Majjhima Nikāya
II. Majjhima-Paṇṇāsa
1. Gahapati Vagga

The Middle Length Sayings
II. The Middle Fifty Discourses
1. The Division on Householders

Sutta 60

Apaṇṇaka Suttaɱ

Translated from the Pali by I.B. Horner, O.B.E., M.A.
Associate of Newham College, Cambridge
First Published in 1954

Copyright The Pali Text Society
Commercial Rights Reserved

For details see Terms of Use.

[400] [69]

[1][than][ntbb][upal] THUS have I heard:

At one time the Lord,
walking on tour among the Kosalans
together with a large Order of monks,^[1]
arrived at the Brahman village of the Kosalans named Sālā.

The Brahman householders of Sālā heard:

“It is said that the recluse Gotama,
the son of the Sakyans,
gone forth from the Sakyan family,
and walking on tour among the Kosalans
[401] together with a large Order of monks,
has reached Sālā,
and that a lovely reputation has gone forth
about the Lord Gotama thus:

‘The Lord is perfected,
wholly Self-awakened,
endowed with (right) knowledge and conduct,
well-farer,
knower of the worlds,
incomparable charioteer of men to be tamed,
teacher of devas and men,
the Awakened One,
the Lord.

He makes known this world
with the devas,
with Māra,
with Brahmā,
creation
with its recluses and Brahmans,
its devas and men,
having realized them
by his own super-knowledge.

He teaches Dhamma
that is lovely at the [70] beginning,
lovely in the middle,
lovely at the ending,
with the spirit and the letter;
he proclaims the Brahmā-faring
wholly fulfilled,
quite purified.

It were good to see perfected ones like this.'”

Then the Brahman householders of Sālā
approached the Lord;
some, having approached,
having greeted the Lord,
sat down at a respectful distance;
some exchanged greetings with the Lord
and having conversed in a friendly and courteous way,
sat down at a respectful distance;
some, having saluted the Lord with joined palms,
sat down at a respectful distance;
some, having made known their names and clans in the Lord’s presence,
sat down at a respectful distance;
some, becoming silent,
sat down at a respectful distance.

As they were sitting down at a respectful distance,
the Lord spoke thus
to the Brahman householders of Sālā:

“Have you, householders,
some satisfactory teacher
in whom your faith is grounded?”

“We have no satisfactory teacher, revered sir,
in whom our faith is grounded.”

“If you, householders,
have no satisfactory teacher,
then taking up this sure^[2] Dhamma
you should practise it.

For, householders, sure is Dhamma;
rightly undertaken,
it will long be for your welfare and happiness.

And what, householders,
is this sure dhamma?

There are, householders,
some recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of these views:^[3]

‘There is no (result of) gift,
there is no (result of) offering,
no (result of) sacrifice;
there is no fruit or ripening of deeds
well done or ill done;
there is not this world,
there is not a world beyond;
there is no (benefit from serving) mother or father;
there are no spontaneously arising beings;
there are not in the world
recluses and Brahmans
who are faring rightly,
proceeding rightly,
and who proclaim this world
and a world beyond,
having realized them
by their own super-knowledge.’

But, householders,
there are [402] some recluses and Brahmans
who speak in direct opposition
to these recluses and Brahmans,
and who say this:

‘There is (result of) gift,
there is (result of) offering,
there is (result of) sacrifice;
there is fruit and ripening
of deeds well done and ill done;
there is this world,
there is a world beyond;
there is (benefit from serving) mother and father;
there are spontaneously uprising beings;
there are in the world
recluses and Brahmans
who are faring rightly,
proceeding rightly,
and who proclaim this world
and a world beyond,
[71] having realized them by their own super-knowledge.’

What do you think about this, householders?

Do not these recluses and Brahmans
speak in direct opposition to one another?”^[4]

“Yes, revered sir.”

“As to this, householders,
of those recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of these views:

‘There is no (result of) gift,
there is no (result of) offering,
no (result of) sacrifice;
there is no fruit or ripening of deeds
well done or ill done;
there is not this world,
there is not a world beyond;
there is no (benefit from serving) mother or father;
there are no spontaneously arising beings;
there are not in the world
recluses and Brahmans
who are faring rightly,
proceeding rightly,
and who proclaim this world
and a world beyond,
having realized them
by their own super-knowledge,’

this is to be expected for them:

Having laid aside
these three good things:
right conduct of body,
right conduct of speech,
right conduct of thought,
and taking up these three bad things:
wrong conduct of body,
wrong conduct of speech,
wrong conduct of thought,
they practise them.

What is the reason for this?

It is that these worthy recluses and Brahmans
do not see the peril in wrong things,
the vanity,
the defilement,
nor the advantage,
allied to purity,
of renouncing them
for the good things.

And because there is indeed a world beyond,
the view of anyone
that there is not a world beyond
is a false view of his.

As there is indeed a world beyond,
if anyone has the conception
that there is not a world beyond,
it is a false conception of his.

As there is indeed a world beyond,
if anyone utters the speech:

‘There is not a world beyond,’

it is a false speech of his.

As there is indeed a world beyond,
if anyone says that
there is not a world beyond,
he makes mock of those perfected ones
who are knowers of a world beyond.

As there is indeed a world beyond,
if he convinces others
that there is not a world beyond,
that convincing of his
is against true Dhamma,
and because of that convincing
which is against true Dhamma,
he is exalting himself
and disparaging others.

Indeed, before his good morality
is got rid of,
bad morality is set up.

And this false view,
false conception,
false speech,
the mocking of the ariyans,
the convincing which
is against true Dhamma,
the exalting of oneself,
the disparaging of others —
these are a variety of evil,
unskilled states
that arise thus because of false view.

[403] Hereupon,^[5] householders,
an intelligent man reflects thus:

‘If there is not a world beyond,
this worthy individual
at the breaking up of the body
will make himself safe;^[6]
but if there is a world beyond,
this worthy individual
at the breaking up of the body after dying,
will arise in a sorrowful way,
a bad bourn,
the downfall,
Niraya Hell.

But if it be granted
that there is not a world beyond,
if this is a true speech
of these recluses and Brahmans,
[72] then the worthy individual
is condemned here and now
by intelligent persons who say:

‘Of bad moral habit is the individual,
of false view,
he holds the theory of
“There is not”.’^[7]

But if there is indeed a world beyond,
thus is there defeat^[8] in two ways
for this worthy individual:
inasmuch as he is condemned here and now
by intelligent persons,
and inasmuch as at the breaking up of the body after dying
he will uprise in a sorrowful way,
a bad bourn,
the downfall,
Niraya Hell.

