The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha

by Bhikkhu Nanamoli

  617 MA points out that by speaking of the neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling of the fourth jhāna as a kind of pleasure, the Buddha is implicitly endorsing the view put forth by Pañcakanga.

  618 MA: Both felt pleasure and unfelt pleasure are found (the latter being the pleasure pertaining to the attainment of cessation). The Tathāgata describes both as pleasure in the sense that they are without suffering (niddukkhabhāva).

  SUTTA 60

  619 MA: The Buddha began by asking this question because the village of Sālā was situated at the entrance to a forest, and many recluses and brahmins of diverse creeds would stay there overnight, expounding their own views and tearing down the views of their opponents. This left the villagers perplexed, unable to commit themselves to a particular teaching.

  620 Apaṇṇakadhamma. MA explains this as a teaching that is uncontradictable, free from ambiguity, definitely acceptable (aviraddho advejjhagāmı̄ ekȧsaḡhiko). The term also occurs at AN 3:16/i.113 and AN 4:71/ii.76.

  621 The three views discussed in §§5, 13 and 21 are called wrong views with fixed evil result (niyat̄ micchā diṭṭhi). To adhere to them with firm conviction closes off the prospect of a heavenly rebirth and the attainment of liberation. For a fuller discussion see Bodhi, Discourse on the Fruits of Recluseship, pp. 79–83.The examination of these views unfolds according to the following pattern: The Buddha discloses the wrong view A and its antithesis B. Taking up A for examination first, in A.i he shows the pernicious effect of this view on bodily, verbal, and mental conduct. In A.ii he proceeds from the judgement that the view is actually wrong and elicits additional negative consequences of its adoption. Then in A.iii he shows how a wise person comes to the conclusion that whether or not the view is true, it serves his best interest to reject it.

  Next, position B is considered. In B.i the Buddha describes the wholesome influence of this view on conduct. In B.ii he elicits additional positive consequences of adopting such a view. And in B.iii he shows how a wise person comes to the conclusion that, irrespective of its actual veracity, it serves his best interest to conduct his affairs as though the view is true.

  622 See n.425 for clarification of several expressions used in the formulation of this view.

  623 The Pali terms are susı̄lya and dusı̄lya. Since “corrupt virtue” sounds self-contradictory, “conduct” has been used in my rendering of the latter expression. Ñm had used “unvirtuousness.”

  624 He has made himself safe (sotthi) in the sense that he will not be subject to suffering in a future existence. However, he is still liable to the types of suffering to be encountered in this existence, which the Buddha is about to mention.

  625 Natthikavāda, lit. “the doctrine of non-existence,” is so called because it denies the existence of an afterlife and of kammic retribution.

  626 His undertaking of the incontrovertible teaching “extends only to one side” in the sense that he makes himself safe with regard to the next life only on the presupposition that there is no afterlife, while if there is an afterlife he loses on both counts.

  627 Atthikavāda: the affirmation of the existence of an afterlife and of kammic retribution.

  628 His undertaking “extends to both sides” since he reaps the benefits of his view affirming the afterlife whether or not an afterlife actually exists.

  629 This doctrine of non-doing (akiririyavāda), in the Sāmaññaphala Sutta (DN 2.17/i.52–53), is attributed to Pūra˚a Kassapa. Although on first encounter the view seems to rest on materialist premises, as the previous nihilistic view does, there is canonical evidence that Pūra˚a Kassapa subscribed to a fatalistic doctrine. Thus his moral antinomianism probably follows from the view that all action is predestined in ways that abrogate the ascription of moral responsibility to its agent. See Basham, History and Doctrines of the Ājı̄vikas, p. 84.

  630 This is the doctrine of non-causality (ahetukavāda) maintained by the Ājı̄vaka leader Makkhali Gosāla, called in the Sāmaññaphala Sutta the doctrine of purification by saṁsāra (saṁsārasuddhi, DN 2.21/i.54). The philosophy of Makkhali Gosāla has been examined in detail by Basham, History and Doctrines of the Ājı̄vikas, Chapters 12 and 13. A translation of the Dı̄gha commentary on this doctrine will be found in Bodhi, Discourse on the Fruits of Recluseship, pp. 70–77.

  631 Niyati, destiny or fate, is the primary explanatory principle in Makkhali’s philosophy, “circumstance and nature” (sangatibhāva) seem to be its modes of operation in external events and in the constitution of the individual, respectively. The six classes (abhijāti) are six gradations of human beings according to their level of spiritual development, the highest being reserved for the three mentors of the Ājı̄vakas mentioned at MN 36.5. On the six classes, see Bodhi, Discourse on the Fruits of Recluseship, pp. 73–75. Also, AN 6:57/iii.383–84.

  632 This is a denial of the four immaterial planes of existence, the objective counterparts of the four immaterial meditative attainments.

  633 These are the gods of the planes corresponding to the four jhānas. They possess bodies of subtle matter, unlike the gods of the immaterial planes who consist entirely of mind without any admixture of matter.

