ nisīdi. Then after two or three days had passed, Citta Hatthisāriputta and Poṭṭhapāda went to the Buddha. Citta Hatthisāriputta bowed and sat down to one side. The commentary says Citta was the son of an elephant trainer. Here he shows greater respect to the Buddha than does Poṭṭhapāda.
Poṭṭhapādo pana paribbājako bhagavatā saddhiṁ sammodi. Sammodanīyaṁ kathaṁ sāraṇīyaṁ vītisāretvā ekamantaṁ nisīdi. But the wanderer Poṭṭhapāda exchanged greetings with the Buddha, and when the greetings and polite conversation were over, he sat down to one side.
Ekamantaṁ nisinno kho poṭṭhapādo paribbājako bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: Poṭṭhapāda told the Buddha what had happened after he left. The Buddha said:
“tadā maṁ, bhante, te paribbājakā acirapakkantassa bhagavato samantato vācāsannitodakena sañjhabbharimakaṁsu:
‘evameva panāyaṁ bhavaṁ poṭṭhapādo yaññadeva samaṇo gotamo bhāsati, taṁ tadevassa abbhanumodati:
“evametaṁ, bhagavā, evametaṁ, sugatā”ti.
Na kho pana mayaṁ kiñci samaṇassa gotamassa ekaṁsikaṁ dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāma:
“sassato loko”ti vā, “asassato loko”ti vā, “antavā loko”ti vā, “anantavā loko”ti vā, “taṁ jīvaṁ taṁ sarīran”ti vā, “aññaṁ jīvaṁ aññaṁ sarīran”ti vā, “hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā”ti vā, “na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā”ti vā, “hoti ca na ca hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā”ti vā, “neva hoti na na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā”ti vā’ti.
Evaṁ vuttāhaṁ, bhante, te paribbājake etadavocaṁ:
‘ahampi kho, bho, na kiñci samaṇassa gotamassa ekaṁsikaṁ dhammaṁ desitaṁ ājānāmi:
“sassato loko”ti vā, “asassato loko”ti vā …pe…
“neva hoti na na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā”ti vā;
api ca samaṇo gotamo bhūtaṁ tacchaṁ tathaṁ paṭipadaṁ paññapeti dhammaṭṭhitataṁ dhammaniyāmataṁ.
Bhūtaṁ kho pana tacchaṁ tathaṁ paṭipadaṁ paññapentassa dhammaṭṭhitataṁ dhammaniyāmataṁ, kathañhi nāma mādiso viññū samaṇassa gotamassa subhāsitaṁ subhāsitato nābbhanumodeyyā’”ti?
“Sabbeva kho ete, poṭṭhapāda, paribbājakā andhā acakkhukā; “All those wanderers, Poṭṭhapāda, are blind and sightless.
tvaṁyeva nesaṁ eko cakkhumā. You are the only one whose eyes are clear.
Ekaṁsikāpi hi kho, poṭṭhapāda, mayā dhammā desitā paññattā; For I have taught and pointed out teachings that are categorical This point seems to be lost on a number of modern commentators, who infer from passages such as the ten undeclared points that the Buddha refused to make any definitive declarations at all. The Buddha, rather, was a vibhajjavādin (MN 99:4.4, AN 10.94:4.7), “one who speaks after analysis”.
anekaṁsikāpi hi kho, poṭṭhapāda, mayā dhammā desitā paññattā. and also teachings that are not categorical.
Katame ca te, poṭṭhapāda, mayā anekaṁsikā dhammā desitā paññattā? And what teachings have I taught and pointed out as not categorical?
‘Sassato loko’ti kho, poṭṭhapāda, mayā anekaṁsiko dhammo desito paññatto; ‘The cosmos is eternal’ …
‘asassato loko’ti kho, poṭṭhapāda, mayā anekaṁsiko dhammo desito paññatto; ‘The cosmos is not eternal’ …
‘antavā loko’ti kho, poṭṭhapāda …pe… ‘The cosmos is finite’ …
‘anantavā loko’ti kho, poṭṭhapāda … ‘The cosmos is infinite’ …
‘taṁ jīvaṁ taṁ sarīran’ti kho, poṭṭhapāda … ‘The soul is the same thing as the body’ …
‘aññaṁ jīvaṁ aññaṁ sarīran’ti kho, poṭṭhapāda … ‘The soul is one thing, the body another’ …
‘hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’ti kho, poṭṭhapāda … ‘A realized one still exists after death’ …
na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’ti kho, poṭṭhapāda … ‘A realized one no longer exists after death’ …
‘hoti ca na ca hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’ti kho, poṭṭhapāda … ‘A realized one both still exists and no longer exists after death’ …
‘neva hoti na na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’ti kho, poṭṭhapāda, mayā anekaṁsiko dhammo desito paññatto. ‘A realized one neither still exists nor no longer exists after death.’
Kasmā ca te, poṭṭhapāda, mayā anekaṁsikā dhammā desitā paññattā? And why have I taught and pointed out such teachings as not categorical?
Na hete, poṭṭhapāda, atthasaṁhitā na dhammasaṁhitā na ādibrahmacariyakā na nibbidāya na virāgāya na nirodhāya na upasamāya na abhiññāya na sambodhāya na nibbānāya saṁvattanti. Because those things aren’t beneficial or relevant to the fundamentals of the spiritual life. They don’t lead to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment.
Tasmā te mayā anekaṁsikā dhammā desitā paññattā. That’s why I have taught and pointed out such teachings as not categorical.
2.1. Ekaṁsikadhammā 2.1. Teachings That Are Categorical
Katame ca te, poṭṭhapāda, mayā ekaṁsikā dhammā desitā paññattā? And what teachings have I taught and pointed out as categorical?
