Skip to content
Tidipa

Alagaddūpamasutta (The Discourse on the Simile of the Water Snake)

· 181 min read

9M/3.2, the second discourse of the Majjhima Nikāya's Opammavagga: the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha holds that the obstructive things do not obstruct, and the Bhagavā teaches the wrongly grasped water snake and the raft, the six grounds for views, not-self in the five collections, and the fruits of the well-proclaimed Dhamma.

Original text: 9M/3.2 Alagaddūpamasutta 772–836 in the World Tipitaka Edition

Summary

Section titled “Summary”

The bhikkhu Ariṭṭha insists that the things the Bhagavā has called obstructive do not obstruct one who indulges in them, and no one can dissuade him. From his wrong grasp the Bhagavā teaches that a badly grasped teaching harms like a badly caught water snake and that the Dhamma is a raft for crossing over, not for holding on; he then sets out the six grounds for views and the not-self reflection on the five collections, answers the charge that he teaches annihilation, since he teaches suffering and its cessation, and closes with the fruits of the well-proclaimed Dhamma.

Diagram

Section titled “Diagram”
flowchart TB
    A["Ariṭṭha's misconception"] --> B["bhikkhū and Bhagavā cannot dissuade him"]
    B --> C["a wrong grasp of the Dhamma"]
    C --> D["water snake: badly or well caught"]
    D --> E["the raft: for crossing over, not holding on"]
    E --> F["six grounds for views"]
    F --> G["agitation over what does not exist"]
    G --> H["not-self: the five collections"]
    H --> I["the liberated bhikkhu, untraceable"]
    I --> J["suffering and its cessation, not annihilation"]
    J --> K["what is not yours, abandon it"]
    K --> L["the fruits of the well-proclaimed Dhamma"]

Text

Section titled “Text”

(234.)

772. Thus heard by me — At one time the Bhagavā was dwelling at Sāvatthī, in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s Park. Now at that time such a harmful misconception had arisen in a bhikkhu named Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher: “I understand the Dhamma taught by the Bhagavā in such a way that those things the Bhagavā has called obstructive are not able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them.” Many bhikkhū heard: “It is said that such a harmful misconception has arisen in a bhikkhu named Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher: ‘I understand the Dhamma taught by the Bhagavā in such a way that those things the Bhagavā has called obstructive are not able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them.’”

773. Then those bhikkhū approached the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher; having approached, they said this to the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher: “Is it really true, Āvuso Ariṭṭha, that such a harmful misconception has arisen in you: ‘I understand the Dhamma taught by the Bhagavā in such a way that those things the Bhagavā has called obstructive are not able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them’?” “Indeed, Āvuso, I understand the Dhamma taught by the Bhagavā in such a way that those things the Bhagavā has called obstructive are not able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them.”

774. Then those bhikkhū, wishing to dissuade the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher, from that harmful misconception, cross-questioned, closely questioned and admonished him: “Do not say so, Āvuso Ariṭṭha, do not misrepresent the Bhagavā; for misrepresenting the Bhagavā is not good, and the Bhagavā would not speak thus. In many ways, Āvuso Ariṭṭha, obstructive things have been called obstructive by the Bhagavā, and they are indeed able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them. Sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to give little enjoyment, much suffering and much despair; the danger in them is greater. Sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to be like a skeleton… sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to be like a lump of meat… sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to be like a grass torch… sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to be like a pit of burning coals… sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to be like a dream… sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to be like borrowed goods… sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to be like a fruit tree… sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to be like a slaughterhouse… sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to be like swords and spears… sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to be like a snake’s head, with much suffering and much despair; the danger in them is greater.”

775. Even so, being cross-questioned, closely questioned and admonished by those bhikkhū, the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher, obstinately and with clinging held fast to that same harmful misconception and declared: “Indeed, Āvuso, I understand the Dhamma taught by the Bhagavā in such a way that those things the Bhagavā has called obstructive are not able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them.”

(235.)

776. Since those bhikkhū were unable to dissuade the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher, from that harmful misconception, those bhikkhū approached the Bhagavā; having approached, they bowed to the Bhagavā and sat down to one side. Seated to one side, those bhikkhū said this to the Bhagavā: “Bhante, such a harmful misconception has arisen in a bhikkhu named Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher: ‘I understand the Dhamma taught by the Bhagavā in such a way that those things the Bhagavā has called obstructive are not able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them.’ We heard, Bhante: ‘It is said that such a harmful misconception has arisen in a bhikkhu named Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher: I understand the Dhamma taught by the Bhagavā in such a way that those things the Bhagavā has called obstructive are not able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them.’

777. Then, Bhante, we approached the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher; having approached, we said this to the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher: ‘Is it really true, Āvuso Ariṭṭha, that such a harmful misconception has arisen in you: I understand the Dhamma taught by the Bhagavā in such a way that those things the Bhagavā has called obstructive are not able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them?’

778. When this was said, Bhante, the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher, said this to us: ‘Indeed, Āvuso, I understand the Dhamma taught by the Bhagavā in such a way that those things the Bhagavā has called obstructive are not able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them.’ Then, Bhante, wishing to dissuade the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher, from that harmful misconception, we cross-questioned, closely questioned and admonished him: ‘Do not say so, Āvuso Ariṭṭha, do not misrepresent the Bhagavā; for misrepresenting the Bhagavā is not good, and the Bhagavā would not speak thus. In many ways, Āvuso Ariṭṭha, obstructive things have been called obstructive by the Bhagavā, and they are indeed able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them. Sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to give little enjoyment, much suffering and much despair; the danger in them is greater. Sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to be like a skeleton … and so on … sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to be like a snake’s head, with much suffering and much despair; the danger in them is greater.’

