中阿含經 義疏通講Madhyama Āgama · Exposition Throughout

“If a bhikṣu accomplishes seven dharmas, he attains joy and happiness among the worthy and noble, and is rightly bound for the ending of outflows.” The five discourses of this fascicle, from the first, the Discourse on Good Dharmas, to the fifth, the Discourse on the Simile of the Woodpile, are the first fascicle of the Chapter on Sevens. The chapter title marks itself as “Chapter on Sevens of the Madhyama Āgama, the First,” with the notes “ten discourses” and “first-day recitation,” and the names of its ten discourses are listed in the summary verse: “Good Dharmas, the Pārijāta Tree, the City, Water, the Simile of the Woodpile / Where the Good Person Goes, the Blessings of the World, the Sun, the Chariot, the Ending of Outflows—seven.” This fascicle holds the first five. In all five the World-Honored One addresses the bhikṣus; in the first three he speaks alone, and in the last two he questions and the bhikṣus answer. The five discourses bear five names, but they speak of one thing: one who accomplishes seven dharmas is a noble disciple, and what the noble disciple is bound for is only the ending of outflows. The first discourse names the seven dharmas; the second, with the seven stages of the pārijāta tree, tells the noble disciple’s course from leaving home to the ending of outflows; the third, with the seven requisites and four provisions of a royal city, tells the seven good dharmas and the four higher states of mind; the fourth, with the seven persons likened to water, tells the course from one who always lies submerged to the brāhmaṇa standing on the bank; the fifth, with seven torments, warns the ascetic who loses the ascetic’s way. The first four tell the stages of accomplishment; the fifth tells the fruit of failing to accomplish. The Chapter on Sevens takes its name from seven, but its meaning lies in the two words “rightly bound.”

I. The Seven Dharmas and Knowing the Superior and Inferior among Persons (Discourse 1)

The seven dharmas are “knowing the Dharma, knowing the meaning, knowing the time, knowing moderation, knowing oneself, knowing the assembly, and knowing the superior and inferior among persons.” The discourse treats each item three ways: what it is to know, what it is not to know, what it is to know well; six items have all three forms, and only knowing the superior and inferior among persons runs long on its own, without the forms of not knowing and knowing well. Knowing the Dharma is knowing the twelve divisions of the teaching, “the discourses, the songs, the expositions, the verses, the causes, the compilations, the origins, the sayings, the birth stories, the detailed explanations, the marvelous dharmas, and the statement of their meaning”; knowing the meaning is “knowing of each saying that its meaning is this meaning or that meaning”; knowing the time is knowing “when it is time to cultivate the lower sign, when the higher sign, when the sign of equanimity”; knowing moderation is, in drinking and eating, going and staying, sitting and lying, speaking and keeping silent, and relieving oneself, “to dispel sleep and cultivate right knowledge”; knowing oneself is “to know of oneself: I have this much faith, precepts, learning, giving, wisdom, eloquence, āgama, and attainment”; knowing the assembly is knowing the four assemblies of kṣatriyas, brāhmaṇas, householders, and ascetics, “in that assembly I should go thus, stay thus, sit thus, speak thus, keep silent thus.” Of the six items, the first two know the Dharma and the meaning that are learned; the next two know the time of cultivation and the moderation of the body; the last two know oneself and the assembly. Dharma, meaning, time, moderation, self, assembly: from outside inward and from inside outward, what a bhikṣu ought to know is exhausted here.

Knowing the superior and inferior among persons is not so. The discourse divides by “two kinds of persons,” layer upon layer: “knowing that there are two kinds of persons, those with faith and those without; one with faith is superior, one without faith is inferior.” Those with faith divide again into those who often go to see the bhikṣus and those who do not; those who often go divide into those who pay respect and those who do not; those who pay respect divide into those who ask about the discourses and those who do not; those who ask divide into those who listen single-mindedly and those who do not; those who listen single-mindedly divide into those who retain what they hear and those who do not; those who retain divide into those who contemplate the meaning of what they hear and those who do not; those who contemplate the meaning divide into those who “know the Dharma, know the meaning, go toward the Dharma and what accords with it, follow the Dharma, and practice according to the Dharma” and those who do not; those who practice according to the Dharma divide into those who “benefit themselves and benefit others, benefit the many, pity the world, and seek the good and benefit of gods and humans, seeking peace and happiness” and those who do not. Nine layers of division, and at every layer the superior is taken and divided again, never the inferior; at the ninth layer, “this person among those persons is the very first, the greatest, the highest, the utmost, the superior, the most honored, the most wonderful,” and the discourse gives the simile of the cow’s milk: “from the cow comes milk, from milk comes curd, from curd comes fresh butter, from fresh butter comes ripened butter, from ripened butter comes the essence of butter, and the essence of butter is the very first among them.” Milk, curd, butter, and the essence of butter are not five things set side by side; they are one thing refined layer by layer. So too, the superior and inferior among persons are not nine kinds of persons set side by side; they are one person ascending layer by layer: with faith one goes to see; having gone to see, one pays respect; having paid respect, one asks; having asked, one listens; having listened, one retains; having retained, one contemplates the meaning; having contemplated the meaning, one practices according to the Dharma; practicing according to the Dharma, one benefits oneself and others alike. The “knowing” in knowing the superior and inferior among persons does tell the superior from the inferior, as the discourse plainly does; and since at every layer the superior is taken and divided again, what is known is this one road of ascent. This item has no forms of not knowing and knowing well precisely because what it says is already the whole of the stages. The last of the seven dharmas is in fact what the first six are bound for.

II. The Seven Stages of the Pārijāta Tree (Discourse 2)

The pārijāta tree of the gods of the Thirty-Three passes through seven stages, from “the leaves turning yellow” to “fully in bloom”; at the start of each of the first six stages “the gods of the Thirty-Three are glad and rejoice,” because they know what is about to come, and at the seventh, when it is fully in bloom, they “gather and amuse themselves beneath the pārijāta tree.” The noble disciple too has seven stages: “when he thinks of leaving home, the noble disciple is then called ‘leaves yellowing’”; “when he shaves off hair and beard, puts on the dyed robe, and with faith leaves home, goes forth from home, and trains in the way, the noble disciple is then called ‘leaves fallen’”; attaining the first dhyāna he is called “leaves growing again,” the second dhyāna “the web forming,” the third dhyāna “like a bird’s beak,” the fourth dhyāna “like a bowl”; and when “his outflows are ended, his mind is liberated and he is liberated by wisdom, and in this very life he knows and realizes for himself and dwells having attained realization,” he is called “fully in bloom.” Of the tree’s seven stages, the first two are the leaves going and the last five the flower coming; of the noble disciple’s seven stages, the first two are leaving home and the last five are the four dhyānas and the ending of outflows. If the leaves do not yellow and fall, the flower does not come; if one does not think of leaving home and does not leave home, the dhyānas are not attained. The four dhyānas are each given in their fixed formula: the first dhyāna, “secluded from desire, secluded from evil and unwholesome dharmas, with initial and sustained thought, with the joy and happiness born of seclusion”; the second, “initial and sustained thought stilled, inwardly calm, the mind unified, without initial and sustained thought, with the joy and happiness born of concentration”; the third, “secluded from joy and desire, dwelling in equanimity without seeking, with right mindfulness and right knowledge, experiencing happiness with the body, that which the noble ones call noble equanimity, mindfulness, happy dwelling, and emptiness”; the fourth, “happiness ceased and pain ceased, joy and sorrow already ceased at their root, neither painful nor pleasant, with equanimity, mindfulness, and purity.” These four formulas appear in three sets in this fascicle: one in the second discourse, and in the third discourse one for the four higher states of mind and one in the matching with the four provisions, with small differences of wording. After the ending of outflows, the gods of the Thirty-Three “gather in the Hall of Good Dharma and praise in acclamation,” saying that “such a venerable disciple of such a village has shaved off hair and beard” up to “knows it as it really is.” The gods’ joy is at the tree in full bloom; the gods’ acclamation is at the disciple’s ending of outflows; “this is called the gathering of the arhats whose outflows are ended.” The discourse likens what the noble disciple accomplishes to what the gods delight in, and what is accomplished the gods themselves praise. The meaning of the seven stages lies not in the tree but in the gods’ foreknowledge of what is about to come: once the noble disciple thinks of leaving home, the six stages that follow can be expected.

III. Not Broken by an Outside Enemy (Discourse 3)

“As a king’s border city with seven requisites complete and four provisions plentiful, easily obtained and not hard to get, is therefore not broken by an outside enemy, except only by its own ruin from within.” The seven requisites are the watchtowers, the moat, the roads around, the four kinds of troops, the weapons, the great general at the gate, and the high wall; the four provisions are water, grass, and firewood; rice and grain and stored barley; many beans and beans large and small; and butter, oil, honey, up to dried meat. “So too, if a noble disciple obtains the seven good dharmas and reaches the four higher states of mind, easily and without difficulty, then the noble disciple is not taken advantage of by King Māra, does not follow evil and unwholesome dharmas, is not stained by defilement, and does not take birth again.” The seven good dharmas are faith, shame, scruple, effort, learning, mindfulness, and wisdom; the four higher states of mind are the four dhyānas. The discourse first tells the royal city separately, then the noble disciple separately, and then matches them one by one: faith is the watchtower, “deeply attached to the Tathāgata, the faculty of faith established, never following outside ascetics and brāhmaṇas, nor gods, Māra, Brahmā, or the rest of the world”; shame is the moat, “able to feel shame, knowing shame, at evil and unwholesome dharmas, defilements, and afflictions”; scruple is the level road, “able to feel scruple, knowing scruple,” at the same; effort is the troops; learning is the weapons, and what is learned is “good in the beginning, good in the middle, good in the end, with meaning and with wording, complete and pure, revealing the holy life”; mindfulness is the great general at the gate, “what was long practiced and long heard, constantly remembered and not forgotten”; wisdom is the wall, “contemplating the dharma of rise and decline, gaining such knowledge, noble wisdom clear and penetrating, discerning and understanding, to bring suffering rightly to an end.” Each of the seven good dharmas closes with “removing evil and unwholesome dharmas and cultivating good dharmas”: the seven requisites are all for defense, and defense is removing evil and cultivating good. The four dhyānas are the four provisions, matched one by one: the first dhyāna is the water, grass, and firewood; the second the rice and grain and stored barley; the third the many beans and beans large and small; the fourth the butter, oil, and honey, up to dried meat. Each dhyāna closes with “dwelling in happiness without lack, at peace and at ease, bringing oneself to nirvāṇa”, the first three occurrences with a closing final particle and the fourth without: the four provisions are all for nourishment, and nourishment is bringing oneself to nirvāṇa. The seven good dharmas defend against what is outside; the four higher states of mind nourish what is within. The simile of the royal city turns on the one phrase “except only by its own ruin from within”: with the seven requisites and four provisions complete, no outside enemy can break it, and the only thing to fear is its own ruin from within. When the noble disciple obtains the seven good dharmas and reaches the four higher states of mind, Māra gains no advantage, and the only thing to fear is his own following of evil and unwholesome dharmas. This discourse tells why the seven dharmas should be accomplished: when they are accomplished, nothing outside can ruin him.

IV. The Seven Persons Likened to Water (Discourse 4)

The World-Honored One first speaks of “seven persons in water,” then of “seven persons likened to water,” and then the bhikṣus request: “The World-Honored One is the root of the Dharma, the World-Honored One is the master of the Dharma, the Dharma comes from the World-Honored One; may he please speak it.” Then the World-Honored One distinguishes its meaning. One who always lies submerged in water is “covered over by unwholesome dharmas, stained by defilement, receiving the fruit of evil dharmas, making the root of birth and death”; one who comes out and sinks again has gained “faith in good dharmas, keeping the precepts, giving, learning, and wisdom” and afterward loses them; one who comes out and stays has gained them and holds them “firm and does not lose them”; one who stays and then looks, within the good dharmas, “knows suffering as it really is, knows the arising of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the path to the cessation of suffering as they really are,” the three bonds are ended, he attains stream-entry, “receiving at most seven existences; after seven comings and goings among gods and humans, he reaches the end of suffering”; one who looks and then crosses has ended the three bonds and “lust, anger, and delusion are thinned, and he attains one more coming among gods and humans”; one who crosses and reaches the far bank has ended the five lower bonds, “is born in that other place and there attains final nirvāṇa, gaining the dharma of no falling back, not returning to this world”; one who reaches the far bank and is the brāhmaṇa standing on the bank has “the mind liberated from the outflow of desire, the mind liberated from the outflow of existence and the outflow of ignorance.” The seven persons differ in three places: in gaining or losing faith in good dharmas, in whether or not they look at the four truths, and in how many bonds are ended. The one always submerged has no faith; the one who comes out and sinks again has faith and loses it; the one who comes out and stays has faith and does not lose it, but has not yet looked; from the one who stays and looks onward, all four look at the four truths, and they differ only in how many bonds are ended—the three bonds, the three bonds with the three poisons thinned, the five lower bonds, all the outflows. The seven stages of the second discourse are divided by leaving home and the four dhyānas; the seven persons of this discourse are divided by faith, the four truths, and the bonds. Both are seven, but what is taken is not the same. In the second discourse every stage is a noble disciple; in this discourse the first three persons are not yet noble disciples, and only from the fourth does one enter the noble. One who has faith in good dharmas but does not look at the four truths, though he has come out of the water and stays, is still on this side of the bank. Each person closes with “in the truth of the world it is so”: the seven kinds of persons really exist in the world; this is not merely a simile set up.

V. Rather Embrace the Woodpile (Discourse 5)

On the road the World-Honored One sees “a great woodpile, blazing through and through,” leaves the road, sits down, and asks the bhikṣus seven questions. To embrace the woodpile or to embrace a kṣatriya girl—“which is happier?” The bhikṣus answer: to embrace the woodpile is “very painful,” to embrace the girl is “very happy.” The World-Honored One says: “I tell you this so that you who train as ascetics do not lose the ascetic’s way. One who wishes to accomplish the unsurpassed holy life would rather embrace a woodpile blazing through and through, sitting or lying on it; though because of it he suffers or dies, he does not on that account, when the body breaks up and life ends, go to a bad destination and be born in hell.” But one who breaks the precepts and is not diligent, who “not living the holy life claims the holy life, not being an ascetic claims to be an ascetic,” for “a long night is unwholesome and unprofitable, receives the fruit of evil dharmas, and when the body breaks up and life ends goes to a bad destination and is born in hell.” The seven rounds share one form: a hair rope twisted tight against receiving massage, a sharp knife cutting the thigh against receiving homage, a sheet of iron wrapped around the body against receiving robes, an iron ball in the mouth against receiving food, an iron bed against receiving bedding, an iron cauldron against receiving a dwelling. What the first round sets against is a girl in the prime of life and adorned; what the second round onward set against are all what an ascetic receives as gifts of faith from “kṣatriyas, brāhmaṇas, householders, and craftsmen”: massage, homage, robes, food, bedding, dwellings—not one is other than a gift of faith. The bhikṣus are not wrong to answer “very happy”: the happiness of gifts of faith is real happiness. The World-Honored One is not wrong to say “rather”: to lose the ascetic’s way and receive gifts of faith has its fruit in hell. The comparison of pain and happiness lies not in one moment of this life but in “contemplating one’s own good, contemplating the other’s good, contemplating the good of both”: one’s own good is one’s leaving home, the other’s good is the donor’s merit, the good of both is both obtained. So every round closes with the same thought: “My leaving home to train is not in vain and not empty; it has fruit and has result; there is the utmost peace and happiness, birth in good places and long life, receiving from people the gifts of faith of robes and bedding, food and drink, beds and couches, and medicines, so that the donors gain great blessing, great fruit, and great radiance.” When leaving home is not in vain, the donor’s merit is not in vain; when an ascetic loses the way, he falls himself and misleads the donor besides. The first four discourses tell what one who accomplishes the seven dharmas gains; this discourse tells what one who fails loses. When this teaching was spoken, “sixty bhikṣus ended their outflows and loosened their bonds, and sixty bhikṣus gave up the precepts and returned home.” The discourse records the reason itself: “the World-Honored One’s instruction is very deep and very hard, and training in the way is likewise very deep and very hard.” One teaching and two fruits: those who loosened the bonds loosened them, and those who returned home returned. The discourse does not conceal the latter, nor does it speak of their fruit; what a reader may take from it is this: rather return home than “not being an ascetic claim to be an ascetic.”

