/ Research / Buddha / Sutta Pitaka / Digha Nikaya / Brahmajāla Sutta 2

Part 2

Brahmajāla Sutta 2

49 minutes • 10259 words

Table of contents

Dependent Co-arising

[ II ] Partial Eternalism

“There are some contemplatives & brahmans who are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists, who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos on four grounds.7 And with reference to what, coming from what, are these honorable contemplatives & brahmans partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos on four grounds?

“There ultimately comes a time when, with the passing of a long stretch of time, this cosmos devolves. When the cosmos is devolving, beings for the most part head toward the Radiant (brahmās). There they stay: mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, coursing through the air, established in beauty for a long stretch of time. Then there ultimately comes a time when, with the passing of a long stretch of time, this cosmos evolves. When the cosmos is evolving, an empty Brahmā palace appears. Then a certain being—from the exhaustion of his life span or the exhaustion of his merit8—falls from the company of the Radiant and re-arises in the empty Brahmā palace. And there he still stays mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, coursing through the air, established in beauty for a long stretch of time.

“After dwelling there alone for a long time, he experiences displeasure & agitation: ‘O, if only other beings would come to this world!’

“Then other beings, through the ending of their life span or the ending of their merit, fall from the company of the Radiant and reappear in the Brahmā palace, in the company of that being. And there they still stay mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, coursing through the air, established in beauty for a long stretch of time.

“Then the thought occurs to the being who reappeared first: ‘I am Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer & Ruler, Father of All That Have Been & Shall Be.9 These beings were created by me. Why is that? First the thought occurred to me, “O, if only other beings would come to this world!” And thus my direction of will brought these beings to this world.’ As for the beings who reappeared later, this thought occurs to them: ‘This is Brahmā… Father of All That Have Been & Shall Be. We were created by this Brahmā. Why is that? We saw that he appeared here before, while we appeared after.’ The being who reappeared first is of longer life span, more beautiful, & more influential, while the beings who reappeared later are of shorter life span, less beautiful, & less influential.

“This is the first basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos.

“As for the second: With reference to what, coming from what, are contemplatives & brahmans partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos?

“There are, monks, devas called Corrupted by Play.10 They spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play. Because they spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play, their mindfulness becomes muddled. Because of muddled mindfulness, they fall from that company of devas.

“Now, there is the possibility, monks, that a certain being, having fallen from that company, comes to this world. Having come to this world, he goes forth from the home life into homelessness. Having gone forth from the home life into homelessness, he—through ardency, through exertion, through commitment, through heedfulness, through right attention—touches an awareness-concentration such that in his concentrated mind he recollects that former life, but nothing prior to that. He says, ‘Those honorable devas who are not corrupted by play don’t spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play. Because they don’t spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play, their mindfulness doesn’t become muddled. Because of unmuddled mindfulness, they don’t fall from that company. They are constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, and will remain just like that for eternity. But those of us who were corrupted by play spent an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play. Because we spent an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play, our mindfulness became muddled. Because of muddled mindfulness, we fell from that company and—inconstant, impermanent, short-lived, subject to falling—have come to this world.’

“This is the second basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos.

“As for the third: With reference to what, coming from what, are contemplatives & brahmans partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos?

“There are, monks, devas called Corrupted by Mind. They spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another.11 Because they spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another, their minds become corrupted toward one another. Because they are corrupted in mind toward one another, they grow exhausted in body & exhausted in mind. They fall from that company of devas.

“Now, there is the possibility, monks, that a certain being, having fallen from that company, comes to this world. Having come to this world, he goes forth from the home life into homelessness. Having gone forth from the home life into homelessness, he—through ardency, through exertion, through commitment, through heedfulness, through right attention—touches an awareness-concentration such that in his concentrated mind he recollects that former life, but nothing prior to that. He says, ‘Those honorable devas who are not corrupted in mind don’t spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another. Because they don’t spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another, their minds don’t become corrupted toward one another. Because they are uncorrupted in mind toward one another, they don’t grow exhausted in body or exhausted in mind. They don’t fall from that company. They are constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, and will remain just like that for eternity. But those of us who were corrupted in mind spent an excessive amount of time staring at one another. Because we spent an excessive amount of time staring at one another, our minds became corrupted toward one another. Because we were corrupted in mind toward one another, we grew exhausted in body & exhausted in mind. We fell from that company and—inconstant, impermanent, short-lived, subject to falling—have come to this world.’

