mn.11 Majjhima Nikāya (Middle Discourses)

Thus have I heard:

At one time the Lord was staying near Sāvatthī in the Jeta Grove in Anāthapiṇḍika's monastery. While he was there, the Lord addressed the monks, saying:

“Monks.”

“Revered one,” these monks answered the Lord in assent. The Lord spoke thus:

“Monks, thinking: ‘Just here is a recluse, here a second recluse, here a third recluse, here a fourth recluse; void of recluses are other (systems teaching) alien views.’ it is thus, monks, that you may rightly roar a lion's roar. But this situation occurs, monks, when wanderers belonging to other sects might herein speak thus:

‘What confidence have the venerable ones, what authority, by reason of which the venerable ones speak thus:

“Just here is a recluse, here a second recluse, here a third recluse, here a fourth recluse; void of recluses are other (systems teaching) alien views?”’

Monks, if there are wanderers belonging to other sects who speak thus, they should be spoken to thus:

‘It is because we see for ourselves four things made known to us by the Lord who knows, who sees, perfected one, fully self-awakened one, that we speak thus:

“Just here is a recluse, here a second recluse, here a third recluse, here a fourth recluse; void of recluses are other (systems teaching) alien views.”’ What are the four?

Your reverences, we have confidence in the Teacher, we have confidence in Dhamma, there is fulfilment of the moral habits, and our fellow Dhamma-men, as well as householders and those who have gone forth, are dear to us and liked (by us). It is, your reverences, because of these four matters, made known to us by the Lord who knows, who sees, perfected one, fully self-awakened one, that we speak thus:

“Just here is a recluse, here a second recluse, here a third recluse, here a fourth recluse; void of recluses are other (systems teaching) alien views.”

But this situation occurs, monks, when wanderers belonging to other sects might speak thus:

‘Your reverences, we too have confidence in that teacher of ours who is our teacher, and we have confidence in that Dhamma of ours which is our Dhamma, and we fulfil those which are our moral habits, and our fellow Dhamma-men, as well as householders and those who have gone forth, are dear to us and liked (by us). So, your reverences, what is the distinction, what the divergence, what the difference between you and us?’

Monks, if there are wanderers belonging to other sects who speak thus, they should be spoken to thus:

‘But, your reverences, is the goal one or is the goal manifold?’ Monks, if answering rightly wanderers belonging to other sects would answer thus:

‘The goal is one, your reverences, the goal is not manifold.’

‘But, your reverences, is this goal for one with attachment or for one without attachment?’ Monks, if answering rightly wanderers belonging to other sects would answer: ‘This goal is for one without attachment, this goal is not for one with attachment.’

‘But, your reverences, is this goal for someone with aversion or for someone without aversion?’ Monks, if answering rightly wanderers belonging to other sects would answer: ‘This goal is for someone without aversion.’

‘But, your reverences, is this goal for someone with confusion or for someone without confusion?’ Monks, if answering rightly wanderers belonging to other sects would answer: ‘This goal is for someone without confusion.’

‘But, your reverences, is this goal for someone with craving or for someone without craving?’ Monks, if answering rightly wanderers belonging to other sects would answer: ‘This goal is for someone without craving.’

‘But, your reverences, is this goal for someone with grasping or for someone without grasping?’ Monks, if answering rightly wanderers belonging to other sects would answer: ‘This goal is for someone without grasping.’

‘But, your reverences, is this goal for someone who is intelligent or for someone who is unintelligent?’ Monks, if answering rightly wanderers belonging to other sects would answer: ‘This goal is for someone who is intelligent.’

‘But, your reverences, is this goal for someone who is yielding and hindered or for someone who is unyielding and unhindered?’ Monks, if answering rightly wanderers belonging to other sects would answer: ‘This goal is for someone who is unyielding and unhindered.’

‘But, your reverences, is this goal for someone with delight in impediments or for someone without delight in impediments?’ Monks, if answering rightly wanderers belonging to other sects would answer thus:

‘This goal is for someone who is without delight in impediments, not for someone with delight in impediments.’

