1. Dependent Co-Arising
Evaṁ me sutaṁ— ekaṁ samayaṁ bhagavā kurūsu viharati kammāsadhammaṁ nāma kurūnaṁ nigamo.
Thus have I heard—At one time, the Blessed One was dwelling in the land of the Kurus, in a town of the Kurus named Kammāsadhamma.
Atha kho āyasmā ānando yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkami, upasaṅkamitvā bhagavantaṁ abhivādetvā ekamantaṁ nisīdi. Ekamantaṁ nisinno kho āyasmā ānando bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: “acchariyaṁ, bhante, abbhutaṁ, bhante. Yāva gambhīro cāyaṁ, bhante, paṭiccasamuppādo gambhīrāvabhāso ca, atha ca pana me uttānakuttānako viya khāyatī”ti.
Then venerable Ānanda approached the Blessed One; having approached, he paid homage to the Blessed One and sat down to one side. Seated to one side, venerable Ānanda said to the Blessed One: “It is wonderful, venerable sir, it is marvelous, venerable sir! How profound is this |dependent co-arising::the process of arising together from a cause, chain of causation, dependent origination [paṭiccasamuppāda]|, venerable sir, and how profound it appears! Yet to me it appears as clear as clear can be.”
“Mā hevaṁ, ānanda, avaca, mā hevaṁ, ānanda, avaca. Gambhīro cāyaṁ, ānanda, paṭiccasamuppādo gambhīrāvabhāso ca. Etassa, ānanda, dhammassa ananubodhā appaṭivedhā evamayaṁ pajā tantākulakajātā kulagaṇṭhikajātā muñjapabbajabhūtā apāyaṁ duggatiṁ vinipātaṁ saṁsāraṁ nātivattati.
“Do not say so, Ānanda! Do not say so, Ānanda! This dependent co-arising is profound, Ānanda, and it appears profound. It is because of |misunderstanding::non-comprehension of [ananubodha]| this Dhamma, |not penetrating::not comprehending; lit. not piercing back [appaṭivedha]| it, that this population has become like a tangled ball of thread, a matted bird’s nest, entwined like |Muñja grass::a tough Asiatic grass used for thatching roofs, ropes and making baskets; (comm) mental firmness and courage [muñja]| and reeds, unable to transcend the plane of misery, the |bad destination::state of misery [duggati]|, the |realm of downfall::realm of misery [vinipāta]|, and the cycle of existence.
Summary
‘Atthi idappaccayā jarāmaraṇan’ti iti puṭṭhena satā, ānanda, atthītissa vacanīyaṁ. ‘Kiṁpaccayā jarāmaraṇan’ti iti ce vadeyya, ‘jātipaccayā jarāmaraṇan’ti iccassa vacanīyaṁ.
Ānanda, if one is asked: ‘Does aging and death have a specific condition?’ one should say: ‘Yes, it does.’ If one is asked: ‘With what as a condition do aging and death come to be?’ one should say: ‘With birth as a condition, aging and death come to be.’
‘Atthi idappaccayā jātī’ti iti puṭṭhena satā, ānanda, atthītissa vacanīyaṁ. ‘Kiṁpaccayā jātī’ti iti ce vadeyya, ‘bhavapaccayā jātī’ti iccassa vacanīyaṁ.
Ānanda, if one is asked: ‘Does birth have a specific condition?’ one should say: ‘Yes, it does.’ If one is asked: ‘With what as a condition does birth come to be?’ one should say: ‘With |existence::being, becoming; continued conditional existence, the karmically conditioned mode of being that leads to future rebirth [bhava]| as a condition, birth comes to be.’
‘Atthi idappaccayā bhavo’ti iti puṭṭhena satā, ānanda, atthītissa vacanīyaṁ. ‘Kiṁpaccayā bhavo’ti iti ce vadeyya, ‘upādānapaccayā bhavo’ti iccassa vacanīyaṁ.
Ānanda, if one is asked: ‘Does existence have a specific condition?’ one should say: ‘Yes, it does.’ If one is asked: ‘With what as a condition does existence come to be?’ one should say: ‘With |clinging::grasping, acquiring, appropriating, taking possession, identifying; fuel for fire; lit. taking near [upādāna]| as a condition, existence comes to be.’
‘Atthi idappaccayā upādānan’ti iti puṭṭhena satā, ānanda, atthītissa vacanīyaṁ. ‘Kiṁpaccayā upādānan’ti iti ce vadeyya, ‘taṇhāpaccayā upādānan’ti iccassa vacanīyaṁ.
Ānanda, if one is asked: ‘Does clinging have a specific condition?’ one should say: ‘Yes, it does.’ If one is asked: ‘With what as a condition does clinging come to be?’ one should say: ‘With |craving::wanting, yearning, longing, attachment, lit. thirst [taṇha]| as a condition, clinging comes to be.’
‘Atthi idappaccayā taṇhā’ti iti puṭṭhena satā, ānanda, atthītissa vacanīyaṁ. ‘Kiṁpaccayā taṇhā’ti iti ce vadeyya, ‘vedanāpaccayā taṇhā’ti iccassa vacanīyaṁ.
Ānanda, if one is asked: ‘Does craving have a specific condition?’ one should say: ‘Yes, it does.’ If one is asked: ‘With what as a condition does craving come to be?’ one should say: ‘With |felt experience::pleasant, neutral, or painful sensation, feeling felt on contact through eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind; second of the five aggregates [vedanā]| as a condition, craving comes to be.’
‘Atthi idappaccayā vedanā’ti iti puṭṭhena satā, ānanda, atthītissa vacanīyaṁ. ‘Kiṁpaccayā vedanā’ti iti ce vadeyya, ‘phassapaccayā vedanā’ti iccassa vacanīyaṁ.
Ānanda, if one is asked: ‘Does felt experience have a specific condition?’ one should say: ‘Yes, it does.’ If one is asked: ‘With what as a condition does felt experience come to be?’ one should say: ‘With |contact::sense impingement, raw experience, touch [phassa]| as a condition, felt experience comes to be.’
‘Atthi idappaccayā phasso’ti iti puṭṭhena satā, ānanda, atthītissa vacanīyaṁ. ‘Kiṁpaccayā phasso’ti iti ce vadeyya, ‘nāmarūpapaccayā phasso’ti iccassa vacanīyaṁ.
Ānanda, if one is asked: ‘Does contact have a specific condition?’ one should say: ‘Yes, it does.’ If one is asked: ‘With what as a condition does contact come to be?’ one should say: ‘With |name and form::mentality and materiality—the integrated structure of mental capacities (intention, attention, contact, feeling, perception) and physical form that together constitute and sustain an individual being [nāmarūpa]| as a condition, contact comes to be.’
‘Atthi idappaccayā nāmarūpan’ti iti puṭṭhena satā, ānanda, atthītissa vacanīyaṁ. ‘Kiṁpaccayā nāmarūpan’ti iti ce vadeyya, ‘viññāṇapaccayā nāmarūpan’ti iccassa vacanīyaṁ.
