“But what, revered sir, is skilled bodily conduct?” “Whatever the bodily conduct, sire, that has no blemish.” “But what, revered sir, is the bodily conduct that has no blemish?” “Whatever the bodily conduct, sire, that is non-injurious.” “And what, revered sir, is the bodily conduct that is non-injurious?” “Whatever the bodily conduct, sire, that is joyous in result.” “And what, revered sir, is the bodily conduct that is joyous in result?” “Whatever bodily conduct, sire, does not conduce to the torment of self and does not conduce to the torment of others and does not conduce to the torment of both, and by which the unskilled states dwindle away, the skilled states increase much….”

“So I, your reverences, after a time, getting rid of my wealth, whether small or great, getting rid of my circle of relations, whether small or great, having cut off my hair and beard, having put on saffron robes, went forth from home into homelessness….”

…These five, brahman youth, are the strands of pleasures of the senses. What five? Material shapes cognizable by the eye, agreeable, pleasant, liked, enticing, connected with sensual pleasures, alluring. Sounds cognizable by the ear…Smells cognizable by the nose…Tastes cognizable by the tongue…Touches cognizable by the body, agreeable, pleasant, liked, enticing, connected with sensual pleasures, alluring. These, brahman youth, are the five strands of sense-pleasures. Brahman youth, the brahman Pokkharasāti of the Upama––a (clan) of the Subhaga forest glade, is enslaved and infatuated by these five strands of sense-pleasures, he is addicted to them, and enjoys them without seeing the peril (in them), without knowing the escape (from them)….

Now I, Māgandiya, when I was formerly a householder, endowed and provided with the five strands of sense-pleasures, revelled in them…. But after a time, having known the coming to be and passing away of sense-pleasures and the satisfaction and peril of them and the escape as it really is, getting rid of the craving for sense-pleasures, suppressing the fever for sense-pleasures, I dwelt devoid of thirst, my mind inwardly calmed. I saw other beings not yet devoid of attachment to sense-pleasures who were pursuing sense-pleasures (although) they were being consumed by craving for sense-pleasures, burning with the fever for sense-pleasures. I did not envy them: I had no delight therein….

“…What do you think about this, monks? Is material shape permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, revered sir.” “But is what is impermanent painful or is it pleasant?” “Painful, revered sir.” “And is it right to regard that which is impermanent, suffering, liable to change, as 'This is mine, this am I, this is myself'?” “No, revered sir.” The Buddha asked the same about mental phenomena.

“Now, good Gotama, what is the cause, what is the reason that lowness and excellence are to be seen among human beings while they are in human form? For, good Gotama, human beings of short lifespan are to be seen and those of long lifespan; those of many and those of few illnesses; those who are ugly, those who are beautiful; those who are of little account, those of great account; those who are poor, those who are wealthy; those who are of lowly families, those of high families; those who are weak in wisdom, those who are full of wisdom.”

“Deeds (kamma) are one's own, brahman youth, beings are heirs to deeds, deeds are matrix, deeds are kin, deeds are arbiters. Deed divides beings, that is to say by lowness and excellence.”

“Why, Visākhā! How is it that you come here with clothes and hair still wet at an unseasonable hour?” “O, sir, my dear and lovely grand-daughter is dead! That is why I come here with hair and clothes still wet at an unseasonable hour.” “Visākhā, would you like to have as many sons and grandsons as there are men in Sāvatthī?” “Yes, sir, I would indeed!” “But how many men do you suppose die daily in Sāvatthī?” “Ten, sir, or maybe nine, or eight. Maybe seven, six, five or four, three, two; may be one a day dies in Sāvatthī, sir. Sāvatthī is never free from men dying, sir.” “What think you, Visākhā? In such case would you ever be without wet hair and clothes?” “Surely not, sir! Enough for me, sir, of so many sons and grandsons!” “Visākhā, whoso have a hundred things beloved, they have a hundred sorrows. Whoso have ninety, eighty…thirty, twenty things beloved…. whoso have ten…whoso have but one thing beloved, have but one sorrow. Whoso have no thing beloved, they have no sorrow. Sorrowless are they and passionless. Serene are they, I declare.”