Idaṁ dukkhanti kho, poṭṭhapāda, mayā ekaṁsiko dhammo desito paññatto. ‘This is suffering’ … ‘This is the origin of suffering’ … ‘This is the cessation of suffering’ … ‘This is the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering’.
Ayaṁ dukkhasamudayoti kho, poṭṭhapāda, mayā ekaṁsiko dhammo desito paññatto.
Ayaṁ dukkhanirodhoti kho, poṭṭhapāda, mayā ekaṁsiko dhammo desito paññatto.
Ayaṁ dukkhanirodhagāminī paṭipadāti kho, poṭṭhapāda, mayā ekaṁsiko dhammo desito paññatto.
Kasmā ca te, poṭṭhapāda, mayā ekaṁsikā dhammā desitā paññattā? And why have I taught and pointed out such teachings as categorical?
Ete hi, poṭṭhapāda, atthasaṁhitā, ete dhammasaṁhitā, ete ādibrahmacariyakā ete nibbidāya virāgāya nirodhāya upasamāya abhiññāya sambodhāya nibbānāya saṁvattanti. Because they are beneficial and relevant to the fundamentals of the spiritual life. They lead to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment.
Tasmā te mayā ekaṁsikā dhammā desitā paññattā. That’s why I have taught and pointed out such teachings as categorical.
Santi, poṭṭhapāda, eke samaṇabrāhmaṇā evaṁvādino evaṁdiṭṭhino: There are some ascetics and brahmins who have this doctrine and view:
‘ekantasukhī attā hoti arogo paraṁ maraṇā’ti. ‘The self is absolutely happy and free of disease after death.’ See DN 1:2.38.2.
Tyāhaṁ upasaṅkamitvā evaṁ vadāmi: I go up to them and say,
‘saccaṁ kira tumhe āyasmanto evaṁvādino evaṁdiṭṭhino: ‘Is it really true that this is the venerables’ view?’ The Buddha does not rely on rumor; he begins by checking his facts with those concerned. Not only does this affirm his commitment to truth, it shows respect and establishes a common ground from which the argument proceeds.
“ekantasukhī attā hoti arogo paraṁ maraṇā”’ti?
Te ce me evaṁ puṭṭhā ‘āmā’ti paṭijānanti. And they answer, ‘Yes’.
Tyāhaṁ evaṁ vadāmi: I say to them,
‘api pana tumhe āyasmanto ekantasukhaṁ lokaṁ jānaṁ passaṁ viharathā’ti? ‘But do you meditate knowing and seeing an absolutely happy world?’ The verb viharati means “dwell”, and functions as an auxiliary verb implying duration. In spiritual contexts it often means “a period or state of meditation”. This first question is asking whether they see such a state in a regular meditation practice.
Iti puṭṭhā ‘no’ti vadanti. Asked this, they say, ‘No.’
Tyāhaṁ evaṁ vadāmi: I say to them,
‘api pana tumhe āyasmanto ekaṁ vā rattiṁ ekaṁ vā divasaṁ upaḍḍhaṁ vā rattiṁ upaḍḍhaṁ vā divasaṁ ekantasukhiṁ attānaṁ sañjānāthā’ti? ‘But have you perceived an absolutely happy self for a single day or night, or even half a day or night?’ Perhaps they might not be able to develop a meditation for seeing that self, but at some point they may have had some sort of perception or vision or insight.
Iti puṭṭhā ‘no’ti vadanti. Asked this, they say, ‘No.’
Tyāhaṁ evaṁ vadāmi: I say to them,
‘api pana tumhe āyasmanto jānātha: ‘But do you know
“ayaṁ maggo ayaṁ paṭipadā ekantasukhassa lokassa sacchikiriyāyā”’ti? a path and a practice to realize an absolutely happy world?’ Since they have no experience, they might at least have an idea how to reach that experience.
Iti puṭṭhā ‘no’ti vadanti. Asked this, they say, ‘No.’
Tyāhaṁ evaṁ vadāmi: I say to them,
‘api pana tumhe āyasmanto yā tā devatā ekantasukhaṁ lokaṁ upapannā, tāsaṁ bhāsamānānaṁ saddaṁ suṇātha: ‘But have you ever heard the voice of the deities reborn in an absolutely happy world saying,
“suppaṭipannāttha, mārisā, ujuppaṭipannāttha, mārisā, ekantasukhassa lokassa sacchikiriyāya; “Practice well, good fellows, practice directly so as to realize an absolutely happy world. They haven’t even heard a report about it.
mayampi hi, mārisā, evaṁpaṭipannā ekantasukhaṁ lokaṁ upapannā”’ti? For this is how we practiced, and we were reborn in an absolutely happy world”?’
Iti puṭṭhā ‘no’ti vadanti. Asked this, they say, ‘No.’
Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, poṭṭhapāda, What do you think, Poṭṭhapāda?
nanu evaṁ sante tesaṁ samaṇabrāhmaṇānaṁ appāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti? This being so, doesn’t what they say turn out to have no demonstrable basis?” “No demonstrable basis” renders appāṭihīrakataṁ. The Vedic pratiharate means “to yearn for, to welcome, to delight in”, from which pāṭihāriya means “that which should be delighted in, an amusement, an entertainment, an attraction”. In early Pali, the primary sense is something demonstrated or displayed that is convincing or inspiring. In later Pali this narrows to “miracle”.
“Addhā kho, bhante, evaṁ sante tesaṁ samaṇabrāhmaṇānaṁ appāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti. “Clearly that’s the case, sir.”
