35. Cūḷasaccaka Sutta

1.Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was living at Vesālī in the Great Wood in the Hall with the Peaked Roof.

2.Now on that occasion Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son was staying at Vesālī, a debater and a clever speaker regarded by many as a saint.³⁶⁹ According to MA, Saccaka was the son of Niga˚ṭha (Jain) parents who were both skilled in philosophical debate. He had learned a thousand doctrines from his parents and many more philosophical systems from others. In the discussion below he is referred to by his clan name, Aggivessana. He was making this statement before the Vesālī assembly: “I see no recluse or brahmin, the head of an order, the head of a group, the teacher of a group, even one claiming to be accomplished and fully enlightened, who would not shake, shiver, and tremble, and sweat under the armpits if he were to engage in debate with me. Even if I were to engage a senseless post in debate, it would shake, shiver, and tremble if it were to engage in debate with me, so what shall I say of a human being?”

3.Then, when it was morning, the venerable Assaji dressed, and taking his bowl and outer robe, went into Vesālī for alms.³⁷⁰ Ven. Assaji was one of the first five disciples of the Buddha. As Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son was walking and wandering for exercise in Vesālī, [228] he saw the venerable Assaji coming in the distance and went up to him and exchanged greetings with him. When this courteous and amiable talk was finished, Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son stood at one side and said to him:

4.“Master Assaji, how does the recluse Gotama discipline his disciples? And how is the recluse Gotama’s instruction usually presented to his disciples?”

“This is how the Blessed One disciplines his disciples, Aggivessana, and this is how the Blessed One’s instruction is usually presented to his disciples: ‘Bhikkhus, material form is impermanent, feeling is impermanent, perception is impermanent, formations are impermanent, consciousness is impermanent. Bhikkhus, material form is not self, feeling is not self, perception is not self, formations are not self, consciousness is not self. All formations are impermanent; all things are not self.’³⁷¹ This summary of the doctrine omits the second of the three characteristics, dukkha or suffering. MA explains that Assaji omitted this in order to avoid giving Saccaka the opportunity to attempt a refutation of the Buddha’s doctrine. That is how the Blessed One disciplines his disciples, and that is how the Blessed One’s instruction is usually presented to his disciples.”

“If we have heard what the recluse Gotama asserts, we have indeed heard what is disagreeable. Perhaps sometime or other we might meet Master Gotama and have some conversation with him. Perhaps we might detach him from that evil view.”

5.Now at that time five hundred Licchavis had met together in an assembly hall for some business or other. Then Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son went to them and said: “Come forth, good Licchavis, come forth! Today there will be some conversation between me and the recluse Gotama. If the recluse Gotama maintains before me what was maintained before me by one of his famous disciples, the bhikkhu named Assaji, then just as a strong man might seize a long-haired ram by the hair and drag him to and drag him fro and drag him round about, so in debate I will drag the recluse Gotama to and drag him fro and drag him round about. Just as a strong brewer’s workman might throw a big brewer’s sieve into a deep water tank, and taking it by the corners, drag it to and drag it fro and drag it round about, so in debate I will drag the recluse Gotama to and drag him fro and drag him round about. Just as a strong brewer’s mixer [229] might take a strainer by the corners and shake it down and shake it up and thump it about, so in debate I will shake the recluse Gotama down and shake him up and thump him about. And just as a sixty-year-old elephant might plunge into a deep pond and enjoy playing the game of hemp-washing, so I shall enjoy playing the game of hemp-washing with the recluse Gotama.³⁷² MA explains that men play this game when preparing hemp cloth. They bind up handfuls of rough hemp, immerse them in the water, and beat them on planks to the left, right, and middle. A royal elephant saw this game, and plunging into the water, he took up water in his trunk and sprayed it on his belly, his body, both sides, and his groin. Come forth, good Licchavis, come forth! Today there will be some conversation between me and the recluse Gotama.”