Monks, there are these two views: view of becoming, and view of annihilation. Monks, whatever recluses and brahmans adhere to the view of becoming, have come under the view of becoming, cleave to the view of becoming, these are obstructed from the view of annihilation. Monks, whatever recluses and brahmans adhere to the view of annihilation, have come under the view of annihilation, cleave to the view of annihilation, these are obstructed from the view of becoming.

Monks, whatever recluses or brahmans do not comprehend as they really are the rise and fall of, and satisfaction in, and peril of these two views and the escape from them, these have attachment, these have aversion, these have confusion, these have craving, these have grasping, these are unintelligent, these are yielding and hindered, these delight in impediments, these are not utterly freed from birth, ageing, dying, grief, sorrow, suffering, lamentation, despair, these are not utterly freed from anguish, I say.

But whatever recluses or brahmans comprehend as they really are the rise and fall of, and the satisfaction in, and the peril of these two views and the escape from them, these are without attachment, these are without aversion, these are without confusion, these are without craving, these are without grasping, these are intelligent, these are unyielding and unhindered, these do not delight in impediments, these are utterly freed from birth, ageing dying, grief, sorrow, suffering, lamentation, despair, these are utterly freed from anguish, I say.

Monks, there are these four (kinds of) grasping. What are the four? The grasping of sense-pleasures, the grasping of view, the grasping of rule and custom, the grasping of the theory of self. There are some recluses and brahmans who, although pretending to a comprehension of all the graspings, do not lay down rightly a comprehension of all the graspings; they lay down a comprehension of the grasping of sense-pleasures, but do not lay down a comprehension of the grasping of view, of the grasping of rule and custom, of the grasping of the theory of self. What is the cause of this? It is that these worthy recluses and brahmans do not understand three situations as they really are. Therefore these worthy recluses and brahmans, although pretending to a comprehension of all the graspings, do not lay down rightly a comprehension of all the graspings; they lay down a comprehension of the grasping of sense-pleasures, but do not lay down a comprehension of the grasping of view, do not lay down a comprehension of the grasping of rule and custom, do not lay down a comprehension of the grasping of the theory of self.

Monks, there are some recluses and brahmans who, although pretending to a comprehension of all the graspings, do not lay down rightly a comprehension of all the graspings; they lay down a comprehension of the grasping of sense-pleasures, they lay down a comprehension of the grasping of view, but they do not lay down a comprehension of the grasping of rule and custom, they do not lay down a comprehension of the grasping of the theory of self. What is the cause of this? It is that these worthy recluses and brahmans do not comprehend two situations as they really are. Therefore these worthy recluses and brahmans, although pretending to a comprehension of all the graspings, do not rightly lay down a comprehension of all the graspings; they lay down a comprehension of the grasping of sense-pleasure, they lay down a comprehension of the grasping of view, they do not lay down the comprehension of the grasping of rule and custom, they do not lay down a comprehension of the grasping of the theory of self.

Monks, there are some recluses and brahmans who although pretending to a comprehension of all the graspings, do not lay down rightly a comprehension of all the graspings; they lay down a comprehension of the grasping of sense-pleasures, they lay down a comprehension of the grasping of view, they lay down a comprehension of the grasping of rule and custom, but they do not lay down a comprehension of the grasping of the theory of self. What is the cause of this? It is that these worthy recluses and brahmans do not understand one situation as it really is. Therefore these worthy recluses and brahmans, although pretending to a comprehension of all the graspings, do not rightly lay down a comprehension of all the graspings; they lay down a comprehension of the grasping of sense-pleasure, they lay down a comprehension of the grasping of view, they lay down a comprehension of the grasping of rule and custom, but they do not lay down a comprehension of the grasping of the theory of self.

In such a Dhamma and discipline as this, monks, that which is confidence in the Teacher is shown to be not perfect, that which is confidence in Dhamma is shown to be not perfect, that which is fulfilment of the moral habits is shown to be not perfect, that which is regard and affection for one's fellow Dhamma-men is shown to be not perfect. What is the cause of this? It comes to be thus, monks, in a Dhamma and discipline that are wrongly shown, wrongly taught, not leading onwards, not conducive to allayment, taught by one who is not fully self-awakened.