“Is it true, as is said, that a pernicious view like this has accrued to you, Sāti: 'In so far as I understand Dhamma taught by the Lord, it is that this consciousness itself runs on, fares on, not another'?” “Even so do I, Lord, understand Dhamma taught by the Lord: it is this consciousness itself that runs on, fares on, not another.” “What is this consciousness, Sāti?” “It is this, Lord, that speaks, that feels, that experiences now here, now there, the fruition of deeds that are lovely and that are depraved.” “But to whom, foolish man, do you understand that Dhamma was taught by me thus? Foolish man, has not consciousness generated by conditions been spoken of in many a figure by me, saying: 'Apart from condition there is no origination of consciousness'? But now you, foolish man, not only misrepresent me because of your own wrong grasp, but you also injure yourself and give rise to much demerit which, foolish man, will be for your woe and sorrow for a long time.” …Then the Lord addressed the monks, saying: “Do you, monks, understand that Dhamma was taught by me thus so that this monk Sāti, a fisherman's son, because of his own wrong grasp not only misrepresents me but is also injuring himself and giving rise to much demerit?” “No, Lord. For in many a figure has consciousness generated by conditions been spoken of to us by the Lord, saying: 'Apart from condition there is no origination of consciousness.' “ “It is good, monks, it is good that you understand thus Dhamma taught by me to you, monks. For in many a figure has consciousness generated by conditions been spoken of by me to you, monks, saying: 'Apart from condition there is no origination of consciousness.' …It is because, monks, an appropriate condition arises that consciousness is known by this or that name: if consciousness arises because of eye and material shapes, it is known as seeing-consciousness; if consciousness arises because of ear and sounds it is known as hearing-consciousness; if consciousness arises because of nose and smells, it is known as smelling-consciousness; if consciousness arises because of tongue and tastes it is known as tasting-consciousness; if consciousness arises because of body and touches, it is known as tactile-consciousness; if consciousness arises because of mind and mental objects, it is known as mental consciousness. Monks, as a fire burns because of this or that appropriate condition, by that it is known; if a fire burns because of sticks, it is known as a stick-fire; and if a fire burns because of chips, it is known as a chip-fire; and if a fire burns because of grass, it is known as a grass-fire; and if a fire burns because of cowdung, it is known as a cowdung-fire; and if a fire burns because of chaff, it is known as a chaff-fire; and if a fire burns because of rubbish, it is known as a rubbish-fire. Even so, monks, when because of a condition appropriate to it consciousness arises, it is known by this or that name…“

…though with pious heart he took refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha, greater would have been the fruit thereof, had he with pious heart undertaken to keep the precepts: abstention from taking life, from taking what is not given, from carnal lusts, from lying and from intoxicating liquor, the cause of sloth. …though with pious heart he undertook to keep these precepts, greater would have been the fruit thereof, had he made become a mere passing fragrance of loving-kindness. …though he made become just the fragrance of loving-kindness, greater would have been the fruit thereof, had he made become, just for a finger-snap, the perception of impermanence.

…and this is said, “Buddha”: in what sense buddha? He is the discoverer (bujjhitā) of the Truths, thus he is enlightened (buddha). He is the enlightener (bodhetā) of the generation, thus he is enlightened. He is enlightened by omniscience, enlightened by seeing all, enlightened without being led by others…he is quite without defilement, thus he is enlightened; he has travelled by the Path that goes in only one way, thus he is enlightened; he alone discovered the peerless complete enlightenment, thus he is enlightened; …Buddha: this is not a name made by a mother, made by a father…this (name) “Buddha”, which signifies final liberation, is a realistic description of Enlightened Ones, Blessed Ones, together with their obtainment of omniscient knowledge at the root of an enlightenment (tree).

“What do you think about this, monks? Is material shape permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, revered sir.” “But is what is impermanent painful or is it pleasant?” “Painful, revered sir.” “And is it right to regard that which is impermanent, suffering, liable to change, as, 'This is mine, this am I, this is myself'?” “No, revered sir.”

“What is to be known is known by me, and to be developed is developed, what is to be got rid of has been got rid of −therefore, brahman, am I awake.”

