Thus have I heard. Once the Blessed One lived at Saavatthii, in
Jeta's Grove, in Anaathapindika's monastery.
2. Now
on that occasion a monk called Arittha, formerly of the vulture
killers, had conceived this pernicious view: "There are things
called 'obstructions'[1] by the Blessed One. As I understand
his teaching, those things are not necessarily obstructive for one
who pursues them."
3.
Several monks, hearing about it, went to the monk Arittha, formerly
of the vulture killers, and asked him: "Is it true, friend Arittha,
that you have conceived this pernicious view: "There are things
called (obstructions) by the Blessed One. As I understand his
teaching, those things are not necessarily obstructive for one who
pursues them'?"
"Yes, indeed, friends, (I do hold that view)."
Then those monks, wishing to dissuade Arittha from that
pernicious view, urged, admonished, questioned and exhorted him
thus: "Do not say so, friend Arittha, do not say so! Do not
misrepresent the Blessed One! It is not right to misrepresent him.
Never would the Blessed One speak like that. For in many ways,
indeed, has the Blessed One said of those obstructive things that
they are obstructions, indeed, and that they necessarily obstruct
him who pursues them. Sense desires, so he has said, bring little
enjoyment and much suffering and disappointment. The perils in them
are greater. Sense desires are like bare bones, has the Blessed One
said; they are like a lump of flesh, like a torch of straw, like a
pit of burning coals, like a dream, like borrowed goods, like a
fruit-bearing tree, like a slaughter house, like a stake of swords,
like a snake's head, are sense desires, has the Blessed One
said.[2] They bring little enjoyment, and
much suffering and disappointment. The perils in them are
greater."
Yet, though the monk Arittha was thus urged, admonished,
questioned and exhorted by those monks, he still clung tenaciously
and obstinately to his pernicious view, saying: "There are things
called 'obstructions' by the Blessed One. As I understand his
teaching, those things are not necessarily obstructive for one who
pursues them."
4. When
those monks could not dissuade the monk Arittha, formerly of the
vulture killers, from his pernicious view, they went to the Blessed
One, and after respectfully saluting him, they sat down at one
side. Being seated they told the Blessed One (all that had
happened), and they said: "Since, O Lord, we could not dissuade the
monk Arittha from his pernicious view, we have now reported this
matter to the Blessed One."
5. Then
the Blessed One addressed a certain monk thus: "Go, O monk, and
tell the monk Arittha, formerly of the vulture killers, that the
Master calls him." — "Yes, Lord," replied the monk. He went to the
monk Arittha and spoke to him: "The Master calls you, friend
Arittha." — "Yes, friend," replied Arittha and he went to meet the
Blessed One. Having arrived, he saluted the Blessed One
respectfully and sat down at one side. When he was seated the
Blessed One addressed him thus:
"Is it true, Arittha, that you have conceived this pernicious
view: 'There are things called "obstructions" by the Blessed One.
As I understand his teaching those things are not necessarily
obstructive for him who pursues them'?" — "Yes, indeed, Lord, I
understand the teaching of the Blessed One in this way that those
things called 'obstructions' by the Blessed One, are not
necessarily obstructive for him who pursues them."
6. "Of
whom do you know, foolish man, that I have taught to him the
teaching in that manner? Did I not, foolish man, speak in many ways
of those obstructive things that they are obstructions indeed, and
that they necessarily obstruct him who pursues them? Sense desires,
so I have said, bring little enjoyment, and much suffering and
disappointment. The perils in them are greater. Sense desires are
like bare bones, have I said; they are like a lump of flesh... they
are like a snake's head, have I said. They bring much suffering and
disappointment. The perils in them are greater. But you, O foolish
man, have misrepresented us by what you personally have wrongly
grasped. You have undermined your own (future) and have created
much demerit. This, foolish man, will bring you much harm and
suffering for a long time."[3]
7. Then
the Blessed One addressed the monks thus: "What do you think, O
monks: has that monk Arittha, formerly of the vulture killers,
produced any spark (of understanding) in this teaching and
discipline?"[4] — "How should that be, Lord?
Certainly not, O Lord."
After these words the monk Arittha, formerly of the vulture
killers, sat silent, confused, with his shoulders drooping and his
head bent, brooding and incapable of making a rejoinder.
Then the Blessed One, knowing (his condition), spoke to him:
"You will be known, foolish man, by what is your own pernicious
view, I shall now question the monks about this."
8. Then
the Blessed One addressed the monks: "Do you, O monks, also
understand the teaching proclaimed by me, in the same manner as
this monk Arittha does, who misrepresents us by what he personally
has wrongly grasped; who has undermined his own (future) and
created much demerit?"
"Certainly not, Lord. For in many ways has the Blessed One told
us of those obstructive things that they are obstructions indeed,
and that they necessarily obstruct him who pursues them..."