6.Thereupon some Licchavis said: “Who is the recluse Gotama that he could refute Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son’s assertions? On the contrary, Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son will refute the recluse Gotama’s assertions.” And some Licchavis said: “Who is Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son that he could refute the Blessed One’s assertions? On the contrary, the Blessed One will refute Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son’s assertions.” Then Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son went with five hundred Licchavis to the Hall with the Peaked Roof in the Great Wood.

7.Now on that occasion a number of bhikkhus were walking up and down in the open. Then Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son went up to them and asked: “Where is Master Gotama staying now, sirs? We want to see Master Gotama.”

“The Blessed One has entered the Great Wood, Aggivessana, and is sitting at the root of a tree for the day’s abiding.”

8.Then Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son, together with a large following of Licchavis, entered the Great Wood and went to the Blessed One. He exchanged greetings with the Blessed One, and after this courteous and amiable talk was finished, sat down at one side. Some of the Licchavis paid homage to the Blessed One and sat down at one side; some exchanged greetings with him, and when this courteous and amiable talk was finished, sat down at one side; some extended their hands in reverential salutation towards the Blessed One and sat down at one side; some pronounced their name and clan in the Blessed One’s presence and sat down at one side; some kept silent and sat down at one side.

9.When Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son had sat down, he said to the Blessed One: “I would like to question Master Gotama on a certain point, if Master Gotama would grant me the favour of an answer to the question.”

“Ask what you like, Aggivessana.” [230]

“How does Master Gotama discipline his disciples? And how is Master Gotama’s instruction usually presented to his disciples?”

“This is how I discipline my disciples, Aggivessana, and this is how my instruction is usually presented to my disciples: ‘Bhikkhus, material form is impermanent, feeling is impermanent, perception is impermanent, formations are impermanent, consciousness is impermanent. Bhikkhus, material form is not self, feeling is not self, perception is not self, formations are not self, consciousness is not self. All formations are impermanent; all things are not self.’ That is the way I discipline my disciples, and that is how my instruction is usually presented to my disciples.”

10.“A simile occurs to me, Master Gotama.”

“Explain how it occurs to you, Aggivessana,” the Blessed One said.

“Just as when seeds and plants, whatever their kind, reach growth, increase, and maturation, all do so in dependence upon the earth, based upon the earth; and just as when strenuous works, whatever their kind, are done, all are done in dependence upon the earth, based upon the earth—so too, Master Gotama, a person has material form as self, and based upon material form he produces merit or demerit. A person has feeling as self, and based upon feeling he produces merit or demerit. A person has perception as self, and based upon perception he produces merit or demerit. A person has formations as self, and based upon formations he produces merit or demerit. A person has consciousness as self, and based upon consciousness he produces merit or demerit.”

11.“Aggivessana, are you not asserting thus: ‘Material form is my self, feeling is my self, perception is my self, formations are my self, consciousness is my self’?”

“I assert thus, Master Gotama: ‘Material form is my self, feeling is my self, perception is my self, formations are my self, consciousness is my self.’ And so does this great multitude.”³⁷³ In asserting the five aggregates to be self he is, of course, directly contradicting the Buddha’s teaching of anattā. He ascribes this view to the “great multitude” with the thought that “the majority cannot be wrong.”

“What has this great multitude to do with you, Aggivessana? Please confine yourself to your own assertion alone.”

“Then, Master Gotama, I assert thus: ‘Material form is my self, feeling is my self, perception is my self, formations are my self, consciousness is my self.’”

12.“In that case, Aggivessana, I shall ask you a question in return. Answer it as you choose. [231] What do you think, Aggivessana? Would a head-anointed noble king—for example, King Pasenadi of Kosala or King Ajātasattu Vedehiputta of Magadha—exercise the power in his own realm to execute those who should be executed, to fine those who should be fined, and to banish those who should be banished?”

“Master Gotama, a head-anointed noble king—for example, King Pasenadi of Kosala or King Ajātasattu Vedehiputta of Magadha—would exercise the power in his own realm to execute those who should be executed, to fine those who should be fined, and to banish those who should be banished. For even these [oligarchic] communities and societies such as the Vajjians and the Mallians exercise the power in their own realm to execute those who should be executed, to fine those who should be fined, and to banish those who should be banished; so all the more so should a head-anointed noble king such as King Pasenadi of Kosala or King Ajātasattu Vedehiputta of Magadha. He would exercise it, Master Gotama, and he would be worthy to exercise it.”