Now I am frail, Ānanda, old, aged, far gone in years. This is my eightieth year and my life is spent…Therefore, Ānanda, be an island to yourself, a refuge to yourself, seeking no external refuge; with Dhamma as your island, Dhamma as your refuge, seeking no other refuge.

“ 'The deathless! The deathless!', lord, is the saying. Pray, lord, what is the deathless, and what the way to the deathless?” “That which is the destruction of greed, the destruction of hatred, the destruction of ignorance, monk −that is called 'the deathless'. This same ariyan eightfold way is the way to the deathless.”

“How many kinds of things, Lord, that happen in the world, make for trouble, for suffering, for distress?” “Three things, sire, happen of that nature. What are the three? Greed, hatred and ignorance: these three make for trouble, for suffering, for distress.”

By knowing, monks, by seeing is, I declare, the destruction of the āsavasCankers or intoxicants, one group of defilements. Defilements are classified into different groups. , not by not knowing, by not seeing…. Suppose, monks, in a monk who lives neglectful of self-training there should arise this wish: ”O that my heart were freed from the āsavas without grasping.” Yet for all that his heart is not freed from the āsavas. What is the cause of that? It must be said that it is his neglect of self-training. Self-training in what? In the four applications of mindfulness…in the ariyan eightfold Path. …in the monk who dwells attentive to self-training there would not arise such a wish as this: “O that my heart were freed from the āsavas without grasping”; and yet his heart is freed from them. What is the cause of that? It must be said it is his attention to self-training…Just as if, monks, when a carpenter or carpenter's apprentice looks upon his adze-handle and sees thereon his thumb-mark and his finger-marks he does not thereby know: ”So and so much of my adze-handle has been worn away today, so much yesterday, so much at other times.” But he knows the wearing away of it just by its wearing away. Even so monks, the monk who dwells attentive to self-training has not this knowledge: “So and so much of the āsavas has been worn away today, so much yesterday, so much at other times.“ But he knows the wearing away of them just by their wearing away.

“Is there, good Ānanda, even one monk who was designated by the good Gotāma, saying: 'After my passing this one will be your support', and to whom you might have recourse now?” “There is not even one monk, brahman, who was designated by the Lord who knew and saw, perfected one, fully Self-Awakened One, saying: 'After my passing this one will be your support', and to whom we might have recourse now.” “But is there even one monk, Ānanda, who is agreed upon by the Order and designated by a number of monks who are elders, saying: 'After the Lord's passing this one will be our support', and to whom you might have recourse now?” “There is not even one monk, brahman, who is agreed upon by the Order…. and to whom we might have recourse now.” “But as you are thus without support, good Ānanda, what is the cause of your unity?” “We brahman, are not without support, we have a support, brahman. Dhamma is the support.”

Of these marvels, master Gotama, the marvel of super-power…seems to me of the nature of an illusion. Then again as to the marvel of thought-reading…this also, master Gotama, seems to me of the nature of an illusion. But as to the marvel of teaching…of these three marvels this one appeals to me as the more wonderful and excellent.

You ought to be at a loss, Vaccha, you ought to be bewildered. For, Vaccha, this dhamma is deep, difficult to see, difficult to understand, peaceful, excellent, beyond dialectic, subtle, intelligible to the wise; but it is hard for you who are of another view, another allegiance, another objective, of a different observance, and under a different teacher.

Body, monks, is not the self. If body, monks, were the self, then body would not be involved in sickness, and one could say of body: “Thus let my body be. Thus let my body not be.”

The eye, monks, is impermanent, changeable, becoming otherwise. The ear, monks, is impermanent, changeable. So is the nose, the tongue, the body, and the mind. It is impermanent, changeable, becoming otherwise…. He, monks, who thus knows, thus sees these doctrines, is called “streamwinner, saved from destruction, assured, bound for enlightenment”.

