The Nibbāna Sermons 23 to 33 by Bhikkhu K Ñāṇananda

An e-learning course hosted by the

Numata Center for Buddhist Studies
University of Hamburg
in collaboration with the
Barre Center for Buddhist Studies
Massachusetts
-------------------------------
“In the seen just the seen: mindfulness and the construction of experience”,
Mindfulness, 2019, 10.1: 179–184.
-------------------------------
Sermon 23
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammāsambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammāsambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammāsambuddhassa

Etaṃ santaṃ, etaṃ paṇītaṃ, yadidaṃ sabbasaṅkhārasamatho

sabbūpadhipaṭinissaggo taṇhakkhayo virāgo nirodho nibbānaṃ.
"This is peaceful, this is excellent, namely the stilling of all preparations, the
relinquishment of all assets, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation,
extinction."
With the permission of the Most Venerable Great Preceptor and the assembly
of the venerable meditative monks. This is the twentythird sermon in the series
of sermons on Nibbāna.
The other day, we brought up quotations to prove that Nibbāna, as the
cessation of becoming, carries no implications of a nihilist or annihilationist
view because the Tathāgata has transcended the concept of a being.
It became evident, from those quotations, that to assert with an eternalist bias,
the proposition that the Tathāgata exists after death, simply because he is
referred to as a being, or a person, in the discourses, is contrary to the spirit of
the Dhamma. The fact that the arahant, who has done away with the latencies to
conceits of 'I' and 'mine', still continues to use even the words 'I' and 'mine', only
as a concession to worldly conventions and common parlance, came to light
from the Arahantasutta of the Saṃyutta Nikāya, quoted on an earlier occasion.
To remind ourselves of the relevant section of that quotation, we may hark
back to the following lines:
'Ahaṃ vadāmī'ti pi so vadeyya,
'Mamaṃ vadantī'ti pi so vadeyya,
Loke samaññaṃ kusalo viditvā,
 Vohāramattena so vohareyya.
"He might still say: 'I speak',
He might also say: 'They speak to me',
Being skilful in knowing the worldly parlance,
He uses such terms merely as a convention."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2000: 102):
“If a bhikkhu is an arahant,
Consummate, with taints destroyed,
One who bears his final body,
He might still say, ‘I speak,’
And he might say, ‘They speak to me.’
Skilful, knowing the world’s parlance,
He uses such terms as mere expressions.”
-------------------------------
The philosophy of voidness that emerges from those discourses which declare
that in reality there is no Tathāgata, we compared to the blazing flames arising
from the fistfuls of a highly inflammable incense powder at the end of an all-
night's ceremony of devil dancing. Generally this fire ordeal is horrifying to the
onlookers. The Buddha also had to stage a similar fire ordeal in the
Dhammayāga, or the "Dhamma-sacrifice", he administered to exorcize the
malignant personality view, sakkāyadiṭṭhi, ingrained in the minds of worldlings.
Of course there is no explicit reference to such a fire ordeal in the discourses.
However, we do come across a word somewhat suggestive of this kind of
exorcism. The word vidhūpeti, derived from the word dhūpa, "incense", is
suggestive of "fumigating" or "smoking out". For instance, we find the
following verse in the Bodhivagga of the Udāna with reference to the stages of
reflection on the law of dependent arising, in direct and reverse order, that the
Buddha had gone through just after his enlightenment.
Yadā have pātubhavanti dhammā,
Ātāpino jhāyato brāhmaṇassa,
Vidhūpayaṃ tiṭṭhati Mārasenaṃ,
Suriyo 'va obhāsayam antalikkhaṃ.
"When dhammas manifest themselves,
To the resolutely meditating Brahmin,
He stands fumigating the hordes of Māra,
Like the sun irradiating the firmament."
-------------------------------
Translation Ireland (1990: 13):
“When the truths become manifest
To the ardent meditating brahmin,
Scattering Māra’s host he stands,
As does the sun illuminating the sky.”
-------------------------------
 The dispelling of the hordes of Māra is rather suggestive of a smoking out. In
some other discourses, this verb vidhūpeti is found contrasted with sandhūpeti.
The meaning of both these verbs, which have the dhūpa element in common, is
not quite clear. It is likely that the two words imply two functions of the ritual
associated with incense. While some fragrant kinds of incense are used for
propitiating benevolent spirits, certain caustic types are utilized for exorcising
evil spirits.
For instance in the Khajjanīyasutta of the Saṃyutta Nikāya, with reference to
the noble disciple, the phrase vidhūpeti na sandhūpeti occurs. Since the implicit
reference is again to the hordes of Māra, the phrase could be rendered as "he
exorcises and does not propitiate".
The ordinary worldling's mode of recognition of the Tathāgata is comparable
to the recognition of a vortex that has already ceased with the help of the flotsam
and jetsam lightly floating around it. Even after the vortex has ceased, flotsam
and jetsam could still go on rotating, giving the wrong impression that the vortex
is still there. If one understands that the vortex has actually ceased deep down at
its centre, and that what remains there, now, is the great ocean, undifferentiated
and unique, one can get rid of the unfounded fear arising from the statement that
there is no Tathāgata in truth and fact.
The cessation of the puny centre of the whirlpool is equivalent to inheriting an
expansive great ocean. It is where a vortex ceases that the great ocean prevails
unhindered. To give up the limitations of a vortex, is to inherit the limitless
ocean. The irony arising from these statements is already implicit in the term
arahant. We use this term with reference to the Buddha as well as the arahants.
Though the commentators later attributed various other meanings to the term,
the basic sense is "to be worthy of gifts". In fact, it is being worthy of receiving
everything.
It is by giving up all that one becomes worthy of all.
Here too, we have a paradox. To become an arahant is to let go of everything.
Craving has to be fully abandoned. It is when all desires are gone, when
everything is given up, that one becomes worthy of receiving everything. This is
the deeper side of the significance of the term arahant.
There are six modes of measuring in accordance with the conceit 'am',
asmimāna. What is known as saḷāyatana, or the six sense-bases, comprise the
six scales of measurement, asserting the conceit 'am'. At whatever point of time
the measuring, evaluating and assessing done by the six sense-bases, such as the
eye, ear, nose etc., ceases, the person concerned thereby becomes immeasurable,
invaluable and boundless. It is here that the simile of the vortex and the ocean
becomes meaningful. So the only way of becoming immeasurable and boundless
is to abandon all those scales of measurement. This might sound extremely
strange.
With the cessation of a vortex, the attention of one who has been looking at it
turns towards the depth, immeasurability and boundlessness of the great ocean.
This line of reflection might even enable one to get a glimpse of an unworldly
beauty in this philosophy of the void, which drives an unfounded fear into the
minds of the worldlings.
We do get positive proof of this fact in such sections of the Dhammapada as
those entitled The Flowers, The Worthy, The Buddha and The Brahmin, as well
as in a number of discourses in the Sutta Nipāta, where we come across
marvellously scintillating verses. This is understandable, since the dawn of that
wisdom which sees the voidness of a self and of everything belonging to a self,
and the attainment of the fruits of the path in the light of that wisdom, marks the
efflorescence as well as the fruition of the saṃsāric existence of a being.
This idea comes up, for instance, in the section on flowers in the
Dhammapada.
Yathā saṅkāradhānasmiṃ,
Ujjhitasmiṃ mahāpathe,
Padumaṃ tattha jāyetha,
Sucigandhaṃ manoramaṃ.
Evaṃ saṅkārabhūtesu,
andhabhūte puthujjane,
atirocati paññāya,
sammāsambuddhasāvako.
"As on top of a rubbish heap,
Dumped by the highway side,
There blossoms forth a lotus,
Pure in fragrance and charming.
So amidst the worldlings blind,
The Fully Awakened One's disciple,
Outshines them in marked contrast,
In point of wisdom bright."
-------------------------------
Translation Norman (2004: 9):
“Just as on a heap of rubbish
Thrown on the high road,
A lotus might grow
With sweet smell, delighting the mind,
Similarly among common people
Who are blind and like rubbish,
The disciple of the Fully Awakened One
Shines forth by reason of his wisdom.”
-------------------------------
So, then, the arahant is that charming lotus, arising out of the cesspool of
saṃsāra. Surely there cannot be anything frightful about it. There is nothing to