Ānanda, if one is asked: ‘Does name and form have a specific condition?’ one should say: ‘Yes, it does.’ If one is asked: ‘With what as a condition does name and form come to be?’ one should say: ‘With |consciousness::quality of awareness — distinctive knowing that arises in dependence on the meeting of eye and form, ear and sound, nose and odor, tongue and taste, body and tangible object, mind and mind object [viññāṇa]| as a condition, name and form come to be.’
‘Atthi idappaccayā viññāṇan’ti iti puṭṭhena satā, ānanda, atthītissa vacanīyaṁ. ‘Kiṁpaccayā viññāṇan’ti iti ce vadeyya, ‘nāmarūpapaccayā viññāṇan’ti iccassa vacanīyaṁ.
Ānanda, if one is asked: ‘Does consciousness have a specific condition?’ one should say: ‘Yes, it does.’ If one is asked: ‘With what as a condition does consciousness come to be?’ one should say: ‘With name and form as a condition, consciousness comes to be.’
Iti kho, ānanda, nāmarūpapaccayā viññāṇaṁ, viññāṇapaccayā nāmarūpaṁ, nāmarūpapaccayā phasso, phassapaccayā vedanā, vedanāpaccayā taṇhā, taṇhāpaccayā upādānaṁ, upādānapaccayā bhavo, bhavapaccayā jāti, jātipaccayā jarāmaraṇaṁ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā sambhavanti. Evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa samudayo hoti.
Thus, Ānanda, with name and form as a condition, consciousness comes to be; with consciousness as a condition, name and form come to be; with name and form as a condition, contact comes to be; with contact as a condition, felt experience comes to be; with felt experience as a condition, craving comes to be; with craving as a condition, clinging comes to be; with clinging as a condition, existence comes to be; with existence as a condition, birth comes to be; with birth as a condition, aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair come to be. Thus is the arising of this whole mass of suffering.
Aging and Death
‘Jātipaccayā jarāmaraṇan’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā jātipaccayā jarāmaraṇaṁ. Jāti ca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, seyyathidaṁ— devānaṁ vā devattāya, gandhabbānaṁ vā gandhabbattāya, yakkhānaṁ vā yakkhattāya, bhūtānaṁ vā bhūtattāya, manussānaṁ vā manussattāya, catuppadānaṁ vā catuppadattāya, pakkhīnaṁ vā pakkhittāya, sarīsapānaṁ vā sarīsapattāya, tesaṁ tesañca hi, ānanda, sattānaṁ tadattāya jāti nābhavissa. Sabbaso jātiyā asati jātinirodhā api nu kho jarāmaraṇaṁ paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘With birth as condition, aging and death come to be.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no birth of any kind anywhere—that is, of gods into the state of gods, of |gandhabbas::demi gods [gandhabba]| into the state of gandhabbas, of spirits into the state of spirits, of ghosts in the ghost realm, of human beings into the human realm, of four-footed animals into the four-footed animal realm, of winged creatures into the winged creature realm, and of reptiles into the reptile realm—if there were no birth of beings of any sort into any state, then, in the complete absence of birth, with the cessation of birth, could aging and death |be discerned::become evident [paññāyetha]|?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo jarāmaraṇassa, yadidaṁ jāti.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for aging and death, namely: birth.
Birth
‘Bhavapaccayā jātī’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā bhavapaccayā jāti. Bhavo ca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, seyyathidaṁ— kāmabhavo vā rūpabhavo vā arūpabhavo vā, sabbaso bhave asati bhavanirodhā api nu kho jāti paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘With existence as condition, birth comes to be.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no existence of any kind anywhere—that is, sensual existence, form existence, or formless existence—then, in the complete absence of existence, with the cessation of existence, could birth be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo jātiyā, yadidaṁ bhavo.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for birth, namely: existence.
Existence
‘Upādānapaccayā bhavo’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā upādānapaccayā bhavo. Upādānañca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, seyyathidaṁ— kāmupādānaṁ vā diṭṭhupādānaṁ vā sīlabbatupādānaṁ vā attavādupādānaṁ vā, sabbaso upādāne asati upādānanirodhā api nu kho bhavo paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘With clinging as condition, existence comes to be.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no clinging of any kind anywhere—that is, clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, clinging to rules and observances, or clinging to a doctrine of self—then, in the complete absence of clinging, with the cessation of clinging, could existence be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo bhavassa, yadidaṁ upādānaṁ.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for existence, namely: clinging.
Clinging
‘Taṇhāpaccayā upādānan’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā taṇhāpaccayā upādānaṁ. Taṇhā ca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, seyyathidaṁ— rūpataṇhā saddataṇhā gandhataṇhā rasataṇhā phoṭṭhabbataṇhā dhammataṇhā, sabbaso taṇhāya asati taṇhānirodhā api nu kho upādānaṁ paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘With craving as condition, clinging comes to be.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no craving of any kind anywhere—that is, craving for forms, craving for sounds, craving for odors, craving for tastes, craving for tangible objects, or craving for mental objects—then, in the complete absence of craving, with the cessation of craving, could clinging be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo upādānassa, yadidaṁ taṇhā.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for clinging, namely: craving.
Craving
‘Vedanāpaccayā taṇhā’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā vedanāpaccayā taṇhā. Vedanā ca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, seyyathidaṁ— cakkhusamphassajā vedanā sotasamphassajā vedanā ghānasamphassajā vedanā jivhāsamphassajā vedanā kāyasamphassajā vedanā manosamphassajā vedanā, sabbaso vedanāya asati vedanānirodhā api nu kho taṇhā paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘With felt experience as condition, craving comes to be.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no felt experience of any kind anywhere—that is, experience felt through eye-contact, experience felt through ear-contact, experience felt through nose-contact, experience felt through tongue-contact, experience felt through body-contact, or experience felt through mind-contact—then, in the complete absence of felt experience, with the cessation of felt experience, could craving be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo taṇhāya, yadidaṁ vedanā.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for craving, namely: felt experience.
The Chain of Causation
Iti kho panetaṁ, ānanda, vedanaṁ paṭicca taṇhā, taṇhaṁ paṭicca pariyesanā, pariyesanaṁ paṭicca lābho, lābhaṁ paṭicca vinicchayo, vinicchayaṁ paṭicca chandarāgo, chandarāgaṁ paṭicca ajjhosānaṁ, ajjhosānaṁ paṭicca pariggaho, pariggahaṁ paṭicca macchariyaṁ, macchariyaṁ paṭicca ārakkho. Ārakkhādhikaraṇaṁ daṇḍādānasatthādānakalahaviggahavivādatuvaṁtuvaṁpesuññamusāvādā aneke pāpakā akusalā dhammā sambhavanti.
Thus, Ānanda, dependent on felt experience, craving arises; dependent on craving, seeking; dependent on seeking, acquisition; dependent on acquisition, decision-making; dependent on decision-making, desire and attachment; dependent on desire and attachment, fixation; dependent on fixation, possessiveness; dependent on possessiveness, stinginess; dependent on stinginess, safeguarding. Because of safeguarding, various harmful, unwholesome states originate—the taking up of sticks and weapons, quarrels, disputes, arguments, accusations, slander, and lies.