Thus this sure Dhamma
has been undertaken imperfectly by him,
he has applied himself one-sidedly,^[9]
he is neglecting the skilled stance.^[10]

Hereupon, householders,
of those recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of these views:

‘There is (result of) gift,
there is (result of) offering,
there is (result of) sacrifice;
there is fruit and ripening
of deeds well done and ill done;
there is this world,
there is a world beyond;
there is (benefit from serving) mother and father;
there are spontaneously uprising beings;
there are in the world
recluses and Brahmans
who are faring rightly,
proceeding rightly,
and who proclaim this world
and a world beyond,
having realized them by their own super-knowledge,’

this is to be expected of them:

Having laid aside these three bad things:
wrong conduct of body,
wrong conduct of speech,
wrong conduct of thought,
and taking up these three good things:
right conduct of body,
right conduct of speech,
right conduct of thought,
they practise them.

What is the reason for this?

It is that these worthy recluses and Brahmans
see the peril,
the vanity,
the defilement
in wrong things,
and the advantage,
allied to purity,
of renouncing them
for states that are good.

And because there is indeed a world beyond,
the view of anyone
that there is a world beyond
is a right view of his.

As there is indeed a world beyond,
if anyone has the conception^[11]
that there is a world beyond
it is a right conception^[12] of his.

As there is indeed a world beyond,
if anyone utters the speech:

‘There is a world beyond,’

it is a right speech of his.

As there is indeed a world beyond,
if anyone says that
there is a world beyond,
he does not make mock of those perfected ones
who are knowers of the world beyond.

As there is indeed a world beyond,
if he convinces others
that there is a world beyond,
[404] that convincing of his
is according to true Dhamma,
and because of this convincing
which is in accordance with true Dhamma,
he does not exalt just himself,
he does not disparage others.

Indeed, before his bad morality is got rid of,
good morality is set up.

And this right view,
right conception,
right speech,
this non-mocking of the ariyans,
the convincing
which is in accordance with true Dhamma,
the non-exalting of self,
the non-disparaging of others —
[73] these are a variety of good states
that arise because of right view.

Hereupon, householders,
an intelligent man reflects thus:

‘If there is a world beyond,
this worthy individual
at the breaking up of the body after dying
will arise in a good bourn,
a heaven world.

But if it be granted
that there is not a world beyond,
if this is a true speech of these recluses and Brahmans,
then this worthy individual
is praised here and now
by intelligent persons
who say:

‘Of good moral habit is the individual,
of right view,
he holds the theory of
“There is.”^[13]

But if there is indeed a world beyond,
thus is there victory^[14] in two ways
for this worthy individual:
inasmuch as he is praised here and now
by intelligent persons,
and inasmuch as at the breaking up of the body after dying
he will uprise in a good bourn,
a heaven world.

Thus this sure Dhamma
has been undertaken perfectly by him,
he has applied himself two-sidedly,^[15]
he is neglecting the unskilled stance.

There are, householders,
some recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus and are of these views:^[16]

‘From doing,^[17]
from making (another) do,
from mutilating,
from making (another) mutilate,
from threatening,
from making (another) threaten,
from causing grief,
from tormenting,
from torturing,
from making (another) torture,
from making onslaught on creatures,
from taking what is not given,
from house-breaking,
from plundering,
from robbery,
from waiting in ambush,
from going after other men’s wives,
from lying speech —
from acting (thus) evil is not done.

If anyone with a discus
having an edge sharp as a razor
should make the creatures of this earth
into one mass of flesh,
into one heap of flesh,
from that source there is not evil,
there is not the perpetuating^[18] of evil.

And if anyone should go
to the south bank of the Ganges^[19]
slaying and striking,
mutilating,
making (others) mutilate,
threatening,
making (others) threaten,
from that source there is not evil,
there is not the perpetuating of evil.

And if he should go
to the north bank of the Ganges^[20]
giving,
[74] making (others) give,
offering,
making (others) offer,
from that source there is not merit,
there is not the perpetuating of merit.

There is no merit from giving,
from taming oneself,
from restraining oneself,
from truth-speaking,
there is not the perpetuating of merit.’

Householders, some recluses and Brahmans
speak in direct opposition
to these recluses and Brahmans,
[405] they speak thus:

‘From doing,
from making (another) do,
from mutilating,
from making (another) mutilate,
from threatening,
from making (another) threaten,
from causing grief,
from tormenting,
from torturing,
from making (another) torture,
from making onslaught on creatures,
from taking what is not given,
from house-breaking,
from plundering,
from robbery,
from waiting in ambush,
from going after other men’s wives,
from lying speech —
from acting (thus) evil is done.

If any one with a discus
having an edge sharp as a razor
should make the creatures of this earth
into one heap of flesh,
one mass of flesh,
from that source there is evil,
there is the perpetuating of evil.

And if anyone should go
to the south bank of the Ganges
slaying and striking,
mutilating,
making (others) mutilate,
threatening,
making (others) threaten,
from that source there is evil,
there is the perpetuating of evil.

And if he should go
to the north bank of the Ganges giving,
making (others) give,
offering,
making (others) offer,
from that source there is merit,
there is the perpetuating of merit.

There is merit from giving,
from taming oneself,
from restraining oneself,
from truth-speaking,
there is the perpetuating of merit.’

What do you think about this, householders?

Do not these recluses and Brahmans
speak in direct opposition to one another?”

“Yes, revered sir.”

“Hereupon, householders,
of those recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and hold these views:

‘From doing,
from making (another) do,
from mutilating,
from making (another) mutilate,
from threatening,
from making (another) threaten,
from causing grief,
from tormenting,
from torturing,
from making (another) torture,
from making onslaught on creatures,
from taking what is not given,
from house-breaking,
from plundering,
from robbery,
from waiting in ambush,
from going after other men’s wives,
from lying speech —
from acting (thus) evil is not done.

If anyone with a discus
having an edge sharp as a razor
should make the creatures of this earth
into one mass of flesh,
into one heap of flesh,
from that source there is not evil,
there is not the perpetuating of evil.

And if anyone should go
to the south bank of the Ganges
slaying and striking,
mutilating,
making (others) mutilate,
threatening,
making (others) threaten,
from that source there is not evil,
there is not the perpetuating of evil.

And if he should go
to the north bank of the Ganges
giving,
making (others) give,
offering,
making (others) offer,
there is not the perpetuating of merit,’
this is to be expected for them:

Having laid aside these three good things:
right conduct of body,
right conduct of speech,
right conduct of thought,
and taking up these three bad things:
wrong conduct of body,
wrong conduct of speech,
wrong conduct of thought,
they practise them.