“Seyyathāpi, poṭṭhapāda, puriso evaṁ vadeyya: “Suppose, Poṭṭhapāda, a man were to say:
‘ahaṁ yā imasmiṁ janapade janapadakalyāṇī, taṁ icchāmi taṁ kāmemī’ti. ‘Whoever the finest lady in the land is, it is her that I want, her that I desire!’ Janapadakalyāṇī is typically rendered as “the most beautiful lady in the land”. At SN 47.20:2.2 we learn that she is a dazzling singer and dancer. And while she was famed for her beauty (Ud 3.2:9.1), the word kalyāṇa normally means “(morally) good, fine, lovely” and does not refer solely to her appearance.
Tamenaṁ evaṁ vadeyyuṁ: They’d say to him,
‘ambho purisa, yaṁ tvaṁ janapadakalyāṇiṁ icchasi kāmesi, jānāsi taṁ janapadakalyāṇiṁ khattiyī vā brāhmaṇī vā vessī vā suddī vā’ti? ‘My man, that finest lady in the land who you desire—do you know whether she’s an aristocrat, a brahmin, a peasant, or a menial?’
Iti puṭṭho ‘no’ti vadeyya. Asked this, he’d say, ‘No.’
Tamenaṁ evaṁ vadeyyuṁ: They’d say to him,
‘ambho purisa, yaṁ tvaṁ janapadakalyāṇiṁ icchasi kāmesi, jānāsi taṁ janapadakalyāṇiṁ evaṁnāmā evaṅgottāti vā, dīghā vā rassā vā majjhimā vā kāḷī vā sāmā vā maṅguracchavī vāti, amukasmiṁ gāme vā nigame vā nagare vā’ti? ‘My friend, that finest lady in the land who you desire—do you know her name or clan? Whether she’s tall or short or medium? Whether her skin is black, brown, or dingy? Whether she comes from such-and-such village, town, or city?’ The same color “dingy”—mud-green—is used of Gotama when his skin was ruined by austerities. It might seem an odd color for a beautiful woman, but then “men’s tastes vary” (SN 4.25:5.2).
Iti puṭṭho ‘no’ti vadeyya. Asked this, he’d say, ‘No.’
Tamenaṁ evaṁ vadeyyuṁ: They’d say to him,
‘ambho purisa, yaṁ tvaṁ na jānāsi na passasi, taṁ tvaṁ icchasi kāmesī’ti? ‘My man, do you desire someone who you’ve never even known or seen?’
Iti puṭṭho ‘āmā’ti vadeyya. Asked this, he’d say, ‘Yes.’
Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, poṭṭhapāda, What do you think, Poṭṭhapāda?
nanu evaṁ sante tassa purisassa appāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti? This being so, doesn’t that man’s statement turn out to have no demonstrable basis?”
“Addhā kho, bhante, evaṁ sante tassa purisassa appāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti. “Clearly that’s the case, sir.”
“Evameva kho, poṭṭhapāda, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā evaṁvādino evaṁdiṭṭhino: “In the same way, the ascetics and brahmins who have that doctrine and view …
‘ekantasukhī attā hoti arogo paraṁ maraṇā’ti.
Tyāhaṁ upasaṅkamitvā evaṁ vadāmi:
‘saccaṁ kira tumhe āyasmanto evaṁvādino evaṁdiṭṭhino:
“ekantasukhī attā hoti arogo paraṁ maraṇā”’ti?
Te ce me evaṁ puṭṭhā ‘āmā’ti paṭijānanti.
Tyāhaṁ evaṁ vadāmi:
‘api pana tumhe āyasmanto ekantasukhaṁ lokaṁ jānaṁ passaṁ viharathā’ti?
Iti puṭṭhā ‘no’ti vadanti.
Tyāhaṁ evaṁ vadāmi:
‘api pana tumhe āyasmanto ekaṁ vā rattiṁ ekaṁ vā divasaṁ upaḍḍhaṁ vā rattiṁ upaḍḍhaṁ vā divasaṁ ekantasukhiṁ attānaṁ sañjānāthā’ti?
Iti puṭṭhā ‘no’ti vadanti.
Tyāhaṁ evaṁ vadāmi:
‘api pana tumhe āyasmanto jānātha:
“ayaṁ maggo ayaṁ paṭipadā ekantasukhassa lokassa sacchikiriyāyā”’ti?
Iti puṭṭhā ‘no’ti vadanti.
Tyāhaṁ evaṁ vadāmi:
‘api pana tumhe āyasmanto yā tā devatā ekantasukhaṁ lokaṁ upapannā, tāsaṁ bhāsamānānaṁ saddaṁ suṇātha:
“suppaṭipannāttha, mārisā, ujuppaṭipannāttha, mārisā, ekantasukhassa lokassa sacchikiriyāya;
mayampi hi, mārisā, evaṁpaṭipannā ekantasukhaṁ lokaṁ upapannā”’ti?
Iti puṭṭhā ‘no’ti vadanti.
Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, poṭṭhapāda, nanu evaṁ sante tesaṁ samaṇabrāhmaṇānaṁ appāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti? Doesn’t what they say turn out to have no demonstrable basis?”
“Addhā kho, bhante, evaṁ sante tesaṁ samaṇabrāhmaṇānaṁ appāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti. “Clearly that’s the case, sir.”
“Seyyathāpi, poṭṭhapāda, puriso cātumahāpathe nisseṇiṁ kareyya pāsādassa ārohaṇāya. “Suppose a man was to build a ladder at the crossroads for climbing up to a stilt longhouse. Nisseni only occurs elsewhere in Bu Ss 6:2.3.6 and Bu Ss 7:2.67, where it is something carried, i.e. a ladder rather than a flight of stairs.