“This is the third basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos.

“As for the fourth: With reference to what, coming from what, are contemplatives & brahmans partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos?

“There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman is a logician, an inquirer. He states his own improvisation, hammered out by logic, deduced from his inquiries: ‘That which is called “eye” & “ear” & “nose” & “tongue” & “body”: That self is inconstant, impermanent, non-eternal, subject to change. But that which is called “mind” or “intellect” or “consciousness”: That self is constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, and will remain just like that for eternity.’12 “This is the fourth basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos.

“These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists, who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos on four grounds. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists, who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos, they all do so on one or another of these four grounds. There is nothing outside of this.

“With regard to this, the Tathāgata discerns that ‘These standpoints, thus seized, thus grasped at, lead to such & such a destination, to such & such a state in the world beyond.’ That the Tathāgata discerns. And he discerns what is higher than that. And yet, discerning that, he does not grasp at it. And as he is not grasping at it, unbinding [nibbuti] is experienced right within. Knowing, as they have come to be, the origination, ending, allure, & drawbacks of feelings, along with the escape from feelings, the Tathāgata, monks—through lack of clinging/sustenance—is released.

“These, monks, are the dhammas—deep, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise—that the Tathāgata proclaims, having directly known & realized them for himself, and that those who, rightly speaking in praise of the Tathāgata in line with what is factual, would speak.

Finite or Infinite Cosmos

“There are some contemplatives & brahmans who are finite-ists or infinite-ists, who proclaim a finite or infinite cosmos on four grounds.13 And with reference to what, coming from what, are these honorable contemplatives & brahmans finite-ists or infinite-ists who proclaim a finite or infinite cosmos on four grounds?

“There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman—through ardency, through exertion, through commitment, through heedfulness, through right attention—touches an awareness-concentration such that he remains with the perception of ‘finite’ with regard to the cosmos. He says, ‘This cosmos is finite, encircled. Why is that? Because I… have attained an awareness-concentration such that I remain with the perception of “finite” with regard to the cosmos. By means of that, I know that the cosmos is finite, encircled.’

“This is the first basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are finite-ists or infinite-ists who proclaim a finite or infinite cosmos.

“As for the second: With reference to what, coming from what, are honorable contemplatives & brahmans finite-ists or infinite-ists who proclaim a finite or infinite cosmos?

“There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman… touches an awareness-concentration such that he remains with the perception of ‘infinite’ with regard to the cosmos. He says, ‘This cosmos is infinite, unencircled. Those contemplatives & brahmans who say that this cosmos is finite, encircled: That is a falsehood on their part. This cosmos is infinite, unencircled. Why is that? Because I… have touched an awareness-concentration such that I remain with the perception of “infinite” with regard to the cosmos. By means of that, I know that the cosmos is infinite, unencircled.’

“This is the second basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are finite-ists or infinite-ists who proclaim a finite or infinite cosmos.

“As for the third: With reference to what, coming from what, are honorable contemplatives & brahmans finite-ists or infinite-ists who proclaim a finite or infinite cosmos?

“There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman… touches an awareness-concentration such that he remains with the perception of ‘finite’ with regard to the cosmos above & below, but with the perception of ‘infinite’ all around. He says, ‘This cosmos is finite & infinite. Those contemplatives & brahmans who say that this cosmos is finite, encircled: That is a falsehood on their part. Those contemplatives & brahmans who say that this cosmos is infinite, unencircled: That is a falsehood on their part, too. This cosmos is finite & infinite. Why is that? Because I… have attained an awareness-concentration such that I remain with the perception of “finite” with regard to the cosmos above & below, but with the perception of “infinite” all around. By means of that, I know that the cosmos is finite & infinite.’

“This is the third basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are finite-ists or infinite-ists who proclaim a finite or infinite cosmos.