get scared about this prospect.
In our last sermon we quoted from a discourse that gives some new
definitions and new concepts of the world. We brought up two statements from
the Lokakāmaguṇasutta (No. 1) of the Saḷāyatanavagga in the Saṃyutta Nikāya.
The first statement is somewhat riddle-like. There the Buddha addresses the
monks and declares:
Nāhaṃ, bhikkhave, gamanena lokassa antaṃ ñātayyaṃ, daṭṭhayyaṃ,
pattayyan'ti vadāmi. Na ca panāhaṃ, bhikkhave, appatvā lokassa antaṃ
dukkhassa antakiriyaṃ vadāmi.
"Monks, I do not say that by travelling one can come to know or see or reach
the end of the world. Nor do I say that without reaching the end of the world one
can put an end to suffering."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2000: 1188):
“Bhikkhus, I say that the end of the world cannot be known, seen, or reached
by travelling. Yet, bhikkhus, I also say that without reaching the end of the
world there is no making an end to suffering.”
SĀ 234
“I do not say that a person reaches the end of the world by walking, and I also
do not say that without walking [the path] one reaches the end of the world
and the unsurpassed transcendence of dukkha.”
--------------------------------
We also mentioned, the other day, the explanation given by Venerable
Ānanda to this cryptic statement at the request of those monks who approached
him to get it clarified. That explanation embodies the definition given by the
Buddha to the term world. It is not the common concept of the world.
Yena kho, āvuso, lokasmiṃ lokasaññī hoti lokamānī, ayaṃ vuccati ariyassa
vinaye loko. Kena c'āvuso lokasmiṃ lokasaññī hoti lokamānī?
Cakkhunā kho, āvuso, lokasmiṃ lokasaññī hoti lokamānī, sotena ... ghānena
... jivhāya ... kāyena ... manena kho, āvuso, lokasmiṃ lokasaññī hoti lokamānī.
Yena kho, āvuso, lokasmiṃ lokasaññī hoti lokamānī, ayaṃ vuccati ariyassa
vinaye loko.
"Friends, that by which one has a perception of the world and has a conceit of
the world, that in this discipline of the Noble Ones is called 'the world'. By what,
friends, has one a perception of the world and a conceit of the world?
By the eye, friends, one has a perception of the world and a conceit of the
world, by the ear ... by the nose ... by the tongue ... by the body ... by the mind ...
That, friends, by which one has a perception of the world and a conceit of the
world, that in this discipline of the Noble Ones is called 'the world'."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2000: 1190):
“That in the world by which one is a perceiver of the world, a conceiver of the
world—this is called the world in the Noble One’s Discipline. And what, friends,
is that in the world by which one is a perceiver of the world, a conceiver of the
world? The eye is that in the world by which one is a perceiver of the world, a
conceiver of the world. The ear … The nose … The tongue … The body … The
mind is that in the world by which one is a perceiver of the world, a conceiver
of the world. That in the world by which one is a perceiver of the world, a
conceiver of the world—this is called the world in the Noble One’s Discipline.”
SĀ 234
“Whatever there is of a ‘world’, of naming a ‘world’, of experiencing a ‘world’,
of designating a ‘world’, of a linguistic expression of a ‘world’, it all enters into
being reckoned as a ‘world’ Venerable friends, that is, the eye is a ‘world’, a
naming of a ‘world’, an experiencing of a ‘world’, a designation of a ‘world’, a
linguistic expression of a ‘world’, it all enters into being reckoned a ‘world’.
“The ear … the nose … the tongue … the body … the mind is also like that.
“A learned noble disciple understands as it really is the arising of the six sense-
spheres, their cessation, their gratification, their danger, and the escape from
them. This is called a noble disciple who reaches the end of the world, who
understands the world and who, having been burdened by the world, has
transcended the world.”
(Next Ānanda also offers a verse summary)
--------------------------------
That with which the world is measured, that itself is called 'the world'. The
above-mentioned measuring rods, namely the eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue,
the body and the mind, give us a conceit of the world and a perception of the
world. Apart from these six there is no way of knowing a world. All theories
about the world are founded on these six sense-bases.
By way of a simple illustration, we alluded to the fact that in the absence of
any standard measuring rod, we resort to the primordial scales based on this
physical frame of ours, such as the inch, the span, the foot and the fathom. The
subtlest scale of measurement, however, is that based on the mind. It is in this
mode of measuring and reckoning that concepts and designations play their part.
But the Buddha's philosophy of the void goes against all these mental modes.
His exorcism by the vision of the void fumigates all concepts and designations.
The six sense-bases are therefore so many scales of measurement. It is with
the help of these that the world is measured. So the above definition of the world
brings out the "prepared", saṅkhata, nature of the world. It is a thought-
construct.
This does not amount to a negation of the role of materiality. All we mean to
say is that the concept of the world is actually an outcome of these six sense
bases. To that extent it is something prepared, a thought-construct.
While discussing the ten indeterminate points on a previous occasion, we
happened to mention that the first four among them concern the world.
1. "The world is eternal".
2. "The world is not eternal".
3. "The world is finite".
4. "The world is infinite".
 What those theorists meant by the term world in this context is none other
than that prepared world which is constructed by the six sense-bases. That is to
say, it is just the concept of the world.
However, they were not aware of the fact that their concept of the world is a
thought-construct, because they had no insight into the law of dependent arising.
They did not understand that these are mere preparations. The fallacy involved
here, that is, the inability to understand that their concept of the world is the
outcome of wrong attention, we illustrated by the simile of the magic kettle.
In an exhibition a magic kettle is displayed from which water keeps on
flowing into a basin. One curious onlooker is waiting to see the kettle empty,
while the other is waiting to see the basin overflowing. Both are unaware of the
fact that a hidden tube conveys the water back again to the kettle, unseen
through the same flow of water.
The ordinary concept of the world carries with it the same fallacy. The
worldlings under the sway of defilements, which thrive on the perception of the
compact, ghanasaññā, have the habit of grasping everything. The ordinary man
of the world, fully overcome by craving and grasping, entertains a perception of
permanence since he has no insight. That is why he regards the world as a unit
due to his perception of the compact, as he takes cognizance only of the arising
aspect, ignoring the decaying aspect.
Whether such a world is eternal or not, is the point at issue in the case of the
first set of questions mentioned above, while the next set poses the dilemma
whether it is finite or infinite. What is at the root of all those ill-conceived
notions, is the premise that it is possible to posit an absolute existence or an
absolute non-existence. In other words, the two extreme views 'everything
exists' and 'nothing exists'.
The unique norm of dependent arising, which the Buddha discovered,
dismisses both those extreme views. It is set forth in the Kaccāyanagottasutta of
the Nidānasaṃyutta in the Saṃyutta Nikāya, which we have quoted earlier too.
We shall, however, bring up again the relevant section to elucidate this point.
Dvayanissito khvāyaṃ, Kaccāyana, loko yebhuyyena: atthitañceva
natthitañca. Lokasamudayaṃ kho, Kaccāyana, yathābhūtaṃ sammappaññāya
passato yā loke natthitā sā na hoti. Lokanirodhaṃ kho, Kaccāyana,
yathābhūtaṃ sammappaññāya passato yā loke atthitā sā na hoti.
"This world, Kaccāyana, for the most part, bases its views on two things: on
existence and non-existence. Now, Kaccāyana, to one who with right wisdom
sees the arising of the world as it is, the view of non-existence regarding the
world does not occur. And to one who with right wisdom sees the cessation of
the world as it really is, the view of existence regarding the world does not
occur."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2000: 544)
 “This world, Kaccāna, for the most part depends on a duality―upon the
notion of existence and the notion of nonexistence. But for one who sees the
origin of the world as it really is with correct wisdom, there is no notion of
nonexistence in regard to the world. And for one who sees the cessation of the
world as it really is with correct wisdom, there is no notion of existence in
regard to the world.”