779. Even so, Bhante, being cross-questioned, closely questioned and admonished by us, the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher, obstinately and with clinging held fast to that same harmful misconception and declared: ‘Indeed, Āvuso, I understand the Dhamma taught by the Bhagavā in such a way that those things the Bhagavā has called obstructive are not able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them.’ Since, Bhante, we were unable to dissuade the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher, from that harmful misconception, we are reporting this matter to the Bhagavā.”

(236.)

780. Then the Bhagavā addressed a certain bhikkhu: “Come, bhikkhu, in my name summon the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher, saying: ‘The Teacher summons you, Āvuso Ariṭṭha.’” “Yes, Bhante,” that bhikkhu replied to the Bhagavā, and he approached the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher; having approached, he said this to the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher: “The Teacher summons you, Āvuso Ariṭṭha.” “Yes, Āvuso,” the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher, replied to that bhikkhu, and he approached the Bhagavā; having approached, he bowed to the Bhagavā and sat down to one side. The Bhagavā said this to the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher, seated to one side: “Is it really true, Ariṭṭha, that such a harmful misconception has arisen in you: ‘I understand the Dhamma taught by the Bhagavā in such a way that those things the Bhagavā has called obstructive are not able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them’?” “Indeed, Bhante, I understand the Dhamma taught by the Bhagavā thus: ‘those things the Bhagavā has called obstructive are not able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them.’”

781. “To whom indeed, foolish man, do you understand me to have taught the Dhamma in such a way? Have I not, foolish man, in many ways called obstructive things obstructive? And they are indeed able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them. Sensual pleasures have been said by me to give little enjoyment, much suffering and much despair; the danger in them is greater. Sensual pleasures have been said by me to be like a skeleton… sensual pleasures have been said by me to be like a lump of meat… sensual pleasures have been said by me to be like a grass torch… sensual pleasures have been said by me to be like a pit of burning coals… sensual pleasures have been said by me to be like a dream… sensual pleasures have been said by me to be like borrowed goods… sensual pleasures have been said by me to be like a fruit tree… sensual pleasures have been said by me to be like a slaughterhouse… sensual pleasures have been said by me to be like swords and spears… sensual pleasures have been said by me to be like a snake’s head, with much suffering and much despair; the danger in them is greater. And yet you, foolish man, by your own wrong grasp misrepresent us, harm yourself and produce much demerit. That will be for your harm and suffering for a long time, foolish man.”

782. Then the Bhagavā addressed the bhikkhū: “What do you think, Bhikkhave? Has this bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher, kindled even a flicker of understanding in this Dhamma and Discipline?” “How could he, Bhante; of course not, Bhante.” When this was said, the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher, sat silent, dumbstruck, slumped over, downcast, brooding and at a loss for words. Then the Bhagavā, having perceived the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher, silent, dumbstruck, slumped over, downcast, brooding and at a loss for words, said this to the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher: “You will be known, foolish man, by this harmful misconception of your own. Here I shall question the bhikkhū in return.”

(237.)

783. Then the Bhagavā addressed the bhikkhū: “Do you too, Bhikkhave, understand the Dhamma taught by me in such a way as this bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher, who by his own wrong grasp misrepresents us, harms himself and produces much demerit?” “Of course not, Bhante. For in many ways, Bhante, obstructive things have been called obstructive for us by the Bhagavā; and they are indeed able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them. Sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to give little enjoyment, much suffering and much despair; the danger in them is greater. Sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to be like a skeleton … and so on … sensual pleasures have been said by the Bhagavā to be like a snake’s head, with much suffering and much despair; the danger in them is greater.”

784. “Excellent, excellent, Bhikkhave! It is good, Bhikkhave, that you understand the Dhamma taught by me in such a way. For in many ways, Bhikkhave, obstructive things have been spoken of by me, and they are indeed able to be an obstacle for one who indulges in them.

785. Sensual pleasures have been said by me to give little enjoyment, much suffering and much despair; the danger in them is greater. Sensual pleasures have been said by me to be like a skeleton … and so on … sensual pleasures have been said by me to be like a snake’s head, with much suffering and much despair; the danger in them is greater. And yet this bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher, by his own wrong grasp misrepresents us, harms himself and produces much demerit. That will be for that foolish man’s harm and suffering for a long time. That one, Bhikkhave, will indulge in sensual pleasures apart from sensual pleasures, apart from the apperception of sensual pleasure, apart from sensual thoughts — this is not possible.

(238.)

786. Here, Bhikkhave, some foolish people learn the Dhamma: suttaṃ (discourses,) geyyaṃ (mixed prose and verse,) veyyākaraṇaṃ (explanations,) gāthaṃ (verses,) udānaṃ (inspired utterances,) itivuttakaṃ (‘as it was said’ speeches,) jātakaṃ (birth stories,) abbhutadhammaṃ (amazing phenomena, and) vedallaṃ (question-and-answer sessions.) Having learned that Dhamma, they don’t examine the meaning of those teachings with wisdom. For them, those teachings don’t bear scrutiny when their meaning is not examined with wisdom. They learn the Dhamma for the purpose of criticising others and for escaping criticism in debate. They don’t experience the benefit for which they learned the Dhamma. For them, those teachings, being badly grasped, lead to their harm and suffering for a long time. For what reason? Because, Bhikkhave, the teachings were badly grasped.