13.“What do you think, Aggivessana? When you say thus: ‘Material form is my self,’ do you exercise any such power over that material form as to say: ‘Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus’?”³⁷⁴ The Buddha is here suggesting that the aggregates are not self because they lack one of the essential characteristics of selfhood—being susceptible to the exercise of mastery. What cannot come under my mastery or perfect control cannot be identified as “my self.” When this was said, Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son was silent.

A second time the Blessed One asked the same question, and a second time Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son was silent. Then the Blessed One said to him: “Aggivessana, answer now. Now is not the time to be silent. If anyone, when asked a reasonable question up to the third time by the Tathāgata, still does not answer, his head splits into seven pieces there and then.”

14.Now on that occasion a thunderbolt-wielding spirit holding an iron thunderbolt that burned, blazed, and glowed, appeared in the air above Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son, thinking: “If this Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son, when asked a reasonable question up to the third time by the Blessed One, still does not answer, I shall split his head into seven pieces here and now.”³⁷⁵ MA identifies this spirit (yakkha) as Sakka, ruler of the gods. The Blessed One saw the thunderbolt-wielding spirit and so did Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son. Then Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son was frightened, alarmed, and terrified. [232] Seeking his shelter, asylum, and refuge in the Blessed One himself, he said: “Ask me, Master Gotama, I will answer.”

15.“What do you think, Aggivessana? When you say thus: ‘Material form is my self,’ do you exercise any such power over that material form as to say: ‘Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus’?”—“No, Master Gotama.”

16.“Pay attention, Aggivessana, pay attention how you reply! What you said afterwards does not agree with what you said before, nor does what you said before agree with what you said afterwards. What do you think, Aggivessana? When you say thus: ‘Feeling is my self,’ do you exercise any power over that feeling as to say: ‘Let my feeling be thus; let my feeling not be thus’?”—“No, Master Gotama.”

17.“Pay attention, Aggivessana, pay attention how you reply! What you said afterwards does not agree with what you said before, nor does what you said before agree with what you said afterwards. What do you think, Aggivessana? When you say thus: ‘Perception is my self,’ do you exercise any power over that perception as to say: ‘Let my perception be thus; let my perception not be thus’?”—“No, Master Gotama.”

18.“Pay attention, Aggivessana, pay attention how you reply! What you said afterwards does not agree with what you said before, nor does what you said before agree with what you said afterwards. What do you think, Aggivessana? When you say thus: ‘Formations are my self,’ do you exercise any such power over those formations as to say: ‘Let my formations be thus; let my formations not be thus’?”—“No, Master Gotama.”

19.“Pay attention, Aggivessana, pay attention how you reply! What you said afterwards does not agree with what you said before, nor does what you said before agree with what you said afterwards. What do you think, Aggivessana? When you say thus: ‘Consciousness is my self,’ do you exercise any such power over that consciousness as to say: ‘Let my consciousness be thus; let my consciousness not be thus’?”—“No, Master Gotama.”

20.“Pay attention, Aggivessana, pay attention how you reply! What you said afterwards does not agree with what you said before, nor does what you said before agree with what you said afterwards. What do you think, Aggivessana, is material form permanent or impermanent?”—“Impermanent, Master Gotama.”—“Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness?”—“Suffering, Master Gotama.”—“Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, [233] this is my self’?”—“No, Master Gotama.”

“What do you think, Aggivessana? Is feeling permanent or impermanent?…Is perception permanent or impermanent?… Are formations permanent or impermanent?…Is consciousness permanent or impermanent?”—“Impermanent, Master Gotama.”—“Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness?”—“Suffering, Master Gotama.”—“Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?”—“No, Master Gotama.”

21.“What do you think, Aggivessana? When one adheres to suffering, resorts to suffering, holds to suffering, and regards what is suffering thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self,’ could one ever fully understand suffering oneself or abide with suffering utterly destroyed?”