But the Tathagata, monks, perfected one, fully self-awakened one, claiming a comprehension of all the graspings, rightly lays down a comprehension of all the graspings; he lays down a comprehension of the grasping of sense-pleasures, he lays down a comprehension of the grasping of view, he lays down a comprehension of the grasping of rule and custom, he lays down a comprehension of the grasping of the theory of self. In such a Dhamma and discipline as this, monks, that which is confidence in the Teacher is shown to be perfect, that which is confidence in Dhamma is shown to be perfect, that which is fulfilment of the moral habits is shown to be perfect, that which is regard and affection for one's fellow Dhamma-men is shown to be perfect. What is the cause of this? It comes to be thus, monks, in a Dhamma and discipline that are rightly shown, rightly taught, leading onwards, conducive to allayment, taught by one who is fully self-awakened.

Monks, what is the provenance, what the origin, what the birth, what the source of these four (kinds of) grasping? Craving, monks, is the provenance, craving is the origin, craving is the birth, craving is the source of these four (kinds of) grasping.

And what, monks, is the provenance, what the origin, what the birth, what the source of craving? Feeling, monks, is the provenance, feeling is the origin, feeling is the birth, feeling is the source of craving.

And what, monks, is the provenance, the origin, the birth, the source of feeling? Sensory impingement is the provenance, sensory impingement is the origin, sensory impingement is the birth, sensory impingement is the source of feeling.

And what, monks, is the provenance, the origin, the birth, the source of sensory impingement? The six bases of sensory impression, monks, is the provenance, the six bases of sensory impression is the origin, the six bases of sensory impression is the birth, the six bases of sensory impression is the source of sensory impingement.

And what, monks, is the provenance, the origin, the birth, the source of the six bases of sensory impression? Name-and-form, monks, is the provenance, name-and-form is the origin, name-and-form is the birth, name-and-form is the source of the six bases of sensory impression.

And what, monks, is the provenance, the origin, the birth, the source of name-and-form? Consciousness, monks, is the provenance, consciousness is the origin, consciousness is the birth, consciousness is the source of name-and-form.

And what, monks, is the provenance, the origin, the birth, the source of consciousness? The karma-formations, monks, are the provenance, the karma-formations are the origin, the karma-formations are the birth, the karma-formations are the source of consciousness.

And what, monks, is the provenance, the origin, the birth, the source of the karma-formations? Ignorance, monks, is the provenance, ignorance is the origin, ignorance is the birth, ignorance is the source of the karma-formations.

When, monks, ignorance is got rid of by a monk and knowledge has arisen, he, by the going down of ignorance, by the uprising of knowledge, neither grasps after the grasping of sense-pleasures, nor grasps after the grasping of view, nor grasp after the grasping of rule and custom, nor grasps after the theory of self. Not grasping, he is not troubled; being untroubled he himself is individually attained to nibbāna and he comprehends: ‘Destroyed is birth, brought to a close is the Brahma-faring, done is what was to be done, there is no more of being such or such.’”

Thus spoke the Lord. Delighted, these monks rejoiced in what the Lord had said.

Lesser Discourse on the Lion's Roar: The First

Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was living at Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s Park. There he addressed the bhikkhus thus: “Bhikkhus.”—“Venerable sir,” they replied. The Blessed One said this:

“Bhikkhus, only here is there a recluse, only here a second recluse, only here a third recluse, only here a fourth recluse. The doctrines of others are devoid of recluses: that is how you should rightly roar your lion’s roar.

“It is possible, bhikkhus, that wanderers of other sects might ask: ‘But on the strength of what argument or with the support of what authority do the venerable ones say thus?’ Wanderers of other sects who ask thus may be answered in this way: ‘Friends, four things have been declared to us by the Blessed One who knows and sees, accomplished and fully enlightened; on seeing these in ourselves we say thus: “Only here is there a recluse, only here a second recluse, only here a third recluse, only here a fourth recluse. The doctrines of others are devoid of recluses.” What are the four? We have confidence in the Teacher, we have confidence in the Dhamma, we have fulfilled the precepts, and our companions in the Dhamma are dear and agreeable to us whether they are laymen or those gone forth. These are the four things declared to us by the Blessed One who knows and sees, accomplished and fully enlightened, on seeing which in ourselves we say as we do.’

