102. Chương 102: Kinh Năm và Ba – MN 102: The Five and Three – Song ngữ

Majjhima Nikaya – Middle-length Discourses of the Buddha

Trung Bộ Kinh

Anh ngữ: Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli      

Việt ngữ: Hòa thượng Thích Minh Châu

Compile: Lotus group

Part III – Majjhima Nikaya – Middle Length Discourses – Trung Bộ Kinh

Chương 102: Kinh Năm và Ba – MN 102: The Five and Three – (Pancattaya sutta)

 

  1. Thus have I heard:

[i] On one occasion the Blessed One was living at Savatthi in Jeta’s Grove, Anathapindika’s Park. There he addressed the bhikkhus thus: “Bhikkhus.” — “Venerable sir,” they replied. The Blessed One said this:

Như vầy tôi nghe.

Một thời Thế Tôn trú ở Savatthi, Jetavana (Kỳ-đà-lâm), tại tu viện ông Anathapindika. Ở đây, Thế Tôn gọi các Tỷ-kheo: “Này các Tỷ-kheo” -“Thưa vâng, bạch Thế Tôn”. Các vị Tỷ-kheo ấy vâng đáp Thế Tôn. Thế Tôn nói như sau: 

 

Speculation about the future

 

  1. “Bhikkhus, there are some recluses and Brahmins who speculate about the future and hold views about the future, who assert various doctrinal propositions concerning the future.

(I) Some assert thus: ‘The self is percipient and unimpaired[ii] after death.’

(II) Some assert thus: ‘The self is non-percipient and unimpaired after death.’

(III) Some assert thus: ‘The self is neither percipient nor non-percipient and unimpaired after death.’

(IV) Or they describe the annihilation, destruction, and extermination of an existing being [at death].

(V) Or some assert Nibbana here and now.

“Thus (a) they either describe an existing self that is unimpaired after death; (b) or they describe the annihilation, destruction, and extermination of an existing being [at death]; (c) or they assert Nibbana here and now. Thus these [views] being five become three, and being three become five. This is the summary of the ‘five and three.’

— Này các Tỷ-kheo, có một số Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn luận bàn về tương lai, thảo luận về tương lai, y cứ vào tương lai, tuyên bố nhiều quan điểm sai khác.

  1. Ở đây, một số tuyên bố: “Sau khi chết, tự ngã không bệnh, có tưởng”.
  2. Ở đây, một số tuyên bố: “Sau khi chết, tự ngã không bệnh, không tưởng”. III. Ở đây một số tuyên bố: “Sau khi chết, tự ngã không bệnh, phi tưởng và phi phi tưởng”.
  3. Hay họ chủ trương đoạn diệt hủy hoại, tiêu diệt của loài hữu tình hiện đang sanh tồn.
  4. Hay một số lại tuyên bố về hiện tại Niết-bàn. 

Như vậy, họ chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã tồn tại không bệnh. Hay họ chủ trương đoạn diệt, hủy hoại, tiêu diệt của loài hữu tình hiện đang sanh tồn. Hay một số lại tuyên bố hiện tại Niết-bàn. Như vậy, những chủ thuyết này, sau khi thành năm trở lại thành ba, sau khi thành ba, trở lại thành năm. Đây là sự tổng thuyết năm và ba.

 

  1. (I) “Therein, bhikkhus, those recluses and Brahmins [229] who describe the self as percipient and unimpaired after death describe such a self, percipient and unimpaired after death, to be either:

material;

or immaterial;

or both material and immaterial;

or neither material nor immaterial;

or percipient of unity;

or percipient of diversity;

or percipient of the limited;

or percipient of the immeasurable.[iii]

Or else, among those few who go beyond this, some assert the consciousness-kasina, immeasurable and imperturbable, [to be the self].[iv]

Ở đây, này các Tỷ-kheo, những vị Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn nào chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã có tưởng, không bệnh, các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy hoặc chủ trương sau khi chết tự ngã có sắc, có tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã hoặc không có sắc, có tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã hoặc có sắc và không sắc, có tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã hoặc không sắc và không không sắc, có tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương tự ngã hoặc nhất tưởng, có tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã hoặc dị tưởng, có tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương tự ngã sau khi chết hoặc thiểu tưởng, có tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã hoặc vô lượng tưởng, có tưởng, không bệnh.