"Good, monks. It is good that you thus understand the teaching
proclaimed by me.[5] For in many ways have I spoken of
those obstructive things that they are obstructions, indeed, and
that they necessarily obstruct him who pursues them. Sense desires,
so have I said, bring little enjoyment, and much suffering and
disappointment. The perils in them are greater. Sense desires are
like bare bones, have I said; they are like a lump of flesh, like a
torch of straw, like a pit of burning coals, like a dream, like
borrowed goods, like a fruit-bearing tree, like a slaughter-house,
like a stake of swords; like a snake's head are sense desires, have
I said. They bring much suffering and disappointment. The perils in
them are greater. But this monk Arittha, formerly of the vulture
killers, misrepresents us by what he personally has wrongly
grasped; he undermines his own (future) and creates much demerit.
This will bring to this foolish man much harm and suffering for a
long time.
9.
"Monks, it is impossible indeed, that one can pursue sense
gratification[6] without sensual desire,[7] without perceptions of sensual
desire, without thoughts of sensual desire.
10.[8] "There are here, O monks, some
foolish men who study the Teaching;[9] having studied it, they do not
wisely examine the purpose of those teachings. To those who do not
wisely examine the purpose, these teachings will not yield
insight.[10] They study the Teaching only to
use it for criticizing or for refuting others in disputation. They
do not experience the (true) purpose[11] for which they[12] (ought to) study the Teaching.
To them these teachings wrongly grasped, will bring harm and
suffering for a long time. And why? Because of their wrong grasp of
the teachings.
"Suppose, monks, a man wants a snake, looks for a snake, goes in
search of a snake. He then sees a large snake, and when he is
grasping its body or its tail, the snake turns back on him and
bites his hand or arm or some other limb of his. And because of
that he suffers death or deadly pain. And why? Because of his wrong
grasp of the snake.
"Similarly, O monks, there are here some foolish men who study
the Teaching; having studied it, they do not wisely examine the
purpose of those teachings. To those who do not wisely examine the
purpose, these teachings will not yield insight. They study the
Teaching only to use it for criticizing or for refuting others in
disputation. They do not experience the (true) purpose for which
they (ought to) study the Teaching. To them these teachings wrongly
grasped, will bring harm and suffering for a long time. And why?
Because of their wrong grasp of the teachings.
11. "But
there are here, O monks, some noble sons who study the
Teaching;[13] and having studied it, they
examine wisely the purpose of those teachings. To those who wisely
examine the purpose, these teachings will yield insight. They do
not study the Teaching for the sake of criticizing nor for refuting
others in disputation. They experience the purpose for which they
study the Teaching; and to them these teachings being rightly
grasped, will bring welfare and happiness for a long time. And why?
Because of their right grasp of the teachings.
"Suppose, monks, a man wants a snake, looks for a snake, goes in
search of a snake. He then sees a large snake, and with a forked
stick he holds it firmly down. Having done so he catches it firmly
by the neck. Then although the snake might entwine with (the coils
of) its body that man's hand or arm or some other limb of his,
still he does not on that account suffer death or deadly pain. And
why not? Because of his right grasp of the snake.
"Similarly, O monks, there are here some noble sons who study
the Teaching; and having learned it, they examine wisely the
purpose of those teachings. To those who wisely examine the
purpose, these teachings will yield insight. They do not study the
Teaching for the sake of criticizing nor for refuting others in
disputation. They experience the purpose for which they study the
Teaching; and to them these teachings being rightly grasped, will
bring welfare and happiness for a long time. And why? Because of
their right grasp of the teachings.
12.
"Therefore, O monks, if you know the purpose of what I have said,
you should keep it in mind accordingly. But if you do not know the
purpose of what I have said, you should question me about it, or
else (ask) those monks who are wise.
13. "I
shall show you, monks, the Teaching's similitude to a raft: as
having the purpose of crossing over, not the purpose of being clung
to. Listen, monks, and heed well what I shall say" — "Yes, Lord,"
replied the monks. and the Blessed One spoke thus:
"Suppose, monks, there is a man journeying on a road and he sees
a vast expanse of water of which this shore is perilous and
fearful, while the other shore is safe and free from danger. But
there is no boat for crossing nor is there a bridge for going over
from this side to the other. So the man thinks: 'This is a vast
expanse of water; and this shore is perilous and fearful, but the
other shore is safe and free from danger. There is, however, no
boat here for crossing, nor a bridge for going over from this side
to the other. Suppose I gather reeds, sticks, branches and foliage,
and bind them into a raft.' Now that man collects reeds, sticks,
branches and foliage, and binds them into a raft. Carried by that
raft, laboring with hands and feet, he safely crosses over to the
other shore. Having crossed and arrived at the other shore, he
thinks: 'This raft, indeed, has been very helpful to me. Carried by
it, laboring with hands and feet, I got safely across to the other
shore. Should I not lift this raft on my head or put it on my
shoulders, and go where I like?'