Tripāṭhī (1962: 167):

dvayaṃ niśrito’yaṃ kātyāyana loko yad bhūyasāsthitāñ ca niśrito nāstitāñ ca
… lokasamudayaṃ kātyāyana yathābhūtaṃ samyakprajñayā paśyato ya loke
nāstitā sā na bhavati. lokanirodhaṃ yathābhūtaṃ samyakprajñayā paśyato yā
loke ’stitā sā na bhavati.

SĀ 301
「世間有二種依，若有、若無」(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 85, c21)
「世間集如實正知見，若世間無者不有，世間滅如實正知見，若世間有者
無有」(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 85, c26-28)
-------------------------------
This is where our simile of the magic kettle becomes meaningful. Had both
onlookers understood that the magic kettle is getting filled at the same time it
gets emptied, and that the basin also gets filled while it is being emptied, they
would not have the curiosity to go on looking at it.
In contradistinction to both these viewpoints, the law of dependent arising
promulgated by the Buddha transcends them by penetrating into the concept as
such. The Buddha explained the arising of the world in terms of the twelve
factors, beginning with "dependent on ignorance preparations", precisely
because it cannot be presented in one word.
Usually, the formula of dependent arising is summed up with the words ayaṃ
dukkhasamudayo, "this is the arising of suffering", or with the more conclusive
statement evam etassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa samudayo hoti, "thus is
the arising of this entire mass of suffering".
There are also instances of explaining the arising of the world through the
principle underlying the norm of dependent arising. The world arises in the six
sense-bases. It is at the same time the arising of suffering. The arising of
suffering is almost synonymous with the arising of the world.
The law of dependent arising is an explanation of the way a concept of the
world comes about. This is an extremely subtle point. Since the concept of the
world is a product of wrong reflection, it is saṅkhata, or "prepared". It is like
something imagined. The saṅkhata, or the "prepared", has a certain circularity
about it.
In fact, the two dilemmas mentioned above involve the question of time and
space. The question whether the world is eternal or not eternal concerns time,
whereas the question whether the world is finite or infinite relates to space. Both
time and space involve a circularity. The furthest limit of the forenoon is the
nearest limit of the afternoon, and the furthest limit of the afternoon is the
nearest limit of the forenoon. This is how the cycle of the day turns round.
Where the forenoon ends is the afternoon, where the afternoon ends is the
forenoon.
A similar time cycle is to be found even in one moment. Rise and fall occur as
a cycle even within a single moment. The same process goes on within an aeon.
That is why an aeon is said to have the two aspects called saṃvatta,
"contraction", and vivaṭṭa, "expansion". World systems go on contracting and
expanding.
The so-called existence of the world is a continuous process of contraction
and expansion. Therefore it is impossible to find any beginning or end. The very
question of a first beginning is ill conceived. It is like an attempt to find a
starting point in a cycle. It is a problem that cannot be solved by speculation.
Because of the cyclic nature of existence, rise and fall is characteristic of
every single moment. It is by ignoring the decaying aspect inherent in one
moment that wrong reflection gives rise to the inference that there must be an
absolute end of the world.
Because the visible world gets destroyed, one conceives of an absolute end of
the world. But when one world system gets destroyed, another world system
gets crystallized somewhere else. Speculative views and standpoints about the
universe, current among the worldlings, are of such a misleading nature that any
reasoning based on them leads to a circularity of argument as is evident from the
Lokāyatikābrāhmaṇāsutta among the Nines of the Aṅguttara Nikāya.
This discourse is about two Lokāyatikābrāhmins. The term Lokāyatika is a
derivative from lokāyata, which signifies a branch of knowledge dealing with
the length and breadth of the world, perhaps a prototype of modern science,
though it relied more on logic than on experiment. The two Brahmins were
probably students of such a branch of learning. One day they came to the
Buddha and posed this question:
"Sire Gotama, now there is this teacher Pūraṇa Kassapa who claims
omniscience, saying that he sees everything and has knowledge and vision of
everything while walking or standing, whether asleep or awake. With these
claims to omniscience, he makes the following declaration:"
Ahaṃ anantena ñāṇena anantaṃ lokaṃ jānaṃ passaṃ viharāmi. "I dwell
knowing and seeing an infinite world with an infinite knowledge."
"But then there is this teacher Nigaṇṭha Nāthaputta who also has similar
claims to omniscience, but declares: Ahaṃ antavantena ñāṇena antavantaṃ
lokaṃ jānaṃ passaṃ viharāmi. "I dwell knowing and seeing a finite world with
a finite knowledge."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2012: 1303)
Master Gotama, Pūraṇa Kassapa claims to be all-knowing and all-seeing and to
have all-embracing knowledge and vision:
‘Whether I am walking, standing, sleeping, or awake, knowledge and vision are
constantly and continuously present to me.’ He says thus: ‘With infinite
knowledge, I dwell knowing and seeing the world to be infinite.’
But Nigaṇṭha Nātaputta also claims to be all-knowing and all-seeing and to
have all-embracing knowledge and vision:
‘Whether I am walking, standing, sleeping, and awake, knowledge and vision
are constantly and continuously present to me.’ He says thus: ‘With finite
knowledge, I dwell knowing and seeing the world to be finite.’
-------------------------------
Then the two Brahmins ask the Buddha which of these two teachers claiming
omniscience in such contradictory terms is correct. But the Buddha's reply was:
Alaṃ brāhmaṇā, tiṭṭhat' etaṃ ... Dhammaṃ vo desissāmi, "enough, brahmins, let
that question be ... I shall preach to you the Dhamma."
The expression used here is suggestive of the fact that the question belongs to
the category of unexplained points. Terms like ṭhapita, "left aside", and
ṭhapanīya, "should be left aside", are used with reference to indeterminate
points.
Why did the Buddha leave the question aside? We can guess the reason,
though it is not stated as such. Now the standpoint of Pūraṇa Kassapa is: "I
dwell knowing and seeing an infinite world with an infinite knowledge." One
can question the validity of his claim with the objection: You see an infinite
world, because your knowledge is not finite, that is to say, incomplete. If it is
complete, there must be an end. Therefore, going by the sense of incompleteness
in the word anantaṃ, one can refute the former view. Why you see the world as
infinite is because your knowledge lacks finality.
Nigaṇṭha Nāthaputta, on the other hand, is asserting that he sees a finite
world with a finite knowledge. But the followers of Pūraṇa Kassapa can raise
the objection: you are seeing the world as finite because your knowledge is
limited. Your knowledge has an end, that is why you see a finite world. So here,
too, we have a circle, or rather a circularity of argument. The two terms anta and
ananata are ambiguous. That must be the reason why the Buddha rejected the
two standpoints in question.
Then he declares: "I shall preach to you the Dhamma", and brings up as a
simile an illustration which could be summed up as follows. Four persons
endowed with the highest ability to walk, the highest speed and the widest stride
possible, stand in the four directions. Their speed is that of an arrow and their
stride is as wide as the distance between the eastern ocean and the western
ocean. Each of them tells himself: 'I will reach the end of the world by walking'
and goes on walking for hundred years, that being his full life-span, resting just
for eating, drinking, defecating, urinating and giving way to sleep or fatigue,
only to die on the way without reaching the end of the world.
'But why so?', asks the Buddha rhetorically and gives the following
explanation. "I do not say, O! Brahmins, that the end of the world can be known,
seen or reached by this sort of running. Nor do I say that there is an ending of
suffering without reaching the end of the world." Then he declares: "Brahmins,
it is these five strands of sense pleasures that in the Noble One's discipline are
called 'the world'".
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2012: 1304)
“I say, brahmins, that by this kind of running one cannot know, see, or reach
the end of the world. And yet I say that without having reached the end
of the world there is no making an end of suffering .
These five objects of sensual pleasure, brahmins, are called ‘the world’ in the
Noble One’s discipline.”
-------------------------------
In this particular context, the Buddha calls these five kinds of sense-pleasures
'the world' according to the Noble One's terminology. This does not contradict
the earlier definition of the world in terms of the six sense-bases, for it is by
means of these six sense-bases that one enjoys the five strands of sense-
pleasures. However, as an art of preaching, the Buddha defines the world in
terms of the five strands of sense-pleasures in this context.
Then he goes on to proclaim the way of transcending this world of the five
sense pleasures in terms of jhānic attainments. When one attains to the first
jhāna, one is already far removed from that world of the five sense-pleasures.
But about him, the Buddha makes the following pronouncement:
Aham pi, brāhmaṇā, evaṃ vadāmi: 'ayam pi lokapariyāpanno, ayam pi
anissaṭo lokamhā'ti, "and I too, O! Brahmins, say this: 'This one, too, is included
in the world, this one, too, has not stepped out of the world'". The Buddha makes
the same pronouncement with regard to those who attain to the other
jhānic levels. But finally he comes to the last step with these words:
Puna ca paraṃ, brāhmaṇā, bhikkhu sabbaso nevasaññānāsaññāyatanaṃ
samatikkama saññāvedayitanirodhaṃ upasampajja viharati, paññāya c' assa
disvā āsavā parikkhīṇā honti. Ayaṃ vuccati, brāhmaṇā, bhikkhu lokassa antam
āgamma lokassa ante viharati tiṇṇo loke visattikaṃ.
"But then, O! Brahmins, a monk, having completely transcended the sphere of
neither-perception-nor-non-perception, attains to and abides in the cessation of
perceptions and feelings, and in him, having seen with wisdom, the influxes are
made extinct. This one, O! Brahmins, is known as one who, on reaching the end
of the world, is dwelling at its very end, having crossed over the agglutinative
craving".
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2012: 1304)
Again, by completely surmounting the base of neither-perception-nor-non-
perception, a bhikkhu enters and dwells in the cessation of perception and
feeling, and having seen with wisdom, his taints are utterly destroyed. This is
called a bhikkhu who, having come to the end of the world, dwells at the end
of the world, one who has crossed over attachment to the world.
-------------------------------
 Going by these discourses, one might conclude that the cessation of
perceptions and feelings is actually Nibbāna itself. But the most important part
of the above quotation is the statement paññāya c' assa disvā āsavā parikkhīṇā
honti, "having seen with wisdom, the influxes are made extinct in him". While
in the attainment of the cessation of perceptions and feelings, all preparations
subside and it is on rising from it that all influxes are made extinct by the vision
of wisdom.
This fact comes to light in the following answer of Venerable Dhammadinnā
Therī to the question raised by the lay-follower Visākha, her former husband, in
the Cūḷavedalla Sutta.
Saññāvedayitanirodhasamāpattiyā vuṭṭhitaṃ, kho āvuso Visākha, bhikkhuṃ
tayo phassā phusanti: suññato phasso, animitta phasso, appaṇihito phasso.
"Friend Visākha, when a monk has emerged from the attainment of the cessation
of perceptions and feelings, three kinds of contact touch him: voidness contact,
signless contact, desireless contact."
-------------------------------
Translation Ñāṇamoli (1995: 400)
“When a bhikkhu has emerged from the attainment of the cessation of
perception and feeling, three kinds of contact touch him: voidness contact,
signless contact, desireless contact.”