787. Suppose, Bhikkhave, a man needing a water snake, searching for a water snake, was wandering in search of a water snake. He might see a large water snake. He might grab it by its coil or its tail. That water snake, turning back, could bite him on the hand, the arm, or some other limb. Because of that, he would come to death or to death-like suffering. For what reason? Because, Bhikkhave, the water snake was badly grasped. In the same way, Bhikkhave, some foolish people here learn the Dhamma: suttaṃ (discourses,) geyyaṃ (mixed prose and verse,) veyyākaraṇaṃ (explanations,) gāthaṃ (verses,) udānaṃ (inspired utterances,) itivuttakaṃ (‘as it was said’ speeches,) jātakaṃ (birth stories,) abbhutadhammaṃ (amazing phenomena, and) vedallaṃ (question-and-answer sessions.) Having learned that Dhamma, they don’t examine the meaning of those teachings with wisdom. For them, those teachings don’t bear scrutiny when their meaning is not examined with wisdom. They learn the Dhamma for the purpose of criticising others and for escaping criticism in debate. They don’t experience the benefit for which they learned the Dhamma. For them, those teachings, being badly grasped, lead to their harm and suffering for a long time. For what reason? Because, Bhikkhave, the teachings were badly grasped.

(239.)

788. But here, Bhikkhave, some young men of good families learn the Dhamma: suttaṃ (discourses,) geyyaṃ (mixed prose and verse,) veyyākaraṇaṃ (explanations,) gāthaṃ (verses,) udānaṃ (inspired utterances,) itivuttakaṃ (‘as it was said’ speeches,) jātakaṃ (birth stories,) abbhutadhammaṃ (amazing phenomena, and) vedallaṃ (question-and-answer sessions.) Having learned that Dhamma, they examine the meaning of those teachings with wisdom. For them, those teachings bear scrutiny when their meaning is examined with wisdom. They do not learn the Dhamma for the purpose of criticising others, nor for escaping criticism in debate. They experience the benefit for which they learned the Dhamma. For them, those teachings, being well grasped, lead to their welfare and happiness for a long time. For what reason? Because, Bhikkhave, the teachings were well grasped.

789. Suppose, Bhikkhave, a man needing a water snake, searching for a water snake, was wandering in search of a water snake. He might see a large water snake. He might hold it down firmly with a forked stick. Having held it down firmly with a forked stick, he might grab it firmly by the neck. Even though that water snake, Bhikkhave, might wrap its coils around that man’s hand, arm or some other limb, he would not because of that come to death or to death-like suffering. For what reason? Because, Bhikkhave, the water snake was well grasped. In the same way, Bhikkhave, some young men of good families here learn the Dhamma: suttaṃ (discourses,) geyyaṃ (mixed prose and verse,) veyyākaraṇaṃ (explanations,) gāthaṃ (verses,) udānaṃ (inspired utterances,) itivuttakaṃ (‘as it was said’ speeches,) jātakaṃ (birth stories,) abbhutadhammaṃ (amazing phenomena, and) vedallaṃ (question-and-answer sessions.) Having learned that Dhamma, they examine the meaning of those teachings with wisdom. For them, those teachings bear scrutiny when their meaning is examined with wisdom. They do not learn the Dhamma for the purpose of criticising others, nor for escaping criticism in debate. They experience the benefit for which they learned the Dhamma. For them, those teachings, being well grasped, lead to their good, welfare and happiness for a long time. For what reason? Because, Bhikkhave, the teachings were well grasped. Therefore, Bhikkhave, when you understand the meaning of what I have said, you should bear it in mind accordingly. But when you do not understand the meaning of what I have said, you should question me about it, or those bhikkhū who are skilled.

(240.)

790. Bhikkhave, I will teach you the dhamma that is like a raft: for crossing over, not for holding on. Listen and pay close attention, I will speak.” “Yes, Bhante,” those bhikkhū replied to the Bhagavā. The Bhagavā said this:

791. “Suppose, Bhikkhave, a person was travelling along a road. He might see a great expanse of water, with the near shore dangerous and fearful, and the far shore safe and free from fear; but there was no boat for crossing over or bridge to go from this side to the other. It might occur to him: ‘This is a great expanse of water, with the near shore dangerous and fearful, and the far shore safe and free from fear; but there is no boat for crossing over or bridge to go from this side to the other. What if I were to gather grass, sticks, branches, and foliage, bind them into a raft, and relying on that raft, striving with my hands and feet, safely cross over to the far shore?’ Then that person, having gathered grass, sticks, branches, and foliage, binding them into a raft, and relying on that raft, striving with hands and feet, would safely cross over to the far shore. Having crossed over and gone beyond, it might occur to him: ‘This raft has been very helpful to me. Relying on this raft, striving with my hands and feet, I have safely crossed over to the far shore. What if I were to hoist this raft onto my head or lift it onto my shoulder and go wherever I want?’ What do you think, Bhikkhave? Would that person be doing what should be done with that raft?”