“As for the fourth: With reference to what, coming from what, are honorable contemplatives & brahmans finite-ists or infinite-ists who proclaim a finite or infinite cosmos?

“There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman is a logician, an inquirer. He states his own improvisation, hammered out by logic, deduced from his inquiries: ‘The cosmos is neither finite nor infinite. Those contemplatives & brahmans who say that this cosmos is finite, encircled: That is a falsehood on their part. Those contemplatives & brahmans who say that this cosmos is infinite, unencircled: That is a falsehood on their part, too. Those contemplatives & brahmans who say that this cosmos is finite & infinite: That is a falsehood on their part, too. The cosmos is neither finite nor infinite.’

“This is the fourth basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are finite-ists or infinite-ists who proclaim a finite or infinite cosmos.

“These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who are finite-ists or infinite-ists who proclaim a finite or infinite cosmos on four grounds. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who are finite-ists or infinite-ists, who proclaim a finite or infinite cosmos, they all do so on one or another of these four grounds. There is nothing outside of this.

Eel-wriggling

“There are, monks, some contemplatives & brahmans who, being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling, on four grounds. And with reference to what, coming from what, do these honorable contemplatives & brahmans, when being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling, on four grounds?

13.“There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman doesn’t discern as it has come to be that ‘This is skillful,’ or that ‘This is unskillful.’ The thought occurs to him: ‘I don’t discern as it has come to be that “This is skillful,” or that “This is unskillful.” If I—not discerning as it has come to be that “This is skillful,” not discerning as it has come to be that “This is unskillful”—were to declare that “This is skillful,” or that “This is unskillful”: That would be a falsehood on my part. Whatever would be a falsehood on my part would be a distress for me. Whatever would be a distress for me would be an obstacle for me.’ So, out of fear of falsehood, a loathing for falsehood, he does not declare that ‘This is skillful,’ or that ‘This is unskillful.’14 Being asked questions regarding this or that, he resorts to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling: ‘I don’t think so. I don’t think in that way. I don’t think otherwise. I don’t think not. I don’t think not not.’

“This is the first basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans, when being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling.

“As for the second: With reference to what, coming from what, do honorable contemplatives & brahmans, when being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling?

“There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman doesn’t discern as it has come to be that ‘This is skillful,’ or that ‘This is unskillful.’ The thought occurs to him: ‘I don’t discern as it has come to be that “This is skillful,” or that “This is unskillful.” If I—not discerning as it has come to be that “This is skillful,” not discerning as it has come to be that “This is unskillful”—were to declare that “This is skillful,” or that “This is unskillful”: That would be a desire on my part, a passion, an aversion, or an irritation on my part. Whatever would be a desire or passion or aversion or irritation on my part would be a clinging on my part. Whatever would be a clinging on my part would be a distress for me. Whatever would be a distress for me would be an obstacle for me.’ So, out of fear of clinging, a loathing for clinging, he does not declare that ‘This is skillful,’ or that ‘This is unskillful.’ Being asked questions regarding this or that, he resorts to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling: ‘I don’t think so. I don’t think in that way. I don’t think otherwise. I don’t think not. I don’t think not not.’

“This is the second basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans, when being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling.

“As for the third: With reference to what, coming from what, do honorable contemplatives & brahmans, when being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling?

“There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman doesn’t discern as it has come to be that ‘This is skillful,’ or that ‘This is unskillful.’ The thought occurs to him: ‘I don’t discern as it has come to be that “This is skillful,” or that “This is unskillful.” If I—not discerning as it has come to be that “This is skillful,” not discerning as it has come to be that “This is unskillful”—were to declare that “This is skillful,” or that “This is unskillful”: There are contemplatives & brahmans who are pundits, subtle, masters of debate. Like hair-splitting marksmen, they prowl about, shooting [philosophical] standpoints to pieces, as it were, with their dialectic. They might cross-question me there, press me for reasons, rebuke me. When they would cross-question me there, press me for reasons, rebuke me, I might not be able to stand my ground against them. The fact that I would not stand my ground would be a distress for me. Whatever would be a distress for me would be an obstacle for me.’ So, out of a fear for interrogation, a loathing for interrogation, he does not declare that ‘This is skillful’ or that ‘This is unskillful.’ Being asked questions regarding this or that, he resorts to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling: ‘I don’t think so. I don’t think in that way. I don’t think otherwise. I don’t think not. I don’t think not not.’

