MN102: Pañcattayasutta - The Five and Three
- © Translated from the Pali by Bhante Sujato. (More copyright information)
mn102:1.1So I have heard.This sutta is something of a “middle length” version of the better-known Brahmajālasutta (DN1). Both these texts emphasize the importance of understanding the views of others. This is important, because we live and communicate in a cultural context, and our views are shared with those of others. Some of the views defined here are still current today, while others have disappeared in history. But we can still learn from the Buddha’s method to learn how to approach different views today.
A Tibetan translation of the Mūlasarvāstivāda Pañcatraya Sūtra is discussed by Peter Skilling in Mahāsūtras II, pp. 469–511. At one time the Buddha was staying near Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery. There the Buddha addressed the mendicants, “Mendicants!”
mn102:1.5“Venerable sir,” they replied. The Buddha said this:
mn102:2.1“Mendicants, there are some ascetics and brahmins who speculate and theorize about the future, and assert various hypotheses concerning the future. Some propose this: ‘The self is percipient and healthy after death.’The first three are varieties of eternalism.
Aroga (“free of disease”) is explained by the commentary as “permanent” (nicca), drawing on the root sense of the word, “unbroken”. However, aroga is always used in the sense “free of disease, well, healthy” (eg. MN97:2.1), and this applies to the Brahmanical tradition as well as the Buddhist. Chandogya Upaniṣad 7.26.2 says that one who sees (the self) does not see death, they have no disease or pain. Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.4.12 similarly says that one who sees the self will not suffer in the wake of the body, which Śaṅkāra explains, “Struggling with desires for himself, for his son, for his wife, and so on, he is born and dies again and again, and is diseased when his body is diseased.” Some propose this: ‘The self is non-percipient and healthy after death.’ Some propose this: ‘The self is neither percipient nor non-percipient and healthy after death.’ But some assert the annihilation, eradication, and obliteration of an existing being, while others propose extinguishment in this life.“Extinguishment in the present life” sounds like the Buddhist view, but since it is collected here with wrong views, it refers to misapprehension of absorption as being Nibbāna (MN102:24.1). This is similar to the five views of DN1:33.10. DN1 adds sensual pleasures as a kind of false Nibbāna; it also makes it explicit that it is the extinguishment of “an existing being”.
In both suttas “extinguishment in the present life” is included with the views about the future, for unclear reasons. Skilling notes, however, that in the Pañcatraya Sūtra, “extinguishment in the present life” constitutes a separate category. Thus they assert an existent self that is free of disease after death; or they assert the annihilation of an existing being; while some propose extinguishment in this life. In this way five become three, and three become five.That is, there are five total propositions, of which the first three are varieties of eternalism, which if treated as a group, gives three kinds of views. This is the summary recital of the five and three.
mn102:3.1Now, the ascetics and brahmins who assert a self that is percipient and healthy after death describe it as formed, or formless, or both formed and formless, or neither formed nor formless. Or they describe it as of unified perception, or of diverse perception, or of limited perception, or of limitless perception. Or some among those who go beyond this propose universal consciousness, limitless and imperturbable.The Buddha subdivides the first kind of eternalist according to the kind of self that is envisaged.
The “form” of the self may be either “coarse” form such as a human body, or “subtle form” like the heaven realms.
A formless self is associated with formless attainments.
“Having form and being formless” is not meant as a paradox. It could mean that the self evolves or transitions through different states, sometimes having form, sometimes not. Or it could refer to something like different layers of sheaths of the self, where everything is the self, but may be lesser attributes of self.
Unified perception results from jhāna, diverse perception from sense experience.
Limited perception is associated with sense consciousness or a limited attainment of absorption, while limitless perception is associated with a limitless absorption. This seems to refer to the first formless attainment.
“Universal consciousness” (viññāṇakasiṇa) is equivalent to the second formless attainment, which is mentioned by both the Pali commentary and the Pañcatraya Sūtra.
mn102:4.1The Realized One understands this as follows. There are ascetics and brahmins who assert a self that is percipient and healthy after death, describing it as formed, or formless, or both formed and formless, or neither formed nor formless. Or they describe it as of unified perception, or of diverse perception, or of limited perception, or of limitless perception. Or some, aware that ‘there is nothing at all’, propose the dimension of nothingness, limitless and imperturbable. They declare that this is the purest, highest, best, and supreme of all those perceptions, whether of form or of formlessness or of unity or of diversity.This is the third formless attainment.
The fourth formless attainment, “neither perception nor non-perception” is so subtle that it cannot be considered an attainment with perception. ‘That much is conditioned and crude. But there is the cessation of conditions—that is real.’This describes the development of insight based on deep absorption. Even the most refined states are still conditioned and therefore “coarse” compared to Nibbāna. Understanding this and seeing the escape from it, the Realized One has gone beyond all that.
mn102:5.1Now, the ascetics and brahmins who assert a self that is non-percipient and healthy after death describe it as formed, or formless, or both formed and formless, or neither formed nor formless.The suttas occasionally mention the “non-percipient beings” (DN1:2.30.1). The commentaries explain this as a realm of pure form, where consciousness is suspended for a long time. This is tricky to interpret in line with the Buddhist classes of existence, since such a state could not be considered “formless”. A similar problem comes when the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception is considered to have form (MN102:8.1). Such cases must refer to sectarian views that do not fit within the Buddhist system.
mn102:6.1So they reject those who assert a self that is percipient and healthy after death. Why is that? Because they believe that perception is a disease, a boil, a dart, and that the state of non-perception is peaceful and sublime.
mn102:7.1The Realized One understands this as follows. There are ascetics and brahmins who assert a self that is non-percipient and healthy after death, describing it as formed, or formless, or both formed and formless, or neither formed nor formless. But if any ascetic or brahmin should say this: ‘Apart from form, feeling, perception, and choices, I will describe the coming and going of consciousness, its passing away and reappearing, its growth, increase, and maturity.’Also at SN22.53, etc.