  634 MA: Even though the wise man discussed here has doubts about the existence of the immaterial planes, he attains the fourth jhāna, and on the basis of that he attempts to attain the immaterial absorptions. If he fails he is certain of rebirth in the fine-material planes, but if he succeeds he will be reborn in the immaterial planes. Thus for him this wager is an “incontrovertible teaching.”

  635 MA: Cessation of being (bhavanirodha) here is Nibbāna.

  636 MA: Even though this person has doubts about the existence of Nibbāna, he attains the eight meditative attainments, and then, using one of those attainments as a basis, he develops insight, thinking: “If there is cessation, then I will reach arahantship and attain Nibbāna.” If he fails he is certain of rebirth in the immaterial planes, but if he succeeds he reaches arahantship and attains Nibbāna.

  SUTTA 61

  637 Rāhula was the only son of the Buddha, born on the day his father left the palace to seek enlightenment. At the age of seven he was ordained as a novice by Ven. Sāriputta on the occasion of the Buddha’s first return visit to Kapilavatthu after his enlightenment. The Buddha declared him the foremost disciple among those desirous of training. According to MA, this discourse was taught to Rāhula when he was seven years old, thus very shortly after his ordination. At MN 147 he attains arahantship after listening to a discourse by the Buddha on the development of insight.

  638 To acknowledge a wrong deed as such, confess it, and undertake restraint for the future leads to growth in the discipline of the Noble One. See MN 65.13.

  639 In this section, however, the phrase “then you should confess such a bodily action...and laid it open” is replaced by the following: “Then you should be repelled,humiliated, and disgusted by that mental action. Having become repelled, humiliated, and disby that action...” This substitution is made because unwholesome thoughts, unlike bodily and verbal transgressions, do not require confession as a means of exoneration. Both Horner in MLS and Ñm in Ms missed this variation.

  SUTTA 62

  640 According to MA, this discourse was taught to Rāhula when he was eighteen years old, for the purpose of dispelling desire connected with the household life. The Shorter Discourse of Advice to Rāhula is MN 147.

  641 MA: While Rāhula was following the Buddha, he noted with admiration the physical perfection of the Master and reflected that he himself was of similar appearance, thinking: “I too am handsome like my father the Blessed One. The Buddha’s form is beautiful and so too is mine.” The Buddha read Rāhula’s thought and decided to admonish him at once, before such vain thoughts led him into greater difficulties. Hence the Buddha framed his advice in terms of contemplating the body as neither a self nor the possession of a self.

  642 MA: Ven. Sāriputta, Rāhula’s teacher, gave Rāhul
a this advice unaware that he had already been given different meditation instructions by the Buddha. He was misled by Rāhula’s cross-legged posture into thinking that he was practising mindfulness of breathing.

  643 MA: The Buddha here explains the meditation on the four great elements rather than mindfulness of breathing in order to dispel Rāhula’s attachment to the body, which had not yet been removed by the brief instruction on the egolessness of material form. See n.329 for explanation of terms requiring comment.

  644 Space (ākāsa) is not a primary material element but is classified under derivative material form (upādā rūpa).

  645 MA: This passage (§13–17) is taught to show the quality of impartiality (tādibhāva).

  646 For explanations of unclear terms in this first tetrad on mindfulness of breathing (§26), see nn.140–142. Terms needing clarification in the following three tetrads will be explained in the notes to MN 118, the Ānāpānasati Sutta.

  647 That is, the meditator dies calmly, with mindfulness and awareness.

  SUTTA 63

  648 Those who have always wondered about the fate of the monk who almost left the Buddha to satisfy his metaphysical curiosity will be gladdened to know that in his old age Mālunkyāputta received a brief discourse on the six sense bases from the Buddha, went off into solitary meditation, and attained arahantship. See SN 35:95/ iv.72–76. His verses are at Thag 399–404 and 794–817.

  SUTTA 64

  649 The five lower fetters (orambhāgiyāni saṁyojanāni) are so called because they lead to rebirth in the sense-sphere planes. They are eradicated in their entirety only by the non-returner.

  650 MA: The question may be raised: “When the Buddha had asked about the fetters and the Elder replied in terms of the fetters, why does the Buddha criticise his reply?” The reason is that Mālunkyāputta held the view that a person is fettered by the defilements only at times when they assail him, while at other times he is not fettered by them. The Buddha spoke as he did to show the error in this view.

  651 Anuseti tvev’assa sakkāyadiṭṭ̣hānusayo. On the anusayas or underlying tendencies, see n.473. In the commentaries the defilements are distinguished as occurring at three levels: the anusaya level, where they remain as mere latent dispositions in the mind; the pariyuṭṭ̣hāna level, where they rise up to obsess and enslave the mind (referred to in §5 of this discourse); and the vı̄tikkama level, where they motivate unwholesome bodily and verbal action. The point of the Buddha’s criticism is that the fetters, even when they do not come to active manifestation, continue to exist at the anusaya level so long as they have not been eradicated by the supramundane path.

  652 Dhammā. This could also have been rendered “things.”

  653 MA: The fetter and the underlying tendency are in principle not distinct things; rather, it is the same defilement that is called a fetter in the sense of binding, and an underlying tendency in the sense of being unabandoned.

