SN 12.24

Aññatitthiyasutta

Rājagahe viharati veḷuvane. Atha kho āyasmā sāriputto pubbaṇhasamayaṁ nivāsetvā pattacīvaramādāya rājagahaṁ piṇḍāya pāvisi. Atha kho āyasmato sāriputtassa etadahosi: “atippago kho tāva rājagahe piṇḍāya carituṁ. Yannūnāhaṁ yena aññatitthiyānaṁ paribbājakānaṁ ārāmo tenupasaṅkameyyan”ti.

Followers of Other Religions

Near Rājagaha, in the Bamboo Grove. Then Venerable Sāriputta robed up in the morning and, taking his bowl and robe, entered Rājagaha for alms. Then it occurred to him, “It’s too early to wander for alms in Rājagaha. Why don’t I visit the monastery for the wanderers of other religions?”

Atha kho āyasmā sāriputto yena aññatitthiyānaṁ paribbājakānaṁ ārāmo tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā tehi aññatitthiyehi paribbājakehi saddhiṁ sammodi. Sammodanīyaṁ kathaṁ sāraṇīyaṁ vītisāretvā ekamantaṁ nisīdi. Ekamantaṁ nisinnaṁ kho āyasmantaṁ sāriputtaṁ te aññatitthiyā paribbājakā etadavocuṁ:

Then he went to the monastery for the wanderers of other religions and exchanged greetings with the wanderers there. When the greetings and polite conversation were over, he sat down to one side. The wanderers said to him:

“Santāvuso sāriputta, eke samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā sayaṅkataṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti. Santi panāvuso sāriputta, eke samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā paraṅkataṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti. Santāvuso sāriputta, eke samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā sayaṅkatañca paraṅkatañca dukkhaṁ paññapenti. Santi panāvuso sāriputta, eke samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā asayaṅkāraṁ aparaṅkāraṁ adhiccasamuppannaṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti. Idha, panāvuso sāriputta, samaṇo gotamo kiṁvādī kimakkhāyī? Kathaṁ byākaramānā ca mayaṁ vuttavādino ceva samaṇassa gotamassa assāma, na ca samaṇaṁ gotamaṁ abhūtena abbhācikkheyyāma, dhammassa cānudhammaṁ byākareyyāma, na ca koci sahadhammiko vādānupāto gārayhaṁ ṭhānaṁ āgaccheyyā”ti?

“Reverend Sāriputta, there are ascetics and brahmins who teach the efficacy of deeds. Some of them assert that suffering is made by oneself. Some of them assert that suffering is made by another. Some of them assert that suffering is made by both oneself and another. Some of them assert that suffering arises anomalously, not made by oneself or another. What does the ascetic Gotama say about this? How does he explain it? How should we answer so as to repeat what the ascetic Gotama has said, and not misrepresent him with an untruth? How should we explain in line with his teaching, with no legitimate grounds for rebuttal and criticism?”

“Paṭiccasamuppannaṁ kho, āvuso, dukkhaṁ vuttaṁ bhagavatā. Kiṁ paṭicca? Phassaṁ paṭicca. Iti vadaṁ vuttavādī ceva bhagavato assa, na ca bhagavantaṁ abhūtena abbhācikkheyya, dhammassa cānudhammaṁ byākareyya, na ca koci sahadhammiko vādānupāto gārayhaṁ ṭhānaṁ āgaccheyya.

“Reverends, the Buddha has said that suffering is dependently originated. Dependent on what? Dependent on contact. In speaking like this, you would repeat what the Buddha has said, and not misrepresent him with an untruth. You would explain in line with his teaching, and there would be no legitimate grounds for rebuttal and criticism.

Tatrāvuso, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā sayaṅkataṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti tadapi phassapaccayā. Yepi te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā paraṅkataṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti tadapi phassapaccayā. Yepi te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā sayaṅkatañca paraṅkatañca dukkhaṁ paññapenti tadapi phassapaccayā. Yepi te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā asayaṅkāraṁ aparaṅkāraṁ adhiccasamuppannaṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti tadapi phassapaccayā.