VI. How to Read the Fascicle

The Chapter on Sevens takes its name from seven, and each of the five discourses of this fascicle has its own seven: seven dharmas; seven stages; seven requisites and four provisions with seven good dharmas and four higher states of mind; seven persons in water; seven rounds. In reading this fascicle one should not seek correspondences in the number seven; what the five discourses count by seven is different in each. What should be looked at is how each discourse uses seven to tell one thing: the first, with seven dharmas, tells what a bhikṣu ought to know, and its last item, knowing the superior and inferior among persons, is a sequence of stages in itself; the second, with seven stages, tells the course from leaving home to the ending of outflows; the third, with seven requisites and four provisions, tells defense and nourishment; the fourth, with seven persons, tells the order of faith, the four truths, and the ending of bonds; the fifth, with seven rounds, tells the fruit of losing the way. Four discourses tell advance and one tells retreat; and between advance and retreat what is at stake is the same one thing, being “rightly bound for the ending of outflows.” The fifth discourse set at the end of the fascicle, with sixty bhikṣus ending their outflows and sixty returning home, is the fascicle’s close: accomplishing the seven dharmas is not easy, and those who do not accomplish them also have a road they ought to take—rather retreat than be false. A reader who enters by the seven dharmas of the first discourse and comes out by the one thought of the fifth has the way to read this fascicle.

Carrying Forward — The Names of the Four Āgamas

This fascicle is the first fascicle of this edition. The base text is the Madhyama Āgama in sixty fascicles translated by Gautama Saṅghadeva, the Tripiṭaka master of Kaśmīra, under the Eastern Jin; the edition follows the base text’s fascicles as units and its chapters as sections; the Chapter on Sevens is the first section, and this fascicle is its first. The treatise collection has no item-by-item gloss of this scripture. What can be carried forward is only the treatise’s own heading: the Compendium of Topics, in its section on the discourses, says, “The discourses as a topic are the four Āgamas: first the Saṃyukta Āgama, second the Madhyama Āgama, third the Dīrgha Āgama, fourth the Ekottarika Āgama,” and of the Madhyama Āgama it explains only the name: “Again, it speaks by way of the remaining characteristics placed in the middle; therefore it is called the Madhyama Āgama.” The treatise names it by ‘placed in the middle’ and does not explain the scripture by topics; the meaning of this fascicle’s five discourses is only what the discourses themselves say, and the commentary sets up no matching term from the treatise. What this edition holds begins with the Chapter on Sevens and proceeds fascicle by fascicle, the chapters it covers growing as they appear; each fascicle’s commentary carries forward its own fascicle and does not speak ahead of what follows.

“Friend, it is for the sake of nirvāṇa without remainder”. The five discourses of this fascicle, from the sixth, the Discourse on Where the Good Person Goes, to the tenth, the Discourse on the Ending of Outflows, are the last fascicle of the Chapter on Sevens; the chapter title at the end of the fascicle marks itself “Chapter on Sevens of the Madhyama Āgama, the First, ends [sixteen thousand and forty-three characters] [first-day recitation]”, and the ten discourses of the chapter are here complete. Of the five, the sixth, eighth, and tenth are the World-Honored One addressing the bhikṣus; in the seventh the venerable Mahācunda asks and the World-Honored One answers; in the ninth the World-Honored One asks the bhikṣus of the native land only two things, where they have come from and who is praised, and the discussion of the meaning is between the venerable Śāriputra and the venerable Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra. The five bear different names, yet what they say is one thing: the sixth tells where the seven good persons go, ending in nirvāṇa without remainder; the seventh tells of blessings that cannot be measured; the eighth tells that all formations are impermanent, and only one who has seen the truths can believe it; the ninth uses seven chariots to speak of seven purities, whose only destination is nirvāṇa without remainder; the tenth tells of the seven ways outflows are cut off, and closes with “all outflows ended and every bond undone”. The five discourses of the previous fascicle speak of accomplishing the seven dharmas; the five of this fascicle speak of where one who has accomplished them goes: to what place, by what means, and by what he knows his going.

I. Where the Seven Good Persons Go (Discourse 6)

The World-Honored One addressed the bhikṣus: “I shall tell you where the seven good persons go and of nirvāṇa without remainder”. The seven persons share one practice: “As for me, there is no self, nor anything belonging to a self; in the future there will be no self, nor anything belonging to a self; what has come to be is cut off, and what is cut off is relinquished; there is happiness without being stained, and there is coming together without clinging”; they share one seeing: “seen by the wisdom of the unsurpassed stilling of traces, yet not yet realized”; and they share one cutting off: “a little conceit not yet ended, the five lower bonds already cut off”. What differs is only where they go: the first, second, and third persons attain final nirvāṇa in the interval; the fourth attains final nirvāṇa on rebirth; the fifth attains final nirvāṇa with effort; the sixth attains final nirvāṇa without effort; and the seventh “attains final nirvāṇa going upstream to Akaniṣṭha”. Seven persons, seven similes: the first person is “like burning bran, which goes out as soon as it catches”; the second to the seventh share one piece of iron as their simile, “It is as when iron is heated until it blazes through and through, and struck with a hammer, sparks fly up into the air,” and the places where the spark goes out are six—going out as soon as it rises; going out on the way down before reaching the ground; falling to the ground and going out; falling on a little grass or wood, burning, and going out; falling on much grass or wood, burning it all up, and going out; burning, and then burning villages, cities, hills, forests, and open country, “going out when it reaches a road, reaches water, or reaches level ground”. The iron is one, and the sparks fall in different places; the practice is one, and the persons go to different places. All seven have cut off the five lower bonds, and none has yet realized; what separates them is only the “little conceit not yet ended”—the little conceit, and how soon it ends. Beyond the seven, nirvāṇa without remainder is spoken of separately: the practice is the same as the seven’s, but it is “seen by the wisdom of the unsurpassed stilling of traces, and already realized”; “he does not go east, nor west, south, north, to the four intermediate directions, up, or down, but in this very life his traces are stilled and he is extinguished”. The seven each have somewhere to go; this one has nowhere to go. Where the seven go has a direction; this one stills his traces in this very life. The discourse is titled where the good person goes, and what it comes home to is no going—the seven places are listed precisely to show this eighth, who is not listed among the seven. The closing phrase for each person is “in the truth of the world it is so”: the seven persons really exist; they are not merely a set of numbers.

II. Blessings That Cannot Be Measured (Discourse 7)

The venerable Mahācunda asked: “World-Honored One, can blessings of the world be set forth?” The World-Honored One answered that they can: “there are seven blessings of the world, by which one gains great good fortune, great fruit, great fame, and great merit”: giving the community of bhikṣus dwellings and halls, giving beds and seats and bedding, giving new, clean, fine robes, regularly giving morning gruel and the midday meal, “and further providing park attendants to serve at command,” and in wind, rain, cold, and snow going in person to the park to give more, so that the community of bhikṣus “is not troubled by wind, rain, cold, or snow soaking their robes, and by day and by night dwells at ease in the stillness of meditation”—“Cunda, this is called the seventh blessing of the world”. In the base text, between the third and the seventh there is no text for the fourth, fifth, and sixth; the discourse is as it is, and nothing is supplied. One who has gained these seven blessings, “whether going or coming, whether standing or sitting, whether asleep or awake, whether by day or by night, his blessings are always arising, ever increasing and ever widening”, “just as the waters of the Gaṅgā flow out from their source and enter the great ocean, and along the way grow ever deeper and ever wider”. Cunda asked again about blessings beyond the world, and the World-Honored One again spoke of seven: hearing that the Tathāgata or a disciple of the Tathāgata is traveling in some place and rejoicing; hearing that he wishes to come from there to here and rejoicing; hearing that he has arrived and rejoicing, going in person to see him, and “taking the threefold refuge in the Buddha, the Dharma, and the community of bhikṣus, and receiving the precepts”—“Cunda, this is called the seventh blessing beyond the world”; here too only the first, second, and seventh are listed. What the blessings of the world give is things; what the blessings beyond the world arise from is the mind: hearing and rejoicing, seeing and paying homage, taking refuge and receiving the precepts. The one kind of blessing arises and follows the person; the two kinds together cannot be counted. The discourse uses five rivers as its simile: “the first is the Gaṅgā, the second the Yamunā, the third the Sarayū, the fourth the Airāvatī, the fifth the Mahī; they flow into the great ocean, and along the way their water cannot be counted”. The one river Gaṅgā is a simile for the ever-increasing blessings of the world; the five rivers entering the ocean are a simile for the two blessings together being beyond measure. The measure of blessing lies not in the things given but in its always arising and being without limit. The World-Honored One then spoke a verse, from “The river Gaṅgā, clear and easy to cross” to “like the river’s water, led into the great ocean”, eight lines: the giver is like a river, “a measureless reward of blessing, bringing one to a wonderful place,” the blessing like the ocean, with a place it reaches. In this fascicle only this discourse speaks of the blessings of the householder, and only this discourse speaks of giving; its place, after the seven good persons’ going and before the seven suns’ impermanence, is worth considering.

III. Seven Suns Rising (Discourse 8)

“All formations are impermanent, not lasting, quick to change, not to be relied upon; such formations should not be delighted in; one should be weary of them, seek to let them go, and seek release”. This sentence stands once at the head of the discourse as its general statement, and each of the seven sections that follow closes with “therefore all formations are impermanent”, eight occurrences in all; and each section brings forward one event as its proof: at a time of no rain, trees, grains, and medicinal plants wither; when a second sun rises, ditches and streams dry up; a third sun, and the great rivers dry up; a fourth sun, and the five great springs dry up; a fifth sun, and the water of the great ocean falls, measured first in yojanas, “the water of the great ocean falls by one hundred yojanas, and falling further, by up to seven hundred yojanas,” then in palm trees, then in the height of a man, each measure stated first as what is lost and then as what remains, until it comes to the body, “the ocean’s water falling to the neck, to the shoulders, to the waist, to the hips, to the knees, to the ankles, until at a time the ocean’s water is gone and does not cover a finger”; a sixth sun, and the great earth and Sumeru, king of mountains, give off smoke, “as when a potter first lights his kiln and smoke rises everywhere”; a seventh sun, and “the whole great earth and Sumeru, king of mountains, blaze through and through, and become a single flame”, “the wind drives the flame up to the Brahmā heaven”. Seven sections are not seven suns: the first section is no rain, and only from the second is a second sun spoken of; the discourse counts by seven without making up a “first sun,” for what it speaks of is the gradual course of destruction, from grass and trees to the great ocean to Sumeru. When the destruction reaches the Brahmā heaven, the newly born among the gods of Radiant Light are afraid, and those born earlier comfort them: “Do not be afraid; the law of fire stops there and never reaches here”. Sumeru, king of mountains, “crumbles, breaks apart, and is destroyed entirely”; of the great earth “there remain no ashes or embers,” “as when butter-oil is burned, boiled away until nothing is left, with no smoke or soot remaining”. The World-Honored One then asks himself: “I have now told you that Sumeru, king of mountains, will crumble and be destroyed entirely. Who can believe it? Only those who have seen the truths”—that the great ocean will dry up and the great earth will burn can be believed only by one who has seen the truths. One who can believe in Sumeru’s destruction is not one who has seen Sumeru destroyed, but one who has seen the truths; one who has seen the truths knows the impermanence of all formations without waiting for their destruction. The discourse then proves it with a birth story: of old there was a great teacher, Good Eye, “honored as teacher by the sages of other paths, who had left behind desire and craving and attained the bases of supernormal power”; he taught his disciples the dharma of the Brahmā world, and those disciples who practiced it were born in the Brahmā heaven, while those who did not fully practice it were born in the six heavens of desire; Good Eye thought, “I should not go to the next life together with my disciples and be born in the same place as they; I had better cultivate higher loving-kindness”, and having cultivated it was born in the Heaven of Radiant Light. “Do you think it was someone else? Do not think so; know that it was I”. The World-Honored One says of himself that at that time he “walked this path in person, for his own benefit and for the benefit of others,” yet “the Dharma I taught did not reach the ultimate, was not ultimately pure, was not the ultimate holy life”, and “I was not free of birth, old age, sickness, death, weeping, and sorrow, nor yet able to be freed from all suffering”; now, having appeared in the world as “the Tathāgata, the Unattached, the Rightly and Fully Awakened, Accomplished in Knowledge and Conduct, the Well-Gone One, the Knower of the World, the Unsurpassed One, the Trainer by the Dharma of the Path, the Teacher of Gods and Humans, called the Buddha, the Blessed One,” “the Dharma I teach reaches the ultimate, is ultimately pure, is the ultimate holy life”, and “I have been freed from all suffering”. What Good Eye cultivated was higher loving-kindness, and where he arrived was the Heaven of Radiant Light—the fire of the seven suns goes “up to the Brahmā heaven” and stops, and the gods of Radiant Light themselves say “the law of fire stops there and never reaches here”; the place the fire does not reach is still among the formations. What the birth story proves is this: birth in the Brahmā heaven and birth among the Radiant Light are neither of them ultimate; the ultimate is only to be freed from all suffering. One who has seen the truths can believe in Sumeru’s destruction, and can also believe that the Brahmā heaven is not ultimate.