“The five khandhas of grasping, friend Koṭṭhita, are the conditions which should be pondered with method by a virtuous monk, as being impermanent, suffering, sick, as a boil, as a dart, as pain, as ill-health, as alien, as transitory, empty and not self…. Indeed, friend, it is possible for a virtuous monk so pondering with method these five khandhas of grasping to realize the fruits of stream-winning.” “But, friend Sāriputta, what are the things which should be pondered with method by a monk who is a sotāpanna?” “By a monk who is a sotāpanna, friend Koṭṭhita, it is these same five khandhas of grasping which should be so pondered. Indeed, friend, it is possible for a monk who is a sotāpanna…by so pondering these five khandhas…to realize the fruits of once-returningThe once-returner or sakadāgāmī has realized the second stage of enlightenment. .“ “But, friend Sāriputta, what are the things which should be pondered with method by a monk who is a once-returner?” “By one who is a once-returner, friend, it is these same five khandhas which should be pondered with method. Indeed it is possible, friend, for one who is a once-returner, by so pondering to realize the fruits of non-returningThe non-returner or anāgāmī has realized the third stage of enlightenment. .” “But, friend Sāriputta, what are the things which should be pondered with method by one who is a non-returner?” “By such a one, friend Koṭṭhita, it is these five khandhas of grasping which should be so pondered. It is possible, friend, for a non-returner by so pondering to realize the fruits of arahatship.” “But what, friend Sāriputta, are the things which should be pondered with method by one who is an arahat?” “By an arahat, friend Koṭṭhita, these five khandhas should be pondered with method as being impermanent, suffering, sick, as a boil, as a dart, as ill-health, as alien, transitory, void and not self. For the arahat, friend, there is nothing further to be done, nor is there return to upheaping of what is done. Nevertheless, these things, if practised and enlarged, conduce to a happy existence and to self-possession even in this present life.”

“Though, friends, I discern in the five khandhas of grasping no self nor anything pertaining to the self, yet am I not arahat, nor one in whom the āsavas (cankers) are destroyed. Though, friend, I see that I have got the idea of 'I am' in the five khandhas of grasping, yet do I not discern that I am this 'I am'.” Then the venerable Dāsaka returned to the monks with that message and reported the words of the venerable Khemaka (and those monks sent this further message): “As to this 'I am', friend Khemaka, of which you speak, what do you mean by this 'I am'? Do you speak of 'I am' as body or as distinct from the body? As feeling, or as distinct from feeling? As perception…as the “activities”…as consciousness, or as distinct from consciousness? As to this 'I am', what do you mean by it?” (So the venerable Dāsaka went again and took the message in these words.) “Enough, friend Dāsaka. What boots this running to and fro! Fetch my staff. I will go myself to these monks.” So the venerable Khemaka, leaning on his staff, came to those monks. When he got there, he greeted them, and exchanging the courtesies of civil words, sat down at one side. As he thus sat, the elders thus spoke to the venerable Khemaka: “As to this 'I am', friend Khemaka, of which you speak, what do you mean by it? Do you speak of it as body or as distinct from body…as consciousness, or as distinct from consciousness?” “No friends, I do not say, 'I am body or feeling, or perception, or the 'activities' or consciousness, or as distinct from these and from consciousness.' Though, friends, I see that I have got the idea of 'I am' in the five khandhas of grasping, yet I do not discern that I am this 'I am'. Just as, friends, in the case of the scent of a blue lotus, or a white lotus, if one should say: 'The scent belongs to the petals or the colour or the fibres of it', would he be rightly describing the scent?” “Surely not, friend.” “Then how would he be right in describing it?” “Surely, friend, by speaking of the scent of the flower.” “Even so, friends, I do not speak of the 'I am' as a body, or as feeling and so forth. Nevertheless I see that in these five khandhas of grasping I have got the idea of 'I am'; yet I do not discern that I am this 'I am'. Though, friends, an ariyan disciple has put away the five lower fettersFetters or sa—yojanas are a group of defilements. The non-returner or anāgāmī has eradicated the five lower fetters, which include wrong views, clinging to sense objects and aversion. The arahat has eradicated the five higher fetters which include conceit, craving for rebirth which is the result of jhāna, restlessness and ignorance. , yet there remains in him a subtle remnant from among the five khandhas of grasping, a subtle remnant of the I am-conceit, of the I am-desire, of the lurking tendency to think 'I am', still not removed from him. Later on he lives contemplating the rise and fall of the five khandhas of grasping, seeing thus: 'Such is body, such is the arising of body, such is the ceasing of it. Such is feeling…perception…the activities…such is consciousness, the arising of it and the ceasing of it'. In this way, as he lives in the contemplation of the five khandhas of grasping, that subtle remnant of the I am-conceit, of the I am-desire, that lurking tendency to think 'I am', which was still not removed from him −that is now removed. Suppose, friends, there is a dirty, soiled cloth, and the owners give it to a washerman, and he rubs it smooth with salt-earth, or lye or cowdung, and rinses it in pure clean water. Now, though that cloth be clean, utterly cleansed, yet there hangs about it, still unremoved, the smell of the salt-earth or lye or cowdung. The washerman returns it to the owners, and they lay it up in a sweet-scented coffer. Thus that smell…is now utterly removed….”

