“What do you think, friend Yamaka, do you regard form as the Tathāgata?” - “No, friend.” - “Do you regard feeling … perception … volitional formations … consciousness as the Tathāgata?” - “No, friend.”
“What do you think, friend Yamaka, do you regard the Tathāgata as in form?” - “No, friend.” - “Do you regard the Tathāgata as apart from form?” - “No, friend.” - “Do you regard the Tathāgata as in feeling? As apart from feeling? As in perception? As apart from perception? As in volitional formations? As apart from volitional formations? As in consciousness? As apart from consciousness?” - “No, friend.”
“What do you think, friend Yamaka, do you regard form, feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness [taken together] as the Tathāgata?” - “No, friend.” [112]
“What do you think, friend Yamaka, do you regard the Tathāgata as one who is without form, without feeling, without perception, without volitional formations, without consciousness?” - “No, friend.”153
“But, friend, when the Tathāgata is not apprehended by you as real and actual here in this very life,154 is it fitting for you to declare: ‘As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, a bhikkhu whose taints are destroyed is annihilated and perishes with the breakup of the body and does not exist after death’?”
“Formerly, friend Sāriputta, when I was ignorant, I did hold that pernicious view, but now that I have heard this Dhamma teaching of the Venerable Sāriputta I have abandoned that pernicious view and have made the breakthrough to the Dhamma.”155
“If, friend Yamaka, they were to ask you: ‘Friend Yamaka, when a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, what happens to him with the breakup of the body, after death?’—being asked thus, what would you answer?”
“If they were to ask me this, friend, I would answer thus: ‘Friends, form is impermanent; what is impermanent is suffering; what is suffering has ceased and passed away. Feeling … Perception … Volitional formations … Consciousness is impermanent; what is impermanent is suffering; what is suffering has ceased and passed away.’ Being asked thus, friend, I would answer in such a way.”156
“Good, good, friend Yamaka! Now, friend Yamaka, I will make up a simile for you in order to convey this same meaning even more clearly. Suppose, friend Yamaka, there was a householder or a householder’s son, a rich man, with much wealth and property, protected by a bodyguard. Then some man would appear who wanted to ruin him, to harm him, to endanger him, to take his life. [113] It would occur to that man: ‘This householder or householder’s son is a rich man, with much wealth and property, protected by a bodyguard. It won’t be easy to take his life by force. Let me get close to him and then take his life.’
“Then he would approach that householder or householder’s son and say to him: ‘I would serve you, sir.’ Then the householder or householder’s son would appoint him as a servant. The man would serve him, rising up before him, retiring after him, doing whatever he wants, agreeable in his conduct, endearing in his speech. The householder or householder’s son would consider him a friend,157 a bosom friend, and he would place trust in him. But when the man becomes aware that the householder or householder’s son has placed trust in him, then, finding him alone, he would take his life with a sharp knife.
“What do you think, friend Yamaka, when that man had approached that householder or householder’s son and said to him: ‘I would serve you, sir,’ wasn’t he a murderer even then, though the other did not recognize him as ‘my murderer’? And when the man was serving him, rising up before him, retiring after him, doing whatever he wants, agreeable in his conduct, endearing in his speech, wasn’t he a murderer then too, though the other did not recognize him as ‘my murderer’? And when the man came upon him while he was alone and took his life with a sharp knife, wasn’t he a murderer then too, though the other did not recognize him as ‘my murderer’?”
“Yes, friend.”
“So too, friend Yamaka,158 the uninstructed worldling, who is not a seer of the noble ones and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, who is not a seer of superior persons and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, regards form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form.
“He regards feeling as self … perception as self … volitional formations as self … consciousness as self, [114] or self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness.
“He does not understand as it really is impermanent form as ‘impermanent form’159 … impermanent feeling as ‘impermanent feeling’ … impermanent perception as ‘impermanent perception’ … impermanent volitional formations as ‘impermanent volitional formations’ … impermanent consciousness as ‘impermanent consciousness.’
“He does not understand as it really is painful form as ‘painful form’ … painful feeling as ‘painful feeling’ … painful perception as ‘painful perception’ … painful volitional formations as ‘painful volitional formations’ … painful consciousness as ‘painful consciousness.’
“He does not understand as it really is selfless form as ‘selfless form’ … selfless feeling as ‘selfless feeling’ … selfless perception as ‘selfless perception’ … selfless volitional formations as ‘selfless volitional formations’ … selfless consciousness as ‘selfless consciousness.’
“He does not understand as it really is conditioned form as ‘conditioned form’ … conditioned feeling as ‘conditioned feeling’ … conditioned perception as ‘conditioned perception’ … conditioned volitional formations as ‘conditioned volitional formations’ … conditioned consciousness as ‘conditioned consciousness.’
“He does not understand as it really is murderous form as ‘murderous form’ … murderous feeling as ‘murderous feeling’ … murderous perception as ‘murderous perception’ … murderous volitional formations as ‘murderous volitional formations’ … murderous consciousness as ‘murderous consciousness.’