Nhưng có một số tuyên bố thức biến này (vinnanakasina) khi vượt qua khỏi (upativattatam) trở thành vô lượng, bất động. 

 

  1. “The Tathagata, bhikkhus, understands this thus: ‘Those good recluses and Brahmins who describe the self as percipient and unimpaired after death describe such a self to be either material … or they describe it to be percipient of the immeasurable. Or else, [230] since the perception “there is nothing” is declared to be the purest, supreme, best, and unsurpassed of those perceptions – whether perceptions of form or of the formless, of the limited or the immeasurable[v] – some assert the base of nothingness, immeasurable and imperturbable, [to be the self]. That is conditioned and gross, but there is cessation of formations.’ Having known ‘There is this,’ seeing the escape from that, the Tathagata has gone beyond that.[vi]

Về vấn đề này, này các Tỷ-kheo, Như Lai biết như sau: “Những Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn nào chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã có tưởng, không bệnh, các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã hoặc có sắc, có tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã hoặc không có sắc, có tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết tự ngã hoặc có sắc và không sắc, có tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết tự ngã hoặc không sắc và không không sắc, có tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã hoặc nhứt tưởng, có tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã hoặc di tưởng, có tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã hoặc thiểu tưởng, có tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã hoặc vô lượng tưởng, có tưởng, không bệnh. Hay (Như Lai biết) loại tưởng nào trong các loại tưởng ấy được xưng là thanh tịnh, tối thắng, đệ nhất, vô thượng, tức là sắc tưởng, tức là vô sắc tưởng, tức là nhứt tưởng, tức là dị tưởng. Nói rằng: “vô sở hữu”, một số tuyên bố Vô sở hữu xứ là vô lượng, bất động. Biết rằng cái này thuộc hữu vi, là thô pháp, nhưng có sự đoạn diệt các hành, biết được có (sự đoạn diệt) này, Như Lai thấy sự giải thoát khỏi (pháp hữu vi) và đã vượt khỏi (pháp hữu vi)”.

 

  1. (II) “Therein, bhikkhus, those recluses and Brahmins who describe the self as non-percipient and unimpaired after death describe such a self, non-percipient and unimpaired after death, to be either:

material;

or immaterial;

or both material and immaterial;

or neither material nor immaterial.[vii]

Ở đây, này các Tỷ-kheo, những vị Sa-môn, Bà- la-môn nào chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã không tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã hoặc có sắc không tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã hoặc không sắc, không tưởng, không bệnh; các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết, tự ngã hoặc có sắc không sắc, không tưởng, không bệnh. Các Tôn giả Sa-môn, Bà-la-môn ấy chủ trương sau khi chết tự ngã hoặc cũng không sắc, không không sắc, không tưởng không bệnh. 

 

  1. “Therein, bhikkhus, these criticise those recluses and Brahmins who describe the self as percipient and unimpaired after death. Why is that? Because they say: ‘Perception is a disease, perception is a tumour, perception is a dart; this is peaceful, this is sublime, that is, non-perception.’
  2. “The Tathagata, bhikkhus, understands this thus: ‘Those good recluses and Brahmins who describe the self as non-percipient and unimpaired after death describe such a self, non-percipient and unimpaired after death, to be either material … or neither material nor immaterial. That any recluse or Brahmin could say:

“Apart from material form, apart from feeling, apart from perception, apart from formations, I shall describe the coming and going of consciousness, its passing away and re-appearance, its growth, increase, and maturation” – that is impossible.[viii] That is conditioned and gross, but there is [231] cessation of formations.’

Having known ‘There is this,’ seeing the escape from that, the Tathagata has gone beyond that.

  1. (III) “Therein, bhikkhus, those recluses and Brahmins who describe the self as neither percipient nor non-percipient and unimpaired after death describe such a self, neither percipient nor non-percipient and unimpaired after death, to be either: material;

or immaterial;

or both material and immaterial;

or neither material nor immaterial.[ix]

