In the Name of the Potter
The Arahant #1 Wide-Awakened One
Majjhima Nikāya
1. Mūla-Paṇṇāsa
1. Mūla-Pariyāya Vagga
Sutta 1
Mūla-Pariyā'ya Suttaṃ
The Root of All Evil
Translated from the Pāḷi
by
Michael M. Olds
[1][chlm][pts][bodh][than][upal] I Hear Tell:
Once upon a time, The Lucky Man,
Ukkattha-Town,
Good-luck Grove,
at the root of the Old Sal Willow
came a revisiting.
There, to the Beggars gathered round, he said:
"Beggars!"
And the Beggars responding:
"Broke-Tooth!"
the Lucky Man said this:
[2][pts][bodh][than][upal] "I will teach you, Beggars,
the One-Up-Passa-Mulapariyaya Spell,
the way passed the root of all evil.
Listen up!
Pay Attention!
I will speak!"
"Even So, Broke-Tooth!"
§
And so the Lucky Man broke this spell for them, saying:
[3][pts][bodh][than][upal] "In the case of the first case, Beggars,
we have the case of the untamed,
untrained,
uneducated
common man;
untamed to the discipline of the aristocrats,
untrained in the manners of the aristocrats,
uneducated to the teachings of the aristocrats,
untamed to the ways of the good man,
untrained in the craft of the good man,
uneducated in the lore of the good man;
he takes earth for earth.
Taking earth for earth,
he conceptualizes earth.
He thinks about earth.
He thinks of earth
in whatever ways he thinks of earth.
He thinks in terms of "My"
with regard to earth.
He takes delight in earth.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[4][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes water for water.
Taking water for water,
he conceptualizes water.
He thinks about water.
He thinks of water
in whatever ways he thinks of water.
He thinks in terms of "My"
with regard to water.
He takes delight in water.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[5][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes fire as fire.
Taking fire for fire, he conceptualizes fire.
He thinks about fire.
He thinks of fire in whatever ways he thinks of fire.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to fire.
He takes delight in fire.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[6][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes wind as wind.
Taking wind for wind, he conceptualizes wind.
He thinks about wind.
He thinks of wind in whatever ways he thinks of wind.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to wind.
He takes delight in wind.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[7][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes beings as beings.
Taking beings for beings, he conceptualizes beings.
He thinks about beings.
He thinks of beings in whatever ways he thinks of beings.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to beings.
He takes delight in beings.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[8][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes deities as deities.
Taking deities for deities, he conceptualizes deities.
He thinks about deities.
He thinks of deities in whatever ways he thinks of deities.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to deities.
He takes delight in deities.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[9][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes The Creator as The Creator.
Taking The Creator for The Creator, he conceptualizes The Creator.
He thinks about The Creator.
He thinks of The Creator in whatever ways he thinks of The Creator.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to The Creator.
He takes delight in The Creator.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[10][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes Brahmā as Brahmā.
Taking Brahmā for Brahmā, he conceptualizes Brahmā.
He thinks about Brahmā.
He thinks of Brahmā in whatever ways he thinks of Brahmā.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to Brahmā.
He takes delight in Brahmā.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[11][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes Radiant Beings as Radiant Beings.
Taking Radiant Beings for Radiant Beings, he conceptualizes Radiant Beings.
He thinks about Radiant Beings.
He thinks of Radiant Beings in whatever ways he thinks of Radiant Beings.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to Radiant Beings.
He takes delight in Radiant Beings.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[12][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes Luminescent Beings as Luminescent Beings.
Taking Luminescent Beings for Luminescent Beings, he conceptualizes Luminescent Beings.
He thinks about Luminescent Beings.
He thinks of Luminescent Beings in whatever ways he thinks of Luminescent Beings.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to Luminescent Beings.
He takes delight in Luminescent Beings.How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[13][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes Bountiful Beings as Bountiful Beings.
Taking Bountiful Beings for Bountiful Beings, he conceptualizes Bountiful Beings.
He thinks about Bountiful Beings.
He thinks of Bountiful Beings in whatever ways he thinks of Bountiful Beings.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to Bountiful Beings.
He takes delight in Bountiful Beings.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[14][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes The Overseer as The Overseer.
Taking The Overseer for The Overseer, he conceptualizes The Overseer.
He thinks about The Overseer.
He thinks of The Overseer in whatever ways he thinks of The Overseer.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to The Overseer.
He takes delight in The Overseer.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[15][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes The Realm of Space as The Realm of Space.
Taking The Realm of Space for The Realm of Space, he conceptualizes The Realm of Space.
He thinks about The Realm of Space.
He thinks of The Realm of Space in whatever ways he thinks of The Realm of Space.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Space.
He takes delight in The Realm of Space.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[16][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge as The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
Taking The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge for The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge, he conceptualizes The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He thinks about The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He thinks of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge in whatever ways he thinks of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He takes delight in The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[17][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes The Realm of No Things Are Had There as The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
Taking The Realm of No Things Are Had There for The Realm of No Things Are Had There, he conceptualizes The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He thinks about The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He thinks of The Realm of No Things Are Had There in whatever ways he thinks of The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He takes delight in The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[18][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception as The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
Taking The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception for The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception, he conceptualizes The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He thinks about The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He thinks of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception in whatever ways he thinks of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He takes delight in The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[19][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes Seeing as Seeing.
Taking Seeing for Seeing, he conceptualizes Seeing.
He thinks about Seeing.
He thinks of Seeing in whatever ways he thinks of Seeing.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to Seeing.
He takes delight in Seeing.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[20][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes Hearing as Hearing.
Taking Hearing for Hearing, he conceptualizes Hearing.
He thinks about Hearing.
He thinks of Hearing in whatever ways he thinks of Hearing.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to Hearing.
He takes delight in Hearing.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[21][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes Sensing as Sensing.
Taking Sensing for Sensing, he conceptualizes Sensing.
He thinks about Sensing.