“It is possible, bhikkhus, that wanderers of other sects might say thus: ‘Friends, we too have confidence in the Teacher, that is, in our Teacher; we too have confidence in the Dhamma, that is, in our Dhamma; we too have fulfilled the precepts, that is, our precepts; and our companions in the Dhamma are dear and agreeable to us too whether they are laymen or those gone forth. What is the distinction here, friends, what is the variance, what is the difference between you and us?’

“Wanderers of other sects who ask thus may be answered in this way: ‘How then, friends, is the goal one or many?’ Answering rightly, the wanderers of other sects would answer thus: ‘Friends, the goal is one, not many.’—‘But, friends, is that goal for one affected by lust or free from lust?’ Answering rightly, the wanderers of other sects would answer thus: ‘Friends, that goal is for one free from lust, not for one affected by lust.’—‘But, friends, is that goal for one affected by hate or free from hate?’ Answering rightly, they would answer: ‘Friends, that goal is for one free from hate, not for one affected by hate.’—‘But, friends, is that goal for one affected by delusion or free from delusion?’ Answering rightly, they would answer: ‘Friends, that goal is for one free from delusion, not for one affected by delusion.’—‘But, friends, is that goal for one affected by craving or free from craving? ’ Answering rightly, they would answer: ‘Friends, that goal is for one free from craving, not for one affected by craving. ’—‘But, friends, is that goal for one affected by clinging or free from clinging?’ Answering rightly, they would answer: ‘Friends, that goal is for one free from clinging, not for one affected by clinging.’—‘But, friends, is that goal for one who has vision or for one without vision?’ Answering rightly, they would answer: ‘Friends, that goal is for one with vision, not for one without vision.’—‘But, friends, is that goal for one who favours and opposes, or for one who does not favour and oppose?’ Answering rightly, they would answer: ‘Friends, that goal is for one who does not favour and oppose, not for one who favours and opposes.’—‘But, friends, is that goal for one who delights in and enjoys proliferation, or for one who does not delight in and enjoy proliferation?’ Answering rightly, they would answer: ‘Friends, that goal is for one who does not delight in and enjoy proliferation, not for one who delights in and enjoys proliferation.’

“Bhikkhus, there are these two views: the view of being and the view of non-being. Any recluses or brahmins who rely on the view of being, adopt the view of being, accept the view of being, are opposed to the view of non-being. Any recluses or brahmins who rely on the view of non-being, adopt the view of non-being, accept the view of non-being, are opposed to the view of being.

“Any recluses or brahmins who do not understand as they actually are the origin, the disappearance, the gratification, the danger, and the escape in the case of these two views are affected by lust, affected by hate, affected by delusion, affected by craving, affected by clinging, without vision, given to favouring and opposing, and they delight in and enjoy proliferation. They are not freed from birth, ageing, and death; from sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair; they are not freed from suffering, I say.

“Any recluses or brahmins who understand as they actually are the origin, the disappearance, the gratification, the danger, and the escape in the case of these two views are without lust, without hate, without delusion, without craving, without clinging, with vision, not given to favouring and opposing, and they do not delight in and enjoy proliferation. They are freed from birth, ageing, and death; from sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair; they are freed from suffering, I say.

“Bhikkhus, there are these four kinds of clinging. What four? Clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, clinging to rules and observances, and clinging to a doctrine of self.

“Though certain recluses and brahmins claim to propound the full understanding of all kinds of clinging, they do not completely describe the full understanding of all kinds of clinging. They describe the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures without describing the full understanding of clinging to views, clinging to rules and observances, and clinging to a doctrine of self. Why is that? Those good recluses and brahmins do not understand these three instances of clinging as they actually are. Therefore, though they claim to propound the full understanding of all kinds of clinging, they describe only the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures without describing the full understanding of clinging to views, clinging to rules and observances, and clinging to a doctrine of self.

“Though certain recluses and brahmins claim to propound the full understanding of all kinds of clinging…they describe the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures and clinging to views without describing the full understanding of clinging to rules and observances and clinging to a doctrine of self. Why is that? They do not understand two instances…therefore they describe only the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures and clinging to views without describing the full understanding of clinging to rules and observances and clinging to a doctrine of self.

