The Middle Length Discourses 43
The Great Series of Questions and Answers
Thus have I heard—
at one time the Bhagavā was dwelling at Sāvatthī, in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s park.
Then Venerable Mahākoṭṭhika, emerging from seclusion in the evening, approached Venerable Sāriputta; having approached, he exchanged greetings with Venerable Sāriputta.
When the courteous and memorable conversation was finished, he sat down to one side. Sitting to one side, Venerable Mahākoṭṭhika said this to Venerable Sāriputta:
“‘Without paññā, without paññā,’ friend, it is said.
In what way, friend, is one called without paññā?”
“‘One does not understand, one does not understand,’ friend, therefore one is called without paññā.
And what does one not understand?
One does not understand, ‘This is dukkha’; one does not understand, ‘This is the arising of dukkha’; one does not understand, ‘This is the cessation of dukkha’; one does not understand, ‘This is the practice leading to the cessation of dukkha.’
‘One does not understand, one does not understand,’ friend, therefore one is called without paññā.”
“Sādhu, friend,” Venerable Mahākoṭṭhika said; having delighted in and expressed anumodanā for Venerable Sāriputta’s statement, he asked Venerable Sāriputta a further question:
“‘Possessing paññā, possessing paññā,’ friend, it is said.
In what way, friend, is one called possessing paññā?”
“‘One understands, one understands,’ friend, therefore one is called possessing paññā.
And what does one understand?
One understands, ‘This is dukkha’; one understands, ‘This is the arising of dukkha’; one understands, ‘This is the cessation of dukkha’; one understands, ‘This is the practice leading to the cessation of dukkha.’
‘One understands, one understands,’ friend, therefore one is called possessing paññā.”
“‘Viññāṇa, viññāṇa,’ friend, it is said.
In what way, friend, is it called viññāṇa?”
“‘It cognizes, it cognizes,’ friend, therefore it is called viññāṇa.
And what does it cognize?
It cognizes what is sukha, it cognizes what is dukkha, and it cognizes what is neither-dukkha-nor-sukha.
‘It cognizes, it cognizes,’ friend, therefore it is called viññāṇa.”
“Friend, as to paññā and viññāṇa—
are these dhammas conjoined or disjoined?
And is it possible, after separating them out again and again, to describe a difference between these dhammas?”
“Friend, as to paññā and viññāṇa—
these dhammas are conjoined, not disjoined.
And it is not possible, after separating these dhammas out again and again, to describe a difference between them.
For what one understands, friend, that one cognizes; what one cognizes, that one understands.
Therefore these dhammas are conjoined, not disjoined.
And it is not possible, after separating these dhammas out again and again, to describe a difference between them.”
“Friend, as to paññā and viññāṇa—
what is the difference between these dhammas that are conjoined, not disjoined?”
“Friend, as to paññā and viññāṇa—
of these dhammas that are conjoined, not disjoined, paññā is to be developed, while viññāṇa is to be fully understood.
This is the difference between them.”
“‘Vedanā, vedanā,’ friend, it is said.
In what way, friend, is it called vedanā?”
“‘It feels, it feels,’ friend, therefore it is called vedanā.
And what does it feel?
It feels what is sukha, it feels what is dukkha, and it feels what is neither-dukkha-nor-sukha.
‘It feels, it feels,’ friend, therefore it is called vedanā.”
“‘Saññā, saññā,’ friend, it is said.
In what way, friend, is it called saññā?”
“‘It recognizes, it recognizes,’ friend, therefore it is called saññā.
And what does it recognize?
It recognizes blue, it recognizes yellow, it recognizes red, and it recognizes white.
‘It recognizes, it recognizes,’ friend, therefore it is called saññā.”
“Friend, as to vedanā, saññā, and viññāṇa—
are these dhammas conjoined or disjoined?
And is it possible, after separating them out again and again, to describe a difference between these dhammas?”
“Friend, as to vedanā, saññā, and viññāṇa—
these dhammas are conjoined, not disjoined.
And it is not possible, after separating these dhammas out again and again, to describe a difference between them.