“This is the third basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans, when being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling.

“As for the fourth: With reference to what, coming from what, do honorable contemplatives & brahmans, when being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling?

“There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman is dull & exceedingly stupid. Out of dullness & exceeding stupidity, he—being asked questions regarding this or that—resorts to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling: “If you ask me if there exists another world [after death],15 if I thought that there exists another world, would I declare that to you? I don’t think so. I don’t think in that way. I don’t think otherwise. I don’t think not. I don’t think not not. If you asked me if there isn’t another world… both is & isn’t… neither is nor isn’t… if there are beings who wander on16… if there aren’t… both are & aren’t… neither are nor aren’t… if the Tathāgata exists after death… doesn’t exist after death… both exists & doesn’t exist after death… neither exists nor doesn’t exist after death,17 would I declare that to you? I don’t think so. I don’t think in that way. I don’t think otherwise. I don’t think not. I don’t think not not.’

“This is the fourth basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans, when being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling.

“These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who, being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who, being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling, they all do so on one or another of these four grounds. There is nothing outside of this.

Fortuitous-arising

“There are, monks, some contemplatives & brahmans who are fortuitous-arising-ists, who proclaim a fortuitously-arisen self & cosmos on two grounds.18 And with reference to what, coming from what, are these honorable contemplatives & brahmans fortuitous-arising-ists who proclaim a fortuitously-arisen self & cosmos on two grounds?

“There are, monks, devas called Non-percipient Beings.19 But, with the arising of perception, they fall from that company of devas. Now, there is the possibility, monks, that a certain being, having fallen from that company, comes to this world. Having come to this world, he goes forth from the home life into homelessness. Having gone forth from the home life into homelessness, he—through ardency, through exertion, through commitment, through heedfulness, through right attention—touches an awareness-concentration such that he recollects the arising of perception, but nothing prior to that. He says, ‘The self & the cosmos are fortuitously arisen. Why is that? Because before I wasn’t; now I am. Not having been, I sprang into being.’

“This is the first basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are fortuitous-arising-ists who proclaim a fortuitously-arisen self & cosmos.

“As for the second: With reference to what, coming from what, are honorable contemplatives & brahmans fortuitous-arising-ists who proclaim a fortuitously-arisen self & cosmos?

“There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman is a logician, an inquirer. He states his own improvisation, hammered out by logic, deduced from his inquiries: ‘The self & the cosmos are fortuitously arisen.’

“This is the second basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are fortuitous-arising-ists, who proclaim a fortuitously-arisen self & cosmos.

“These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who are fortuitous-arising-ists, who proclaim a fortuitously-arisen self & cosmos on two grounds. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who are fortuitous-arising-ists, who proclaim a fortuitously-arisen self & cosmos, they all do so on one or another of these two grounds. There is nothing outside of this.

“These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the past, who hold views about the past, who approve of various beliefs with reference to the past on 18 grounds. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the past, who hold views about the past, who approve of various beliefs with reference to the past, they all do so on one or another of these 18 grounds. There is nothing outside of this.

Theorists about the Future “There are some contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the future, who hold views about the future, who approve of various beliefs with reference to the future on 44 grounds. And with reference to what, coming from what, are these honorable contemplatives & brahmans theorists about the past who hold views about the future, who approve of various beliefs with reference to the future on 44 grounds?

Percipient After-death

“There are, monks, some contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a percipient after-death, who proclaim a percipient self20 after death on 16 grounds. And with reference to what, coming from what, are these honorable contemplatives & brahmans adherents of a percipient after-death, who proclaim a percipient self after death on 16 grounds?