“Though certain recluses and brahmins claim to propound the full understanding of all kinds of clinging…they describe the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, and clinging to rules and observances without describing the full understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self. They do not understand one instance…therefore they describe only the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, and clinging to rules and observances without describing the full understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self.

“Bhikkhus, in such a Dhamma and Discipline as that, it is plain that confidence in the Teacher is not rightly directed, that confidence in the Dhamma is not rightly directed, that fulfilment of the precepts is not rightly directed, and that the affection among companions in the Dhamma is not rightly directed. Why is that? Because that is how it is when the Dhamma and Discipline is badly proclaimed and badly expounded, unemancipating, unconducive to peace, expounded by one who is not fully enlightened.

“Bhikkhus, when a Tathāgata, accomplished and fully enlightened, claims to propound the full understanding of all kinds of clinging, he completely describes the full understanding of all kinds of clinging: he describes the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, clinging to rules and observances, and clinging to a doctrine of self.

“Bhikkhus, in such a Dhamma and Discipline as that, it is plain that confidence in the Teacher is rightly directed, that confidence in the Dhamma is rightly directed, that fulfilment of the precepts is rightly directed, and that the affection among companions in the Dhamma is rightly directed. Why is that? Because that is how it is when the Dhamma and Discipline is well proclaimed and well expounded, emancipating, conducive to peace, expounded by one who is fully enlightened.

“Now these four kinds of clinging have what as their source, what as their origin, from what are they born and produced? These four kinds of clinging have craving as their source, craving as their origin, they are born and produced from craving. Craving has what as its source…? Craving has feeling as its source…Feeling has what as its source…? Feeling has contact as its source…Contact has what as its source…? Contact has the sixfold base as its source…The sixfold base has what as its source…? The sixfold base has mentality-materiality as its source…Mentality-materiality has what as its source…? Mentality-materiality has consciousness as its source…Consciousness has what as its source…? Consciousness has formations as its source…Formations have what as their source…? Formations have ignorance as their source, ignorance as their origin, they are born and produced from ignorance.

“Bhikkhus, when ignorance is abandoned and true knowledge has arisen in a bhikkhu, then with the fading away of ignorance and the arising of true knowledge he no longer clings to sensual pleasures, no longer clings to views, no longer clings to rules and observances, no longer clings to a doctrine of self. When he does not cling, he is not agitated. When he is not agitated, he personally attains Nibbāna. He understands: ‘Birth is destroyed, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more coming to any state of being.’”

That is what the Blessed One said. The bhikkhus were satisfied and delighted in the Blessed One’s words.

Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at Sāvatthi, at Jeta‘s Grove, in Anāthapiṇḍika‘s park. There the Blessed One addressed the monks: “Monks!” “Venerable sir,” those monks replied to the Blessed One. The Blessed One said this:

“Monks, it is only here that there is the contemplative¹, here that there is the second contemplative, here that there is the third contemplative, here that there is the fourth contemplative; other doctrines are empty of contemplatives. Monks, it is in just this way that you rightly roar a lion‘s roar.

“Monks, it is possible that a wanderer of another religion might say, ‘But what is the Venerable‘s assurance, what is his strength, by means of which you say, “It is only here there is the contemplative… other doctrines are empty of contemplatives”?’ Monks, this is what is to be said to wanderers of other religions who speak in that way: ‘Venerable, we have four things which have been declared by the Blessed One, the Knower, the Seer, the Arahant, the fully enlightened one; seeing them in ourselves, we say, ‘It is only here there is the contemplative… other doctrines are empty of contemplatives.’ What four? Venerable, we have confidence in the Teacher², we have confidence in the Dhamma, we are accomplished in virtue, and our co-practitioners are dear and agreeable to us – both householders and renunciants. Venerable, these are the four things which have been declared by the Blessed One, the Knower, the Seer, the Arahant, the fully enlightened one; which, seeing them in ourselves, we say, ‘It is only here there is the contemplative… other doctrines are empty of contemplatives.’”