Tamenaṁ evaṁ vadeyyuṁ: They’d say to him,
‘ambho purisa, yassa tvaṁ pāsādassa ārohaṇāya nisseṇiṁ karosi, jānāsi taṁ pāsādaṁ puratthimāya vā disāya dakkhiṇāya vā disāya pacchimāya vā disāya uttarāya vā disāya ucco vā nīco vā majjhimo vā’ti? My friend, that stilt longhouse for which you’re building a ladder—do you know whether it’s to the north, south, east, or west? Or whether it’s tall or short or medium?’
Iti puṭṭho ‘no’ti vadeyya. Asked this, he’d say, ‘No.’
Tamenaṁ evaṁ vadeyyuṁ: They’d say to him,
‘ambho purisa, yaṁ tvaṁ na jānāsi na passasi, tassa tvaṁ pāsādassa ārohaṇāya nisseṇiṁ karosī’ti? ‘My man, are you building a ladder for a longhouse that you’ve never even known or seen?’
Iti puṭṭho ‘āmā’ti vadeyya. Asked this, he’d say, ‘Yes.’
Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, poṭṭhapāda, What do you think, Poṭṭhapāda?
nanu evaṁ sante tassa purisassa appāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti? This being so, doesn’t that man’s statement turn out to have no demonstrable basis?”
“Addhā kho, bhante, evaṁ sante tassa purisassa appāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti. “Clearly that’s the case, sir.”
“Evameva kho, poṭṭhapāda, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā evaṁvādino evaṁdiṭṭhino: “In the same way, the ascetics and brahmins who have those various doctrines and views …
‘ekantasukhī attā hoti arogo paraṁ maraṇā’ti.
Tyāhaṁ upasaṅkamitvā evaṁ vadāmi:
‘saccaṁ kira tumhe āyasmanto evaṁvādino evaṁdiṭṭhino:
“ekantasukhī attā hoti arogo paraṁ maraṇā”’ti?
Te ce me evaṁ puṭṭhā ‘āmā’ti paṭijānanti.
Tyāhaṁ evaṁ vadāmi:
‘api pana tumhe āyasmanto ekantasukhaṁ lokaṁ jānaṁ passaṁ viharathā’ti?
Iti puṭṭhā ‘no’ti vadanti.
Tyāhaṁ evaṁ vadāmi:
‘api pana tumhe āyasmanto ekaṁ vā rattiṁ ekaṁ vā divasaṁ upaḍḍhaṁ vā rattiṁ upaḍḍhaṁ vā divasaṁ ekantasukhiṁ attānaṁ sañjānāthā’ti?
Iti puṭṭhā ‘no’ti vadanti.
Tyāhaṁ evaṁ vadāmi:
‘api pana tumhe āyasmanto jānātha ayaṁ maggo ayaṁ paṭipadā ekantasukhassa lokassa sacchikiriyāyā’ti?
Iti puṭṭhā ‘no’ti vadanti.
Tyāhaṁ evaṁ vadāmi:
‘api pana tumhe āyasmanto yā tā devatā ekantasukhaṁ lokaṁ upapannā tāsaṁ devatānaṁ bhāsamānānaṁ saddaṁ suṇātha:
“suppaṭipannāttha, mārisā, ujuppaṭipannāttha, mārisā, ekantasukhassa lokassa sacchikiriyāya;
mayampi hi, mārisā, evaṁ paṭipannā ekantasukhaṁ lokaṁ upapannā”’ti?
Iti puṭṭhā ‘no’ti vadanti.
Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, poṭṭhapāda, nanu evaṁ sante tesaṁ samaṇabrāhmaṇānaṁ appāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti? Doesn’t what they say turn out to have no demonstrable basis?”
“Addhā kho, bhante, evaṁ sante tesaṁ samaṇabrāhmaṇānaṁ appāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti. “Clearly that’s the case, sir.”
2.2. Tayoattapaṭilābha 2.2. Three Kinds of Incarnation
“Tayo kho me, poṭṭhapāda, attapaṭilābhā—“Poṭṭhapāda, there are these three kinds of incarnation: Attapaṭilābha is literally “re-acquisition of self”, where attā is explained by the commentary as attabhāva, the “state of the self” or “life-form” that is acquired or “incarnated” at rebirth, i.e. the body (sarīra), whether material or immaterial. Here we see an echo of the old use of ātman as “body”, although it is applied even to the formless realms.
oḷāriko attapaṭilābho, manomayo attapaṭilābho, arūpo attapaṭilābho. a solid incarnation, a mind-made incarnation, and a formless incarnation. These recap the three theses of perception and the self posted by Poṭṭhapāda from DN 9:22.1.
Katamo ca, poṭṭhapāda, oḷāriko attapaṭilābho? And what is a solid incarnation?
Rūpī cātumahābhūtiko kabaḷīkārāhārabhakkho, ayaṁ oḷāriko attapaṭilābho. It is formed, made up of the four principal states, and consumes edible food.
Katamo manomayo attapaṭilābho? What is a mind-made incarnation?
Rūpī manomayo sabbaṅgapaccaṅgī ahīnindriyo, ayaṁ manomayo attapaṭilābho. It is formed, mind-made, whole in its major and minor limbs, not deficient in any faculty.
Katamo arūpo attapaṭilābho? What is a formless incarnation?
Arūpī saññāmayo, ayaṁ arūpo attapaṭilābho. It is formless, made of perception.
Oḷārikassapi kho ahaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, attapaṭilābhassa pahānāya dhammaṁ desemi: I teach the Dhamma for the giving up of reincarnation in these three kinds of incarnation.
‘yathāpaṭipannānaṁ vo saṅkilesikā dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissathā’ti. ‘When you practice accordingly, corrupting qualities will be given up in you and cleansing qualities will grow. You’ll enter and remain in the fullness and abundance of wisdom, having realized it with your own insight in this very life.’
