Other Translations: Deutsch , Italiano , ру́сский язы́к , Srpski

From: , ,

PreviousNext

Majjhima Nikāya 49 Middle Discourses 49Middle Discourses 49

Brahmanimantanikasutta The Brahmā InvitationOn the Invitation of Divinity

Evaṁ me sutaṁ—In this sutta, the Buddha faces two antagonists: Baka, a Brahmā who believes that his Brahmā-attainment is the highest attainment there is; and Māra, who wants (1) to keep Baka under his power by allowing Baka to maintain his deluded opinion, and (2) to prevent the Buddha from sharing his awakened knowledge with others. Of the two, Māra is the more insidious, a point illustrated by the fact that Māra always speaks through someone else and never directly shows his face. (Another interesting point is illustrated by the fact that Māra is the source of the demand that one obey a creator god.) In overcoming his antagonists, the Buddha asserts the superiority of his knowledge in two major fashions: through a description of his awakened knowledge and through a display of psychic powers. The Buddha describes his awakened knowledge in a variety of ways: —by identifying Māra whenever he possesses an attendant of Baka’s assembly, —by describing the full extent of Baka’s power, —by identifying levels of being that Baka does not know, —by describing an awakened consciousness that is not known by means of any of the six senses at all, —by asserting an awareness that avoids delight in both becoming and the quest for non-becoming, and —by asserting that he has abandoned all possible conditions that would lead to further rebirth. Some of these assertions—in particular, the assertion of a consciousness not mediated by any of the six senses—are extremely important Dhamma lessons, which are further explained in the notes. But as the sutta shows, even the Buddha’s description of these teachings was not enough to win over Baka or the members of his following. They were convinced only when the Buddha then performed a feat of psychic power that (1) even Baka could not fathom and (2) illustrated the Buddha’s major point. Up to then, in identifying Māra and the range of Baka’s power, the Buddha was in effect saying, “I see you, but you don’t see me.” With his display of psychic power, in which Brahmā and his following could not see him but could hear his voice, he demonstrated his point in such graphic terms that Baka and his following were immediately won over. In this way, the protagonists of this sutta react in a way very different from that of a typical modern reader. We at present, when reading this sutta, may be more impressed with the Buddha’s explanation of his awakened knowledge than we are with the account of his display of psychic power, for after all, both aspects of the sutta—the description of the Buddha’s knowledge and the description of his psychic power—are, for us, just that: descriptions. But, for those who witnessed it, his display of power was an undeniable fact that went beyond words. They saw him go beyond their range. Prior to that display, they regarded his claims of knowledge simply as that: mere claims. When he showed, however, that he could perform a miracle that even Baka could not perform, they were forced to concede his superiority. Thus this sutta imparts a lesson often forgotten at present, that the Buddha taught not only by word but also by example, and that some of his examples required a dimension of power that even the gods could not match. Strictly speaking, of course, the Buddha’s display of power did not prove that he had gone beyond becoming. After all, in becoming invisible to Baka, he may simply have gone to another level of becoming of which Baka was unaware. However, the Buddha correctly surmised that a display of power would subdue the pride of his listeners, awaken a sense of conviction in his attainment, and thus enable them to enter the path of practice. As he states in MN 27, only when one sees the four noble truths—usually a synonym for stream-entry—is one’s conviction in the Buddha’s awakening confirmed. Only when one puts an end to one’s mental effluents does one have firm proof of the Buddha’s awakening. The Buddha notes in DN 11 that a display of psychic powers can sometimes backfire, in that one’s audience might assume that one is engaging in cheap magic tricks. Thus, instead of inspiring conviction, the display simply increases doubt. Nevertheless, there are other instances in the Canon—most notably in the story of the Kassapa brothers (Mv.I.15-22) and that of Aṅgulimāla (MN 86)—where the Buddha was able to display his powers to good effect. But because he could not trust even his arahant disciples to possess his same sense of when such powers would work and when they would backfire, he forbade his disciples from displaying psychic powers to lay people. (See Cv.V.8; Buddhist Monastic Code, vol. 2, chapter 10.) The conclusion of the sutta states that the sutta’s name comes from two facets of the story: the fact that it contains an invitation from a Brahmā—when Baka welcomes the Buddha to his realm—and from the silencing of Māra. The first point is clear enough, but the second requires explanation. It is a play on the word Brahmā, which is not only a noun denoting the highest levels of devas, but also an adjective meaning “of great or high power.” The Buddha’s last statement, in which he declares his freedom from rebirth, is something of an invitation to Māra: Māra is welcome to refute it if he can. Up to that point, Māra has phrased his threats to the Buddha in terms of the fortunate rebirths the Buddha will experience if he obeys Māra’s advice, and the unfortunate ones he will experience if he doesn’t. Now that the Buddha declares, in a way that Māra cannot refute, that he has abandoned all possible conditions for rebirth, Māra has nothing more on which to base his threats. Thus he is left speechless. In this way, the Buddha’s last statement is a brahma-invitation: a statement that anyone is welcome to refute, but of such great power that no one can refute it at all. * * * I have heard thatSo I have heard. This sutta is a unique fusion of high philosophy and cosmic drama, positing an unthinkable alliance between what in Christian terms would be called God and the Devil. Nonetheless, due to a plethora of textual difficulties and uncertain readings, caution in interpretation would be wise.

ekaṁ samayaṁ bhagavā sāvatthiyaṁ viharati jetavane anāthapiṇḍikassa ārāme. on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery.At one time the Buddha was staying near Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery.

Tatra kho bhagavā bhikkhū āmantesi: There he addressed the monks,There the Buddha addressed the mendicants,

“bhikkhavo”ti. “Monks!”“Mendicants!”

“Bhadante”ti te bhikkhū bhagavato paccassosuṁ. “Yes, lord,” the monks responded to him.“Venerable sir,” they replied.

Bhagavā etadavoca: The Blessed One said:The Buddha said this:

“Ekamidāhaṁ, bhikkhave, samayaṁ ukkaṭṭhāyaṁ viharāmi subhagavane sālarājamūle. “On one occasion recently I was staying in Ukkaṭṭha in the Subhaga forest at the root of a royal Sal tree.“This one time, mendicants, I was staying near Ukkaṭṭhā in the Subhaga Forest at the root of a magnificent sal tree. SN 6.4, which otherwise opens with the same events, is simply set in Sāvatthī with no mention of Ukkaṭṭhā, which is the same setting as MN 1, with which this sutta shares some themes. Both critique the sophisticated philosophy of the Kosalan brahmins, and hence are set in the town of their leader Pokkharasāti (DN 3:1.2.1).

Tena kho pana, bhikkhave, samayena bakassa brahmuno evarūpaṁ pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ uppannaṁ hoti: Now on that occasion an evil viewpoint had arisen to Baka Brahmā:Now at that time Baka the Divinity had the following harmful misconception: Baka maintains the same wrong view at SN 6.4, where his past lives are revealed. The word baka means “stork” or “crane”. To search for a high divinity of this name in Brahmanism is to be disappointed, for instead we find a man-eating demon (rakṣasa) in bird form whose fate is to be slain by the hero Bhīma (or Kṛṣṇa). Pali stories tell of how the stork dozes peacefully as if meditating by the water, while in reality he is trying to fool fish into approaching so he can snatch them up (Ja 38, Ja 236). A cunning, large, white, high-flying, predatory bird who fakes meditation is a fitting image for the antagonist of these suttas.