“Monks, it is possible that the wanderer of another religion might say, ‘Venerable, we also have confidence in a teacher – our teacher. We also have confidence in Dhamma – our Dhamma. We also are accomplished in virtue – our virtue. And our co-practitioners also are dear and agreeable to us – both householders and renunciants. Venerable, what is the distinction here, what is the variance, what makes it different for you than it is for us?’

“Monks, this is what is to be said to wanderers of other religions who speak in that way: ‘Venerable, is there one goal or many goals?’ Monks, a wanderer of another religion who speaks correctly will answer in this way: ‘Venerable, there is one goal, not many goals.’

“‘But, Venerable, is the goal for one who is lustful or for one who is free of lust?’ Monks, a wanderer of another religion who speaks correctly will answer in this way: ‘Venerable, the goal is for one who is free of lust, not for one who is lustful.’

“‘But, Venerable, is the goal for one who has hate or one who is free of hate?’ Monks, a wanderer of another religion who speaks correctly will answer in this way: ‘Venerable, the goal is for one who is free of hate, not for one who has hate.’

“‘But, Venerable, is the goal for one who is deluded or for one who is free of delusion?’ Monks, a wanderer of another religion who speaks correctly will answer in this way: ‘Venerable, the goal is for one who is free of delusion, not for one who is deluded.’

“‘But, Venerable, is the goal for one who has craving or for one who is free of craving?’ Monks, a wanderer of another religion who speaks correctly will answer in this way: ‘Venerable, the goal is for one who is free of craving, not for one who has craving.’

“‘But, Venerable, is the goal for one who has clinging or for one who is free of clinging?’ Monks, a wanderer of another religion who speaks correctly will answer in this way: ‘Venerable, the goal is for one who is free of clinging, not for one who has clinging.’

“‘But, Venerable, is the goal for one who is wise or for one who is unwise?’ Monks, a wanderer of another religion who speaks correctly will answer in this way: ‘Venerable, the goal is for one who is wise, not for one who is unwise.’

“‘But, Venerable, is the goal for one who approves and rejects³ or for one who does not approve or reject?’ Monks, a wanderer of another religion who speaks correctly will answer in this way: ‘Venerable, the goal is for one who does not approve or reject, not for one who approves and rejects.’

“‘But, Venerable, is the goal for one who delights in proliferation or for one who does not delight in proliferation?’ Monks, a wanderer of another religion who speaks correctly will answer in this way: ‘Venerable, the goal is for one who does not delight in proliferation, not for one who delights in proliferation.’

“Monks, there are these two perspectives⁴: the perspective of existence and the perspective of non-existence. Monks, those contemplatives and priests⁵ who are stuck on the perspective of existence, stay close to the perspective of existence, and adhere to the perspective of existence reject the perspective of non-existence. Monks, those contemplatives and priests who are stuck on the perspective of non-existence, stay close to the perspective of non-existence, and adhere to the perspective of non-existence reject the perspective of existence. Monks, this is what I say about those contemplatives and priests who do not accurately understand the origin, disappearance, gratification, drawback, and escape from those two perspectives: ‘They have lust, hate, delusion, craving, and clinging; they are unwise, prone to approving and rejecting, delighting in proliferation. They have not been freed from birth, old age, dying, sorrow, lamentation, pain, depression, and anguish; they have not been freed from suffering.’

“Monks, there are these four kinds of clinging. What four? Clinging to sensuality, clinging to perspectives, clinging to habitual practices, and clinging to self-belief⁶. Monks, there are some contemplatives and priests who claim to have a doctrine of the complete understanding of all clinging. They do not correctly make known the complete understanding of all clinging; they make known the complete understanding of clinging to sensuality, but they do not make known the complete understanding of clinging to perspectives, clinging to habitual practices, and clinging to self-belief. For what reason? Because these honorable contemplatives and priests do not accurately understand these three things. Therefore, although those honorable contemplatives and priests claim to have a doctrine of the complete understanding of all clinging, they do not correctly make known the complete understanding of all clinging – they make known the complete understanding of clinging to sensuality, but they do not make known the complete understanding of clinging to perspectives, clinging to habitual practices, and clinging to self-belief.