Now when this teaching was thus expounded the hearts of as many as sixty monks were utterly set free from the āsavas, and so was it also with the heart of the venerable Khemaka.

Thus have I heard: At one time the Lord was staying near Sāvatthī in the Jeta Grove in Anāthapiṇḍika's monastery. Now at that time the dear and beloved little only son of a certain householder had passed away. After he had passed away (the father) had no inclination for work or for food. Going constantly to the cemetery, he wailed: “Where are you, little only son? Where are you, little only son?” Then that householder approached the Lord; having approached, having greeted the Lord, he sat down at a respectful distance. The Lord spoke thus to that householder as he was sitting down at a respectful distance: “Do you not have, householder, controlling faculties for stilling your own mind? There is a change in your faculties.” “But how could there be no change in my faculties, Lord? For, Lord, my dear and beloved little only son has passed away….” “That is just it, householder. For, householder, grief, sorrow, suffering, lamentation and despair are born of affection, originate in affection.” “But for whom Lord, could this hold good in this way: 'Grief, sorrow, suffering, lamentation and despair are born of affection, originate in affection'? For, Lord, bliss and happiness are born of affection, originate in affection.” Then the householder, not rejoicing in what the Lord had said, repudiating it, rising from his seat, departed….

Now this, monks, is the ariyan truth about dukkha: Birth is dukkha, decay is dukkha, sickness is dukkha, death is dukkha; likewise sorrow and grief, woe, lamentation and despair. To be conjoined with things we dislike, to be separated from things we like that also is dukkha. Not to get what one wants −that also is dukkha. In a word, the five khandhas which are based on grasping are dukkha.

Now this, monks, is the ariyan truth about the arising of dukkha: It is that craving that leads back to birth, along with the lure and the lust that lingers longingly now here, now there: namely the craving for sensual pleasure, the craving to be born again, the craving for existence to end. Such, monks, is the ariyan truth about the arising of dukkha.

And this, monks, is the ariyan truth about the ceasing of dukkha: Verily it is the utter passionless cessation of, the giving up, the forsaking, the release from, the absence of longing for this craving.

Now this, monks, is the ariyan truth about the practice that leads to the ceasing of dukkha: Verily it is the ariyan eightfold way, namely: Right understanding, right thinking, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.

…in the ultimate sense the life-moment of living beings is extremely short, being only as much as the occurrence of a single conscious moment. Just as a chariot wheel, when it is rolling, rolls (that is, touches the ground) only on one point of (the circumference of) its tyre, and, when it is at rest, rests only on one point, so too, the life of living beings lasts only for a single conscious moment. When that consciousness has ceased, the being is said to have ceased….

…For a living body is just as foul as a dead one, only the characteristic of foulness is not evident in a living body, being hidden by adventitious embellishments.

And again, monks, a monk reflects on precisely this body itself, encased in skin and full of various impurities, from the soles of the feet up and from the crown of the head down, that: “There is connected with this body hair of the head, hair of the body, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, sinews, bones, marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, membranes, spleen, lungs, intestines, mesentary, stomach, excrement, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, serum, saliva, mucus, synovic fluid, urine.”

And again, monks, a monk reflects on this body according to how it is placed or disposed in respect of the elements, thinking: “In this body there is the element of extension, the element of cohesion, the element of heat, the element of motion.”