For what one feels, friend, that one recognizes; what one recognizes, that one cognizes.
Therefore these dhammas are conjoined, not disjoined.
And it is not possible, after separating these dhammas out again and again, to describe a difference between them.”
“Friend, with the five indriyas relinquished, what may be known by purified mind-viññāṇa?”
“Friend, with the five indriyas relinquished, by purified mind-viññāṇa the dimension of infinite space [ākāsānañcāyatanaṁ] may be known as ‘space is infinite’; the dimension of infinite viññāṇa [viññāṇañcāyatanaṁ] may be known as ‘viññāṇa is infinite’; and the dimension of nothingness [ākiñcaññāyatanaṁ] may be known as ‘there is nothing.’”
“But, friend, by what does one understand a dhamma that may be known?”
“Friend, one understands a dhamma that may be known by the eye of paññā.”
“But, friend, what is paññā for?”
“Friend, paññā is for direct knowledge, for full understanding, and for abandoning.”
“But, friend, how many conditions are there for the arising of right view?”
“There are two conditions, friend, for the arising of right view—
the voice of another and appropriate attention [yoniso manasikāro].
These, friend, are the two conditions for the arising of right view.”
“But, friend, supported by how many factors does right view have liberation of citta as its fruit and benefit, and liberation by paññā as its fruit and benefit?”
“Friend, supported by five factors, right view has liberation of citta as its fruit and benefit, and liberation by paññā as its fruit and benefit.
Here, friend, right view is supported by virtue, supported by learning, supported by discussion, supported by settling [samatha], and supported by insight [vipassanā].
Supported by these five factors, friend, right view has liberation of citta as its fruit and benefit, and liberation by paññā as its fruit and benefit.”
“But, friend, how many bhavas are there?”
“There are these three bhavas, friend—
sensual bhava, form [rūpa] bhava, and formless bhava.”
“But, friend, how does the production of renewed bhava in the future occur?”
“Friend, beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by taṇhā take delight here and there—
thus the production of renewed bhava in the future occurs.”
“But, friend, how does the production of renewed bhava in the future not occur?”
“Friend, from the fading away of ignorance, the arising of knowledge, and the cessation of taṇhā—
thus the production of renewed bhava in the future does not occur.”
“But, friend, what is the first jhāna?”
“Here, friend, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome dhammas, a bhikkhu enters and dwells in the first jhāna, which has thought and examination, with pīti and sukha born of seclusion [viveka]—
this, friend, is called the first jhāna.”
“But, friend, the first jhāna has how many factors?”
“Friend, the first jhāna has five factors.
Here, friend, in a bhikkhu who has entered the first jhāna, thought occurs, examination occurs, and pīti, sukha, and oneness of citta [cittekaggatā] occur.
Friend, the first jhāna has five factors in this way.”
“But, friend, the first jhāna is free from how many factors and endowed with how many factors?”
“Friend, the first jhāna is free from five factors and endowed with five factors.
Here, friend, in a bhikkhu who has entered the first jhāna, sensual desire has been abandoned, ill will has been abandoned, dullness and drowsiness have been abandoned, restlessness and remorse have been abandoned, and doubt has been abandoned;
thought occurs, examination occurs, and pīti, sukha, and oneness of citta [cittekaggatā] occur.
Friend, the first jhāna is free from five factors and endowed with five factors in this way.”
“These five indriyas, friend, have distinct domains and distinct ranges; they do not experience one another’s range and domain, namely—
the eye-indriya, the ear-indriya, the nose-indriya, the tongue-indriya, and the body-indriya.
For these five indriyas, friend, which have distinct domains and distinct ranges and do not experience one another’s range and domain, what is their refuge, and what experiences their range and domain?”
“These five indriyas, friend, have distinct domains and distinct ranges; they do not experience one another’s range and domain, namely—
the eye-indriya, the ear-indriya, the nose-indriya, the tongue-indriya, and the body-indriya.
For these five indriyas, friend, which have distinct domains and distinct ranges and do not experience one another’s range and domain, mind is their refuge, and mind experiences their range and domain.”