What is the reason for this?

It is that these worthy recluses and Brahmans do not see the peril in wrong things,
the vanity,
the defilement,
nor the advantage,
allied to purity,
of renouncing them for the good things.

And because there is indeed effective action,^[21]
the view of anyone
that there is not effective action
is a false view of his.

As there is indeed effective action,
if anyone has the conception
that there is not effective action
it is a false conception of his.

As there is indeed effective action,
if anyone utters the speech:

‘There is not effective action,’

it is a false speech of his.

As there is indeed effective action,
if anyone says
there is not effective action
he is naking a mock
of those perfected ones
who profess effective action.^[22]

As there is indeed effective action,
if he convinces others
that there [75] is not effective action,
that convincing of his
is against true Dhamma,
and because of that convincing
which is against true Dhamma,
he is exalting himself
and disparaging others.

Indeed, before his good morality is got rid of,
bad morality is set up.

[406] And this false view,
false conception,
false speech,
the mocking of the ariyans,
the convincing which is against true Dhamma,
the exalting of oneself,
the disparaging of others —
these are a variety of evil,
wrong states
that arise because of false view.

Hereupon, householders,
an intelligent man reflects thus:

‘If there is not effective action,
this worthy individual
at the breaking up of the body
will make himself safe;
but if there is effective action,
this worthy individual
at the breaking up of the body after dying
will arise in a sorrowful way,
a bad bourn,
the downfall,
Niraya Hell.

But if it be granted
that there is not effective action,
if this is a true speech
of these worthy recluses and Brahmans,
then the worthy individual
is condemned here and now
by intelligent persons
who say:

“Of bad moral habit
is the individual,
of false view,
he professes ineffective action.”^[23]

But if there is indeed effective action,
there is thus defeat in two ways
for this worthy individual:
inasmuch as he is condemned here and now
by intelligent persons,
and inasmuch as
at the breaking up of the body after dying
he will uprise in a sorrowful way,
a bad bourn,
the downfall,
Niraya Hell.

This sure Dhamma has thus
been undertaken imperfectly by him,
he has applied himself one-sidedly,
he is neglecting the skilled stance.

Hereupon, householders,
those recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus and hold these views:

‘From doing,
from making (another) do,
from mutilating,
from making (another) mutilate,
from threatening,
from making (another) threaten,
from causing grief,
from tormenting,
from torturing,
from making (another) torture,
from making onslaught on creatures,
from taking what is not given,
from house-breaking,
from plundering,
from robbery,
from waiting in ambush,
from going after other men’s wives,
from lying speech —
from acting (thus) evil is done.

If any one with a discus
having an edge sharp as a razor
should make the creatures of this earth
into one heap of flesh,
one mass of flesh,
from that source there is evil,
there is the perpetuating of evil.

And if anyone should go
to the south bank of the Ganges
slaying and striking,
mutilating,
making (others) mutilate,
threatening,
making (others) threaten,
from that source there is evil,
there is the perpetuating of evil.

And if he should go
to the north bank of the Ganges giving,
making (others) give,
offering,
making (others) offer,
from that source there is merit,
there is the perpetuating of merit.

There is merit from giving,
from taming oneself,
from restraining oneself,
from truth-speaking,
there is the perpetuating of merit,’

this is to be expected for them:

Having laid aside
these three bad things:
wrong conduct of body,
wrong conduct of speech,
wrong conduct of thought,
and taking up these three good things:
right conduct of body,
right conduct of speech,
right conduct of thought,
they practise them.

What is the reason for this?

It is that these worthy recluses and Brahmans
see the peril in wrong things,
the vanity,
the defilement,
and the advantage,
allied to purity,
of renouncing them for states that are good.

And because there is indeed effective action,
the view of anyone
that [76] there is effective action
is a right view of his.

And as there is indeed effective action,
if anyone has the conception
that there is effective action,
it is a right conception of his.

And as there is indeed effective action,
if anyone utters the speech:

‘There is effective action,’

it is a right speech of his.

And as there is indeed effective action,
if anyone says
that there is effective action,
he is not making a mock
of those perfected ones
who hold the theory of effective action.

As there is indeed effective action,
if he convinces others
that there is effective action,
that convincing of his
is according to true Dhamma,
[407] and because of this convincing
which is in accordance with true Dhamma,
he is not exalting himself,
he is not disparaging others.

Indeed before his bad morality is got rid of,
good morality is set up.

And this right view,
right conception,
right speech,
the non-mocking of the ariyans,
the convincing which
is in accordance with true Dhamma,
the non-exalting of self,
the non-disparagement of others —
these are a variety of good states
which arise because of right view.

Hereupon, householders,
an intelligent man reflects thus:

‘If there is effective action,
this worthy individual
at the breaking up of the body after dying
will arise in a good bourn,
a heaven world.

But if it be granted
that there is not effective action,
if this is a true speech
of these worthy recluses and Brahmans,
then this worthy individual
is praised here and now
by intelligent persons
who say:

‘Of good moral habit
is the individual,
of right view,
he professes effective action.’

If there is indeed effective action,
thus is there victory in two ways
for this worthy individual:
inasmuch as he is praised here and now
by intelligent persons,
and inasmuch as
at the breaking up of the body after dying
he will uprise in a good bourn,
in a heaven world.

Thus this sure Dhamma
has been undertaken perfectly by him,
he has applied himself two-sidedly,
he is neglecting the unskilled stance.

There are, householders,
some recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of these views:^[24]

‘There is no cause,
no reason
for the defilement of creatures,
creatures are defiled without cause,
without reason.

There is no cause,
no reason
for the purification of creatures,
creatures are purified without cause,
without reason.

There is not strength,
there is not energy,
there is not human vigour,
there is not human effort;
all creatures,^[25]
all breathing things,
all beings,
[77] all living things
are without power,
without strength,
without energy,
bent^[26] by fate,^[27]
chance,^[28]
and nature^[29],
they experience pleasure and pain^[30]
amid the six classes.’^[31]

But, householders,
there are some recluses and Brahmans
who speak in direct opposition
to these recluses and Brahmans,
and who say this:

‘There is cause,
there is reason
for the defilement of creatures,
creatures are defiled with cause,
with reason.

There is cause,
there is reason
for the purification of creatures,
creatures are purified with cause,
with reason.

There is strength,
there is energy,
there is human vigour,
there is human effort;
all creatures,
all breathing things,
all beings,
all living things are not (so) without power,
without strength,
without energy
that they are bent by fate,
chance
and nature,
that they experience pleasure and pain
amid the six classes.