‘idaṁ niccaṁ, idaṁ dhuvaṁ, idaṁ sassataṁ, idaṁ kevalaṁ, idaṁ acavanadhammaṁ, idañhi na jāyati na jīyati na mīyati na cavati na upapajjati, ito ca panaññaṁ uttari nissaraṇaṁ natthī’ti. ‘This is constant. This is permanent. This is eternal. This is total. This is not subject to falling away—for this does not take birth, does not age, does not die, does not fall away, does not reappear. And there is no other, higher escape.’Baka Brahmā here appears to be referring both to his Brahmā world and to the state of mind that enables one to inhabit his Brahmā world.‘This is permanent, this is everlasting, this is eternal, this is whole, this is not liable to pass away. For this is where there’s no being born, growing old, dying, passing away, or being reborn. And there’s no other escape beyond this.’ The use of the impersonal pronoun (idaṁ) to refer to the self as divinity is a characteristic Upaniṣadic idiom: “you are that” (tat tvam asi, Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.8.7); “that self is divinity” (ayam ātmā brahma, Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad 1.2); “I am that” (so’ham asmi, Īśa Upaniṣad 16); “this is that self hidden in all” (eṣa ta ātmā sarvāntaraḥ, Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 3.4.1, etc.); “this, verily, is that” (etad vai tat, Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.1.5). | For idaṁ niccaṁ see eṣa nityo (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.4.23); for idaṁ dhuvaṁ see etad apramayaṁ dhruvam (4.4.20).

Atha khvāhaṁ, bhikkhave, bakassa brahmuno cetasā cetoparivitakkamaññāya—“So I—having known with my awareness the line of thinking in Baka Brahmā’s awareness—Then I knew what Baka the Divinity was thinking.

seyyathāpi nāma balavā puriso samiñjitaṁ vā bāhaṁ pasāreyya, pasāritaṁ vā bāhaṁ samiñjeyya; evameva—ukkaṭṭhāyaṁ subhagavane sālarājamūle antarahito tasmiṁ brahmaloke pāturahosiṁ. as a strong man would extend his flexed arm or flex his extended arm, vanished into the root of the royal Sal tree in the Subhaga forest in Ukkaṭṭha and appeared in that Brahmā world.As easily as a strong person would extend or contract their arm, I vanished from the Subhaga Forest and reappeared in that realm of divinity.

Addasā kho maṁ, bhikkhave, bako brahmā dūratova āgacchantaṁ; Baka Brahmā saw me coming in the distance and,Baka saw me coming off in the distance

disvāna maṁ etadavoca: on seeing me, said,and said,

‘ehi kho, mārisa, svāgataṁ, mārisa. ‘Come, good sir. You are well-come, good sir.‘Come, good fellow! Welcome, good fellow! “Good fellow” (mārisa; Sanskrit mārṣa, māriṣa) is a special term of address used by deities and sometimes by kings. The term harks back to Sanskrit mādṛśa, “one like me”, in the sense of having a comparable status.

Cirassaṁ kho, mārisa, imaṁ pariyāyamakāsi yadidaṁ idhāgamanāya. It has been long, good sir, since you arranged to come here—It’s been a long time since you took the opportunity to come here.

Idañhi, mārisa, niccaṁ, idaṁ dhuvaṁ, idaṁ sassataṁ, idaṁ kevalaṁ, idaṁ acavanadhammaṁ, idañhi na jāyati na jīyati na mīyati na cavati na upapajjati. Ito ca panaññaṁ uttari nissaraṇaṁ natthī’ti. for this, good sir, is constant. This is permanent. This is eternal. This is total. This is not subject to falling away—for here one does not take birth, does not age, does not die, does not fall away, does not reappear. And there is no other, higher escape.’For this is permanent, this is everlasting, this is eternal, this is whole, this is not liable to pass away. For this is where there’s no being born, growing old, dying, passing away, or being reborn. And there’s no other escape beyond this.’

Evaṁ vutte, ahaṁ, bhikkhave, bakaṁ brahmānaṁ etadavocaṁ: “When this was said, I told Baka Brahmā,When he had spoken, I said to him,

‘avijjāgato vata bho bako brahmā, avijjāgato vata bho bako brahmā; ‘How immersed in ignorance is Baka Brahmā! How immersed in ignorance is Baka Brahmā! —‘Oh lord, Baka the Divinity is lost in ignorance! Oh lord, Baka the Divinity is lost in ignorance!

yatra hi nāma aniccaṁyeva samānaṁ niccanti vakkhati, addhuvaṁyeva samānaṁ dhuvanti vakkhati, asassataṁyeva samānaṁ sassatanti vakkhati, akevalaṁyeva samānaṁ kevalanti vakkhati, cavanadhammaṁyeva samānaṁ acavanadhammanti vakkhati; in that what is actually inconstant he calls “constant.” What is actually impermanent he calls “permanent.” What is actually non-eternal he calls “eternal.” What is actually partial he calls “total.” What is actually subject to falling away he calls “not subject to falling away.”Because what is actually impermanent, not lasting, transient, incomplete, and liable to pass away, he says is permanent, everlasting, eternal, whole, and not liable to pass away.

yattha ca pana jāyati jīyati mīyati cavati upapajjati tañca vakkhati: Where one takes birth, ages, dies, falls away, and reappears, he says,And where there is being born, growing old, dying, passing away, and being reborn, he says that

“idañhi na jāyati na jīyati na mīyati na cavati na upapajjatī”ti; “For here one does not take birth, does not age, does not die, does not fall away, does not reappear.”there’s no being born, growing old, dying, passing away, or being reborn.

santañca panaññaṁ uttari nissaraṇaṁ “natthaññaṁ uttari nissaraṇan”ti vakkhatī’ti. And there being another, higher escape, he says, “There is no other, higher escape.”’And although there is another escape beyond this, he says that there’s no other escape beyond this.’

Atha kho, bhikkhave, māro pāpimā aññataraṁ brahmapārisajjaṁ anvāvisitvā maṁ etadavoca: “Then Māra, the Evil One, taking possession of an attendant of the Brahmā assembly, said to me,Then Māra the Wicked took possession of a member of the retinue of Divinity and said this to me, From this point the text diverges from SN 6.4:4.1.

‘bhikkhu bhikkhu, metamāsado metamāsado, eso hi, bhikkhu, brahmā mahābrahmā abhibhū anabhibhūto aññadatthudaso vasavattī issaro kattā nimmātā seṭṭho sajitā vasī pitā bhūtabhabyānaṁ. ‘Monk! Monk! Don’t attack him! Don’t attack him! For this Brahmā, monk, is the Great Brahmā, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be.‘Mendicant, mendicant! Don’t attack this one! Don’t attack this one! For this is the Divinity, the Great Divinity, the Vanquisher, the Unvanquished, the Universal Seer, the Wielder of Power, God Almighty, the Maker, the Creator, the First, the Begetter, the Controller, the Father of those who have been born and those yet to be born. Māra adopts the boast of Brahmā (DN 1:2.5.2). | It is rare for the Buddha to be addressed as “mendicant” (bhikkhu) and it is probably meant in a slighting sense.