‘Ārakkhādhikaraṇaṁ daṇḍādānasatthādānakalahaviggahavivādatuvaṁtuvaṁpesuññamusāvādā aneke pāpakā akusalā dhammā sambhavantī’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā ārakkhādhikaraṇaṁ daṇḍādānasatthādānakalahaviggahavivādatuvaṁtuvaṁpesuññamusāvādā aneke pāpakā akusalā dhammā sambhavanti. Ārakkho ca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, sabbaso ārakkhe asati ārakkhanirodhā api nu kho daṇḍādānasatthādānakalahaviggahavivādatuvaṁtuvaṁpesuññamusāvādā aneke pāpakā akusalā dhammā sambhaveyyun”ti?
It was said: ‘Because of safeguarding, various harmful, unwholesome states originate—the taking up of sticks and weapons, quarrels, disputes, arguments, accusations, slander, and lies.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no safeguarding of any kind anywhere, then, in the complete absence of safeguarding, with the cessation of safeguarding, would various harmful, unwholesome states originate—the taking up of sticks and weapons, quarrels, disputes, arguments, accusations, slander, and lies?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo daṇḍādānasatthādānakalahaviggahavivādatuvaṁtuvaṁpesuññamusāvādānaṁ anekesaṁ pāpakānaṁ akusalānaṁ dhammānaṁ sambhavāya yadidaṁ ārakkho.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for the origination of various harmful, unwholesome states—the taking up of sticks and weapons, quarrels, disputes, arguments, accusations, slander, and lies—namely: safeguarding.
‘Macchariyaṁ paṭicca ārakkho’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā macchariyaṁ paṭicca ārakkho. Macchariyañca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, sabbaso macchariye asati macchariyanirodhā api nu kho ārakkho paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘Dependent on |stinginess::selfishness, meanness, tight-fistedness [macchariya]|, safeguarding [comes to be].’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no stinginess of any kind anywhere, then, in the complete absence of stinginess, with the cessation of stinginess, could safeguarding be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo ārakkhassa, yadidaṁ macchariyaṁ.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for safeguarding, namely: stinginess.
‘Pariggahaṁ paṭicca macchariyan’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā pariggahaṁ paṭicca macchariyaṁ. Pariggaho ca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, sabbaso pariggahe asati pariggahanirodhā api nu kho macchariyaṁ paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘Dependent on |possessiveness::lit. grasping all around [pariggaha]|, stinginess [comes to be].’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no possessiveness of any kind anywhere, then, in the complete absence of possessiveness, with the cessation of possessiveness, could stinginess be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo macchariyassa, yadidaṁ pariggaho.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for stinginess, namely: possessiveness.
‘Ajjhosānaṁ paṭicca pariggaho’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā ajjhosānaṁ paṭicca pariggaho. Ajjhosānañca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, sabbaso ajjhosāne asati ajjhosānanirodhā api nu kho pariggaho paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘Dependent on |fixation::attachment, clinging [ajjhosāna]|, possessiveness [comes to be].’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no fixation of any kind anywhere, then, in the complete absence of fixation, with the cessation of fixation, could possessiveness be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo pariggahassa—yadidaṁ ajjhosānaṁ.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for possessiveness, namely: fixation.
‘Chandarāgaṁ paṭicca ajjhosānan’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā chandarāgaṁ paṭicca ajjhosānaṁ. Chandarāgo ca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, sabbaso chandarāge asati chandarāganirodhā api nu kho ajjhosānaṁ paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘Dependent on |desire and attachment::desire-passion, sensual craving, intention of sensuality and lust [chandarāga]|, fixation arises.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no desire and attachment of any kind anywhere, then, in the complete absence of desire and attachment, with the cessation of desire and attachment, could fixation be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo ajjhosānassa, yadidaṁ chandarāgo.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for fixation, namely: desire and attachment.
‘Vinicchayaṁ paṭicca chandarāgo’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā vinicchayaṁ paṭicca chandarāgo. Vinicchayo ca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, sabbaso vinicchaye asati vinicchayanirodhā api nu kho chandarāgo paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘Dependent on |decision-making::assessment, evaluation [vinicchaya]|, desire and attachment arises.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no decision-making of any kind anywhere, then, in the complete absence of decision-making, with the cessation of decision-making, could desire and attachment be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo chandarāgassa, yadidaṁ vinicchayo.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for desire and attachment, namely: decision-making.
‘Lābhaṁ paṭicca vinicchayo’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā lābhaṁ paṭicca vinicchayo. Lābho ca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, sabbaso lābhe asati lābhanirodhā api nu kho vinicchayo paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘Dependent on |acquisition::gain, money, profit, possession [lābha]|, decision-making arises.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no acquisition of any kind anywhere, then, in the complete absence of acquisition, with the cessation of acquisition, could decision-making be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo vinicchayassa, yadidaṁ lābho.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for decision-making, namely: acquisition.
‘Pariyesanaṁ paṭicca lābho’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā pariyesanaṁ paṭicca lābho. Pariyesanā ca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, sabbaso pariyesanāya asati pariyesanānirodhā api nu kho lābho paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘Dependent on |seeking::searching, on a quest of, inquiring, in pursuit of [pariyesanā]|, an acquisition [comes to be].’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no seeking of any kind anywhere, then, in the complete absence of seeking, with the cessation of seeking, could acquisition be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo lābhassa, yadidaṁ pariyesanā.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for acquisition, namely: seeking.
‘Taṇhaṁ paṭicca pariyesanā’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā taṇhaṁ paṭicca pariyesanā. Taṇhā ca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, seyyathidaṁ— kāmataṇhā bhavataṇhā vibhavataṇhā, sabbaso taṇhāya asati taṇhānirodhā api nu kho pariyesanā paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘Dependent on craving, seeking [comes to be].’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no craving of any kind anywhere—that is, sensual craving, craving for existence, or craving for non-existence—then, in the complete absence of craving, with the cessation of craving, could seeking be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo pariyesanāya, yadidaṁ taṇhā. Iti kho, ānanda, ime dve dhammā dvayena vedanāya ekasamosaraṇā bhavanti.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for seeking, namely: craving. Thus, Ānanda, these two phenomena [the cycle of existence and the cycle of conflict], being a duality, converge into one at felt experience.
Contact
‘Phassapaccayā vedanā’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā phassapaccayā vedanā. Phasso ca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, seyyathidaṁ— cakkhusamphasso sotasamphasso ghānasamphasso jivhāsamphasso kāyasamphasso manosamphasso, sabbaso phasse asati phassanirodhā api nu kho vedanā paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘With contact as condition, felt experience comes to be.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no contact of any kind anywhere—that is, eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, or mind-contact—then, in the complete absence of contact, with the cessation of contact, could felt experience be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo vedanāya, yadidaṁ phasso.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for felt experience, namely: contact.