Consider the ascetics and brahmins who teach the efficacy of deeds. In the case of those who assert that suffering is made by oneself, that’s dependent on contact. In the case of those who assert that suffering is made by another, that’s also dependent on contact. In the case of those who assert that suffering is made by oneself and another, that’s also dependent on contact. In the case of those who assert that suffering arises anomalously, not made by oneself or another, that’s also dependent on contact.

Tatrāvuso, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā sayaṅkataṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti, te vata aññatra phassā paṭisaṁvedissantīti netaṁ ṭhānaṁ vijjati. Yepi te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā paraṅkataṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti, te vata aññatra phassā paṭisaṁvedissantīti netaṁ ṭhānaṁ vijjati. Yepi te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā sayaṅkatañca paraṅkatañca dukkhaṁ paññapenti, te vata aññatra phassā paṭisaṁvedissantīti netaṁ ṭhānaṁ vijjati. Yepi te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā asayaṅkāraṁ aparaṅkāraṁ adhiccasamuppannaṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti, te vata aññatra phassā paṭisaṁvedissantīti netaṁ ṭhānaṁ vijjatī”ti.

Consider the ascetics and brahmins who teach the efficacy of deeds. In the case of those who assert that suffering is made by oneself, it’s impossible that they will experience that without contact. In the case of those who declare that suffering is made by another, it’s impossible that they will experience that without contact. In the case of those who assert that suffering is made by oneself and another, it’s impossible that they will experience that without contact. In the case of those who assert that suffering arises anomalously, not made by oneself or another, it’s impossible that they will experience that without contact.”

Assosi kho āyasmā ānando āyasmato sāriputtassa tehi aññatitthiyehi paribbājakehi saddhiṁ imaṁ kathāsallāpaṁ. Atha kho āyasmā ānando rājagahe piṇḍāya caritvā pacchābhattaṁ piṇḍapātapaṭikkanto yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā bhagavantaṁ abhivādetvā ekamantaṁ nisīdi. Ekamantaṁ nisinno kho āyasmā ānando yāvatako āyasmato sāriputtassa tehi aññatitthiyehi paribbājakehi saddhiṁ ahosi kathāsallāpo taṁ sabbaṁ bhagavato ārocesi.

Venerable Ānanda heard this discussion between Venerable Sāriputta and those wanderers of other religions. Then Ānanda wandered for alms in Rājagaha. After the meal, on his return from almsround, he went to the Buddha, bowed, sat down to one side, and informed the Buddha of all they had discussed.

“Sādhu sādhu, ānanda, yathā taṁ sāriputto sammā byākaramāno byākareyya. Paṭiccasamuppannaṁ kho, ānanda, dukkhaṁ vuttaṁ mayā. Kiṁ paṭicca? Phassaṁ paṭicca. Iti vadaṁ vuttavādī ceva me assa, na ca maṁ abhūtena abbhācikkheyya, dhammassa cānudhammaṁ byākareyya, na ca koci sahadhammiko vādānupāto gārayhaṁ ṭhānaṁ āgaccheyya.

“Good, good, Ānanda! It’s just as Sāriputta has so rightly explained. I have said that suffering is dependently originated. Dependent on what? Dependent on contact. Saying this you would repeat what I have said, and not misrepresent me with an untruth. You would explain in line with my teaching, and there would be no legitimate grounds for rebuttal and criticism.

Tatrānanda, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā sayaṅkataṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti tadapi phassapaccayā. Yepi te …pe… yepi te …pe… yepi te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā asayaṅkāraṁ aparaṅkāraṁ adhiccasamuppannaṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti tadapi phassapaccayā.

Consider the ascetics and brahmins who teach the efficacy of deeds. In the case of those who assert that suffering is made by oneself, that’s dependent on contact. … In the case of those who assert that suffering arises anomalously, not made by oneself or another, that’s also dependent on contact.

Tatrānanda, yepi te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā sayaṅkataṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti, te vata aññatra phassā paṭisaṁvedissantīti netaṁ ṭhānaṁ vijjati. Yepi te …pe… yepi te …pe… yepi te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā asayaṅkāraṁ aparaṅkāraṁ adhiccasamuppannaṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti, te vata aññatra phassā paṭisaṁvedissantīti netaṁ ṭhānaṁ vijjati.