He thinks of Sensing in whatever ways he thinks of Sensing.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to Sensing.
He takes delight in Sensing.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[22][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes Intuiting as Intuiting.
Taking Intuiting for Intuiting, he conceptualizes Intuiting.
He thinks about Intuiting.
He thinks of Intuiting in whatever ways he thinks of Intuiting.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to Intuiting.
He takes delight in Intuiting.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[23][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes Oneness as Oneness.
Taking Oneness for Oneness, he conceptualizes Oneness.
He thinks about Oneness.
He thinks of Oneness in whatever ways he thinks of Oneness.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to Oneness.
He takes delight in Oneness.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[24][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes Multiplicity as Multiplicity.
Taking Multiplicity for Multiplicity, he conceptualizes Multiplicity.
He thinks about Multiplicity.
He thinks of Multiplicity in whatever ways he thinks of Multiplicity.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to Multiplicity.
He takes delight in Multiplicity.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[25][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes all as all.
Taking all for all, he conceptualizes all.
He thinks about all.
He thinks of all in whatever ways he thinks of all.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to all.
He takes delight in all.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
[26][pts][bodh][than][upal] He takes Nibbāna as Nibbāna.
Taking Nibbāna for Nibbāna, he conceptualizes Nibbāna.
He thinks about Nibbāna.
He thinks of Nibbāna in whatever ways he thinks of Nibbāna.
He thinks in terms of "My" with regard to Nibbāna.
He takes delight in Nibbāna.
How come?
Because this matter is not fully understood by him,
so I say.
§
[27-50][pts][bodh][than][upal] In the case of the second case, Beggars,
we have the Beggar who is a seeker,
a little developed in mind,
short of his intended goal,
one who lives preparing to throw off the yoke
the throwing off of which there is nothing better,
he recognizes earth as earth.
Recognizing earth as earth, he knows about earth.
Let him think not about earth.
Let him think not of earth in whatever ways he thinks of earth.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to earth.
Let him take no delight in earth.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes water as water.
Recognizing water as water, he knows about water.
Let him think not about water.
Let him think not of water in whatever ways he thinks of water.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to water.
Let him take no delight in water.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes fire as fire.
Recognizing fire as fire, he knows about fire.
Let him think not about fire.
Let him think not of fire in whatever ways he thinks of fire.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to fire.
Let him take no delight in fire.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes wind as wind.
Recognizing wind as wind, he knows about wind.
Let him think not about wind.
Let him think not of wind in whatever ways he thinks of wind.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to wind.
Let him take no delight in wind.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes beings as beings.
Recognizing beings as beings, he knows about beings.
Let him think not about beings.
Let him think not of beings in whatever ways he thinks of beings.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to beings.
Let him take no delight in beings.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes deities as deities.
Recognizing deities as deities, he knows about deities.
Let him think not about deities.
Let him think not of deities in whatever ways he thinks of deities.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to deities.
Let him take no delight in deities.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Creator as The Creator.
Recognizing The Creator as The Creator, he knows about The Creator.
Let him think not about The Creator.
Let him think not of The Creator in whatever ways he thinks of The Creator.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Creator.
Let him take no delight in The Creator.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Brahmā as Brahmā.
Recognizing Brahmā as Brahmā, he knows about Brahmā.
Let him think not about Brahmā.
Let him think not of Brahmā in whatever ways he thinks of Brahmā.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to Brahmā.
Let him take no delight in Brahmā.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Radiant Beings as Radiant Beings.
Recognizing Radiant Beings as Radiant Beings, he knows about Radiant Beings.
Let him think not about Radiant Beings.
Let him think not of Radiant Beings in whatever ways he thinks of Radiant Beings.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to Radiant Beings.
Let him take no delight in Radiant Beings.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Luminescent Beings as Luminescent beings.
Recognizing Luminescent Beings as Luminescent Beings, he knows about Luminescent Beings.
Let him think not about Luminescent Beings.
Let him think not of Luminescent Beings in whatever ways he thinks of Luminescent Beings.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to Luminescent Beings.
Let him take no delight in Luminescent Beings.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Bountiful Beings as Bountiful Beings.
Recognizing Bountiful Beings as Bountiful Beings, he knows about Bountiful Beings.
Let him think not about Bountiful Beings.
Let him think not of Bountiful Beings in whatever ways he thinks of Bountiful Beings.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to Bountiful Beings.
Let him take no delight in Bountiful Beings.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Overseer as The Overseer.
Recognizing The Overseer as The Overseer, he knows about The Overseer.
Let him think not about The Overseer.
Let him think not of The Overseer in whatever ways he thinks of The Overseer.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Overseer.
Let him take no delight in The Overseer.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Space as The Realm of Space.
Recognizing The Realm of Space as The Realm of Space, he knows about The Realm of Space.
Let him think not about The Realm of Space.
Let him think not of The Realm of Space in whatever ways he thinks of The Realm of Space.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Space.
Let him take no delight in The Realm of Space.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge as The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
Recognizing The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge as The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge, he knows about The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
Let him think not about The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
Let him think not of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge in whatever ways he thinks of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
Let him take no delight in The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of No Things Are Had There as The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
Recognizing The Realm of No Things Are Had There as The Realm of No Things Are Had There, he knows about The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
Let him think not about The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
Let him think not of The Realm of No Things Are Had There in whatever ways he thinks of The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
Let him take no delight in The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception as The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
Recognizing The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception as The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception, he knows about The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
Let him think not about The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
Let him think not of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception in whatever ways he thinks of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
Let him take no delight in The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Seeing as Seeing.
Recognizing Seeing as Seeing, he knows about Seeing.
Let him think not about Seeing.
Let him think not of Seeing in whatever ways he thinks of Seeing.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to Seeing.
Let him take no delight in Seeing.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Hearing as Hearing.
Recognizing Hearing as Hearing, he knows about Hearing.
Let him think not about Hearing.