IV. Seven Purities, Seven Chariots (Discourse 9)

In this discourse the World-Honored One does not teach the meaning of the Dharma. Bhikṣus from the native land come to the World-Honored One, and the World-Honored One first asks, “Bhikṣus, where have you come from? Where did you spend the rains?” and then asks who in their native land is praised by the assembly, from “himself of few wishes and contented, and commending few wishes and contentment” to “himself encouraging aspiration and bringing about joy, and commending the encouraging of aspiration and the bringing about of joy”, with the six in between—seclusion, effort, right mindfulness, one-pointedness, wisdom, and the ending of outflows—in the same form, eight things practiced in himself and commended in others; the bhikṣus answer with Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra. Śāriputra, seated there, hears it and thinks, “When shall I be able to meet with the friend Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra and ask him a little about the meaning?” Later both come to Śrāvastī, both come to the Andha Grove, and Śāriputra goes in the afternoon to ask. He asks, “Do you live the holy life under the ascetic Gautama?”, and the answer is yes; he asks whether it is for the sake of purity of precepts, and the answer is “No”; he asks whether it is for the sake of purity of mind, purity of view, purity from the hindrance of doubt, purity of knowledge and vision of what is the path and what is not, purity of knowledge and vision of the path’s track, or purity of the knowledge of cutting off on the path’s track, and the answer is no. “Then for what reason do you live the holy life under the ascetic Gautama?” He answered: “Friend, it is for the sake of nirvāṇa without remainder”. Śāriputra then asks by the seven purities again whether the ascetic Gautama sets forth nirvāṇa without remainder, and Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra again answers no; Śāriputra asks his meaning, and Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra then says: “If it were for the sake of purity of precepts that the World-Honored One, the ascetic Gautama, set forth nirvāṇa without remainder, then he would be calling what has remainder ‘without remainder’”, and so for the other six purities; “if apart from these dharmas the World-Honored One set forth nirvāṇa without remainder, then the ordinary person too would attain final nirvāṇa, since the ordinary person too is apart from these dharmas”. The seven purities are not nirvāṇa without remainder, and apart from the seven purities there is no nirvāṇa without remainder either; “but by purity of precepts one gains purity of mind, and by purity of mind one gains purity of view”, and so on up to “by purity of the knowledge of cutting off on the path’s track the World-Honored One, the ascetic Gautama, sets forth nirvāṇa without remainder”. Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra then tells of the seven chariots: King Prasenajit, from Śrāvastī to Sāketa, “had seven chariots stationed along the way”, “reaching the first chariot he mounted the first chariot; reaching the second chariot he left the first chariot and mounted the second chariot”, and so on to the seventh chariot, and “within a single day he reached Sāketa”. The ministers asked the king: did you reach it in one day by riding the first chariot? The king said no; by riding the second chariot, up to the seventh? The king said no—the king answered: seven chariots were stationed, and riding one and leaving one, he arrived within a day. No one of the seven chariots can reach it, yet without the seven chariots one does not reach it; no one of the seven purities is nirvāṇa, yet without the seven purities one does not attain nirvāṇa. The phrase “calling what has remainder ‘without remainder’” is the eye of this discourse: the seven purities all have remainder, and to take what has remainder for what is without remainder is to mistake the chariot for the place one is going. The questions and answers over, the two ask each other’s names: “My name is Pūrṇa; my mother’s name is Maitrāyaṇī, and so those who live the holy life call me Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra”; “My name is Upatiṣya; my mother’s name is Śārī, and so those who live the holy life call me Śāriputra”. Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra then knows that the one he has been discoursing with is “the second honored one,” “the General of the Dharma,” “the one who turns the wheel of the Dharma again as a disciple,” and says of himself, “had I known it was the venerable Śāriputra, I could not have answered a single sentence”; and the two “commended each other and praised each other’s goodness, rejoiced and practiced accordingly, rose from their seats, and each returned to his own place”. The questioner does not give his name first, and the answerer does not ask it—the Dharma is in the words, not in the names; and once the names are known, Śāriputra praises Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra as “wise in debate, intelligent and decisive, at peace and without fear, accomplished in self-mastery, having reached great eloquence,” those who live the holy life “gain a great benefit in meeting the friend Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra,” and “should carry the friend Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra on their heads wrapped in their robes”; and what each praises in the other is the same phrase: “has gained the banner of the deathless, and in the realm of the deathless has himself realized, attained, and dwells”. This discourse has no closing “Thus spoke the Buddha”; in it the World-Honored One asks only where they have come from and who is praised, and teaches no dharma; and the substance of that praise is in one session of discourse in the Andha Grove.

V. Outflows Cut Off in Seven Ways (Discourse 10)

“It is by knowing and by seeing that the outflows are ended, not by not knowing and not seeing”. What is known and seen? “There is right reflection and wrong reflection”: with wrong reflection, “the outflow of desire not yet arisen arises, and once arisen it increases and widens; the outflow of existence and the outflow of ignorance not yet arisen arise, and once arisen they increase and widen”, and with right reflection the reverse. The ordinary, foolish person “does not get to hear the right Dharma, does not meet true friends, does not know the noble Dharma, is not disciplined in the noble Dharma, and does not know the Dharma as it really is”, and so “thinks of what should not be thought of, and does not think of what should be thought of”; the learned noble disciple is the reverse. The arising and ceasing of the three outflows hangs on whether reflection is right or wrong; whether reflection is right or wrong hangs on whether one knows the Dharma as it really is; knowing the Dharma as it really is hangs on hearing the right Dharma and meeting true friends—the root of ending outflows is in knowing and seeing, and the root of knowing and seeing is in what one hears and whom one meets. Then the seven ways of cutting off are taught: “there are outflows cut off by seeing, outflows cut off by guarding, outflows cut off by avoiding, outflows cut off by using, outflows cut off by enduring, outflows cut off by removing, and outflows cut off by reflection”. Cutting off by seeing: the ordinary person, reflecting wrongly, raises doubts about his own self in the past and the future, and “among the six views, a view arises according to his thinking”—there is a self, there is no self, the self sees the self, the self sees what is not the self, what is not the self sees the self, this is the self that can speak and know—“this is called the ruin of views, being moved by views, bound by the bond of views,” and “because of this the ordinary, foolish person undergoes the suffering of birth, old age, sickness, and death”; the noble disciple “knows suffering as it really is, knows the arising of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the path to the cessation of suffering as they really are”, and “the three bonds are ended; with the three bonds of the view of the body, clinging to precepts, and doubt ended, he attains stream-entry,” “does not fall into evil states, is certainly bound for right awakening, and undergoing at most seven existences, going back and forth seven times among gods and humans, reaches the end of suffering”. Cutting off by guarding is guarding the six faculties: “when the eye sees a form, one guards the eye faculty by rightly reflecting on the contemplation of the impure”. Cutting off by avoiding is avoiding wild elephants and wild horses, up to cliffs, and avoiding bad friends, bad companions, bad teachers of other paths, bad neighborhoods, and bad dwellings, where what is avoided is the place in which “one who had no doubt is made to doubt”. Cutting off by using is using robes, food, dwellings, and medicines “not for gain and not out of pride”, but against gnats, wind, rain, cold, and heat, so that the body may last long, so that weariness may be relieved, and so that illness and affliction may be removed. Cutting off by enduring is “with effort cutting off evil and unwholesome things and cultivating good dharmas,” “not giving up effort until what is sought is gained, and only then letting effort rest,” enduring hunger, thirst, cold, heat, harsh words and blows, and the pains of sickness. Cutting off by removing is removing, wherever “a thought of desire arises and is not removed, cut off, and let go, a thought of hatred or a thought of harming arises and is not removed, cut off, and let go”. Cutting off by reflection is “reflecting on the first awakening factor, mindfulness, dependent on seclusion, dependent on dispassion, dependent on cessation”, “rising toward deliverance, then the awakening factors of investigation of dharmas, effort, joy, tranquility, and concentration, and reflecting on the seventh awakening factor, equanimity,” the factor of equanimity too “tending toward deliverance”. The closing phrase of each of the seven sections has one form: if not so, “afflictions and sorrow arise,” and if so, they do not arise—what the seven ways cut off, the discourse names “outflows, afflictions, and sorrow.” Among the seven, cutting off by seeing comes first; what it cuts off is the three bonds, and what it attains is stream-entry; the other six—guarding, avoiding, using, enduring, removing, and reflection—are the practice of daily life. It opens by establishing cutting off on knowing and seeing, and closes with reflection on the seven awakening factors; and “if a bhikṣu has outflows to be cut off by seeing, he cuts them off by seeing”, each by its own way of cutting off—“this is called a bhikṣu with all outflows ended and every bond undone, who by right knowledge reaches the end of suffering”. The first discourse of the previous fascicle speaks of being rightly bound for the ending of outflows; the last discourse of this fascicle speaks of how outflows come to be ended: by knowing and by seeing, and each cut off by the way proper to it.

VI. How to Read the Fascicle

Each of the five discourses of this fascicle has its seven: seven good persons, seven blessings of the world and seven beyond the world, seven suns, seven purities and seven chariots, seven ways of cutting off. The sevens of the previous fascicle speak of accomplishment; the sevens of this fascicle speak of where one goes and by what means. The sixth discourse says there are seven places to go, all ending in nirvāṇa without remainder; the ninth says there are seven means, whose only destination is nirvāṇa without remainder—the fascicle answers itself from beginning to end, both coming home to nirvāṇa without remainder, while none of the sevens is nirvāṇa without remainder: none of the seven good persons has yet realized, and all seven purities have remainder. The seventh discourse says blessings cannot be measured, and the eighth says formations are impermanent; the two stand opposite each other: blessings always arise and ever increase, formations do not last and are quick to change. Blessings cannot be measured precisely because they always arise; formations should be wearied of precisely because they change. The tenth discourse closes it all with knowing and seeing: where one goes, by what means, and what one believes, none is apart from knowing and seeing. In reading this fascicle, see how each discourse speaks of one thing by seven, and how beyond the seven there is one that is not counted: beyond the seven good persons there is nirvāṇa without remainder, beyond the seven chariots there is the place one reaches, beyond the seven ways of cutting off there is “by knowing and by seeing.” What is counted is seven; what is come home to is one. The ten discourses of the Chapter on Sevens are here complete. The chapter takes seven for its name, and the last discourse of the previous fascicle says rather withdraw than be false, while the last discourse of this fascicle says outflows are cut off in seven ways—one who withdraws rather than be false preserves what can be cut off; one who knows and can cut off completes the right course.

Carrying Forward — The End of the Chapter on Sevens

This fascicle is the last of the Chapter on Sevens. The treatise collection has no item-by-item gloss on this discourse; what can be carried forward is only the treatise’s own statement: “Further, it speaks with other characteristics, standing in the middle; therefore it is called the Madhyama Āgama”. The treatise gives the name by ‘standing in the middle,’ and does not gloss the discourses by headings; the meaning of the five discourses of this fascicle is spoken only by the discourses themselves, and the commentary does not set up a parallel term from the treatise. The Chapter on Sevens has ten discourses; the previous fascicle holds five and this fascicle holds five, and the number the chapter title gives itself is here full. The commentary of each fascicle carries its own fascicle; the meaning of the chapter is in the ten discourses of the two fascicles, and no separate commentary is made for the chapter.

“According to the action a person does, so he experiences its result”—the Discourse on the Simile of the Salt opens the fascicle with this sentence, and says that it has two readings: if one action must receive one result, then “one who does not practice the holy life cannot end suffering”; if the result experienced differs according to the person, then “one who practices the holy life can end suffering”. The seven discourses of this fascicle are the first half of the Chapter on Action; the chapter title marks itself “Chapter on Action, the Second [ten discourses] [first-day recitation]”, the chapter takes its name from this self-marking, and the ten discourses are divided between two fascicles, this fascicle holding the first seven and the last three being in Fascicle 4. The names of the ten discourses are given by the two-line summary verse at the head of the chapter: “Simile of the Salt, Vappa, Fords, Rāhula, Intention, Kālāmas”, “Gāmaṇi, Siṃha the Nirgrantha, Pāṭaliya”. Of the seven, three—the Discourse on the Simile of the Salt, the Discourse on the Fords, and the Discourse on Intention—are the World-Honored One addressing the bhikṣus; the Discourse to Vappa records the venerable Mahāmaudgalyāyana’s discussion with Vappa of the Śākya clan, a disciple of the Nirgrantha, and then the World-Honored One comes and questions Vappa himself; the Discourse to Rāhula is the World-Honored One teaching the venerable Rāhula; the Discourse to the Kālāmas is the World-Honored One answering the doubt of the Kālāma people of Kesaputta; the Discourse to Gāmaṇi is the World-Honored One answering the question of Gāmaṇi, son of the god Asura. What the seven discourses say is all a matter between action and its result: the action is the same and the result differs, the result having something else to depend on besides the action; old action can be cast off and new action need not be made; the purity or impurity of an action can be observed when one is about to do it, is doing it, and has done it; action is divided into what is done intentionally and what is not; action has three causes; action tends downward or rises upward of itself.

I. The Action Is the Same and the Result Differs (Discourse 11)

“That is, there is a person who does not cultivate the body, does not cultivate the precepts, does not cultivate the mind, does not cultivate wisdom, and whose life is very short; this is called a person who does an unwholesome action and must experience the painful fruit, the result of hell”; “that is, there is a person who cultivates the body, cultivates the precepts, cultivates the mind, cultivates wisdom, and whose life is very long; this is called a person who does an unwholesome action and must experience the painful fruit, the result in this very life”. In the two sentences the action done is one, and the words “does an unwholesome action” do not change; what differs is only cultivating and not cultivating, and the result divides into hell and this very life. The simile of the salt says this: “there is a person who throws a tael of salt into a little water, wishing to make the water salty so that it cannot be drunk”, while the same tael of salt thrown into the river Gaṅgā is not so, for “a tael of salt is little, and so it cannot make it salty and undrinkable”. The salt is the action and the water is the person; the salt does not change, and the amount of water changes. The simile of taking the sheep and the simile of the debt are the same: one who takes a sheep and has power takes it, while one who steals a sheep and has no power has it taken back by the owner; one who owes five coins and is poor is bound by the owner, while one who owes a hundred coins and is rich is not bound by the owner. Each of the three similes divides into two sides, and each side returns to the cultivating or not cultivating of the four things, cultivating the body, cultivating the precepts, cultivating the mind, cultivating wisdom; at the end of the side of the result in this very life in the third simile, it is concluded with one sentence: “for him, even if he experiences the result of good and bad action in this very life, it is slight”, and the discourse ends there. The result of an action depends not only on the action but also on the person who experiences the result. This is what the Chapter on Action sets up at its opening: action is a cause, but not the only cause.

II. Not Making New Action, Casting Off Old Action (Discourse 12)

The Discourse to Vappa first records the discussion between Vappa of the Śākya clan, a disciple of the Nirgrantha, and the venerable Mahāmaudgalyāyana; what Vappa holds is that though a bhikṣu guards body, speech, and mind, “if there was unwholesome conduct in a former life, from this unwholesome outflows arise which lead to a later life”; the World-Honored One comes and questions Vappa himself. The World-Honored One’s question is one thing only: a bhikṣu gives rise to unwholesome bodily conduct, outflows, vexation, and sorrow, and “at a later time his unwholesome bodily conduct ceases, he does not make new action and casts off old action, and right in this present life he reaches the end and is without vexation, dwelling constantly and unchanging, which is what noble wisdom sees and noble wisdom knows”; speech and mind are spoken of in the same way. Then he asks: “do you see any ground on which, from this, unwholesome outflows would arise leading to a later life?” Vappa answers that he sees no such ground. Not making new action and casting off old action are set side by side: not making is for the future, casting off is for what has been done. The Discourse on the Simile of the Salt says that the action is the same and the result differs; this discourse goes a step further: action can be ended, and when it is ended it does not reach a later life. The mark of its ending the discourse states as “ignorance ended and knowledge arisen”, “when a feeling bounded by the body arises he knows a feeling bounded by the body arises, and when a feeling bounded by life arises he knows a feeling bounded by life arises”, and when the body breaks up and life ends, “right in this present life everything felt comes to an end and ceases”, “know that it is utterly cooled”; this is illustrated by the shadow of a tree: “because of the tree there is a shadow”, and when the root is cut and burnt to ash, “the shadow exists because of the tree; when that shadow has had its cause cut off, does it cease and not arise?”, so the cessation of feeling is likewise because its cause is cut off; and in the time before life ends, he gains the six good abidings: “a bhikṣu, seeing forms with the eye, is neither glad nor sorrowful, dwelling in equanimity, seeking the unconditioned, with right mindfulness and right knowledge”, and likewise for the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind. The six good abidings are where a person whose action is ended dwells in this life; being neither glad nor sorrowful is the mark of not making new action. Having heard this, Vappa states these six himself, and takes refuge three times: “I only wish that the World-Honored One would accept me as an upāsaka; from this day on, for life, I take refuge, until life ends”; taking refuge a second time he says of himself, “it is like a person who keeps a bad horse, hoping to gain profit from it, who only wearies himself and gains no profit”, having long honored the Nirgrantha in vain and to no benefit; taking refuge a third time he says that his faith and reverence toward the Nirgrantha are “cut off from this day. Why is that? Because he deceived me”.