The process of rebirth is often described in terms of consciousness, as in dependent origination or, say, the “stream of consciousness” (DN28:7.10). However, consciousness never exists by itself, but only in relation to the other aggregates.
The case of the formless realm might seem to be somewhat of an exception. However even formless rebirth is dependent on form of the past, since a meditator must undertake the practice, and also the four “form” absorptions are the basis for the formless attainments. Thus while the formless realms can be described without reference to present form they cannot be described without reference to form at all. That is not possible. ‘All that is conditioned and crude. But there is the cessation of conditions—that is real.’ Understanding this and seeing the escape from it, the Realized One has gone beyond all that.
mn102:8.1Now, the ascetics and brahmins who assert a self that is neither percipient nor non-percipient and healthy after death describe it as formed, or formless, or both formed and formless, or neither formed nor formless.
mn102:9.1So they reject those who assert a self that is percipient and healthy after death, as well as those who assert a self that is non-percipient and healthy after death. Why is that? Because they believe that perception is a disease, a boil, a dart; that non-perception is a stupor; and that the state of neither perception nor non-perception is peaceful and sublime.This is the highest of the formless attainments.
“Stupor” is sammoha.
mn102:10.1The Realized One understands this as follows. There are ascetics and brahmins who assert a self that is neither percipient nor non-percipient and healthy after death, describing it as formed, or formless, or both formed and formless, or neither formed nor formless. Some ascetics or brahmins assert the embracing of that dimension merely through the conditioned phenomena of what is able to be seen, heard, thought, and known. But that is said to be a disastrous approach.The commentary resolves the compound diṭṭhasutamutaviññātabba by applying the future passive participle viññātabba to the preceding items: diṭṭhaviññātabbamattena sutaviññātabbamattena mutaviññātabbamattena. However the same phrase occurs at SN35.95 and AN4.24, and in both cases the future passive sense is clearly meant to be distributed to each item. Thus it means “what is seeable, hearable, thinkable, and knowable”. For that dimension is said to be not attainable by means of conditioned phenomena,Cp. SN14.11. but only with a residue of conditioned phenomena.This “residue” is the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception itself. ‘All that is conditioned and crude. But there is the cessation of conditions—that is real.’ Understanding this and seeing the escape from it, the Realized One has gone beyond all that.
mn102:11.1Now, the ascetics and brahmins who assert the annihilation, eradication, and obliteration of an existing being reject those who assert a self that is healthy after death, whether percipient or non-percipient or neither percipient non-percipient. Why is that? Because they think: ‘All of those ascetics and brahmins only assert their attachment to heading upstream:For uddhaṁ saraṁ (“heading upstream”) in the sense “heading for rebirth in a higher realm”, compare uddhaṁsoto (“one who heads upstream”), a term for a non-returner. “After death we shall be like this! After death we shall be like that!”
mn102:12.1Suppose a trader was going to market, thinking: “With this, that shall be mine! This way, I shall get that!” In the same way, those ascetics and brahmins seem to be like traders when they say:This is a pointed criticism of those who approach spiritual life with a materialist mindset. “After death we shall be like this! After death we shall be like that!”’
The Realized One understands this as follows. The ascetics and brahmins who assert the annihilation, eradication, and obliteration of an existing being; from fear and disgust with substantial reality, they just keep running and circling around substantial reality.“Fear and disgust” is what in the second Noble Truth is called “craving for non-existence” (vibhavataṇhā).
“Substantial reality” (sakkāya) is the five aggregates that make up the three realms of existence, and which are grasped at as an “existing being” (sato sattassa). Suppose a dog on a leash was tethered to a strong post or pillar. It would just keeping running and circling around that post or pillar.Sā (Sanskrit śvan) is a short form for “dog” (in masculine). This simile is also at SN22.99. In the same way, those ascetics and brahmins, from fear and disgust with substantial reality, just keep running and circling around substantial reality. ‘All that is conditioned and crude. But there is the cessation of conditions—that is real.’ Understanding this and seeing the escape from it, the Realized One has gone beyond all that.
mn102:13.1Whatever ascetics and brahmins speculate and theorize about the future, and propose various hypotheses concerning the future, all of them propose one or other of these five theses.This statement seems misplaced here, as the introduction included “extinguishment in the present life” which has not yet been discussed. Probably it should occur further down, perhaps at MN102:25.1.
mn102:14.1There are some ascetics and brahmins who theorize about the past, and propose various hypotheses concerning the past. They propose the following, each insisting that theirs is the only truth and that everything else is wrong.“Theories of the past” are not mentioned in the introduction. In the Brahmajālasutta, such theories are logically described before theories of the future. The theories of the past are similar to those of the Brahmajālasutta, but not identical, so they cannot have been simply copied over. These theories may have originally been mentioned in the introduction and listed at the start of the sutta, but displaced due to textual corruption. We have already seen in the preceding segment that corruption is likely at this point. Analayo discusses this issue in detail (Comparative Study, vol. ii, p. 597ff).