“He becomes engaged with form, clings to it, and takes a stand upon it as ‘my self.’160 He becomes engaged with feeling … with perception … with volitional formations … with consciousness, clings to it, and takes a stand upon it as ‘my self.’ These same five aggregates of clinging, to which he becomes engaged and to which he clings, lead to his harm and suffering for a long time.
“But, friend, the instructed noble disciple, who is a seer of the noble ones … does not regard form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form.
“He does not regard feeling as self … perception as self … volitional formations as self … consciousness as self, or self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness. [115]
“He understands as it really is impermanent form as ‘impermanent form’ … impermanent consciousness as ‘impermanent consciousness.’
“He understands as it really is painful form as ‘painful form’ … painful consciousness as ‘painful consciousness.’
“He understands as it really is selfless form as ‘selfless form’ … selfless consciousness as ‘selfless consciousness.’
“He understands as it really is conditioned form as ‘conditioned form’ … conditioned consciousness as ‘conditioned consciousness. ’
“He understands as it really is murderous form as ‘murderous form’ … murderous consciousness as ‘murderous consciousness.’
“He does not become engaged with form, cling to it, and take a stand upon it as ‘my self.’ He does not become engaged with feeling … with perception … with volitional formations … with consciousness, cling to it, and take a stand upon it as ‘my self.’ These same five aggregates of clinging, to which he does not become engaged and to which he does not cling, lead to his welfare and happiness for a long time.”
“So it is, friend Sāriputta, for those venerable ones who have such compassionate and benevolent brothers in the holy life to admonish and ins
truct them. And now that I have heard this Dhamma teaching of the Venerable Sāriputta, my mind is liberated from the taints by nonclinging.” [116]
This is what the Venerable Sāriputta said. Elated, the Venerable Yamaka delighted in the Venerable Sāriputta’s statement.161
86 (4) Anurādha
On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at Vesālī in the Great Wood in the Hall with the Peaked Roof.162 Now on that occasion the Venerable Anurādha was dwelling in a forest hut not far from the Blessed One. Then a number of wanderers of other sects approached the Venerable Anurādha and exchanged greetings with him. When they had concluded their greetings and cordial talk, they sat down to one side and said to him:
“Friend Anurādha, when a Tathāgata is describing a Tathāgata—the highest type of person, the supreme person, the attainer of the supreme attainment163—he describes him in terms of these four cases: ‘The Tathāgata exists after death,’ or ‘The Tathāgata does not exist after death,’ or ‘The Tathāgata both exists and does not exist after death,’ or ‘The Tathāgata neither exists nor does not exist after death.’”
When this was said, the Venerable Anurādha said to those wanderers: ‘Friends, when a Tathāgata is describing a Tathāgata—the highest type of person, the supreme person, the attainer of the supreme attainment—he describes him apart from these four cases: ‘The Tathāgata exists after death,’ or ‘The Tathāgata does not exist after death,’ or ‘The Tathāgata both exists and does not exist after death,’ or ‘The Tathāgata neither exists nor does not exist after death.’”164
When this was said, those wanderers said to the Venerable Anurādha: ‘This bhikkhu must be newly ordained, not long gone forth; or, if he is an elder, he must be an incompetent fool.”
Then those wanderers of other sects, having denigrated the Venerable Anurādha with the terms “newly ordained” and “fool,” rose from their seats and departed. [117]
Then, not long after those wanderers had left, it occurred to the Venerable Anurādha: “If those wanderers of other sects should question me further, how should I answer if I am to state what has been said by the Blessed One and not misrepresent him with what is contrary to fact? And how should I explain in accordance with the Dhamma, so that no reasonable consequence of my assertion would give ground for criticism?”
Then the Venerable Anurādha approached the Blessed One, paid homage to him, sat down to one side, and reported to the Blessed One everything that had happened, [118] asking: “If those wanderers of other sects should question me further, how should I answer … so that no reasonable consequence of my assertion would give ground for criticism?”
“What do you think, Anurādha, is form permanent or impermanent?” - “Impermanent, venerable sir.”… - “Therefore … Seeing thus … He understands: ‘… there is no more for this state of being.’
“What do you think, Anurādha, do you regard form as the Tathāgata?” - “No, venerable sir.” - “Do you regard feeling … perception … volitional formations … consciousness as the Tathāgata?” - “No, venerable sir.”
“What do you think, Anurādha, do you regard the Tathāgata as in form?” - “No, venerable sir.” - “Do you regard the Tathāgata as apart from form?” - “No, venerable sir.” - “Do you regard the Tathāgata as in feeling? As apart from feeling? As in perception? As apart from perception? As in volitional formations? As apart from volitional formations? As in consciousness? As apart from consciousness?” - “No, venerable sir.”
“What do you think, Anurādha, do you regard form, feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness [taken together] as the Tathāgata?” - “No, venerable sir.”
“What do you think, Anurādha, do you regard the Tathāgata as one who is without form, without feeling, without perception, without volitional formations, without consciousness?” - “No, venerable sir.”