MĀ 211
“When a monk emerges from the concentration of cessation he contacts three
types of contact. What are the three? One: imperturbable contact, two:
nothingness contact, and three: signless contact”
-------------------------------
On this point, the commentary too, gives the explanation suññatā nāma
phalasamāpatti, "'voidness' means the attainment of the fruit of arahant-hood".
In answer to another question, Venerable Dhammadinnā Therī says,
Saññāvedayitanirodhasamāpattiyā vuṭṭhitassa, kho āvuso Visākha, bhikkhuno
vivekaninnaṃ cittaṃ hoti vivekapoṇaṃ vivekapabbhāraṃ, "Friend Visākha,
when a monk has emerged from the attainment of the cessation of perceptions
and feelings, his mind inclines to seclusion, slants to seclusion, tends to
seclusion".
-------------------------------
MĀ 210
“[When] a monk has emerged from the concentration of cessation, his mind
delights in seclusion, it tends towards seclusion, it inclines towards seclusion.”
-------------------------------
Here the commentary explains nibbānaṃ viveko nāma, "what is called
seclusion is Nibbāna".
So it is on emerging from the attainment of the cessation of perceptions and
feelings, that is in the arahattaphalasamādhi, references to which we have cited
earlier, that Nibbāna is realized. It is then that one actually sees the end of the
world.
-------------------------------
AN 5.166 at AN III 194:
atha kho bhagavā bhikkhū āmantesi: idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu sīlasampanno
samādhisampanno paññāsampanno saññāvedayitanirodhaṃ samāpajjeyyāpi
vuṭṭhaheyyāpi, atthetaṃ ṭhānaṃ: no ce diṭṭheva dhamme aññaṃ ārādheyya,
atikkammeva kabaḷīkārāhārabhakkhānaṃ devānaṃ sahabyataṃ aññataraṃ
manomayaṃ kāyaṃ upapanno saññāvedayitanirodhaṃ samāpajjeyyāpi
vuṭṭhaheyyāpi. atthetaṃ ṭhānan ti.
Translation Bodhi (2012: 779)
Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus: “Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu
accomplished in virtuous behavior, concentration, and wisdom might enter
and emerge from the cessation of perception and feeling. If he does not reach
final knowledge in this very life, then, having been reborn among a certain
group of mind-made [deities] that transcend the company of devas that subsist
on edible food, he might [again] enter and emerge from the cessation of
perception and feeling. There is this possibility.”

Vism 708 kathaṃ vuṭṭhānan ti ? anāgāmissa anāgāmiphaluppattiyā, arahato

arahattaphaluppattiyāti evaṃ dvedhā vuṭṭhānaṃ hoti.
Translation Ñāṇamoli (1991: 737): How does emergence from it come about?
The emergence comes about in two ways thus: by means of the fruition of non-
return in the case of the non-returner, or by means of the fruition of
arahantship in the case of the arahant.”

Griffith 1986/1991: 35 (On Being Mindless), suggests “to take Buddhaghosa’s

mention of the occurrence of the ‘fruits’ as descriptive of the first mental
events that occur upon leaving the attainment of cessation”.