‘The self and the cosmos are eternal.’See the four kinds of eternalism at DN1:1.30.1.
The phrase “self and cosmos” (attā ca loko ca) refers to the Upaniṣadic view, where the Self is ultimately a contingent aspect of the divinity that is the cosmos. That is why they occur together, as their nature and fate is inseparable. This is not true of other philosophies, as for example where a “soul” is created in a pre-existing universe, or when the universe is felt to be impermanent but the soul is eternal.
‘The self and the cosmos are not eternal.’This implies that at some point in the past, the self and the world appeared, which the commentary equates with the two kinds of “origination by chance” of DN1:2.30.1.
‘The self and the cosmos are both eternal and not eternal.’Compare the four kinds of “partial eternalism” (DN1:2.1.1).
The self and the cosmos are neither eternal nor not eternal.’The commentary suggests that these are the “endless flip-floppers” of DN1:2.23.1. That may be so, but they are characterized by the refusal to make a statement, whereas here we have a definite statement, even if the exact sense is unclear. As a rule, constructions of the “neither … nor” type point to a subtle state that does not fit a dualistic description. Perhaps it refers to a philosophy that words such as “eternal” are inadequate, because “eternal” means “live for an infinite time” whereas they believed in a destiny that transcends time.
‘The self and the cosmos are finite.’These four views correspond to the same four “theories of the past” at DN1:2.16.1. In addition, all the following items in this list are “theories of the future” at DN1:2.38.1. Clearly it is possible to have similar views in relation to both the past and future. The classification of the finitude of the cosmos in relation to time seems puzzling, although in a relativistic universe time and distance are inextricably linked by the speed of light.
‘The self and the cosmos are infinite.’
‘The self and the cosmos are both finite and infinite.’
‘The self and the cosmos are neither finite nor infinite.’
‘The self and the cosmos are unified in perception.’
‘The self and the cosmos are diverse in perception.’
‘The self and the cosmos have limited perception.’
‘The self and the cosmos have limitless perception.’
‘The self and the cosmos experience nothing but happiness.’
‘The self and the cosmos experience nothing but suffering.’
‘The self and the cosmos experience both happiness and suffering.’
‘The self and the cosmos experience neither happiness nor suffering.’
mn102:15.1Now, consider the ascetics and brahmins whose view is as follows. ‘The self and the cosmos are eternal. This is the only truth, anything else is futile.’ It’s simply not possible for them to have personal knowledge of this that is pure and bright, apart from faith, endorsement, oral transmission, reasoned train of thought, or acceptance of a view after deliberation. But in the absence of personal knowledge that is pure and bright, even the portion of knowledge they illuminate is said to be grasping on their part.The phrase “pure and bright” (parisuddhe pariyodāte) normally describes the fourth absorption. The argument here may be parsed as follows. Even in the highest form of consciousness it is not possible to directly know such things as whether the cosmos is infinite. Any such doctrine, therefore, must be inferred from experience through the five forms of unreliable knowledge starting with faith. They are therefore confidently asserting things of which they have no direct knowledge. Because of this, even the portion of genuine knowledge and insight their meditation has brought them is corrupted by attachment.
Pariyodāta (“bright”) is glossed by the commentary as pabhassara (“radiant”). But “brighten” doesn’t quite work here for the verbal form pariyodapenti, so I use “illuminate”. ‘All that is conditioned and crude. But there is the cessation of conditions—that is real.’ Understanding this and seeing the escape from it, the Realized One has gone beyond all that.
mn102:16.1Now, consider the ascetics and brahmins whose view is as follows. The self and the cosmos are not eternal, or both eternal and not eternal, or neither eternal nor not-eternal, or finite, or infinite, or both finite and infinite, or neither finite nor infinite, or of unified perception, or of diverse perception, or of limited perception, or of limitless perception, or experience nothing but happiness, or experience nothing but suffering, or experience both happiness and suffering, or experience neither happiness nor suffering. It’s simply not possible for them to have personal knowledge of this that is pure and bright, apart from faith, endorsement, oral transmission, reasoned train of thought, or acceptance of a view after deliberation. But in the absence of personal knowledge that is pure and bright, even the portion of knowledge they illuminate is said to be grasping on their part. ‘All that is conditioned and crude. But there is the cessation of conditions—that is real.’ Understanding this and seeing the escape from it, the Realized One has gone beyond all that.
mn102:17.1Now, some ascetics and brahmins, letting go of theories about the past and the future, not fixating on the fetters of sensuality, enter and remain in the rapture of seclusion:The following section illustrates how genuine experiences of deep meditation become misapprehended as “extinguishment in the present life”. It begins with a lengthy and unique description of the absorptions, before specifying how grasping intervenes.