Name and Form
‘Nāmarūpapaccayā phasso’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā nāmarūpapaccayā phasso. Yehi, ānanda, ākārehi yehi liṅgehi yehi nimittehi yehi uddesehi nāmakāyassa paññatti hoti, tesu ākāresu tesu liṅgesu tesu nimittesu tesu uddesesu asati api nu kho rūpakāye adhivacanasamphasso paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘With name and form as condition, contact comes to be.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: Ānanda, those features, traits, signs, and indicators by which the mental body is designated—if those features, traits, signs, and indicators were absent, could verbal contact be discerned in the physical body?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Yehi, ānanda, ākārehi yehi liṅgehi yehi nimittehi yehi uddesehi rūpakāyassa paññatti hoti, tesu ākāresu …pe… tesu uddesesu asati api nu kho nāmakāye paṭighasamphasso paññāyethā”ti?
“Ānanda, those features, traits, signs, and indicators by which the physical body is designated—if those features, traits, signs, and indicators were absent, could resistance-contact be discerned in the mental body?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Yehi, ānanda, ākārehi …pe… yehi uddesehi nāmakāyassa ca rūpakāyassa ca paññatti hoti, tesu ākāresu …pe… tesu uddesesu asati api nu kho adhivacanasamphasso vā paṭighasamphasso vā paññāyethā”ti?
“Ānanda, those features, traits, signs, and indicators by which the mental body and the physical body are designated—if those features, traits, signs, and indicators were absent, could verbal contact or resistance-contact be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Yehi, ānanda, ākārehi …pe… yehi uddesehi nāmarūpassa paññatti hoti, tesu ākāresu …pe… tesu uddesesu asati api nu kho phasso paññāyethā”ti?
“Ānanda, those features, traits, signs, and indicators by which name and form is designated—if those features, traits, signs, and indicators were absent, could contact be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo phassassa, yadidaṁ nāmarūpaṁ.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for contact, namely: name and form.
Consciousness
‘Viññāṇapaccayā nāmarūpan’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā viññāṇapaccayā nāmarūpaṁ. Viññāṇañca hi, ānanda, mātukucchismiṁ na okkamissatha, api nu kho nāmarūpaṁ mātukucchismiṁ samuccissathā”ti?
It was said: ‘With consciousness as condition, name and form come to be.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If consciousness were not to descend into the mother’s womb, would name and form take shape in the mother’s womb?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Viññāṇañca hi, ānanda, mātukucchismiṁ okkamitvā vokkamissatha, api nu kho nāmarūpaṁ itthattāya abhinibbattissathā”ti?
“If consciousness, having descended into the mother’s womb, were to depart, would name and form be produced for this state of existence?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Viññāṇañca hi, ānanda, daharasseva sato vocchijjissatha kumārakassa vā kumārikāya vā, api nu kho nāmarūpaṁ vuddhiṁ virūḷhiṁ vepullaṁ āpajjissathā”ti?
“If the consciousness of a young boy or girl were to be cut off, would name and form come to growth, increase, and full development?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo nāmarūpassa—yadidaṁ viññāṇaṁ.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for name and form, namely: consciousness.
Mutual Dependence of Name and Form and Consciousness
‘Nāmarūpapaccayā viññāṇan’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā nāmarūpapaccayā viññāṇaṁ. Viññāṇañca hi, ānanda, nāmarūpe patiṭṭhaṁ na labhissatha, api nu kho āyatiṁ jātijarāmaraṇaṁ dukkhasamudayasambhavo paññāyethā”ti?
It was said: ‘With name and form as condition, consciousness comes to be.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If consciousness were not to gain a footing in name and form, would an origination of the mass of suffering—of future birth, aging, and death—be discerned?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“No, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo viññāṇassa yadidaṁ nāmarūpaṁ. Ettāvatā kho, ānanda, jāyetha vā jīyetha vā mīyetha vā cavetha vā upapajjetha vā. Ettāvatā adhivacanapatho, ettāvatā niruttipatho, ettāvatā paññattipatho, ettāvatā paññāvacaraṁ, ettāvatā vaṭṭaṁ vattati itthattaṁ paññāpanāya yadidaṁ nāmarūpaṁ saha viññāṇena aññamaññapaccayatā pavattati.
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origination, this is the condition for consciousness, namely: name and form. To this extent, Ānanda, one may be born, age, die, pass away, or be reborn. To this extent there is a pathway for designation, to this extent there is a pathway for language, to this extent there is a pathway for description, to this extent there is a sphere for wisdom, and to this extent the cycle revolves for manifesting in this state of existence—namely, name and form together with consciousness, operating as mutually dependent conditions.
2. Designations of Self
Kittāvatā ca, ānanda, attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti? Rūpiṁ vā hi, ānanda, parittaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti: ‘rūpī me paritto attā’ti. Rūpiṁ vā hi, ānanda, anantaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti: ‘rūpī me ananto attā’ti. Arūpiṁ vā hi, ānanda, parittaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti: ‘arūpī me paritto attā’ti. Arūpiṁ vā hi, ānanda, anantaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti: ‘arūpī me ananto attā’ti.
In what ways, Ānanda, does one designating a self designate it? Ānanda, one designating a self designates it as having form and being limited, thinking: ‘My self has form and is limited.’ Or, Ānanda, one designating a self designates it as having form and being infinite, thinking: ‘My self has form and is infinite.’ Or, Ānanda, one designating a self designates it as formless and being limited, thinking: ‘My self is formless and is limited.’ Or, Ānanda, one designating a self designates it as formless and being infinite, thinking: ‘My self is formless and is infinite.’
Tatrānanda, yo so rūpiṁ parittaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti. Etarahi vā so rūpiṁ parittaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti, tattha bhāviṁ vā so rūpiṁ parittaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti, ‘atathaṁ vā pana santaṁ tathattāya upakappessāmī’ti iti vā panassa hoti. Evaṁ santaṁ kho, ānanda, rūpiṁ parittattānudiṭṭhi anusetīti iccālaṁ vacanāya.
Therein, Ānanda, he who designates a self as having form and being limited, designates it as such either in the present, or he designates it as such for the future, or he thinks: ‘Though it is not so, I will adapt it to become so.’ This being the case, Ānanda, it is fitting to say that the underlying tendency to the view of a self that has form and is limited lies within him.
Tatrānanda, yo so rūpiṁ anantaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti. Etarahi vā so rūpiṁ anantaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti, tattha bhāviṁ vā so rūpiṁ anantaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti, ‘atathaṁ vā pana santaṁ tathattāya upakappessāmī’ti iti vā panassa hoti. Evaṁ santaṁ kho, ānanda, rūpiṁ anantattānudiṭṭhi anusetīti iccālaṁ vacanāya.
Therein, Ānanda, he who designates a self as having form and being infinite, designates it as such either in the present, or he designates it as such for the future, or he thinks: ‘Though it is not so, I will adapt it to become so.’ This being the case, Ānanda, it is fitting to say that the underlying tendency to the view of a self that has form and is infinite lies within him.