-------------------------------
So from this we can well infer that in advancing a new definition of the world,
in introducing a new concept of the world, the Buddha was not trying to
sidetrack the moot point of the worldlings by bringing in something totally
irrelevant. He was simply rejecting for some sound reason the worldlings'
concept of the world, which is born of wrong reflection, and illustrating the
correct measuring rod, the true criterion of judgement regarding the origin of the
concept of the world according to radical reflection.
Out of all the discourses dealing with the question of the end of the world and
the end of suffering, perhaps the most significant is the Rohitassa Sutta, which is
found in the Sagāthakasaṃyutta of the Saṃyutta Nikāya, as well as in the
section of the Fours in the Aṅguttara Nikāya. Once when the Buddha was
staying at the Jetavana monastery at Sāvatthī, a deity named Rohitassa visited
him in the night and asked the following question: "Where Lord one does not
get born, nor grow old, nor die, nor pass away, nor get reborn, is one able, Lord,
by travelling to come to know that end of the world or to see it or to get there?"
The Buddha replies: "Where, friend, one does not get born, nor grow old, nor
die, nor pass away, nor get reborn, that end of the world, I say, one is not able by
travelling to come to know or to see or to arrive at."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2000: 157)
“Is it possible, venerable sir, by travelling to know or to see or to reach the end
of the world, where one is not born, does not age, does not die, does not pass
away, and is not reborn?”
“As to that end of the world, friend, where one is not born, does not age, does
not die, does not pass away, and is not reborn—I say that it cannot be known,
seen, or reached by travelling.”

SĀ 1307
「時，彼赤馬天子白佛言：「世尊！頗有能行過世界邊，至不生、不老、
不死處不？」
佛告赤馬：「無有能過世界邊，至不生、不老、不死處者。」(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p.
359, a13-16)
-------------------------------
When the Buddha gave this brief answer, the deity Rohitassa praised him
with the following words of approbation: Acchariyaṃ bhante, abbhutaṃ bhante,
yāva subhāsitam idaṃ bhagavatā, "it is wonderful, Lord, it is marvellous, Lord,
how well it is said by the Exalted One."
Why did he express his approbation? Because he had already realized the
truth of the Buddha's statement by his own experience. Then he goes on to relate
the whole story of his past life.
"In times past, Lord, I was a seer, Rohitassa by name, son of Bhoja, gifted so
that I could fly through the air, and so swift, Lord, was my speed that I could fly
just as quickly as a master of archery, well-trained, expert, proficient, a past
master in his art, armed with a strong bow, could without difficulty send a light
arrow far past the area coloured by a palm tree's shadow; and so great, Lord, was
my stride that I could step from the eastern to the western ocean. In me, Lord,
arose such a wish as this: 'I will arrive at the end of the world by walking'. And
though such, Lord, was my speed and such my stride, and though with a life
span of a century, living for a hundred years, I walked continuously for hundred
years, except for the times spent in eating, drinking, chewing or tasting, or in
answering calls of nature, and the time I gave to way to sleep or fatigue, yet I
died on the way, without reaching the end of the world. Wonderful is it, O!
Lord, marvellous is it, Lord, how well it is said by the Exalted One:
Where, friend, one does not get born, nor grow old, nor die, nor pass away,
nor get reborn, that end of the world, I say, one is not able by travelling to come
to know or to see or to arrive at."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2000: 157f)
“It is wonderful, venerable sir! It is amazing, venerable sir! How well this was
stated by the Blessed One: ‘As to that end of the world, friend, … I say that it
cannot be known, seen, or reached by travelling.’
“Once in the past, venerable sir, I was a seer named Rohitassa, son of Bhoja,
possessed of spiritual power, able to travel through the sky. My speed was
such, venerable sir, that I could move just as swiftly as a firm-bowed archer—
trained, skilful, practised, experienced—could easily shoot past the shadow of
a palmyra tree with a light arrow. My stride was such, venerable sir, that it
seemed to reach from the eastern ocean to the western ocean.
Then, venerable sir, the wish arose in me: ‘I will reach the end of the world by
travelling.’ Possessing such speed and such a stride, and having a life span of a
hundred years, living for a hundred years, I travelled for a hundred years,
without pausing except to eat, drink, take meals and snacks, to defecate and
urinate, to sleep and dispel fatigue; yet I died along the way without having
reached the end of the world.

SĀ 1307
赤馬天子白佛言：「奇哉！世尊！善說斯義。如世尊說言：『無過世界邊
，至不生、不老、不死處[3]者。』所以者何？世尊！我自憶宿命，名曰赤
馬，作外道仙人，得神通，離諸愛欲。我時，作是念：『我有如是[揵>捷]
疾神足，如健士夫，以利箭橫射過多羅樹影之頃，能登一須彌，至一須彌
，足躡東海，超至西海。』我時，作是念：『我今成就如是[揵>捷]疾神力
，今日寧可求世界邊。』作是念已，即便發行，唯除食息便利，減節睡眠
，常行百歲，於彼命終，竟不能[4]得過世界邊，至不生、不老、不死之處
」(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 359, a16-27)
-------------------------------
It is at this point, that the Buddha comes out with a momentous declaration,
while granting Rohitassa's approbation.
Yattha kho, āvuso, na jāyati na jīyati na mīyati na cavati na upapajjati,
nāhaṃ taṃ 'gamanena lokassa antaṃ ñāteyyaṃ daṭṭheyyaṃ patteyyan'ti vadāmi.
Na cāhaṃ, āvuso, appatvā lokassa antaṃ dukkhassantakiriyaṃ vadāmi. Api
c'āhaṃ, āvuso, imasmiṃ yeva byāmamatte kaḷevare sasaññimhi samanake
lokañca paññāpemi lokasamudayañca lokanirodhañca lokanirodhagāminiñca
paṭipadaṃ.
"Where, friend, one does not get born, nor grow old, nor die, nor pass away,
nor get reborn, that end of the world, I say, one is not able by travelling to come
to know or to see or to arrive at. But neither do I say, friend, that without having
reached the end of the world there could be an ending of suffering. It is in this
very fathom-long physical frame with its perceptions and mind, that I declare
lies the world, the arising of the world, the cessation of the world, and the path
leading to the cessation of the world."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2000: 157f)
“As to that end of the world, friend, where one is not born, does not age, does
not die, does not pass away, and is not reborn—I say that it cannot
be known, seen, or reached by travelling.’
However, friend, I say that without having reached the end of the world there
is no making an end to suffering. It is, friend, in just this fathom-high carcass
endowed with perception and mind that I make known the world, the origin of
the world, the cessation of the world, and the way leading to the cessation of
the world.