The “rapture of seclusion” includes the first two absorptions, which are characterized by rapture (pīti). ‘This is peaceful, this is sublime, that is, entering and remaining in the rapture of seclusion.’ But that rapture of seclusion of theirs ceases. When the rapture of seclusion ceases, sadness arises; and when sadness ceases, the rapture of seclusion arises.Upon emerging from the bliss of absorption, the mind experiences anew all the flavors of life, including sadness. Typically a meditator is happy and refreshed for a long time after a deep meditation. Still, there can be a sense of loss of the blissful state, and a melancholy reflection that that too is impermanent.
mn102:18.1It’s like how the sunlight fills the space when the shadow leaves, or the shadow fills the space when the sunshine leaves. In the same way, when the rapture of seclusion ceases, sadness arises; and when sadness ceases, the rapture of seclusion arises.
The Realized One understands this as follows. This good ascetic or brahmin, letting go of theories about the past and the future, not fixating on the fetters of sensuality, enters and remains in the rapture of seclusion: ‘This is peaceful, this is sublime, that is, entering and remaining in the rapture of seclusion.’ But that rapture of seclusion of theirs ceases. When the rapture of seclusion ceases, sadness arises; and when sadness ceases, the rapture of seclusion arises. ‘All that is conditioned and crude. But there is the cessation of conditions—that is real.’ Understanding this and seeing the escape from it, the Realized One has gone beyond all that.
mn102:19.1Now, some ascetics and brahmins, letting go of theories about the past and the future, not fixating on the fetters of sensuality, going beyond the rapture of seclusion, enter and remain in pleasure not of the flesh.The “pleasure not of the flesh” (nirāmisaṁ sukhaṁ) is the third absorption, characterized by the ending of rapture and the persistence of pleasure (sukha). At SN36.31 it is described as all the jhānas leading up to the third. The same sense is also at AN6.45. ‘This is peaceful, this is sublime, that is, entering and remaining in pleasure not of the flesh.’ But that pleasure not of the flesh of theirs ceases. When pleasure not of the flesh ceases, the rapture of seclusion arises; and when the rapture of seclusion ceases, pleasure not of the flesh arises.
mn102:20.1It’s like how the sunlight fills the space when the shadow leaves, or the shadow fills the space when the sunshine leaves. …
The Realized One understands this as follows. This good ascetic or brahmin, letting go of theories about the past and the future, not fixating on the fetters of sensuality, going beyond the rapture of seclusion, enters and remains in pleasure not of the flesh. ‘This is peaceful, this is sublime, that is, entering and remaining in pleasure not of the flesh.’ But that pleasure not of the flesh of theirs ceases. When pleasure not of the flesh ceases, the rapture of seclusion arises; and when the rapture of seclusion ceases, pleasure not of the flesh arises. ‘All that is conditioned and crude. But there is the cessation of conditions—that is real.’ Understanding this and seeing the escape from it, the Realized One has gone beyond all that.
mn102:21.1Now, some ascetics and brahmins, letting go of theories about the past and the future, not fixating on the fetters of sensuality, going beyond the rapture of seclusion and pleasure not of the flesh, enter and remain in neutral feeling.This is the fourth absorption. ‘This is peaceful, this is sublime, that is, entering and remaining in neutral feeling.’ Then that neutral feeling ceases. When neutral feeling ceases, pleasure not of the flesh arises; and when pleasure not of the flesh ceases, neutral feelings arises.
mn102:22.1It’s like how the sunlight fills the space when the shadow leaves, or the shadow fills the space when the sunshine leaves. …
The Realized One understands this as follows. This good ascetic or brahmin, letting go of theories about the past and the future, not fixating on the fetters of sensuality, going beyond the rapture of seclusion and pleasure not of the flesh, enters and remains in neutral feeling. ‘This is peaceful, this is sublime, that is, entering and remaining in neutral feeling.’ Then that neutral feeling ceases. When neutral feeling ceases, pleasure not of the flesh arises; and when pleasure not of the flesh ceases, neutral feelings arises. ‘All that is conditioned and crude. But there is the cessation of conditions—that is real.’ Understanding this and seeing the escape from it, the Realized One has gone beyond all that.
mn102:23.1Now, some ascetics and brahmins, letting go of theories about the past and the future, not fixating on the fetters of sensuality, go beyond the rapture of seclusion, pleasure not of the flesh, and neutral feeling. They regard themselves like this: ‘I am at peace; I am quenched; I am free of grasping.’The repeated “I am” (ahamasmi) emphasizes the conceit that reinforces the sense of self.
mn102:24.1The Realized One understands this as follows. This good ascetic or brahmin, letting go of theories about the past and the future, not fixating on the fetters of sensuality, goes beyond the rapture of seclusion, pleasure not of the flesh, and neutral feeling. They regard themselves like this: ‘I am at peace; I am quenched; I am free of grasping.’ Clearly this venerable speaks of a practice that’s conducive to extinguishment.The practice of absorption leads to Nibbāna, but if the state of absorption itself is misapprehended as being Nibbāna, the misapprehension is a form of attachment. Nevertheless, they still grasp at theories about the past or the future, or the fetters of sensuality, or the rapture of seclusion, or pleasure not of the flesh, or neutral feeling.This contrasts with the earlier statement that they had let go of views of the past and future before entering absorption. Perhaps they had had temporarily let them go, only for them to re-arise later. Or perhaps there is an editorial issue. And when they regard themselves like this: ‘I am at peace; I am quenched; I am free of grasping,’ that’s also said to be grasping on their part. ‘All that is conditioned and crude. But there is the cessation of conditions—that is real.’ Understanding this and seeing the escape from it, the Realized One has gone beyond all that.