Then, when the BhagavāThe Buddha. had passed away, some monks, not yet freed from passion, lifted up their arms and wept; and some, flinging themselves on the ground, rolled from side to side and wept, lamenting: “Too soon has the Bhagavā come to his parinibbāna! Too soon has the Happy One come to his parinibbāna! Too soon has the Eye of the World vanished from sight!” But the monks who were freed from passion, mindful and clearly comprehending, reflected in this way: “Impermanent are all compounded things. How could this be otherwise?” And the venerable Anuruddha addressed the monks, saying: “Enough, friends! Do not grieve, do not lament! For has not the Bhagavā declared before, that with all that is dear and beloved there must be change, separation and severance? Of that which has arisen, has come into being, is compounded and subject to decay, how can one say: 'May it not come to dissolution' ?”

Now I am frail, Ānanda, old, aged, far gone in years. This is my eightieth year and my life is spent…Therefore, Ānanda, be an island to yourself, a refuge to yourself, seeking no external refuge; with Dhamma as your island, Dhamma as your refuge, seeking no other refuge. And how, Ānanda, is a monk an island to himself, a refuge to himself, seeking no external refuge; with Dhamma as his island, Dhamma as his refuge, seeking no other refuge? When he dwells contemplating the body in the body, earnestly, clearly comprehending, and mindfully, after having overcome desire and sorrow in regard to the world; he dwells contemplating feeling in the feelings, mind in the mind, and mental objects in the mental objects, earnestly, clearly comprehending, and mindfully, after having overcome desire and sorrow in regard to the world, then, truly, he is an island to himself, a refuge to himself, seeking no external refuge; having Dhamma as his island and refuge, seeking no other refuge….

Monks, (anyone) not knowing, not seeing eye as it really is, not knowing, not seeing material shapes…visual consciousness…impact on the eye as it really is, and not knowing, not seeing as it really is the feeling, whether pleasant, painful or neither painful nor pleasant, that arises conditioned by impact on the eye, is attached to the eye, is attached to material shapes, is attached to visual consciousness, is attached to impact on the eye; and as for that feeling, whether pleasant, painful or neither painful nor pleasant, that arises conditioned by impact on the eye −to that too is he attached. While he, observing the satisfaction, is attached, bound and infatuated, the five khandhas of grasping go on to future accumulation. And his craving, which is connected with again-becoming, accompanied by attachment and delight, finding its pleasure here and there, increases in him. And his physical anxieties increase, and mental anxieties increase, and physical torments increase, and mental torments increase, and physical fevers increase, and mental fevers increase. He experiences anguish of body and anguish of mind.

But (anyone), monks, knowing and seeing eye as it really is, knowing and seeing material shapes…. visual consciousness…. impact on the eye as it really is, and knowing, seeing as it really is the feeling, whether pleasant, painful or neither painful nor pleasant, that arises conditioned by impact on the eye, is not attached to the eye nor to material shapes nor to visual consciousness nor to impact on the eye; and that feeling, whether pleasant or painful or neither painful nor pleasant, that arises conditioned by impact on the eye −neither to that is he attached. While he, observing the peril, is not attached, bound or infatuated, the five khandhas of grasping go on to future diminution. And his craving which is connected with again-becoming, accompanied by attachment and delight, finding its pleasure here and there, decreases in him. And his physical anxieties decrease, and mental anxieties decrease, and bodily torments…. and mental torments…. and bodily fevers decrease, and mental fevers decrease. He experiences happiness of body and happiness of mind.

This is the simile of the gate-keeper: just as a gate-keeper does not examine people inside and outside the town, asking, “Who are you? Where have you come from? Where are you going? What have you got in your hand?” for those people are not his concern −but does examine each man as he arrives at the gate, so too, the incoming breaths that have gone inside and the outgoing breaths that have gone outside are not this bhikkhu's concern, but they are his concern each time they arrive at the (nostril) gate itself.