792. “Of course not, Bhante.” “And how, Bhikkhave, would that person be doing what should be done with that raft? Here, Bhikkhave, having crossed over and gone beyond, it might occur to that person: ‘This raft has been very helpful to me. Relying on this raft, striving with my hands and feet, I have safely crossed over to the far shore. What if I were to beach this raft on dry land or set it adrift in the water and go wherever I want?’ By doing so, Bhikkhave, that person would be doing what should be done with that raft. In the same way, Bhikkhave, I have taught the dhamma using the simile of the raft: for crossing over, not for holding on. By understanding the dhamma as similar to a raft, you should abandon even the teachings, let alone what is against the teachings.

(241.)

793. Bhikkhave, there are these six grounds for views. What six? Here, Bhikkhave, an assutavā (unlearned) puthujjana (ordinary person), who has no regard for the liberated, unskilled in the Dhamma of the liberated, untrained in the Dhamma of the liberated, who has no regard for good people, unskilled in the Dhamma of good people, untrained in the Dhamma of good people, regards rūpa (form) as: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my attā (self)’; he regards vedanā (feeling) as: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my attā’; he regards saññā (apperception) as: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my attā’; he regards saṅkhārā (mental constructions) as: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my attā’; and whatever is seen, heard, thought, known, attained, sought, explored by the mind, that too he regards as: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my attā’; and whatever ground for views there is— ‘That is the world, that is the attā; after death I shall be permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change, and I shall remain just so for ever and ever’— that too he regards as: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my attā.’

794. But the sutavā (learned) ariyasāvaka (disciple of the liberated), Bhikkhave, who has regard for the liberated, skilled in the Dhamma of the liberated, well trained in the Dhamma of the liberated, who has regard for good people, skilled in the Dhamma of good people, well trained in the Dhamma of good people, regards rūpa as: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my attā’; he regards vedanā as: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my attā’; he regards saññā as: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my attā’; he regards saṅkhārā as: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my attā’; and whatever is seen, heard, thought, known, attained, sought, explored by the mind, that too he regards as: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my attā’; and whatever ground for views there is— ‘That is the world, that is the attā; after death I shall be permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change, and I shall remain just so for ever and ever’— that too he regards as: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my attā.’ Regarding thus, he is not agitated about what does not exist.”

(242.)

795. When this was said, a certain bhikkhu said this to the Bhagavā: “Could there be, Bhante, agitation about what does not exist externally?” “There could be, Bhikkhu,” the Bhagavā said. “Here, Bhikkhu, it occurs to someone: ‘Alas, it was mine; alas, it is mine no more; alas, may it be mine; alas, I do not get it.’ He sorrows, becomes weary, laments, wails beating his breast, and falls into confusion. Thus, Bhikkhu, there is agitation about what does not exist externally.”

796. “But could there be, Bhante, an absence of agitation about what does not exist externally?” “There could be, Bhikkhu,” the Bhagavā said. “Here, Bhikkhu, it does not occur to someone: ‘Alas, it was mine; alas, it is mine no more; alas, may it be mine; alas, I do not get it.’ He does not sorrow, does not become weary, does not lament, does not wail beating his breast, and does not fall into confusion. Thus, Bhikkhu, there is an absence of agitation about what does not exist externally.”

797. “Could there be, Bhante, agitation about what does not exist internally?” “There could be, Bhikkhu,” the Bhagavā said. “Here, Bhikkhu, someone has this view: ‘That is the world, that is the attā; after death I shall be permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change, and I shall remain just so for ever and ever.’ He hears the Tathāgata or a disciple of the Tathāgata teaching the Dhamma for the eradication of all grounds for views, standpoints, obsessions, adherences and underlying tendencies, for the calming of all saṅkhārā, for the relinquishing of all acquisitions, for the destruction of taṇhā (craving), for detachment, for cessation, for nibbāna (extinguishment). It occurs to him: ‘I shall certainly be annihilated! I shall certainly perish! I certainly shall not be!’ He sorrows, becomes weary, laments, wails beating his breast, and falls into confusion. Thus, Bhikkhu, there is agitation about what does not exist internally.”

798. “But could there be, Bhante, an absence of agitation about what does not exist internally?” “There could be, Bhikkhu,” the Bhagavā said. “Here, Bhikkhu, someone does not have this view: ‘That is the world, that is the attā; after death I shall be permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change, and I shall remain just so for ever and ever.’ He hears the Tathāgata or a disciple of the Tathāgata teaching the Dhamma for the eradication of all grounds for views, standpoints, obsessions, adherences and underlying tendencies, for the calming of all saṅkhārā, for the relinquishing of all acquisitions, for the destruction of taṇhā, for detachment, for cessation, for nibbāna. It does not occur to him: ‘I shall certainly be annihilated! I shall certainly perish! I certainly shall not be!’ He does not sorrow, does not become weary, does not lament, does not wail beating his breast, and does not fall into confusion. Thus, Bhikkhu, there is an absence of agitation about what does not exist internally.

(243.)

799. Bhikkhave, you may well take possession of that possession, a possession which would be permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change, and would remain just so for ever and ever. Do you see, Bhikkhave, that possession, a possession which would be permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change, and would remain just so for ever and ever?” “Of course not, Bhante.” “Excellent, Bhikkhave. I too, Bhikkhave, do not see that possession, a possession which would be permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change, and would remain just so for ever and ever.