In the case of those who assert that suffering is made by oneself, it’s impossible that they will experience that without contact. … In the case of those who assert that suffering arises anomalously, not made by oneself or another, it’s impossible that they will experience that without contact.

Ekamidāhaṁ, ānanda, samayaṁ idheva rājagahe viharāmi veḷuvane kalandakanivāpe. Atha khvāhaṁ, ānanda, pubbaṇhasamayaṁ nivāsetvā pattacīvaramādāya rājagahaṁ piṇḍāya pāvisiṁ. Tassa mayhaṁ, ānanda, etadahosi: ‘atippago kho tāva rājagahe piṇḍāya carituṁ. Yannūnāhaṁ yena aññatitthiyānaṁ paribbājakānaṁ ārāmo tenupasaṅkameyyan’ti.

Ānanda, this one time I was staying near Rājagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the squirrels’ feeding ground. Then I robed up in the morning and, taking my bowl and robe, entered Rājagaha for alms. Then I thought: ‘It’s too early to wander for alms in Rājagaha. Why don’t I visit the monastery for the wanderers of other religions?’

Atha khvāhaṁ, ānanda, yena aññatitthiyānaṁ paribbājakānaṁ ārāmo tenupasaṅkamiṁ; upasaṅkamitvā tehi aññatitthiyehi paribbājakehi saddhiṁ sammodiṁ. Sammodanīyaṁ kathaṁ sāraṇīyaṁ vītisāretvā ekamantaṁ nisīdiṁ. Ekamantaṁ nisinnaṁ kho maṁ, ānanda, te aññatitthiyā paribbājakā etadavocuṁ:

Then I went to the monastery for the wanderers of other religions and exchanged greetings with the wanderers there. When the greetings and polite conversation were over, I sat down to one side. …”

‘Santāvuso gotama, eke samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā sayaṅkataṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti. Santi panāvuso gotama, eke samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā paraṅkataṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti. Santāvuso gotama, eke samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā sayaṅkatañca paraṅkatañca dukkhaṁ paññapenti. Santi panāvuso gotama, eke samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā asayaṅkāraṁ aparaṅkāraṁ adhiccasamuppannaṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti. Idha no āyasmā gotamo kiṁvādī kimakkhāyī? Kathaṁ byākaramānā ca mayaṁ vuttavādino ceva āyasmato gotamassa assāma, na ca āyasmantaṁ gotamaṁ abhūtena abbhācikkheyyāma, dhammassa cānudhammaṁ byākareyyāma, na ca koci sahadhammiko vādānupāto gārayhaṁ ṭhānaṁ āgaccheyyā’ti? Evaṁ vuttāhaṁ, ānanda, te aññatitthiye paribbājake etadavocaṁ: ‘paṭiccasamuppannaṁ kho, āvuso, dukkhaṁ vuttaṁ mayā. Kiṁ paṭicca? Phassaṁ paṭicca. Iti vadaṁ vuttavādī ceva me assa, na ca maṁ abhūtena abbhācikkheyya, dhammassa cānudhammaṁ byākareyya, na ca koci sahadhammiko vādānupāto gārayhaṁ ṭhānaṁ āgaccheyyāti. Tatrāvuso, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā sayaṅkataṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti tadapi phassapaccayā. Yepi te …pe… yepi te …pe… yepi te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā asayaṅkāraṁ aparaṅkāraṁ adhiccasamuppannaṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti tadapi phassapaccayā. Tatrāvuso, ye te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā sayaṅkataṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti, te vata aññatra phassā paṭisaṁvedissantīti netaṁ ṭhānaṁ vijjati. Yepi te …pe… yepi te …pe… yepi te samaṇabrāhmaṇā kammavādā asayaṅkāraṁ aparaṅkāraṁ adhiccasamuppannaṁ dukkhaṁ paññapenti, te vata aññatra phassā paṭisaṁvedissantīti netaṁ ṭhānaṁ vijjatī’”ti.

(The wanderers asked the Buddha the very same questions, and he gave the same answers.)

“Acchariyaṁ bhante, abbhutaṁ bhante. Yatra hi nāma ekena padena sabbo attho vutto bhavissati. Siyā nu kho, bhante, esevattho vitthārena vuccamāno gambhīro ceva assa gambhīrāvabhāso cā”ti?

