an.4.192 Aṅguttara Nikāya (Numbered Discourses)

Traits

“Monks, these four traits may be known by means of four [other] traits. Which four?

“It’s through living together that a person’s virtue may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.

“It’s through dealing with a person that his purity may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.

“It’s through adversity that a person’s endurance may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.

“It’s through discussion that a person’s discernment may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.

[1] “‘It’s through living together that a person’s virtue may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning’: Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said?

“There is the case where one individual, through living with another, knows this: ‘For a long time this person has been torn, broken, spotted, splattered in his actions. He hasn’t been consistent in his actions. He hasn’t practiced consistently with regard to the precepts. He is an unprincipled person, not a virtuous, principled one.’ And then there is the case where one individual, through living with another, knows this: ‘For a long time this person has been untorn, unbroken, unspotted, unsplattered in his actions. He has been consistent in his actions. He has practiced consistently with regard to the precepts. He is a virtuous, principled person, not an unprincipled one.’

“‘It’s through living together that a person’s virtue may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning’: Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

[2] “‘It’s through dealing with a person that his purity may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning’: Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said?

“There is the case where one individual, through dealing with another, knows this: ‘This person deals one way when one-on-one, another way when with two, another way when with three, another way when with many. His earlier dealings do not jibe with his later dealings. He is impure in his dealings, not pure.’ And then there is the case where one individual, through dealing with another, knows this: ‘The way this person deals when one-on-one, is the same way he deals when with two, when with three, when with many. His earlier dealings jibe with his later dealings. He is pure in his dealings, not impure.’

“‘It’s through dealing with a person that his purity may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning’: Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

[3] “‘It’s through adversity that a person’s endurance may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning’: Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said?

“There is the case where a person, suffering loss of relatives, loss of wealth, or loss through disease, does not reflect: ‘That’s how it is when living together in the world. That’s how it is when gaining a personal identity. When there is living in the world, when there is the gaining of a personal identity, these eight worldly conditions spin after the world, and the world spins after these eight worldly conditions: gain, loss, status, disgrace, censure, praise, pleasure, & pain.’ Suffering loss of relatives, loss of wealth, or loss through disease, he sorrows, grieves, & laments, beats his breast, becomes distraught. And then there is the case where a person, suffering loss of relatives, loss of wealth, or loss through disease, reflects: ‘That’s how it is when living together in the world. That’s how it is when gaining a personal identity. When there is living in the world, when there is the gaining of a personal identity, these eight worldly conditions spin after the world, and the world spins after these eight worldly conditions: gain, loss, status, disgrace, censure, praise, pleasure, & pain.’ Suffering loss of relatives, loss of wealth, or loss through disease, he does not sorrow, grieve, or lament, does not beat his breast or become distraught.

“‘It’s through adversity that a person’s endurance may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning’: Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

[4] “‘It’s through discussion that a person’s discernment may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning’: Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said?

“There is the case where one individual, through discussion with another, knows this: ‘From the way this person rises to an issue, from the way he applies [his reasoning], from the way he addresses a question, he is dull, not discerning. Why is that? He does not make statements that are deep, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. He cannot declare the meaning, teach it, describe it, set it forth, reveal it, explain it, or make it plain. He is dull, not discerning.’ Just as if a man with good eyesight standing on the shore of a body of water were to see a small fish rise. The thought would occur to him, ‘From the rise of this fish, from the break of its ripples, from its speed, it is a small fish, not a large one.’ In the same way, one individual, in discussion with another, knows this: ‘From the way this person rises to an issue, from the way he applies [his reasoning], from the way he addresses a question… he is dull, not discerning.’

“And then there is the case where one individual, through discussion with another, knows this: ‘From the way this person rises to an issue, from the way he applies [his reasoning], from the way he addresses a question, he is discerning, not dull. Why is that? He makes statements that are deep, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. He can declare the meaning, teach it, describe it, set it forth, reveal it, explain it, & make it plain. He is discerning, not dull.’ Just as if a man with good eyesight standing on the shore of a body of water were to see a large fish rise. The thought would occur to him, ‘From the rise of this fish, from the break of its ripples, from its speed, it is a large fish, not a small one.’ In the same way, one individual, in discussion with another, knows this: ‘From the way this person rises to an issue, from the way he applies [his reasoning], from the way he addresses a question… he is discerning, not dull.’

“‘It’s through discussion that a person’s discernment may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning’: Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

“These, monks, are the four traits that may be known by means of these four [other] traits.”