“How could one, Master Gotama? No, Master Gotama.”

*“What do you think, Aggivessana? That being so, do you not adhere to suffering, resort to suffering, hold to suffering, and regard what is suffering thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?”

“How could I not, Master Gotama? Yes, Master Gotama.”*³⁷⁶ The text between the asterisks is absent from the PTS ed. but is supplied from BBS and SBJ. The five aggregates are here called suffering because they are impermanent and not susceptible to the exercise of mastery.

22.“It is as though a man needing heartwood, seeking heartwood, wandering in search of heartwood, were to take a sharp axe and enter the wood, and there he would see a large plantain trunk, straight, young, with no fruit-bud core. Then he would cut it down at the root, cut off the crown, and unroll the leaf-sheaths; but as he went on unrolling the leaf sheaths, he would never come even to any sapwood, let alone heartwood. So too, Aggivessana, when you are pressed, questioned, and cross-questioned by me about your own assertion, you turn out to be empty, vacant, and mistaken. But it was you who made this statement before the Vesālī assembly: ‘I see no recluse or brahmin, the head of an order, the head of a group, the teacher of a group, even one claiming to be accomplished and fully enlightened, who would not shake, shiver, and tremble and sweat under the armpits if he were to engage in debate with me. Even if I were to engage a senseless post in debate, it would shake, shiver, and tremble if it were to engage in debate with me, so what shall I say of a human being?’ Now there are drops of sweat on your forehead and they have soaked through your upper robe and fallen to the ground. But there is no sweat on my body now.” And the Blessed One uncovered his golden-coloured body before the assembly. [234] When this was said, Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son sat silent, dismayed, with shoulders drooping and head down, glum, and without response.

23.Then Dummukha, the son of the Licchavis, seeing Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son in such a condition, said to the Blessed One: “A simile occurs to me, Master Gotama.”

“Explain how it occurs to you, Dummukha.”

“Suppose, venerable sir, not far from a village or town there was a pond with a crab in it. And then a party of boys or girls went out from the town or village to the pond, went into the water, and pulled the crab out of the water and put it on dry land. And whenever the crab extended a leg, they cut it off, broke it, and smashed it with sticks and stones, so that the crab with all its legs cut off, broken, and smashed, would be unable to get back to the pond as before. So too, all Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son’s contortions, writhings, and vacillations have been cut off, broken, and smashed by the Blessed One, and now he cannot get near the Blessed One again for the purpose of debate.”

24.When this was said, Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son told him: “Wait, Dummukha, wait! We are not speaking with you, here we are speaking with Master Gotama.”

[Then he said]: “Let be, Master Gotama, that talk of ours and of other ordinary recluses and brahmins. It was mere prattle, I think. But in what way is a disciple of the Master Gotama one who carries out his instruction, who responds to his advice, who has crossed beyond doubt, become free from perplexity, gained intrepidity, and become independent of others in the Teacher’s Dispensation?”³⁷⁷ These are the characteristics of a sekha. The arahant, in contrast, not only possesses the right view of non-self, but has used it to eradicate all clinging, as the Buddha will explain in §25.

“Here, Aggivessana, any kind of material form whatever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near—a disciple of mine sees all material form as it actually is with proper wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ [235] Any kind of feeling whatever…Any kind of perception whatever…Any kind of formations whatever…Any kind of consciousness whatever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near—a disciple of mine sees all consciousness as it actually is with proper wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ It is in this way that a disciple of mine is one who carries out my instruction, who responds to my advice, who has crossed beyond doubt, become free from perplexity, gained intrepidity, and become independent of others in the Teacher’s Dispensation.”

25.“Master Gotama, in what way is a bhikkhu an arahant with taints destroyed, one who has lived the holy life, done what had to be done, laid down the burden, reached his own goal, destroyed the fetters of being, and is completely liberated through final knowledge?”