Then with mind collected…I directed the mind towards the knowledge of the destruction of the cankers. I knew as it really is: This is dukkha, this is the arising of dukkha, this is the stopping of dukkha, this is the course leading to the stopping of dukkha…In me, thus knowing, thus seeing, my mind was freed from the canker of sensual pleasures, my mind was freed from the canker of becoming, my mind was freed from the canker of false views, my mind was freed from the canker of ignorance. (To me) freed, came knowledge through the freedom; I knew: Destroyed is rebirth, lived is the Brahma-life, done is what was to be done, there is no beyond for this state of things. This was, brahmin, the third knowledge attained by me in the third watch of the night. Ignorance was dispelled, knowledge arose, darkness was dispelled, light arose….

…And when it was asked, “Have you seen the king, venerable sir?”, he asked: “But which is better for you, to seek the king or to seek yourself?” She replied, “Myself, venerable sir”. Then he likewise taught her the Dhamma as she sat there, so that, together with the thousand women attendants, she became established in the fruition of stream entry (sotāpanna), while the ministers reached the fruition of non-return (anāgāmī), and the king that of arahatship.

Monks, just as the dawn is the forerunner, the harbinger, of the arising of the sun, even so is right view the forerunner, the harbinger, of fully comprehending the four Ariyan truths. Of a monk who has right view it may be expected that he will understand as it really is: This is dukkha…this is the arising of dukkha…. this is the ceasing of dukkha…this is the way leading to the ceasing of dukkha. Wherefore, monks, an effort must be made to realise: This is dukkha, this is the arising of dukkha, this is the ceasing of dukkha, this is the way leading to the ceasing of dukkha.

…Just as if, monks, when a carpenter or carpenter's apprentice looks upon his adze-handle and sees thereon his thumb-mark and his finger-marks he does not thereby know: “So and so much of my adze-handle has been worn away today, so much yesterday, so much at other times.” But he knows the wearing away of it just by its wearing away.

Then the Exalted One preached a graduated discourse to Sīha, the general, that is to say: on alms-giving, the precepts and on heaven. He set forth the peril, the folly and the depravity of lusts and the blessedness of renunciation. And when the Exalted One knew that the heart of Sīha, the general, was clear, malleable, free from hindrance, uplifted and lucid, then he revealed that teaching of Dhamma which Buddhas alone have won, that is to say: Dukkha, its coming-to-be, its ending and the Way. Just as a clean cloth, free of all stain, will take dye perfectly; even so in Sīha, the general, seated there, there arose the spotless, stainless vision of Dhamma: that whatsoever be conditioned by coming-to-be all that is subject to ending….

What is the accomplishment of watchfulness? Herein, Tigerfoot (Vyagghapajja), whatsoever wealth a householder is in possession of, obtained by dint of effort, collected by strength of arm, by the sweat of his brow, justly acquired by right means −such he looks after well by guarding and watching so that kings would not seize it, thieves would not steal it, fire would not burn it, water would not carry it away, nor ill-disposed heirs would remove it. This is the accomplishment of watchfulness….

…Herein a clansman while experiencing both gain and loss in wealth, continues his business serenely, not unduly elated or depressed. He thinks: “Thus my income, after deducting loss, will stand (at so much) and my outgoings will not exceed my income”….

I will teach you, monks, a way that is helpful for nibbāna. Do you listen to it. And what, monks, is that way? Herein, monks, a monk regards the eye as impermanent. He regards objects, eye-consciousness, eye-contact as impermanent. That pleasant, unpleasant or neutral feeling experienced, which arises by eye-contact −that also he regards as impermanent. He regards the ear…the nose…the tongue…the body…He regards mind, mind-states, mind-consciousness, mind-contact as impermanent. The pleasant feeling or unpleasant feeling or neutral feeling…arising therefrom, he regards that also as impermanent. This, monks, is the way that is helpful for nibbāna.