Ahesuṁ kho ye, bhikkhu, tayā pubbe samaṇabrāhmaṇā lokasmiṁ pathavīgarahakā pathavījigucchakā, āpagarahakā āpajigucchakā, tejagarahakā tejajigucchakā, vāyagarahakā vāyajigucchakā, bhūtagarahakā bhūtajigucchakā, devagarahakā devajigucchakā, pajāpatigarahakā pajāpatijigucchakā, brahmagarahakā brahmajigucchakā—There were, monk, before your time, contemplatives & brahmans in the world who found fault with earth and were disgusted with earth, who found fault with liquid and were disgusted with liquid, who found fault with fire and were disgusted with fire, who found fault with wind and were disgusted with wind, who found fault with beings and were disgusted with beings, who found fault with devas and were disgusted with devas, who found fault with Pajāpati and were disgusted with Pajāpati, who found fault with Brahmā and were disgusted with Brahmā.Pajāpati has different meanings in different contexts. In some contexts, it refers to a creator deva dwelling in a Brahmā world of form. In other contexts, it refers to the chief wife of a major deva.There have been ascetics and brahmins before you, mendicant, who criticized and loathed earth, water, fire, air, creatures, gods, the Progenitor, and the Divinity. This is a summary of the items in MN 1. | The “ascetics and brahmins” referred to here would include the ancient practitioners of movements such as Jainism, whose rejection of Vedism predates the Buddha.

te kāyassa bhedā pāṇupacchedā hīne kāye patiṭṭhitā ahesuṁ. “‘They, with the break-up of the body, with the cutting off of life, were established in a coarse body.The word body in this discourse refers to three things: an individual body, a group of beings on a particular level of being, and the level of being as a whole. The Commentary says that coarse body here refers to the four levels of deprivation, and refined body, further on, to the Brahmā worlds.When their bodies broke up and their breath was cut off they were established in a lower realm. “With breath cut off” (pāṇupacchedā) is a unique idiom for death in Pali, but compare Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1.5.14: prāṇaṁ na vicchindyāt; Atharvaveda 19.58.1c: prāṇo’chinno.

Ye pana, bhikkhu, tayā pubbe samaṇabrāhmaṇā lokasmiṁ pathavīpasaṁsakā pathavābhinandino, āpapasaṁsakā āpābhinandino, tejapasaṁsakā tejābhinandino, vāyapasaṁsakā vāyābhinandino, bhūtapasaṁsakā bhūtābhinandino, devapasaṁsakā devābhinandino, pajāpatipasaṁsakā pajāpatābhinandino, brahmapasaṁsakā brahmābhinandino—There were, monk, before your time, contemplatives & brahmans in the world who praised earth and were delighted with earth, who praised liquid and were delighted with liquid, who praised fire and were delighted with fire, who praised wind and were delighted with wind, who praised beings and were delighted with beings, who praised devas and were delighted with devas, who praised Pajāpati and were delighted with Pajāpati, who praised Brahmā and were delighted with Brahmā.There have been ascetics and brahmins before you, mendicant, who praised and approved earth, water, fire, air, creatures, gods, the Progenitor, and the Divinity. This would be the ancient sages revered in the Vedic tradition.

te kāyassa bhedā pāṇupacchedā paṇīte kāye patiṭṭhitā. “‘They, with the break-up of the body, with the cutting off of life, were established in a refined body.When their bodies broke up and their breath was cut off they were established in a higher realm.

Taṁ tāhaṁ, bhikkhu, evaṁ vadāmi: So I tell you, monk,So, mendicant, I tell you this:

“iṅgha tvaṁ, mārisa, yadeva te brahmā āha tadeva tvaṁ karohi, mā tvaṁ brahmuno vacanaṁ upātivattittho”. “Please, good sir, do only as Brahmā says. Don’t defy the word of Brahmā.please, good fellow, do exactly what the Divinity says. Don’t go beyond the word of the Divinity.

Sace kho tvaṁ, bhikkhu, brahmuno vacanaṁ upātivattissasi, seyyathāpi nāma puriso siriṁ āgacchantiṁ daṇḍena paṭippaṇāmeyya, seyyathāpi vā pana, bhikkhu, puriso narakappapāte papatanto hatthehi ca pādehi ca pathaviṁ virādheyya, evaṁ sampadamidaṁ, bhikkhu, tuyhaṁ bhavissati. If you defy the word of Brahmā, then—as a man, when the goddess of fortune approaches, chases her away with a stick, or as a man, falling into hell, loses hold of the earth with his hands and feet—that will be what you have accomplished.If you do, then you’ll end up like a person who, when approached by Lady Luck, would fend her off with a staff; or who, as they are falling over a cliff, would push away the ground with their hands and feet. “Lady Luck” is Siri, later famed as goddess of fortune and prosperity. The same idiom recurs at Thag 8.3:2.1. As to why someone would “fend her off” (see note on MN 37:7.3), Siri (Sanskrit śrī) is identified with Lakṣmī “the undeparting” (Śrī Sūkta 2, lakṣmīmanapagāminīm). Atharva Veda 7.115 opens with, “Fly away wicked Lakṣmī, vanish, fly hence”. Apparently 101 Lakṣmīs attach to a man when born, and the spell chases away the wicked (pāpi) while keeping the good (puṇya). In this case the Pali text does not draw directly from the Veda, as there is no close verbal parallel, and the Pali presents as irrational an action that makes good sense in the context of the Vedic passage. Rather, it would seem, the Pali draws from a more general cultural awareness. | For “falling over a cliff” see DN 12:78.2.

Iṅgha tvaṁ, mārisa, yadeva te brahmā āha tadeva tvaṁ karohi, mā tvaṁ brahmuno vacanaṁ upātivattittho. Please, good sir, do only as Brahmā says. Don’t defy the word of Brahmā.Please, good fellow, do exactly what the Divinity says. Don’t go beyond the word of the Divinity.

Nanu tvaṁ, bhikkhu, passasi brahmaparisaṁ sannipatitan’ti? Don’t you see that Brahmā’s assembly has gathered?”’Do you not see the assembly of the Divinity gathered here?’

Iti kho maṁ, bhikkhave, māro pāpimā brahmaparisaṁ upanesi. And so Māra the Evil One directed my attention to Brahmā’s assembly.And so Māra the Wicked presented the assembly of the Divinity to me.

Evaṁ vutte, ahaṁ, bhikkhave, māraṁ pāpimantaṁ etadavocaṁ: “When this was said, I told Māra the Evil One,When he had spoken, I said to Māra,

‘jānāmi kho tāhaṁ, pāpima; mā tvaṁ maññittho: ‘I know you, Evil One. Don’t assume,‘I know you, Wicked One. Do not think,

“na maṁ jānātī”ti. “He doesn’t know me.”“He does not know me.”

Māro tvamasi, pāpima. You are Māra, Evil One.You are Māra the Wicked.

Yo ceva, pāpima, brahmā, yā ca brahmaparisā, ye ca brahmapārisajjā, sabbeva tava hatthagatā sabbeva tava vasaṅgatā. And Brahmā, and Brahmā’s assembly, and the attendants of Brahmā’s assembly have all come into your hands. They have all come under your sway.And the Divinity, the Divinity’s assembly, and the retinue of Divinity have all fallen into your hands; they’re under your sway. Normally Māra is believed to hold sway over all the sensual realms, while the jhānas (and their corresponding planes of rebirth) are beyond him (MN 25:12.1). Here his reach goes even further, as even the Brahmā realms, while freed from sensuality, are not freed from the attachment to continued existence.

Tuyhañhi, pāpima, evaṁ hoti: And you think,And you think,

“esopi me assa hatthagato, esopi me assa vasaṅgato”ti. “This one, too, has come into my hands, has come under my sway.”“Maybe this one, too, has fallen into my hands; maybe he’s under my sway!”