What do you think about this, householders?

[408] Do not these recluses and Brahmans
speak in direct opposition to one another?”

“Yes, revered sir.”

“Hereupon, householders,
those recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of these views:

There is no cause,
no reason
for the purification of creatures,
creatures are purified without cause,
without reason.

There is not strength,
there is not energy,
there is not human vigour,
there is not human effort;
all creatures,
all breathing things,
all beings,
all living things
are without power,
without strength,
without energy,
bent by fate,
chance,
and nature,
they experience pleasure and pain
amid the six classes.’

this is to be expected for them:

Having laid aside
the three good things:
right conduct of body,
right conduct of speech,
right conduct of thought,
and taking up these three bad things:
wrong conduct of body,
wrong conduct of speech,
wrong conduct of thought,
they practise them.

What is the reason for this?

It is that these worthy recluses and Brahmans
do not see the peril in wrong things,
the vanity,
the defilement,
nor the advantage,
allied to purity,
in renouncing them for the good things.

And because there is indeed cause,
the view of anyone that there is not cause
is a [78] false view of his.

As there is indeed cause,
if anyone has the conception
that there is not cause
it is a false conception of his.

As there is indeed cause,
if anyone utters the speech:

‘There is not cause,’

it is a false speech of his.

As there is indeed cause,
if anyone says there is not cause,
he makes mock
of those perfected ones
who profess that there is cause.

As there is indeed cause,
if he convinces others
that there is not cause,
this convincing of his
is against true Dhamma,
and because of this convincing
which is against true Dhamma,
he is exalting himself
and disparaging others.

Indeed, before his good morality is got rid of,
bad morality is set up.

And this false view,
false conception,
false speech,
the mocking of the ariyans,
the convincing which is against true Dhamma,
the exalting of oneself,
the disparaging of others —
these are a variety of evil,
wrong states that arise thus because of false view.

Hereupon, householders,
an intelligent man reflects thus:

‘If there is not cause,
this worthy individual
at the breaking up of the body
will make himself safe;
but if there is cause,
this worthy individual
at the breaking up of the body after dying
will arise in a sorrowful way,
a bad bourn,
the downfall,
Niraya Hell.

But if it be granted
that there is not cause,
if this is a true speech
of these recluses and Brahmans,
then this worthy individual
is condemned here and now
by intelligent persons
who say:

“Of bad moral habit
is the individual,
of false view,
he professes
that there is not cause.”

But if there is indeed cause,
thus there is defeat in two ways
for this worthy individual:
[409] inasmuch as he is condemned here and now
by intelligent persons,
and inasmuch as
on the breaking up of the body after dying
he will arise in a sorrowful way,
a bad bourn,
the downfall,
Niraya Hell.

This sure Dhamma
has thus been imperfectly undertaken by him,
he has applied himself one-sidedly,
he is neglecting the skilled stance.

Hereupon, householders,
those recluses and Brahmans who speak thus and are of these views:

‘There is cause,
there is reason
for the purification of creatures,
creatures are purified with cause,
with reason.

There is strength,
there is energy,
there is human vigour,
there is human effort;
all creatures,
all breathing things,
all beings,
all living things are not (so) without power,
without strength,
without energy
that they are bent by fate,
chance
and nature,
that they experience pleasure and pain
amid the six classes,’

this is to be expected for them:

Having laid aside
these three bad things:
wrong conduct of body,
wrong conduct of speech,
wrong conduct of thought,
and taking up these three good things:
right conduct of body,
right conduct of speech,
right conduct of thought,
they practise them.

What is the reason for this?

It is that these worthy recluses and Brahmans
see the peril in wrong things,
the vanity,
the defilement,
the advantage,
allied to purity,
of renouncing them for good states.

And because there is indeed cause,
the view of anyone
that there is cause
is a right view of his.

As there is indeed cause,
if anyone has the conception
that there is cause
it is a right conception of his.

[79] As there is indeed cause,
if anyone utters the speech:

‘There is cause,’

it is a right speech of his.

As there is indeed cause,
if anyone says
that there is cause,
he does not make mock
of those perfected ones
who hold the theory of cause.

As there is indeed cause,
if he convinces others
that there is cause,
this convincing of his
is in accordance with true Dhamma,
and because of this convincing
which is in accordance with true Dhamma,
he does not exalt himself,
does not disparage others.

Indeed, before his bad morality is got rid of,
good morality is set up.

And this right view,
right conception,
right speech,
the non-mocking of the ariyans,
the convincing
which is in accordance with true Dhamma,
the nonexalting of self,
the non-disparaging of others —
these are a variety of good states
that arise because of right view.

Hereupon, householders,
an intelligent man reflects thus:

‘If there is indeed cause,
this worthy individual
at the breaking up of the body after dying
will arise in a good bourn,
a heaven world.

But if it be granted
that there is not cause,
if this is a true speech
of these worthy recluses and Brahmans,
then this worthy individual
is praised here and now
by intelligent persons
who say:

‘Of good moral habit
is the individual,
of right view,
he professes that there is cause.’

If there is indeed [410] cause,
thus is there victory in two ways
for this worthy individual:
inasmuch as he is praised here and now
by intelligent persons,
and inasmuch as
on the breaking up of the body after dying
he will arise in a good bourn,
a heaven world.

Thus this sure Dhamma
has been undertaken perfectly by him,
he has applied himself two-sidedly,
he is neglecting the unskilled stance.

There are, householders,
some recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of this view:

‘There is not formlessness throughout.’^[32]

But, householders,
there are some recluses and Brahmans
who are in direct opposition
to these recluses and Brahmans,
and who say this:

‘There is formlessness throughout.’

What do you think about this, householders?

Do not these recluses and Brahmans
speak in direct opposition to one another?”

“Yes, revered sir.”

“Hereupon, householders,
an intelligent man reflects thus:

‘Those worthy recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of this view:

“There is not formlessness throughout” —

this is not seen by [80] me.

And those worthy recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of this view:

“There is formlessness throughout” —

this is not known by me.

And if I,
not knowing,
not seeing,
were to take up one side
and define it,
saying:

“This is the truth,
all else is falsehood,”

this would not be suitable in me.

If this is a true saying
of these worthy recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus and are of this view:

“There is not formlessness throughout,”

then this situation occurs
that surely my uprising
will be there
where are those devas that have form
and are made by mind.^[33]

But if this is a true saying
of those worthy recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of this view:

“There is formlessness throughout,”

then this situation occurs
that surely my uprising
will be there
where are those devas that are formless,
made from perceiving.^[34]

Concerning what has form,
taking up the stick is to be seen,
and taking up the sword,
quarrel,
dispute,
contention,
strife,
slander,
lying speech.^[35]

But there is not this
in what is formless throughout.’