SĀ 1307

「佛告赤馬：「我今但以一尋之身，說於世界、世界集、世界滅、世界滅
道跡。赤馬天子！
何等為世間？謂五受陰。何等為五？色受陰、受受陰、想受陰、行受陰、
識受陰，是名世間。
何等為<世間>集？謂當來有愛，貪、喜俱，彼彼染著，是名世間集。
云何為世間滅？若彼當來有愛，貪、喜俱，彼彼染著無餘斷、捨、離、盡
、無欲、滅、息、沒，是名世間滅。
何等為世間滅道跡？謂八聖道，正見、正志、正語、正業、正命、正方便
、正念、正定，是名世間滅道跡」(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 359, a27-b7)
-------------------------------
This momentous declaration, which is comparable to a fearless lion's roar that
puts all religious and philosophical systems to flight, has been misinterpreted by
some who have not grasped its true significance. They say that according to this
discourse the cessation of the world is not here and that only the other three are
to be found in this fathom-long body.
Such misinterpretations are the result of taking seriously various far-fetched
speculations of later origin about Nibbāna. According to them, Nibbāna is some
mysterious non-descript place of rest for the arahants after their demise. One
who goes by that kind of speculation is not ready to accept the Buddha's
declaration that it is in this very fathom-long body with its perceptions and mind
that a cessation of the world can be realized.
The commentary in this context simply observes that the four noble truths are
to be found not in grass and twigs outside, but in this body consisting of the four
elements. It has nothing more to add. A certain modern scholar has rightly
pointed out that the commentator has missed a great opportunity for exegesis.
The reason for the commentator's lack of interest, in the case of such a discourse
of paramount importance, is probably his predilection for these later
speculations on Nibbāna.
All what we have so far stated in explaining the significance of discourses
dealing with the subject of Nibbāna, could even be treated as a fitting
commentary to the Rohitassasutta.
 The point of relevance is the couple of words sasaññimhi samanake,
occurring in the discourse in question. This fathom-long physical frame is here
associated with perceptions and mind. The expression used by the Buddha in
this context is full of significance.
As we saw above, Venerable Ānanda defines the term 'world' as follows: yena
kho, āvuso, lokasmiṃ lokasaññī hoti lokamānī, ayaṃ vuccati ariyassa vinaye
loko. "Friends, that by which one has a perception of the world and has a conceit
of the world that in the discipline of the Noble Ones is called 'the world'."
The conceit of the world is a form of measuring with the mind. So the two
words sasaññimhi samanake are suggestive of the concept of the world in the
Noble Ones' discipline.
While discussing the significance of arahattaphalasamāpatti, also known as
aññāphalasamādhi, and aññāvimokkha, we had occasion to bring up such
quotations as the following:
Siyā nu kho, bhante, bhikkhuno tathārūpo samādhipaṭilābho yathā neva
paṭhaviyaṃ paṭhavīsaññī assa, na āpasmiṃ āposaññī assa, na tejasmiṃ
tejosaññī assa, na vāyasmiṃ vāyosaññī assa, na ākāsānañcāyatane
ākāsānañcāyatanasaññī assa, na viññāṇañcāyatane viññāṇancāyatanasaññī
assa, na ākiñcaññāyatane ākiñcaññāyatanasaññī assa, na
nevasaññānāsaññāyatane nevasaññānāsaññāyatanasaññī assa, na idhaloke
idhalokasaññī assa, na paraloke paralokasaññī assa, yam p'idaṃ diṭṭhaṃ sutaṃ
mutaṃ viññātaṃ pattaṃ pariyesitaṃ anuvicaritaṃ manasā tatrāpi na saññī
assa, saññī ca pana assa?
"Could there be, Lord, for a monk such an attainment of concentration
wherein he will not be conscious (literally: 'percipient') of earth in earth, nor of
water in water, nor of fire in fire, nor of air in air, nor will he be conscious of the
sphere of infinite space in the sphere of infinite space, nor of the sphere of
infinite consciousness in the sphere of infinite consciousness, nor of the sphere
of nothingness in the sphere of nothingness, nor of the sphere of neither-
perception-nor-non-perception in the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-
perception, nor will he be conscious of a this world in this world, nor of a world
beyond in a world beyond, whatever is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained,
sought after, traversed by the mind, even of that he will not be conscious - and
yet he will be conscious?"
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2012: 1557f):
“Bhante, could a bhikkhu obtain such a state of concentration that he would
not be percipient of earth in relation to earth; of water in relation to water; of
fire in relation to fire; of air in relation to air; of the base of the infinity of
space in relation to the base of the infinity of space; of the base of the infinity
of consciousness in relation to the base of the infinity of consciousness; of the
base of nothingness in relation to the base of nothingness; of the base of
neither-perception-nor-non-perception in relation to the base of neither-
perception-nor-non-perception; of this world in relation to this world; of the
other world in relation to the other world; of anything seen, heard, sensed,
cognized, reached, sought after, and examined by the mind, but he would still
be percipient?”
-------------------------------
The arahattaphalasamādhi is so extraordinary that while in it one has no
perception of earth, water, fire and air, or of this world, or of the other world, of
whatever is seen, heard, sensed and cognized, but one is all the same percipient
or conscious, saññī ca pana assa.
To the question: 'Of what is he percipient?', kiṃ saññī?, once Venerable
Sāriputta gave the answer that the perception is of Nibbāna as the cessation of
existence, bhavanirodho nibbānaṃ.
In another discourse that we happened to quote, the mode of questioning has
the following sequence: "Could there be, Lord, for a monk such an attainment of
concentration wherein he will not be attending to the eye, nor to form, nor to the
ear, nor to sound" etc., but ends with the riddle like phrase "and yet he will be
attending", manasi ca pana kareyya.
When the Buddha grants the possibility of such a concentration, Venerable
Ānanda rejoins with an inquisitive "how could there be, Lord?", and the Buddha
explains that what a monk attends to while in that attainment could be summed
up in the stereotyped phrase:
Etaṃ santaṃ, etaṃ paṇītaṃ, yadidaṃ sabbasaṅkhārasamatho
sabbūpadhipaṭinissaggo taṇhakkhayo virāgo nirodho nibbānaṃ, "this is
peaceful, this is excellent, namely the stilling of all preparations, the
relinquishment of all assets, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation,
extinction."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2012: 1558):
“‘This is peaceful, this is sublime, that is, the stilling of all activities, the
relinquishing of all acquisitions, the destruction of craving, dispassion,
cessation, nibbāna.”
-------------------------------
It is Nibbāna, then, that one attends to while in that attainment. So we find
even the terms "perception", saññā, and "attention", manasikāra, being used in
the context of arahattaphalasamāpatti, or "attainment to the fruit of arahant-
hood".
Therefore, Nibbāna is not an experience as dry as a log of wood, but a state of
serene awareness of its true significance. It is a transcendence of the world by
realization of its cessation. That is why the two words sasaññimhi samanake,
"with its perceptions and mind", have been used to qualify, kaḷevare, "physical
frame", or "body", in the momentous declaration.
We also came across some instances in the discourses where the Buddha calls
the cessation of the six sense-spheres itself Nibbāna. The most notable instance
is perhaps the Kāmaguṇasutta we had already quoted. As we saw, even its
presentation is rather enigmatic. It runs.
Tasmātiha, bhikkhave, se āyatane veditabbe yattha cakkhuñca nirujjhati
rūpasaññā ca virajjati, se āyatane veditabbe yattha sotañca nirujjhati
saddasaññā ca virajjati, se āyatane veditabbe yattha ghānañca nirujjhati
gandhasaññā ca virajjati, se āyatane veditabbe yattha jivhā ca nirujjhati
rasasaññā ca virajjati, se āyatane veditabbe yattha kāyo ca nirujjhati
phoṭṭabbasaññā ca virajjati, se āyatane veditabbe yattha mano ca nirujjhati
dhammasaññā ca virajjati, se āyatane veditabbe.
"Therefore, monks, that sphere should be known wherein the eye ceases and
the perception of forms fades away, the ear ceases and the perception of sounds
fades away, the nose ceases and the perception of smells fades away, the tongue
ceases and the perception of tastes fades away, the body ceases and the
perception of tangibles fades away, the mind ceases and the perception of ideas
fades away, that sphere should be known."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2000: 1191):
“Therefore, bhikkhus, that base should be understood, where the eye ceases
and perception of forms fades away. That base should be understood, where
the ear ceases and perception of sounds fades away … That base should be
understood, where the mind ceases and perception of mental phenomena
fades away. That base should be understood.”
SĀ 211
是故，比丘！於彼入處當覺知，若眼滅，色想則離。耳、鼻、舌、身、意
滅，法想則離
(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 53, b12-14)
--------------------------------
Venerable Ānanda, commenting on this riddle-like sermon of the Buddha,
concludes that the Buddha is here referring to the cessation of the six sense-
spheres, saḷāyatananirodhaṃ, āvuso, Bhagavatā sandhāya bhāsitaṃ. "Friends,
it is with reference to the cessation of the six sense-spheres that the Exalted One
has preached this sermon."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2000: 1191):
“This was stated by the Blessed One, friends, with reference to the cessation of
the six sense bases.”
SĀ 211
「世尊略說者，即是滅六入處有餘之說」
(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 53, c2-3)
--------------------------------
The cessation of the six sense-spheres is Nibbāna.
 All this goes to show that the concept of a world is the product of the six
sense-spheres. Those six measuring rods have measured out a world for us.
Since the world is built up by the six sense-spheres, it has also to cease by the
cessation of those six sense-spheres. That is why Nibbāna is defined as the
cessation of the six sense-spheres, saḷāyatananirodho Nibbānaṃ. All those
measuring rods and scales lose their applicability with the cessation of the six
sense-spheres.
How can there be an experience of cessation of the six sense-spheres? The
cessation here meant is actually the cessation of the spheres of contact. A sphere
of contact presupposes a duality. Contact is always between two things, between
eye and forms, for instance. It is because of a contact between two things that
one entertains a perception of permanence in those two things. Dependent on
that contact, feelings and perceptions arise, creating a visual world. The visual
world of the humans differs from that of animals. Some things that are visible to
animals are not visible to humans. That is due to the constitution of the eye-
faculty. It is the same with regard to the ear-faculty. These are the measuring
rods and scales which build up a world.
Now this world, which is a product of the spheres of sense-contact, is a world
of papañca, or "proliferation". Nibbāna is called nippapañca because it
transcends this proliferation, puts an end to proliferation. The end of
proliferation is at the same time the end of the six sense-spheres.
There is a discourse in the section of the Fours in the Aṅguttara Nikāya which
clearly brings out this fact. There we find Venerable Mahākoṭṭhita putting a
question to Venerable Sāriputta on this point. Venerable Mahākoṭṭhita and
Venerable Sāriputta are often found discussing intricate points in the Dhamma,
not because they are in doubt, but in order to clarify matters for us. They are
thrashing out problems for our sake. In this particular instance, Venerable
Mahākoṭṭhita puts the following question to Venerable Sāriputta:
Channaṃ, āvuso, phassāyatanānaṃ asesavirāganirodhā atth'aññaṃ kiñci?
"Friend, with the remainderless fading away and cessation of the six spheres of
sense-contact, is there something left?"
Venerable Sāriputta's response was: Mā hevaṃ āvuso, "do not say so, friend."
Venerable Mahākoṭṭhita follows it up with three other possible alternatives, all
of which Venerable Sāriputta dismisses with the same curt reply. The three
alternatives are:
Channaṃ, āvuso, phassāyatanānaṃ asesavirāganirodhā natth' aññaṃ kiñci?
"Friend, with the remainderless fading away and cessation of the six spheres of
sense-contact, is there nothing left?"
Channaṃ, āvuso, phassāyatanānaṃ asesavirāganirodhā atthi ca natthi ca
aññaṃ kiñci? "Friend, with the remainderless fading away and cessation of the
six spheres of sense-contact, is it the case that there is and is not something
left?"
Channaṃ, āvuso, phassāyatanānaṃ asesavirāganirodhā nev'atthi no
natth'aññaṃ kiñci? "Friend, with the remainderless fading away and cessation of
the six spheres of sense-contact, is it the case that there neither is nor is not
something left?"
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2000: 539)
“Friend, with the remainderless fading away and cessation of the six bases for
contact, is there anything else?”
“Do not say so, friend.”
“With the remainderless fading away and cessation of the six bases for contact,
is there nothing else?”
“Do not say so, friend.”
“With the remainderless fading away and cessation of the six bases for contact,
is there both something else and nothing else?”
“Do not say so, friend.”
“With the remainderless fading away and cessation of the six bases for contact,
is there neither something else nor nothing else?”
“Do not say so, friend.”