Ahaṁ kho pana, pāpima, neva tava hatthagato neva tava vasaṅgato’ti. But, Evil One, I have neither come into your hands nor have I come under your sway.’But I haven’t fallen into your hands; I’m not under your sway.’

Evaṁ vutte, bhikkhave, bako brahmā maṁ etadavoca: “When this was said, Baka Brahmā told me,When I had spoken, Baka the Divinity said to me,

‘ahañhi, mārisa, niccaṁyeva samānaṁ “niccan”ti vadāmi, dhuvaṁyeva samānaṁ “dhuvan”ti vadāmi, sassataṁyeva samānaṁ “sassatan”ti vadāmi, kevalaṁyeva samānaṁ “kevalan”ti vadāmi, acavanadhammaṁyeva samānaṁ “acavanadhamman”ti vadāmi, yattha ca pana na jāyati na jīyati na mīyati na cavati na upapajjati tadevāhaṁ vadāmi: ‘But, good sir, what is actually constant I call “constant.” What is actually permanent I call “permanent.” What is actually eternal I call “eternal.” What is actually total I call “total.” What is actually not subject to falling away I call “not subject to falling away.” Where one does not take birth, age, die, fall away, or reappear, I say,‘But, good fellow, what I say is permanent, everlasting, eternal, whole, and not liable to pass away is in fact permanent, everlasting, eternal, whole, and not liable to pass away. And where I say there’s no being born, growing old, dying, passing away, or being reborn there is in fact One of Māra’s talents is making people believe that his malign ideas are in fact their own.

“idañhi na jāyati na jīyati na mīyati na cavati na upapajjatī”ti. “For this does not take birth, does not age, does not die, does not fall away, does not reappear.”no being born, growing old, dying, passing away, or being reborn.

Asantañca panaññaṁ uttari nissaraṇaṁ “natthaññaṁ uttari nissaraṇan”ti vadāmi. And there being no other, higher escape, I say, “There is no other, higher escape.”And when I say there’s no other escape beyond this there is in fact no other escape beyond this.

Ahesuṁ kho, bhikkhu, tayā pubbe samaṇabrāhmaṇā lokasmiṁ yāvatakaṁ tuyhaṁ kasiṇaṁ āyu tāvatakaṁ tesaṁ tapokammameva ahosi. ‘There were, monk, before your time, contemplatives & brahmans in the world whose ascetic practice lasted as long as your entire life span.There have been ascetics and brahmins in the world before you, mendicant, whose deeds of fervent mortification lasted as long as your entire life. Note the use of kasiṇa in the sense “entire”.

Te kho evaṁ jāneyyuṁ santañca panaññaṁ uttari nissaraṇaṁ “atthaññaṁ uttari nissaraṇan”ti, asantaṁ vā aññaṁ uttari nissaraṇaṁ “natthaññaṁ uttari nissaraṇan”ti. They knew, when there was another, higher escape, that there was another, higher escape; or, when there was no other, higher escape, that there was no other, higher escape.When there was another escape beyond this they knew it, and when there was no other escape beyond this, they knew it.

Taṁ tāhaṁ, bhikkhu, evaṁ vadāmi: So I tell you, monk,So, mendicant, I tell you this:

“na cevaññaṁ uttari nissaraṇaṁ dakkhissasi, yāvadeva ca pana kilamathassa vighātassa bhāgī bhavissasi. “both that you will not find another, higher escape, and that, to that extent, you will reap your share of trouble & weariness.you will never find another escape beyond this, and you will eventually get weary and frustrated.

Sace kho tvaṁ, bhikkhu, pathaviṁ ajjhosissasi, opasāyiko me bhavissasi vatthusāyiko, yathākāmakaraṇīyo bāhiteyyo. Monk, if you relish earth, you will lie close to me, lie within my domain, for me to banish and to do with as I like.If you attach to earth, you will lie close to me, in my domain, subject to my will, and expendable.

Sace āpaṁ … If you relish liquid…If you attach to water …

tejaṁ … fire…fire …

vāyaṁ … wind…air …

bhūte … beings…creatures …

deve … devas…gods …

pajāpatiṁ … Pajāpati…the Progenitor …

brahmaṁ ajjhosissasi, opasāyiko me bhavissasi vatthusāyiko, yathākāmakaraṇīyo bāhiteyyo”’ti. Brahmā, you will lie close to me, lie within my domain, for me to banish and to do with as I like.’”the Divinity, you will lie close to me, in my domain, subject to my will, and expendable.’

‘Ahampi kho evaṁ, brahme, jānāmi: ‘I, too, know that, Brahmā.‘Divinity, I too know that

“sace pathaviṁ ajjhosissāmi, opasāyiko te bhavissāmi vatthusāyiko, yathākāmakaraṇīyo bāhiteyyo. If I relish earth, I will lie close to you, lie within your domain, for you to banish and to do with as you like.if I attach to earth, I will lie close to you, in your domain, subject to your will, and expendable.

Sace āpaṁ … If I relish liquid…If I attach to water …

tejaṁ … fire…fire …

vāyaṁ … wind…air …

bhūte … beings…creatures …

deve … devas…gods …

pajāpatiṁ … Pajāpati…the Progenitor …

brahmaṁ ajjhosissāmi, opasāyiko te bhavissāmi vatthusāyiko, yathākāmakaraṇīyo bāhiteyyo”ti api ca te ahaṁ, brahme, gatiñca pajānāmi, jutiñca pajānāmi: Brahmā, I will lie close to you, lie within your domain, for you to banish and to do with as you like. Moreover, I discern your sphere, I discern your splendor:the Divinity, I will lie close to you, in your domain, subject to your will, and expendable. And in addition, Divinity, I understand your range and your light: The measuring of a Brahmā by their “light” (juti) shows the close connection between divinity and the stars.

“evaṁ mahiddhiko bako brahmā, evaṁ mahānubhāvo bako brahmā, evaṁ mahesakkho bako brahmā”ti. “Baka Brahmā has this much great power. Baka Brahmā has this much great might. Baka Brahmā has this much great influence.”’“That’s how powerful is Baka the Divinity, how illustrious and mighty.”’

Yathākathaṁ pana me tvaṁ, mārisa, gatiñca pajānāsi, jutiñca pajānāsi: ‘Well, monk, how do you discern my sphere, how do you discern my splendor:‘But in what way do you understand my range and my light?’

“evaṁ mahiddhiko bako brahmā, evaṁ mahānubhāvo bako brahmā, evaṁ mahesakkho bako brahmā”’ti? “Baka Brahmā has this much great power. Baka Brahmā has this much great might. Baka Brahmā has this much great influence”?’

‘Yāvatā candimasūriyā, ‘As far as suns & moons revolve,‘A galaxy extends a thousand times as far

Pariharanti disā bhanti virocanā; shining, illuminating the directions,as the moon and sun revolve

Tāva sahassadhā loko, over a thousand-fold worldand the dazzling ones light up the quarters.

Ettha te vattate vaso. your control holds sway.And there you wield your power.

Paroparañca jānāsi, There you know those above & below,You know the high and low,

atho rāgavirāginaṁ; those with lust & those without,the passionate and dispassionate,

Itthabhāvaññathābhāvaṁ, the state of what is as it is, the state of what becomes otherwise,and the coming and going of sentient beings

sattānaṁ āgatiṁ gatinti. the coming & going of beings.from this realm to another.