“Here, Aggivessana, any kind of material form whatever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near—a bhikkhu has seen all material form as it actually is with proper wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self,’ and through not clinging he is liberated. Any kind of feeling whatever…Any kind of perception whatever…Any kind of formations whatever …Any kind of consciousness whatever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near—a bhikkhu has seen all consciousness as it actually is with proper wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self,’ and through not clinging he is liberated. It is in this way that a bhikkhu is an arahant with taints destroyed, one who has lived the holy life, done what had to be done, laid down the burden, reached his own goal, destroyed the fetters of being, and is completely liberated through final knowledge.

26.“When a bhikkhu’s mind is thus liberated, he possesses three unsurpassable qualities: unsurpassable vision, unsurpassable practice, and unsurpassable deliverance.³⁷⁸ MA gives several alternative explanations of these three terms. They are mundane and supramundane wisdom, practice, and deliverance. Or they are entirely supramundane: the first is the right view of the path of arahantship, the second the remaining seven path factors, the third the supreme fruit (of arahantship). Or the first is the vision of Nibb̄na, the second the path factors, the third the supreme fruit. When a bhikkhu is thus liberated, he still honours, respects, reveres, and venerates the Tathāgata thus: ‘The Blessed One is enlightened and he teaches the Dhamma for the sake of enlightenment. The Blessed One is tamed and he teaches the Dhamma for taming oneself. The Blessed One is at peace and he teaches the Dhamma for the sake of peace. The Blessed One has crossed over and he teaches the Dhamma for crossing over. The Blessed One has attained Nibbāna and he teaches the Dhamma for attaining Nibbāna.’”

27.When this was said, Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son [236] replied: “Master Gotama, we were bold and impudent in thinking we could attack Master Gotama in debate. A man might attack a mad elephant and find safety, yet he could not attack Master Gotama and find safety. A man might attack a blazing mass of fire and find safety, yet he could not attack Master Gotama and find safety. A man might attack a terrible poisonous snake and find safety, yet he could not attack Master Gotama and find safety. We were bold and impudent in thinking we could attack Master Gotama in debate.

“Let the Blessed One together with the Sangha of bhikkhus consent to accept tomorrow’s meal from me.” The Blessed One consented in silence.

28.Then, knowing that the Blessed One had consented, Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son addressed the Licchavis: “Hear me, Licchavis. The recluse Gotama together with the Sangha of good bhikkhus has been invited by me for tomorrow’s meal. You may bring to me whatever you think would be suitable for him.”

29.Then, when the night had ended, the Licchavis brought five hundred ceremonial dishes of milk rice as gifts of food. Then Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son had good food of various kinds prepared in his own park and had the time announced to the Blessed One: “It is time, Master Gotama, the meal is ready.”

30.Then, it being morning, the Blessed One dressed, and taking his bowl and outer robe, he went with the Sangha of bhikkhus to the park of Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son and sat down on the seat made ready. Then, with his own hands, Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son served and satisfied the Sangha of bhikkhus headed by the Buddha with the various kinds of good food. When the Blessed One had eaten and had put his bowl aside, Saccaka the Nigaṇṭha’s son took a low seat, sat down at one side, and said to the Blessed One: “Master Gotama, may the merit and the great meritorious fruits of this act of giving be for the happiness of the givers.”

“Aggivessana, whatever comes about from giving to a recipient such as yourself—one who is not free from lust, not free from hate, not free from delusion—[237] that will be for the givers. And whatever comes about from giving to a recipient such as myself—one who is free from lust, free from hate, free from delusion—that will be for you.”³⁷⁹ Though Saccaka admitted defeat in debate, he must have still considered himself a saint, and thus did not feel impelled to go for refuge to the Triple Gem. Also, because he continued to regard himself as a saint, he must have felt that it was not proper for him to dedicate the merit of the alms offering to himself, and thus he wished to dedicate the merit to the Licchavis. But the Buddha replies that the Licchavis will gain the merit of providing Saccaka with food to offer to the Buddha, while Saccaka himself will gain the merit of offering the food to the Buddha. The merit of giving alms differs in quality according to the purity of the recipient, as explained at MN 142.6.