“But, Anurādha, when the Tathāgata is not apprehended by you as real and actual here in this very life, is it fitting for you to declare: ‘Friends, when a Tathāgata is describing a Tathāgata—the highest type of person, the supreme person, the attainer of the supreme attainment—he describes him apart from these four cases: [119] ‘The Tathāgata exists after death,’ or … ‘The Tathāgata neither exists nor does not exist after death’?”
“No, venerable sir.”
“Good, good, Anurādha! Formerly, Anurādha, and also now, I make known just suffering and the cessation of suffering.”165
87 (5) Vakkali
Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at Rājagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrel Sanctuary. Now on that occasion the Venerable Vakkali was dwelling in a potter’s shed, sick, afflicted, gravely ill.166 Then the Venerable Vakkali addressed his attendants:
“Come, friends, approach the Blessed One, pay homage to him in my name with your head at his feet, and say: ‘Venerable sir, the bhikkhu Vakkali is sick, afflicted, gravely ill; he pays homage to the Blessed One with his head at his feet.’ Then say: ‘It would be good, venerable sir, if the Blessed One would approach the bhikkhu Vakkali out of compassion.’”
“Yes, friend,” those bhikkhus replied, and they approached the Blessed One, paid homage to him, sat down to one side, and delivered their message. The Blessed One consented by silence.
Then the Blessed One dressed and, taking bowl and robe, approached the Venerable Vakkali. [120] The Venerable Vakkali saw the Blessed One coming in the distance and stirred on his bed.167 The Blessed One said to him: “Enough, Vakkali, do not stir on your bed. There are these seats ready, I will sit down there.”
The Blessed One then sat down on the appointed seat and said to the Venerable Vakkali: “I hope you are bearing up, Vakkali, I hope you are getting better. I hope that your painful feelings are subsiding and not increasing, and that their subsiding, not their increase, is to be discerned.”
“Venerable sir, I am not bearing up, I am not getting better. Strong painful feelings are increasing in me, not subsiding, and their increase, not their subsiding, is to be discerned.”
“I hope then, Vakkali, that you are not troubled by remorse and regret.”
“Indeed, venerable sir, I have quite a lot of remorse and regret.”
“I hope, Vakkali, that you have nothing for which to reproach yourself in regard to virtue.”
“I have nothing, venerable sir, for which to reproach myself in regard to virtue.”
“Then, Vakkali, if you have nothing for which to reproach yourself in regard to virtue, why are you troubled by remorse and regret?”
“For a long time, venerable sir, I have wanted to come to see the Blessed One, but I haven’t been fit enough to do so.”
“Enough, Vakkali! Why do you want to see this foul body? One who sees the Dhamma sees me; one who sees me sees the Dhamma.168 For in seeing the Dhamma, Vakkali, one sees me; and in seeing me, one sees the Dhamma.
“What do you think, Vakkali, is form permanent or impermanent?” - [121] “Impermanent, venerable sir.”… - “Therefore … Seeing thus … He understands: ‘… there is no more for this state of being.’”
Then the Blessed One, having given this exhortation to the Venerable Vakkali, rose from his seat and departed for Mount Vulture Peak.
Then, not long after the Blessed One had left, the Venerable Vakkali addressed his attendants thus: “Come, friends, lift me up on this bed and carry me to the Black Rock on the Isigili Slope.169 How can one like me think of dying among the houses?”
“Yes, friend,” those bhikkhus replied and, having lifted up the Venerable Vakkali on the bed, they carried him to the Black Rock on the Isigili Slope.
The Blessed One spent the rest of that day and night on Mount Vulture Peak. Then, when the night was well advanced, two devatās of stunning beauty approached the Blessed One, illuminating the whole of Mount Vulture Peak…. Standing to one side, one devatā said to the Blessed One: “Venerable sir, the bhikkhu Vakkali is intent on deliverance.”170 The other devatā said: �
��Surely, venerable sir, he will be liberated as one well liberated.”171 This is what those devatās said. Having said this, they paid homage to the Blessed One and, keeping him on their right, they disappeared right there.
Then, when the night had passed, the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus thus: “Come, bhikkhus, approach the bhikkhu Vakkali and say to him: ‘Friend Vakkali, listen to the word of the Blessed One [122] and two devatās. Last night, friend, when the night was well advanced, two devatās of stunning beauty approached the Blessed One. One devatā said to the Blessed One: “Venerable sir, the bhikkhu Vakkali is intent on deliverance.” The other devatā said: “Surely, venerable sir, he will be liberated as one well liberated.” And the Blessed One says to you, friend Vakkali: “Do not be afraid, Vakkali, do not be afraid! Your death will not be a bad one. Your demise will not be a bad one.”’”
“Yes, venerable sir,” those bhikkhus replied, and they approached the Venerable Vakkali and said to him: “Friend Vakkali, listen to the word of the Blessed One and two devatās.”
The Connected Discourses of the Buddha Page 102