Let him think not of Hearing in whatever ways he thinks of Hearing.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to Hearing.
Let him take no delight in Hearing.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Sensing as Sensing.
Recognizing Sensing as Sensing, he knows about Sensing.
Let him think not about Sensing.
Let him think not of Sensing in whatever ways he thinks of Sensing.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to Sensing.
Let him take no delight in Sensing.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Intuiting as Intuiting.
Recognizing Intuiting as Intuiting, he knows about Intuiting.
Let him think not about Intuiting.
Let him think not of Intuiting in whatever ways he thinks of Intuiting.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to Intuiting.
Let him take no delight in Intuiting.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Oneness as Oneness.
Recognizing Oneness as Oneness, he knows about Oneness.
Let him think not about Oneness.
Let him think not of Oneness in whatever ways he thinks of Oneness.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to Oneness.
Let him take no delight in Oneness.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Multiplicity as Multiplicity.
Recognizing Multiplicity as Multiplicity, he knows about Multiplicity.
Let him think not about Multiplicity.
Let him think not of Multiplicity in whatever ways he thinks of Multiplicity.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to Multiplicity.
Let him take no delight in Multiplicity.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes all as all.
Recognizing all as all, he knows about all.
Let him think not about all.
Let him think not of all in whatever ways he thinks of all.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to all.
Let him take no delight in all.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Nibbāna as Nibbāna.
Recognizing Nibbāna as Nibbāna, he knows about Nibbāna.
Let him think not about Nibbāna.
Let him think not of Nibbāna in whatever ways he thinks of Nibbāna.
Let him not think in terms of "My" with regard to Nibbāna.
Let him take no delight in Nibbāna.
How come?
Because this way this matter may be fully understood by him,
so I say.
§
[51-74][pts][bodh][than][upal] In the case of the third case, Beggars,
we have the Beggar who is Arahant,
one who has left behind the corrupting influences,
has arrived at the end,
has done duty's doing,
dumped the load,
is at his intended goal,
has thrown off the yokes to rebirth,
and is freed by straight-answer-knowledge,
he recognizes earth as earth.
Recognizing earth as earth, he knows about earth.
He does not think about earth.
He does not think of earth in whatever ways he thought of earth.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to earth.
He takes no delight in earth.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes water as water.
Recognizing water as water, he knows about water.
He does not think about water.
He does not think of water in whatever ways he thought of water.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to water.
He takes no delight in water.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes fire as fire.
Recognizing fire as fire, he knows about fire.
He does not think about fire.
He does not think of fire in whatever ways he thought of fire.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to fire.
He takes no delight in fire.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes wind as wind.
Recognizing wind as wind, he knows about wind.
He does not think about wind.
He does not think of wind in whatever ways he thought of wind.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to wind.
He takes no delight in wind.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes beings as beings.
Recognizing beings as beings, he knows about beings.
He does not think about beings.
He does not think of beings in whatever ways he thought of beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to beings.
He takes no delight in beings.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes deities as deities.
Recognizing deities as deities, he knows about deities.
He does not think about deities.
He does not think of deities in whatever ways he thought of deities.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to deities.
He takes no delight in deities.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Creator as The Creator.
Recognizing The Creator as The Creator, he knows about The Creator.
He does not think about The Creator.
He does not think of The Creator in whatever ways he thought of The Creator.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Creator.
He takes no delight in The Creator.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Brahmā as Brahmā.
Recognizing Brahmā as Brahmā, he knows about Brahmā.
He does not think about Brahmā.
He does not think of Brahmā in whatever ways he thought of Brahmā.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Brahmā.
He takes no delight in Brahmā.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Radiant Beings as Radiant Beings.
Recognizing Radiant Beings as Radiant Beings,
he knows about Radiant Beings.
He does not think about Radiant Beings.
He does not think of Radiant Beings in whatever ways he thought of Radiant Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Radiant Beings.
He takes no delight in Radiant Beings.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Luminescent Beings as Luminescent Beings.
Recognizing Luminescent Beings as Luminescent Beings, he knows about Luminescent Beings.
He does not think about Luminescent Beings.
He does not think of Luminescent Beings in whatever ways he thought of Luminescent Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Luminescent Beings.
He takes no delight in Luminescent Beings.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Bountiful Beings as Bountiful Beings.
Recognizing Bountiful Beings as Bountiful Beings, he knows about Bountiful Beings.
He does not think about Bountiful Beings.
He does not think of Bountiful Beings in whatever ways he thought of Bountiful Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Bountiful Beings.
He takes no delight in Bountiful Beings.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Overseer as The Overseer.
Recognizing The Overseer as The Overseer, he knows about The Overseer.
He does not think about The Overseer.
He does not think of The Overseer in whatever ways he thought of The Overseer.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Overseer.
He takes no delight in The Overseer.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Space as The Realm of Space.
Recognizing The Realm of Space as The Realm of Space, he knows about The Realm of Space.
He does not think about The Realm of Space.
He does not think of The Realm of Space in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Space.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Space.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Space.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge as The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
Recognizing The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge as The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge, he knows about The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think about The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of No Things Are Had There as The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
Recognizing The Realm of No Things Are Had There as The Realm of No Things Are Had There, he knows about The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think about The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think of The Realm of No Things Are Had There in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He takes no delight in The Realm of No Things There.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception as The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
Recognizing The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception as The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception, he knows about The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think about The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Seeing as Seeing.
Recognizing Seeing as Seeing, he knows about Seeing.
He does not think about Seeing.
He does not think of Seeing in whatever ways he thought of Seeing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Seeing.
He takes no delight in Seeing.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Hearing as Hearing.
Recognizing Hearing as Hearing, he knows about Hearing.
He does not think about Hearing.
He does not think of Hearing in whatever ways he thought of Hearing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Hearing.
He takes no delight in Hearing.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Sensing as Sensing.
Recognizing Sensing as Sensing, he knows about Sensing.