mn102:25.1But the Realized One has awakened to the supreme state of sublime peace, that is, liberation by not grasping after truly understanding the six fields of contact’s origin, disappearance, gratification, drawback, and escape.”The Brahmajālasutta also emphasizes how liberation from the “sixty-two” wrong views is achieved through insight into the “six fields of contact” (DN1:3.29.1).
mn102:25.3That is what the Buddha said. Satisfied, the mendicants approved what the Buddha said.
1Evaṁ me sutaṁ — ekaṁ samayaṁ bhagavā sāvatthiyaṁ viharati jetavane anāthapiṇḍikassa ārāme. Tatra kho bhagavā bhikkhū āmantesi: "bhikkhavo"ti.
"Bhadante"ti te bhikkhū bhagavato paccassosuṁ. Bhagavā etadavoca:
"santi, bhikkhave, eke samaṇabrāhmaṇā aparantakappikā aparantānudiṭṭhino aparantaṁ ārabbha anekavihitāni adhivuttipadāni abhivadanti.
‘Saññī attā hoti arogo paraṁ maraṇā’ti — ittheke abhivadanti;
‘asaññī attā hoti arogo paraṁ maraṇā’ti — ittheke abhivadanti;
‘nevasaññīnāsaññī attā hoti arogo paraṁ maraṇā’ti — ittheke abhivadanti;
diṭṭhadhammanibbānaṃ vā paneke abhivadanti.
sato vā pana sattassa ucchedaṁ vināsaṁ vibhavaṁ paññapenti,
diṭṭhadhammanibbānaṁ vā paneke abhivadanti.
Iti santaṁ vā attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā, sato vā pana sattassa ucchedaṁ vināsaṁ vibhavaṁ paññapenti, diṭṭhadhammanibbānaṁ vā paneke abhivadanti. Iti imāni pañca
hutvā tīṇi honti, tīṇi hutvā pañca honti – ayamuddeso pañcattayassa.
2Tatra, bhikkhave, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
rūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
arūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
rūpiñca arūpiñca vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
nevarūpiṁ nārūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
ekattasaññiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
nānattasaññiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
parittasaññiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
appamāṇasaññiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
etaṁ vā panekesaṁ upātivattataṁ viññāṇakasiṇameke abhivadanti appamāṇaṁ āneñjaṁ.
Tayidaṁ, bhikkhave, tathāgato abhijānāti. Ye kho te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
rūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
arūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
rūpiñca arūpiñca vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
nevarūpiṁ nārūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā, ekattasaññiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā, nānattasaññiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā, parittasaññiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā, appamāṇasaññiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā, yā vā panetāsaṁ saññānaṁ parisuddhā paramā aggā anuttariyā akkhāyati — yadi rūpasaññānaṁ yadi arūpasaññānaṁ yadi ekattasaññānaṁ yadi nānattasaññānaṁ. ‘Natthi kiñcī’ti ākiñcaññāyatanameke abhivadanti appamāṇaṁ āneñjaṁ. ‘Tayidaṁ saṅkhataṁ oḷārikaṁ atthi kho pana saṅkhārānaṁ nirodho atthetan’ti — iti viditvā tassa nissaraṇadassāvī tathāgato tadupātivatto.
3Tatra, bhikkhave, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā asaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
rūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā asaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
arūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā asaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
rūpiñca arūpiñca vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā asaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
nevarūpiṁ nārūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā asaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā.
Tatra, bhikkhave, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā tesamete paṭikkosanti. Taṁ kissa hetu? Saññā rogo saññā gaṇḍo saññā sallaṁ, etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ: ‘asaññan’ti.
Tayidaṁ, bhikkhave, tathāgato abhijānāti ye kho te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā asaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā, rūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā asaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā, arūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā asaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā, rūpiñca arūpiñca vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā asaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā, nevarūpiṁ nārūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā asaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā. Yo hi koci, bhikkhave, samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā evaṁ vadeyya: ‘ahamaññatra rūpā, aññatra vedanāya, aññatra saññāya, aññatra saṅkhārehi, viññāṇassa āgatiṁ vā gatiṁ vā cutiṁ vā upapattiṁ vā vuddhiṁ vā virūḷhiṁ vā vepullaṁ vā paññapessāmī’ti – netaṁ ṭhānaṁ vijjati. ‘Tayidaṁ saṅkhataṁ oḷārikaṁ atthi kho pana saṅkhārānaṁ nirodho atthetan’ti — iti viditvā tassa nissaraṇadassāvī tathāgato tadupātivatto.
4Tatra, bhikkhave, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā nevasaññīnāsaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
rūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā nevasaññīnāsaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
arūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā nevasaññīnāsaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
rūpiñca arūpiñca vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā nevasaññīnāsaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā,
nevarūpiṁ nārūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā nevasaññīnāsaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā.