“These five indriyas, friend, namely—
the eye-indriya, the ear-indriya, the nose-indriya, the tongue-indriya, and the body-indriya.
These five indriyas, friend, stand dependent on what?”
“These five indriyas, friend, namely—
the eye-indriya, the ear-indriya, the nose-indriya, the tongue-indriya, and the body-indriya.
These five indriyas, friend, stand dependent on life.”
“But, friend, life stands dependent on what?”
“Life stands dependent on heat.”
“But, friend, heat stands dependent on what?”
“Heat stands dependent on life.”
“Just now, friend, we understood Venerable Sāriputta’s statement in this way:
‘Life stands dependent on heat.’
But just now, friend, we also understood Venerable Sāriputta’s statement in this way:
‘Heat stands dependent on life.’
How, friend, should the meaning of this statement be seen?”
“Then, friend, I will make a simile for you;
for some wise people here understand the meaning of a statement by means of a simile.
Just as, friend, when an oil-lamp is burning, radiance is discerned dependent on the flame, and the flame is discerned dependent on the radiance;
so too, friend, life stands dependent on heat, and heat stands dependent on life.”
“Friend, are life-saṅkhāras these very dhammas that are to be felt, or are life-saṅkhāras one thing and dhammas that are to be felt another?”
“Friend, life-saṅkhāras are not those very dhammas that are to be felt.
For if life-saṅkhāras were those very dhammas that are to be felt, then the emergence of a bhikkhu who has entered the cessation of saññā and what is felt would not be discerned.
But because, friend, life-saṅkhāras are one thing and dhammas that are to be felt another, therefore the emergence of a bhikkhu who has entered the cessation of saññā and what is felt is discerned.”
“Friend, when how many dhammas leave this body, does this body then lie abandoned, cast aside, like a senseless log?”
“Friend, when three dhammas leave this body—life, heat, and viññāṇa—then this body lies abandoned, cast aside, like a senseless log.”
“Friend, what is the difference between one who is dead, passed away, and this bhikkhu who has entered the cessation of saññā and vedanā?”
“Friend, for one who is dead, passed away, his bodily saṅkhāras have ceased and subsided, his verbal saṅkhāras have ceased and subsided, his mental saṅkhāras have ceased and subsided, his life is exhausted, his heat has subsided, and his indriyas are completely broken up.
For this bhikkhu who has entered the cessation of saññā and vedanā, his bodily saṅkhāras too have ceased and subsided, his verbal saṅkhāras have ceased and subsided, and his mental saṅkhāras have ceased and subsided; but his life is not exhausted, his heat has not subsided, and his indriyas are bright.
This, friend, is the difference between one who is dead, passed away, and this bhikkhu who has entered the cessation of saññā and vedanā.”
“But, friend, how many conditions are there for the attainment of the liberation of citta that is neither-dukkha-nor-sukha?”
“There are four conditions, friend, for the attainment of the liberation of citta that is neither-dukkha-nor-sukha.
Here, friend, with the abandoning of sukha and the abandoning of dukkha, and with the previous passing away of gladness and dejection, a bhikkhu enters and dwells in the fourth jhāna, which is neither-dukkha-nor-sukha, with purity of sati due to upekkhā.
These, friend, are the four conditions for the attainment of the liberation of citta that is neither-dukkha-nor-sukha.”
“But, friend, how many conditions are there for the attainment of the signless liberation of citta?”
“There are two conditions, friend, for the attainment of the signless liberation of citta—
non-attention to all nimittas, and attention to the signless element.
These, friend, are the two conditions for the attainment of the signless liberation of citta.”
“But, friend, how many conditions are there for the stability of the signless liberation of citta?”
“There are three conditions, friend, for the stability of the signless liberation of citta—
non-attention to all nimittas, attention to the signless element, and prior preparation.
These, friend, are the three conditions for the stability of the signless liberation of citta.”
“But, friend, how many conditions are there for emerging from the signless liberation of citta?”