Evaṁ kho te ahaṁ, brahme, gatiñca pajānāmi jutiñca pajānāmi: ‘That, Brahmā, is how I discern your sphere, that is how I discern your splendor:That’s how I understand your range and your light.

“evaṁ mahiddhiko bako brahmā, evaṁ mahānubhāvo bako brahmā, evaṁ mahesakkho bako brahmā”ti. “Baka Brahmā has this much great power. Baka Brahmā has this much great might. Baka Brahmā has this much great influence.”’

Atthi kho, brahme, añño kāyo, taṁ tvaṁ na jānāsi na passasi; There are, Brahmā, bodies other than yours that you don’t know, don’t see,But there are three other realms that you don’t know or see, MS reads añño kāyo (“another realm”), but the PTS and BJT reading aññe tayo kāyā is supported by the Chinese parallel (MA 78 at T i 548a28). Possibly this change was necessitated by the addition of a fourth realm below.

tamahaṁ jānāmi passāmi. but that I know, I see.but which I know and see. PTS and BJT have tyāhaṁ (= te ahaṁ), consistent with their plural reading, as opposed to MS’s singular tamahaṁ. This shows that this variation, which is not decided by the commentary, was a deliberate editorial choice.

Atthi kho, brahme, ābhassarā nāma kāyo yato tvaṁ cuto idhūpapanno. There is, Brahmā, the body named Ābhassarā [Radiant] from which you fell away & reappeared here.The Ābhassarā Brahmā-body is attained through mastering and relishing the second jhāna. The next two Brahmā-bodies are attained through mastering and relishing the third and fourth. See AN 4:123 & 125, and in particular note 2 under the latter sutta.There is the realm named after the gods of sublime luminosity. You passed away from there and were reborn here. Here ābhassarā is masculine plural, hence not an adjective of kāyo but a reference to the “gods” of that realm. MS is inconsistent in this point, for below we find subhakiṇho and vehapphalo as singular adjectives, where PTS and BJT consistently use the plural form.

Tassa te aticiranivāsena sā sati pamuṭṭhā, tena taṁ tvaṁ na jānāsi na passasi; From your having lived here so long, your memory of that has become muddled. That is why you don’t know it, don’t see it,You’ve dwelt here so long that you’ve forgotten about that, so you don’t know it or see it. Brahmā also forgets his origins at DN 1:2.2.1.

tamahaṁ jānāmi passāmi. but I know it, I see it.But I know it and see it.

Evampi kho ahaṁ, brahme, neva te samasamo abhiññāya, kuto nīceyyaṁ? Thus I am not your mere equal in terms of direct knowing, so how could I be inferior?So Divinity, I am not your equal in knowledge, let alone your inferior.

Atha kho ahameva tayā bhiyyo. I am actually superior to you.Rather, I know more than you.

Atthi kho, brahme, subhakiṇho nāma kāyo, vehapphalo nāma kāyo, abhibhū nāma kāyo, taṁ tvaṁ na jānāsi na passasi; ‘There is, Brahmā, the body named Subhakiṇhā [Beautiful Black]… the body named Vehapphalā [Sky-fruit], {the body named Abhibhū [Conqueror]} which you don’t know, don’t see,The phrase in braces is from the Burmese edition of the Canon.There is the realm named after the gods of universal beauty … There is the realm named after the gods of abundant fruit, which you don’t know or see. MS adds a fourth class here, abhibhū (“the Vanquisher”), which is not supported by PTS or BJT, or the Chinese parallel.

tamahaṁ jānāmi passāmi. but that I know, I see.But I know it and see it.

Evampi kho ahaṁ, brahme, neva te samasamo abhiññāya, kuto nīceyyaṁ? Thus I am not your mere equal in terms of direct knowing, so how could I be your inferior?So Divinity, I am not your equal in knowledge, let alone your inferior.

Atha kho ahameva tayā bhiyyo. I am actually superior to you.Rather, I know more than you.

Pathaviṁ kho ahaṁ, brahme, pathavito abhiññāya yāvatā pathaviyā pathavattena ananubhūtaṁ tadabhiññāya pathaviṁ nāpahosiṁ, pathaviyā nāpahosiṁ, pathavito nāpahosiṁ, pathaviṁ meti nāpahosiṁ, pathaviṁ nābhivadiṁ. ‘Having directly known earth as earth, and having directly known the extent of what has not been experienced through the earthness of earth, I wasn’t earth, I wasn’t in earth, I wasn’t coming from earth, I wasn’t “Earth is mine.” I didn’t affirm earth.What is not experienced through the earthness of earth (and so on through the list of categories up through the allness of the all) is nibbāna, or unbinding. It is described in these terms because it is directly known, without intermediary of any sort. These statements can be read in two ways. The first way is to regard them in light of the standard definition of self-identification view (see, for instance, MN 44, MN 109, and SN 22:1) in which one defines self either as identical with an aggregate, as possessing an aggregate, as being contained in an aggregate, or as containing an aggregate within it. The second way is to regard the statements in light of the parallel passage from MN 1, in which one engages in metaphysical speculation as to whether one’s being is identical with something, lies within something, or comes from something. For more on this topic, see the introduction to MN 1.Since directly knowing earth as earth, and since directly knowing that which does not fall within the scope of experience characterized by earth, I have not become earth, I have not become in earth, I have not become as earth, I have not become one who thinks ‘earth is mine’, I have not affirmed earth. This difficult passage directly echoes MN 1:3.3. | Anubhūta has its normal sense of “experiences”, “undergoes” (Thig 10.1:8.2, more commonly paccanubhūta, eg. MN 79:8.1, SN 15.1:1.14). Commentary has appattaṁ, “not attained” (i.e. not within the scope of absorption). | That which “falls within the scope of experience characterized by earth” (yāvatā pathaviyā pathavattena ananubhūtaṁ) is sense experience and the four absorptions; that which does not fall in such a scope are the formless attainments and especially Nibbāna. | For nāhosiṁ (prefer over MS nāpahosiṁ) the commentary glosses “grasps”. The sense is that he does not identify. | For abhivadati, compare Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 2.4.14, which says that so long as there is the appearance of duality, one sees, hears, smells, “speaks about” (abhivadati), “conceives” (manute), and “cognizes” (vijānāti) particulars. Notice that this employs abhivadati alongside manute, just as abhivadati in the Pali appears alongside where maññati appears in MN 1:3.3.

Evampi kho ahaṁ, brahme, neva te samasamo abhiññāya, kuto nīceyyaṁ? Thus I am not your mere equal in terms of direct knowing, so how could I be inferior?So Divinity, I am not your equal in knowledge, let alone your inferior.

Atha kho ahameva tayā bhiyyo. I am actually superior to you.Rather, I know more than you.