SĀ 249
The venerable Ānanda asked the venerable Sāriputta: “When the six spheres of
contact have been eradicated, faded away, ceased, appeased, and disappeared,
is there something that still remains?”
The venerable Sāriputta said to Ānanda: “You should not ask this question:
‘When the six spheres of contact have been eradicated, faded away, ceased,
appeased, and disappeared, is there something that still remains?”
Ānanda asked the venerable Sāriputta again: “When the six spheres of contact
have been eradicated, faded away, ceased, appeased, and disappeared, is there
nothing that still remains?”
The venerable Sāriputta said to Ānanda: “It is also not proper to ask in this
way: ‘When the six spheres of contact have been eradicated, faded away,
ceased, appeased, and disappeared, is there nothing that still remains?”
Ānanda asked the venerable Sāriputta again: “When the six spheres of contact
have been eradicated, faded away, ceased, appeased, and disappeared, is there
something that remains and nothing that remains, or neither something that
remains nor nothing that remains?”
The venerable Sāriputta said to Ānanda: “It is also not proper to ask in this
way: ‘When the six spheres of contact have been eradicated, faded away,
ceased, appeased, and disappeared, is there something that remains and
nothing that remains, or neither something that remains nor nothing that
remains?”
-------------------------------
The mode of questioning takes the form of a tetralemma and Venerable
Sāriputta dismisses all the four alternatives as inapplicable. Then Venerable
Mahākoṭṭhita asks why all these four questions were ruled out, and Venerable
Sāriputta explains:
 'Channaṃ, āvuso, phassāyatanānaṃ asesavirāganirodhā atth' aññaṃ kiñcī'ti,
iti vadaṃ appapañcaṃ papañceti. 'Channaṃ, āvuso, phassāyatanānaṃ
asesavirāganirodhā natth'aññaṃ kiñcī'ti, iti vadaṃ appapañcaṃ papañceti.
'Channaṃ, āvuso, phassāyatanānaṃ asesavirāganirodhā atthi ca natthi ca
aññaṃ kiñcī'ti, iti vadaṃ appapañcaṃ papañceti. 'Channaṃ, āvuso,
phassāyatanānaṃ asesavirāganirodhā nev'atthi no natth'aññaṃ kiñcī'ti, iti
vadaṃ appapañcaṃ papañceti.
Yāvatā, āvuso, channaṃ phassāyatanānaṃ gati tāvatā papañcassa gati,
yāvatā papañcassa gati tāvatā channaṃ phassāyatanānaṃ gati. Channaṃ,
āvuso, phassāyatanānaṃ asesavirāganirodhā papañcanirodho
papañcavūpasamo.
"Friend, he who says: 'With the remainderless fading away and cessation of
the six spheres of sense-contact, there is something left' is conceptually
proliferating what should not be proliferated conceptually. Friend, he who says:
'With the remainderless fading away and cessation of the six spheres of sense-
contact, there is nothing left' is conceptually proliferating what should not be
proliferated conceptually. Friend, he who says: 'With the remainderless fading
away and cessation of the six spheres of sense-contact, there is and is not
something left' is conceptually proliferating what should not be proliferated
conceptually. Friend, he who says: 'With the remainderless fading away and
cessation of the six spheres of sense-contact, there neither is nor is not
something left' is conceptually proliferating what should not be proliferated
conceptually.
Friend, whatever is the range of the six spheres of sense-contact, that itself is
the range of conceptual proliferation, and whatever is the range of conceptual
proliferation, that itself is the range of the six spheres of sense-contact. By the
remainderless fading away and cessation of the six spheres of sense-contact,
there comes to be the cessation and appeasement of conceptual proliferation."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2000: 540)

Friend, if one says: ‘With the remainderless fading away and cessation of the
six bases for contact, there is something else,’ one proliferates that which is
not to be proliferated.
If one says: ‘Friend, with the remainderless fading away and cessation of the
six bases for contact, there is nothing else,’ one proliferates that which is not
to be proliferated.
If one says: ‘Friend, with the remainderless fading away and cessation of the
six bases for contact, there is both something else and nothing else,’ one
proliferates that which is not to be proliferated.
If one says: ‘Friend, with the remainderless fading away and cessation of the
six bases for contact, there is neither something else nor nothing else,’ one
proliferates that which is not to be proliferated.
“Friend, as far as the range of the six bases for contact extends, just so far
extends the range of proliferation. As far as the range of proliferation extends,
just so far extends the range of the six bases for contact. With the
remainderless fading away and cessation of the six bases for contact there is
the cessation of proliferation, the subsiding of proliferation.”