III. The Three Fords (Discourse 13)

“There are three fords, different in lineage, different in name, different in school, different in teaching, which the wise receive well, hold firmly, and teach to others, and yet gain no benefit”. The three are: “that is, that everything a person does is made by past deeds”, “that is, that everything a person does is made by a lord’s creation”, “that is, that everything a person does is without cause and without condition”. The World-Honored One’s refutation does not argue whether the teaching is right or wrong, but points to where it leads: if everything is made by past deeds, then “Friends, you are all killers. Why is that? Because everything is made by past deeds”, and likewise for taking what is not given, sexual misconduct, false speech, up to wrong view; if a person sees thus and sees it as it really is, then “with regard to what should be done and not done, within, there is neither desire nor effort”, and “if, with regard to what should be done and not done, one does not know as it really is, one loses right mindfulness and has no right knowledge, and then there is nothing by which one can be taught”. The teachings of a lord’s creation and of no cause and no condition are refuted in the same way. The three teachings differ, and where they lead is one: doing and not doing are alike not in one’s own hands, and so there is neither desire nor effort. These are the three extremes the Chapter on Action rules out: action fixed beforehand, action fixed by another, action with nothing it comes from. Having ruled them out, it then sets up; what it sets up is the Dharma the World-Honored One has known and awakened to himself, which “none can overcome, none can defile, none can restrain”; the six sense bases, “that is, the eye base, and the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind bases”, and the six elements, “that is, the earth element, and the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness elements”: “through the union of the six elements there is birth in a mother’s womb; because of the six elements there are the six sense bases, because of the six sense bases there is contact, because of contact there is feeling”, and “one who has feeling knows suffering as it really is, knows the arising of suffering, knows the cessation of suffering, knows the path to the cessation of suffering as it really is”. The six elements, the six sense bases, contact, and feeling all belong to this present body, not to past deeds, not to a lord, not to no cause; one who has feeling knows the four truths: suffering, “that is, the suffering of birth, the suffering of old age, the suffering of sickness, the suffering of death, the suffering of meeting what one hates, the suffering of parting from what one loves, the suffering of not getting what one seeks, and in brief, the suffering of the five aggregates of clinging”; the arising of suffering, “that is, this craving which takes up future existence, together with delight and desire, seeking existence here and there”; the cessation of suffering, which is this craving “cut off without remainder, given up, vomited out, exhausted, without desire, ceased, stilled, sunk away”; the path to the cessation of suffering, “that is, the noble path of eight factors”; “one should know suffering as it really is, one should cut off the arising of suffering, one should realize the cessation of suffering, one should cultivate the path to the cessation of suffering”, and one who does so has “all outflows ended, all bonds undone, and by right knowledge reaches the end of suffering”. The path comes after knowing. The preceding discourse says that action can be ended; this discourse says who it is that ends it: a person who has feeling and knows suffering, not past deeds, not a lord, and not something with nothing it comes from.

IV. Observing in the Present, Purifying in the Present (Discourse 14)

The Discourse to Rāhula is the World-Honored One going himself to the Hot Spring Grove to teach the venerable Rāhula. The water vessel is turned four times: poured out leaving a little water, poured out entirely, turned over, turned face up, and with each turn the World-Honored One says “I say that his path is little”, “I say that his path is entirely thrown away”, “I say that his path is overturned”, “I say that his path is face up”, each of the four once, and all tied to one thing: “that is, one who knowingly speaks falsely, without shame and without remorse, without conscience and without scruple—Rāhula, there is no evil he will not do”; therefore “you should train thus: you must not speak falsely even in jest”; the royal elephant entering battle “only guards its trunk”, and the elephant trainer knows that “this royal great elephant still cherishes its life”, while once the trunk too is used it no longer cherishes its life; one who knowingly speaks falsely and has no conscience or scruple is one who will stop at nothing. The verse says “a person who transgresses one dharma, that is, false speech, who does not fear the next world, there is no evil he will not do”, “better to swallow an iron ball, hot as fire, than to break the precepts and receive the faithful offerings of the world”, and again “if an unwholesome action has been done or is being done, in the end one is not freed from it, nor is there any place to flee”. This is one place in the Chapter on Action that speaks of verbal action: the one dharma of false speech is the gate to every unwholesome action. After the simile of the mirror, with its question “wishing to look at one’s face, to see whether it is clean or not”, the World-Honored One teaches the observing of action: “if you are about to do a bodily action, observe that bodily action: ‘I am about to do a bodily action; is that bodily action pure or impure, for myself or for another?’”; if it is impure, “Rāhula, you should cast off that bodily action you are about to do”, and if it is pure, “you should take up that bodily action you are about to do”; so also for what one is doing and has done, and so also for verbal action and mental action; three times and three actions, nine sections, and the pattern does not change. The śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas of the past, the future, and the present all observe bodily, verbal, and mental action in this way, “observing in the present, purifying in the present”, and he teaches Rāhula, “you should train thus: I too, with this same bodily, verbal, and mental action, observe in the present and purify in the present”—the ‘I too’ being the words Rāhula is to set for himself. The Discourse on the Simile of the Salt says that the result differs according to the person; this discourse says what it is that makes persons differ: it lies in observing. Observing when about to act, one casts off what is impure and takes up what is pure; observing while acting, one casts off what is impure and takes up what is pure; observing what has been done, if it is impure one “should go to good friends and those of the holy life” and “wholeheartedly confesses it, speaks of it with remorse, is careful not to conceal it, and guards oneself better from then on”, and if it is pure one “rejoices day and night, dwelling with right mindfulness and right knowledge”. The action is what is observed, and the observer is the person; the person’s relation to action is not merely to experience it. The second verse, “bodily action, verbal action, mental action—Rāhula, wholesome and unwholesome dharmas you should constantly observe”, is the teaching of this discourse; the verse also says “one who overturns the dharma of an ascetic, empty and without truth, that is, one who speaks falsely and does not guard his mouth”, “therefore do not speak falsely, son of the Rightly Awakened One”, and its last line, “Rāhula, when you go there, do no harm to others”.

V. Done Intentionally and Not Done Intentionally (Discourse 15)

“If there is action done intentionally, I say that one must experience its result, either in this world or in a later life; if there is action not done intentionally, I say that one need not experience its result”. Done intentionally and not done intentionally is the first cut by which the Chapter on Action divides action: what must receive its result is only action done intentionally. Of action done intentionally, “the body intentionally does three actions, unwholesome, which with painful fruit are experienced as a painful result; speech has four actions, and mind has three”; the three of the body: killing, “extremely evil, drinking blood, desiring to injure, without loving-kindness toward living beings, down to insects and worms”; taking what is not given, “attached to another’s property, taking it with the intention of theft”; sexual misconduct, meaning violating a woman protected by father or mother, down to one protected by kinsfolk, “and one who belongs to another by name, one on hire, down to one given a garland”; the four of speech: false speech, “not knowing, saying he knows; knowing, saying he does not know; not seeing, saying he sees; seeing, saying he does not see”; divisive speech, “wishing to part others, hearing this he tells that, wishing to break this up”; harsh speech, “words coarse and rough, with an evil sound offensive to the ear”; idle speech, “speaking at the wrong time, speaking what is not true, speaking what is without meaning, speaking what is not Dharma, speaking what does not bring stillness”; the three of mind: covetousness, “seeing another’s property and means of livelihood, he constantly looks and longs, wishing that I might have it”; ill will, “harboring hatred and envy in the mind” and wishing that the other might receive measureless suffering; wrong view, “his views inverted”, that is, that there is no giving and no offering, no result of good and bad action. Then it speaks of the learned noble disciple casting off unwholesome action and cultivating wholesome action: “with a mind imbued with loving-kindness he dwells pervading one direction”, “and so the second, third, and fourth directions, the four intermediate directions, above and below, all around everywhere”, and likewise for compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity, and he thinks thus: “formerly this mind of mine was little and not well cultivated; now this mind of mine is measureless and well cultivated”. When the mind is measureless and well cultivated, “if formerly, because of bad friends, he was heedless and did unwholesome action, that cannot carry him off, cannot defile him, and no longer follows him”. The unwholesome action already done cannot carry him off—this is why the Discourse to Vappa’s “casts off old action” is so: the discourse does not say that the action ceases; what it says is that it cannot carry him off and no longer follows him, for when the mind is great, action cannot follow it. The World-Honored One further asks, “if there were a young boy or girl who from birth could practice the liberation of mind by loving-kindness, could that one, at a later time, do unwholesome action with body, speech, or mind again?”, and the bhikṣus answer no, for “if one does no evil action oneself, from what could evil action arise?” At the end the discourse says that one who cultivates the liberation of mind by equanimity “does not carry this body to that world, but goes only according to the mind”, and should think, “formerly I was heedless and did unwholesome action; all of that I can experience now, and in the end not in a later life”; one who cultivates thus “surely attains non-returning, or attains something higher still”. “I can experience it now, and in the end not in a later life” is the same thing as the Discourse on the Simile of the Salt’s “result in this very life”: when the mind is measureless and well cultivated, the result is in this very life and slight, and does not reach a later life.

VI. Actions Are of Three Kinds, Arising from What Is Habitually Accumulated (Discourse 16)

The Kālāma people of Kesaputta hear śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas each praising their own teaching and disparaging the teachings of others, and doubt arises; they ask the World-Honored One which is true. The World-Honored One first answers their doubt: “do not give rise to doubt. Why is that? Because from doubt arises hesitation”; then he does not say which is true, but speaks of action: “know that actions are of three kinds, arising from what is habitually accumulated”, the three being greed, hatred, and delusion. “The greedy one, covered by greed, has a mind without contentment”, and either kills, or takes what is not given, or commits sexual misconduct, or knowingly speaks falsely, or further drinks liquor; hatred and delusion are the same. Action has three causes; the result of action comes after the action, and the cause of action comes before the action; the Discourse on the Fords rules out past deeds, a lord, and no cause, and this discourse states the cause positively: greed, hatred, and delusion. The learned noble disciple leaves off killing and cuts off killing, and “with regard to killing he purifies his mind”; “he takes only what is given, delights in what is given, and constantly loves to give”, and with regard to taking what is not given he purifies his mind; “he diligently practices the holy life, energetically practices what is excellent, pure and without stain”, and with regard to what is not the holy life he purifies his mind; “he speaks the truth, delights in the truth, dwells in the truth without wavering”, and with regard to false speech he purifies his mind; “those who are parted he wishes to unite, and those united he gladdens”, and with regard to divisive speech he purifies his mind; what he says is “clear and gentle, soft and smooth, pleasing to the ear and entering the heart”, and with regard to harsh speech he purifies his mind; “he speaks at the right time, speaks what is true, speaks what is Dharma, speaks what has meaning, speaks what brings stillness”, and with regard to idle speech he purifies his mind; “his mind harbors no contention”, and with regard to covetousness he purifies his mind; “he has a mind of loving-kindness and compassion, benefiting all, down to insects and worms”, and with regard to ill will he purifies his mind; “he practices right view and is not inverted”, and with regard to wrong view he purifies his mind; then with loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity he dwells pervading the whole world, and so gains the four secure abidings. The four secure abidings are what this discourse alone says: “there is this world and that world, there is the result of good and bad action; I have gained this action that accords with right view, and hold it fully, and when the body breaks up and life ends I will surely reach a good place, and be born in a heaven”, which is the first; “there is no this world and that world, there is no result of good and bad action; even so, in this very life I am not on that account reviled by others, but am praised by those of right knowledge”, which is the second; “whatever I may do, I will surely do no evil, and I think no evil. Why is that? If I do no evil myself, from what could suffering arise?”, which is the third; “I should always have loving-kindness and pity for the whole world; my mind does not contend with living beings; it is unclouded and joyful”, which is the fourth. What the Kālāma people doubt is whether there is a later life and whether there is sin and merit; the World-Honored One does not answer that first, but shows them the four abidings: if there is a later life one reaches a good place, if there is none one is praised in this very life by those of right knowledge, if one does no evil oneself suffering has nothing to arise from, and if one does not contend with living beings one is unclouded and joyful. The four abidings are provided for both sides, whether there is a later life or not: if there is, one reaches a good place, and if there is not, one is praised by those of right knowledge; what they all depend on is in the present mind, without bonds, without resentment, without hatred, without contention. They ask which is true in doubt, and are answered with where one can dwell securely; this is the Discourse to the Kālāmas’ way of answering, and it is also the Chapter on Action’s way of answering the question ‘is there a result of action or not’.

VII. Black Has a Black Result, White Has a White Result (Discourse 17)

Gāmaṇi, son of the god Asura, asks the World-Honored One whether the brāhmaṇas, who exalt themselves and serve various gods, can cause one who has died to be born in a good place. The World-Honored One uses the simile of a heavy stone: the stone is thrown into deep water, and the crowd, with joined palms, praises and prays “may the stone float up”, but the stone does not float up on that account; a person accomplished in the ten unwholesome courses of action, though the crowd praises and prays for him, is not born in a good place on that account, for “these ten unwholesome courses of action: black has a black result, naturally tends downward, and surely reaches a bad place”. Conversely, a person accomplished in the ten wholesome courses of action, though the crowd prays that “when the body breaks up and life ends, he will reach a bad place and be born in hell”, does not fall on that account; and there is the simile of the jar of ghee and oil: the jar is thrown into the water and breaks, “the dregs and shards sink down, and the ghee and oil float up”, the oil floating without anyone praying for it, for “these ten wholesome courses of action: white has a white result, naturally rises upward, and surely reaches a good place”. A black result and a white result, naturally tending downward and naturally rising upward: the result is in the action, not in the prayers of others. The body is of the kind of the four great elements, and when life ends it scatters; but “his mind, mentation, and consciousness, constantly imbued with faith, imbued with energy, much learning, giving, and wisdom, because of this and conditioned by this, naturally rise upward and are born in a good place”. What is imbued is the mind, and what rises upward is also the mind; the water of the Discourse on the Simile of the Salt and the measureless mind of the Discourse on Intention are both seen here. At the end the discourse speaks of “the path to the garden, the path upward, the path to a good place”: from leaving off killing up to gaining right view is one path, and “that is, the noble path of eight factors, from right view up to right concentration, these being eight” is again a path. The ten wholesome ones are the path upward, and the noble path of eight factors is also the path upward, and the latter stands above the former: the ten wholesome ones reach a good place, while the noble path of eight factors is what is practiced by one who, as the Discourse on the Fords says, knows the path to the cessation of suffering as it really is.