At Sāvatthī was the occasion (for this discourse)… Then the venerable Migajāla came to see the Exalted One…Seated at one side he thus addressed the Exalted One: “ 'Dwelling alone! Dwelling alone!' Lord, is the saying. Pray, lord, to what extent is one a dweller alone, and to what extent is one a dweller with a mate?” “There are, Migajāla, objects cognizable by the eye, objects desirable, pleasant, delightful and dear, passion-fraught, inciting to lust. If a monk be enamoured of them, if he welcome them, if he persist in clinging to them, so enamoured, so persisting in clinging to them, there comes a lure upon him. Where there is a lure there is infatuation. Where there is infatuation there is bondage. Bound in the bondage of the lure, Migajāla, a monk is called 'dweller with a mate'…. A monk so dwelling, Migajāla, though he frequent jungle glades, hermitages and lodgings in the forest, remote from sound, remote from uproar, free from the breath of crowds, where one lodges far from human kind, places suitable for solitude −yet is he called 'dweller with a mate.' Why so? Craving is the mate he has not left behind. Therefore is he called 'dweller with a mate.' But, Migajāla, there are objects cognizable by the eye, desirable, pleasant, delightful and dear, passion-fraught, inciting to lust. If a monk be not enamoured of them…the lure fades away. Where there is no lure, there is no infatuation. Where there is no infatuation, there is no bondage. Freed from the bondage of the lure, Migajāla, a monk is called 'dweller alone'… Thus dwelling, Migajāla, a monk, though he dwell amid a village crowded with monks and nuns, with laymen and women lay-followers, with rājahs and royal ministers, with sectarians and their followers −yet is he called 'dweller alone'. Why so? Craving is the mate he has left behind. Therefore is he called 'dweller alone'.”

“ 'The righteous life, the righteous life!' is the saying, friend Ānanda. Pray, friend, what is the righteous life, and in what does it end?” “Well said, well said, friend Bhadda…Well, friend, it is just that ariyan eightfold way, namely: Right understanding, right thinking, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration. The destruction of lust, the destruction of hatred, the destruction of illusion, friend, that is what this righteous life ends in.”

Monks, these eight worldly conditions obsess the world; the world revolves around these eight worldly conditions. What eight? Gain and loss, fame and obscurity, blame and praise, contentment and pain…

…Monks, mastered by eight wrong states, Devadatta, with his mind out of control, became one doomed to suffer in hell, in perdition, dwelling there a kappaA “world-period” or aeon, an inconceivably long space of time. , irreprievable. By what eight? Mastered by gain…by loss…by fame…by obscurity…by honour…. by lack of honour…by evil intentions…by evil friendship, with his mind out of control, Devadatta became one doomed to suffer in hell, in perdition, dwelling there a kappa, irreprievable….

“For a long time, lord, I have been longing to set eyes on the Exalted one, but I had not strength enough in this body to come to see the Exalted One.” “Hush, Vakkali! What is there in seeing this vile body of mine? He who sees the Dhamma, Vakkali, he sees me; he who sees me, Vakkali, he sees the Dhamma. Verily, seeing the Dhamma, Vakkali, one sees me; seeing me, one sees the Dhamma. As to this, what do you think, Vakkali? Is body permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, lord.” “Is feeling…perception, the activities, is consciousness permanent or impermanent?” “ Impermanent, lord.” “Wherefore, Vakkali, he who thus sees…he knows '…for life in these conditions there is no hereafter'. “

Without fully knowing, without comprehending the all, monks, without detaching himself from, without abandoning the all, a man is incapable of extinguishing dukkha. Without fully knowing, without comprehending, without detaching himself from, without abandoning what (all) is a man incapable of extinguishing dukkha? It is by not fully knowing the eye…objects…eye-consciousness…. eye-contact…that pleasant or unpleasant or indifferent feeling…. the tongue…savours…the body…touches…the mind…. mind-objects….Also the ear, sound, the nose, odour, the contacts through the ear, the nose and the other doorways, and the feelings arising conditioned by those contacts are included in the “all”, as is explained in par 23, “The all”. that a man is incapable of extinguishing dukkha. This is the all, monks, without fully knowing which…a man is so incapable. But by fully knowing, by comprehending, by detaching himself from, by abandoning the all, one is capable of extinguishing dukkha.

“If a man's mind is sorrowless, stainless, and secure, and does not shake when touched by worldly vicissitudes −this is the Highest Blessing.” Those who are arahats have a mind unruffled by worldly conditions, they are free from sorrow, free from defilements. Nothing can disturb the arahat any more. The sutta continues: “Those who are thus acting are everywhere unconquered, attain happiness everywhere −to them these are the Highest Blessings.”