So, by reflecting thus,
he is one faring along
precisely for the disregard
of material shapes,
for detachment (concerning them)
and for their stopping.

There are, householders,
some recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of this view:

‘There is not the stopping of becomings^[36] throughout.’

But, householders,
there are some recluses and Brahmans
who speak in direct opposition
to those recluses and Brahmans
and who say this:

‘There is [411] the stopping of becomings throughout.’

What do you think about this, householders?

Do not these recluses and Brahmans
speak in direct opposition to one another?

“Yes, revered sir.”

“Hereupon, householders,
an intelligent man reflects thus:

‘Those worthy recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of this view:

“There is not the stopping of becomings throughout” —

this is not seen by me.

But those worthy recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of this view:

“There is the stopping of [81] becomings throughout” —

this is not known by me.

And if I,
not knowing,
not seeing,
were to take up one side
and define it,
saying:

“This is the truth,
all else is falsehood” —
this would not be suitable in me.

If this is a true saying
of those worthy recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of this view:

“There is not the stopping of becomings throughout,”

then this situation occurs
that surely my uprising
will be there
where are those devas who are formless,
made from perceiving.

But if this is a true saying
of those worthy recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of this view:

“There is the stopping of becomings throughout,”

then this situation occurs:
that I will attain nibbana here-now.

If this is a true saying
of those worthy recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of this view:

“There is not the stopping of becomings throughout,”

this view of theirs
is close to attachment,
close to the fetters,
close to delight,
close to cleaving,
close to grasping.

But if this is a true saying
of those worthy recluses and Brahmans
who speak thus
and are of this view:

“There is the stopping of becomings throughout,”

this view of theirs
is close to detachment,
close to the absence of the fetters,
close to the absence of delight,
close to the absence of cleaving,
close to the absence of grasping.’^[37]

Through reflecting thus
he is one faring along
precisely for the disregard of becomings,
for detachment (concerning them),
and for their stopping.

Householders,
there are these four kinds of persons
existing in the world.^[38]

What four?

Here, householders,
some person is a tormentor of self,
intent on the practice of self-torment.

Here, householders,
some person is a tormentor of others,
intent on the practice of tormenting others.

Here, householders,
some person is both a self-tormentor,
intent on the practice of tormenting self,
and a tormentor of others,
intent on the practice of tormenting others.

Here, householders,
some person is neither a self-tormentor
intent on the practice of self-torment,
nor a tormentor of others
intent on the practice of tormenting others.

He, [412] neither a self-tormentor
nor a tormentor of others,
is here-now allayed,
quenched,
[82] become cool,
an experiencer of bliss
that lives with self Brahmā-become.

And which, householders,
is the self-tormentor,
intent on the practice of self-torment?

In this case, householders,
some person comes to be unclothed,
flouting life’s decencies,
licking his hands (after meals),
not one to come when asked to do so,
not one to stand still
when asked to do so.

He does not consent (to accept food)
offered or specially prepared (for him)
or (to accept) an invitation (to a meal).

He does not accept (food)
straight from a cooking-pot or pan,
nor within the threshould,
nor among the faggots,
nor among the rice-pounders,
nor when two people are eating,
nor from a pregnant woman,
nor from one giving suck,
nor from one cohabiting with a man,
nor from gleanings,
nor from where a dog is standing by,
nor where flies are swarming,
nor fish,
nor meat.

He drinks neither fermented liquor
nor spirits nor rice-gruel.

He comes to be a one-house man
or a one-piece man,
or a two-house man
or a two-piece man or a three-house man
or a three-piece man or a four-house man
or a four-piece man or a five-house man
or a five-piece man or a six-house man
or a six-piece man or a seven-house man
or a seven-piece man.

He subsists on one little offering
he subsists on two little offerings
he subsists on three little offerings
he subsists on four little offerings
he subsists on five little offerings
he subsists on six little offerings
he subsists on seven little offerings.

He takes food only once a day,
and once in two days
and once in three days
and once in four days
and once in five days
and once in six days
and once in seven days.

Then he lives intent
on such a practice
as eating rice
at regular fortnightly intervals.

He is one feeding on potherbs
or feeding on millet
or on wild rice
or on snippets of leather
or on water-plants
or on the red powder of rice husks
or on the discarded scum of rice on the boil
or on the flour of oil-seeds
or grass
or cowdung.

He is one who subsists
on forest roots or fruits,
eating the fruits that have fallen.

He wears coarse hempen cloths
and he wears mixed cloths
or cerements
or rags taken from the dust-heap
or tree-bark fibre
or antelope skins
or strips of antelope skin
or cloths of kusa-grass
or cloths or bark
or cloths of wood shavings
or a blanket of human hair
or he wears owls’ feathers.

He is one who plucks out
the hair of his head and beard,
intent on the practice
of plucking out the hair of the head and beard;
and he is one who stands upright,
refusing a seat;
and he is one who squats on his haunches,
intent on the practice of squatting;
and he is one for covered thorns,
he makes his bed on covered thorns;
and he lives intent on the practice
of going down to the water to bathe
three times in an evening.

Thus in many a way
does he live intent on the practice
of mortifying and tormenting his body.

Householders, this is called
the person who is a self-tormentor,
intent on the practice of self-torment.^[39]

And which, householders,
is the tormentor of others,
intent on the practice of tormenting others?

In this case, householders,
some person is a cattle-butcher,^[40]
or a pig-killer,
fowler,
deer-stalker,
hunter,
fisherman,
thief,
executioner,
jailer,
or (one of) those others
who follow a bloody calling.

This is the person, householders,
who is called a tormentor of others,
intent on the practice of tormenting others.

And which, householders,
is the person who is both a self-tormentor,
intent on the practice of tormenting self,
and also a tormentor of others,
intent on the practice of tormenting others?

In this case, householders,
some person is a noble anointed king
or a very rich brahman.^[41]

He, having had a new conference hall built
to the east of the town,
having had his head and beard shaved,
having put on a shaggy skin,
having smeared his body with ghee and oil,
scratching his back with a deer-horn,
enters the conference hall
together with his chief consort
and a brahman priest.

Then he lies down to sleep
on the bare grassy ground.

The king lives
on the milk from one udder
of a cow that has a calf of like colour,
his chief consort
lives on the milk from the second udder,
the brahman priest
lives on the milk from the third udder,
the milk from the fourth udder
they offer to the fire;
the calf lives on what is over.