800. Bhikkhave, you may well take up that attavādupādāna (fuel of the theory of self), a fuel of the theory of self such that, for one taking it up, sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure and despair would not arise. Do you see, Bhikkhave, that attavādupādāna, a fuel of the theory of self such that, for one taking it up, sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure and despair would not arise?” “Of course not, Bhante.” “Excellent, Bhikkhave. I too, Bhikkhave, do not see that attavādupādāna, a fuel of the theory of self such that, for one taking it up, sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure and despair would not arise.

801. Bhikkhave, you may well rely on that diṭṭhinissaya (support for views), a support for views such that, for one relying on it, sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure and despair would not arise. Do you see, Bhikkhave, that diṭṭhinissaya, a support for views such that, for one relying on it, sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure and despair would not arise?” “Of course not, Bhante.” “Excellent, Bhikkhave. I too, Bhikkhave, do not see that diṭṭhinissaya, a support for views such that, for one relying on it, sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure and despair would not arise.”

(244.)

802. “And, Bhikkhave, when there is an attā, would there be: ‘What belongs to the self is mine’?”

803. “Yes, Bhante.”

804. “Or, Bhikkhave, when there is what belongs to the self, would there be: ‘The self is mine’?” “Yes, Bhante.”

805. “Bhikkhave, when an attā and what belongs to the self are not found as true and real, is not this ground for views— ‘That is the world, that is the attā; after death I shall be permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change, and I shall remain just so for ever and ever’— Bhikkhave, an entirely and completely foolish teaching?”

806. “Why should it not be, Bhante? It is indeed, Bhante, an entirely and completely foolish teaching.”

807. “Bhikkhave, what do you consider: is rūpa (form) nicca (permanent) or anicca (impermanent)?”

808. “Anicca, Bhante.”

809. “Now, is that which is impermanent dukkha (suffering) or sukha (happiness)?”

810. “Dukkha, Bhante.”

811. “Now, is it proper to regard that which is anicca, dukkha, and vipariṇāmadhamma (subject to change), as: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my attā (self)’?”

812. “Of course not, Bhante.”

813. “Bhikkhave, what do you consider: is vedanā (feeling) … and so on … saññā (apperception)… saṅkhārā (mental constructions)… viññāṇa (consciousness) nicca or anicca?”

814. “Anicca, Bhante.”

815. “Now, is that which is impermanent dukkha (suffering) or sukha (happiness)?”

816. “Dukkha, Bhante.”

817. “Now, is it proper to regard that which is anicca, dukkha, and vipariṇāmadhamma (subject to change), as: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my attā (self)’?”

818. “Of course not, Bhante.”

819. “Therefore, Bhikkhave, whatever rūpa there is, atītānāgatapaccuppanna (past, future, or present), ajjhatta (internal) or bahiddhā (external), oḷārika (coarse) or sukhuma (fine), hīna (inferior) or paṇīta (superior), far or near, all rūpa should be regarded yathābhūta (in reality), with sammappaññā (correct understanding), thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my attā.’ Whatever vedanā there is … and so on … whatever saññā… whatever saṅkhārā… whatever viññāṇa there is, atītānāgatapaccuppanna, ajjhatta or bahiddhā, oḷārika or sukhuma, hīna or paṇīta, far or near, all viññāṇa should be regarded yathābhūta, with sammappaññā, thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my attā.’

(245.)

820. Thus seeing, Bhikkhave, the sutavā ariyasāvaka nibbindati (is disenchanted with) rūpa, is disenchanted with vedanā, is disenchanted with saññā, is disenchanted with saṅkhārā, is disenchanted with viññāṇa; through nibbidā (disenchantment) he virajjati (becomes detached); from detachment he vimuccati (becomes liberated); in liberation there is the ñāṇa (knowledge): ‘liberated’. He knows clearly: ‘Birth (of suffering) is finished, the optimal life is lived, what had to be done is done, there is nothing further for this present state of existence.’ This bhikkhu, Bhikkhave, is called ‘one who has lifted the crossbar’, and also ‘one who has filled the trench’, and also ‘one who has pulled out the pillar’, and also ‘one who is unbarred’, and also ‘a liberated one who has lowered the banner, laid down the burden, unfettered’.

821. And how, Bhikkhave, is a bhikkhu one who has lifted the crossbar? Here, Bhikkhave, a bhikkhu’s avijjā (ignorance) is given up, cut off at the root, made like a palm stump, obliterated, and not subject to future arising. Thus, Bhikkhave, a bhikkhu is one who has lifted the crossbar.

822. And how, Bhikkhave, is a bhikkhu one who has filled the trench? Here, Bhikkhave, a bhikkhu’s cycle of rebirth leading to renewed existence is given up, cut off at the root, made like a palm stump, obliterated, and not subject to future arising. Thus, Bhikkhave, a bhikkhu is one who has filled the trench.

823. And how, Bhikkhave, is a bhikkhu one who has pulled out the pillar? Here, Bhikkhave, a bhikkhu’s taṇhā is given up, cut off at the root, made like a palm stump, obliterated, and not subject to future arising. Thus, Bhikkhave, a bhikkhu is one who has pulled out the pillar.