  1. “Therein, bhikkhus, these criticise those good recluses and Brahmins who describe the self as percipient and unimpaired after death, and they criticise those good recluses and Brahmins who describe the self as non-percipient and unimpaired after death. Why is that? Because they say: ‘Perception is a disease, perception is a tumour, perception is a dart, and non-perception is stupefaction;[x] this is peaceful, this is sublime, that is, neitherperception-nor-non-perception.’
  2. “The Tathagata, bhikkhus, understands this thus: ‘Those good recluses and Brahmins who describe the self as neither percipient nor non-percipient and unimpaired after death describe such a self, neither percipient nor non-percipient and unimpaired after death, to be either material … or neither material nor immaterial. If any recluses or Brahmins describe the entering upon this base to come about through a measure of formations regarding what is seen, heard, sensed, and cognized, that is declared to be a disaster for entering upon this base.[xi] [232] For this base, it is declared, is not to be attained as an attainment with formations; this base, it is declared, is to be attained as an attainment with a residue of formations.[xii] That is conditioned and gross, but there is cessation of formations.’ Having known ‘There is this,’ seeing the escape from that, the Tathagata has gone beyond that.
  3. (IV) “Therein, bhikkhus, those recluses and Brahmins who describe the annihilation, destruction, and extermination of an existing being [at death][xiii] criticise those good recluses and Brahmins who describe the self as percipient and unimpaired after death, and they criticise those good recluses and Brahmins who describe the self as non-percipient and unimpaired after death, and they criticise those good recluses and Brahmins who describe the self as neither percipient nor non-percipient and unimpaired after death. Why is that? All these good recluses and Brahmins, rushing onwards, assert their attachment thus: ‘We shall be thus after death, we shall be thus after death.’ Just as a merchant going to market thinks: ‘Through this, that will be mine; with this, I will get that’; so too, these good recluses and Brahmins seem like merchants when they declare: ‘We shall be thus after death, we shall be thus after death.’
  4. “The Tathagata, bhikkhus, understands this thus: ‘Those good recluses and Brahmins who describe the annihilation, destruction, and extermination of an existing being [at death], through fear of personality and disgust with personality, keep running and circling around that same personality.[xiv] Just as a dog bound by a leash tied to a firm post or pillar [233] keeps on running and circling around that same post or pillar; so too, these good recluses and Brahmins, through fear of personality and disgust with personality, keep running and circling around that same personality. That is conditioned and gross, but there is cessation of formations.’ Having known ‘There is this,’ seeing the escape from that, the Tathagata has gone beyond that.
  5. “Bhikkhus, any recluses or Brahmins who speculate about the future and hold views about the future, who assert various doctrinal propositions concerning the future, all assert these five bases or a certain one among them.[xv]

(SPECULATIONS ABOUT THE PAST)

  1. “Bhikkhus, there are some recluses and Brahmins who speculate about the past and hold views about the past, who assert various doctrinal propositions concerning the past.

(1) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world are eternal: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’[xvi]

(2) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world are not eternal: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’[xvii]

(3) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world are both eternal and not eternal: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’[xviii]

(4) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world are neither eternal nor not eternal: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’[xix]

(5) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world are finite: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’[xx]

(6) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world are infinite: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’

(7) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world are both finite and infinite: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’

(8) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world are neither finite nor infinite: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’

(9) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world are percipient of unity: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’[xxi]

(10) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world are percipient of diversity: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’

(11) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world are percipient of the limited: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’

(12) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world are percipient of the immeasurable: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’

(13) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world [experience] exclusively pleasure: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’

(14) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world [experience] exclusively pain: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’ [234]

(15) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world [experience] both pleasure and pain: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’

(16) Some assert thus: ‘The self and the world [experience] neither pleasure nor pain: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’

  1. (1) “Therein, bhikkhus, as to those recluses and Brahmins who hold such a doctrine and view as this: ‘The self and the world are eternal: only this is true, anything else is wrong,’ that apart from faith, apart from approval, apart from oral tradition, apart from reasoned cogitation, apart from reflective acceptance of a view, they will have any pure and clear personal knowledge of this – that is impossible.[xxii] Since they have no pure and clear personal knowledge, even the mere fragmentary knowledge that those good recluses and Brahmins clarify [about their view] is declared to be clinging on their part.[xxiii] That is conditioned and gross, but there is cessation of formations. Having known ‘There is this,’ seeing the escape from that, the Tathagata has gone beyond that.
  2. (2-16) “Therein, bhikkhus, as to those recluses and Brahmins who hold such a doctrine and view as this: ‘The self and the world are not eternal … both eternal and not eternal.. .neither eternal nor not eternal … finite … infinite … both finite and infinite … neither finite nor infinite … percipient of unity … percipient of diversity … percipient of the limited … percipient of the immeasurable … [experience] exclusively pleasure … [experience] exclusively pain … [experience] both pleasure and pain … [experience] neither pleasure nor pain: only this is true, anything else is wrong,’ that apart from faith, apart from approval, apart from oral tradition, apart from reasoned cogitation, apart from reflective acceptance of a view, they will have any pure and clear personal knowledge of this – that is impossible. [235] Since they have no pure and clear personal knowledge, even the mere fragmentary knowledge that those good recluses and Brahmins clarify [about their view] is declared to be clinging on their part. That is conditioned and gross, but there is cessation of formations. Having known ‘There is this,’ seeing the escape from that, the Tathagata has gone beyond that.[xxiv]