Tatrānanda, yo so arūpiṁ parittaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti. Etarahi vā so arūpiṁ parittaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti, tattha bhāviṁ vā so arūpiṁ parittaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti, ‘atathaṁ vā pana santaṁ tathattāya upakappessāmī’ti iti vā panassa hoti. Evaṁ santaṁ kho, ānanda, arūpiṁ parittattānudiṭṭhi anusetīti iccālaṁ vacanāya.
Therein, Ānanda, he who designates a self as formless and being limited, designates it as such either in the present, or he designates it as such for the future, or he thinks: ‘Though it is not so, I will adapt it to become so.’ This being the case, Ānanda, it is fitting to say that the underlying tendency to the view of a self that is formless and limited lies within him.
Tatrānanda, yo so arūpiṁ anantaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti. Etarahi vā so arūpiṁ anantaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti, tattha bhāviṁ vā so arūpiṁ anantaṁ attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti, ‘atathaṁ vā pana santaṁ tathattāya upakappessāmī’ti iti vā panassa hoti. Evaṁ santaṁ kho, ānanda, arūpiṁ anantattānudiṭṭhi anusetīti iccālaṁ vacanāya. Ettāvatā kho, ānanda, attānaṁ paññapento paññapeti.
Therein, Ānanda, he who designates a self as formless and being infinite, designates it as such either in the present, or he designates it as such for the future, or he thinks: ‘Though it is not so, I will adapt it to become so.’ This being the case, Ānanda, it is fitting to say that the underlying tendency to the view of a self that is formless and infinite lies within him. To this extent, Ānanda, does one designating a self designate it.
3. Not Designating a Self
Kittāvatā ca, ānanda, attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti? Rūpiṁ vā hi, ānanda, parittaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti: ‘rūpī me paritto attā’ti. Rūpiṁ vā hi, ānanda, anantaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti: ‘rūpī me ananto attā’ti. Arūpiṁ vā hi, ānanda, parittaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti: ‘arūpī me paritto attā’ti. Arūpiṁ vā hi, ānanda, anantaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti: ‘arūpī me ananto attā’ti.
And in what ways, Ānanda, does one not designating a self not designate it? Not designating a self as having form and as limited, one does not designate it thus: ‘My self has form and is limited.’ Or, Ānanda, not designating a self as having form and as infinite, one does not designate it thus: ‘My self has form and is infinite.’ Or, Ānanda, not designating a self as formless and as limited, one does not designate it thus: ‘My self is formless and is limited.’ Or, Ānanda, not designating a self as formless and as infinite, one does not designate it thus: ‘My self is formless and is infinite.’
Tatrānanda, yo so rūpiṁ parittaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti. Etarahi vā so rūpiṁ parittaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti, tattha bhāviṁ vā so rūpiṁ parittaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti, ‘atathaṁ vā pana santaṁ tathattāya upakappessāmī’ti iti vā panassa na hoti. Evaṁ santaṁ kho, ānanda, rūpiṁ parittattānudiṭṭhi nānusetīti iccālaṁ vacanāya.
Therein, Ānanda, he who does not designate a self as having form and as limited, does not designate it thus in the present, nor does he designate it thus for the future, nor does he think: ‘Though it is not so, I will adapt it to become so.’ This being the case, Ānanda, it is fitting to say that the underlying tendency to the view of a self that has form and is limited does not lie within him.
Tatrānanda, yo so rūpiṁ anantaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti. Etarahi vā so rūpiṁ anantaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti, tattha bhāviṁ vā so rūpiṁ anantaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti, ‘atathaṁ vā pana santaṁ tathattāya upakappessāmī’ti iti vā panassa na hoti. Evaṁ santaṁ kho, ānanda, rūpiṁ anantattānudiṭṭhi nānusetīti iccālaṁ vacanāya.
Therein, Ānanda, he who does not designate a self as having form and as infinite, does not designate it thus in the present, nor does he designate it thus for the future, nor does he think: ‘Though it is not so, I will adapt it to become so.’ This being the case, Ānanda, it is fitting to say that the underlying tendency to the view of a self that has form and is infinite does not lie within him.
Tatrānanda, yo so arūpiṁ parittaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti. Etarahi vā so arūpiṁ parittaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti, tattha bhāviṁ vā so arūpiṁ parittaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti, ‘atathaṁ vā pana santaṁ tathattāya upakappessāmī’ti iti vā panassa na hoti. Evaṁ santaṁ kho, ānanda, arūpiṁ parittattānudiṭṭhi nānusetīti iccālaṁ vacanāya.
Therein, Ānanda, he who does not designate a self as formless and as limited, does not designate it thus in the present, nor does he designate it thus for the future, nor does he think: ‘Though it is not so, I will adapt it to become so.’ This being the case, Ānanda, it is fitting to say that the underlying tendency to the view of a self that is formless and is limited does not lie within him.
Tatrānanda, yo so arūpiṁ anantaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti. Etarahi vā so arūpiṁ anantaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti, tattha bhāviṁ vā so arūpiṁ anantaṁ attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti, ‘atathaṁ vā pana santaṁ tathattāya upakappessāmī’ti iti vā panassa na hoti. Evaṁ santaṁ kho, ānanda, arūpiṁ anantattānudiṭṭhi nānusetīti iccālaṁ vacanāya. Ettāvatā kho, ānanda, attānaṁ na paññapento na paññapeti.
Therein, Ānanda, he who does not designate a self as formless and as infinite, does not designate it thus in the present, nor does he designate it thus for the future, nor does he think: ‘Though it is not so, I will adapt it to become so.’ This being the case, Ānanda, it is fitting to say that the underlying tendency to the view of a self that is formless and is infinite does not lie within him. To this extent, Ānanda, does one not designating a self not designate it.
4. Perceiving as Self
Kittāvatā ca, ānanda, attānaṁ samanupassamāno samanupassati? Vedanaṁ vā hi, ānanda, attānaṁ samanupassamāno samanupassati: ‘vedanā me attā’ti. ‘Na heva kho me vedanā attā, appaṭisaṁvedano me attā’ti iti vā hi, ānanda, attānaṁ samanupassamāno samanupassati. ‘Na heva kho me vedanā attā, nopi appaṭisaṁvedano me attā, attā me vediyati, vedanādhammo hi me attā’ti iti vā hi, ānanda, attānaṁ samanupassamāno samanupassati.
And in what ways, Ānanda, does one perceiving a self perceive it? Perceiving feeling as self, Ānanda, one perceives it thus: ‘Feeling is my self.’ Or, Ānanda, perceiving a self, one perceives it thus: ‘Feeling is certainly not my self; my self is without feeling.’ Or, Ānanda, perceiving a self, one perceives it thus: ‘Feeling is certainly not my self, nor is my self without feeling; my self feels, for my self is subject to feeling.’