“They proclaim that the self after death is undiseased,21 percipient, &:

possessed of form,
formless,
possessed of form & formless,
neither possessed of form nor formless,
finite,
infinite,
both finite & infinite,
neither finite nor infinite,
percipient of singleness,
percipient of multiplicity,
percipient of what is limited,
percipient of what is limitless,
exclusively pleasant,22
exclusively pained,
both pleasant & pained,
neither pleasant nor pained.

“These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a percipient after-death, who proclaim a percipient self after death on 16 grounds. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a percipient after-death, who proclaim a percipient self after death, they all do so on one or another of these 16 grounds. There is nothing outside of this.

Non-percipient After-death

“There are, monks, some contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a non-percipient after-death, who proclaim a non-percipient self after death on eight grounds. And with reference to what, coming from what, are these honorable contemplatives & brahmans adherents of a non-percipient after-death who proclaim a non-percipient self after death on eight grounds?

“They proclaim that the self after death is undiseased, non-percipient, &:

possessed of form,
formless,
possessed of form & formless,
neither possessed of form nor formless,
finite,
infinite,
both finite & infinite,
neither finite nor infinite.

“These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a non-percipient after-death, who proclaim a non-percipient self after death on eight grounds. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a non-percipient after-death, who proclaim a non-percipient self after death, they all do so on one or another of these eight grounds. There is nothing outside of this.

Neither Percipient nor Non-percipient After-death

“There are, monks, some contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a neither percipient nor non-percipient after-death, who proclaim a neither percipient nor non-percipient self after death on eight grounds. And with reference to what, coming from what, are these honorable contemplatives & brahmans adherents of a neither percipient nor non-percipient after-death who proclaim a neither percipient nor non-percipient self after death on eight grounds?

“They proclaim that the self after death is undiseased, neither percipient nor non-percipient, &:

possessed of form,
formless,
possessed of form & formless,
neither possessed of form nor formless,
finite,
infinite,
both finite & infinite,
neither finite nor infinite.

“These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a neither percipient nor non-percipient after-death, who proclaim a neither percipient nor non-percipient self after death on eight grounds. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a neither percipient nor non-percipient after-death, who proclaim a neither percipient nor non-percipient self after death, they all do so on one or another of these eight grounds. There is nothing outside of this.

Annihilationism

“There are, monks, some contemplatives & brahmans who are annihilationists,23 who proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being [sant satta]24 on seven grounds. And with reference to what, coming from what, are these honorable contemplatives & brahmans annihilationists who proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being on seven grounds?

“There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman is of this opinion, this view: ’When the self that is possessed of form, made of the four great elements,25 engendered by mother & father, is—with the breakup of the body—annihilated, destroyed, & does not exist after death, it’s to this extent that the self is completely exterminated.’ This is how some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being.
“Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that the self is completely exterminated. There is another self—divine, possessed of form, on the sensual level, feeding on material food. You don’t know or see that, but I know it, I see it. When this self—with the breakup of the body—is annihilated, destroyed, & does not exist after death, it’s to this extent that the self is completely exterminated.’ This is how some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being.
“Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that the self is completely exterminated. There is another self—divine, possessed of form,26 mind-made, complete in all its limbs, not destitute of any faculties. You don’t know or see that, but I know it, I see it. When this self—with the breakup of the body—is annihilated, destroyed, & does not exist after death, it’s to this extent that the self is completely exterminated.’ This is how some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being.
“Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that the self is completely exterminated. There is another self where—with the complete transcending of perceptions of form, with the disappearance of perceptions of resistance, and not heeding perceptions of diversity, (perceiving,) ‘Infinite space’—one enters & remains in the dimension of the infinitude of space.27 You don’t know or see that, but I know it, I see it. When this self—with the breakup of the body—is annihilated, destroyed, & does not exist after death, it’s to this extent that the self is completely exterminated.’
“Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that the self is completely exterminated. There is another self where—with the complete transcending of the dimension of the infinitude of space, (perceiving,) ‘Infinite consciousness’—one enters & remains in the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness. You don’t know or see that, but I know it, I see it. When this self—with the breakup of the body—is annihilated, destroyed, & does not exist after death, it’s to this extent that the self is completely exterminated.’ This is how some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being.
“Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that the self is completely exterminated. There is another self where—with the complete transcending of the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, (perceiving,) ‘There is nothing’—one enters & remains in the dimension of nothingness.28 You don’t know or see that, but I know it, I see it. When this self—with the breakup of the body—is annihilated, destroyed, & does not exist after death, it’s to this extent that the self is completely exterminated.’ This is how some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being.
“Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that the self is completely exterminated. There is another self where—with the complete transcending of the dimension of nothingness—one enters & remains in the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. You don’t know or see that, but I know it, I see it. When this self—with the breakup of the body—is annihilated, destroyed, & does not exist after death, it’s to this extent that the self is completely exterminated.’ This is how some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being.