SĀ 249

The venerable Sāriputta said to the venerable Ānanda: “This is indeed baseless
talk: ‘When the six spheres of contact have been eradicated, faded away,
ceased, appeased, and disappeared, is there something that remains?’ This is
indeed baseless talk: ‘Is there nothing that remains?’ This is indeed baseless
talk: ‘Is there something that remains and nothing that remains?’ This is
indeed baseless talk: ‘Is there neither something that remains nor nothing that
remains?’
If one says: ‘When the six spheres of contact have been eradicated, faded away,
ceased, appeased, and disappeared, one attains Nirvāṇa and is apart from all
that is baseless and false, then this is indeed what the Buddha taught.”
-------------------------------
The commentator gives the following explanation to the expression atth'
aññaṃ kiñci, "is there something left?": 'tato paraṃ koci appamattako pi kileso
atthī'ti pucchati. According to him, Venerable Mahākoṭṭhita is asking whether
there is even a little defilement left after the cessation of the six spheres of
sense-contact. But the question is obviously not about the remaining
defilements, in which case even a categorical negative could have been the
correct answer. The question here is about the very usage of the expressions 'is'
and 'is not'.
With the cessation of the six spheres of sense-contact all four propositions of
the tetralemma, based on the two standpoints 'is' and 'is not', lose their
applicability. They are rejected in toto. Here the papañca, or "conceptual
proliferation", implied, is the very discrimination between 'is' and 'is not'.
The entire world is built up on the two concepts 'is' and 'is not'. Being
unaware of the saṅkhata, or "prepared", nature of these concepts, we are
accustomed to say 'this is' as occasion demands. This recording machine before
us 'is there'. So also are the things which we presume to exist. We ourselves do
exist, do we not? One could say 'I am'.
Out of the two rapid processes going on within us every moment, namely
arising and passing away, we are most of the time dwelling on the side of
arising. The two concepts 'is' and 'is not' are structured on the six spheres of
sense-contact. Not only 'is' and 'is not', but also the entire logical structure
connecting these two postulates is founded on these six spheres. Here, then, we
see the fistfuls of inflammable incense powder the Buddha had directed towards
language and logic, setting all that ablaze.
What this discourse highlights is the fact that by the very cessation of the six
spheres of sense-contact the cessation of conceptual proliferation is brought
about. With reference to speculative views, particularly to those wrong views
that were put aside as unexplained points, the Buddha uses the term
diṭṭhipariḷāha, "delirium of views". Pariḷāha means "delirious fever".
Patients in delirium cry out for water. The worldlings, in general, are in high
delirium. Even such teachers like Pūraṇa Kassapa and Nigaṇṭha Nātaputta, who
were trying to solve these speculative problems about the world by logic, were
also in delirium. Their views, based on wrong reflections, were mere
hallucinations. They kept on raising such questions, because they had no insight
into the nature of saṅkhāras, or "preparations".
The worldlings spend their whole lifetime running in search of the world's
end. All that is papañca, conceptual proliferation. In fact, the term papañca is so
pervasive in its gamut of meaning that it encompasses the entire world. Usually,
the term is glossed over by explaining it with reference to taṇhā, māna and
diṭṭhi, bringing in craving, conceits and views as illustrations of papañca. But
that does not amount to an explanation proper. It is only a definition in extension
by giving three instances of papañca. To rattle off the three instances is not a fit
answer to the question 'what is papañca'.
The primary significance of papañca is traceable to the linguistic medium.
We have already shown how the network of grammar spreads as soon as the peg
'am' is driven down to earth, as it were. The reality in the first person in
grammar beckons a second and a third person to complete the picture. In logic,
too, a similar legerdemain takes place. The interminable questions of identity
and difference lead the logician up the garden path.
The 'world' is precariously perched on a fictitious network of grammar and
logic.
It is as a solution to all this that the Buddha came out with the extraordinary
prospect of a cessation of the six spheres of sense-contact. This, then, is a level
of experience realizable here and now. That is why the Buddha declared that the
world is in this very fathom-long body with its perceptions and mind.
Now as to the questions about the world, we have already pointed out that
there is a circularity involved. Though one cannot find an end in something of a
cyclic nature, there is still a solution possible. There is only one solution, that is,
to break the cycle. That is what the term vaṭṭupaccheda means. One can breach
the cycle. The cycle cannot be discovered by travelling. It is not out there, but in
this very stream of consciousness within us. We have already described it as the
vortex between consciousness and name-and-form. An allusion to the breach of
the vortex is found in the following verse, which we had already discussed in
connection with Nibbāna.
Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ,
anantaṃ sabbato pabhaṃ,
ettha āpo ca paṭhavī,
tejo vāyo na gādhati.
Ettha dīghañca rassañca,
aṇuṃ thūlaṃ subhāsubhaṃ,
ettha nāmañca rūpañca,
asesaṃ uparujjhati,
viññāṇassa nirodhena,
etth'etaṃ uparujjhati.
"Consciousness, which is non-manifestative,
Endless, lustrous on all sides,
Here it is that earth and water,
Fire and air no footing find.
Here it is that long and short,
Fine and coarse, pleasant, unpleasant,
And Name-and-form are cut off without exception,
When consciousness has surceased,
These are held in check herein."
-------------------------------
Translation Walshe (1987: 179)
“Where consciousness is signless, boundless, all-luminous
That’s where earth, water, fire and air find no footing,
There both long and short, small and great, fair and foul,
There ‘name-and-form’ are wholly destroyed.
With the cessation of consciousness this is all destroyed.”

Sanskrit fragment parallel in Zhou 2008: 9, 389v7f (with corrections)

tatredaṃ vyākaraṇaṃ bhavati jñātvā dharmān yathātathaṃ:
vijñānyānidarśanam anantaṃ sarvataḥ pṛthuṃ taṃ pṛthivīpṛthatvena
anabhibhūtaṃ atha pṛthivī āpaś ca tejo vāyur na gāhate, atra dīrghaṃ ca
hrasvaṃ cāpy aṇu sthūlaṃ śubhāśubham atra nāma ca rūpaṃ cāpy aśeṣaṃm
uparudhyate

Chinese parallel DĀ 24
應答識無形，無量自有光。
此滅四大滅，麤細好醜滅，
於此名色滅，識滅餘亦滅」(CBETA, T01, no. 1, p. 102, c17-19)

Translation Meisig (1995: 195): “This must be answered: consciousness ―

shapeless, extraordinary, radiating by its own ― if this vanishes, then the four
elements vanish, and coarse and subtle, nice and ugly vanish. Into this name
and form vanish to (sic). If consciousness vanishes, the rest vanishes, too.”
-------------------------------
Here one can see how name-and-form are cut off. Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ,
anantaṃ sabbato pabhaṃ, "consciousness, which is non-manifestative, infinite
and lustrous on all sides". In this consciousness even the four great primaries
earth, water, fire and air, do not find a footing. Cakkavāla, or a world-system, is
supposed to be made up of these four primary elements. Even the term
cakkavāla implies something cyclic. The world is a product of these primary
elements, but these are not there in that non-manifestative consciousness.
Such relative distinctions as long and short, subtle and gross, have no place in
it. Name-and-form cease there, leaving no residue. Like an expert physician,
who treats the germ of a disease and immunizes the patient, the Buddha effected
a breach in the saṃsāric vortex by concentrating on its epicycle within this
fathom-long body.
The ever recurrent process of mutual interrelation between consciousness and
name-and-form forming the epicycle of the saṃsāric vortex was breached. With
the cessation of consciousness comes the cessation of name-and-form. With the
cessation of name-and-form comes the cessation of consciousness. That is the
dictum of the Naḷakalāpīsutta. Out of the two bundles of reeds left standing,
supporting each other, when one is drawn the other falls down. Even so, with the
cessation of consciousness comes the cessation of name-and-form. With the
cessation of name-and-form comes the cessation of consciousness. That is how
the Buddha solved this problem.