- Translator: Thanissaro Bhikkhu

- Editor: Gabriel Laera

Facts

“Mendicants, these four things can be known in four situations.
What four?
You can get to know a person’s ethics by living with them. But only after a long time, not casually; only when paying attention, not when inattentive; and only by the wise, not the witless.
You can get to know a person’s purity by dealing with them. …
You can get to know a person’s resilience in times of trouble. …
You can get to know a person’s wisdom by discussion. But only after a long time, not casually; only when paying attention, not when inattentive; and only by the wise, not the witless.
‘You can get to know a person’s ethics by living with them. But only after a long time, not casually; only when paying attention, not when inattentive; and only by the wise, not the witless.’
That’s what I said, but why did I say it?
Take a person who’s living with someone else. They come to know:
‘For a long time this venerable’s deeds have been broken, tainted, spotty, and marred. Their deeds and behavior are inconsistent.
This venerable is unethical, not ethical.’
Take another person who’s living with someone else. They come to know:
‘For a long time this venerable’s deeds have been unbroken, impeccable, spotless, and unmarred. Their deeds and behavior are consistent.
This venerable is ethical, not unethical.’
That’s why I said that you can get to know a person’s ethics by living with them. But only after a long time, not a short time; only when paying attention, not when inattentive; and only by the wise, not the witless.
‘You can get to know a person’s purity by dealing with them. …’
That’s what I said, but why did I say it?
Take a person who has dealings with someone else. They come to know:
‘This venerable deals with one person in one way. Then they deal with two, three, or many people each in different ways.
They’re not consistent from one deal to the next.
This venerable’s dealings are impure, not pure.’
Take another person who has dealings with someone else. They come to know:
‘This venerable deals with one person in one way. Then they deal with two, three, or many people each in the same way.
They’re consistent from one deal to the next.
This venerable’s dealings are pure, not impure.’
That’s why I said that you can get to know a person’s purity by dealing with them. …
‘You can get to know a person’s resilience in times of trouble. …’
That’s what I said, but why did I say it?
Take a person who experiences loss of family, wealth, or health. But they don’t reflect:
‘The world’s like that. Reincarnation’s like that. That’s why the eight worldly conditions revolve around the world, and the world revolves around the eight worldly conditions:
gain and loss, fame and disgrace, blame and praise, pleasure and pain.’
They sorrow and wail and lament, beating their breast and falling into confusion.
Take another person who experiences loss of family, wealth, or health. But they reflect:
‘The world’s like that. Reincarnation’s like that. That’s why the eight worldly conditions revolve around the world, and the world revolves around the eight worldly conditions:
gain and loss, fame and disgrace, blame and praise, pleasure and pain.’
They don’t sorrow or wail or lament, beating their breast and falling into confusion.
That’s why I said that you can get to know a person’s resilience in times of trouble. …

‘You can get to know a person’s wisdom by discussion. But only after a long time, not casually; only when paying attention, not when inattentive; and only by the wise, not the witless.’
That’s what I said, but why did I say it?
Take a person who is discussing with someone else. They come to know:
‘Judging by this venerable’s approach, by what they’re getting at, and by how they discuss a question, they’re witless, not wise.
Why is that?
This venerable does not utter a deep and meaningful saying that is peaceful, sublime, beyond the scope of logic, subtle, comprehensible to the astute.
When this venerable speaks on Dhamma they’re not able to explain the meaning, either briefly or in detail. They can’t teach it, assert it, establish it, clarify it, analyze it, or reveal it.
This venerable is witless, not wise.’
Suppose a person with good eyesight was standing on the bank of a lake. They’d see a little fish rising,
and think:
‘Judging by this fish’s approach, by the ripples it makes, and by its force, it’s a little fish, not a big one.’
In the same way, a person who is discussing with someone else would come to know:
‘Judging by this venerable’s approach, by what they’re getting at, and by how they discuss a question, they’re witless, not wise. …’

Take another person who is discussing with someone else. They come to know:
‘Judging by this venerable’s approach, by what they’re getting at, and by how they discuss a question, they’re wise, not witless.
Why is that?
This venerable utters a deep and meaningful saying that is peaceful, sublime, beyond the scope of logic, subtle, comprehensible to the astute.
When this venerable speaks on Dhamma they’re able to explain the meaning, either briefly or in detail. They teach it, assert it, establish it, clarify it, analyze it, and reveal it.
This venerable is wise, not witless.’
Suppose a man with good eyesight was standing on the bank of a lake. He’d see a big fish rising,
and think:
‘Judging by this fish’s approach, by the ripples it makes, and by its force, it’s a big fish, not a little one.’
In the same way, a person who is discussing with someone else would come to know:
‘Judging by this venerable’s approach, by what they’re getting at, and by how they articulate a question, they’re wise, not witless. …’

That’s why I said that you can get to know a person’s wisdom by discussion. But only after a long time, not casually; only when paying attention, not when inattentive; and only by the wise, not the witless.
These are the four things that can be known in four situations.”