He speaks thus:

‘Let so many bulls
be slain for the sacrifice,
let so many steers
be slain for the sacrifice,
let so many heifers
be slain for the sacrifice,
let so many goats
be slain for the sacrifice,
let so many rams be slain for the sacrifice,
let so many trees
be felled for the sacrificial posts,
let so much kusa-grass
be reaped for the sacrificial spot.’

Those who are called his slaves
or messengers
or workpeople,
they, scared of the stick,
scared of danger,
with tearful faces and crying,
set about their preparations.

This, householders, is called
the person who is both a self-tormentor,
intent on the practice of self-torment,
and a tormentor of others,
intent on the practice of tormenting others.

And which, householders,
is the person who is neither a self-tormentor,
not intent on the practice of self-torment,
nor a tormentor of others,
not intent on the practice of tormenting others,
and who,
neither a self-tormentor
nor a tormentor of others,
is here-now allayed,
quenched,
become cool,
an experiencer of bliss
that lives with self Brahma-become?

In this case, householders,
a Tathāgata arises in the world,^[42]
[413] a perfected one,
fully Self-Awakened One,
endowed with (right) knowledge and conduct,
well-farer,
knower of the worlds,
matchless charioteer of men to be tamed,
teacher of devas and mankind,
the Awakened One,
the Lord.

Having realized it by his own super-knowledge,
he proclaims this world
with its devas,
Māras,
Brahmās,
creation
with its recluses and brahmans,
with its devas and men.

With the meaning and the spirit
he teaches Dhamma
that is lovely at the beginning,
lovely in the middle,
lovely at the ending;
he proclaims the Brahma-faring
wholly fulfilled and purified.

A householder
or a householder’s son
or one born in some respectable family
hears that Dhamma.

When he has heard that Dhamma
he acquires faith in the Tathāgata.

Possessed of this faith he has acquired,
he reflects thus:

‘Confined is this household life,
a path of dust,
while going forth is of the open air.

Yet it is not easy
for one who has lived in a house
to fare the Brahma-faring
completely fulfilled,
completely purified,
polished like a conch-shell.

Yet suppose I were to have my hair and beard shaved,
to don saffron robes,
and go forth from home
into homelessness?’

After a time,
getting rid of his mass of wealth,
whether large or small,
getting rid of his circle of relations,
whether large or small,
having had his hair and beard shaved,
having donned saffron robes,
he goes forth from home
into homelessness.

He, gone forth thus,
being possessed of the way of life
and the training of householders,
abandoning onslaught on creatures,
is one that abstains from onslaught on creatures;
stick and sword laid aside
he dwells scrupulous,
kindly,
friendly
and compassionate towards all living things
and creatures.

Abandoning the taking
of what has not been given,
he is one that abstains from taking
what has not been given;
taking (only) what is given,
waiting for what is given,
without stealing
he dwells with self become pure.

Abandoning unchastity,
he is one that is chaste,
keeping remote
he is one that refrains from dealings with women.

Abandoning lying speech,
he is one that abstains from lying speech,
a truth-speaker,
a bondsman to truth,
trustworthy,
dependable,
no deceiver of the world.

Abandoning slanderous speech,
he is one that abstains from slanderous speech;
having heard something here
he is not one to repeat it elsewhere
for (causing) variance among those people;
or, having heard something elsewhere
he is not one to repeat it here
for (causing) variance among these people;
concord is his pleasure,
concord his delight,
concord his joy,
concord the motive of his speech.

Abandoning harsh speech,
he is one that abstains from harsh speech;
whatever speech is gentle,
pleasing to the ear,
affectionate,
going to the heart,
urbane,
pleasant to the manyfolk,
agreeable to the manyfolk –
he is one that utters speech like this.

Abandoning frivolous chatter,
he is one that abstains from frivolous chatter;
he is a speaker at a right time,
a speaker of fact,
a speaker on the goal,
a speaker on Dhamma,
a speaker on discipline,
he speaks words that are worth treasuring,
with an opportune simile,
discriminating,
connected with the goal.

He is one that abstains
from what involves destruction to seed-growth,
to vegetable growth.

He is one that eats one meal a day,
desisting at night,
refraining from eating at a wrong time.

He is one that abstains
from watching shows of dancing,
singing,
music.

He is one that abstains
from using garlands,
scents,
unguents,
adornments,
finery.

He is one that abstains
from using high beds,
large beds.

He is one that abstains
from accepting gold and silver.

He is one that abstains
from accepting raw grain.

He is one that abstains
from accepting raw meat.

He is one that abstains
from accepting women and girls.

He is one that abstains
from accepting women slaves and men slaves.

He is one that abstains
from accepting goats and sheep.

He is one that abstains
from accepting fowl and swine.

He is one that abstains
from accepting elephants,
cows,
horses,
mares.

He is one that abstains
fields and sites.

He is one that abstains
from the practice
of sending or going on messages.

He is one that abstains
from buying and selling.

He is one that abstains
from from cheating with weights,
bronzes
and measures.

He is one that abstains
from the crooked ways
of bribery,
fraud
and deceit.

He is one that abstains
from maiming,
murdering,
manacling,
highway robbery.

He is contented with a robe
to protect his body,
with almsfood
to sustain his stomach.

Wherever he goes
he takes these things with him as he goes.

As a bird on the wing
wherever it flies
takes its wings with it as it flies,
so a monk,
contented with a robe
to protect his body,
with almsfood to sustain his stomach,
wherever he goes
takes these things with him as he goes.

He, possessed of this ariyan body of moral habit,
inwardly experiences
the bliss of blamelessness.

Having seen a material shape with the eye,
he is not entranced by the general appearance,
he is not entranced by the detail.

If he dwell with this organ of sight uncontrolled,
covetousness and dejection,
evil unskilled states of mind
might predominate.

So he fares along controlling it,
he guards the organ of sight,
he achieves control over the organ of sight.

Having heard a sound with the ear,
he is not entranced by the general appearance,
he is not entranced by the detail.

If he dwell with this organ of hearing uncontrolled,
covetousness and dejection,
evil unskilled states of mind
might predominate.

So he fares along controlling it,
he guards the organ of hearing,
he achieves control over the organ of hearing.

Having smelt a smell with the nose,
he is not entranced by the general appearance,
he is not entranced by the detail.

If he dwell with this organ of smell uncontrolled,
covetousness and dejection,
evil unskilled states of mind
might predominate.

So he fares along controlling it,
he guards the organ of smell,
he achieves control over the organ of smell.