"What do you think about it, O monks? Will this man by acting
thus, do what should be done with a raft?" — "No, Lord" — "How
then, monks, would he be doing what ought to be done with a raft?
Here, monks, having got across and arrived at the other shore, the
man thinks: 'This raft, indeed, has been very helpful to me.
Carried by it, and laboring with hands and feet, I got safely
across to the other shore. Should I not pull it up now to the dry
land or let it float in the water, and then go as I please?' By
acting thus, monks, would that man do what should be done with a
raft.
"In the same way, monks, have I shown to you the Teaching's
similitude to a raft: as having the purpose of crossing over, not
the purpose of being clung to.
14.
"You, O monks, who understand the Teaching's similitude to a raft,
you should let go even (good) teachings,[14] how much more false ones!
15.
"There are, monks, these six grounds for false views.[15] What are the six? There is here,
monks, an uninstructed worldling who has no regard for Noble Ones,
who is ignorant of their teaching and untrained in it; who has no
regard for men of worth, who is ignorant of their teaching and
untrained in it: he considers corporeality thus: 'This is mine,
this I am, this is my self';[16] he considers feeling...
perception... mental formations thus: 'This is mine, this I am,
this is my self'; and what is seen, heard, sensed, and
thought;[17] what is encountered, sought,
pursued in mind,[18] this also he considers thus:
'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'; and also this ground
for views (holding): 'The universe is the Self.[19] That I shall be after
death;[20] permanent, stable, eternal,
immutable; eternally the same,[21] shall I abide in that very
condition' — that (view), too, he considers thus: 'This is mine,
this I am, this is my self.'[22]
16.
"But, monks, there is here a well-instructed noble disciple who has
regard for Noble Ones, who knows their teaching and is well trained
in it; who has regard for men of worth, who knows their teaching
and is well trained in it: he does not consider corporeality in
this way: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'; he does not
consider feeling... perception... mental formations in this way:
'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'; and what is seen,
heard, sensed, and thought; what is encountered, sought, pursued in
mind, this also he does not consider in this way: 'This is mine,
this I am, this is my self'; and also this ground for views
(holding): 'The universe is the Self. That I shall be after death;
permanent, stable, eternal, immutable, eternally the same shall I
abide in that very condition' — that (view), too, he does not
consider thus: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self.'
17.
"Considering thus, he is not anxious about unrealities."[23]
18. When
this was said, a certain monk asked the Blessed One:
"Lord, can there be anxiety about unrealities, in the
external?"[24]
"There can be, O monk," said the Blessed One. "In that case,
monk, someone thinks: 'Oh, I had it! That, alas, I have no longer!
Oh, may I have it again! But alas, I do not get it!' Hence he
grieves, is depressed and laments; beating his breast, he weeps and
dejection befalls him. Thus, monk, is there anxiety about
unrealities, in the external."
19.
"But, Lord, can there be absence of anxiety about unrealities, in
the external?"
"There can be, O monk," said the Blessed One. "In that case,
monk, someone does not think thus: 'Oh, I had it! That, alas, I
have no longer! Oh, may I have it again! But, alas, I do not get
it!' Hence he does not grieve, is not depressed, does not lament;
he does not beat his breast nor does he weep, and no dejection
befalls him. Thus, monk, is there absence of anxiety about
unrealities, in the external."
20.
"Lord, can there be anxiety about unrealities, in the
internal?"
"There can be, monk," said the Blessed One. "In that case, monk,
someone has this view: 'The universe is the Self. That I shall be
after death; permanent, stable, eternal, immutable; eternally the
same shall I abide in that very condition.' He then hears a Perfect
One expounding the Teaching for the removal of all grounds for
views, of all prejudices, obsessions, dogmas and biases; for the
stilling of all (kamma-) processes, for the relinquishment of all
substrata (of existence), for the extirpation of craving, for
dispassion, cessation, Nibbaana. He then thinks: 'I shall be
annihilated, I shall be destroyed! No longer shall I exist!' Hence
he grieves, is depressed and laments; beating his breast, he weeps,
and dejection befalls him. Thus, monk, is there anxiety about
unrealities, in the internal."
21.
"But, Lord, can there be absence of anxiety about unrealities, in
the internal?"
