“Monks, I have known two qualities through experience: discontent with regard to skillful qualities1 and unrelenting exertion. Relentlessly I exerted myself, (thinking,) ‘Gladly would I let the flesh & blood in my body dry up, leaving just the skin, tendons, & bones, but if I have not attained what can be reached through manly firmness, manly persistence, manly striving, there will be no relaxing my persistence.’ From this heedfulness of mine was attained awakening. From this heedfulness of mine was attained the unexcelled freedom from bondage.
“You, too, monks, should relentlessly exert yourselves, (thinking,) ‘Gladly would we let the flesh & blood in our bodies dry up, leaving just the skin, tendons, & bones, but if we have not attained what can be reached through manly firmness, manly persistence, manly striving, there will be no relaxing our persistence.’ You, too, in no long time will enter & remain in the supreme goal of the holy life for which clansmen rightly go forth from home into homelessness, directly knowing & realizing it for yourselves in the here & now.
“Thus you should train yourselves: ‘We will relentlessly exert ourselves, (thinking,) “Gladly would we let the flesh & blood in our bodies dry up, leaving just the skin, tendons, & bones, but if we have not attained what can be reached through manly firmness, manly persistence, manly striving, there will be no relaxing our persistence.”’ That’s how you should train yourselves.”
Note
1. In other words, not allowing oneself to rest content merely with the skillful qualities developed on the path. In the Buddha’s biography, this point is illustrated by his refusal to rest content with the formless absorptions he mastered under his first two teachers. See MN 36. Contentment, of course, is a virtue on the path, but as AN 4:28 shows, it is a quality to be developed around the material requisites of life. As this discourse shows, it is not to be applies to mental qualities. MN 2 makes a similar point: One should endure pains and harsh words, but should not endure the presence of unskillful states in the mind.
See also: MN 29–30; MN 70; SN 35:97; SN 55:40; AN 4:178; AN 5:77—80; AN 5:180; AN 6:20; AN 6:60; AN 10:51
“Monks, these two bright qualities guard the world. Which two? Shame & compunction. If these two bright qualities did not guard the world, there would be no recognition of ‘mother’ here, no recognition of ‘mother’s sister,’ ‘uncle’s wife,’ ‘teacher’s wife,’ or ‘wives of those who deserve respect.’ The world would be immersed in promiscuity, like rams with goats, roosters with pigs, or dogs with jackals. But because these two bright qualities guard the world, there is recognition of ‘mother,’ ‘mother’s sister,’ ‘uncle’s wife,’ ‘teacher’s wife,’ & ‘wives of those who deserve respect.’”
See also: AN 6:45; AN 7:6; Iti 34; Iti 40; Iti 42
Then Ven. Ānanda went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, the Blessed One said to him, “I say categorically, Ānanda, that bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, & mental misconduct should not be done.”
“Given that the Blessed One has declared, lord, that bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, & mental misconduct should not be done, what drawbacks can one expect when doing what should not be done?”
“Given that I have declared, Ānanda, that bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, & mental misconduct should not be done, these are the drawbacks one can expect when doing what should not be done: One can fault oneself; observant people, on close examination, criticize one; one’s bad reputation gets spread about; one dies confused; and—on the break-up of the body, after death—one reappears in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell. Given that I have declared, Ānanda, that bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, & mental misconduct should not be done, these are the drawbacks one can expect when doing what should not be done.
“I say categorically, Ānanda, that good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, & good mental conduct should be done.”
“Given that the Blessed One has declared, lord, that good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, & good mental conduct should be done, what rewards can one expect when doing what should be done?”
“Given that I have declared, Ānanda, that good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, & good mental conduct should be done, these are the rewards one can expect when doing what should be done: One doesn’t fault oneself; observant people, on close examination, praise one; one’s good reputation gets spread about; one dies unconfused; and—on the break-up of the body, after death—one reappears in a good destination, a heavenly world. Given that I have declared, Ānanda, that good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, & good mental conduct should be done, these are the rewards one can expect when doing what should be done.”
See also: DN 9; AN 11:16
“Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, ‘Abandon what is unskillful.’ But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, ‘Abandon what is unskillful.’ If this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, ‘Abandon what is unskillful.’ But because this abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, ‘Abandon what is unskillful.’
“Develop what is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is skillful, I would not say to you, ‘Develop what is skillful.’ But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to you, ‘Develop what is skillful.’ If this development of what is skillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, ‘Develop what is skillful.’ But because this development of what is skillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, ‘Develop what is skillful.’”
See also: SN 22:2; Iti 39
“Monks, these two are fools. Which two? The one who doesn’t see his transgression as a transgression, and the one who doesn’t rightfully pardon another who has confessed his transgression. These two are fools.