VIII. How to Read the Fascicle

The chapter is named “Action”, and the seven discourses of this fascicle all speak around one sentence: “according to the action a person does, so he experiences its result”. The Discourse on the Simile of the Salt states the limit of this sentence: the result differs according to the person, not according to the action alone. The Discourse to Vappa says that action can be ended: not making new action, casting off old action. The Discourse on the Fords says who is the master of action: not past deeds, not a lord, not no cause, but a person who has feeling and knows suffering. The Discourse to Rāhula says how action is observed: about to do, doing, having done, one observes at all three times. The Discourse on Intention says how action is divided: what is done intentionally must receive its result, what is not done intentionally need not; and when the mind is measureless and well cultivated, old action cannot carry one off. The Discourse to the Kālāmas says the cause of action: greed, hatred, and delusion; and the security of action: the four abidings are secure whether there is a later life or not. The Discourse to Gāmaṇi says where the result lies: black has a black result, white has a white result, of itself, not in the prayers of others. Read together, the seven discourses show that action is not a fixed fate: action has a cause, and the cause can be purified; action has a result, and the result differs according to the person; action can be observed, and when observed the pure is taken up and the impure cast off; action can be cast off, and when cast off it does not reach a later life. One who reads this chapter should look at the person each discourse sets in place: the Discourse on the Simile of the Salt sets the person who cultivates or does not cultivate, the Discourse to Vappa the bhikṣu who guards body, speech, and mind, the Discourse on the Fords the person who has feeling and knows suffering, the Discourse to Rāhula the person who constantly observes, the Discourse on Intention the person whose mind is measureless and well cultivated, the Discourse to the Kālāmas the person whose mind is without bonds and without resentment, the Discourse to Gāmaṇi the person whose mind is imbued with faith. Action is in the person’s hands, and the result is in the person’s mind; this is what the seven discourses of this fascicle say in common.

Carrying Forward — The Beginning of the Chapter on Action

The treatise collection has no item-by-item gloss on this chapter; what can be carried forward is only the treatise’s own statement: “The discourses as a topic are the four Āgamas: first, the Saṃyukta Āgama; second”, “the Madhyama Āgama; third, the Dīrgha Āgama; fourth, the Ekottarika”, “further, it speaks with other characteristics, standing in the middle; therefore it is called the Madhyama Āgama”. The treatise gives the name by ‘standing in the middle’ and does not gloss the discourses by headings; the meaning of the ten discourses of this chapter is spoken only by the discourses themselves, and the commentary does not set up a parallel term from the treatise. The meaning of action has already been spoken of in the published sections of the Saṃyukta Āgama: the Connected Discourses on the Six Sense Bases say that the eye, the ear, up to the mind all have action as their cause, their condition, and their bond; they also say that there is the result of action but no agent, and that when these aggregates have ceased, other aggregates continue; the Connected Discourses Spoken by the Disciples speak of the courses of action, the ten unwholesome courses from killing to wrong view, whose items are the same as the ten unwholesome courses of action listed in this fascicle’s Discourse to Gāmaṇi. That collection first says that action is cause and condition and that action has no agent; on top of that, this chapter says that the result of action differs according to the person, that action can be ended, that action can be observed, and that action has a cause; the two collections carry each other forward, and neither replaces the other. What the Analysis of Action in the Abhidharmakośa says, that the differences of the world arise from action, that action is intention and what intention does, and that action has four kinds, black with black ripening, white with white ripening, and so on, may be consulted alongside this chapter’s Discourse on the Simile of the Salt, where the action is the same and the result differs, and its Discourse to Gāmaṇi, with its black result and white result; but the treatise has its own headings, and this commentary explains the discourses only by the discourses, not by the treatise’s headings. The ten discourses of this chapter are divided between two fascicles, and the seven of this fascicle end here; the commentary of the chapter follows each fascicle, and the commentary on the three discourses of Fascicle 4 is found in that fascicle; the chapter being the two fascicles, no separate commentary is written for the chapter.

Fascicle 3 says “according to the action a person does, so he experiences its result”: the result differs according to the person, and action can be observed, can be cast off, and has a cause. The three discourses of Fascicle 4 follow this and speak of the other face of action: action cannot be turned, and yet suffering can be ended in this very life. This fascicle is the second half of the Chapter on Action and holds the last three discourses of the chapter, the Discourse to Siṃha, the Discourse on the Nirgranthas, and the Discourse to Pāṭaliya; the summary verse at the head of the chapter is in Fascicle 3, this fascicle has no chapter title, and at the end of the fascicle there is one line marking the end of the chapter, “Chapter on Action of the Madhyama Āgama, the Second, ends [twenty-one thousand and sixty characters] [first-day recitation]”, with which the ten discourses of this chapter are complete. All three discourses are the Dharma the World-Honored One spoke to those outside: the Discourse to Siṃha answers the slander passed on to the minister Siṃha, a disciple of the Nirgranthas, and the World-Honored One makes his tenet plain in eight points; in the Discourse on the Nirgranthas the World-Honored One addresses the bhikṣus, recounting how he went himself to question the Nirgranthas on their view that “whatever a person experiences is all due to what was done before”, refuting it question by question, and then teaching the way by which a bhikṣu severs his own suffering and reaches the ultimate in this very life; the Discourse to Pāṭaliya answers the doubt of Pāṭaliya the Gāmaṇi about the saying that the ascetic Gautama “knows illusion to be illusion”, then answers the saying that action “is experienced in this very life” and the dispute of the four debaters, and shows him the concentration on the Dharma called seclusion. What the three discourses face is in each case the saying of another; what they establish is in each case one thing: the result of action cannot be turned by ascetic practice, and is not all exhausted in this very life; yet a person can in this very life know his own action, sever his own suffering, and gain his own concentration, and reach the ultimate without waiting for a later life.

I. Holding as His Tenet What Is Not to Be Done, Holding as His Tenet What Is to Be Done (Discourse 18)

The minister Siṃha wished to go and see the Buddha and first told the Nirgranthas; “the Nirgrantha rebuked Siṃha”, and the words of the rebuke were “the ascetic Gautama holds as his tenet what is not to be done, and teaches others the dharma of what is not to be done”; “the minister Siṃha then went without taking leave of the Nirgranthas” and put these words to the Buddha. The World-Honored One does not deny them, but says “there is a ground, and because of that ground, one cannot slander with regard to the true Dharma”: since this one thing truly exists, these words are no slander. What is not to be done is this: “I say that bodily misconduct is not to be done, and verbal and mental misconduct are also not to be done”; “such measureless unwholesome and defiled dharmas are the root of future existence, painful results of vexation and burning, and the cause of birth, aging, sickness, and death”, and all these dharmas are not to be done. By the same way of answering the World-Honored One raises seven more points: he holds as his tenet what is to be done, “I say that bodily good conduct is to be done, and verbal and mental good conduct are also to be done”, “such measureless wholesome dharmas bring pleasant fruit, one experiences a pleasant result, and is born in a good place and gains long life”; he holds annihilation as his tenet, for bodily, verbal, and mental misconduct are to be annihilated; he holds the detestable as his tenet, for bodily, verbal, and mental misconduct are detestable; he holds the Dharma and discipline as his tenet, “for the severing of lust I teach the Dharma and discipline, and for the severing of hatred and delusion I teach the Dharma and discipline”; he holds ascetic practice as his tenet; he holds not entering a womb as his tenet; he holds security as his tenet. Among the eight points, what is not to be done and what is to be done stand opposed; annihilation and the detestable both point to misconduct; the Dharma and discipline name the reason for his teaching; ascetic practice, not entering a womb, and security point to the Tathāgata himself. The Nirgranthas take “not to be done” as slander, supposing that Gautama teaches people to do nothing; the World-Honored One speaks “not to be done” and “to be done” together, what is not to be done being misconduct and what is to be done being good conduct. Faced with a slander of one phrase, the World-Honored One does not argue over the phrase but supplies its other half: beyond what is not to be done there is what is to be done. This is the general sentence of the Chapter on Action on good and bad action, and it answers the Discourse on Intention of Fascicle 3, with its three unwholesome actions of body, four of speech, and three of mind, and the Discourse to the Kālāmas, with its purifying of the mind as the good.

II. Holding Ascetic Practice as His Tenet, Holding Security as His Tenet (Discourse 18)

Among the eight points, ascetic practice is the longest. The World-Honored One first lists the items of the ascetic practice of other paths: going naked without clothes, not eating food obtained by knife and staff or by robbery, eating once a day up to once a month, eating greens and millet, wearing hair garments and toushe robes, with loose hair or braided hair, lying on thorns or lying on fruit, serving water and serving fire, serving the sun, the moon, lords and great persons; and then he says “I do not say that this ascetic practice does not exist”, “but this ascetic practice is a base undertaking, utterly painful and utterly hard, practiced by ordinary people, not the noble path”. Ascetic practice is not nonexistent; it is a base undertaking, and not the noble path. What the Tathāgata calls ascetic practice is different: “if there are śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas who know the dharma of ascetic practice to be severed and exhausted, pulled out by the root, never to arise again, I say that they practice asceticism”; the Tathāgata, with regard to the dharma of ascetic practice, “knows it to be severed and exhausted, pulled out by the root, never to arise again, and therefore I practice asceticism”. The words ascetic practice are the same, but the paths outside take practicing pain as ascetic practice, and the World-Honored One takes severing ascetic practice as ascetic practice; the word is the same and the matter is reversed. Not entering a womb follows the same pattern: “I know future existence in a womb to be severed and exhausted, pulled out by the root, never to arise again, and therefore I do not enter a womb”. Security alone is spoken of not by severing but by attaining: the son of a good family who goes forth to train in the path knows and awakens himself in this very life, realizes and dwells, birth is ended and the holy life established, and “I am myself secure and make others secure, bhikṣus, bhikṣuṇīs, upāsakas, and upāsikās”; “beings are liberated from the dharma of birth”, and from the dharmas of aging, sickness, death, sorrow, and defilement likewise. The eight points come to rest here in security: what is not to be done and what is to be done are the Dharma taught to people; annihilation and the detestable are what is severed; the Dharma and discipline are the reason for the teaching; ascetic practice and not entering a womb are the Tathāgata’s own severing; security is the Tathāgata’s own attainment, which reaches others. Having heard this, Siṃha praises the World-Honored One as “like a person with clear eyes, who turns up what is overturned, uncovers what is covered, shows the way to the lost, and brings light into darkness”, and takes refuge in the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha; again he says “it is like a person who keeps a bad horse, hoping to gain some benefit, and only wears himself out in vain and gains no benefit”, saying of himself that he “did not recognize a good field and did not examine for himself, and through the long night paid reverence” to the Nirgranthas, and takes refuge a second time; a third time he says “I was formerly without knowledge, and had faith and respect for the foolish Nirgranthas; from this day I cut it off. Why is that? Because they deceived me”, and takes refuge a third time. Each of the three refuges has its own reason: one praises what he has gained, one regrets what he lost, one cuts off what he believed. This is of the same pattern as the words of refuge in the Discourse to Vappa of Fascicle 3.

III. Whatever a Person Experiences Is All Due to What Was Done Before (Discourse 19)

The view that the Discourse on the Nirgranthas refutes is one sentence: “whatever a person experiences is all due to what was done before; if old action is exhausted through ascetic practice and no new is made, then all actions are ended; when all actions are ended, suffering is ended; when suffering is ended, the end of suffering is reached”. This view has four parts: what is experienced is all due to what was done before; old action is exhausted through ascetic practice; no new action is made; when action is ended suffering is ended. In the Discourse to Vappa of Fascicle 3 the World-Honored One also says “he does not make new action and casts off old action”, words close to this view and a matter wholly different; the World-Honored One’s questioning enters from this very difference. The first question is about pure knowledge: “do you yourselves have pure knowledge, whether I existed before or did not exist before, whether I did evil before or did not do evil, whether so much of my suffering is exhausted or so much of my suffering is not exhausted”—if what is experienced is all due to what was done before, then one ought to know what was done before and how much has been exhausted; the Nirgranthas do not know. The simile of the poisoned arrow says this: one struck by an arrow knows why he suffers, why it is drawn out, and why he regains strength and is free of trouble, and this is having pure knowledge of one’s own; the Nirgranthas do not know what was done before and yet speak of what was done before, which is speaking without pure knowledge. The second question is about ascetic practice: “if the Nirgranthas have intense severing and intense ascetic practice, does intense suffering then arise for the Nirgranthas?”, and likewise moderate and mild; the Nirgranthas answer yes; conversely, “if the Nirgranthas have intense severing and intense ascetic practice, then intense suffering is allayed for the Nirgranthas”, and likewise moderate and mild. Since suffering arises and is allayed according to whether there is ascetic practice or not, “know that the Nirgranthas make suffering in this very world”: ascetic practice does not exhaust old action; it only makes new suffering in this very world. The third question is that action cannot be turned: “if there is action with a pleasant result, can that action, through severing and through ascetic practice, be turned into a painful result?”; action with a painful result turned into a pleasant result, action with a result in this very life turned into a result in a later birth, action with a result in a later birth turned into a result in this very life, unripened action turned into ripened result, action with a ripened result turned into something different, and to all six questions the answer is no; the conclusion is “vain effort, empty severing, nothing gained”. These six questions are the limit the Chapter on Action sets on the result of action: whether the result is pleasant or painful, in this very life or in a later birth, ripened or unripened, none of it can be turned by severing or by ascetic practice. The Discourse on the Simile of the Salt of Fascicle 3 says that the result is light or heavy according to the person; this discourse says that the kind of result cannot be turned; the two do not contradict each other: lightness and heaviness follow the person, and the kind follows the action and is not turned by severing or ascetic practice.

IV. Five Reproaches, Five Praises (Discourse 19)

The Nirgranthas further cite their teacher: “we have a revered teacher, Qinzi the Nirgrantha, who says this”, that all evil action done before can be exhausted through this ascetic practice, and that if one now guards body, speech, and mind one does no more evil action. The World-Honored One does not argue with their teacher, but asks what their faith rests on: “there are five things that have two results in this very world: faith, liking, hearing, reflection, and seeing well upon consideration”; a person may have false words of his own, and these too may be believed, liked, heard, reflected on, and seen well upon consideration; what faith rests on is not the depth of the faith. Then he turns the Nirgranthas’ view back upon the Nirgranthas: if the pleasure and pain beings experience are all due to what was done before, then the Nirgranthas, who now undergo utterly grave suffering, did evil action before; if all due to association, then their former association was bad; if all due to livelihood, then their former livelihood was bad; if all due to view, then they held bad views before; if all due to a lord’s creation, then their former lord was bad—“in the true Dharma they get five reproaches, and are detestable”. The five reproaches set up no separate doctrine; they only return the saying to the one who says it: for one who holds to what was done before, his present suffering is the proof of his former evil. Set against this is the Tathāgata’s “gaining five praises, in accordance with the Dharma, without dispute, worthy of love and worthy of respect”: “the Tathāgata did excellent action before, and because of that the Tathāgata now has the noble pleasure without outflows, and feels pleasure in stillness and calm”, and likewise association, livelihood, view, and the lord. The same sentence, “all due to what was done before”, is for the Nirgranthas a reproach and for the Tathāgata a praise; what differs is only what is now experienced: the Nirgranthas now undergo utterly grave suffering, and the Tathāgata now has the noble pleasure without outflows. The Discourse on the Fords of Fascicle 3 refutes the three fords, made by past deeds, made by a lord’s creation, and without cause and without condition; among the five reproaches of this discourse, what was done before is the same as made by past deeds, and the lord’s creation is the same as the lord’s creation; the Discourse on the Fords says that if one holds such a view, then “with regard to what should be done and not done, there is neither desire nor effort”, and this discourse says that if one holds such a view, then one’s present suffering is the proof of one’s former evil. Read together, what the two discourses ward off is one.