Having savoured a taste with the tongue,
he is not entranced by the general appearance,
he is not entranced by the detail.

If he dwell with this organ of taste uncontrolled,
covetousness and dejection,
evil unskilled states of mind
might predominate.

So he fares along controlling it,
he guards the organ of taste,
he achieves control over the organ of taste.

Having felt a touch with the body,
he is not entranced by the general appearance,
he is not entranced by the detail.

If he dwell with this organ of touch uncontrolled,
covetousness and dejection,
evil unskilled states of mind
might predominate.

So he fares along controlling it,
he guards the organ of touch,
he achieves control over the organ of touch.

Having cognised a mental object with the mind,
he is not entranced by the general appearance,
he is not entranced by the detail.

If he dwell with this organ of mind uncontrolled,
covetousness and dejection,
evil unskilled states of mind
might predominate.

So he fares along controlling it,
he guards the organ of mind,
he achieves control over the organ of mind.

He, possessed of this ariyan control
over the sense-organs,
inwardly experiences the bliss
of being ‘unaffected.’

Whether he is setting out or returning,
he is one who comports himself properly;
whether he is looking down or looking round,
he is one who comports himself properly;
whether he is bending back or stretching out (his arm),
he is one who comports himself properly;
whether he is carrying his outer cloak,
his bowl,
his robe,
he is one who comports himself properly;
whether he is munching,
drinking,
eating,
savouring,
he is one who comports himself properly;
whether he is obeying the calls of nature,
he is one who comports himself properly;
whether he is walking,
standing,
asleep,
awake,
talking,
silent,
he is one who comports himself properly.

Possessed of this ariyan body of moral habit,
possessed of this ariyan control over the sense-organs,
and possessed of this ariyan mindfulness
and clear consciousness,
he chooses a remote lodging
in a forest,
at the root of a tree,
on a mountain slope,
in a wilderness,
a hill-cave,
a cemetery,
a forest haunt,
in the open air
or on a heap of straw.

Returning from alms-gathering
after the meal,
he sits down cross-legged
holding the back erect,
having made mindfulness rise up in front of him.

Having got rid of covetousness for the world,
he lives with a mind devoid of coveting
and purifies the mind of coveting.

By getting rid of the taint of ill-will,
he lives benevolent in mind;
and compassionate for the welfare
of all creatures and beings,
he purifies the mind
of the taint of ill-will.

By getting rid of sloth and torpor,
he lives devoid of sloth and torpor;
perceiving the light,
mindful and clearly conscious,
he purifies the mind
of sloth and torpor.

By getting rid of restlessness and worry,
he lives calmly,
the mind inwardly tranquillised,
and he purifies the mind
of restlessness and worry.

By getting rid of doubt,
he lives doubt-crossed;
unperplexed as to states that are skilled,
he purifies the mind of doubt.

He, by getting rid of these five hindrances –
defilements of the mind
and weakening to intuitive wisdom –
aloof from pleasures of the senses,
aloof from unskilled states of mind,
enters and abides in the first meditation,
which is accompanied by initial thought and discursive thought,
is born of aloofness
and is rapturous and joyful.

By allying initial and discursive thought,
the mind subjectively tranquillised
and fixed on one point,
he enters and abides in the second meditation,
which is devoid of initial and discursive thought,
is born of concentration
and is rapturous and joyful.

By the fading out of rapture,
he dwells with equanimity,
attentive and clearly conscious,
and experiences in his person
that joy of which the ariyans say:
‘Joyful lives he who has equanimity and is mindful’,
and he enters and abides in the third meditation.

By getting rid of joy,
by getting rid of anguish,
by the going down of his former pleasures and sorrows,
he enters and abides in the fourth meditation,
which has neither anguish nor joy,
and which is entirely purified
by equanimity and mindfulness.

Thus with the mind composed,
quite purified,
quite clarified,
without blemish,
without defilement,
grown soft and workable,
stable,
immovable,
he directs his mind to the knowledge and recollection
of former habitations.

He recollects a variety of former habitations, thus:

one birth,
two births,
three births,
four births,
five births,
ten births,
twenty births,
thirty births,
forty births,
fifty births,
a hundred births,
a thousand births,
a hundred thousand births,
and many an eon of integration
and many an eon of disintegration
and many an eon of integration-disintegration:

‘Such a one was I by name,
having such and such a clan,
such and such a colour,
so I was nourished,
such and such pleasant and painful experiences were mine,
so did the span of life end.

Passing from this,
I came to be in another state
where I was such a one by name,
having such and such a clan,
such and such a colour,
so I was nourished,
such and such pleasant and painful experiences were mine,
so did the span of life end.

Passing from this,
I arose here.’

Thus he recollects
divers former habitations
in all their modes and detail.

With the mind composed thus,
quite purified,
quite clarified,
without blemish,
without defilement,
grown soft and workable,
stable,
immovable,
he directs his mind
to the knowledge of the passing hence
and the arising of beings.

With the purified deva-vision
surpassing that of men,
he sees beings as they pass hence
or come to be;
he comprehends that beings are mean,
excellent,
comely,
ugly,
well-going,
ill-going,
according to the consequences of deeds,
and thinks:

‘Indeed these worthy beings
who were possessed of wrong conduct in body,
speech
and thought,
scoffers at the ariyans,
holding a wrong view,
incurring deeds consequent on a wrong view –
these, at the breaking up of the body after dying,
have arisen in a sorrowful state,
a bad bourn,
the abyss,
Niraya Hell.

But these worthy beings
who were possessed of good conduct in body,
speech
and thought,
who did not scoff at the ariyans,
holding a right view,
incurring deeds consequent on a right view –
these at the breaking up of the body after dying,
have arisen in a good bourn,
a heaven world.’

Thus with the purified deva-vision
surpassing that of men
does he see beings as they pass hence,
as they arise;
he comprehends that beings are mean,
excellent,
comely,
ugly,
well-going,
ill-going
according to the consequences of deeds.

With the mind composed thus
quite purified,
quite clarified,
without blemish,
without defilement,
grown soft and workable,
stable,
immovable,
he directs his mind to
the knowledge of the destruction of the cankers.

He comprehends as it really is:

This is anguish,
this is the arising of anguish,
this is the stopping of anguish,
this is the course
leading to the stopping of anguish.

He comprehends as it really is:

These are the cankers,
this is the arising of the cankers,
this is the stopping of the cankers,
this is the course
leading to the stopping of the cankers.

Knowing thus,
seeing thus,
his mind is freed from the canker of sense-pleasures
and his mind is freed from the canker of becoming
and his mind is freed from the canker of ignorance.