"There can be, monk," said the Blessed One. "In that case, monk,
someone does not have this view: 'The universe is the Self...
eternally the same shall I abide in that very condition.' He then
hears a Perfect One expounding the Teaching for the removal of all
grounds for views, of all prejudices, obsessions, dogmas and
biases; for the stilling of all (kamma-) processes, for the
relinquishing of all substrata (of existence), for the extirpation
of craving, for dispassion, cessation, Nibbaana. He then does not
think: 'I shall be annihilated, I shall be destroyed! No longer
shall I exist!' Hence he does not grieve, is not depressed, does
not lament; he does not beat his breast nor does he weep, and no
dejection befalls him. Thus, monk, is there absence of anxiety
about unrealities, in the internal.[25]
22. "You
may well take hold of a possession,[26] O monks, that is permanent,
stable, eternal, immutable, that abides eternally the same in its
very condition. (But) do you see, monks, any such possession?" —
"No, Lord." — "Well, monks, I, too, do not see any such possession
that is permanent, stable, eternal, immutable, that abides
eternally the same in its very condition."
23. "You
may well accept, monks, the assumption of a self-theory[27] from the acceptance of which
there would not arise sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief, and
despair. (But) do you see, monks, any such assumption of a
self-theory?" — "No, Lord." — "Well, monks, I, too, do not see any
such assumption of a self-theory from the acceptance of which there
would not arise sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief and
despair."
24. "You
may well rely, monks, on any supporting (argument) for
views[28] from the reliance on which there
would not arise sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief and despair.
(But) do you see, monks, any such supporting (argument) for views?"
— "No, Lord." — "Well, monks, I, too, do not see any such
supporting (argument) for views from the reliance on which there
would not arise sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief and
despair."[29]
25. "If
there were a self, monks, would there be my self's property?" — "So
it is, Lord." — "Or if there is a self's property, would there by
my self?" — "So it is, Lord." — "Since in truth and in fact, self
and self's property do not obtain, O monks, then this ground for
views, 'The universe is the Self. That I shall be after death;
permanent, stable, eternal, immutable; eternally the same shall I
abide, in that very condition' — is it not, monks, an entirely and
perfectly foolish idea?" — "What else should it be, Lord? It is an
entirely and perfectly foolish idea."[30]
26.
"What do you think, monks: is corporeality permanent or
impermanent?" — "Impermanent, Lord." — "And what is impermanent, is
it painful or pleasant?" — "Painful, Lord." — "What is impermanent,
painful, subject to change, is it fit to be considered thus: 'This
is mine, this I am, this is my self'?" — "Certainly not, Lord." —
"What do you think, monks: Is feeling... is perception... are
mental formations... is consciousness... permanent or impermanent?"
— "Impermanent, Lord." — "And what is impermanent, is it painful or
pleasant?" — "Painful, Lord." — "And what is impermanent, painful,
subject to change, is it fit to be considered thus: 'This is mine,
this I am, this is my self?" — "Certainly not, Lord."
27.
"Therefore, monks, whatever corporeality, whether past, future, or
present, in oneself or external, gross or subtle, inferior or
superior, far or near — all corporeality should with right wisdom,
thus be seen as it is: 'This is not mine, this I am not, this is
not my self.'
"Whatever feeling... whatever perception... whatever mental
formations... whatever consciousness, whether past, future or
present, in oneself or external, gross or subtle, inferior or
superior, far or near — all... consciousness should, with right
wisdom, thus be seen as it is: 'This is not mine, this I am not,
this is not my self.'
28.
"Seeing this, monks, the well-instructed noble disciple becomes
disgusted[31] with corporeality, becomes
disgusted with feeling, with perception, with mental formations,
with consciousness.
29.
"Through his being disgusted, his passion fades away.[32] His passion having faded, he is
freed.[33] In him who is freed there is the
knowledge of freedom:[34] "Ceased has rebirth, fulfilled
is the holy life, the task is done, there is no more of this to
come," thus he knows.
30.
"This monk is called one who has removed the crossbar, has filled
the moat, has broken the pillar, has unbolted (his mind); a Noble
One who has taken down the flag, put down the burden, become
unfettered.
31. "And
how, monks, is that monk one who has removed the cross-bar? Herein
the monk has abandoned ignorance, has cut it off at the root,
removed it from its soil like a palmyra tree, brought it to utter
extinction, incapable of arising again. Thus has he removed the
cross-bar.
32. "And
how, monks, is that monk one who has filled the moat? Herein the
monk has abandoned the round of rebirths, leading to renewed
existence; he has cut it off at the root, removed it from its soil
like a palmyra tree, brought it to utter extinction, incapable of
arising again.
33. "And
how has he broken the pillar? He has abandoned craving, has cut it
off at the root, removed it from its soil like a palmyra tree,
brought it to utter extinction, incapable of arising again.
34. "And
how has he unbolted (his mind)? He has abandoned the five lower
fetters, has cut them off at the root, removed them from their soil
like a palmyra tree, brought them to utter extinction, incapable of
arising again.