V. Practicing with Desire, Practicing with the Abandoning of Desire (Discourse 19)

Having refuted the Nirgranthas, the World-Honored One teaches his own Dharma: “the Dharma I have known and awakened to myself and teach you, no śramaṇa or brāhmaṇa, no god, Māra, or Brahmā, nor anyone else in the world can overcome, none can defile, none can restrain”, a sentence the same as in the Discourse on the Fords. His Dharma is this: a bhikṣu casts off unwholesome action of body, speech, and mind and cultivates wholesome action of body, speech, and mind, “with regard to future suffering he knows for himself that he has no future suffering, and he does not cast off the pleasure gained in accordance with the Dharma”; “he may wish to sever the cause of suffering and practice with desire, or he may wish to sever the cause of suffering and practice with the abandoning of desire”; one who practices with desire cultivates that practice with desire, one who practices with the abandoning of desire cultivates that practice with the abandoning of desire, and when it is severed, suffering is ended. There are two ways of severing suffering, differing according to the cause of the suffering, and not one rule of ascetic practice for all. A bhikṣu severs his own suffering not for the sake of pain, but because “as I act and practice, unwholesome dharmas arise and wholesome dharmas cease, while if I sever my own suffering, unwholesome dharmas cease and wholesome dharmas arise; I had better sever my own suffering”; and when the suffering is severed, “he severs suffering no more. Why is that? Bhikṣu, what he set out to do has had its meaning accomplished; were he to sever suffering again, that would not be fitting”. The simile of the arrow-maker says this: “like an arrow-maker who straightens an arrow with a straightener, and when the arrow is already straight uses the straightener no more”. This is the division between the World-Honored One’s ascetic practice and that of the Nirgranthas: the Nirgranthas exhaust old action by ascetic practice, and the ascetic practice has no end; a bhikṣu ends unwholesome dharmas by severing his own suffering, and when the unwholesome dharmas have ceased he severs suffering no more. The simile of the beloved woman goes further: a man who loves and is attached to a woman suffers when she speaks with another; if “because he suffers and sorrows himself, he severs his love and attachment for that woman”, then though the woman still speaks with another, suffering arises no more. Where suffering arises is in love, not in the woman; sever the love and suffering does not arise; one does not sever the woman. Then, “whatever the cause by which I might sever suffering, I have already severed it; yet my desire is still as before unsevered; I had better seek to sever desire”, and he dwells alone in seclusion, severs “the five hindrances, defilements of the mind and weakeners of wisdom”, reaches the fourth dhyāna, “gains such concentration, the mind pure, without stain and without vexation, pliant and well established”, “gains an unmoving mind, and turns toward the realization of the knowledge of the ending of outflows”, knows suffering, the arising of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the path to the cessation of suffering as they really are, “also knows the outflows as they really are, knows the arising of the outflows, knows the cessation of the outflows, knows the path to the cessation of the outflows as they really are”, “then his mind is liberated from the outflow of sensual desire, and his mind is liberated from the outflow of existence and the outflow of ignorance”, and “being liberated, he knows that he is liberated; birth is ended, the holy life established, what was to be done is done, there is no further existence, and he knows this as it really is”. This way lies wholly in this very life, and the end of the discourse says so plainly: “there are five causes by which the mind gives rise to sorrow and pain”, being bound by sensual desire, by hatred, by sleepiness, by restlessness and remorse, and by doubt; when the bond is removed the sorrow and pain cease, and one “reaches the ultimate in this very life, without vexation, without burning, constantly abiding and unchanging, known by the noble ones and seen by the noble ones”; and further “there is yet another reaching of the ultimate in this very life”, “namely the noble path of eight factors, from right view up to right concentration, these are the eight”. The Discourse to Vappa of Fascicle 3 says “in this very world one reaches the ultimate, without vexation and burning, constantly abiding and unchanging, that is, what is seen by noble wisdom and known by noble wisdom”; this discourse explains it by the removal of the five bonds and by the noble path of eight factors. The Nirgranthas seek the end of suffering in ascetic practice; the World-Honored One shows the ultimate in this very life.

VI. I Know That Illusion, but I Myself Am Not an Illusion (Discourse 20)

The slander Pāṭaliya the Gāmaṇi has heard is that “the ascetic Gautama knows illusion to be illusion”. The World-Honored One’s way of answering is the same as in the Discourse to Siṃha: these words are no slander, “I know that illusion, but I myself am not an illusion”. The Gāmaṇi still supposes that one who knows illusion is himself an illusion, and the World-Honored One uses the Koliya soldiers as a simile: the soldiers gravely violate the prohibitions and precepts and practice only evil, the Gāmaṇi knows this, and the Gāmaṇi does not thereby violate the prohibitions and precepts; “the Koliya soldiers differ in view, differ in desire, and differ in aspiration”. To know a thing is not to be that thing. Then he says: “I know illusion, I know the one who practices illusion, I know the result of illusion, I know the severing of illusion”, and of killing, taking what is not given, and false speech he likewise knows all four. Knowing illusion, knowing the one who practices illusion, knowing the result of illusion, knowing the severing of illusion: these four knowings are the full pattern in which the Chapter on Action speaks of action, knowing the action, knowing the one who does it, knowing its result, knowing its severing; and this is of the same pattern as the four knowings of the Discourse on the Fords in Fascicle 3, knowing suffering, its arising, its cessation, and the path to its cessation. The World-Honored One further warns him: “if anyone says that the ascetic Gautama, knowing illusion, is himself an illusion, and he does not abandon this statement”, then “in the time it takes to bend or stretch an arm, at death he is born in hell”. The Gāmaṇi confesses his fault, and the World-Honored One accepts it: “if anyone confesses his fault, sees the offense and discloses it, and guards against doing it again, he nurtures the noble Dharma without loss”, which is the same as the Discourse to Rāhula’s teaching that one who has done impure action should disclose it and confess the fault. After the confession, the Gāmaṇi asks about the saying that action “is experienced in this very life”: “whoever kills, all of them experience the result in this very life, and because of that sorrow and pain arise for them”, and likewise for taking what is not given and false speech. The World-Honored One answers with six examples: among those who kill, there is one who “kills an enemy for the king, and the king, delighted, bestows a reward on him” and is as happy as a king, and there is one who wrongly kills an innocent person and is executed by the king; among those who take what is not given, there is one who takes in another country and is rewarded, and one who takes in the king’s own country and is executed; among those who speak falsely, there is one who delights the king with a jest and is rewarded, and one who bears false witness before the king and is killed. The same action, and the result in this very life is reward in one case and execution in another, and the one rewarded is happy and without sorrow or pain; therefore “whoever kills, all of them experience the result in this very life, and because of that sorrow and pain arise for them” is false speech, and the Gāmaṇi answers himself that he does not believe it. What is refuted is the qualification “all” and “because of that sorrow and pain arise”, not the existence of a result of action. This may be read with the six questions of the Discourse on the Nirgranthas: that discourse says that action with a result in this very life cannot be turned into a result in a later birth, nor action with a result in a later birth into a result in this very life; this discourse says that killing and the rest do not all receive a result of sorrow and pain in this very life. Whether the result is in this very life or in a later birth is settled by the action, not by any one saying.

VII. A Concentration on the Dharma Called Seclusion (Discourse 20)

The Gāmaṇi has built a lofty hall in North Village to lodge śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, and four debaters gather there whose views are opposed: one says “there is no giving, no offering, no incantations, no good and bad action, no result of good and bad action”, no this world and the next, no father and mother, no true persons in the world; the second “has right view” and says the reverse, that there is giving and offering, up to that there are true persons in the world; the third says that doing it oneself or having it done, killing, taking what is not given, sexual misconduct, false speech, up to destroying cities and ruining countries, “is not doing evil”, that to cut down all the beings on this earth with an iron wheel “brings no evil action and no result of evil action”, that killing on the south bank of the river Gaṅgā and giving on the north bank “brings neither offense nor merit, and neither result of offense nor result of merit”; the fourth “has right view” and says the reverse, that this “truly is doing evil”, and “brings evil action and brings the result of evil action”. The Gāmaṇi doubts which speaks truly and which falsely. The World-Honored One’s answer is the same as in the Discourse to the Kālāmas: “do not give rise to doubt. Why is that? From doubt comes hesitation”; and he asks “you yourself have no pure knowledge whether there is a later life or there is no later life”, nor whether what one does is evil or good—this pure knowledge is the same pure knowledge the Discourse on the Nirgranthas asked of the Nirgranthas; and then, without judging the four debaters, he shows him a concentration: “there is a concentration on the Dharma called seclusion; through this concentration you can gain right mindfulness and can gain one-pointedness of mind”, and in this very life sever doubt and advance. The cultivation of the concentration of seclusion begins with seeing one’s own action: the learned noble disciple abstains from killing and severs killing, up to severing wrong view and gaining right view, and “he sees for himself: I have severed the ten unwholesome courses of action and am mindful of the ten wholesome courses of action”; having seen this, “gladness arises; when gladness has arisen, joy arises; when joy has arisen, the body is calmed; when the body is calmed, he feels bodily happiness; when he feels bodily happiness, he gains one-pointedness of mind”; having gained one-pointedness of mind, he dwells with a mind imbued with loving-kindness, pervading one direction and up to the whole world; and then, with regard to each of the four debaters, he thinks: “if what those śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas say is true, I do not transgress against the fear and the fearlessness of the world; I should always have loving-kindness and pity for the whole world; my mind does not contend with living beings; it is unclouded and joyful”, “I have now gained the unsurpassed dharma beyond the human, I have advanced and gained a secure dwelling, namely the concentration of seclusion”; with regard to what they say he “neither affirms nor denies. Having neither affirmed nor denied, he gains inner stillness”. The four sections of loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity are of the same pattern, each facing one of the four debaters. The Discourse to the Kālāmas speaks of the four secure abidings, secure on both faces, whether there is a later life or not; this discourse speaks of the concentration of seclusion, which neither affirms nor denies the four debaters on either face and gains inner stillness. What makes it possible to neither affirm nor deny is that one has first seen for oneself the severing of the ten unwholesome courses of action and the mindfulness of the ten wholesome courses of action: when action is in one’s own hands and one sees it for oneself, what others say exists or does not exist neither adds to nor takes from oneself. As this Dharma was being spoken, “for Pāṭaliya the Gāmaṇi dust was removed and stain left behind, and the pure eye of the Dharma arose”; he saw the Dharma and attained the Dharma, “with no other to revere, following no one else, without hesitation, abiding in the realization of the fruit”, “he gained fearlessness in the Dharma of the World-Honored One”, and took refuge as an upāsaka, “for life, taking refuge until his life’s end”. Of the ten discourses of this chapter, only this one records the arising of the eye of the Dharma on hearing the Dharma.

VIII. How to Read the Chapter

Of the ten discourses of the Chapter on Action, the first seven are in Fascicle 3 and the last three in this fascicle. The first seven set up the right teaching on action: the result follows the person, action can be cast off, action has an owner, action can be observed, what is done intentionally surely receives its result, action has three causes, and black result and white result come of themselves. The last three speak to those outside and show its limit and its ultimate: the Discourse to Siṃha says that what is not to be done and what is to be done go together, that ascetic practice is the severing of ascetic practice, and that security is being secure oneself and making others secure; the Discourse on the Nirgranthas says that the kind of result cannot be turned by ascetic practice, and that the ending of suffering lies in severing one’s own suffering in this very life, not in the accumulation of ascetic practice; the Discourse to Pāṭaliya says that one who knows illusion is not an illusion, that the result of sorrow and pain in this very life is not for all, and that the dispute over right and wrong is stilled by seeing one’s own action. All three discourses face the sayings of others, but the pattern differs: in the Discourse to Siṃha and the Discourse to Pāṭaliya a questioner comes bringing a slander he has heard, while in the Discourse on the Nirgranthas the World-Honored One goes himself to question the Nirgranthas and tells the bhikṣus of it; in each the World-Honored One does not argue with the saying but shows the matter: the Discourse to Siṃha shows the eight points, the Discourse on the Nirgranthas shows pure knowledge and that action cannot be turned, the Discourse to Pāṭaliya shows the four knowings and the concentration of seclusion. Reading the ten discourses together, the action the Chapter on Action speaks of has four faces: the cause of action lies in greed, hatred, and delusion; the result of action is light or heavy according to the person and of a kind settled by the action and not turned by ascetic practice; the ending of action lies in not making new action, casting off old action, and severing one’s own suffering; the knowing of action lies in the observing of what one is about to do, is doing, and has done, and in the four knowings of illusion, the one who practices it, its result, and its severing. The ten discourses end with the arising of the eye of the Dharma, and this is just where the chapter comes to rest: the meaning of action does not lie in believing what others say, but in seeing one’s own action; seeing it, gladness arises and one gains one-pointedness of mind; gaining one-pointedness of mind, one dwells with loving-kindness and gains inner stillness; through this concentration one severs doubt in this very life and advances.

Carrying Forward — The End of the Chapter on Action

The treatise collection has no item-by-item gloss on this chapter; what can be carried forward is only the treatise’s own statement: “The discourses as a topic are the four Āgamas: first, the Saṃyukta Āgama; second”, “the Madhyama Āgama; third, the Dīrgha Āgama; fourth, the Ekottarika”, “further, it speaks with other characteristics, standing in the middle; therefore it is called the Madhyama Āgama”. The treatise gives the name by ‘standing in the middle’ and does not gloss the discourses by headings; the meaning of the ten discourses of this chapter is spoken only by the discourses themselves. The published sections of the Saṃyukta Āgama have already spoken of action: the Connected Discourses on the Six Sense Bases say that the eye, the ear, up to the mind all have action as their cause, their condition, and their bond, and also that there is the result of action but no agent; the Connected Discourses Spoken by the Disciples speak of the ten unwholesome courses of action. On top of that, the three discourses of this fascicle speak of action that cannot be turned, of suffering severed by oneself, and of the four knowings of action. What the Analysis of Action in the Abhidharmakośa discusses, that the ripening of action is fixed or not fixed, and the three times of action, to be experienced in this life, in the next birth, or in a later birth, may be consulted alongside the six questions of the Discourse on the Nirgranthas, that action with a result in this very life and action with a result in a later birth cannot be turned into each other, and that unripened action and action with a ripened result cannot be turned; the treatise also discusses the manifest and the unmanifest, and intention and what intention does, which may be consulted alongside the eight points of the Discourse to Siṃha, what is to be done and what is not to be done, and the four knowings of the Discourse to Pāṭaliya; but the treatise has its own headings, and this commentary explains the discourses only by the discourses, not by the treatise’s headings. The ten discourses of this chapter are divided between two fascicles; the commentary on the seven discourses of Fascicle 3 is in that fascicle, and the commentary on the three discourses of this fascicle ends here; the chapter is simply the two fascicles, and no separate commentary is made for the chapter.