(NIBBANA HERE AND NOW)[xxv]

  1. (V) “Here, bhikkhus,[xxvi] some recluse or Brahmin, with the relinquishing of views about the past and the future and through complete lack of resolve upon the fetters of sensual pleasure, enters upon and abides in the rapture of seclusion.[xxvii] He thinks: ‘This is the peaceful, this is the sublime, that I enter upon and abide in the rapture of seclusion.’ That rapture of seclusion ceases in him. With the cessation of the rapture of seclusion, grief arises, and with the cessation of grief, the rapture of seclusion arises.[xxviii] Just as the sunlight pervades the area that the shadow leaves, and the shadow pervades the area that the sunlight leaves, so too, with the cessation of the rapture of seclusion, grief arises, and with the cessation of grief, the rapture of seclusion arises.
  2. “The Tathagata, bhikkhus, understands this thus: ‘This good recluse or Brahmin, with the relinquishing of views about the past and the future … and with the cessation of grief, the rapture of seclusion arises. That is conditioned and gross, but there is cessation of formations.’ Having known ‘There is this,’ seeing the escape from that, the Tathagata has gone beyond that.
  3. “Here, bhikkhus, some recluse or Brahmin, with the relinquishing of views about the past and the future, through complete lack of resolve upon the fetters of sensual pleasure, and with the surmounting of the rapture of seclusion, enters upon and abides in unworldly pleasure.[xxix] He thinks: ‘This is the peaceful, this is the sublime, that I enter upon and abide in unworldly pleasure.’ That unworldly pleasure ceases in him. With the cessation of unworldly pleasure, the rapture of seclusion arises, and with the cessation of the rapture of seclusion, unworldly pleasure arises. [236] Just as the sunlight pervades the area that the shadow leaves, and the shadow pervades the area that the sunlight leaves, so too, with the cessation of unworldly pleasure, the rapture of seclusion arises and with the cessation of the rapture of seclusion, unworldly pleasure arises.
  4. “The Tathagata, bhikkhus, understands this thus: ‘This good recluse or Brahmin, with the relinquishing of views about the past and the future … and with the cessation of the rapture of seclusion, unworldly pleasure arises. That is conditioned and gross, but there is cessation of formations.’ Having known ‘There is this,’ seeing the escape from that, the Tathagata has gone beyond that.
  5. “Here, bhikkhus, some recluse or Brahmin, with the relinquishing of views about the past and the future, through complete lack of resolve upon the fetters of sensual pleasure, and with the surmounting of the rapture of seclusion and unworldly pleasure, enters upon and abides in neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling.[xxx] He thinks: ‘This is the peaceful, this is the sublime, that I enter upon and abide in neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling.’ That neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling ceases in him. With the cessation of neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, unworldly pleasure arises, and with the cessation of unworldly pleasure, neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling arises. Just as the sunlight pervades the area that the shadow leaves, and the shadow pervades the area that the sunlight leaves, so too, with the cessation of neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, unworldly pleasure arises, and with the cessation of unworldly pleasure, neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling arises.
  6. “The Tathagata, bhikkhus, understands this thus: ‘This good recluse or Brahmin, with the relinquishing of views about the past and the future … [237] … and with the cessation of unworldly pleasure, neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling arises. That is conditioned and gross, but there is cessation of formations.’ Having known ‘There is this,’ seeing the escape from that, the Tathagata has gone beyond that.
  7. “Here, bhikkhus, some recluse or Brahmin, with the relinquishing of views about the past and the future, through complete lack of resolve upon the fetters of sensual pleasure, and with the surmounting of the rapture of seclusion, unworldly pleasure, and neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, regards himself thus: ‘I am at peace, I have attained Nibbana, I am without clinging.’[xxxi]
  8. “The Tathagata, bhikkhus, understands this thus: ‘This good recluse or Brahmin, with the relinquishing of views about the past and the future … regards himself thus: “I am at peace, I have attained Nibbana, I am without clinging.” Certainly this venerable one asserts the way directed to Nibbana. Yet this good recluse or Brahmin still clings, clinging either to a view about the past or to a view about the future or to a fetter of sensual pleasure or to the rapture of seclusion or to unworldly pleasure or to neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. And when this venerable one regards himself thus: “I am at peace, I have attained Nibbana, I am without clinging,” that too is declared to be clinging on the part of this good recluse or Brahmin.[xxxii] That is conditioned and gross, but there is cessation of formations.’ Having understood ‘There is this,’ seeing the escape from that, the Tathagata has gone beyond that.
  9. “Bhikkhus, this supreme state of sublime peace has been discovered by the Tathagata, that is, liberation through not clinging,[xxxiii] by understanding as they actually are the origination, the disappearance, the gratification, the danger, and the escape in the case of the six bases of contact. Bhikkhus, that is the supreme state of sublime peace discovered by the Tathagata, [238], that is, liberation through not clinging, by understanding as they actually are the origination, the disappearance, the gratification, the danger, and the escape in the case of the six bases of contact.”[xxxiv]