He does not think about Sensing.
He does not think of Sensing in whatever ways he thought of Sensing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Sensing.
He takes no delight in Sensing.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Intuiting as Intuiting.
Recognizing Intuiting as Intuiting, he knows about Intuiting.
He does not think about Intuiting.
He does not think of Intuiting in whatever ways he thought of Intuiting.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Intuiting.
He takes no delight in Intuiting.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Oneness as Oneness.
Recognizing Oneness as Oneness, he knows about Oneness.
He does not think about Oneness.
He does not think of Oneness in whatever ways he thought of Oneness.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Oneness.
He takes no delight in Oneness.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Multiplicity as Multiplicity.
Recognizing Multiplicity as Multiplicity, he knows about Multiplicity.
He does not think about Multiplicity.
He does not think of Multiplicity in whatever ways he thought of Multiplicity.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Multiplicity.
He takes no delight in Multiplicity.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes all as all.
Recognizing all as all, he knows about all.
He does not think about all.
He does not think of all in whatever ways he thought of all.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to all.
He takes no delight in all.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Nibbāna as Nibbāna.
Recognizing Nibbāna as Nibbāna, he knows about Nibbāna.
He does not think about Nibbāna.
He does not think of Nibbāna in whatever ways he thought of Nibbāna.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Nibbāna.
He takes no delight in Nibbāna.
How come?
Because this matter is fully understood by him, so I say.
§
[75-98][pts][bodh][than][upal] In the case of the fourth case, Beggars,
we have the Beggar who is Arahant,
one who has left behind the corrupting influences,
has arrived at the end,
has done duty's doing,
dumped the load,
is at his intended goal,
has thrown off the yokes to rebirth,
and is freed by straight-answer-knowledge,
he recognizes earth as earth.
Recognizing earth as earth, he knows about earth.
He does not think about earth.
He does not think of earth in whatever ways he thought of earth.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to earth.
He takes no delight in earth.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes water as water.
Recognizing water as water, he knows about water.
He does not think about water.
He does not think of water in whatever ways he thought of water.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to water.
He takes no delight in water.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes fire as fire.
Recognizing fire as fire, he knows about fire.
He does not think about fire.
He does not think of fire in whatever ways he thought of fire.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to fire.
He takes no delight in fire.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes wind as wind.
Recognizing wind as wind, he knows about wind.
He does not think about wind.
He does not think of wind in whatever ways he thought of wind.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to wind.
He takes no delight in wind.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes beings as beings.
Recognizing beings as beings, he knows about beings.
He does not think about beings.
He does not think of beings in whatever ways he thought of beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to beings.
He takes no delight in beings.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes deities as deities.
Recognizing deities as deities, he knows about deities.
He does not think about deities.
He does not think of deities in whatever ways he thought of deities.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to deities.
He takes no delight in deities.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Creator as The Creator.
Recognizing The Creator as The Creator, he knows about The Creator.
He does not think about The Creator.
He does not think of The Creator in whatever ways he thought of The Creator.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Creator.
He takes no delight in The Creator.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Brahmā as Brahmā.
Recognizing Brahmā as Brahmā, he knows about Brahmā.
He does not think about Brahmā.
He does not think of Brahmā in whatever ways he thought of Brahmā.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Brahmā.
He takes no delight in Brahmā.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Radiant Beings as Radiant Beings.
Recognizing Radiant Beings as Radiant Beings, he knows about Radiant Beings.
He does not think about Radiant Beings.
He does not think of Radiant Beings in whatever ways he thought of Radiant Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Radiant Beings.
He takes no delight in Radiant Beings.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Luminescent Beings as Luminescent Beings.
Recognizing Luminescent Beings as Luminescent Beings, he knows about Luminescent Beings.
He does not think about Luminescent Beings.
He does not think of Luminescent Beings in whatever ways he thought of Luminescent Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Luminescent Beings.
He takes no delight in Luminescent Beings.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Bountiful Beings as Bountiful Beings.
Recognizing Bountiful Beings as Bountiful Beings, he knows about Bountiful Beings.
He does not think about Bountiful Beings.
He does not think of Bountiful Beings in whatever ways he thought of Bountiful Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Bountiful Beings.
He takes no delight in Bountiful Beings.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Overseer as The Overseer.
Recognizing The Overseer as The Overseer, he knows about The Overseer.
He does not think about The Overseer.
He does not think of The Overseer in whatever ways he thought of The Overseer.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Overseer.
He takes no delight in The Overseer.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Space as The Realm of Space.
Recognizing The Realm of Space as The Realm of Space, he knows about The Realm of Space.
He does not think about The Realm of Space.
He does not think of The Realm of Space in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Space.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Space.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Space.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge as The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
Recognizing The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge as The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge, he knows about The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think about The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of No Things Are Had There as The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
Recognizing The Realm of No Things Are Had There as The Realm of No Things Are Had There, he knows about The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think about The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think of The Realm of No Things Are Had There in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He takes no delight in The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception as The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
Recognizing The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception as The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception, he knows about The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think about The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Seeing as Seeing.
Recognizing Seeing as Seeing, he knows about Seeing.
He does not think about Seeing.
He does not think of Seeing in whatever ways he thought of Seeing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Seeing.
He takes no delight in Seeing.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust, so I say
He recognizes Hearing as Hearing.
Recognizing Hearing as Hearing, he knows about Hearing.
He does not think about Hearing.
He does not think of Hearing in whatever ways he thought of Hearing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Hearing.
He takes no delight in Hearing.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Sensing as Sensing.
Recognizing Sensing as Sensing, he knows about Sensing.
He does not think about Sensing.
He does not think of Sensing in whatever ways he thought of Sensing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Sensing.
He takes no delight in Sensing.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Intuiting as Intuiting.
Recognizing Intuiting as Intuiting, he knows about Intuiting.
He does not think about Intuiting.
He does not think of Intuiting in whatever ways he thought of Intuiting.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Intuiting.