“Ānanda, this is dharma benefiting dharma, dharma depending on dharma; thus these precepts go on to the first, that is, crossing from this shore and reaching the far shore”. The sixteen discourses of this fascicle are the whole of the Chapter on Supporting Conditions; the chapter title marks itself “Chapter on Supporting Conditions, the Fifth [sixteen discourses] [first-day recitation]”, so one fascicle is one chapter, and the chapter takes its name from this self-marking. The names of the sixteen discourses are given by the two-line summary verse at the head of the chapter: “What Meaning, Not Thinking, Mindfulness, Shame twice, Precepts and Respect twice each, and First Beginning”, “Nutriment twice, Knowledge of Ending, speaking of Nirvāṇa, Mixi, and Spoken for the Bhikṣus”. Of the sixteen, eleven are the World-Honored One addressing the bhikṣus; in the Discourse on What Meaning the venerable Ānanda asks and the World-Honored One answers, and in the Discourse on Not Thinking the World-Honored One addresses Ānanda; the fifth Discourse on Shame and Scruple and the seventh Discourse on Precepts are the venerable Śāriputra addressing the bhikṣus, saying the same as the two discourses of the World-Honored One with one simile of a tree added; the Discourse on Mixi first records how the venerable Mixi went to a mango grove to train in cutting off, and then the World-Honored One sets forth for him the five supporting dharmas. The word “supporting condition” in the chapter’s name is the one in the discourses’ “has a supporting condition, it is not without a supporting condition”: one dharma has another dharma as that which supports it, on which it depends, from which it arises. The sixteen discourses say only one thing, and say it in three ways: the Discourse on What Meaning asks “what is the meaning of keeping the precepts?” and answers that keeping the precepts brings freedom from regret, which is to state in the forward direction what it brings about; the five discourses from the Discourse on Mindfulness on speak of “harming” and “supporting”, without this that is harmed, with this that is supported, which is to state it from both sides; the five discourses from the Discourse on the First Beginning on ask “what is the supporting condition of craving for existence? The answer: ignorance is its supporting condition”, asking one layer down after another, which is to trace back what it arises from; the last two, the Discourse on Mixi and the Discourse Spoken for the Bhikṣus, do not ask item by item but set out five supporting dharmas that together nourish one mind, a fourth way beyond the three. The items the three ways list, from guarding the faculties, guarding the precepts, freedom from regret, gladness, joy, calm, happiness, concentration, seeing as it really is and knowing as it really is, weariness, and dispassion up to liberation, are thirteen items whose order never changes and which every discourse that uses this chain shares—six discourses, the Discourse on Mindfulness, the two Discourses on Shame and Scruple, the ninth discourse on Respect, the Discourse on the Knowledge of Ending, and the Discourse on Nirvāṇa, list them in full from guarding the faculties, and four, the Discourse on What Meaning, the Discourse on Not Thinking, and the two Discourses on Precepts, begin from freedom from regret without listing guarding the faculties and guarding the precepts, ten discourses in all; the eighth discourse on Respect puts in their place the five bodies of precepts, concentration, wisdom, liberation, and the knowledge and vision of liberation, and the chains of the Discourse on the First Beginning and the two Discourses on Nutriment list instead the five hindrances, the three bad conducts, the seven factors of awakening, and the four foundations of mindfulness, and do not use this chain. Among the discourses that use the chain, what differs is only its head and tail—the Discourse on What Meaning begins from keeping the precepts and ends at liberation, the Discourse on the Knowledge of Ending begins from the knowledge of ending and ends at attending upon good friends, and the Discourse on Nirvāṇa begins from nirvāṇa and ends at ignorance; the separate chain of the Discourse on the First Beginning begins from craving for existence and ends at the bad person.

I. What Is the Meaning of Keeping the Precepts (Discourses 42 and 43)

In the afternoon the venerable Ānanda rose from sitting in meditation, went to the Buddha, and asked: “World-Honored One, what is the meaning of keeping the precepts?” The World-Honored One answered: “Ānanda, keeping the precepts has the meaning of bringing freedom from regret. Ānanda, if one keeps the precepts, one gains freedom from regret”. Ānanda asked again what the meaning of freedom from regret is, and was answered that it brings gladness; so ten questions and ten answers, freedom from regret, gladness, joy, calm, happiness, concentration, seeing as it really is and knowing as it really is, weariness, dispassion, up to the question of the meaning of dispassion, answered: “dispassion has the meaning of bringing liberation. Ānanda, if one has dispassion, one gains liberation from all lust, anger, and delusion”. Every answer has two clauses: first that this dharma “brings” that meaning, then that one who has this “gains” that—the meaning is what it tends toward, the gaining is what it brings about. What is gained also has its place: for one who has joy, “the body gains calm”; one who has calm “feels happiness”; for one who has happiness, “the mind gains concentration”—calm is in the body, happiness in feeling, concentration in the mind, and for the other items no place is named. The World-Honored One then summed up: “because of keeping the precepts one gains freedom from regret, because of freedom from regret one gains gladness, because of gladness one gains joy, because of joy one gains calm, because of calm one gains happiness, because of happiness one gains concentration”, and from concentration on he begins a separate sentence: “the learned noble disciple, because of concentration, gains seeing as it really is and knowing as it really is; because of seeing as it really is and knowing as it really is, he gains weariness; because of weariness he gains dispassion; because of dispassion he gains liberation; because of liberation he knows he is liberated: birth is ended, the holy life has been established, what was to be done has been done, there will be no further existence, and he knows it as it really is”. Up to concentration is what anyone who keeps the precepts can gain; from concentration on is prefaced by “the learned noble disciple”, and from seeing as it really is and knowing as it really is on is the affair of the noble ones. “Dharma benefiting dharma, dharma depending on dharma”—benefiting is the earlier dharma benefiting the later; depending is the later dharma depending on the earlier; “thus these precepts go on to the first, that is, crossing from this shore and reaching the far shore”: the precepts are the first step on this shore, and what they tend toward is the far shore.

The items the Discourse on Not Thinking sets out are all the same; what differs is one sentence: “one who keeps the precepts should not think, ‘let me be free from regret’. Ānanda, it is simply the nature of dharmas that one who keeps the precepts gains freedom from regret”. So for all ten items: one who is free from regret should not think, let me be glad; one who is glad should not think, let me be joyful; up to “one who has dispassion should not think, ‘let me be liberated’. Ānanda, it is simply the nature of dharmas that one who has dispassion gains liberation from all lust, anger, and delusion”. The Discourse on What Meaning says that keeping the precepts brings freedom from regret; the Discourse on Not Thinking says that one who keeps the precepts should not think to seek freedom from regret; what is gained is one, and yet one should not seek it—because “it is simply the nature of dharmas”: dharma depends on dharma and does not wait on a person’s wish to seek it. It is gained without being thought of and sought; not seeking is not not practicing, it is practicing what one practices without thinking of what one will gain. The two discourses have the same summing-up: “because of keeping the precepts one gains freedom from regret”, “this is dharma benefiting dharma, dharma depending on dharma”; they differ in one word: the Discourse on What Meaning has “because of happiness one gains concentration”, the Discourse on Not Thinking “because of happiness one gains concentration of mind”, the same as the tenfold answer’s “the mind gains concentration”.

II. Harming and Supporting (Discourses 44 to 48)

The Discourse on Mindfulness, the two Discourses on Shame and Scruple, and the two Discourses on Precepts, five discourses of one form: without this that is harmed, with this that is supported. The Discourse on Mindfulness: “if a bhikṣu is very forgetful and without right knowledge, he harms right mindfulness and right knowledge”; without right mindfulness and right knowledge he harms guarding the faculties, guarding the precepts, freedom from regret, up to liberation, and “if there is no liberation, he harms nirvāṇa”; conversely, “if a bhikṣu is not very forgetful and has right knowledge, he supports right mindfulness and right knowledge”, and having right mindfulness and right knowledge he supports guarding the faculties and the thirteen items below, and “if there is liberation, he supports nirvāṇa”. The Discourse on Shame and Scruple begins from shame and scruple: “if a bhikṣu has no shame and no scruple, he harms loving respect; if there is no loving respect, he harms his faith; if there is no faith, he harms right reflection; if there is no right reflection, he harms right mindfulness and right knowledge”, and from there joins the chain of the Discourse on Mindfulness; shame and scruple come before loving respect, loving respect before faith, faith before right reflection, right reflection before right mindfulness and right knowledge, so the chain of the Discourse on Mindfulness here gains four items above. The Discourse on Precepts begins from the precepts: “if a bhikṣu breaks the precepts, he harms freedom from regret”, from freedom from regret down to nirvāṇa; keeping the precepts, he supports freedom from regret down to nirvāṇa. The chains of the three discourses differ in their first item and all end in nirvāṇa: the Discourse on Mindfulness has right mindfulness and right knowledge first, the Discourse on Shame and Scruple has shame and scruple first, the Discourse on Precepts has the precepts first; guarding the faculties and guarding the precepts sit after right mindfulness and right knowledge and before freedom from regret, and the Discourse on Precepts begins from freedom from regret without listing guarding the faculties and guarding the precepts, because the precepts are its head.

In the fifth Discourse on Shame and Scruple and the seventh Discourse on Precepts, the venerable Śāriputra addresses the bhikṣus, saying word for word what the discourses of the World-Honored One say, only calling them “Friends”, and each adds a simile of a tree. The simile of the Discourse on Shame and Scruple: “it is like a tree: if the outer bark is harmed, the inner bark does not form; if the inner bark does not form, then the stem, trunk, heartwood, joints, branches, leaves, flowers, and fruit all fail to form”; the simile of the Discourse on Precepts: “if the root is harmed, then the stem, trunk, heartwood, joints, branches, leaves, flowers, and fruit all fail to form”. Each simile has its positive side: “if the outer bark is not harmed, the inner bark forms; if the inner bark forms, then the stem, trunk, heartwood, joints, branches, leaves, flowers, and fruit all come to form”; “if the root is not harmed, then the stem, trunk, heartwood, joints, branches, leaves, flowers, and fruit all come to form”. Shame and scruple are like the outer bark, and the precepts are like the root; when the outer bark is harmed the inner bark does not form, and when the root is harmed everything from the stem and trunk up fails to form; when the outer bark is not harmed the inner bark forms and all eight parts form, and when the root is not harmed all eight parts form. What differs in the similes is what differs in the first items of the two discourses: shame and scruple are the outermost layer, and what they protect is within; the precepts are the root, and what they give rise to is above. Śāriputra’s discourses are placed after the World-Honored One’s, with the same name and a simile added, using the simile to explain why, in the chain the World-Honored One speaks, one harm harms all and one support supports all.

III. There Is No Such Possibility, There Is Such a Possibility (Discourses 49 and 50)

In the two Discourses on Respect the World-Honored One addresses the bhikṣus: “a bhikṣu should practice respect and good regard, and honor those who live the holy life”. Not practicing respect, not practicing good regard, not honoring those who live the holy life, then “that he should be complete in the dharmas of deportment, there is no such possibility”; not complete in the dharmas of deportment yet complete in the dharmas of training, not complete in the dharmas of training yet complete in the body of precepts, not complete in the body of precepts yet complete in the body of concentration, not complete in the body of concentration yet complete in the body of wisdom, not complete in the body of wisdom yet complete in the body of liberation, not complete in the body of liberation yet complete in the body of the knowledge and vision of liberation—of all these there is no such possibility; “not complete in the body of the knowledge and vision of liberation, that he should be complete in nirvāṇa, there is no such possibility”. Conversely, practicing respect and good regard and honoring those who live the holy life, that he should be complete in the dharmas of deportment there is such a possibility, up to “complete in the body of the knowledge and vision of liberation, that he should be complete in nirvāṇa, there is such a possibility”. The first half of the ninth discourse is the same, and from the dharmas of training on it changes to the thirteen items: “not complete in the dharmas of training, guarding the faculties, guarding the precepts, freedom from regret, gladness, joy, calm, happiness, concentration, seeing as it really is, knowing as it really is, weariness, dispassion, liberation; not complete in liberation, that he should be complete in nirvāṇa, there is no such possibility”. The two discourses have the same head, respect, good regard, and honoring those who live the holy life; after that the eighth discourse lists the five bodies of precepts, concentration, wisdom, liberation, and the knowledge and vision of liberation, and the ninth lists the thirteen items from guarding the faculties on; the five bodies and the thirteen items are here two ways of counting the same stretch of road, beginning from respect and ending at nirvāṇa. “There is no such possibility” and “there is such a possibility”, together with the “harming” and “supporting” of the previous five discourses and the “brings” and “gains” of the two before them, are three ways of saying one thing: not a prohibition, but the nature of dharmas; when the earlier dharma is not complete, there is no way for the later one to be complete.

IV. The First Beginning Cannot Be Known (Discourses 51 to 53)

The Discourse on the First Beginning: “as for craving for existence, its first beginning cannot be known; there was no craving for existence before, and yet now craving for existence has arisen, and this can be known: that on which craving for existence depends”. The first beginning of craving for existence cannot be known, while what craving for existence depends on can be known—one does not ask when it began, only from what it comes to be. “Craving for existence has a supporting condition, it is not without a supporting condition. What is the supporting condition of craving for existence? The answer: ignorance is its supporting condition”; ignorance has the five hindrances as its supporting condition, the five hindrances the three bad conducts, the three bad conducts not guarding the faculties, not guarding the faculties wrong mindfulness and wrong knowledge, wrong mindfulness and wrong knowledge wrong reflection, wrong reflection lack of faith, lack of faith hearing bad dharmas, hearing bad dharmas keeping close to bad friends, and “what is the supporting condition of keeping close to bad friends? The answer: the bad person is its supporting condition”. Tracing back stops at the bad person, and then it is stated forward: once there is the bad person, there is keeping close to bad friends, up to once there is ignorance there is craving for existence, “thus this craving for existence comes to be complete in turn”. The second half of the same discourse speaks of clear knowing and liberation: “clear knowing and liberation too have a supporting condition, they are not without a supporting condition. What is the supporting condition of clear knowing and liberation? The answer: the seven factors of awakening are their supporting condition”; the seven factors of awakening have the four foundations of mindfulness as their supporting condition, the four foundations of mindfulness the three good conducts, the three good conducts guarding the faculties, guarding the faculties right mindfulness and right knowledge, right mindfulness and right knowledge right reflection, right reflection faith, faith hearing the good Dharma, hearing the good Dharma keeping close to good friends, and “what is the supporting condition of keeping close to good friends? The answer: the good person is its supporting condition”; stated forward, “thus this clear knowing and liberation come to be complete in turn”. The two chains stand opposite each other: the bad person to the good person, bad friends to good friends, bad dharmas to the good Dharma, lack of faith to faith, wrong reflection to right reflection, wrong mindfulness and wrong knowledge to right mindfulness and right knowledge, not guarding the faculties to guarding the faculties; from there down, the bad chain is the three bad conducts, the five hindrances, ignorance, and craving for existence, and the good chain is the three good conducts, the four foundations of mindfulness, the seven factors of awakening, and clear knowing and liberation. The first beginning of craving for existence cannot be known, and the first beginning of clear knowing and liberation is never spoken of either; what can be known is their supporting condition, and at the head of what supports them, in both cases, is a person—the bad person and the good person.