35. "And
how is the monk a Noble One who has taken down the flag, put down
the burden, become unfettered? He has abandoned the conceit of
self, has cut it off at the root, removed it from is soil like a
palmyra tree, brought it to utter extinction, incapable of arising
again. Thus is the monk a Noble One who has taken down the flag,
put down the burden, become unfettered.
36.
"When a monk's mind is thus freed, O monks, neither the gods with
Indra, nor the gods with Brahma, nor the gods with the Lord of
Creatures (Pajaapati), when searching will find[36] on what the consciousness of one
thus gone (tathaagata) is based. Why is that? One who has
thus gone is no longer traceable here and now, so I say.[37]
37. "So
teaching, so proclaiming, O monks, I have been baselessly, vainly,
falsely and wrongly accused by some ascetics and brahmans: 'A
nihilist[38] is the ascetic Gotama; He
teaches the annihilation, the destruction, the non-being of an
existing individual.'[39]
"As I am not as I do not teach, so have I been baselessly,
vainly, falsely and wrongly accused by some ascetics and brahmans
thus: 'A nihilist is the ascetic Gotama; He teaches the
annihilation, the destruction, the non-being of an existing
individual.'
"What I teach now as before, O monks, is suffering and the
cessation of suffering.
38. "If
for that (reason)[40] others revile, abuse, scold and
insult the Perfect One, on that account, O monks, the Perfect One
will not feel annoyance, nor dejection, nor displeasure in his
heart. And if for that (reason) others respect, revere, honor and
venerate the Perfect One, on that account the Perfect One will not
feel delight, nor joy, nor elation in his heart. If for that
(reason) others respect, revere, honor and venerate the Perfect
One, He will think: 'It is towards this (mind-body aggregate) which
was formerly[41] fully comprehended, that they
perform such acts.'[42]
39.
"Therefore, O monks, if you, too, are reviled, abused, scolded and
insulted by others, you should on that account not entertain
annoyance, nor dejection, nor displeasure in your hearts. And if
others respect, revere, honor and venerate you, on that account you
should not entertain delight nor joy nor elation in your hearts. If
others respect, revere, honor and venerate you, you should think:
'It is towards this (mind-body aggregate) which was formerly
comprehended, that they perform such acts.'[43]
40.
"Therefore, monks, give up whatever is not yours.[45] Your giving it up will for a
long time bring you welfare and happiness. What is it that is not
yours? Corporeality is not yours. Give it up! Your giving it up
will for a long time bring you welfare and happiness. Feeling is
not yours. Give it up! Your giving it up will for a long bring you
welfare and happiness. Perception is not yours. Give it up! Your
giving it up will for a long time bring you welfare and happiness.
Mental formations are not yours. Give them up! Your giving them up
will for a long time bring you welfare and happiness. Consciousness
is not yours. Give it up! Your giving it up will for a long time
bring you welfare and happiness.[46]
41.
"What do you think, monks: if people were to carry away the grass,
sticks, branches and leaves in this Jeta Grove, or burnt them or
did with them what they pleased, would you think: These people
carry us away, or burn us, or do with us as they please?" — "No,
Lord." — "Why not?" Because, Lord, that is neither our self nor the
property of our self." — "So, too, monks, give up what is not
yours! Your giving it up will for a long time bring you welfare and
happiness. What is it that is not yours? Corporeality... feeling...
perception... mental formations... consciousness are not yours.
Give them up! Your giving them up will for a long time bring you
welfare and happiness."
42.
"Monks, this Teaching[47] so well proclaimed by me, is
plain, open, explicit, free of patchwork.[48] In this Teaching that is so well
proclaimed by me and is plain, open, explicit and free of
patchwork; for those who are arahants, free of taints, who have
accomplished and completed their task, have laid down the burden,
achieved their aim, severed the fetters binding to existence, who
are liberated by full knowledge, there is no (future) round of
existence that can be ascribed to them.
43.
"Monks, in this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is
plain, open, explicit and free of patchwork, those monks who have
abandoned the five lower fetters will all be reborn spontaneously
(in the Pure Abodes) and there they will pass away finally, no more
returning from that world.
44.
"Monks, in this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is
plain, open, explicit and free of patchwork, those monks who have
abandoned three fetters and have reduced greed, hatred and
delusion, are all once-returners, and, returning only once to this
world, will then make an end of suffering.
45.
"Monks, in this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is
plain, open, explicit and free of patchwork, those monks who have
abandoned three fetters, are all stream-enterers, no more liable to
downfall, assured, and headed for full Enlightenment.
46.
"Monks, in this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is
plain, open, explicit, and free of patchwork, those monks who are
mature in Dhamma, mature in faith,[49] are all headed for full
Enlightenment.
47.
"Monks, in this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is
plain, open, explicit and free of patchwork, those who have simply
faith in me, simply love for me,[50] are all destined for
heaven."