“These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who are annihilationists, who proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being on seven grounds. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who are annihilationists who proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being, they all do so on one or another of these seven grounds. There is nothing outside of this.

The Self’s Unbinding in the Here-&-Now

“There are, monks, some contemplatives & brahmans who are proponents of unbinding [nibbāna] in the here-&-now, who proclaim the highest here-&-now unbinding of an existing being [sant satta]29 on five grounds. And with reference to what, coming from what, are these honorable contemplatives & brahmans proponents of unbinding in the here-&-now who proclaim the highest here-&-now unbinding of an existing being on five grounds?

“There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman is of this opinion, this view: ‘When the self goes about endowed & provided with the five strings of sensuality, it’s to this extent that the self attains the highest here-&-now unbinding.’30 This is how some proclaim the highest here-&-now unbinding of an existing being.
“Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that one attains the highest here-&-now unbinding. Why is that? Because sensuality is inconstant, stressful, subject to change. From its condition of being subject to change & becoming otherwise arises sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. But when this self—quite secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful qualities—enters & remains in the first jhāna: rapture & pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation,31 it’s to that extent that this self attains the highest here-&-now unbinding.’ This is how some proclaim the highest here-&-now unbinding of an existing being.
“Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that one attains the highest here-&-now unbinding. Why is that? Because precisely what’s thought or evaluated there: That’s declared to be gross. But when this self—with the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations—enters & remains in the second jhāna: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation, internal assurance, it’s to that extent that this self attains the highest here-&-now unbinding.’ This is how some proclaim the highest here-&-now unbinding of an existing being.
“Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that one attains the highest here-&-now unbinding. Why is that? Because precisely the state of mental exhilaration immersed in rapture there: That’s declared to be gross. But when this self, with the fading of rapture, remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and, sensing pleasure with the body, enters & remains in the third jhāna, of which the noble ones declare, ‘Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding,’ it’s to that extent that this self attains the highest here-&-now unbinding.’ This is how some proclaim the highest here-&-now unbinding of an existing being.
“Another says to him, ‘There is, my good man, that self of which you speak. I don’t say that there’s not. But it’s not to that extent that one attains the highest here-&-now unbinding. Why is that? Because precisely the mental concern with “pleasure” there: That’s declared to be gross. But when this self, with the abandoning of pleasure & pain—as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress—enters & remains in the fourth jhāna: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain, it’s to that extent that this self attains the highest here-&-now unbinding.’ This is how some proclaim the highest here-&-now unbinding of an existing being.

“These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who are proponents of unbinding in the here-&-now, who proclaim the highest here-&-now unbinding of an existing being on five grounds. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who are proponents of unbinding in the here-&-now, who proclaim the highest here-&-now unbinding of an existing being, they all do so on one or another of these five grounds. There is nothing outside of this.

“These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the future, who hold views about the future, who approve of various beliefs with reference to the future on 44 grounds. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the future, who hold views about the future, who approve of various beliefs with reference to the future, they all do so on one or another of these 44 grounds. There is nothing outside of this.

“These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the past, theorists about the future, & theorists about the past & the future, who hold views about the past & the future, who approve of various beliefs with reference to the past & the future on 62 grounds. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the past, theorists about the future, & theorists about the past & the future, who hold views about the past & the future, who approve of various beliefs with reference to the past & the future, they all do so on one or another of these 62 grounds. There is nothing outside of this.