The two Discourses on Nutriment are the same as the Discourse on the First Beginning, only replacing the word “supporting condition” with the word “nutriment”: “craving for existence has nutriment, it is not without nutriment”. A supporting condition is that depending on which something arises; nutriment is that fed by which something grows; one matter under two names. The eleventh discourse, the first on Nutriment, adds after each of the two chains the simile of the great ocean: “the great ocean too has nutriment, it is not without nutriment. What is the nutriment of the great ocean? The answer: the great rivers are its nutriment”; the great rivers have the small rivers as their nutriment, the small rivers the great streams, the great streams the small streams, the small streams the mountain crags, gullies, ravines, and level marshes, and “what is the nutriment of the mountain crags, gullies, ravines, and level marshes? The answer: rain is their nutriment. At times there is great rain, and when the great rain has fallen, the mountain crags, gullies, ravines, and level marshes are full of water”; when the mountain crags, gullies, ravines, and level marshes are full, the small streams are full, when the small streams are full the great streams are full, up to when the great rivers are full the great ocean is full, “thus that great ocean comes to be full in turn”. After each simile the chain is stated once more: “thus craving for existence too has nutriment, it is not without nutriment”, “thus clear knowing and liberation too have nutriment, they are not without nutriment”, traced back again from ignorance and from the seven factors of awakening and stated forward again; the simile stands in the middle of the chain without breaking it. The nutriment of the great ocean is traced back to rain, and rain flows forward to reach the ocean; the nutriment of craving for existence is traced back to the bad person, and the bad person comes forward to complete craving for existence; the nutriment of clear knowing and liberation is traced back to the good person, and the good person comes forward to complete clear knowing and liberation. The twelfth discourse, the second on Nutriment, leaves out the intermediate waters of the simile of the great ocean and says directly: “the great ocean too has nutriment, it is not without nutriment. What is the nutriment of the great ocean? The answer: rain is its nutriment”; why the great ocean is full, traced to its source, is only rain. What the three discourses say is one: craving for existence does not come to be without cause, and clear knowing and liberation do not come to be without cause either; their cause is not in a first beginning, but in the person one now keeps close to and the Dharma one now hears.

V. The Knowledge of Ending and Nirvāṇa (Discourses 54 and 55)

The Discourse on the Knowledge of Ending first establishes knowing and seeing: “one who knows and sees gains the ending of outflows, not one who does not know, not one who does not see”; what is known and seen is the four truths: “that is, knowing and seeing suffering as it really is, one gains the ending of outflows. Knowing and seeing the arising of suffering, knowing and seeing the cessation of suffering, knowing and seeing the path to the cessation of suffering as they really are, one gains the ending of outflows”. The word for “arising” here in “the arising of suffering” is the same character as the “supporting condition” in the chapter’s name: that from which suffering gathers and arises. Then it speaks of the supporting condition of the knowledge of ending: “the knowledge of ending has a supporting condition, it is not without a supporting condition. What is the supporting condition of the knowledge of ending? The answer: liberation is its supporting condition”; liberation has dispassion as its supporting condition, dispassion weariness, weariness seeing as it really is and knowing as it really is, seeing as it really is and knowing as it really is concentration, concentration happiness, happiness calm, calm joy, joy gladness, gladness freedom from regret, freedom from regret guarding the precepts, guarding the precepts guarding the faculties, guarding the faculties right mindfulness and right knowledge, right mindfulness and right knowledge right reflection, right reflection faith—so far the same as the earlier discourses; from faith it traces further: faith has acceptance through contemplating the Dharma as its supporting condition, acceptance through contemplating the Dharma reciting the Dharma, reciting the Dharma receiving and holding the Dharma, receiving and holding the Dharma contemplating the meaning of the Dharma, contemplating the meaning of the Dharma the ear element, the ear element hearing the good Dharma, hearing the good Dharma going to them, and “what is the supporting condition of going to them? The answer: attending upon them is its supporting condition”. From attending upon good friends to the knowledge of ending there are twenty-three steps of supporting; the chain of the Discourse on Nirvāṇa, from ignorance to nirvāṇa, has twenty-eight and is longer, and what the Discourse on the Knowledge of Ending has beyond the others are the eight steps before faith. “If one attends upon good friends, what was not heard is heard, and what has been heard is turned to benefit”; not attending upon them harms the supporting condition of attending, without attending one harms the supporting condition of going to them, harming each in turn, “if there is no liberation, one harms the supporting condition of the knowledge of ending”; attending upon them supports attending, supporting each in turn, “if there is liberation, one supports the knowledge of ending”. Before faith there is acceptance through contemplating the Dharma, and before that reciting, receiving and holding, contemplating the meaning, the ear element, hearing the Dharma, going to them, and attending upon them: faith does not arise from nowhere, it is what comes after hearing the Dharma, holding it, reciting it, contemplating it, and accepting it; and before hearing the Dharma one must first go to and attend upon good friends.

The Discourse on Nirvāṇa: “nirvāṇa has a supporting condition, it is not without a supporting condition. What is the supporting condition of nirvāṇa? The answer: liberation is its supporting condition”, and from liberation it traces back to faith, the same as the Discourse on the Knowledge of Ending; from faith it differs: “what is the supporting condition of faith? The answer: suffering is its supporting condition”; suffering has old age and death as its supporting condition, old age and death birth, birth existence, existence clinging, clinging craving, craving feeling, feeling contact, contact the six sense bases, the six sense bases name and form, name and form consciousness, consciousness formations, “what is the supporting condition of formations? The answer: ignorance is their supporting condition”. Then it is stated forward: “this is: conditioned by ignorance, formations; conditioned by formations, consciousness; conditioned by consciousness, name and form; conditioned by name and form, the six sense bases; conditioned by the six sense bases, contact; conditioned by contact, feeling; conditioned by feeling, craving; conditioned by craving, clinging; conditioned by clinging, existence; conditioned by existence, birth; conditioned by birth, old age and death; conditioned by old age and death, suffering”, “supported by suffering, there is faith. Supported by faith, there is right reflection”, right mindfulness and right knowledge, guarding the faculties, guarding the precepts, and so on down to liberation, “supported by liberation, one gains nirvāṇa”. This discourse is the pivot of the whole chapter: the supporting condition of nirvāṇa, traced back, passes faith and reaches suffering, passes suffering and enters the twelve links, and stops at ignorance; stated forward it runs from ignorance to suffering, and suffering is the supporting condition of faith. The last of the twelve links is suffering, and the first of the path is faith; suffering is where the two join: where dependent arising ends is where the path begins. Faith does not have evil as its supporting condition; it has suffering as its supporting condition; suffering is not what one seeks, yet in one who knows suffering faith arises. The Discourse on the First Beginning says that craving for existence has ignorance as its supporting condition; the Discourse on Nirvāṇa says that craving has feeling as its supporting condition and feeling has contact as its supporting condition; the craving the two discourses speak of is in one the first item of the round of existence and in the other one of the twelve links, the same word in a different position, each according to its discourse. The names of the twelve links in this fascicle are, in the Chinese, “further contact”, “awareness”, and “receiving” for contact, feeling, and clinging; the reader of this fascicle recognizes contact in the one, feeling in the next, and clinging in the third, and the characters are not changed.

VI. The Mind’s Liberation Not Yet Ripe (Discourses 56 and 57)

The Discourse on Mixi first records the events: the venerable Mixi was the World-Honored One’s attendant; having begged for food, he came to the bank of the Jinbi River, saw a fine mango grove, and thought, “if a son of good family wished to train in cutting off, this is the place to do it; I too have something to cut off—might I not train in cutting off in this quiet place?” and told the World-Honored One that he wished to go. The World-Honored One told him: “Mixi, do you know it or not? I am alone with no one, I have no attendant; you may stay a little, until a bhikṣu comes to be my attendant”; Mixi asked again and a third time, the World-Honored One answered again and a third time, and Mixi said once more: “the World-Honored One has nothing to accomplish, nothing to do, and nothing to look to. World-Honored One, I have something to accomplish, something to do, and something to look to”—the World-Honored One has nothing to seek, and I have something to seek. The World-Honored One then said: “Mixi, since you wish to seek cutting off, what more should I say? Mixi, go, as you wish”. Mixi went to the mango grove, sat cross-legged under a tree, and “there arose three evil and unwholesome thoughts, a thought of desire, a thought of hatred, and a thought of harming, and because of this he thought of the World-Honored One”, and returned to tell him. The World-Honored One told him: “when the mind’s liberation is not yet ripe, for one who wishes to ripen it there are five supporting dharmas”. The first, “he himself is together with good friends, as a good friend joined with good friends”; the second, “he cultivates the restraining precepts and guards the code of liberation, and further takes good care of his deportment and manners, sees danger in the slightest fault, is ever fearful of it, and receives and keeps the training precepts”; the third, “that is, what may be spoken of as noble and meaningful, which makes the mind pliant and leaves the mind without hindrance”, the things spoken of being “speaking of precepts, speaking of concentration, speaking of wisdom, speaking of liberation, speaking of the knowledge and vision of liberation, speaking of reduction, speaking of not delighting in company, speaking of few wishes, speaking of contentment, speaking of cutting off, speaking of dispassion, speaking of cessation, speaking of sitting in meditation, speaking of dependent arising”, “and such things as ascetics speak of he gains in full, gains easily, and does not gain with difficulty”—not only listing what may be spoken of, but saying that such speech is gained in full and easily, not with difficulty; the fourth, “he always practices effort, cutting off what is evil and unwholesome and cultivating the good dharmas, ever rousing his own intention, single and firm, as the root of all good, not giving up the means”; the fifth, “he cultivates wisdom and contemplates the dharma of rise and decline, gains such knowledge, the noble wisdom that is clear and penetrating, that discerns and understands, so as rightly to end suffering”. After the five supporting dharmas he further cultivates four dharmas: “he cultivates the contemplation of the impure, to cut off desire; he cultivates loving-kindness, to cut off hatred; he cultivates breathing out and breathing in, to cut off distracted thoughts; he cultivates the perception of impermanence, to cut off conceit”. Then the World-Honored One says it once more, with the first gathering the rest: “if a bhikṣu is himself together with good friends, as a good friend joined with good friends, know that he will surely cultivate the restraining precepts”, know that he will surely gain what may be spoken of as noble and meaningful, know that he will surely practice effort, know that he will surely practice wisdom, know that he will surely cultivate the contemplation of the impure, loving-kindness, breathing out and breathing in, and the perception of impermanence; and he closes with the perception of impermanence: “if a bhikṣu gains the perception of impermanence, he will surely gain the perception of not self”, and one who gains the perception of not self “in this very life cuts off all conceit and gains stilling, cessation, ending, the unconditioned, nirvāṇa”. The events of Mixi and the five supporting dharmas answer to each other: Mixi going alone to the mango grove is leaving good friends to seek cutting off; the three evil thoughts arising is the mind’s liberation not yet ripe; the World-Honored One does not say that the quiet place is wrong, only that one not yet ripe should first cultivate the five dharmas, and the first of the five is being together with good friends. The four dharmas treat four things: the contemplation of the impure treats desire, loving-kindness treats hatred, breathing out and breathing in treats distracted thoughts, the perception of impermanence treats conceit—of the three thoughts that arose in Mixi, a thought of desire, a thought of hatred, and a thought of harming, the first two are the desire and hatred the four dharmas cut off. The perception of impermanence brings the perception of not self, the perception of not self cuts off conceit, and cutting off conceit brings nirvāṇa: the five supporting dharmas nourish the mind to ripeness, and the four dharmas cut off what is to be cut off, and what is cut off reaches conceit and stops.

In the Discourse Spoken for the Bhikṣus, the World-Honored One addresses the bhikṣus: “when the mind’s liberation is not yet ripe, for one who wishes to ripen it there are five supporting dharmas”; the five supporting dharmas, the four dharmas, the first gathering the other four, and the perception of impermanence, the perception of not self, and the cutting off of conceit are all the same as in the Discourse on Mixi, only without the events and only addressed to the bhikṣus. The chapter ends with this discourse: the chains of all the earlier discourses speak of one dharma supporting one dharma; these two discourses speak of five dharmas together supporting one mind, ripening what is not yet ripe; and what is ripened? The mind’s liberation.

VII. How to Read the Fascicle

The word “supporting condition” in the chapter’s name is explained by the discourses themselves: “has a supporting condition, it is not without a supporting condition”—a dharma does not come to be of itself, it has what supports it; ‘what is the supporting condition of such a thing? The answer: such a thing is its supporting condition’—what supports it is another dharma; “supported by suffering, there is faith”—being supported, it is gained. A supporting condition is what something depends on, comes from, and is nourished by; the Discourses on Nutriment replace it with the word nutriment, and the sense of nourishing shows more plainly. In the discourses of the chapter that use the chain, the middle thirteen items never change: guarding the faculties, guarding the precepts, freedom from regret, gladness, joy, calm, happiness, concentration, seeing as it really is and knowing as it really is, weariness, dispassion, liberation, with nirvāṇa or the knowledge of ending as their end. The heads of the chains differ: keeping the precepts, right mindfulness and right knowledge, shame and scruple, respect, faith, acceptance through contemplating the Dharma, attending upon good friends, the good person, suffering, ignorance. One who reads this chapter should look at the head: where a chain begins is what that discourse teaches. The Discourse on What Meaning begins from keeping the precepts, teaching one who keeps the precepts to know what they tend toward; the Discourse on the First Beginning begins from the bad person and the good person, teaching the importance of whom one keeps close to; the Discourse on the Knowledge of Ending begins from attending upon good friends, teaching the order of hearing the Dharma; the Discourse on Nirvāṇa begins from ignorance, teaching where suffering and faith join; the Discourse on Mixi begins from good friends, teaching that a mind not yet ripe must first be nourished. Their end is one: liberation, nirvāṇa. One sentence of the Discourse on Not Thinking governs the whole chapter: “it is simply the nature of dharmas”—when the earlier dharma is complete the later is complete of itself, gained without thinking or seeking; yet “it is simply the nature of dharmas” is not not practicing, as the Discourses on Respect say: when the earlier dharma is not complete, for the later there is no such possibility. The Discourse on the First Beginning says that the first beginning cannot be known while what it depends on can be known, and this is the limit of this chapter: it does not ask when ignorance began, only what supports ignorance; it does not ask the start of craving for existence, only the person one now keeps close to.

Carrying Forward — The End of the Chapter on Supporting Conditions

The treatise collection has no item-by-item gloss on this chapter; what can be carried forward is only the treatise’s own statement: “The discourses as a topic are the four Āgamas: first, the Saṃyukta Āgama; second”, “the Madhyama Āgama; third, the Dīrgha Āgama; fourth, the Ekottarika”, “further, it speaks with other characteristics, standing in the middle; therefore it is called the Madhyama Āgama”. The treatise gives the name by ‘standing in the middle’ and does not gloss the discourses by headings; the meaning of the sixteen discourses of this chapter is spoken only by the discourses themselves, and the commentary does not set up a parallel term from the treatise. The forward statement of the twelve links in this fascicle’s Discourse on Nirvāṇa, “this is: conditioned by ignorance, formations; conditioned by formations, consciousness; conditioned by consciousness, name and form”, has the same form as the dependent arising spoken in the discourses of the Saṃyukta Āgama’s Connected Discourses on Dependent Arising, Nutriment, the Truths, and the Elements; that chapter already has its commentary, and this chapter does not write a separate commentary on the links of dependent arising; what this chapter adds is “conditioned by old age and death, suffering. Supported by suffering, there is faith”—the end of dependent arising joining the head of the path, which is what the Chapter on Supporting Conditions alone says. The Chapter on Supporting Conditions, one fascicle of sixteen discourses, is here complete; the commentary of each fascicle carries its own fascicle, and the chapter being the fascicle, no separate commentary is written for the chapter.