“It’s incredible, sir, it’s amazing, how the whole matter is stated with one phrase. Could there be a detailed explanation of this matter that is both deep and appears deep?”

“Tena hānanda, taññevettha paṭibhātū”ti. “Sace maṁ, bhante, evaṁ puccheyyuṁ: ‘jarāmaraṇaṁ, āvuso ānanda, kiṁnidānaṁ kiṁsamudayaṁ kiṁjātikaṁ kiṁpabhavan’ti? Evaṁ puṭṭhohaṁ, bhante, evaṁ byākareyyaṁ: ‘jarāmaraṇaṁ kho, āvuso, jātinidānaṁ jātisamudayaṁ jātijātikaṁ jātipabhavan’ti. Evaṁ puṭṭhohaṁ, bhante, evaṁ byākareyyaṁ.

“Well then, Ānanda, clarify this matter yourself.” “Sir, suppose they were to ask me: ‘Reverend Ānanda, what is the source, origin, birthplace, and inception of old age and death?’ I’d answer like this: ‘Reverends, rebirth is the source, origin, birthplace, and inception of old age and death.’ That’s how I’d answer such a question.

Sace maṁ, bhante, evaṁ puccheyyuṁ: ‘jāti panāvuso ānanda, kiṁnidānā kiṁsamudayā kiṁjātikā kiṁpabhavā’ti? Evaṁ puṭṭhohaṁ, bhante, evaṁ byākareyyaṁ: ‘jāti kho, āvuso, bhavanidānā bhavasamudayā bhavajātikā bhavappabhavā’ti. Evaṁ puṭṭhohaṁ, bhante, evaṁ byākareyyaṁ.

Suppose they were to ask me: ‘What is the source of rebirth?’ I’d answer like this: ‘Continued existence is the source of rebirth.’ That’s how I’d answer such a question.

Sace maṁ, bhante, evaṁ puccheyyuṁ: ‘bhavo panāvuso ānanda, kiṁnidāno kiṁsamudayo kiṁjātiko kiṁpabhavo’ti? Evaṁ puṭṭhohaṁ, bhante, evaṁ byākareyyaṁ: ‘bhavo kho, āvuso, upādānanidāno upādānasamudayo upādānajātiko upādānappabhavo’ti. Evaṁ puṭṭhohaṁ, bhante, evaṁ byākareyyaṁ.

Suppose they were to ask me: ‘What is the source of continued existence?’ I’d answer like this: ‘Grasping is the source of continued existence.’ That’s how I’d answer such a question.

Sace maṁ, bhante, evaṁ puccheyyuṁ— upādānaṁ panāvuso …pe… taṇhā panāvuso …pe… vedanā panāvuso …pe… sace maṁ, bhante, evaṁ puccheyyuṁ: ‘phasso panāvuso ānanda, kiṁnidāno kiṁsamudayo kiṁjātiko kiṁpabhavo’ti? Evaṁ puṭṭhohaṁ, bhante, evaṁ byākareyyaṁ: ‘phasso kho, āvuso, saḷāyatananidāno saḷāyatanasamudayo saḷāyatanajātiko saḷāyatanappabhavo’ti. ‘Channaṁ tveva, āvuso, phassāyatanānaṁ asesavirāganirodhā phassanirodho; phassanirodhā vedanānirodho; vedanānirodhā taṇhānirodho; taṇhānirodhā upādānanirodho; upādānanirodhā bhavanirodho; bhavanirodhā jātinirodho; jātinirodhā jarāmaraṇaṁ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā nirujjhanti. Evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa nirodho hotī’ti. Evaṁ puṭṭhohaṁ, bhante, evaṁ byākareyyan”ti.

Suppose they were to ask me: ‘What is the source of grasping?’ … craving … feeling … Suppose they were to ask me: ‘What is the source of contact?’ I’d answer like this: ‘The six sense fields are the source, origin, birthplace, and inception of contact.’ ‘When the six fields of contact fade away and cease with no residue left behind, contact ceases. When contact ceases, feeling ceases. When feeling ceases, craving ceases. When craving ceases, grasping ceases. When grasping ceases, continued existence ceases. When continued existence ceases, rebirth ceases. When rebirth ceases, old age and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress cease. That is how this entire mass of suffering ceases.’ That’s how I’d answer such a question.”