48. This
said the Blessed One. Satisfied, the monks rejoiced in the words of
the Blessed One.
Things called "obstructions" (antaraayikaa
dhammaa). Comy gives here a list of ideas and actions that
obstruct either heavenly rebirth or final deliverance or both.
Arittha, so says Comy being a learned exponent of the Teaching, was
quite familiar with most of these "obstructions"; but, being
unfamiliar with the Code of Discipline (Vinaya), he conceived the
view that sex indulgence was not necessarily an obstruction for a
monk. Arittha is said to have used a rather sophistic argument,
saying, "If some of the five sense enjoyments are permissible even
for lay adherents who are stream-enterers (sotaapanna),
etc., why is an exception made as to the visible shape, voice,
touch, etc., of women?" According to Comy, Arittha goes so far as
to charge the Buddha with exaggerating the importance of the first
grave offence (paaraajikaa) for a monk (i.e., sexual
intercourse), saying that the emphasis given to it is like the
effort of one who tries to chain the ocean.
The similes about sense-desires, given in the following section
of the discourse, seem to support the commentarial reference to
sexual intercourse.
The similes about sense-desires. Of the ten
similes, the first seven were explained in detail in the Potaliya
Sutta, (MN
54; see The Wheel No. 79). A summary of these
explanations follows here; and after each of these, and also for
the remaining three similes, and expansion is given of the one-word
explanation found in the Comy to our present text:
(1) Bare bones, fleshless, blood-smeared, are
thrown to a starving dog but cannot satisfy the animal's hunger.
Similarly, sense-desires give no lasting satisfaction (Comy:
appasaadatthena).
(2) A lump of flesh for which birds of prey
fight each other; if the bird that has seized the lump of flesh,
does not yield it, it may meet death or deadly pain from the beaks
and claws of the other birds. Similarly, the sense-desires are
common to many (bahusaadhaarana), i.e., the same sense
objects may be claimed by many and may become the cause of deadly
conflict.
(3) A torch of straw carried against the wind
may cause severe burns to the careless man if not quickly
discarded. Similarly, sense-desires will severely burn
(anudahana) i.e., greatly harm him who thoughtlessly, and
unaware of the great danger, partakes of them in the belief that
they will bring light and joy to his life.
(4) A pit of burning coals towards which a man
is dragged by others; if he cannot free himself from the grip, he
will be thrown into the fire and consumed by it. Similarly,
sense-desires are like a vast conflagration
(maha-bhitaapa) into which the victim is dragged by bad
company, or by his own deeds, causing his rebirth in miserable
states of woe.
(5) A dream of a beautiful landscape that
vanishes on awakening. Similarly, sense-desires are a brief
illusion (ittara-paccupatthaana) like a dream, and
disappointing after one awakens from infatuation to reality.
(6) Borrowed goods on which the borrower
foolishly prides himself in public; but which are withdrawn by the
owners when they see the boastful man. Similarly, sense-desires are
temporary (taavakaalika) and not a true and lasting
possession of him who enjoys them, filled with vain glory.
(7) A fruit tree climbed by one who craves for
the fruits; but another man, likewise greedy for them but unable to
climb, chooses another method and fells the tree; and unless the
first man quickly descends, he will break his limbs. Similarly, in
the blind pursuit of sense pleasures one may "break all one's
limbs" (sabbanga paccanga bhañjana), may suffer severe
injury of body and mind. The Sub-Comy refers also to punishment and
torture incurred by reckless deeds to which people are driven by
sense infatuation.
(8) A slaughter house (or place of execution):
because sense-desires are like a butcher's (or executioner's) block
(adhikuttana). This may mean that sense-desires kill much
that is noble in man and cut off his higher development.
(9) A stake of swords: sense-desires are
piercing (vinivijjhana) penetrating deep within, causing
wounds where there had been none. Unfulfilled or frustrated desire,
or the pains of jealousy, are, indeed, like that ancient torture of
the state of swords.
(10) A snake's head: sense-desires are a grave
risk and peril (sasanka-sappatibhaya) for the present and
future welfare, if one walks unwarily.
Dhammaa na ni jjhaanam khamanti. Comy: The teachings do
not become clear, do not come into the range (of understanding); so
that one cannot discern whether in the respective place of the
exposition, morality is spoken of, or concentration, insight, the
paths, the fruits, the round of existence or its ending. Sub-Comy:
"That is, once cannot understand that the purpose of morality is
the attaining of concentration, the purpose of concentration the
winning of insight, etc."
Nijjhaana has here the meaning of "insight" or
"comprehension" (Sub-Comy: nijjhaana-pañña-kkhamaa na
honti). This phrase appears with the same meaning and in the
same context, in the Kiitaagiri Sutta (MN
70) and the Cankii Sutta (MN
95), that is, likewise preceded by an "examination of purpose
(or meaning)." Also
SN 25.1 confirms our rendering: Yassa khobhikkhave
imedhammaa evam paññaaya mattaso nijjhaana.m khamanti aya.m vuccati
dhammaanusaarii.