824. And how, Bhikkhave, is a bhikkhu one who is unbarred? Here, Bhikkhave, a bhikkhu’s five lower fetters are given up, cut off at the root, made like palm stumps, obliterated, and not subject to future arising. Thus, Bhikkhave, a bhikkhu is one who is unbarred.

825. And how, Bhikkhave, is a bhikkhu a liberated one who has lowered the banner, laid down the burden, unfettered? Here, Bhikkhave, a bhikkhu’s asmimāna (conceit ‘I am’) is given up, cut off at the root, made like a palm stump, obliterated, and not subject to future arising. Thus, Bhikkhave, a bhikkhu is a liberated one who has lowered the banner, laid down the burden, unfettered.

(246.)

826. Bhikkhave, the devas with Inda, with Brahmā, with Pajāpati, searching for a bhikkhu whose mind is thus liberated, do not find [anything of which to say]: ‘The consciousness of the tathāgata (one thus gone) is dependent on this.’ For what reason? Even in this very life, Bhikkhave, I say the Tathāgata is untraceable. Bhikkhave, some religious practitioners misrepresent me, who speak thus and declare thus, with what is not true, with what is hollow, falsely, with what is false: ‘The wanderer Gotama is an annihilationist; he declares the annihilation, destruction and non-existence of an existing being.’ As I am not, Bhikkhave, and as I do not say, so those worthy religious practitioners misrepresent me with what is not true, with what is hollow, falsely, with what is false: ‘The wanderer Gotama is an annihilationist; he declares the annihilation, destruction and non-existence of an existing being.’ Both formerly, Bhikkhave, and now, I declare only suffering and the cessation of suffering. In that case, Bhikkhave, if others abuse, revile, irritate and harass the Tathāgata, there is in the Tathāgata, Bhikkhave, no resentment, no indignation, no displeasure of mind.

827. In that case, Bhikkhave, if others honour, esteem, revere and respect the Tathāgata, there is in the Tathāgata, Bhikkhave, no joy, no pleasure, no elation of mind. Or, in that case, Bhikkhave, if others honour, esteem, revere and respect the Tathāgata, the Tathāgata thinks, Bhikkhave: ‘Such services are done to me in regard to that which was formerly fully understood.’ Therefore, Bhikkhave, even if others should abuse, revile, irritate and harass you, in that case you indeed should have no resentment, no indignation, no displeasure of mind. Therefore, Bhikkhave, even if others should honour, esteem, revere and respect you, in that case you should have no joy, no pleasure, no elation of mind. Therefore, Bhikkhave, even if others should honour, esteem, revere and respect you, in that case you should think: ‘Such services are done to me in regard to that which was formerly fully understood.’

(247.)

828. Therefore, Bhikkhave, what is not yours, give that up; when it is given up, that will be for your welfare and happiness for a long time. And what, Bhikkhave, is not yours? Rūpa, Bhikkhave, is not yours; give it up; when it is given up, that will be for your welfare and happiness for a long time. Vedanā, Bhikkhave, is not yours; give it up; when it is given up, that will be for your welfare and happiness for a long time. Saññā, Bhikkhave, is not yours; give it up; when it is given up, that will be for your welfare and happiness for a long time. Saṅkhārā, Bhikkhave, are not yours; give them up; when they are given up, those will be for your welfare and happiness for a long time. Viññāṇa, Bhikkhave, is not yours; give it up; when it is given up, that will be for your welfare and happiness for a long time. Bhikkhave, what do you consider: whatever grass, sticks, branches and foliage there are in this Jeta’s Grove, people might carry them away, or burn them, or do with them as they like. Would you think: ‘People are carrying us away, or burning us, or doing with us as they like’?” “Of course not, Bhante.” “For what reason?” “No indeed, Bhante, for this is neither our attā nor what belongs to our self.” “Just so, Bhikkhave, what is not yours, give that up; when it is given up, that will be for your welfare and happiness for a long time. And what, Bhikkhave, is not yours? Rūpa, Bhikkhave, is not yours; give it up; when it is given up, that will be for your welfare and happiness for a long time. Vedanā, Bhikkhave, … and so on … saññā, Bhikkhave… saṅkhārā, Bhikkhave, … and so on … viññāṇa, Bhikkhave, is not yours; give it up; when it is given up, that will be for your welfare and happiness for a long time.

(248.)

829. Thus, Bhikkhave, the Dhamma has been well proclaimed by me, clear, open, made known, free from patchwork. Bhikkhave, in the Dhamma thus well proclaimed by me, clear, open, made known, free from patchwork, those bhikkhū who are liberated ones, with the defilements destroyed, who have lived the life, done what had to be done, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, utterly destroyed the fetters of existence, liberated by right knowledge — for them there is no round [of existence] for description.

830. Thus, Bhikkhave, the Dhamma has been well proclaimed by me, clear, open, made known, free from patchwork. Bhikkhave, in the Dhamma thus well proclaimed by me, clear, open, made known, free from patchwork, those bhikkhū who have given up the five lower fetters are all spontaneously reborn, attaining complete extinguishment there, not destined to return from that world.

831. Thus, Bhikkhave, the Dhamma has been well proclaimed by me, clear, open, made known, free from patchwork. Bhikkhave, in the Dhamma thus well proclaimed by me, clear, open, made known, free from patchwork, those bhikkhū who have given up three fetters, with passion, hatred and delusion diminished, are all once-returners; having come back to this world only once, they will make an end of suffering.