  654 Upadhivivekā. MA glosses upadhi here as the five cords of sensual pleasure. Though the first three clauses of this statement seem to express the same ideas as the two more usual clauses that follow, Ṃ indicates that they are intended to show the means for becoming “quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states.”

  655 This passage shows the development of insight (vipassanā) upon a basis of serenity (samatha), using the jhāna on which the practice of insight is based as the object of insight contemplation. See MN 52.4 and n.552. Here two terms—impermanent and disintegrating—show the characteristic of impermanence; three terms—alien, void, and not self—show the characteristic of non-self; the remaining six terms show the characteristic of suffering.

  656 MA: He “turns his mind away” from the five aggregates included within the jh̄na, which he has seen to be stamped with the three characteristics. The “deathless element” (amatā dhātu) is Nibbāna. First “he directs his mind to it” with the insight consciousness, having heard it praised and described as “the peaceful and sublime,” etc. Then, with the supramundane path, “he directs his mind to it” by making it an object and penetrating it as the peaceful and sublime, etc.

  657 See n.553.

  658 On the omission of the fourth immaterial attainment, see n.554.

  659 MA: Among those who proceed by way of serenity, one bhikkhu emphasises unification of mind—he is said to gain deliverance of mind; another emphasises wisdom—he is said to gain deliverance by wisdom. Among those who proceed by way of insight, one emphasises wisdom—he is said to gain deliverance by wisdom; another emphasises unification of mind—he is said to gain deliverance of mind. The two chief disciples attained arahantship by emphasising both serenity and insight, but Ven. Sāriputta became one who gained deliverance by wisdom and Ven. Mahā Moggallāna became one who gained deliverance of mind. Thus the reason (for the different designations) is the difference in their faculties, i.e., between the predominance of the concentration faculty and of the wisdom faculty.

  SUTTA 65

  660 This refers to the Buddha’s practice of eating a single meal in the forenoon only. According to the Pātimokkha, the bhikkhus are prohibited from eating from noon until the following dawn, though the single-session practice is only recommended but not required.

  661 MA: He would be worried and anxious whether he could live the holy life for his entire life.

  662 His anxiety persisted because he would still have to finish his meal of the remains by noon.

  663 This is the rule prohibiting eating outside the proper time limits. See Vin Pāc 37/iv.35.

  664 The seven terms used in this section represent a sevenfold classification of noble individuals. They are explicated at MN 70.14–21.

  665 Both Ñm and Horner take sankameyya here to mean that the bhikkhu makes himself a plank, i.e., lies down across the mud. This, however, is contradicted by Bhaddāli’s negative answer. Thus it would seem more correct to take this verb to mean that he crosses over himself (as the verb literally does mean), in disregard of the Buddha’s injunction. MA points out that the Buddha would never give such a command to his disciples, but only says this to emphasise the recalcitrant behaviour of Bhaddāli.

  666 MA: He maintains himself by a measure of worldly faith and worldly love towards his preceptor and teacher. Because the other bhikkhus help him, he remains in the homeless life and may eventually become a great monk who has attained to the direct knowledges.

  667 This passage refers to the fixed principle that the Buddha does not lay down a training rule until a case arises that requires the promulgation of an appropriate training rule. See Vin Pār 1/iii.9–10.

  668 Tasmiṁ ṭhāne parinibbāyati. The verb used here is the verbal form of parinibbāna, and could be literally, though erroneously, translated, “He attains final Nibbāna in that action.”

  669 “One beyond training” (asekha) is an arahant. MA explains these ten factors as constituents of the fruit of arahantship.

  670 Right knowledge (samm̄ ñāṇa) is the knowledge pertaining to the fruit of arahantship, right deliverance (samm̄ vimutti) the arahant’s liberation from all defilements.

  SUTTA 66

  671 From this passage and that to follow, it appears that the Buddha restricted the allowable time for bhikkhus’ meals in two successive stages, first prohibiting only the afternoon meal and allowing a night meal. However, in the Vinaya account of the origin of Pāc 37 (Vin iv.85) no mention is made of this successive prohibition. To the contrary, the text seems to assume it to be an item of common knowledge that monks should not consume food past noon, and it shows the Buddha laying down the rule against untimely eating with one categorical pronouncement valid for all meals past noon.

  672 The utterance is in what appears to be very colloquial Pali. MA explains: If one’s mother and father were alive, they would give their son various kinds of food and offer him a place to sleep, and thus he would not have to wander about for food at night.

  673 MA: The Budd
ha undertakes this teaching in order to analyse the person who abandons what he is told to abandon (§9) into four distinct types of individuals.

  674 Upadhi. MA glosses: For the abandoning of four kinds of upadhi—the aggregates, defilements, volitional formations, and cords of sensual pleasure (khandh’upadhi kiles’upadhi abhisankhār’upadhi k̄magụ’upadhi).

  675 MA: The ordinary man, the stream-enterer, the once-returner, and the non-returner can all be included under the first category (§14), the non-returner because the craving for being still exists in him and thus at times he can delight in thoughts of worldly enjoyment. The same four can be included in the second category (§15), the ordinary man because he may suppress arisen defilements, arouse energy, develop insight, and eradicate defilements by attaining the supramundane path.