Agitation & Vacillation “There,32 where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of eternalism proclaim an eternal self & cosmos on four grounds, that is just an agitation & vacillation to be felt by those contemplatives & brahmans who, not knowing, not seeing, are immersed in craving.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos on four grounds, that is just an agitation & vacillation to be felt by those contemplatives & brahmans who, not knowing, not seeing, are immersed in craving.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are finite-ists or infinite-ists proclaim a finite or infinite cosmos on four grounds, that is just an agitation & vacillation to be felt by those contemplatives & brahmans who, not knowing, not seeing, are immersed in craving.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who, being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling on four grounds, that is just an agitation & vacillation to be felt by those contemplatives & brahmans who, not knowing, not seeing, are immersed in craving.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are fortuitous-arising-ists proclaim a fortuitously-arisen self & cosmos on two grounds, that is just an agitation & vacillation to be felt by those contemplatives & brahmans who, not knowing, not seeing, are immersed in craving.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the past hold views about the past, approve of various beliefs with reference to the past on 18 grounds, that is just an agitation & vacillation to be felt by those contemplatives & brahmans who, not knowing, not seeing, are immersed in craving.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a percipient after-death proclaim a percipient self after death on 16 grounds, that is just an agitation & vacillation to be felt by those contemplatives & brahmans who, not knowing, not seeing, are immersed in craving.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a non-percipient after-death proclaim a non-percipient self after death on eight grounds, that is just an agitation & vacillation to be felt by those contemplatives & brahmans who, not knowing, not seeing, are immersed in craving.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a neither percipient nor non-percipient after-death, proclaim a neither percipient nor non-percipient self after death on eight grounds, that is just an agitation & vacillation to be felt by those contemplatives & brahmans who, not knowing, not seeing, are immersed in craving.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are annihilationists proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being on seven grounds, that is just an agitation & vacillation to be felt by those contemplatives & brahmans who, not knowing, not seeing, are immersed in craving.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are proponents of unbinding in the here-&-now proclaim the highest here-&-now unbinding of an existing being on five grounds, that is just an agitation & vacillation to be felt by those contemplatives & brahmans who, not knowing, not seeing, are immersed in craving.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the future hold views about the future, approve of various beliefs with reference to the future on 44 grounds, that is just an agitation & vacillation to be felt by those contemplatives & brahmans who, not knowing, not seeing, are immersed in craving.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the past, theorists about the future, & theorists about the past & the future hold views about the past & the future, approve of various beliefs with reference to the past & the future on 62 grounds, that is just an agitation & vacillation to be felt by those contemplatives & brahmans who, not knowing, not seeing, are immersed in craving.

Conditioned by Contact “There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of eternalism proclaim an eternal self & cosmos on four grounds, that comes from contact as a requisite condition.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are finite-ists or infinite-ists proclaim a finite or infinite cosmos on four grounds, that comes from contact as a requisite condition.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who, being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling on four grounds, that comes from contact as a requisite condition.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are fortuitous-arising-ists proclaim a fortuitously-arisen self & cosmos on two grounds, that comes from contact as a requisite condition.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a percipient after-death proclaim a percipient self after death on 16 grounds, that comes from contact as a requisite condition.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a non-percipient after-death proclaim a non-percipient self after death on eight grounds, that comes from contact as a requisite condition.

No Other Possibility “There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of eternalism proclaim an eternal self & cosmos on four grounds: That they would experience that other than through contact isn’t possible.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos on four grounds: That they would experience that other than through contact isn’t possible.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are finite-ists or infinite-ists proclaim a finite or infinite cosmos on four grounds: That they would experience that other than through contact isn’t possible.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who, being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling on four grounds: That they would experience that other than through contact isn’t possible.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are fortuitous-arising-ists proclaim a fortuitously-arisen self & cosmos on two grounds: That they would experience that other than through contact isn’t possible.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the past hold views about the past, approve of various beliefs with reference to the past on 18 grounds: That they would experience that other than through contact isn’t possible.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a percipient after-death proclaim a percipient self after death on 16 grounds: That they would experience that other than through contact isn’t possible.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a non-percipient after-death proclaim a non-percipient self after death on eight grounds: That they would experience that other than through contact isn’t possible.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a neither percipient nor non-percipient after-death, proclaim a neither percipient nor non-percipient self after death on eight grounds: That they would experience that other than through contact isn’t possible.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are annihilationists proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being on seven grounds: That they would experience that other than through contact isn’t possible.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are proponents of unbinding in the here-&-now proclaim the highest here-&-now unbinding of an existing being on five grounds: That they would experience that other than through contact isn’t possible.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the future hold views about the future, approve of various beliefs with reference to the future on 44 grounds: That they would experience that other than through contact isn’t possible.