In freedom the knowledge comes to be:

‘I am freed’;
and he comprehends:

‘Destroyed is birth,
brought to a close the Brahma-faring,
done is what was to be done,
there is no more of being such or so.’

This, householders, is called
the person who is neither a self-torment
or intent on the practice of tormenting self,
nor a tormentor of others
intent on the practice of tormenting others,
and who,
neither a self-tormentor
nor a tormentor of others,
is here-now allayed,
quenched,
become cool,
an experiencer of bliss
that lives with self Brahmā-become.”

[83] When this had been said, the Brahman householders of Sālā spoke thus to the Lord:

“Excellent, good Gotama;
good Gotama, it is excellent.

It is as if, good Gotama,
one might set upright what had been upset,
or might disclose what was covered,
or point out the way
to one who had gone astray,
or might bring an oil-lamp into the darkness
so that those with vision might see material shapes –
even so in many a figure has Dhamma been made clear by the good Gotama.

We are going to the revered Gotama for refuge
and to Dhamma
and to the Order of monks.

May the good Gotama accept us as lay-disciples
going for refuge from this day forth
for as long as life lasts.”

[This version of this sutta has been fully unabridged. Notes referring to abridged sections are left in for reference only.]

^[1] Down to where the Lord begins to speak is the same as at M. i. 285.

^[2] apaṇṇaka. Cf. A. i. 113, ii. 76 (apaṇṇakatā paṭipadā), and see notes at G.S. i. 97, ii. 85.

^[3] As at M. i. 287.

^[4] As at D. i. 1.

^[5] MA. iii. 117 “among the views of those recluses and Brahmans.”

^[6] sotthim attāna-karissati. MA. iii. 117 does not explain. Cf. M. i. 353.

^[7] natthikavāda, a “there-is-not-ist.”

^[8] kaliggaha, the losing throw at dice.

^[9] Intent on his own theory.

^[10] thāna, occasion, situation, position.

^[11] saṅkappeti.

^[12] sammā-saṅkappa. See table of attempts to translate this word at Mrs. Rhys Davids, Sakya, p. 85.

^[13] He is an Affirmationist, a “there-is-ist,” atthikavāda.

^[14] kaṭaggaha, the winning throw at dice.

^[15] MA. iii. 118, intent on his own theory and that of others.

^[16] As at M. i. 516; S. iii. 208; at D. i. 52 attributed to Pūraṇa Kassapa.

^[17] MA. iii. 118, “with the hand.”

^[18] āgama, the handing down, tradition; cf. āgatūgama as at Vin. iv. 158: one to whom the tradition has been handed down.

^[19] People here are rough and cruel, MA. iii. 119.

^[20] People here have faith and are believing, devoted to the Buddha, Dhamma and the Order.

^[21] kiriya, doing, fulfilment, so a complete act, i.e. act and its effect(s).

^[22] kiriyavāda.

^[23] akiriyavāda. Cf. D. i. 53, akiriyaɱ vyākasi, and A. i. 286 where the view n’atthi kammaɱ n’atthi kiriyaɱ n’atthi viriyaɱ is ascribed to Makkhali Gosāla. See also E. J. Thomas, Hist. Bud. Thought, p. 72. A. K. Coomaraswamy, Some Pali Words, H.J.A.S., vol. 4, No. 2, p. 119 appears to confuse akiriya with akarṇiya.

^[24] Also given at S. iii. 210. At D. i. 63 they are ascribed to Makkhali Gosāla.

^[25] MA. iii. 120 = DA. i. 161 says creatures, sattā, are camels, oxen, donkeys, etc.; “breathers,” pāṇā, are those who have one or two faculties; beings, bhūtā, are those enclosed in eggs or membraneous sheaths; living things, jīvā, are rice, wheat, etc. See Dial. i. 71, n. 2.

^[26] pariṇatā, also meaning changed, ripened, matured.

^[27] niyati, a word, as used by Makkhali Gosāla, implying determination, necessity. See B. M. Barua, Pre-Buddhistic Indian Philosophy, p. 310; and A. L. Basham, History and Doctrines of the Ājīvikas, p. 224.

^[28] saṅgati, meeting together, here of events over which the being has no power or control, see B. M. Barua, op. cit., p. 311; Basham, op. cit., p. 225.

^[29] bhāva=sabhāva, MA. iii. 120, character, nature, disposition. See Barua, op. cit., p. 311; Basham, op. cit., p. 226.

^[30] See comment at Sūtrakytāṇga, I. i. 2. 4. Of beings. The divisions to which Gosālā’s expression has reference are of colours: black, blue (or green), red, yellow, white, and intensely white. Typical members of the classes are given at MA. iii. 121. Cf. D. iii. 250; A. iii. 383; G.S. iii. 273, and see B. M. Barua, op. cit. p. 309.

^[31] Of beings. The divisions to which Gosāla’s expression has reference are of colours: black, blue (or green), red, yellow, white, and intensely white. Typical members of the classes are given at MA. iii. 121. Cf. D. iii. 250; A. iii. 383; G.S. iii. 273, and see B. M. Barua, op. cit. p. 309.

^[32] n’atthi sabbaso āruppa ti. MA. iii. 122 says there is not a Brahmā-world that is formless throughout (or in every way).

^[33] manomayā. MA. iii. 122 explains by jhānacittarnayā, made by thought in meditation.

^[34] saññāmayā. MA. iii. 122 says arūpajjhānasaññāya saññāmayā, made by perception in the perception in the meditation on formlessness.

^[35] Sequence as at M. i. 110.

^[36] MA. iii. 123 says that bhavanirodha (the stopping of becoming or becomings) is nibbāna, as does S. ii. 117, A. v. 9. I take bhava, in bhava-nirodha, as a plural to fit the plural bhavānaɱ at the end of this clause, see p. 81 below. Reference is no doubt intended to the three becomings, kāma-bhava, rūpa- and arūpa-bhava.

^[37] Cf. M. i. 498.

^[38] As in the Kandaraka Sutta, M. Sta. No. 51. MA. iii. 124 says that the five types of persons who hold the views: There is not, there is no efficient action, there is no cause, there is not formlessness, there is not stopping — become as it were three persons here; and the five who hold the opposite views of There is, etc., become as it were one person, namely the fourth kind. It must therefore be supposed that Bu. thought of the first group as comprising tormentors of self, of others and of both. The second “group “held the right views and are non-tormentors.

^[39] M. i. 342.

^[40] M. i. 343.

^[41] M. i. 343-344.

^[42] M. i. 344-349.