Siyā kho pana te, poṭṭhapāda, evamassa: Poṭṭhapāda, you might think:
‘saṅkilesikā dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissati, dukkho ca kho vihāro’ti. ‘Corrupting qualities will be given up and cleansing qualities will grow. One will enter and remain in the fullness and abundance of wisdom, having realized it with one’s own insight in this very life. But such a life is suffering.’ Compare with the similar sentiment at SN 22.2:10.1.
Na kho panetaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, evaṁ daṭṭhabbaṁ. But you should not see it like this.
Saṅkilesikā ceva dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā ca dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissati, pāmujjañceva bhavissati pīti ca passaddhi ca sati ca sampajaññañca sukho ca vihāro. Corrupting qualities will be given up and cleansing qualities will grow. One will enter and remain in the fullness and abundance of wisdom, having realized it with one’s own insight in this very life. And there will be only joy and happiness, tranquility, mindfulness and awareness. Such a life is blissful.
Manomayassapi kho ahaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, attapaṭilābhassa pahānāya dhammaṁ desemi:
‘yathāpaṭipannānaṁ vo saṅkilesikā dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissathā’ti.
Siyā kho pana te, poṭṭhapāda, evamassa:
‘saṅkilesikā dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissati, dukkho ca kho vihāro’ti.
Na kho panetaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, evaṁ daṭṭhabbaṁ.
Saṅkilesikā ceva dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā ca dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissati, pāmujjañceva bhavissati pīti ca passaddhi ca sati ca sampajaññañca sukho ca vihāro.
Arūpassapi kho ahaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, attapaṭilābhassa pahānāya dhammaṁ desemi:
‘yathāpaṭipannānaṁ vo saṅkilesikā dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissathā’ti.
Siyā kho pana te, poṭṭhapāda, evamassa:
‘saṅkilesikā dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissati, dukkho ca kho vihāro’ti.
Na kho panetaṁ, poṭṭhapāda, evaṁ daṭṭhabbaṁ.
Saṅkilesikā ceva dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā ca dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissati, pāmujjañceva bhavissati pīti ca passaddhi ca sati ca sampajaññañca sukho ca vihāro.
Pare ce, poṭṭhapāda, amhe evaṁ puccheyyuṁ: Poṭṭhapāda, if others should ask us,
‘katamo pana so, āvuso, oḷāriko attapaṭilābho, yassa tumhe pahānāya dhammaṁ desetha, yathāpaṭipannānaṁ vo saṅkilesikā dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissathā’ti, tesaṁ mayaṁ evaṁ puṭṭhā evaṁ byākareyyāma: ‘But reverends, what is that solid incarnation for the giving up of which you teach?’ We’d answer like this,
‘ayaṁ vā so, āvuso, oḷāriko attapaṭilābho, yassa mayaṁ pahānāya dhammaṁ desema, yathāpaṭipannānaṁ vo saṅkilesikā dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissathā’ti. ‘This is that solid incarnation.’
Pare ce, poṭṭhapāda, amhe evaṁ puccheyyuṁ: If others should ask us,
‘katamo pana so, āvuso, manomayo attapaṭilābho, yassa tumhe pahānāya dhammaṁ desetha, yathāpaṭipannānaṁ vo saṅkilesikā dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissathā’ti? ‘But reverends, what is that mind-made incarnation?’ We’d answer like this,
Tesaṁ mayaṁ evaṁ puṭṭhā evaṁ byākareyyāma:
‘ayaṁ vā so, āvuso, manomayo attapaṭilābho yassa mayaṁ pahānāya dhammaṁ desema, yathāpaṭipannānaṁ vo saṅkilesikā dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissathā’ti. ‘This is that mind-made incarnation.’ The Buddha points to the experience to demonstrate what he is talking about, rather than offering a long theoretical explanation. Ayaṁ is a pronoun of presence, used to indicate what is apparent before the subject.
Pare ce, poṭṭhapāda, amhe evaṁ puccheyyuṁ: If others should ask us,
‘katamo pana so, āvuso, arūpo attapaṭilābho, yassa tumhe pahānāya dhammaṁ desetha, yathāpaṭipannānaṁ vo saṅkilesikā dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissathā’ti? ‘But reverends, what is that formless incarnation?’ We’d answer like this,
Tesaṁ mayaṁ evaṁ puṭṭhā evaṁ byākareyyāma:
‘ayaṁ vā so, āvuso, arūpo attapaṭilābho yassa mayaṁ pahānāya dhammaṁ desema, yathāpaṭipannānaṁ vo saṅkilesikā dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissathā’ti. ‘This is that formless incarnation.’
Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, poṭṭhapāda, What do you think, Poṭṭhapāda?
nanu evaṁ sante sappāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti? This being so, doesn’t that statement turn out to have a demonstrable basis?”
“Addhā kho, bhante, evaṁ sante sappāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti. “Clearly that’s the case, sir.”
“Seyyathāpi, poṭṭhapāda, puriso nisseṇiṁ kareyya pāsādassa ārohaṇāya tasseva pāsādassa heṭṭhā. “Suppose a man were to build a ladder for climbing up to a stilt longhouse right underneath that longhouse.
Tamenaṁ evaṁ vadeyyuṁ: They’d say to him,
‘ambho purisa, yassa tvaṁ pāsādassa ārohaṇāya nisseṇiṁ karosi, jānāsi taṁ pāsādaṁ, puratthimāya vā disāya dakkhiṇāya vā disāya pacchimāya vā disāya uttarāya vā disāya ucco vā nīco vā majjhimo vā’ti? ‘My man, that stilt longhouse for which you’re building a ladder—do you know whether it’s to the north, south, east, or west? Or whether it’s tall or short or medium?’