Āpaṁ kho ahaṁ, brahme …pe… ‘Having directly known liquid as liquid…Since directly knowing water …

tejaṁ kho ahaṁ, brahme …pe… fire as fire…fire …

vāyaṁ kho ahaṁ, brahme …pe… wind as wind…air …

bhūte kho ahaṁ, brahme …pe… beings as beings…creatures …

deve kho ahaṁ, brahme …pe… devas as devas…gods …

pajāpatiṁ kho ahaṁ, brahme …pe… Pajāpati as Pajāpati…the Progenitor …

brahmaṁ kho ahaṁ, brahme …pe… Brahmā as Brahmā…the Divinity …

ābhassare kho ahaṁ, brahme …pe… the radiant as radiant…the gods of sublime luminosity …

subhakiṇhe kho ahaṁ, brahme …pe… the beautiful black as the beautiful black…the gods of universal beauty …

vehapphale kho ahaṁ, brahme …pe… the sky-fruit as the sky-fruit…the gods of abundant fruit …

abhibhuṁ kho ahaṁ, brahme …pe… the conqueror as the conqueror…the Vanquisher …

sabbaṁ kho ahaṁ, brahme, sabbato abhiññāya yāvatā sabbassa sabbattena ananubhūtaṁ tadabhiññāya sabbaṁ nāpahosiṁ sabbasmiṁ nāpahosiṁ sabbato nāpahosiṁ sabbaṁ meti nāpahosiṁ, sabbaṁ nābhivadiṁ. ‘Having directly known the all as the all, and having directly known the extent of what has not been experienced through the allness of the all, I wasn’t the all, I wasn’t in the all, I wasn’t coming forth from the all, I wasn’t “The all is mine.” I didn’t affirm the all.“What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This is termed the All. Anyone who would say, ‘Repudiating this All, I will describe another,’ if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his assertion, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why is that? Because it lies beyond range.” —SN 35:23 For more on this topic, see The Mind Like Fire Unbound, Chapter 1.Since directly knowing all as all, and since directly knowing that which does not fall within the scope of experience characterized by all, I have not become all, I have not become in all, I have not become as all, I have not become one who thinks ‘all is mine’, I have not affirmed all. This whole passage seems designed to culminate with “experience characterized by all” (sabbassa sabbattena ananubhūtaṁ) in answer to Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 2.5.19, which says that “this self that experiences all is divinity” (ayam ātmā brahma sarvānubhūḥ). In surpassing even the “experience of all” the Buddha unequivocally asserts his superiority to the Upaniṣadic teaching.

Evampi kho ahaṁ, brahme, neva te samasamo abhiññāya, kuto nīceyyaṁ? Thus I am not your mere equal in terms of direct knowing, so how could I be inferior?So Divinity, I am not your equal in knowledge, let alone your inferior.

Atha kho ahameva tayā bhiyyo’ti. I am actually superior to you.’Rather, I know more than you.’

‘Sace kho, mārisa, sabbassa sabbattena ananubhūtaṁ, tadabhiññāya mā heva te rittakameva ahosi, tucchakameva ahosīti. ‘If, good sir, you have directly known the extent of what has not been experienced through the allness of the all, may it not turn out to be actually vain and void for you.’‘Well, good fellow, if you have directly known that which does not fall within the scope of experience characterized by all, may that not be vacuous and hollow for you! The close -ti in MS edition indicates the end of Baka’s speech, but this is not found in PTS or BJT editions. If the close -ti is accepted here, then the next paragraph is spoken by the Buddha and it should also end with close -ti, but no edition has this. We would also expect the Buddha to use a vocative, but there is none. The only reading that is both coherent and attested is that Baka’s speech begins here and ends when he says he will vanish. This is supported by the Chinese parallel, which while lacking an exact equivalent, attributes a similar claim to Brahmā (MA 78 at T i 548b11).

Viññāṇaṁ anidassanaṁ ‘Consciousness without surface, endless, radiant all around, has not been experienced through the earthness of earth… the liquidity of liquid… the fieriness of fire… the windiness of wind… the allness of the all.’Consciousness without surface (viññāṇaṁ anidassanaṁ): This term appears to be related to the following image from SN 12:64: “Just as if there were a roofed house or a roofed hall having windows on the north, the south, or the east. When the sun rises, and a ray has entered by way of the window, where does it land?” “On the western wall, lord.” “And if there is no western wall, where does it land?” “On the ground, lord.” “And if there is no ground, where does it land?” “On the water, lord.” “And if there is no water, where does it land?” “It doesn’t land, lord.” “In the same way, where there is no passion for the nutriment of physical food… contact… intellectual intention… consciousness, where there is no delight, no craving, then consciousness does not land there or grow. Where consciousness does not land or grow, name-&-form does not alight. Where name-&-form does not alight, there is no growth of fabrications. Where there is no growth of fabrications, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. Where there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging, & death. That, I tell you, has no sorrow, affliction, or despair.” In other words, normal sensory consciousness is experienced because it has a “surface” against which it lands: the sense organs and their objects, which constitute the “all.” For instance, we experience visual consciousness because of the eye and forms of which we are conscious. Consciousness without surface, however, is directly known, without intermediary, free from any dependence on conditions at all. This consciousness thus differs from the consciousness factor in dependent co-arising, which is defined in terms of the six sense media. Lying outside of time and space, it would also not come under the consciousness-aggregate, which covers all consciousness near and far; past, present, and future. And, as SN 35:23 notes, the word “all” in the Buddha’s teaching covers only the six sense media, which is another reason for not including this consciousness under the aggregates. However, the fact that it is outside of time and space—in a dimension where there is no here, there, or in between (Ud 1:10), no coming, no going, or staying (Ud 8:1)—means that it cannot be described as permanent or omnipresent, terms that have meaning only within space and time. Some have objected to the equation of this consciousness with nibbāna, on the grounds that nibbāna is nowhere else in the Canon described as a form of consciousness. Thus they have proposed that consciousness without surface be regarded as an arahant’s consciousness of nibbāna in meditative experience, and not nibbāna itself. This argument, however, contains a flaw: If nibbāna is an object of mental consciousness (as a dhamma), it would come under the all, as an object of the intellect. There are passages in the Canon (such as AN 9:36) that describe meditators experiencing nibbāna as a dhamma, but these passages seem to indicate that this description applies up through the level of non-returning. Other passages, however, describe nibbāna as the ending of all dhammas. For instance, Sn 5:6 quotes the Buddha as calling the attainment of the goal the transcending of all dhammas. Sn 4:6 and Sn 4:10 state that the arahant has transcended dispassion, said to be the highest dhamma. Thus, for the arahant, nibbāna is not an object of consciousness. Instead it is directly known without mediation. Because consciousness without feature is directly known without mediation, there seems good reason to equate the two. Also, given that this consciousness is independent of the six senses, and that at the death of the arahant the six senses simply grow cold (Iti 44), then such an event should have no effect on it.Consciousness where no form appears, These two lines, which appear to be an independent, free-floating expression of the Upaniṣadic view, are quoted at DN 11:85.18. Baka is asserting that what the Buddha has described is none other than the domain of “infinite consciousness”, which is one of the highest attainments attributed to Brahmanical sages. | “Where no form appears” (anidassanaṁ) here is a synonym for “formless” (see eg. MN 21:14.8, “space is formless and invisible”, ākāso arūpī anidassano). Normally the colors and images seen in the “form” absorptions are described as “visible” (eg. DN 16:3.29.1), so this indicates the formless attainments.

anantaṁ sabbato pabhaṁ. infinite, radiant all-round.

Taṁ pathaviyā pathavattena ananubhūtaṁ, āpassa āpattena ananubhūtaṁ, tejassa tejattena ananubhūtaṁ, vāyassa vāyattena ananubhūtaṁ, bhūtānaṁ bhūtattena ananubhūtaṁ, devānaṁ devattena ananubhūtaṁ, pajāpatissa pajāpatittena ananubhūtaṁ, brahmānaṁ brahmattena ananubhūtaṁ, ābhassarānaṁ ābhassarattena ananubhūtaṁ, subhakiṇhānaṁ subhakiṇhattena ananubhūtaṁ, vehapphalānaṁ vehapphalattena ananubhūtaṁ, abhibhussa abhibhuttena ananubhūtaṁ, sabbassa sabbattena ananubhūtaṁ. That is what does not fall within the scope of experience characterized by earth, water, fire, air, creatures, gods, the Progenitor, the Divinity, the gods of sublime luminosity, the gods of universal beauty, the gods of abundant fruit, the Vanquisher, and the all.