Tatrānanda, yo so evamāha: ‘vedanā me attā’ti, so evamassa vacanīyo: ‘tisso kho imā, āvuso, vedanā— sukhā vedanā dukkhā vedanā adukkhamasukhā vedanā. Imāsaṁ kho tvaṁ tissannaṁ vedanānaṁ katamaṁ attato samanupassasī’ti? Yasmiṁ, ānanda, samaye sukhaṁ vedanaṁ vedeti, neva tasmiṁ samaye dukkhaṁ vedanaṁ vedeti, na adukkhamasukhaṁ vedanaṁ vedeti; sukhaṁyeva tasmiṁ samaye vedanaṁ vedeti. Yasmiṁ, ānanda, samaye dukkhaṁ vedanaṁ vedeti, neva tasmiṁ samaye sukhaṁ vedanaṁ vedeti, na adukkhamasukhaṁ vedanaṁ vedeti; dukkhaṁyeva tasmiṁ samaye vedanaṁ vedeti. Yasmiṁ, ānanda, samaye adukkhamasukhaṁ vedanaṁ vedeti, neva tasmiṁ samaye sukhaṁ vedanaṁ vedeti, na dukkhaṁ vedanaṁ vedeti; adukkhamasukhaṁyeva tasmiṁ samaye vedanaṁ vedeti.
Therein, Ānanda, he who says: ‘Feeling is my self,’ should be spoken to thus: ‘Friend, there are these three feelings—pleasant feeling, painful feeling, and neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. Of these three feelings, which do you perceive as self?’ Whenever, Ānanda, one feels a pleasant feeling—at that time, one does not feel a painful feeling, nor does one feel a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling; at that time, one feels only a pleasant feeling. Whenever, Ānanda, one feels a painful feeling—at that time, one does not feel a pleasant feeling, nor does one feel a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling; at that time, one feels only a painful feeling. Whenever, Ānanda, one feels a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling—at that time, one does not feel a pleasant feeling, nor does one feel a painful feeling; at that time, one feels only a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling.
Sukhāpi kho, ānanda, vedanā aniccā saṅkhatā paṭiccasamuppannā khayadhammā vayadhammā virāgadhammā nirodhadhammā. Dukkhāpi kho, ānanda, vedanā aniccā saṅkhatā paṭiccasamuppannā khayadhammā vayadhammā virāgadhammā nirodhadhammā. Adukkhamasukhāpi kho, ānanda, vedanā aniccā saṅkhatā paṭiccasamuppannā khayadhammā vayadhammā virāgadhammā nirodhadhammā. Tassa sukhaṁ vedanaṁ vediyamānassa ‘eso me attā’ti hoti. Tassāyeva sukhāya vedanāya nirodhā ‘byagā me attā’ti hoti. Dukkhaṁ vedanaṁ vediyamānassa ‘eso me attā’ti hoti. Tassāyeva dukkhāya vedanāya nirodhā ‘byagā me attā’ti hoti. Adukkhamasukhaṁ vedanaṁ vediyamānassa ‘eso me attā’ti hoti. Tassāyeva adukkhamasukhāya vedanāya nirodhā ‘byagā me attā’ti hoti. Iti so diṭṭheva dhamme aniccasukhadukkhavokiṇṇaṁ uppādavayadhammaṁ attānaṁ samanupassamāno samanupassati, yo so evamāha: ‘vedanā me attā’ti. Tasmātihānanda, etena petaṁ nakkhamati: ‘vedanā me attā’ti samanupassituṁ.
Pleasant feeling, Ānanda, is |impermanent::not lasting, transient, unreliable [anicca]|, |constructed::compounded, conditioned, fabricated [saṅkhata]|, |dependently arisen::casually produced, arisen together from a cause [paṭiccasamuppanna]|, naturally wearing away, subject to disintegration, subject to fading away, having the nature to end. Painful feeling, Ānanda, is impermanent, constructed, dependently arisen, naturally wearing away, subject to disintegration, subject to fading away, having the nature to end. Neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, Ānanda, is impermanent, constructed, dependently arisen, naturally wearing away, subject to disintegration, subject to fading away, having the nature to end. For one feeling a pleasant feeling, the thought occurs: ‘This is my self.’ With the cessation of that very pleasant feeling, the thought occurs: ‘My self has vanished.’ For one feeling a painful feeling, the thought occurs: ‘This is my self.’ With the cessation of that very painful feeling, the thought occurs: ‘My self has vanished.’ For one feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, the thought occurs: ‘This is my self.’ With the cessation of that very neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, the thought occurs: ‘My self has vanished.’ Thus, he who says: ‘Feeling is my self,’ perceives as self something that, in this very life, is impermanent, a mixture of pleasure and pain, and subject to arising and passing away. Therefore, Ānanda, it is not suitable to perceive: ‘Feeling is my self.’
Tatrānanda, yo so evamāha: ‘na heva kho me vedanā attā, appaṭisaṁvedano me attā’ti, so evamassa vacanīyo: ‘yattha panāvuso, sabbaso vedayitaṁ natthi api nu kho, tattha “ayamahamasmī”ti siyā’”ti?
Therein, Ānanda, he who says: ‘Feeling is certainly not my self; my self is without feeling,’ should be spoken to thus: ‘Friend, where there is absolutely no feeling at all, could there be the thought “I am this”?’
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“Certainly not, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, etena petaṁ nakkhamati: ‘na heva kho me vedanā attā, appaṭisaṁvedano me attā’ti samanupassituṁ.
“Therefore, Ānanda, it is not suitable to perceive: ‘Feeling is certainly not my self; my self is without feeling.’”
Tatrānanda, yo so evamāha: ‘na heva kho me vedanā attā, nopi appaṭisaṁvedano me attā, attā me vediyati, vedanādhammo hi me attā’ti. So evamassa vacanīyo— vedanā ca hi, āvuso, sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ aparisesā nirujjheyyuṁ. Sabbaso vedanāya asati vedanānirodhā api nu kho tattha ‘ayamahamasmī’ti siyā”ti?
Therein, Ānanda, he who says: ‘Feeling is certainly not my self, nor is my self without feeling; my self feels, for my self is subject to feeling,’ should be spoken to thus: ‘Friend, if feeling were to cease entirely, completely, in every way, without remainder—with the complete absence of feeling, through the cessation of feeling, could there be the thought “I am this”?’
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“Certainly not, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātihānanda, etena petaṁ nakkhamati: ‘na heva kho me vedanā attā, nopi appaṭisaṁvedano me attā, attā me vediyati, vedanādhammo hi me attā’ti samanupassituṁ.
“Therefore, Ānanda, it is not suitable to perceive: ‘Feeling is certainly not my self, nor is my self without feeling; my self feels, for my self is subject to feeling.’
Yato kho, ānanda, bhikkhu neva vedanaṁ attānaṁ samanupassati, nopi appaṭisaṁvedanaṁ attānaṁ samanupassati, nopi ‘attā me vediyati, vedanādhammo hi me attā’ti samanupassati. So evaṁ na samanupassanto na ca kiñci loke upādiyati, anupādiyaṁ na paritassati, aparitassaṁ paccattaññeva parinibbāyati, ‘khīṇā jāti, vusitaṁ brahmacariyaṁ, kataṁ karaṇīyaṁ, nāparaṁ itthattāyā’ti pajānāti.