Tatra, bhikkhave, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā tesamete paṭikkosanti, yepi te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā asaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā tesamete paṭikkosanti. Taṁ kissa hetu? Saññā rogo saññā gaṇḍo saññā sallaṁ, asaññā sammoho, etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ: ‘nevasaññānāsaññan’ti.
Tayidaṁ, bhikkhave, tathāgato abhijānāti. Ye kho te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā nevasaññīnāsaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā, rūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā nevasaññīnāsaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā, arūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā nevasaññīnāsaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā, rūpiñca arūpiñca vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā nevasaññīnāsaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā, nevarūpiṁ nārūpiṁ vā te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā nevasaññīnāsaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā. Ye hi keci, bhikkhave, samaṇā vā brāhmaṇā vā diṭṭhasutamutaviññātabbasaṅkhāramattena etassa āyatanassa upasampadaṁ paññapenti, byasanañhetaṁ, bhikkhave, akkhāyati etassa āyatanassa upasampadāya. Na hetaṁ, bhikkhave, āyatanaṁ saṅkhārasamāpattipattabbamakkhāyati; saṅkhārāvasesasamāpattipattabbametaṁ, bhikkhave, āyatanamakkhāyati. ‘Tayidaṁ saṅkhataṁ oḷārikaṁ atthi kho pana saṅkhārānaṁ nirodho atthetan’ti — iti viditvā tassa nissaraṇadassāvī tathāgato tadupātivatto.
5Tatra, bhikkhave, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā sato sattassa ucchedaṁ vināsaṁ vibhavaṁ paññapenti, tatra, bhikkhave, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā saññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā tesamete paṭikkosanti, yepi te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā asaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā tesamete paṭikkosanti, yepi te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā nevasaññīnāsaññiṁ attānaṁ paññapenti arogaṁ paraṁ maraṇā tesamete paṭikkosanti. Taṁ kissa hetu? Sabbepime bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā uddhaṁ saraṁ āsattiṁyeva abhivadanti: ‘iti pecca bhavissāma, iti pecca bhavissāmā’ti.
Seyyathāpi nāma vāṇijassa vāṇijjāya gacchato evaṁ hoti: ‘ito me idaṁ bhavissati, iminā idaṁ lacchāmī’ti; evamevime bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā vāṇijūpamā maññe paṭibhanti: ‘iti pecca bhavissāma, iti pecca bhavissāmā’ti.
Tayidaṁ, bhikkhave, tathāgato abhijānāti. Ye kho te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā sato sattassa ucchedaṁ vināsaṁ vibhavaṁ paññapenti te sakkāyabhayā sakkāyaparijegucchā sakkāyaññeva anuparidhāvanti anuparivattanti. Seyyathāpi nāma sā gaddulabaddho daḷhe thambhe vā khile vā upanibaddho, tameva thambhaṁ vā khilaṁ vā anuparidhāvati anuparivattati; evamevime bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā sakkāyabhayā sakkāyaparijegucchā sakkāyaññeva anuparidhāvanti anuparivattanti. ‘Tayidaṁ saṅkhataṁ oḷārikaṁ atthi kho pana saṅkhārānaṁ nirodho atthetan’ti — iti viditvā tassa nissaraṇadassāvī tathāgato tadupātivatto.
6Ye hi keci, bhikkhave, samaṇā vā brāhmaṇā vā aparantakappikā aparantānudiṭṭhino aparantaṁ ārabbha anekavihitāni adhivuttipadāni abhivadanti, sabbe te imāneva pañcāyatanāni abhivadanti etesaṁ vā aññataraṁ.
7Santi, bhikkhave, eke samaṇabrāhmaṇā pubbantakappikā pubbantānudiṭṭhino pubbantaṁ ārabbha anekavihitāni adhivuttipadāni abhivadanti.
‘Sassato attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti — ittheke abhivadanti,
‘asassato attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti — ittheke abhivadanti,
‘sassato ca asassato ca attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti — ittheke abhivadanti,
‘nevasassato nāsassato attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti — ittheke abhivadanti,
‘antavā attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti — ittheke abhivadanti,
‘anantavā attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti — ittheke abhivadanti,
‘antavā ca anantavā ca attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti — ittheke abhivadanti,
‘nevantavā nānantavā attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti — ittheke abhivadanti,
‘ekattasaññī attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti — ittheke abhivadanti,
‘nānattasaññī attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti — ittheke abhivadanti,
‘parittasaññī attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti – ittheke abhivadanti,
‘appamāṇasaññī attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti — ittheke abhivadanti,
‘ekantasukhī attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti — ittheke abhivadanti,
‘ekantadukkhī attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti — ittheke abhivadanti,
‘sukhadukkhī attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti — ittheke abhivadanti,
‘adukkhamasukhī attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti — ittheke abhivadanti.