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the past, theorists about the future, & theorists about the past & the future hold views about the past & the future, approve of various beliefs with reference to the past & the future on 62 grounds: That they would experience that other than through contact isn’t possible.

Dependent Co-arising

“There, where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of eternalism proclaim an eternal self & cosmos on four grounds,

where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos on four grounds,

where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are finite-ists or infinite-ists proclaim a finite or infinite cosmos on four grounds,

where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who, being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling on four grounds,

where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are fortuitous-arising-ists proclaim a fortuitously-arisen self & cosmos on two grounds,

where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the past hold views about the past, approve of various beliefs with reference to the past on 18 grounds,

where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a percipient after-death proclaim a percipient self after death on 16 grounds,

where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a non-percipient after-death proclaim a non-percipient self after death on eight grounds,

where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are adherents of a neither percipient nor non-percipient after-death, proclaim a neither percipient nor non-percipient self after death on eight grounds,

where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are annihilationists proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being on seven grounds,

where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are proponents of unbinding in the here-&-now proclaim the highest here-&-now unbinding of an existing being on five grounds,

where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the future hold views about the future, approve of various beliefs with reference to the future on 44 grounds,

where any of those contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the past, theorists about the future, & theorists about the past & the future, who hold views about the past & the future, who approve of various beliefs with reference to the past & the future on 62 grounds:

“They all experience that through repeated contact at the six sense media. For them, from feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging-&-death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering.33 “But when a monk discerns the origination, ending, allure, drawbacks of, & escape from the six sense media, he discerns what is higher than all of this.

The Net “Any contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the past, theorists about the future, & theorists about the past & the future, who hold views about the past & the future, who approve of various beliefs with reference to the past & the future, all come under this net with its 62 interstices. When emerging, they emerge trapped here. When emerging, they emerge encompassed here under this net. Just as if a deft fisherman or fisherman’s apprentice were to cover a small body of water with a fine-meshed net: The thought would occur to him, ‘Any sizeable creatures in this body of water all come under this net. When emerging, they emerge trapped here. When emerging, they emerge encompassed here under this net.’ In this same way, monks, any contemplatives & brahmans who are theorists about the past, theorists about the future, & theorists about the past & the future, who hold views about the past & the future, who approve of various beliefs with reference to the past & the future, all come under this net with its 62 interstices. When emerging, they emerge trapped here. When emerging, they emerge encompassed here under this net.

“The body of the Tathāgata stands with the cord binding it to becoming cut through. As long as his body remains, human beings & devas will see him. But with the break-up of the body and the depletion of life, human beings & devas will see him no more. Just as with the cutting of the stalk of a bunch of mangoes, all the mangoes connected to the stalk follow with it; in the same way, the body of the Tathāgata stands with the cord binding it to becoming34 cut through. As long as his body remains, human beings & devas will see him. But with the break-up of the body and the depletion of life, human beings & devas will see him no more.”35 When this was said, Ven. Ānanda said to the Blessed One, “It’s amazing, lord. It’s astounding. What is the name of this Dhamma discourse?”

“Thus, Ānanda, remember this as ‘The Net of Meaning’ [or: ‘The Net of What is Profitable [attha]’], ‘The Net of Dhamma,’ ‘The Brahmā Net,’ ‘The Net of Views,’ ‘The Unexcelled Victory in Battle.’”36 That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, the monks delighted in the Blessed One’s words. And as this explanation was being spoken, the ten-thousand-fold cosmos shook.