“These two are wise people. Which two? The one who sees his transgression as a transgression, and the one who rightfully pardons another who has confessed his transgression. These two are wise people.”
See also: DN 2; MN 140; AN 2:99; AN 4:159
“Monks, these two slander the Tathāgata. Which two? He who explains what was not said or spoken by the Tathāgata as said or spoken by the Tathāgata. And he who explains what was said or spoken by the Tathāgata as not said or spoken by the Tathāgata. These are the two who slander the Tathāgata.”
See also: MN 22; MN 38
“Monks, these two slander the Tathāgata. Which two? He who explains a discourse whose meaning needs to be inferred as one whose meaning has already been fully drawn out. And he who explains a discourse whose meaning has already been fully drawn out as one whose meaning needs to be inferred. These are the two who slander the Tathāgata.”
“These two qualities have a share in clear knowing. Which two? Tranquility [samatha] & insight [vipassanā].
“When tranquility is developed, what purpose does it serve? The mind is developed. And when the mind is developed, what purpose does it serve? Passion is abandoned.
“When insight is developed, what purpose does it serve? Discernment is developed. And when discernment is developed, what purpose does it serve? Ignorance is abandoned.”
See also: MN 149; SN 35:204; AN 4:94; AN 4:170; AN 10:71,
“Defiled by passion, the mind is not released. Defiled by ignorance, discernment does not develop. Thus from the fading of passion is there awareness-release. From the fading of ignorance is there discernment-release.”
See also: DN 15; SN 12:70; SN 20:4–5; AN 9:43—45
“Monks, I will teach you the level of a person of no integrity and the level of a person of integrity. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak.”
“As you say, lord,” the monks responded to him.
The Blessed One said, “Now what is the level of a person of no integrity? A person of no integrity is ungrateful & unthankful. This ingratitude, this lack of thankfulness, is advocated by rude people. It is entirely on the level of people of no integrity. A person of integrity is grateful & thankful. This gratitude, this thankfulness, is advocated by civil people. It is entirely on the level of people of integrity.”
“I tell you, monks, there are two people who are not easy to repay. Which two?
Your mother & father. Even if you were to carry your mother on one shoulder & your father on the other shoulder for 100 years, and were to look after them by anointing, massaging, bathing, & rubbing their limbs, and they were to defecate & urinate right there [on your shoulders], you would not in that way pay or repay your parents. If you were to establish your mother & father in absolute sovereignty over this great earth, abounding in the seven treasures, you would not in that way pay or repay your parents. Why is that? Mother & father do much for their children. They care for them, they nourish them, they introduce them to this world. But anyone who rouses his unbelieving mother & father, settles & establishes them in conviction; rouses his unvirtuous mother & father, settles & establishes them in virtue; rouses his stingy mother & father, settles & establishes them in generosity; rouses his foolish mother & father, settles & establishes them in discernment: To this extent one pays & repays one’s mother & father.“
See also: MN 110; SN 7:14; AN 2:118; AN 4:32; AN 4:73; Iti 106
I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery. And on that occasion Ven. Sāriputta was staying near Sāvatthī in the Eastern Monastery, the palace of Migāra’s mother. There Ven. Sāriputta said to the monks, “Friend monks!”
“Yes, friend,” the monks responded to him.
Ven. Sāriputta said, “Friends, I will teach you about the individual interiorly fettered and the one exteriorly fettered. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak.”
“As you say, friend,” the monks responded to him.
Ven. Sāriputta said, “And which, friends, is the individual interiorly fettered? There is the case where a monk is virtuous. He dwells restrained in accordance with the Pāṭimokkha, consummate in his behavior & sphere of activity. He trains himself, having undertaken the training rules, seeing danger in the slightest fault. On the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in a certain deva-host. On falling from there, he is a returner, one who returns to this state.1 This is called an individual interiorly fettered, a returner, one who returns to this state.
“And which, friends, is the individual exteriorly fettered? There is the case where a monk is virtuous. He dwells restrained in accordance with the Pāṭimokkha, consummate in his behavior & sphere of activity. He trains himself, having undertaken the training rules, seeing danger in the slightest fault. He enters & remains in a certain awareness-release.2 On the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in a certain deva-host. On falling from there, he is a non-returner, one who does not return to this state.3 This is called an individual exteriorly fettered, a non-returner, one who does not return to this state.