The three ways of studying the teaching. Comy:
"They, the noble sons, study the Teaching for the sake of crossing
(the ocean of sa.msaric suffering). There are to wit, three manners
of studying the Teaching: studying it in the manner of the
Snake-simile (alagadda-pariyatti); studying it for the
sake of crossing over (nittharana-pariyatti); and studying
in a treasurer's (or store-keeper's) position
(bhandaa-gaarika-pariyatti).
(1) He who studies the Buddha's word for getting robes and other
requisites, or for becoming widely known; that is, he who learns
for the sake of fame and gain, his study is that of the
Snake-simile (i.e., the wrong grasp); but better than such a study
would be for him to sleep and not to study at all.
(2) But there is one who studies the Buddha's word, and when
morality is the subject, he fulfills morality; when concentration
is the subject, he lets it take deep root; when insight is the
subject, he establishes himself well in insight; when the paths and
fruitions are the subject, he studies with the intention, "I shall
develop the path, I shall realize the fruition." Only the studying
of such a one is "studying for the sake of crossing over" (as
expressed in the simile of the raft; §13).
(3) But the studying by one who (as an arahant, a saint) has
extinguished the taints (khiinaasavo), is "studying in the
Treasurer's position." For him, indeed, there remains nothing
unpenetrated, nothing unrelinquished, nothing undeveloped, and
nothing unrealized. [This refers to the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 3rd
Truths, respectively.] He is one who has penetrated the aggregates
of existence (khandha), who has relinquished the
defilements, developed the path and realized the fruition. Hence,
in studying the Buddha's Word, he studies it as a keeper of the
scriptures, as a guardian of the tradition, as a preserver of the
continuity. Thus his study is like (the activity of) a treasurer
(or store keeper).
"Now, when those proficient in the books cannot live at one
place, being afraid of starvation, etc., if (in such a situation)
there is one who, while himself going the alms round with very
great fatigue, as an unliberated worlding takes up studies with the
thought: 'Lest the exceedingly sweet Buddha-word may perish, I
shall keep the scriptures (in mind), shall preserve the continuity
and guard the tradition,' in that case, is his study of the
Treasurer's type or is it not? — It is not. And why not? Because
his study is not applied to his own situation (na attano thaane
thatvaa pariyaapunattaa; Sub-Comy: that of (having to) cross
over. An unliberated worldling's study [be he a monk or a lay
follower] will either be of the type of the Snake-simile, or for
the sake of crossing over; while for the seven (noble persons;
ariya-puggala) who have entered the higher training
(sekha), the study is only for the sake of crossing over;
for the saint (arahat) it is only of the Treasurer's
type."
Grounds for false views
(ditthi-tthaana). Comy: By the words "There are, monks,
these six grounds for false views," the Master wishes to show this:
"He who takes the five aggregates of existence as 'I' and 'Mine',
by way of a threefold wrong grasp (tividha-gaaha), he
flings mud and refuse into my dispensation, like this Arittha."
Comy and Sub-Comy: False views themselves are "grounds" (or
bases, starting-points) for subsequently arising false views, like
personality belief, eternalism, etc. (Comy: ditthiipi
ditthi-tthaana.m). Further, the "grounds" are the
subject-matter (aarammana, "object") of the views, i.e.,
the five aggregates, the visual objects, etc. Finally, they are
also the conditioning factors (paccaya) of the false
views, e.g., ignorance, sense-impression (phassa),
(faulty) perceptions and thoughts, unwisely directed attention
(ayoniso manasikaara), bad company, others' speech, etc.
[These, with the aggregates as the first, are the eight "grounds
for false views," as mentioned in the Patisambhidaa Magga
(Ditthi-kathaa). The term ditthi-tthaana also occurs in
the Brahmajaala Sutta (DN 1) and in the commentary to it.
"Encountered": (Comy) after having been sought
for, or not sought for; "sought": encountered or
not encountered (before); "mentally pursued"
(anuvicarita.m manasaa): resorted to by consciousness
(cittena anusañcarita.m) — what was encountered or not
encountered without being sought for.
The terms "thought," "encountered," etc., refer to the fifth
aggregate, i.e., consciousness (viññaanakkhandha), which
was not mentioned in the first part of §15.