“There are two conditions, friend, for emerging from the signless liberation of citta—
attention to all nimittas, and non-attention to the signless element.
These, friend, are the two conditions for emerging from the signless liberation of citta.”
“Friend, as to this measureless liberation of citta, the liberation of citta through nothingness, the liberation of citta through emptiness, and the signless liberation of citta—are these dhammas different in meaning and different in phrasing, or are they the same in meaning, differing only in phrasing?”
“Friend, as to this measureless liberation of citta, the liberation of citta through nothingness, the liberation of citta through emptiness, and the signless liberation of citta—there is, friend, a method by which these dhammas are different in meaning and different in phrasing;
and there is, friend, a method by which these dhammas are the same in meaning, differing only in phrasing.
And what, friend, is the method by which these dhammas are different in meaning and different in phrasing?
Here, friend, a bhikkhu dwells pervading one direction with a citta accompanied by mettā, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth. Thus above, below, across, everywhere, to all as to himself, he dwells pervading the whole world with a citta accompanied by mettā, abundant, exalted, measureless, without hostility, without ill will.
With a citta accompanied by karuṇā …
with a citta accompanied by muditā …
he dwells pervading one direction with a citta accompanied by upekkhā, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth. Thus above, below, across, everywhere, to all as to himself, he dwells pervading the whole world with a citta accompanied by upekkhā, abundant, exalted, measureless, without hostility, without ill will.
This, friend, is called the measureless liberation of citta.
And what, friend, is the liberation of citta through nothingness?
Here, friend, with the complete surmounting of the dimension of infinite viññāṇa [viññāṇañcāyatanaṁ], a bhikkhu enters and dwells in the dimension of nothingness [ākiñcaññāyatanaṁ], aware that ‘there is nothing.’
This, friend, is called the liberation of citta through nothingness.
And what, friend, is the liberation of citta through emptiness?
Here, friend, having gone to the wilderness, or to the root of a tree, or to an empty hut, a bhikkhu reflects thus:
‘This is empty of self or of what belongs to self.’
This, friend, is called the liberation of citta through emptiness.
And what, friend, is the signless liberation of citta?
Here, friend, through non-attention to all nimittas, a bhikkhu enters and dwells in signless samādhi of citta.
This, friend, is called the signless liberation of citta.
This, friend, is the method by which these dhammas are different in meaning and different in phrasing.
And what, friend, is the method by which these dhammas are the same in meaning, differing only in phrasing?
Lust, friend, is a maker of measure; hatred is a maker of measure; delusion is a maker of measure.
For a bhikkhu with āsavas destroyed [khīṇāsavassa], these are abandoned, cut off at the root, made like a palm stump, made non-existent, and not liable to arise in the future.
Among measureless liberations of citta, friend, the unshakable liberation of citta is declared the foremost of them.
And that unshakable liberation of citta is empty of lust, empty of hatred, empty of delusion.
Lust, friend, is something; hatred is something; delusion is something.
For a bhikkhu with āsavas destroyed [khīṇāsavassa], these are abandoned, cut off at the root, made like a palm stump, made non-existent, and not liable to arise in the future.
Among liberations of citta through nothingness, friend, the unshakable liberation of citta is declared the foremost of them.
And that unshakable liberation of citta is empty of lust, empty of hatred, empty of delusion.
Lust, friend, is a maker of nimitta; hatred is a maker of nimitta; delusion is a maker of nimitta.
For a bhikkhu with āsavas destroyed [khīṇāsavassa], these are abandoned, cut off at the root, made like a palm stump, made non-existent, and not liable to arise in the future.
Among signless liberations of citta, friend, the unshakable liberation of citta is declared the foremost of them.
And that unshakable liberation of citta is empty of lust, empty of hatred, empty of delusion.
This, friend, is the method by which these dhammas are the same in meaning, differing only in phrasing.”
This is what Venerable Sāriputta said.
Satisfied, Venerable Mahākoṭṭhika delighted in Venerable Sāriputta’s statement.
The Great Series of Questions and Answers is finished, the third.