Handa carahi te, mārisa, passa antaradhāyāmī’ti. ‘Well then, good sir, I will disappear from you.’Come then, good fellow, see me vanish from you!’

‘Handa carahi me tvaṁ, brahme, antaradhāyassu, sace visahasī’ti. ‘Well then, Brahmā, disappear from me if you can.’‘Come on then, Divinity, vanish from me—if you can.’

Atha kho, bhikkhave, bako brahmā: Then Baka Brahmā, (thinking,)Then Baka the Divinity said,

‘antaradhāyissāmi samaṇassa gotamassa, antaradhāyissāmi samaṇassa gotamassā’ti nevassu me sakkoti antaradhāyituṁ. ‘I will disappear from Gotama the contemplative. I will disappear from Gotama the contemplative,’ was not able to disappear from me.‘I will vanish from the ascetic Gotama! I will vanish from the ascetic Gotama!’ But he was unable to vanish from me. Since he believes the dimension of infinite consciousness is that which the Buddha speaks of, he mistakenly assumes he has the power.

Evaṁ vutte, ahaṁ, bhikkhave, bakaṁ brahmānaṁ etadavocaṁ: When this was said, I said to Baka Brahmā,So I said to him,

‘handa carahi te brahme antaradhāyāmī’ti. ‘Well then, Brahmā, I will disappear from you.’‘Come then, Divinity, see me vanish from you!’

‘Handa carahi me tvaṁ, mārisa, antaradhāyassu sace visahasī’ti. ‘Well then, good sir, disappear from me if you can.’‘Come on then, good fellow, vanish from me—if you can.’

Atha kho ahaṁ, bhikkhave, tathārūpaṁ iddhābhisaṅkhāraṁ abhisaṅkhāsiṁ: So then, monks, I fabricated a fabrication of psychic power to the extent thatThen I used my psychic power to will that

‘ettāvatā brahmā ca brahmaparisā ca brahmapārisajjā ca saddañca me sossanti, na ca maṁ dakkhantī’ti. Brahmā, the Brahmā assembly, and the attendants of the Brahmā assembly heard my voice but did not see me.my voice would extend so that divinity, his assembly, and his retinue would hear me, but they would not see me. This is a dramatic expression of the philosophical gulf between the Buddha and Baka. Baka’s power manifests as “light”, whereas the Buddha demonstrates invisibility.

Antarahito imaṁ gāthaṁ abhāsiṁ: Having disappeared, I recited this verse:And while vanished I spoke this verse:

‘Bhavevāhaṁ bhayaṁ disvā, ‘Having seen danger right in becoming,‘Seeing the danger in existence—The Buddha shifts the focus from the attainment of a state of exalted consciousness to the cessation of existence.

bhavañca vibhavesinaṁ; and becoming in searching for non-becoming,In other words, the act of searching for non-becoming—or annihilation—is also a type of becoming. Although the Buddhist path aims at the cessation of becoming (bhava), it does not attempt this cessation by trying to annihilate the process of becoming. Instead, it does so by focusing on what has already come to be (bhūta), developing dispassion for what has come to be and for the nutriment—the causes—of what has come to be. With no more passion, there is no clinging to or taking sustenance from the causes of what has come to be. And through this lack of clinging or sustenance comes release. On this point see SN 12:31 and Iti 49.that life in any existence will cease to be—Following Bodhi and Critical Pali Dictionary in reading vibhavesi. | The ca here answers to the last line of the verse.

Bhavaṁ nābhivadiṁ kiñci, I didn’t affirm any kind of becoming,I didn’t affirm any kind of existence,

nandiñca na upādiyin’ti. or cling to any delight.’and didn’t grasp at relishing.’

Atha kho, bhikkhave, brahmā ca brahmaparisā ca brahmapārisajjā ca acchariyabbhutacittajātā ahesuṁ: “Then in Brahmā, the Brahmā assembly, and the attendants of the Brahmā assembly there arose a sense of amazement & astonishment:Then the Divinity, his assembly, and his retinue, their minds full of wonder and amazement, thought,

‘acchariyaṁ vata bho, abbhutaṁ vata bho. ‘How amazing! How astounding! —‘Oh lord, how incredible, how amazing!

Samaṇassa gotamassa mahiddhikatā mahānubhāvatā, na ca vata no ito pubbe diṭṭho vā, suto vā, añño samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā evaṁ mahiddhiko evaṁ mahānubhāvo yathāyaṁ samaṇo gotamo sakyaputto sakyakulā pabbajito. The great power, the great might of Gotama the contemplative! Never before have we seen or heard of any other contemplative or brahman of such great power, such great might as that of this Gotama the contemplative, who went forth from a Sakyan clan!The ascetic Gotama has such psychic power and might! We’ve never before seen or heard of any other ascetic or brahmin with psychic power and might like the ascetic Gotama, who has gone forth from the Sakyan clan.

Bhavarāmāya vata, bho, pajāya bhavaratāya bhavasammuditāya samūlaṁ bhavaṁ udabbahī’ti. Living in a generation that so delights in becoming, so rejoices in becoming, is so fond of becoming, he has pulled out becoming by the root!’Though people enjoy continued existence, loving it so much, he has extracted it, root and all.’

Atha kho, bhikkhave, māro pāpimā aññataraṁ brahmapārisajjaṁ anvāvisitvā maṁ etadavoca: “Then Māra, the Evil One, taking possession of an attendant of the Brahmā assembly, said to me,Then Māra the Wicked took possession of a member of the retinue of Divinity and said this to me,

‘sace kho tvaṁ, mārisa, evaṁ pajānāsi, sace tvaṁ evaṁ anubuddho, mā sāvake upanesi, mā pabbajite; ‘If, good sir, this is what you discern, if this is what you have awakened to, do not lead (lay) disciples or those gone forth.‘If such is your understanding, good fellow, do not present it to your disciples or those gone forth! The verb upanesi here is used above at MN 49:5.12 in the opposite case, where Māra “presents” Brahmā’s assembly to the Buddha.

mā sāvakānaṁ dhammaṁ desesi, mā pabbajitānaṁ; Do not teach the Dhamma to (lay) disciples or those gone forth.Do not teach this Dhamma to your disciples or those gone forth!

mā sāvakesu gedhimakāsi, mā pabbajitesu. Do not yearn for (lay) disciples or those gone forth.Do not wish this for your disciples or those gone forth!

Ahesuṁ kho, bhikkhu, tayā pubbe samaṇabrāhmaṇā lokasmiṁ arahanto sammāsambuddhā paṭijānamānā. There were, good sir, before your time, contemplatives & brahmans in the world who claimed to be worthy & rightly self-awakened.There have been ascetics and brahmins before you, mendicant, who claimed to be perfected ones, fully awakened Buddhas.