8Tatra, bhikkhave, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā evaṁvādino evaṁdiṭṭhino: ‘sassato attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti, tesaṁ vata aññatreva saddhāya aññatra ruciyā aññatra anussavā aññatra ākāraparivitakkā aññatra diṭṭhinijjhānakkhantiyā paccattaṁyeva ñāṇaṁ bhavissati parisuddhaṁ pariyodātanti — netaṁ ṭhānaṁ vijjati. Paccattaṁ kho pana, bhikkhave, ñāṇe asati parisuddhe pariyodāte yadapi te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā tattha ñāṇabhāgamattameva pariyodapenti tadapi tesaṁ bhavataṁ samaṇabrāhmaṇānaṁ upādānamakkhāyati. ‘Tayidaṁ saṅkhataṁ oḷārikaṁ atthi kho pana saṅkhārānaṁ nirodho atthetan’ti – iti viditvā tassa nissaraṇadassāvī tathāgato tadupātivatto.
9Tatra, bhikkhave, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā evaṁvādino evaṁdiṭṭhino: ‘asassato attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññan’ti … pe … sassato ca asassato ca attā ca loko ca … nevasassato nāsassato attā ca loko ca … antavā attā ca loko ca … anantavā attā ca loko ca … antavā ca anantavā ca attā ca loko ca … nevantavā nānantavā attā ca loko ca … ekattasaññī attā ca loko ca … nānattasaññī attā ca loko ca … parittasaññī attā ca loko ca … appamāṇasaññī attā ca loko ca … ekantasukhī attā ca loko ca … ekantadukkhī attā ca loko ca … sukhadukkhī attā ca loko ca … adukkhamasukhī attā ca loko ca, idameva saccaṁ moghamaññanti, tesaṁ vata aññatreva saddhāya aññatra ruciyā aññatra anussavā aññatra ākāraparivitakkā aññatra diṭṭhinijjhānakkhantiyā paccattaṁyeva ñāṇaṁ bhavissati parisuddhaṁ pariyodātanti — netaṁ ṭhānaṁ vijjati. Paccattaṁ kho pana, bhikkhave, ñāṇe asati parisuddhe pariyodāte yadapi te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā tattha ñāṇabhāgamattameva pariyodapenti tadapi tesaṁ bhavataṁ samaṇabrāhmaṇānaṁ upādānamakkhāyati. ‘Tayidaṁ saṅkhataṁ oḷārikaṁ atthi kho pana saṅkhārānaṁ nirodho atthetan’ti — iti viditvā tassa nissaraṇadassāvī tathāgato tadupātivatto.
10Idha, bhikkhave, ekacco samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā pubbantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, aparantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, sabbaso kāmasaṁyojanānaṁ anadhiṭṭhānā, pavivekaṁ pītiṁ upasampajja viharati: ‘etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ pavivekaṁ pītiṁ upasampajja viharāmī’ti. Tassa sā pavivekā pīti nirujjhati. Pavivekāya pītiyā nirodhā uppajjati domanassaṁ, domanassassa nirodhā uppajjati pavivekā pīti.
Seyyathāpi, bhikkhave, yaṁ chāyā jahati taṁ ātapo pharati, yaṁ ātapo jahati taṁ chāyā pharati; evameva kho, bhikkhave, pavivekāya pītiyā nirodhā uppajjati domanassaṁ, domanassassa nirodhā uppajjati pavivekā pīti.
Tayidaṁ, bhikkhave, tathāgato abhijānāti. Ayaṁ kho bhavaṁ samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā pubbantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, aparantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, sabbaso kāmasaṁyojanānaṁ anadhiṭṭhānā, pavivekaṁ pītiṁ upasampajja viharati: ‘etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ pavivekaṁ pītiṁ upasampajja viharāmī’ti. Tassa sā pavivekā pīti nirujjhati. Pavivekāya pītiyā nirodhā uppajjati domanassaṁ, domanassassa nirodhā uppajjati pavivekā pīti. ‘Tayidaṁ saṅkhataṁ oḷārikaṁ atthi kho pana saṅkhārānaṁ nirodho atthetan’ti – iti viditvā tassa nissaraṇadassāvī tathāgato tadupātivatto.
11Idha pana, bhikkhave, ekacco samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā pubbantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, aparantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, sabbaso kāmasaṁyojanānaṁ anadhiṭṭhānā, pavivekāya pītiyā samatikkamā nirāmisaṁ sukhaṁ upasampajja viharati: ‘etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ nirāmisaṁ sukhaṁ upasampajja viharāmī’ti. Tassa taṁ nirāmisaṁ sukhaṁ nirujjhati. Nirāmisassa sukhassa nirodhā uppajjati pavivekā pīti, pavivekāya pītiyā nirodhā uppajjati nirāmisaṁ sukhaṁ.
Seyyathāpi, bhikkhave, yaṁ chāyā jahati taṁ ātapo pharati, yaṁ ātapo jahati taṁ chāyā pharati; evameva kho, bhikkhave, nirāmisassa sukhassa nirodhā uppajjati pavivekā pīti, pavivekāya pītiyā nirodhā uppajjati nirāmisaṁ sukhaṁ.