"The universe is the Self," lit.: "This (is)
the world, this (is) the self" (so loko so attaa). That,
in fact, an identification of the two terms is intended here, will
be shown in the following comments. The best explanation of the
passage is furnished in the Brahmajaala Sutta (DN 1) where a
similar phraseology is used: "There are, monks, some ascetics and
brahmans who are eternalists and who proclaim self and world to be
eternal" (sassatavaadaa sassata.m attañca lokañca
paññapenti); subsequently the theorist is introduced as
stating his view in similar terms: "Eternal are self and world...
they exist as eternally the same" (sassato attaa ca loko ca...
atthi iveva sassatisama.m). The last term appears likewise in
our text; see Note 21. From this we may safely conclude that it is
the identity, or unity, of the Self (or soul; mahaatman,
paramaatman) with the universe (or the Universal Spirit,
Brahman) which is conveyed by our text.
In the Commentary specific to our text, this eternalistic view
is rendered and classified in the terminology of the Dhamma. The
Commentary says:
"This statement ('The universe is the Self') refers to the
(wrong) view 'He considers corporeality, etc., as the self
(ruupa.m attato samanupassatii' ti aadinaa nayena).'"
The canonical quotation (e.g., in MN 44), included here in the
Commentary, has two implications which are of importance for
understanding the reason why it was cited in this context:
(1) As very often in the commentaries (e.g., to Satipatthaana
Sutta), the term "world" (loko) is explained as truly
referring to the five aggregates (khanda, i.e.,
corporeality, feeling, etc.), singly or in toto.
(2) This quotation is the formula for the first of the twenty
types of personality-belief (sakkaaya-ditthi; e.g., in
MN
44). In the first five of these twenty, the self is said to be
identical with each of the five aggregates (as in the earlier part
of §15 of our text). Hence the application of this quote to our
textual passage signifies that the theorist conceives the "world"
(i.e., corporeality, feeling, etc.) as identical with the
self.
The double "So (loko) so (attaa)" in our text, should
therefore, be taken as standing for "yo (loko) so
(attaa)," lit.: what is the world that is the self. In the
Comy to MN
44 we find a similar phrase: "Someone considers corporeality as
self: what is corporeality that is 'I'; what is 'I' that is
corporeality. Thus he considers corporeality and self as non-dual'
(... ya.m ruupa.m so aha.m, yo aha.m ta.m ruupan' ti ruupañca
advaya.m samanupassati)." According to this interpretation the
phrase has been translated here by "This universe is the Self."
Mostly, the first five types of personality-belief are explained
as referring to the wrong view of annihilationism
(uccheda-ditthi). [See, e.g., Patisambhidaa-Magga,
Ditthikathaa, Ucchedaditthi-niddesa; further Comy to MN
44.]
But their being quoted in our context, shows that they may also
apply to eternalism (sassata-ditthi). We have come to this
conclusion since it is improbable that, in our textual passage two
mutually exclusive views should have been combined in a single
statement formulating the sixth "ground for false views"; that is,
in the first part of that statement, annihilationism, and in the
second, eternalism.
"Eternally the same" (sassati-sama.m):
an Upanishadic term; see Brhadaranyaka-Upanisad, 5, 10:
saasvatiih samaah.
This entire statement of the sixth 'ground for views' may well
have been the original creed of an eternalistic doctrine. The
phrasing appears rather vague in the first part, and in general it
is rather loosely worded (so for so aham). To
contemporaries, however, the meaning may have been quite clear
since it was perhaps the stock formula for teachings that were well
known. Hence, in this translation, we have left the first part of
the statement in its rather cryptic and ambiguous original form,
while giving the interpretations in the notes only.
"He is not anxious about unrealities"
(asati na paritassati); or "about the non-existing" ("I"
and "Mine"). The verb paritassati has, according to Comy
the twofold connotation of fear (bhaya) and craving
(tanhaa). Hence this passage may also be rendered: "he has
no fears nor cravings concerning the non-existent." Comy and
Sub-Comy to the Brahmaajala Sutta have a long disquisition about
the corresponding noun paritassana, occurring also in
MN
138, SN 22.7, SN 22.8,
SN 22.53, and
SN 22.55.
Comy: "By showing herewith the taint-free saint who has no
anxiety at the destruction of his own (lit.: internal) aggregates,
the Blessed One concludes his exposition.
Attavaadupaadaanam upadiyetha. While in most
translations the term upaadaana has been rendered by
"clinging," we have followed here a suggestion of the late Bhikkhu
Ñanamoli, rendering it by "assumption" [see The Wheel No.
17: Three Cardinal Discourses of the Buddha, p. 19
(Buddhist Publication Society, Kandy)]. In this context, the word
"assumption" should be understood: (1) in the sense of a
supposition, (2) in the literal sense of its Latin source:
adsumere, "to take up," which closely parallels the
derivation of our Paali term: upa-aadaana, "taking up
strongly." In this sense we have used it when translating the
derivative verb upaadiyetha by "you may accept."
Attavaadupaadaana is one of the four types of clinging
(see Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary), conditioned by
craving (tanhaa). This term comprises, according to Comy,
the twenty types of personality-belief