When, Ānanda, a bhikkhu perceives neither feeling as self, nor a self without feeling, nor that ‘my self feels, for my self is subject to feeling’—not perceiving thus, he does not |cling to::grasp, hold onto, take possession of [upādiyati]| anything in the world. Not clinging, he is not |perturbed::agitated, shaken up [paritassati]|. Remaining unperturbed, he personally attains |complete quenching::complete cooling, total emancipation [parinibbāyati]|. He knows clearly: ‘Birth is exhausted, the spiritual life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more coming to any state of existence.’
Evaṁ vimuttacittaṁ kho, ānanda, bhikkhuṁ yo evaṁ vadeyya: ‘hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā itissa diṭṭhī’ti, tadakallaṁ. ‘Na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā itissa diṭṭhī’ti, tadakallaṁ. ‘Hoti ca na ca hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā itissa diṭṭhī’ti, tadakallaṁ. ‘Neva hoti na na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā itissa diṭṭhī’ti, tadakallaṁ.
Ānanda, if anyone were to say of a bhikkhu whose mind is thus liberated: ‘He holds the view that the |Tathāgata::one who has arrived at the truth, an epithet of a perfectly Awakened One [tathāgata]| exists after death’—that would not be proper. ‘He holds the view that the Tathāgata does not exist after death’—that would not be proper. ‘He holds the view that the Tathāgata both exists and does not exist after death’—that would not be proper. ‘He holds the view that the Tathāgata neither exists nor does not exist after death’—that would not be proper.
Taṁ kissa hetu? Yāvatā, ānanda, adhivacanaṁ yāvatā adhivacanapatho, yāvatā nirutti yāvatā niruttipatho, yāvatā paññatti yāvatā paññattipatho, yāvatā paññā yāvatā paññāvacaraṁ, yāvatā vaṭṭaṁ, yāvatā vaṭṭati, tadabhiññāvimutto bhikkhu, tadabhiññāvimuttaṁ bhikkhuṁ ‘na jānāti na passati itissa diṭṭhī’ti, tadakallaṁ.
For what reason? As far as designation and the pathway of designation, as far as language and the pathway of language, as far as description and the pathway of description, as far as wisdom and the sphere of wisdom, as far as the cycle and the turning of the cycle—having directly known all that, the bhikkhu is liberated. To say of a bhikkhu liberated by directly knowing this that he holds the view: ‘One does not know and does not see’—that would not be proper.
5. Seven Planes of Consciousness
Satta kho, ānanda, viññāṇaṭṭhitiyo, dve āyatanāni. Katamā satta?
There are, Ānanda, seven planes of consciousness and two bases. What are the seven?
Santānanda, sattā nānattakāyā nānattasaññino, seyyathāpi manussā, ekacce ca devā, ekacce ca vinipātikā. Ayaṁ paṭhamā viññāṇaṭṭhiti.
1.) There are, Ānanda, sentient beings with diverse bodies and diverse perceptions, such as humans, certain gods, and some who have fallen into a |realm of downfall::realm of misery [vinipāta]|. This is the first plane of consciousness.
Santānanda, sattā nānattakāyā ekattasaññino, seyyathāpi devā brahmakāyikā paṭhamābhinibbattā. Ayaṁ dutiyā viññāṇaṭṭhiti.
2.) There are, Ānanda, sentient beings with diverse bodies but identical perceptions, such as the gods belonging to the |Brahma’s::God, the first deity to be born at the beginning of a new cosmic cycle and whose lifespan lasts for the entire cycle [brahmā]| assembly who are reborn through the first [jhāna]. This is the second plane of consciousness.
Santānanda, sattā ekattakāyā nānattasaññino, seyyathāpi devā ābhassarā. Ayaṁ tatiyā viññāṇaṭṭhiti.
3.) There are, Ānanda, sentient beings with identical bodies but diverse perceptions, such as the |radiant gods::effulgent deities; a class of Brahma gods [ābhassarā + devā]|. This is the third plane of consciousness.
Santānanda, sattā ekattakāyā ekattasaññino, seyyathāpi devā subhakiṇhā. Ayaṁ catutthī viññāṇaṭṭhiti.
4.) There are, Ānanda, sentient beings with identical bodies and identical perceptions, such as the |gods of Refulgent Glory::MA: By mentioning these, all beings occupying the plane of the third jhāna — the gods of Limited Glory and the gods of Immeasurable Glory — should be included [subhakiṇha]|. This is the fourth plane of consciousness.
Santānanda, sattā sabbaso rūpasaññānaṁ samatikkamā paṭighasaññānaṁ atthaṅgamā nānattasaññānaṁ amanasikārā ‘ananto ākāso’ti ākāsānañcāyatanūpagā. Ayaṁ pañcamī viññāṇaṭṭhiti.
5.) There are, Ānanda, sentient beings who, with the complete surpassing of |perceptions of form::recognition of matter, concept of materiality [rūpasaññā]|, with the passing away of |perceptions of sensory impact::recognition of sense impression, aversion; lit. striking against perception [paṭighasaññā]|, and non-attention to |perceptions of diversity::recognition of diversity, perception of multiplicity [nānattasaññā]|, perceive ‘boundless space.’ They are established in the base of boundless space. This is the fifth plane of consciousness.
Santānanda, sattā sabbaso ākāsānañcāyatanaṁ samatikkamma ‘anantaṁ viññāṇan’ti viññāṇañcāyatanūpagā. Ayaṁ chaṭṭhī viññāṇaṭṭhiti.
6.) There are, Ānanda, sentient beings who, with the complete surpassing of the base of boundless space, perceive ‘boundless consciousness.’ They are established in the base of boundless consciousness. This is the sixth plane of consciousness.
Santānanda, sattā sabbaso viññāṇañcāyatanaṁ samatikkamma ‘natthi kiñcī’ti ākiñcaññāyatanūpagā. Ayaṁ sattamī viññāṇaṭṭhiti.
7.) There are, Ānanda, sentient beings who, with the complete surpassing of the base of boundless consciousness, perceive ‘there is nothing at all.’ They are established in the base of nothingness. This is the seventh plane of consciousness.
Asaññasattāyatanaṁ nevasaññānāsaññāyatanameva dutiyaṁ.
The base of non-percipient beings and, second, the base of neither perception nor non-perception—[these are the two bases].
Tatrānanda, yāyaṁ paṭhamā viññāṇaṭṭhiti nānattakāyā nānattasaññino, seyyathāpi manussā, ekacce ca devā, ekacce ca vinipātikā. Yo nu kho, ānanda, tañca pajānāti, tassā ca samudayaṁ pajānāti, tassā ca atthaṅgamaṁ pajānāti, tassā ca assādaṁ pajānāti, tassā ca ādīnavaṁ pajānāti, tassā ca nissaraṇaṁ pajānāti, kallaṁ nu tena tadabhinanditun”ti?