832. Thus, Bhikkhave, the Dhamma has been well proclaimed by me, clear, open, made known, free from patchwork. Bhikkhave, in the Dhamma thus well proclaimed by me, clear, open, made known, free from patchwork, those bhikkhū who have given up three fetters are all stream-enterers, not liable to states of suffering, certain, destined for full awakening.

833. Thus, Bhikkhave, the Dhamma has been well proclaimed by me, clear, open, made known, free from patchwork. Bhikkhave, in the Dhamma thus well proclaimed by me, clear, open, made known, free from patchwork, those bhikkhū who are Dhamma-followers and confidence-followers are all destined for full awakening.

834. Thus, Bhikkhave, the Dhamma has been well proclaimed by me, clear, open, made known, free from patchwork. Bhikkhave, in the Dhamma thus well proclaimed by me, clear, open, made known, free from patchwork, those who have a measure of saddhā (confidence) in me, a measure of affection, are all destined for heaven.”

835. This the Bhagavā said. Those bhikkhū, delighted, rejoiced in the Bhagavā’s words.

836. The Discourse on the Simile of the Water Snake, the second, is finished.

Commentary

Section titled “Commentary”
  • Grasping holds the sutta together: Ariṭṭha’s wrong grasp (duggahita) of a teaching, the water snake and the raft, then the upādāna (fuel) of views of self and the “not yours” simile. The raft and learning passages are the author’s twins on buddhavacana (mahayana, devolution, failure); not-self and the five collections: 7-anatta, collections.
  • Renderings: alagadda “water snake” (the DPD; buddhavacana’s failure page has “cobra”), antarāyikā dhammā “obstructive things”, kāmā “sensual pleasures”, diṭṭhigata “misconception”, moghapurisa “foolish man”.
  • The edition opens the Bhagavā’s speech at 784 and closes it at 834, so the English carries no closing mark between, and the raft passage (790) lacks the opening quote of the buddhavacana extract.
  • The gods’ search for the liberated bhikkhu’s consciousness (826) and the heavenly destiny of those with mere confidence (834) are the text’s rhetoric, for the author’s rational reading.

Parallels

Section titled “Parallels”

The Chinese parallel is the 阿梨吒經 of the Madhyama Āgama (MA 200, 中阿含經 fascicle 54, CBETA T01, no. 26, pp. 763b–766b), read here in CBETA’s text; the discourse is compared with the Pāḷi in Minh Chau’s and Anālayo’s studies of the two collections (Anālayo, 2011; Minh Chau, 1991). The frame and the sequence are the same: the Bhagavā at Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove; the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture catcher (阿梨吒比丘本伽陀婆梨), holds his view, is questioned and rebuked by the bhikkhū without yielding, is reported and summoned, and is questioned and rebuked by the Bhagavā, who turns to the other bhikkhū and the similes of sensual pleasures; the badly and the well grasped teaching are compared with a snake badly and well caught, and the Dhamma is a raft for crossing over, not for holding on; then the six grounds for views, a bhikkhu’s questions on agitation over what does not exist, the three things that would not bring sorrow and cannot be found, self and what belongs to self not found, the liberated bhikkhu with his five epithets, the gods who cannot find the Tathāgata’s consciousness and the charge of annihilationism, evenness under abuse and honour, the grass and wood of Jeta’s Grove, the well-taught Dhamma and the destinies of those who practise it, and the bhikkhū’s delight. The differences, checked in CBETA’s text:

  • The view and the rebuke. The Chinese names the view “one who practises sensual pleasure has no obstacle” (行欲者無障礙, p. 763b), where the Pāḷi speaks of “the things the Bhagavā has called obstructive” (772); Ariṭṭha’s obstinacy is the formula “this is true, all else is false” said up to three times (此是真實，餘者虛妄 … 如是再三), and the bhikkhū answer with the Bhagavā’s countless statements that sensual pleasure obstructs and “give up this evil view quickly” (汝可速捨此惡見, p. 763b), without the Pāḷi’s ten similes (774). The messenger bows and circumambulates the Bhagavā three times (p. 763c).
  • The Bhagavā’s rebuke. The Chinese asks “from whose mouth did you hear me teach thus?” and “I do not speak one-sidedly, yet you speak one-sidedly?” (我不一向說，汝一向說耶), and puts “I shall now ask the bhikkhū” into what Ariṭṭha should have answered (p. 763c); the bhikkhū are questioned first, and only after their answer is Ariṭṭha told that he has “grasped the meaning and the letter upside down” (顛倒受解義及文) and sits dejected (p. 764a). The Pāḷi has the rebuke, the question whether he has kindled even a flicker of understanding, and his dejection before the bhikkhū are questioned (781–783); the Chinese has no “flicker” (782.1) and no “you will be known by this harmful misconception of your own” (782.5).
  • The similes. Eight for the Pāḷi’s ten: a chain of bones, a lump of meat, a torch, a fire pit, a poisonous snake, a dream, borrowed goods and tree fruit (p. 763c), given in full twice; the slaughterhouse and the swords and spears are absent, and the snake stands fifth.
  • Learning the Dhamma. The instruction to ask about what one does not understand stands before the passage on learning and names “me and the wise companions in the optimal life” (問我及諸智梵行者, p. 764a); the divisions of the teaching are twelve (p. 764a) against the Pāḷi’s nine (786), and the foolish learner learns “for dispute, not for liberation” and “suffers greatly and tires himself in vain” (但受極苦，唐自疲勞).
  • The snake and the raft. The Chinese man seizes the snake “by the middle” (捉其腰中) and is bitten in hand, foot or limb, so that he “does not get what he sought” (p. 764a), where the Pāḷi’s man dies (787); the skilled man presses the snake’s head down with an iron staff before gripping it (先以鐵杖押彼蛇頂, p. 764b), the Pāḷi’s with a forked stick (789). The raft is a teaching “long taught” (我為汝等長夜說筏喻法, p. 764b); the water is a mountain torrent with no boat or bridge and no contrast of a dangerous and a safe shore (791); the raft of grass and wood is ridden across, and after the right course the bhikkhū themselves answer that it is beneficial (益也, p. 764c).
  • The six grounds. The Chinese states them only as the learned disciple regards them, “not mine, I am not that, nor is it a self” (彼一切非我有，我非彼有，亦非是神, p. 764c), with the qualifiers past, future, present, inside, outside and the rest on form, where the Pāḷi gives first the ordinary person’s regard (793), then the disciple’s (794), and the qualifiers at 819; its fourth ground is the view “I shall not be, I shall not exist” (我當無，我當不有) where the Pāḷi has saṅkhārā.
  • Agitation inside and outside. The Chinese explains “fear because of the inside” (因內有恐怖, p. 764c) by the loss of a possession and “fear because of the outside” (因外有恐怖, p. 765a) by the self-view and the fear of annihilation, the reverse of the Pāḷi’s external and internal cases (795, 797); its bhikkhu rises, bares a shoulder, asks “how is there fear?” before each answer and praises the Bhagavā at the end, and its Tathāgata teaches “for the cessation of all self-identity, the abandoning of all defilements, all ‘I’ and ‘mine’, the cessation of the tendency to conceit” (p. 765a), where the Pāḷi lists the grounds for views, saṅkhārā, acquisitions, craving, detachment, cessation and nibbāna (797.4).
  • The three things not found. The Chinese order is a taking up (受), a support for views and a permanent “body” (p. 765b), the Pāḷi’s a possession, the fuel of the theory of self and a support for views (799–801), and the Chinese opens each question with “Good, good!” (善哉！善哉！). It then asks whether the self-view is not “a complete statement of views, like that of the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha” (猶如阿梨吒比丘, pp. 765b–c), where the Pāḷi calls it “an entirely and completely foolish teaching” (805–806).
  • No catechism. The Pāḷi’s “is form permanent or impermanent?” over the five collections (807–819) has no counterpart; the Chinese repeats the six grounds and ties liberation to the absence of fear, “not taking up this world, he has no fear; without fear he attains parinibbāna” (便不受此世…便無恐怖，因不恐怖已，便得般涅槃, p. 765c), where the Pāḷi runs disenchantment, detachment, liberation and knowledge (820).
  • The five epithets. Chinese: crossed the moat (ignorance), passed beyond the moat (craving for existence), broken the city wall (endless birth and death), without gate (the five lower fetters), mirror of the wisdom of the liberated (聖智慧鏡; the conceit “I am”) (pp. 765c–766a); the Pāḷi’s crossbar, trench, pillar, bar and lowered banner (820–825) assign the round of births to the second and craving to the third, and the images differ.
  • The gods and the Tathāgata. The Chinese names Indra, Īśāna, Brahmā and his retinue (因提羅及天伊沙那，有梵及眷屬, p. 766a) for the Pāḷi’s Inda, Brahmā and Pajāpati, adds “the Tathāgata is Brahmā, the Tathāgata is cool, without fever, not other” (如來是梵，如來是冷，如來不煩熱，如來是不異), and has “the Tathāgata declares freedom from sorrow in this very life” where the Pāḷi has “both formerly and now I declare only suffering and the cessation of suffering” (826).
  • Abuse, honour and the grass. The Chinese adds beating to the abuse (撾打, p. 766a), has the Tathāgata reflect under abuse too, “what I formerly did and made, because of that this has come” (若我本所作、本所造者，因彼致此), gives the reason “we have no self and nothing belonging to self” (我等無神、無神所有) before the simile where the Pāḷi’s bhikkhū give it after (828.18), asks whether the dry grass and dead wood outside the gate of Jeta’s Grove would think “people are taking me away to burn” (pp. 766a–b), and has no “what is not yours, give it up” (828).
  • The destinies. The Chinese Dhamma is “well taught, revealed and widely spread, without gaps, proclaimed as far as gods and humans” (p. 766b); it adds “at death” to each class, gives the stream-enterer “at most seven returns among gods and humans” (極七往來天上人間), has no Dhamma-followers and confidence-followers (833), and ends with those who “have faith and delight in me” born “in a good place” (信樂於我…皆生善處) where the Pāḷi’s measure of confidence and affection leads to heaven (834).

Go to parent page (Majjhima Nikāya) / Go to next page (Pāsarāsisutta (The Discourse on the Heap of Traps))

References

Section titled “References”
Anālayo, B. (2011). A Comparative Study of the Majjhima-nikāya. Dharma Drum Academic Publisher.
Minh Chau, T. (1991). The Chinese Madhyama Āgama and the Pāli Majjhima Nikāya: A Comparative Study. Motilal Banarsidass.

Backlinks