“Monks, there are some contemplatives and priests who claim to have a doctrine of the complete understanding of all clinging. They do not correctly make known the complete understanding of all clinging; they make known the complete understanding of clinging to sensuality and clinging to perspectives, but they do not make known the complete understanding of clinging to habitual practices and clinging to self-belief. For what reason? Because these honorable contemplatives and priests do not accurately understand these two things. Therefore, although those honorable contemplatives and priests claim to have a doctrine of the complete understanding of all clinging, they do not correctly make known the complete understanding of all clinging – they make known the complete understanding of clinging to sensuality and clinging to perspectives, but they do not make known the complete understanding of clinging to habitual practices and clinging to self-belief.

“Monks, there are some contemplatives and priests who claim to have a doctrine of the complete understanding of all clinging. They do not correctly make known the complete understanding of all clinging; they make known the complete understanding of clinging to sensuality, clinging to perspectives, and clinging to habitual practices, but they do not make known the complete understanding of clinging to self-belief. For what reason? Because these honorable contemplatives and priests do not accurately understand this one thing. Therefore, although those honorable contemplatives and priests claim to have a doctrine of the complete understanding of all clinging, they do not correctly make known the complete understanding of all clinging – they make known the complete understanding of clinging to sensuality, clinging to perspectives, and clinging to habitual practices, but they do not make known the complete understanding of clinging to self-belief.

“Monks, when it is in a Dhamma-Vinaya of that kind, confidence in the teacher is not said to be the right approach, faith in the Dhamma is not said to be the right approach, accomplishment in virtue is not said to be the right approach, and being dear and agreeable among one‘s co-practitioners is not said to be the right approach. For what reason? Monks, it is because it is in a poorly expounded Dhamma-Vinaya that is poorly declared, not conducive to true peace, and not declared by a completely enlightened being.

“Monks, the Tathāgata, the Arahant, the Completely Enlightened One, claims to have a doctrine of the complete understanding of all clinging. He correctly makes known the complete understanding of all clinging; he makes known the complete understanding of clinging to sensuality, clinging to perspectives, clinging to habitual practices, and clinging to self-belief. Monks, when it is in a Dhamma-Vinaya of that kind, confidence in the teacher is said to be the right approach, faith in the Dhamma is said to be the right approach, accomplishment in virtue is said to be the right approach, and being dear and agreeable among one‘s co-practitioners is said to be the right approach. For what reason? Monks, it is because it is in a well-expounded Dhamma-Vinaya that is well-declared, conducive to true peace, and declared by a completely enlightened being.

“Monks, there are these four kinds of clinging. What is their foundation, their origin, their birthplace, their source? These four kinds of clinging have craving as their foundation, craving as their origin, craving as their birthplace, craving as their source. And, monks, what is the foundation, origin, birthplace, and source of craving? Craving has feeling as its foundation, origin, birthplace, and source. And, monks, what is the foundation, origin, birthplace, and source of feeling? Feeling has sense contact as its foundation, origin, birthplace, and source. And, monks, what is the foundation, origin, birthplace, and source of sense contact? Sense contact has the sixfold extent⁷ as its foundation, origin, birthplace, and source. And, monks, what is the foundation, origin, birthplace, and source of the sixfold extent? The sixfold extent has mind and body⁸ as its foundation, origin, birthplace, and source. And, monks, what is the foundation, origin, birthplace, and source of mind and body? Mind and body has consciousness as its foundation, origin, birthplace, and source. And, monks, what is the foundation, origin, birthplace, and source of consciousness? Consciousness has conditional formations as its foundation, origin, birthplace, and source. And, monks, what is the foundation, origin, birthplace, and source of conditional formations? Conditional formations have ignorance as their foundation, origin, birthplace, and source.

“Monks, when there is a monk for whom ignorance has been abandoned and true knowledge has arisen, then because of that abandonment of ignorance and appearance of true knowledge he does not cling to sensuality, he does not cling to perspectives, he does not cling to habitual practices, and he does not cling to self-belief. Not clinging, he is not agitated. Not agitated, he personally attains Nibbāna. He knows: ‘Birth has been eliminated. The Holy Life has been lived. What was to be done has been done. There will be no further existence here.’”

This is what the Blessed One said. Satisfied, those monks delighted in the Blessed One‘s speech.