That is what the Blessed One said. The bhikkhus were satisfied and delighted in the Blessed One’s words.

 

Sources:

Tài liệu tham khảo:

  1. http://thuvienhoasen.org/p15a890/70-kinh-kitagiri-kitagiri-sutta
  2. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/
  3. http://lirs.ru/lib/sutra/The_Middle_Length_Discourses(Majjhima_Nikaya),

Nanamoli, Bodhi, 1995.pdf

 

102. Pancattaya Sutta – The Five and Three

[i] This sutta is a “middle length” counterpart of the longer Brahmajala Sutta, included in the Digha Nikaya and published in translation with its commentaries in Bodhi, Discourse on the All-Embracing Net of Views. Detailed explanations for almost all the views mentioned in this sutta will be found in the Introduction and Part Two of that work.

[ii] Aroga, “healthy,” explained by MA as meaning permanent.

[iii] In the Brahmajala Sutta sixteen varieties of this view are mentioned, the eight given here and two other tetrads: the self as finite, infinite, both, and neither; and the self as experiencing exclusively pleasure, exclusively pain, a mixture of both, and neither. In the present sutta these two tetrads are incorporated under speculations about the past in §14.

[iv] Evidently, in the above list the views of the self as immaterial, percipient of unity, and percipient of the immeasurable are based on attainment of the base of infinite space. MT explains the consciousness-kasina as the base of infinite consciousness, stating that these theorists declare that base to be the self.

[v] The perception within the third immaterial meditation – the base of nothingness – is the subtlest and most refined of all mundane perceptions. Although there is still a kind of perception in the fourth immaterial attainment, it is so subtle that it is considered no longer appropriate to designate it perception.

[vi] MA paraphrases thus: “All those types of perceptions together with the views are conditioned, and because they are conditioned, they are gross. But there is Nibbana, called the cessation of formations, that is, of the conditioned. Having known ‘There is this,’ that there is Nibbana, seeing the escape from the conditioned, the Tathagata has gone beyond the conditioned.”

[vii] The second tetrad of §3 is dropped here since the self is conceived as non-percipient. In the Brahmajala Sutta eight varieties of this view are mentioned, these four plus the finite-infinite tetrad.

[viii] MA points out that this statement is made with reference to those planes of existence where all five aggregates exist. In the immaterial planes consciousness occurs without the aggregate of material form, and in the nonpercipient plane there is material form without consciousness. But consciousness never occurs without the three other mental aggregates.

[ix] The Brahmajala Sutta mentions eight varieties of this view, these four plus the finite-infinite tetrad.

[x] Sammoha, here obviously having a different meaning than the usual “confusion” or “delusion.”