Te sāvake upanesuṁ pabbajite, sāvakānaṁ dhammaṁ desesuṁ pabbajitānaṁ, sāvakesu gedhimakaṁsu pabbajitesu, te sāvake upanetvā pabbajite, sāvakānaṁ dhammaṁ desetvā pabbajitānaṁ, sāvakesu gedhitacittā pabbajitesu, They led (lay) disciples & those gone forth. They taught the Dhamma to (lay) disciples & those gone forth. They yearned for (lay) disciples & those gone forth.They presented, taught, and wished this for their disciples and those gone forth.

kāyassa bhedā pāṇupacchedā hīne kāye patiṭṭhitā. Having led (lay) disciples & those gone forth, having taught the Dhamma to (lay) disciples & those gone forth, having yearned for (lay) disciples & those gone forth, they—on the break-up of the body, with the cutting off of life—were established in a coarse body.When their bodies broke up and their breath was cut off they were established in a lower realm.

Ahesuṁ ye pana, bhikkhu, tayā pubbe samaṇabrāhmaṇā lokasmiṁ arahanto sammāsambuddhā paṭijānamānā. “‘There were, good sir, before your time, contemplatives & brahmans in the world who claimed to be worthy & rightly self-awakened.But there have also been other ascetics and brahmins before you, mendicant, who claimed to be perfected ones, fully awakened Buddhas.

Te na sāvake upanesuṁ na pabbajite, na sāvakānaṁ dhammaṁ desesuṁ na pabbajitānaṁ, na sāvakesu gedhimakaṁsu na pabbajitesu, te na sāvake upanetvā na pabbajite, na sāvakānaṁ dhammaṁ desetvā na pabbajitānaṁ, na sāvakesu gedhitacittā na pabbajitesu, They did not lead (lay) disciples or those gone forth. They did not teach the Dhamma to (lay) disciples or those gone forth. They did not yearn for (lay) disciples or those gone forth.They did not present, teach, or wish this for their disciples and those gone forth.

kāyassa bhedā pāṇupacchedā paṇīte kāye patiṭṭhitā. Having not led (lay) disciples or those gone forth, having not taught the Dhamma to (lay) disciples or those gone forth, having not yearned for (lay) disciples or those gone forth, they—on the break-up of the body, with the cutting off of life—were established in a refined body.When their bodies broke up and their breath was cut off they were established in a higher realm.

Taṁ tāhaṁ, bhikkhu, evaṁ vadāmi—So, monk, I tell you this:So, mendicant, I tell you this:

iṅgha tvaṁ, mārisa, appossukko diṭṭhadhammasukhavihāramanuyutto viharassu, anakkhātaṁ kusalañhi, mārisa, mā paraṁ ovadāhī’ti. Please, good sir, be effortless. Abide committed to a pleasant abiding in the here & now—for it’s skillful, good sir, that this not be taught. Don’t instruct others.’please, good fellow, remain passive, dwelling in blissful meditation in this life, for this is better left unsaid. Good fellow, do not instruct others.’

Evaṁ vutte, ahaṁ, bhikkhave, māraṁ pāpimantaṁ etadavocaṁ: “When this was said, I told Māra the Evil One,When he had spoken, I said to Māra,

‘jānāmi kho tāhaṁ, pāpima, mā tvaṁ maññittho: ‘I know you, Evil One. Don’t assume,‘I know you, Wicked One. Do not think,

“na maṁ jānātī”ti. “He doesn’t know me.”“He doesn’t know me.”

Māro tvamasi, pāpima. You are Māra, Evil One.You are Māra the Wicked.

Na maṁ tvaṁ, pāpima, hitānukampī evaṁ vadesi; And it’s not sympathetic to welfare that you speak thus to me.You don’t speak to me like this out of sympathy,

ahitānukampī maṁ tvaṁ, pāpima, evaṁ vadesi. It’s sympathetic to what is not welfare that you speak thus to me.but with no sympathy.

Tuyhañhi, pāpima, evaṁ hoti: You think this, Evil One:For you think,

“yesaṁ samaṇo gotamo dhammaṁ desessati, te me visayaṁ upātivattissantī”ti. “Those to whom Gotama the contemplative will teach the Dhamma will defy my sovereignty”.“Those who the ascetic Gotama teaches will go beyond my reach.”

Asammāsambuddhāva pana te, pāpima, samānā sammāsambuddhāmhāti paṭijāniṁsu. Without being rightly self-awakened, Evil One, your contemplatives & brahmans claimed to be rightly self-awakened.Those who formerly claimed to be fully awakened Buddhas were not in fact fully awakened Buddhas.

Ahaṁ kho pana, pāpima, sammāsambuddhova samāno sammāsambuddhomhīti paṭijānāmi. I, however, being rightly self-awakened, claim to be rightly self-awakened.But I am.

Desentopi hi, pāpima, tathāgato sāvakānaṁ dhammaṁ tādisova adesentopi hi, pāpima, tathāgato sāvakānaṁ dhammaṁ tādisova. For when the Tathāgata is teaching the Dhamma to his disciples, he is Such. When he is not teaching the Dhamma to his disciples, he is Such.The Realized One remains such whether or not he teaches disciples.

Upanentopi hi, pāpima, tathāgato sāvake tādisova, anupanentopi hi, pāpima, tathāgato sāvake tādisova. When leading his disciples he is Such. When not leading his disciples he is Such.The Realized One remains as such whether or not he presents the teaching to disciples.

Taṁ kissa hetu? Why is that?Why is that?

Tathāgatassa, pāpima, ye āsavā saṅkilesikā ponobbhavikā sadarā dukkhavipākā āyatiṁ jātijarāmaraṇiyā—The effluents that defile, that lead to further becoming, that disturb, that ripen in stress, that tend to future birth, aging, & death:Because the Realized One has given up the defilements that are corrupting, leading to future lives, hurtful, resulting in suffering and future rebirth, old age, and death.

te pahīnā ucchinnamūlā tālāvatthukatā anabhāvaṅkatā āyatiṁ anuppādadhammā. Those the Tathāgata has abandoned, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising.He has cut them off at the root, made them like a palm stump, obliterated them so they are unable to arise in the future.

Seyyathāpi, pāpima, tālo matthakacchinno abhabbo puna virūḷhiyā; Just as a palmyra tree with its crown cut off is incapable of growing again;Just as a palm tree with its crown cut off is incapable of further growth,

evameva kho, pāpima, tathāgatassa ye āsavā saṅkilesikā ponobbhavikā sadarā dukkhavipākā āyatiṁ jātijarāmaraṇiyā—so, too, the effluents that defile, that lead to further becoming, that disturb, that ripen in stress, that tend to future birth, aging, & death:the Realized One has given up the defilements that are corrupting, leading to future lives, hurtful, resulting in suffering and future rebirth, old age, and death.

te pahīnā ucchinnamūlā tālāvatthukatā anabhāvaṅkatā āyatiṁ anuppādadhammā’ti. Those the Tathāgata has abandoned, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising.’”He has cut them off at the root, made them like a palm stump, obliterated them so they are unable to arise in the future.’”

Iti hidaṁ mārassa ca anālapanatāya brahmuno ca abhinimantanatāya, tasmā imassa veyyākaraṇassa brahmanimantanikantveva adhivacanan”ti. Thus, because of the silencing of Māra, and because of the Brahmā’s invitation, this discourse is entitled, “The Brahmā Invitation.”See also: DN 11; MN 1; MN 72; MN 86And so, because of the silencing of Māra, and because of the invitation of the Divinity, the name of this discussion is “On the Invitation of Divinity”. There is no record of Baka’s conversion.

Brahmanimantanikasuttaṁ niṭṭhitaṁ navamaṁ.
PreviousNext