He takes no delight in Intuiting.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Oneness as Oneness.
Recognizing Oneness as Oneness, he knows about Oneness.
He does not think about Oneness.
He does not think of Oneness in whatever ways he thought of Oneness.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Oneness.
He takes no delight in Oneness.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Multiplicity as Multiplicity.
Recognizing Multiplicity as Multiplicity, he knows about Multiplicity.
He does not think about Multiplicity.
He does not think of Multiplicity in whatever ways he thought of Multiplicity.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Multiplicity.
He takes no delight in Multiplicity.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes all as all.
Recognizing all as all, he knows about all.
He does not think about all.
He does not think of all in whatever ways he thought of all.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to all.
He takes no delight in all.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Nibbāna as Nibbāna.
Recognizing Nibbāna as Nibbāna, he knows about Nibbāna.
He does not think about Nibbāna.
He does not think of Nibbāna in whatever ways he thought of Nibbāna.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Nibbāna.
He takes no delight in Nibbāna.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from lust by the withering away of lust,
so I say.
§
[99-122][pts][bodh][than][upal] In the case of the fifth case, Beggars,
we have the Beggar who is Arahant,
one who has left behind the corrupting influences,
has arrived at the end,
has done duty's doing,
dumped the load,
is at his intended goal,
has thrown off the yokes to rebirth,
and is freed by straight-answer-knowledge,
he recognizes earth as earth.
Recognizing earth as earth, he knows about earth.
He does not think about earth.
He does not think of earth in whatever ways he thought of earth.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to earth.
He takes no delight in earth.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes water as water.
Recognizing water as water, he knows about water.
He does not think about water.
He does not think of water in whatever ways he thought of water.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to water.
He takes no delight in water.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes fire as fire.
Recognizing fire as fire, he knows about fire.
He does not think about fire.
He does not think of fire in whatever ways he thought of fire.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to fire.
He takes no delight in fire.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes wind as wind.
Recognizing wind as wind, he knows about wind.
He does not think about wind.
He does not think of wind in whatever ways he thought of wind.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to wind.
He takes no delight in wind.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes beings as beings.
Recognizing beings as beings, he knows about beings.
He does not think about beings.
He does not think of beings in whatever ways he thought of beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to beings.
He takes no delight in beings.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes deities as deities.
Recognizing deities as deities, he knows about deities.
He does not think about deities.
He does not think of deities in whatever ways he thought of deities.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to deities.
He takes no delight in deities.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Creator as The Creator.
Recognizing The Creator as The Creator, he knows about The Creator.
He does not think about The Creator.
He does not think of The Creator in whatever ways he thought of The Creator.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Creator.
He takes no delight in The Creator.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Brahmā as Brahmā.
Recognizing Brahmā as Brahmā, he knows about Brahmā.
He does not think about Brahmā.
He does not think of Brahmā in whatever ways he thought of Brahmā.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Brahmā.
He takes no delight in Brahmā.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Radiant Beings as Radiant Beings.
Recognizing Radiant Beings as Radiant Beings, he knows about Radiant Beings.
He does not think about Radiant Beings.
He does not think of Radiant Beings in whatever ways he thought of Radiant Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Radiant Beings.
He takes no delight in Radiant Beings.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Luminescent Beings as Luminescent Beings.
Recognizing Luminescent Beings as Luminescent Beings, he knows about Luminescent Beings.
He does not think about Luminescent Beings.
He does not think of Luminescent Beings in whatever ways he thought of Luminescent Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Luminescent Beings.
He takes no delight in Luminescent Beings.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Bountiful Beings as Bountiful Beings.
Recognizing Bountiful Beings as Bountiful Beings, he knows about Bountiful Beings.
He does not think about Bountiful Beings.
He does not think of Bountiful Beings in whatever ways he thought of Bountiful Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Bountiful Beings.
He takes no delight in Bountiful Beings.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Overseer as The Overseer.
Recognizing The Overseer as The Overseer, he knows about The Overseer.
He does not think about The Overseer.
He does not think of The Overseer in whatever ways he thought of The Overseer.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Overseer.
He takes no delight in The Overseer.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Space as The Realm of Space.
Recognizing The Realm of Space as The Realm of Space, he knows about The Realm of Space.
He does not think about The Realm of Space.
He does not think of The Realm of Space in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Space.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Space.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Space.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge as The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
Recognizing The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge as The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge, he knows about The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think about The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of No Things Are Had There as The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
Recognizing The Realm of No Things Are Had There as The Realm of No Things Are Had There, he knows about The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think about The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think of The Realm of No Things Are Had There in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He takes no delight in The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception as The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
Recognizing The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception as The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception, he knows about The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think about The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Seeing as Seeing.
Recognizing Seeing as Seeing, he knows about Seeing.
He does not think about Seeing.
He does not think of Seeing in whatever ways he thought of Seeing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Seeing.
He takes no delight in Seeing.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Hearing as Hearing.
Recognizing Hearing as Hearing, he knows about Hearing.
He does not think about Hearing.
He does not think of Hearing in whatever ways he thought of Hearing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Hearing.
He takes no delight in Hearing.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger, so I say
■
He recognizes Sensing as Sensing.
Recognizing Sensing as Sensing, he knows about Sensing.
He does not think about Sensing.
He does not think of Sensing in whatever ways he thought of Sensing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Sensing.
He takes no delight in Sensing.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Intuiting as Intuiting.
Recognizing Intuiting as Intuiting, he knows about Intuiting.
He does not think about Intuiting.
He does not think of Intuiting in whatever ways he thought of Intuiting.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Intuiting.
He takes no delight in Intuiting.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Oneness as Oneness.
Recognizing Oneness as Oneness, he knows about Oneness.
He does not think about Oneness.
He does not think of Oneness in whatever ways he thought of Oneness.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Oneness.
He takes no delight in Oneness.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Multiplicity as Multiplicity.