“Further, there is the case where a monk is virtuous. He dwells restrained in accordance with the Pāṭimokkha, consummate in his behavior & sphere of activity. He trains himself, having undertaken the training rules, seeing danger in the slightest fault. He is one who practices for disenchantment toward, dispassion for, and the cessation of sensuality. He is one who practices for disenchantment toward, dispassion for, and the cessation of becomings. He is one who practices for the ending of craving. He is one who practices for the ending of greed. On the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in a certain deva-host. On falling from there, he is a non-returner, one who does not return to this state. This is called an individual exteriorly fettered, a non-returner, one who does not return to this state.”
Then many devas with their minds in tune [samacitta] went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, bowed down to him and stood to one side. As they were standing there, they said to the Blessed One, “Lord, Ven. Sāriputta is teaching the monks in the Eastern Monastery, the palace of Migāra’s mother, about the individual interiorly fettered and the one exteriorly fettered. The assembly is overjoyed. It would be good, lord, if the Blessed One went to Ven. Sāriputta out of kindness.”4
The Blessed One acquiesced through silence. Then—just as a strong man might extend his flexed arm or flex his extended arm—he disappeared from Jeta’s Grove and re-appeared in the Eastern Monastery, the palace of Migāra’s mother, right in front of Ven. Sāriputta. He sat down on a seat laid out. Ven. Sāriputta, bowing down to the Blessed One, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, the Blessed One said to him, “Just now, Sāriputta, many devas with their minds in tune went to me and, on arrival, bowed down to me and stood to one side. As they were standing there, they said to me, ‘Lord, Ven. Sāriputta is teaching the monks in the Eastern Monastery, the palace of Migāra’s mother, about the individual interiorly fettered and the one exteriorly fettered. The assembly is overjoyed. It would be good, lord, if the Blessed One went to Ven. Sāriputta out of kindness.’
“Those devas—whether they are ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, or sixty—can stand on an area the size of the tip of an awl and yet not disturb one another. If the thought should occur to you that ‘Those devas must have developed their minds there (in their heaven) so that—whether they are ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, or sixty—they can stand on an area the size of the tip of an awl and yet not disturb one another,’ it shouldn’t be seen in that way. It was right here5 that those devas developed their minds so that—whether they are ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, or sixty—they can stand on an area the size of the tip of an awl and yet not disturb one another.
“Thus, Sāriputta, you should train yourselves: ‘We will be peaceful in our (sense) faculties, peaceful in our minds.’ That’s how you should train yourselves. When you are peaceful in your faculties, peaceful in your minds, [think,] ‘Bodily action will be peaceful, verbal action will be peaceful, mental action will be peaceful, & we will render peaceful service to our fellows in the holy life’: That’s how you should train yourselves.
“Sāriputta, those members of other sects who don’t get to hear this Dhamma discourse are lost.”
Notes
1. This state = the human realm. According to the Commentary, “interior” here means sensual levels of becoming; “exterior” means form and formless levels of becoming. Alternatively, it says that “interior” denotes the five lower fetters, whereas “exterior” denotes the five higher fetters. It illustrates the idea that a person interiorly fettered can sojourn in the higher levels of becoming before returning to this state with an analogy: a calf fettered by a tether to a post inside a corral but whose tether is long enough for it to lie down for a while outside of the corral. Similarly, a person externally fettered who is currently alive in this state is like a calf tethered to a post outside of a corral but who is currently lying down in the corral.
2. A concentration attainment. See SN 42:8, SN 46:54, AN 2:30, AN 6:13, and AN 8:63.
3. This individual, after leaving that deva realm, will either be reborn in one of the Pure Abodes or will gain unbinding. See AN 3:88.
4. The Commentary states that there were many more devas present at Ven. Sāriputta’s talk than the ones who went to see the Buddha, and that many of the devas listening to the discourse attained noble attainments. In fact, the Commentary, groups this sutta with the Mahāsamaya Sutta (DN 20), the Cūḷarāhulovāda Sutta (MN 147), and the Maṅgala Sutta (Sn 2:4) as having been particularly fruitful in this regard. Of these suttas, however, only MN 147 states that devas reached a noble attainment while listening to it.
5. According to the Commentary, “here” can mean either here in the human realm or here in the Dhamma-Vinaya of a Buddha.
See also: MN 70; AN 3:85–87
On one occasion Ven. Mahā Kaccāna was staying at Varaṇā on the shore of Kaddama (Muddy) Lake. Then Ārāmadaṇḍa the brahman went to Ven. Mahā Kaccāna and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to Ven. Mahā Kaccāna, “What is the cause, Master Kaccāna, what is the reason, why noble warriors dispute with noble warriors, brahmans dispute with brahmans, and householders dispute with householders?”