Therein, Ānanda, regarding this first plane of consciousness of sentient beings with diverse bodies and diverse perceptions, such as humans, certain gods, and some who have fallen into a realm of downfall—one who discerns it, discerns its |arising::appearance, origination [samudaya]|, discerns its |passing away::disappearance, vanishing, subsiding [atthaṅgama]|, discerns its |gratification::satisfaction, pleasure, enjoyment, sweetness [assāda]|, discerns its |drawback::disadvantage, unsatisfactoriness, inadequacy, danger [ādīnava]|, and discerns the |escape::way out, remedy [nissaraṇa]| from it: is it suitable for him to delight in it?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante” …pe…
“Certainly not, venerable sir.” ...
“tatrānanda, yamidaṁ asaññasattāyatanaṁ. Yo nu kho, ānanda, tañca pajānāti, tassa ca samudayaṁ pajānāti, tassa ca atthaṅgamaṁ pajānāti, tassa ca assādaṁ pajānāti, tassa ca ādīnavaṁ pajānāti, tassa ca nissaraṇaṁ pajānāti, kallaṁ nu tena tadabhinanditun”ti?
“Therein, Ānanda, regarding this base of non-percipient beings—one who discerns it, discerns its arising, discerns its passing away, discerns its gratification, discerns its drawback, and discerns the escape from it: is it suitable for him to delight in it?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“Certainly not, venerable sir.” ...
“Tatrānanda, yamidaṁ nevasaññānāsaññāyatanaṁ. Yo nu kho, ānanda, tañca pajānāti, tassa ca samudayaṁ pajānāti, tassa ca atthaṅgamaṁ pajānāti, tassa ca assādaṁ pajānāti, tassa ca ādīnavaṁ pajānāti, tassa ca nissaraṇaṁ pajānāti, kallaṁ nu tena tadabhinanditun”ti?
“Therein, Ānanda, regarding this base of neither perception nor non-perception—one who discerns it, discerns its arising, discerns its passing away, discerns its gratification, discerns its drawback, and discerns the escape from it: is it suitable for him to delight in it?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“Certainly not, venerable sir.” ...
“Yato kho, ānanda, bhikkhu imāsañca sattannaṁ viññāṇaṭṭhitīnaṁ imesañca dvinnaṁ āyatanānaṁ samudayañca atthaṅgamañca assādañca ādīnavañca nissaraṇañca yathābhūtaṁ viditvā anupādā vimutto hoti, ayaṁ vuccatānanda, bhikkhu paññāvimutto.
“When, Ānanda, a bhikkhu, having known |as it truly is::as it has come to be, as it is in actuality [yathābhūta]| the arising, the passing away, the gratification, the drawback, and the escape regarding these seven planes of consciousness and these two bases, is liberated by non-clinging—this, Ānanda, is called a bhikkhu liberated by wisdom.
6. Eight Liberations
Aṭṭha kho ime, ānanda, vimokkhā. Katame aṭṭha?
There are, Ānanda, these eight liberations. What are the eight?
Rūpī rūpāni passati ayaṁ paṭhamo vimokkho.
1.) Possessed of form, one sees forms; this is the first liberation.
Ajjhattaṁ arūpasaññī bahiddhā rūpāni passati, ayaṁ dutiyo vimokkho.
2.) Not perceiving form internally, one sees forms externally; this is the second liberation.
Subhanteva adhimutto hoti, ayaṁ tatiyo vimokkho.
3.) One is resolved only upon the beautiful; this is the third liberation.
Sabbaso rūpasaññānaṁ samatikkamā paṭighasaññānaṁ atthaṅgamā nānattasaññānaṁ amanasikārā ‘ananto ākāso’ti ākāsānañcāyatanaṁ upasampajja viharati, ayaṁ catuttho vimokkho.
4.) With the complete surpassing of perceptions of form, with the passing away of perception of sensory impact, and non-attention to perception of diversity, aware that ‘space is boundless,’ one enters and dwells in the |base of boundless space::field of boundless expanse, dimension of infinite space [ākāsānañcāyatana]|; this is the fourth liberation.
Sabbaso ākāsānañcāyatanaṁ samatikkamma ‘anantaṁ viññāṇan’ti viññāṇañcāyatanaṁ upasampajja viharati, ayaṁ pañcamo vimokkho.
5.) With the complete surpassing of the base of boundless space, aware that ‘consciousness is boundless,’ one enters and dwells in the base of boundless consciousness; this is the fifth liberation.
Sabbaso viññāṇañcāyatanaṁ samatikkamma ‘natthi kiñcī’ti ākiñcaññāyatanaṁ upasampajja viharati, ayaṁ chaṭṭho vimokkho.
6.) With the complete surpassing of the base of boundless consciousness, aware that ‘there is nothing,’ one enters and dwells in the base of nothingness; this is the sixth liberation.
Sabbaso ākiñcaññāyatanaṁ samatikkamma nevasaññānāsaññāyatanaṁ upasampajja viharati, ayaṁ sattamo vimokkho.
7.) With the complete surpassing of the base of nothingness, one enters and dwells in the base of neither perception nor non-perception; this is the seventh liberation.
Sabbaso nevasaññānāsaññāyatanaṁ samatikkamma saññāvedayitanirodhaṁ upasampajja viharati, ayaṁ aṭṭhamo vimokkho.
8.) With the complete surpassing of the base of neither perception nor non-perception, one enters and dwells in the |cessation of perception and what is felt::ending of recognition and felt experience, cessation of conception and what is felt [saññāvedayitanirodha]|; this is the eighth liberation.
Ime kho, ānanda, aṭṭha vimokkhā.
These, Ānanda, are the eight liberations.
Yato kho, ānanda, bhikkhu ime aṭṭha vimokkhe anulomampi samāpajjati, paṭilomampi samāpajjati, anulomapaṭilomampi samāpajjati, yatthicchakaṁ yadicchakaṁ yāvaticchakaṁ samāpajjatipi vuṭṭhātipi. Āsavānañca khayā anāsavaṁ cetovimuttiṁ paññāvimuttiṁ diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharati, ayaṁ vuccatānanda, bhikkhu ubhatobhāgavimutto. Imāya ca, ānanda, ubhatobhāgavimuttiyā aññā ubhatobhāgavimutti uttaritarā vā paṇītatarā vā natthī”ti.
When, Ānanda, a bhikkhu attains these eight liberations in forward order, attains them in reverse order, and attains them in both forward and reverse order, attaining them and emerging from them wherever he wishes, however he wishes, and for as long as he wishes; and when, through the |wearing away of the taints::gradual exhaustion and elimination of the mental defilements or deep-seated afflictions such as sensual desire, craving for existence, views, and ignorance [āsava + khaya]|, he realizes for himself, through |direct knowledge::experiential understanding [abhiññāya]|, the taintless |liberation of mind::emancipated by mind/heart, samādhi obtained from fruition [cetovimutti]| and |liberation by wisdom::emancipation by insight [paññāvimutti]|, and in this very life, having attained it, he abides in it—this, Ānanda, is called a bhikkhu |liberated in both ways::emancipated in two regards [ubhatobhāgavimutta]|. And, Ānanda, there is no other liberation in both ways that is higher or more sublime than this.”
Idamavoca bhagavā. Attamano āyasmā ānando bhagavato bhāsitaṁ abhinandīti.
The Blessed One said this. The venerable Ānanda was delighted and pleased with the Blessed One’s words.