Recognizing Multiplicity as Multiplicity, he knows about Multiplicity.
He does not think about Multiplicity.
He does not think of Multiplicity in whatever ways he thought of Multiplicity.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Multiplicity.
He takes no delight in Multiplicity.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes all as all.
Recognizing all as all, he knows about all.
He does not think about all.
He does not think of all in whatever ways he thought of all.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to all.
He takes no delight in all.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Nibbāna as Nibbāna.
Recognizing Nibbāna as Nibbāna, he knows about Nibbāna.
He does not think about Nibbāna.
He does not think of Nibbāna in whatever ways he thought of Nibbāna.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Nibbāna.
He takes no delight in Nibbāna.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from anger by the withering away of anger,
so I say.
§
[123-146][pts][bodh][than][upal] In the case of the sixth case, Beggars,
we have the Beggar who is Arahant,
one who has left behind the corrupting influences,
has arrived at the end,
has done duty's doing,
dumped the load,
is at his intended goal,
has thrown off the yokes to rebirth,
and is freed by straight-answer-knowledge,
he recognizes earth as earth.
Recognizing earth as earth, he knows about earth.
He does not think about earth.
He does not think of earth in whatever ways he thought of earth.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to earth.
He takes no delight in earth.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes water as water.
Recognizing water as water, he knows about water.
He does not think about water.
He does not think of water in whatever ways he thought of water.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to water.
He takes no delight in water.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes fire as fire.
Recognizing fire as fire, he knows about fire.
He does not think about fire.
He does not think of fire in whatever ways he thought of fire.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to fire.
He takes no delight in fire.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes wind as wind.
Recognizing wind as wind, he knows about wind.
He does not think about wind.
He does not think of wind in whatever ways he thought of wind.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to wind.
He takes no delight in wind.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes beings as beings.
Recognizing beings as beings, he knows about beings.
He does not think about beings.
He does not think of beings in whatever ways he thought of beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to beings.
He takes no delight in beings.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes deities as deities.
Recognizing deities as deities, he knows about deities.
He does not think about deities.
He does not think of deities in whatever ways he thought of deities.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to deities.
He takes no delight in deities.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Creator as The Creator.
Recognizing The Creator as The Creator, he knows about The Creator.
He does not think about The Creator.
He does not think of The Creator in whatever ways he thought of The Creator.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Creator.
He takes no delight in The Creator.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Brahmā as Brahmā.
Recognizing Brahmā as Brahmā, he knows about Brahmā.
He does not think about Brahmā.
He does not think of Brahmā in whatever ways he thought of Brahmā.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Brahmā.
He takes no delight in Brahmā.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Radiant Beings as Radiant Beings.
Recognizing Radiant Beings as Radiant Beings, he knows about Radiant Beings.
He does not think about Radiant Beings.
He does not think of Radiant Beings in whatever ways he thought of Radiant Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Radiant Beings.
He takes no delight in Radiant Beings.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Luminescent Beings as Luminescent Beings.
Recognizing Luminescent Beings as Luminescent Beings, he knows about Luminescent Beings.
He does not think about Luminescent Beings.
He does not think of Luminescent Beings in whatever ways he thought of Luminescent Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Luminescent Beings.
He takes no delight in Luminescent Beings.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Bountiful Beings as Bountiful Beings.
Recognizing Bountiful Beings as Bountiful Beings, he knows about Bountiful Beings.
He does not think about Bountiful Beings.
He does not think of Bountiful Beings in whatever ways he thought of Bountiful Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Bountiful Beings.
He takes no delight in Bountiful Beings.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Overseer as The Overseer.
Recognizing The Overseer as The Overseer, he knows about The Overseer.
He does not think about The Overseer.
He does not think of The Overseer in whatever ways he thought of The Overseer.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Overseer.
He takes no delight in The Overseer.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Space as The Realm of Space.
Recognizing The Realm of Space as The Realm of Space, he knows about The Realm of Space.
He does not think about The Realm of Space.
He does not think of The Realm of Space in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Space.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Space.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Space.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge as The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
Recognizing The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge as The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge, he knows about The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think about The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of No Things Are Had There as The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
Recognizing The Realm of No Things Are Had There as The Realm of No Things Are Had There, he knows about The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think about The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think of The Realm of No Things Are Had There in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He takes no delight in The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception as The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
Recognizing The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception as The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception, he knows about The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think about The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Seeing as Seeing.
Recognizing Seeing as Seeing, he knows about Seeing.
He does not think about Seeing.
He does not think of Seeing in whatever ways he thought of Seeing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Seeing.
He takes no delight in Seeing.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Hearing as Hearing.
Recognizing Hearing as Hearing, he knows about Hearing.
He does not think about Hearing.
He does not think of Hearing in whatever ways he thought of Hearing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Hearing.
He takes no delight in Hearing.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Sensing as Sensing.
Recognizing Sensing as Sensing, he knows about Sensing.
He does not think about Sensing.
He does not think of Sensing in whatever ways he thought of Sensing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Sensing.
He takes no delight in Sensing.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Intuiting as Intuiting.
Recognizing Intuiting as Intuiting, he knows about Intuiting.
He does not think about Intuiting.
He does not think of Intuiting in whatever ways he thought of Intuiting.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Intuiting.
He takes no delight in Intuiting.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Oneness as Oneness.
Recognizing Oneness as Oneness, he knows about Oneness.
He does not think about Oneness.
He does not think of Oneness in whatever ways he thought of Oneness.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Oneness.
He takes no delight in Oneness.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Multiplicity as Multiplicity.
Recognizing Multiplicity as Multiplicity, he knows about Multiplicity.
He does not think about Multiplicity.
He does not think of Multiplicity in whatever ways he thought of Multiplicity.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Multiplicity.
He takes no delight in Multiplicity.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes all as all.
Recognizing all as all, he knows about all.
He does not think about all.
He does not think of all in whatever ways he thought of all.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to all.