So evaṁ vadeyya: He’d say,
‘ayaṁ vā so, āvuso, pāsādo, yassāhaṁ ārohaṇāya nisseṇiṁ karomi, tasseva pāsādassa heṭṭhā’ti. ‘This is that stilt longhouse for which I’m building a ladder, right underneath it.’
Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, poṭṭhapāda, What do you think, Poṭṭhapāda?
nanu evaṁ sante tassa purisassa sappāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti? This being so, doesn’t that man’s statement turn out to have a demonstrable basis?”
“Addhā kho, bhante, evaṁ sante tassa purisassa sappāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti. “Clearly that’s the case, sir.”
“Evameva kho, poṭṭhapāda, pare ce amhe evaṁ puccheyyuṁ:
‘katamo pana so, āvuso, oḷāriko attapaṭilābho …pe…
katamo pana so, āvuso, manomayo attapaṭilābho …pe…
katamo pana so, āvuso, arūpo attapaṭilābho, yassa tumhe pahānāya dhammaṁ desetha, yathāpaṭipannānaṁ vo saṅkilesikā dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissathā’ti?
Tesaṁ mayaṁ evaṁ puṭṭhā evaṁ byākareyyāma:
‘ayaṁ vā so, āvuso, arūpo attapaṭilābho, yassa mayaṁ pahānāya dhammaṁ desema, yathāpaṭipannānaṁ vo saṅkilesikā dhammā pahīyissanti, vodāniyā dhammā abhivaḍḍhissanti, paññāpāripūriṁ vepullattañca diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharissathā’ti.
Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, poṭṭhapāda, nanu evaṁ sante sappāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti?
“Addhā kho, bhante, evaṁ sante sappāṭihīrakataṁ bhāsitaṁ sampajjatī”ti.
Evaṁ vutte, citto hatthisāriputto bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: When the Buddha had spoken, Citta Hatthisāriputta said,
“yasmiṁ, bhante, samaye oḷāriko attapaṭilābho hoti, moghassa tasmiṁ samaye manomayo attapaṭilābho hoti, mogho arūpo attapaṭilābho hoti; “Sir, when reincarnated in a solid incarnation, are the mind-made and formless incarnations fictitious, Citta is asking an ontological question, assuming that these three states are existent realities of the self.
oḷāriko vāssa attapaṭilābho tasmiṁ samaye sacco hoti. and only the solid incarnation real?
Yasmiṁ, bhante, samaye manomayo attapaṭilābho hoti, moghassa tasmiṁ samaye oḷāriko attapaṭilābho hoti, mogho arūpo attapaṭilābho hoti; When reincarnated in a mind-made incarnation, are the solid and formless incarnations fictitious,
manomayo vāssa attapaṭilābho tasmiṁ samaye sacco hoti. and only the mind-made incarnation real?
Yasmiṁ, bhante, samaye arūpo attapaṭilābho hoti, moghassa tasmiṁ samaye oḷāriko attapaṭilābho hoti, mogho manomayo attapaṭilābho hoti; When reincarnated in a formless incarnation, are the solid and mind-made incarnations fictitious,
arūpo vāssa attapaṭilābho tasmiṁ samaye sacco hotī”ti. and only the formless incarnation real?”
“Yasmiṁ, citta, samaye oḷāriko attapaṭilābho hoti, neva tasmiṁ samaye manomayo attapaṭilābhoti saṅkhaṁ gacchati, na arūpo attapaṭilābhoti saṅkhaṁ gacchati; “When reincarnated in a solid incarnation, it’s not referred to as a mind-made or formless incarnation, The Buddha reframes the question as one of conventional description. He is describing states in which one might be reborn, not underlying ontologies.
oḷāriko attapaṭilābhotveva tasmiṁ samaye saṅkhaṁ gacchati. only as a solid incarnation.
Yasmiṁ, citta, samaye manomayo attapaṭilābho hoti, neva tasmiṁ samaye oḷāriko attapaṭilābhoti saṅkhaṁ gacchati, na arūpo attapaṭilābhoti saṅkhaṁ gacchati; When reincarnated in a mind-made incarnation, it’s not referred to as a solid or formless incarnation,
manomayo attapaṭilābhotveva tasmiṁ samaye saṅkhaṁ gacchati. only as a mind-made incarnation.
Yasmiṁ, citta, samaye arūpo attapaṭilābho hoti, neva tasmiṁ samaye oḷāriko attapaṭilābhoti saṅkhaṁ gacchati, na manomayo attapaṭilābhoti saṅkhaṁ gacchati; When reincarnated in a formless incarnation, it’s not referred to as a solid or mind-made incarnation,
arūpo attapaṭilābhotveva tasmiṁ samaye saṅkhaṁ gacchati. only as a formless incarnation.
Sace taṁ, citta, evaṁ puccheyyuṁ: Citta, suppose they were to ask you,
‘ahosi tvaṁ atītamaddhānaṁ, na tvaṁ nāhosi; ‘Did you exist in the past? This anticipates one of the great philosophical debates of sectarian Buddhists which gave rise to the Sarvāstivāda, the school whose core doctrine was that “all exists (in the past, future, and present)”. The Buddha describes past, future, and present with the three grammatical tenses.
bhavissasi tvaṁ anāgatamaddhānaṁ, na tvaṁ na bhavissasi; Will you exist in the future?
atthi tvaṁ etarahi, na tvaṁ natthī’ti. Do you exist now?’
Evaṁ puṭṭho tvaṁ, citta, kinti byākareyyāsī”ti? How would you answer?”