Tayidaṁ, bhikkhave, tathāgato abhijānāti. Ayaṁ kho bhavaṁ samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā pubbantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, aparantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, sabbaso kāmasaṁyojanānaṁ anadhiṭṭhānā, pavivekāya pītiyā samatikkamā, nirāmisaṁ sukhaṁ upasampajja viharati: ‘etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ nirāmisaṁ sukhaṁ upasampajja viharāmī’ti. Tassa taṁ nirāmisaṁ sukhaṁ nirujjhati. Nirāmisassa sukhassa nirodhā uppajjati pavivekā pīti, pavivekāya pītiyā nirodhā uppajjati nirāmisaṁ sukhaṁ. ‘Tayidaṁ saṅkhataṁ oḷārikaṁ atthi kho pana saṅkhārānaṁ nirodho atthetan’ti — iti viditvā tassa nissaraṇadassāvī tathāgato tadupātivatto.
12Idha pana, bhikkhave, ekacco samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā pubbantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, aparantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, sabbaso kāmasaṁyojanānaṁ anadhiṭṭhānā, pavivekāya pītiyā samatikkamā, nirāmisassa sukhassa samatikkamā, adukkhamasukhaṁ vedanaṁ upasampajja viharati: ‘etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ adukkhamasukhaṁ vedanaṁ upasampajja viharāmī’ti. Tassa sā adukkhamasukhā vedanā nirujjhati. Adukkhamasukhāya vedanāya nirodhā uppajjati nirāmisaṁ sukhaṁ, nirāmisassa sukhassa nirodhā uppajjati adukkhamasukhā vedanā.
Seyyathāpi, bhikkhave, yaṁ chāyā jahati taṁ ātapo pharati, yaṁ ātapo jahati taṁ chāyā pharati; evameva kho, bhikkhave, adukkhamasukhāya vedanāya nirodhā uppajjati nirāmisaṁ sukhaṁ, nirāmisassa sukhassa nirodhā uppajjati adukkhamasukhā vedanā.
Tayidaṁ, bhikkhave, tathāgato abhijānāti. Ayaṁ kho bhavaṁ samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā pubbantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, aparantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, sabbaso kāmasaṁyojanānaṁ anadhiṭṭhānā, pavivekāya pītiyā samatikkamā, nirāmisassa sukhassa samatikkamā, adukkhamasukhaṁ vedanaṁ upasampajja viharati: ‘etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ adukkhamasukhaṁ vedanaṁ upasampajja viharāmī’ti. Tassa sā adukkhamasukhā vedanā nirujjhati. Adukkhamasukhāya vedanāya nirodhā uppajjati nirāmisaṁ sukhaṁ, nirāmisassa sukhassa nirodhā uppajjati adukkhamasukhā vedanā. ‘Tayidaṁ saṅkhataṁ oḷārikaṁ atthi kho pana saṅkhārānaṁ nirodho atthetan’ti — iti viditvā tassa nissaraṇadassāvī tathāgato tadupātivatto.
13Idha pana, bhikkhave, ekacco samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā pubbantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, aparantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, sabbaso kāmasaṁyojanānaṁ anadhiṭṭhānā, pavivekāya pītiyā samatikkamā, nirāmisassa sukhassa samatikkamā, adukkhamasukhāya vedanāya samatikkamā: ‘santohamasmi, nibbutohamasmi, anupādānohamasmī’ti samanupassati.
Tayidaṁ, bhikkhave, tathāgato abhijānāti. Ayaṁ kho bhavaṁ samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā pubbantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, aparantānudiṭṭhīnañca paṭinissaggā, sabbaso kāmasaṁyojanānaṁ anadhiṭṭhānā, pavivekāya pītiyā samatikkamā, nirāmisassa sukhassa samatikkamā, adukkhamasukhāya vedanāya samatikkamā: ‘santohamasmi, nibbutohamasmi, anupādānohamasmī’ti samanupassati; addhā ayamāyasmā nibbānasappāyaṁyeva paṭipadaṁ abhivadati. Atha ca panāyaṁ bhavaṁ samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā pubbantānudiṭṭhiṁ vā upādiyamāno upādiyati, aparantānudiṭṭhiṁ vā upādiyamāno upādiyati, kāmasaṁyojanaṁ vā upādiyamāno upādiyati, pavivekaṁ vā pītiṁ upādiyamāno upādiyati, nirāmisaṁ vā sukhaṁ upādiyamāno upādiyati, adukkhamasukhaṁ vā vedanaṁ upādiyamāno upādiyati. Yañca kho ayamāyasmā: ‘santohamasmi, nibbutohamasmi, anupādānohamasmī’ti samanupassati tadapi imassa bhoto samaṇassa brāhmaṇassa upādānamakkhāyati. ‘Tayidaṁ saṅkhataṁ oḷārikaṁ atthi kho pana saṅkhārānaṁ nirodho atthetan’ti — iti viditvā tassa nissaraṇadassāvī tathāgato tadupātivatto.
14Idaṁ kho pana, bhikkhave, tathāgatena anuttaraṁ santivarapadaṁ abhisambuddhaṁ yadidaṁ — channaṁ phassāyatanānaṁ samudayañca atthaṅgamañca assādañca ādīnavañca nissaraṇañca yathābhūtaṁ viditvā anupādāvimokkho"ti.
15Idamavoca bhagavā. Attamanā te bhikkhū bhagavato bhāsitaṁ abhinandunti.
Pañcattayasuttaṁ niṭṭhitaṁ dutiyaṁ.