“Brahman, it’s with relishing, possession, greed, bondage, & entrenchment in passion for sensuality as a cause that noble warriors dispute with noble warriors, brahmans dispute with brahmans, and householders dispute with householders.”
“And what is the cause, Master Kaccāna, what is the reason, why contemplatives dispute with contemplatives?”
“Brahman, it’s with relishing, possession, greed, bondage, & entrenchment in passion for views as a cause that contemplatives dispute with contemplatives.”
“And is there anyone in the world, Master Kaccāna, who has overcome both this relishing… entrenchment in passion for sensuality, and… this relishing… entrenchment in passion for views?”
“There is, brahman, someone in the world who has overcome both this relishing… entrenchment in passion for sensuality, and… this relishing… entrenchment in passion for views.”
“And who in the world, Master Kaccāna, has overcome both this relishing… entrenchment in passion for sensuality, and… this relishing… entrenchment in passion for views?”
“There is, brahman, in the eastern countryside, a city named Sāvatthī. There the Blessed One—the Worthy One, the Rightly Self-awakened One—is now dwelling. That Blessed One has overcome this relishing… entrenchment in passion for sensuality, and… this relishing… entrenchment in passion for views.”
When this was said, Ārāmadaṇḍa the brahman—getting up from his seat, arranging his robe over one shoulder, lowering his right knee to the ground, and raising his hands palm-to-palm over the heart—exclaimed three times: “Homage to the Blessed One, the Worthy One, the Rightly Self-awakened One! Homage to the Blessed One, the Worthy One, the Rightly Self-awakened One! Homage to the Blessed One, the Worthy One, the Rightly Self-awakened One! For that Blessed One is one who has overcome both this relishing, possession, greed, bondage, & entrenchment in passion for sensuality, and this relishing, possession, greed, bondage, & entrenchment in passion for views!
“Magnificent, Master Kaccāna! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has Master Kaccāna—through many lines of reasoning—made the Dhamma clear. I go to Master Gotama for refuge, to the Dhamma, & to the Saṅgha of monks. May Master Kaccāna remember me as a lay follower who has gone for refuge from this day forward, for life.”
See also: MN 13–14; MN 72; AN 10:93; Sn 4:3–5; Sn 4:8–13
On one occasion Ven. Mahā Kaccāna was staying near Madhura in the Gundā Forest. Then Kaṇḍarāyana the brahman went to Ven. Mahā Kaccāna and on arrival exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to Ven. Mahā Kaccāna, “I have heard it said, Master Kaccāna, that, ‘Kaccāna the contemplative does not raise his hands in respect to aged, venerable brahmans—advanced in years, come to the last stage of life—nor does he rise up to greet them, nor does he offer them a seat.’ Insofar as you don’t raise your hands in respect to aged, venerable brahmans—advanced in years, come to the last stage of life—nor rise up to greet them, nor offer them a seat, that is simply not right, Master Kaccāna.”
“Brahman, the Blessed One—the one who knows, the one who sees, worthy & rightly self-awakened—has declared the level of one who is venerable and the level of one who is a youngster. Even if one is venerable—80, 90, 100 years old—yet if one partakes of sensuality, lives in the midst of sensuality, burns with sensual fever, is chewed up by sensual thoughts, and is eager in the search for sensuality, then one is reckoned simply as a young fool, not an elder.
“But if one is a youngster, youthful—a black-haired young person endowed with the blessings of youth in the first stage of life—yet does not partake of sensuality, does not live in the midst of sensuality, does not burn with sensual fever, is not chewed up by sensual thoughts, and is not eager in the search for sensuality, then one is reckoned as a wise elder.”
When this was said, Kaṇḍarāyana the brahman rose up from his seat, arranged his cloak over one shoulder, and bowed down at the feet of the monks who were youngsters, (saying,) “You, sirs, are the venerable ones, standing on the level of those who are venerable. We are the youngsters, standing on the level of those who are youngsters.
“Magnificent, Master Kaccāna! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has Master Kaccāna—through many lines of reasoning—made the Dhamma clear. I go to Master Gotama for refuge, to the Dhamma, & to the Saṅgha of monks. May Master Kaccāna remember me as a lay follower who has gone for refuge from this day forward, for life.”
See also: SN 3:1; Dhp 260–261
“Monks, there are these two assemblies. Which two? The assembly trained in bombast and not in cross-questioning, and the assembly trained in cross-questioning and not in bombast.
“And which is the assembly trained in bombast and not in cross-questioning?