He takes no delight in all.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Nibbāna as Nibbāna.
Recognizing Nibbāna as Nibbāna, he knows about Nibbāna.
He does not think about Nibbāna.
He does not think of Nibbāna in whatever ways he thought of Nibbāna.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Nibbāna.
He takes no delight in Nibbāna.
How come?
Because he has attained freedom from bewilderment by the withering away of bewilderment,
so I say.
§
[147-170][pts][bodh][than][upal] In the case of the seventh case, Beggars,
we have the Tathāgata who is Arahant,
The Number One Wide Awakened One,
he recognizes earth as earth.
Recognizing earth as earth, he knows about earth.
He does not think about earth.
He does not think of earth in whatever ways he thought of earth.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to earth.
He takes no delight in earth.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes water as water.
Recognizing water as water, he knows about water.
He does not think about water.
He does not think of water in whatever ways he thought of water.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to water.
He takes no delight in water.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes fire as fire.
Recognizing fire as fire, he knows about fire.
He does not think about fire.
He does not think of fire in whatever ways he thought of fire.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to fire.
He takes no delight in fire.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes wind as wind.
Recognizing wind as wind, he knows about wind.
He does not think about wind.
He does not think of wind in whatever ways he thought of wind.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to wind.
He takes no delight in wind.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes beings as beings.
Recognizing beings as beings, he knows about beings.
He does not think about beings.
He does not think of beings in whatever ways he thought of beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to beings.
He takes no delight in beings.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes deities as deities.
Recognizing deities as deities, he knows about deities.
He does not think about deities.
He does not think of deities in whatever ways he thought of deities.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to deities.
He takes no delight in deities.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Creator as The Creator.
Recognizing The Creator as The Creator, he knows about The Creator.
He does not think about The Creator.
He does not think of The Creator in whatever ways he thought of The Creator.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Creator.
He takes no delight in The Creator.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Brahmā as Brahmā.
Recognizing Brahmā as Brahmā, he knows about Brahmā.
He does not think about Brahmā.
He does not think of Brahmā in whatever ways he thought of Brahmā.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Brahmā.
He takes no delight in Brahmā.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Radiant Beings as Radiant Beings.
Recognizing Radiant Beings as Radiant Beings, he knows about Radiant Beings.
He does not think about Radiant Beings.
He does not think of Radiant Beings in whatever ways he thought of Radiant Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Radiant Beings.
He takes no delight in Radiant Beings.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Luminescent Beings as Luminescent Beings.
Recognizing Luminescent Beings as Luminescent Beings, he knows about Luminescent Beings.
He does not think about Luminescent Beings.
He does not think of Luminescent Beings in whatever ways he thought of Luminescent Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Luminescent Beings.
He takes no delight in Luminescent Beings.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Bountiful Beings as Bountiful Beings.
Recognizing Bountiful Beings as Bountiful Beings, he knows about Bountiful Beings.
He does not think about Bountiful Beings.
He does not think of Bountiful Beings in whatever ways he thought of Bountiful Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Bountiful Beings.
He takes no delight in Bountiful Beings.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Overseer as The Overseer.
Recognizing The Overseer as The Overseer, he knows about The Overseer.
He does not think about The Overseer.
He does not think of The Overseer in whatever ways he thought of The Overseer.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Overseer.
He takes no delight in The Overseer.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Space as The Realm of Space.
Recognizing The Realm of Space as The Realm of Space, he knows about The Realm of Space.
He does not think about The Realm of Space.
He does not think of The Realm of Space in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Space.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Space.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Space.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge as The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
Recognizing The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge as The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge, he knows about The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think about The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of No Things Are Had There as The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
Recognizing The Realm of No Things Are Had There as The Realm of No Things Are Had There, he knows about The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think about The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think of The Realm of No Things Are Had There in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He takes no delight in The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception as The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
Recognizing The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception as The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception, he knows about The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think about The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Seeing as Seeing.
Recognizing Seeing as Seeing, he knows about Seeing.
He does not think about Seeing.
He does not think of Seeing in whatever ways he thought of Seeing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Seeing.
He takes no delight in Seeing.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Hearing as Hearing.
Recognizing Hearing as Hearing, he knows about Hearing.
He does not think about Hearing.
He does not think of Hearing in whatever ways he thought of Hearing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Hearing.
He takes no delight in Hearing.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Sensing as Sensing.
Recognizing Sensing as Sensing, he knows about Sensing.
He does not think about Sensing.
He does not think of Sensing in whatever ways he thought of Sensing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Sensing.
He takes no delight in Sensing.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Intuiting as Intuiting.
Recognizing Intuiting as Intuiting, he knows about Intuiting.
He does not think about Intuiting.
He does not think of Intuiting in whatever ways he thought of Intuiting.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Intuiting.
He takes no delight in Intuiting.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Oneness as Oneness.
Recognizing Oneness as Oneness, he knows about Oneness.
He does not think about Oneness.
He does not think of Oneness in whatever ways he thought of Oneness.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Oneness.
He takes no delight in Oneness.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Multiplicity as Multiplicity.
Recognizing Multiplicity as Multiplicity, he knows about Multiplicity.
He does not think about Multiplicity.
He does not think of Multiplicity in whatever ways he thought of Multiplicity.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Multiplicity.
He takes no delight in Multiplicity.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes all as all.
Recognizing all as all, he knows about all.
He does not think about all.
He does not think of all in whatever ways he thought of all.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to all.
He takes no delight in all.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
■
He recognizes Nibbāna as Nibbāna.
Recognizing Nibbāna as Nibbāna, he knows about Nibbāna.
He does not think about Nibbāna.
He does not think of Nibbāna in whatever ways he thought of Nibbāna.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Nibbāna.
He takes no delight in Nibbāna.
How come?
Because this matter is thoroughly understood by the Tathāgata,
so I say.
§
[171-194][pts][bodh][than][upal] In the case of the eighth case, Beggars,
we have the Tathāgata who is Arahant,
The Number One Wide Awakened One,
he recognizes earth as earth.