“Sace maṁ, bhante, evaṁ puccheyyuṁ: “Sir, if they were to ask me this,
‘ahosi tvaṁ atītamaddhānaṁ, na tvaṁ na ahosi;
bhavissasi tvaṁ anāgatamaddhānaṁ, na tvaṁ na bhavissasi;
atthi tvaṁ etarahi, na tvaṁ natthī’ti.
Evaṁ puṭṭho ahaṁ, bhante, evaṁ byākareyyaṁ: I’d answer like this,
‘ahosāhaṁ atītamaddhānaṁ, nāhaṁ na ahosiṁ; ‘I did exist in the past.
bhavissāmahaṁ anāgatamaddhānaṁ, nāhaṁ na bhavissāmi; I will exist in the future.
atthāhaṁ etarahi, nāhaṁ natthī’ti. I do exist now.’
Evaṁ puṭṭho ahaṁ, bhante, evaṁ byākareyyan”ti. That’s how I’d answer.”
“Sace pana taṁ, citta, evaṁ puccheyyuṁ: “But Citta, suppose they were to ask you,
‘yo te ahosi atīto attapaṭilābho, sova te attapaṭilābho sacco, mogho anāgato, mogho paccuppanno? ‘Is the reincarnation you had in the past your only real one, and those of the future and present fictitious?
Yo te bhavissati anāgato attapaṭilābho, sova te attapaṭilābho sacco, mogho atīto, mogho paccuppanno? Is the reincarnation you will have in the future your only real one, and those of the past and present fictitious?
Yo te etarahi paccuppanno attapaṭilābho, sova te attapaṭilābho sacco, mogho atīto, mogho anāgato’ti. Is the reincarnation you have now your only real one, and those of the past and future fictitious?’
Evaṁ puṭṭho tvaṁ, citta, kinti byākareyyāsī”ti? How would you answer?”
“Sace pana maṁ, bhante, evaṁ puccheyyuṁ: “Sir, if they were to ask me this,
‘yo te ahosi atīto attapaṭilābho, sova te attapaṭilābho sacco, mogho anāgato, mogho paccuppanno.
Yo te bhavissati anāgato attapaṭilābho, sova te attapaṭilābho sacco, mogho atīto, mogho paccuppanno.
Yo te etarahi paccuppanno attapaṭilābho, sova te attapaṭilābho sacco, mogho atīto, mogho anāgato’ti.
Evaṁ puṭṭho ahaṁ, bhante, evaṁ byākareyyaṁ: I’d answer like this,
‘yo me ahosi atīto attapaṭilābho, sova me attapaṭilābho tasmiṁ samaye sacco ahosi, mogho anāgato, mogho paccuppanno. ‘The reincarnation I had in the past was real at that time, and those of the future and present fictitious.
Yo me bhavissati anāgato attapaṭilābho, sova me attapaṭilābho tasmiṁ samaye sacco bhavissati, mogho atīto, mogho paccuppanno. The reincarnation I will have in the future will be real at the time, and those of the past and present fictitious.
Yo me etarahi paccuppanno attapaṭilābho, sova me attapaṭilābho sacco, mogho atīto, mogho anāgato’ti. The reincarnation I have now is real at this time, and those of the past and future fictitious.’
Evaṁ puṭṭho ahaṁ, bhante, evaṁ byākareyyan”ti. That’s how I’d answer.”
“Evameva kho, citta, yasmiṁ samaye oḷāriko attapaṭilābho hoti, neva tasmiṁ samaye manomayo attapaṭilābhoti saṅkhaṁ gacchati, na arūpo attapaṭilābhoti saṅkhaṁ gacchati. “In the same way, while in any one of the three reincarnations, it’s not referred to as the other two, only under its own name.
Oḷāriko attapaṭilābhotveva tasmiṁ samaye saṅkhaṁ gacchati.
Yasmiṁ, citta, samaye manomayo attapaṭilābho hoti …pe…
yasmiṁ, citta, samaye arūpo attapaṭilābho hoti, neva tasmiṁ samaye oḷāriko attapaṭilābhoti saṅkhaṁ gacchati, na manomayo attapaṭilābhoti saṅkhaṁ gacchati;
arūpo attapaṭilābhotveva tasmiṁ samaye saṅkhaṁ gacchati.
Seyyathāpi, citta, gavā khīraṁ, khīramhā dadhi, dadhimhā navanītaṁ, navanītamhā sappi, sappimhā sappimaṇḍo. From a cow comes milk, from milk comes curds, from curds come butter, from butter comes ghee, and from ghee comes cream of ghee. And the cream of ghee is said to be the best of these. Compare Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 3.3.3.2.
Yasmiṁ samaye khīraṁ hoti, neva tasmiṁ samaye dadhīti saṅkhaṁ gacchati, na navanītanti saṅkhaṁ gacchati, na sappīti saṅkhaṁ gacchati, na sappimaṇḍoti saṅkhaṁ gacchati; While it’s milk, it’s not referred to as curds, butter, ghee, or cream of ghee.
khīrantveva tasmiṁ samaye saṅkhaṁ gacchati. It’s only referred to as milk.
Yasmiṁ samaye dadhi hoti …pe… While it’s curd
navanītaṁ hoti … or butter
sappi hoti … or ghee
sappimaṇḍo hoti, neva tasmiṁ samaye khīranti saṅkhaṁ gacchati, na dadhīti saṅkhaṁ gacchati, na navanītanti saṅkhaṁ gacchati, na sappīti saṅkhaṁ gacchati; or cream of ghee, it’s not referred to as anything else,
sappimaṇḍotveva tasmiṁ samaye saṅkhaṁ gacchati. only under its own name.