There is the case where in any assembly when the discourses of the Tathāgata—deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness—are recited, the monks don’t listen, don’t lend ear, don’t set their hearts on knowing them, don’t regard them as worth grasping or mastering. But when discourses that are literary works—the works of poets, artful in sound, artful in expression, the work of outsiders, words of disciples—are recited, they listen, they lend ear, they set their hearts on knowing them, they regard them as worth grasping & mastering. Yet when they have mastered that Dhamma, they don’t cross-question one another about it, don’t dissect: ‘How is this? What is the meaning of this?’ They don’t make open what isn’t open, don’t make plain what isn’t plain, don’t dispel doubt on its various doubtful points. This is called an assembly trained in bombast, not in cross-questioning.
“And which is the assembly trained in cross-questioning and not in bombast?
“There is the case where in any assembly when discourses that are literary works—the works of poets, artful in sound, artful in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples—are recited, the monks don’t listen, don’t lend ear, don’t set their hearts on knowing them; don’t regard them as worth grasping or mastering. But when the discourses of the Tathāgata—deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness—are recited, they listen, they lend ear, they set their hearts on knowing them, they regard them as worth grasping & mastering. And when they have mastered that Dhamma, they cross-question one another about it and dissect it: ‘How is this? What is the meaning of this?’ They make open what isn’t open, make plain what isn’t plain, dispel doubt on its various doubtful points. This is called an assembly trained in cross-questioning and not in bombast.”
See also: MN 146; AN 5:79; AN 6:51
“Monks, these two are fools. Which two? The one who takes up a burden that hasn’t fallen to him, and the one who doesn’t take up a burden that has. These two are fools.”
See also: AN 5:159
“Monks, these two people are hard to find in the world. Which two? The one who is first to do a kindness, and the one who is grateful for a kindness done and feels obligated to repay it. These two people are hard to find in the world.”
See also: AN 2:31—32; AN 4:32
“Monks, there are these two conditions for the arising of wrong view. Which two? The voice of another1 and inappropriate attention. These are the two conditions for the arising of wrong view.”
“Monks, there are these two conditions for the arising of right view. Which two? The voice of another and appropriate attention. These are the two conditions for the arising of right view.”
Note
1. The Commentary identifies “voice of another” (parato ghoso) as meaning, in the case of the first sutta, the voice of another person teaching what is not true Dhamma, and in the case of the second sutta, the voice of another person teaching true Dhamma.
However, Woodward’s translation for the PTS renders parato ghoso as “a voice from another world,” and in a footnote he interprets it as “clairaudience from another (world).” To summarize his reasoning: If ordinary speech were meant, the word vācā or vācī would have been used instead of ghoso; and if another person were meant, aññassa or aññatarassa would have been used instead of parato. Finally, he notes that this passage appears also in MN 43 following a statement of “abnormal powers,” which apparently is meant to show that, in context, this statement must refer to the type of psychic knowledge that derives from abnormal powers.
There are several problems with this interpretation, the first being that it leaves no room for an event happening many times in the Canon: people gaining right view simply on hearing the words of another person. One scholar has tried to get around this objection, saying that the voice from another world must refer to the voice of the Buddha or to one of the noble disciples who gained awakening on hearing the Buddha’s own voice. The implication here is that only the words of these two classes of people can inspire right view. This position, however, is disproved by the fact that in Mv.I.23.5 Ven. Sāriputta, who at that point has not yet met the Buddha, is able to inspire the arising of the Dhamma eye in Ven. Moggallāna. This passage appears in the long origin story leading up to the rules dealing with ordination, and makes an important point in validating the tradition of ordination: that a person who has not met the Buddha can still inspire right view and even awakening in the mind of another. So the Canon itself disproves both of these otherworldly interpretations of this statement.
As for Woodward’s linguistic arguments: It is hard for a non-native speaker of a dead language to know the reasoning in the mind of a native speaker in that language, but it might have been the case that the Buddha avoided the word aññassa for “other” because it could have easily been confused for another meaning of aññassa, “pertaining to the knowledge of an arahant.” As for vācī and aññatarassa, neither of them fits the context. Vācī is a stem-form used in compounds, and aññatarassa means “of a certain person.” This leaves vācā, “statement” as a possible alternative, but perhaps the Buddha chose ghoso to leave room for the possibility that there are times when one can bring another to his/her senses simply by clearing one’s throat.
Finally, concerning the passage from MN 43: This sutta is a long series of questions and answers that abruptly switch from topic to topic, so it’s hard to say that the sutta provides a clear sense of context for any of its statements. That said, however, it’s not even the case that this passage follows on a statement about abnormal powers. It actually follows on two questions about discernment, which in turn follow on a discussion of the formless jhānas—apparently the “abnormal powers” mentioned by Woodward—and as AN 9:36 and MN 140 show, it’s possible to develop discernment based on these attainments without psychic powers.