Recognizing earth as earth, he knows about earth.
He does not think about earth.
He does not think of earth in whatever ways he thought of earth.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to earth.
He takes no delight in earth.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes water as water.
Recognizing water as water, he knows about water.
He does not think about water.
He does not think of water in whatever ways he thought of water.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to water.
He takes no delight in water.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes fire as fire.
Recognizing fire as fire, he knows about fire.
He does not think about fire.
He does not think of fire in whatever ways he thought of fire.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to fire.
He takes no delight in fire.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes wind as wind.
Recognizing wind as wind, he knows about wind.
He does not think about wind.
He does not think of wind in whatever ways he thought of wind.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to wind.
He takes no delight in wind.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes beings as beings.
Recognizing beings as beings, he knows about beings.
He does not think about beings.
He does not think of beings in whatever ways he thought of beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to beings.
He takes no delight in beings.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes deities as deities.
Recognizing deities as deities, he knows about deities.
He does not think about deities.
He does not think of deities in whatever ways he thought of deities.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to deities.
He takes no delight in deities.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes The Creator as The Creator.
Recognizing The Creator as The Creator, he knows about The Creator.
He does not think about The Creator.
He does not think of The Creator in whatever ways he thought of The Creator.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Creator.
He takes no delight in The Creator.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes Brahmā as Brahmā.
Recognizing Brahmā as Brahmā, he knows about Brahmā.
He does not think about Brahmā.
He does not think of Brahmā in whatever ways he thought of Brahmā.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Brahmā.
He takes no delight in Brahmā.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes Radiant Beings as Radiant Beings.
Recognizing Radiant Beings as Radiant Beings, he knows about Radiant Beings.
He does not think about Radiant Beings.
He does not think of Radiant Beings in whatever ways he thought of Radiant Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Radiant Beings.
He takes no delight in Radiant Beings.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes Luminescent Beings as Luminescent Beings.
Recognizing Luminescent Beings as Luminescent Beings, he knows about Luminescent Beings.
He does not think about Luminescent Beings.
He does not think of Luminescent Beings in whatever ways he thought of Luminescent Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Luminescent Beings.
He takes no delight in Luminescent Beings.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes Bountiful Beings as Bountiful Beings.
Recognizing Bountiful Beings as Bountiful Beings, he knows about Bountiful Beings.
He does not think about Bountiful Beings.
He does not think of Bountiful Beings in whatever ways he thought of Bountiful Beings.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Bountiful Beings.
He takes no delight in Bountiful Beings.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes The Overseer as The Overseer.
Recognizing The Overseer as The Overseer, he knows about The Overseer.
He does not think about The Overseer.
He does not think of The Overseer in whatever ways he thought of The Overseer.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Overseer.
He takes no delight in The Overseer.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Space as The Realm of Space.
Recognizing The Realm of Space as The Realm of Space, he knows about The Realm of Space.
He does not think about The Realm of Space.
He does not think of The Realm of Space in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Space.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Space.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Space.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge as The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
Recognizing The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge as The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge, he knows about The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think about The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Re-knowing-knowing-knowledge.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes The Realm of No Things Are Had There as The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
Recognizing The Realm of No Things Are Had There as The Realm of No Things Are Had There, he knows about The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think about The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think of The Realm of No Things Are Had There in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
He takes no delight in The Realm of No Things Are Had There.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception as The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
Recognizing The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception as The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception, he knows about The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think about The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception in whatever ways he thought of The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
He takes no delight in The Realm of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes Seeing as Seeing.
Recognizing Seeing as Seeing, he knows about Seeing.
He does not think about Seeing.
He does not think of Seeing in whatever ways he thought of Seeing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Seeing.
He takes no delight in Seeing.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes Hearing as Hearing.
Recognizing Hearing as Hearing, he knows about Hearing.
He does not think about Hearing.
He does not think of Hearing in whatever ways he thought of Hearing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Hearing.
He takes no delight in Hearing.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes Sensing as Sensing.
Recognizing Sensing as Sensing, he knows about Sensing.
He does not think about Sensing.
He does not think of Sensing in whatever ways he thought of Sensing.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Sensing.
He takes no delight in Sensing.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes Intuiting as Intuiting.
Recognizing Intuiting as Intuiting, he knows about Intuiting.
He does not think about Intuiting.
He does not think of Intuiting in whatever ways he thought of Intuiting.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Intuiting.
He takes no delight in Intuiting.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes Oneness as Oneness.
Recognizing Oneness as Oneness, he knows about Oneness.
He does not think about Oneness.
He does not think of Oneness in whatever ways he thought of Oneness.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Oneness.
He takes no delight in Oneness.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes Multiplicity as Multiplicity.
Recognizing Multiplicity as Multiplicity, he knows about Multiplicity.
He does not think about Multiplicity.
He does not think of Multiplicity in whatever ways he thought of Multiplicity.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Multiplicity.
He takes no delight in Multiplicity.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes all as all.
Recognizing all as all, he knows about all.
He does not think about all.
He does not think of all in whatever ways he thought of all.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to all.
He takes no delight in all.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I.
■
He recognizes Nibbāna as Nibbāna.
Recognizing Nibbāna as Nibbāna, he knows about Nibbāna.
He does not think about Nibbāna.
He does not think of Nibbāna in whatever ways he thought of Nibbāna.
He does not think in terms of "My" with regard to Nibbāna.
He takes no delight in Nibbāna.
How come?
Because he knows delight is the root of pain;
its outgrowth is birth
and its end result is aging and death for beings.
It needs no thought, therefore, Beggars, to say 'The Tathāgata,
having completely uprooted thirst
by withering away,
dispassion,
ending
and letting go,
has attained awakening
to the unsurpassed #1 Wide Awakening,
so say I."
§
This was what the Teacher said, but on that occasion the Beggars gathered round did not understand a word.