Evameva kho, citta, yasmiṁ samaye oḷāriko attapaṭilābho hoti …pe… In the same way, while in any one of the three incarnations, it’s not referred to as the other two, only under its own name.
yasmiṁ, citta, samaye manomayo attapaṭilābho hoti …pe…
yasmiṁ, citta, samaye arūpo attapaṭilābho hoti, neva tasmiṁ samaye oḷāriko attapaṭilābhoti saṅkhaṁ gacchati, na manomayo attapaṭilābhoti saṅkhaṁ gacchati;
arūpo attapaṭilābhotveva tasmiṁ samaye saṅkhaṁ gacchati.
Imā kho, citta, lokasamaññā lokaniruttiyo lokavohārā lokapaññattiyo, yāhi tathāgato voharati aparāmasan”ti. These are the world’s common usages, definitions, expressions, and descriptions, which the Realized One uses to communicate without getting stuck on them.” Words such as “self” have a conventional usage and in that context are perfectly fine. But what that “self” refers to is constantly changing, as it is reincarnated in different states. It is like a river which keeps the same name even though the water is always changing. If, driven by attachment, we assume there is a metaphysical reality underlying the conventional “self”, we step beyond what can be empirically verified. Note, however, that the Buddha is not asserting that there are two levels of truth, conventional and ultimate, a distinction not found in early Buddhism. | Compare MN 139:3.9, MN 74:13.1, SN 1.25.
Evaṁ vutte, poṭṭhapādo paribbājako bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: When he had spoken, the wanderer Poṭṭhapāda said to the Buddha,
“abhikkantaṁ, bhante, abhikkantaṁ, bhante. “Excellent, sir! Excellent!
Seyyathāpi, bhante, nikkujjitaṁ vā ukkujjeyya, paṭicchannaṁ vā vivareyya, mūḷhassa vā maggaṁ ācikkheyya, andhakāre vā telapajjotaṁ dhāreyya: ‘cakkhumanto rūpāni dakkhantī’ti; evamevaṁ bhagavatā anekapariyāyena dhammo pakāsito. As if he were righting the overturned, or revealing the hidden, or pointing out the path to the lost, or lighting a lamp in the dark so people with clear eyes can see what’s there, so too the Buddha has made the teaching clear in many ways.
Esāhaṁ, bhante, bhagavantaṁ saraṇaṁ gacchāmi dhammañca bhikkhusaṅghañca. I go for refuge to the Buddha, to the teaching, and to the mendicant Saṅgha.
Upāsakaṁ maṁ bhagavā dhāretu ajjatagge pāṇupetaṁ saraṇaṁ gatan”ti. From this day forth, may the Buddha remember me as a lay follower who has gone for refuge for life.”
2.3. Cittahatthisāriputtaupasampadā 2.3. The Ordination of Citta Hatthisāriputta
Citto pana hatthisāriputto bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: But Citta Hatthisāriputta said to the Buddha,
“abhikkantaṁ, bhante, abhikkantaṁ, bhante. “Excellent, sir! Excellent!
Seyyathāpi, bhante, nikkujjitaṁ vā ukkujjeyya, paṭicchannaṁ vā vivareyya, mūḷhassa vā maggaṁ ācikkheyya, andhakāre vā telapajjotaṁ dhāreyya: ‘cakkhumanto rūpāni dakkhantī’ti; evamevaṁ bhagavatā anekapariyāyena dhammo pakāsito. As if he were righting the overturned, or revealing the hidden, or pointing out the path to the lost, or lighting a lamp in the dark so people with clear eyes can see what’s there, so too the Buddha has made the teaching clear in many ways.
Esāhaṁ, bhante, bhagavantaṁ saraṇaṁ gacchāmi dhammañca bhikkhusaṅghañca. I go for refuge to the Buddha, to the teaching, and to the mendicant Saṅgha.
Labheyyāhaṁ, bhante, bhagavato santike pabbajjaṁ, labheyyaṁ upasampadan”ti. Sir, may I receive the going forth, the ordination in the Buddha’s presence?”
Alattha kho citto hatthisāriputto bhagavato santike pabbajjaṁ, alattha upasampadaṁ. And Citta Hatthisāriputta received the going forth, the ordination in the Buddha’s presence.
Acirūpasampanno kho panāyasmā citto hatthisāriputto eko vūpakaṭṭho appamatto ātāpī pahitatto viharanto na cirasseva—yassatthāya kulaputtā sammadeva agārasmā anagāriyaṁ pabbajanti, tadanuttaraṁ—brahmacariyapariyosānaṁ diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja vihāsi. Not long after his ordination, Venerable Citta Hatthisāriputta, living alone, withdrawn, diligent, keen, and resolute, soon realized the supreme culmination of the spiritual path in this very life. He lived having achieved with his own insight the goal for which gentlemen rightly go forth from the lay life to homelessness. In AN 6.60 we find Citta Hatthisāriputta, still a somewhat junior monk, rudely interrupting his seniors. After admonition he disrobed, but he ordained again and later achieved arahantship. We can reconcile these two accounts by recognizing that the phrase acira “not long after” is a conventional term, which might be several years. Thus the events of AN 6.60 occurred some time between his ordination and awakening.
“khīṇā jāti, vusitaṁ brahmacariyaṁ, kataṁ karaṇīyaṁ, nāparaṁ itthAttāyā”ti abbhaññāsi. He understood: “Rebirth is ended; the spiritual journey has been completed; what had to be done has been done; there is nothing further for this place.”
Aññataro kho panāyasmā citto hatthisāriputto arahataṁ ahosīti. And Venerable Citta Hatthisāriputta became one of the perfected.
Poṭṭhapādasuttaṁ niṭṭhitaṁ navamaṁ.