[xi] MA explains the compound ditthasutamutavinnatabba as meaning “what is to be cognized as the seen, heard, and sensed” and takes it to refer to sense-door cognitions. However, it can also comprise all grosser mind-door cognitions as well. To enter the fourth immaterial attainment, all the ordinary “mental formations” involved in other cognitive processes must be overcome, for their persistence is an obstacle to entering this attainment. Hence it is called “not percipient” (n’eva sanni).

[xii] Sasankharavasesasamapatti. Within the fourth immaterial attainment a residue of extremely subtle mental formations remains. Hence it is called “not non-percipient” (nasanni).

[xiii] The Brahmajala explains seven types of annihilationism, here all collected together as one.

[xiv] The “fear and disgust with personality” is an aspect of vibhavatanha, the craving for non-existence. The annihilationist view to which it gives rise still involves an identification of personality with self – a self that is annihilated at death – and thus, despite his denial, it binds the theorist to the round of existence.

[xv] So far only four of the original five classes of speculations about the future have been analysed, yet the Buddha speaks as if they were all explicated. MA tries to resolve the problem by explaining that assertions of “Nibbana here and now” were comprised by the terms “percipient of unity” and “percipient of diversity” in §3. This explanation, however, is not convincing. Nm, in Ms, had added the heading “Nibbana Here and Now” over §17, and §§17-21 do seem to correspond with the last four of the five doctrines of Nibbana here and now in the Brahmajala. However, this interpretation seems contradicted by §13 and by the phrase used in §17, §19 and §21, “with the relinquishing of views about the past and the future,” which would exclude the doctrines of Nibbana here and now. The problem seems insoluble, and raises the question whether a passage on Nibbana here and now was not lost in the course of the sutta’s oral transmission. In the Brahmajala the five doctrines are the assertion of sensual pleasures and the four jhanas to be the self’s attainment of supreme Nibbana here and now.

[xvi] This view includes all four of the eternalists who speculate about the past mentioned in the Brahmajala.

[xvii] Since this is a view referring to the past, it may be taken to imply that the self and the world arose spontaneously out of nothing at some point in the past. Thus it would comprise the two doctrines of fortuitous origination of the Brahmajala, as MA maintains.

[xviii] This includes the four types of partial eternalism.

[xix] This may include the four types of endless equivocation or “eel-wriggling” of the Brahmajala.

[xx] Views 5-8 correspond exactly to the four extensionists of the Brahmajala.

[xxi] The eight views (9-16) are, in the Brahmajala, included among the doctrines of percipient immortality comprised under speculations about the future.

[xxii] That is, they must accept their doctrine on some ground other than knowledge, one involving belief or reasoning. At MN 95.14, it is said that these five grounds of conviction yield conclusions that can turn out to be either true or false.

[xxiii] MA: That is not really knowledge but wrong understanding; thus it is declared to be clinging to views.

[xxiv] MA says that at this point all sixty-two of the views set forth in the Brahmajala Sutta have been incorporated, yet this sutta has an even wider range since it includes an exposition of personality view (most notably implied by §24).

[xxv] This section title, and the following Roman numeral “V”, were inserted by Nm on the supposition that this passage presents the doctrines of Nibbana here and now, mentioned but not explicated earlier. However, as pointed out in n.949, while the text of this passage lends some support to that supposition, there are also cogent reasons against it. Unfortunately, Ms contains no note by Nm dealing with the problem of sequence in this sutta.

[xxvi] MA: This section is intended to show how all sixty-two speculative views arise predominated over by personality view.

[xxvii] Pavivekath patith. This refers to the first two jhanas, which include piti.

[xxviii] MA explains that this is the grief caused by the loss of the jhana. The grief does not arise immediately upon the cessation of the jhana, but only after reflection upon its disappearance.

[xxix] Niramisam sukham. This is the pleasure of the third jhana.

[xxx] The fourth jhana.

[xxxi] Santo’ham asmi, nibbuto’ham asmi, anupadano’ham asmi. In the Pali the expression aham asmi, “I am,” reveals that he is still involved with clinging, as the Buddha will point out.

[xxxii] MA takes this to be an allusion to personality view. Thus he is still clinging to a view.

[xxxiii] MA states that elsewhere the expression “liberation through not clinging” (anupada vimokkha) signifies Nibbana, but here it means the attainment of the fruit of arahantship.

[xxxiv] The Brahmajala Sutta too points to the understanding of the origination, etc., of the six bases of contact as the way to transcend all views.