SN 35-44 The Group of Connected Discourses Beginning With the Six Sense Fields – Saḷāyatanavaggasaṁyutta > SN 44 Connected Discourses on the Undeclared – Abyākatasaṁyutta > SN 44.10 With Ānanda

Linked Discourses 44.10 – Saṁyutta Nikāya 44.10

1. The Undeclared Points – 1. Abyākatavagga

SN 44.10 With Ānanda – Ānandasutta

Then the wanderer Vacchagotta went up to the Buddha and exchanged greetings with him.

Atha kho vacchagotto paribbājako yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā bhagavatā saddhiṁ sammodi.

When the greetings and polite conversation were over, he sat down to one side and said to the Buddha:

Sammodanīyaṁ kathaṁ sāraṇīyaṁ vītisāretvā ekamantaṁ nisīdi. Ekamantaṁ nisinno kho vacchagotto paribbājako bhagavantaṁ etadavoca:

“Master Gotama, does the self survive?”

“kiṁ nu kho, bho gotama, atthattā”ti?

But when he said this, the Buddha kept silent.

Evaṁ vutte, bhagavā tuṇhī ahosi.

“Then does the self not survive?”

“Kiṁ pana, bho gotama, natthattā”ti?

But for a second time the Buddha kept silent.

Dutiyampi kho bhagavā tuṇhī ahosi.

Then the wanderer Vacchagotta got up from his seat and left.

Atha kho vacchagotto paribbājako uṭṭhāyāsanā pakkāmi.

And then, not long after Vacchagotta had left, Venerable Ānanda said to the Buddha:

Atha kho āyasmā ānando acirapakkante vacchagotte paribbājake bhagavantaṁ etadavoca:

“Sir, why didn’t you answer Vacchagotta’s question?”

“kiṁ nu kho, bhante, bhagavā vacchagottassa paribbājakassa pañhaṁ puṭṭho na byākāsī”ti?

“Ānanda, when Vacchagotta asked me whether the self survives, if I had answered that ‘the self survives’ I would have been siding with the ascetics and brahmins who are eternalists.

“Ahañcānanda, vacchagottassa paribbājakassa ‘atthattā’ti puṭṭho samāno ‘atthattā’ti byākareyyaṁ, ye te, ānanda, samaṇabrāhmaṇā sassatavādā tesametaṁ saddhiṁ abhavissa.

When Vacchagotta asked me whether the self does not survive, if I had answered that ‘the self does not survive’ I would have been siding with the ascetics and brahmins who are annihilationists.

Ahañcānanda, vacchagottassa paribbājakassa ‘natthattā’ti puṭṭho samāno ‘natthattā’ti byākareyyaṁ, ye te, ānanda, samaṇabrāhmaṇā ucchedavādā tesametaṁ saddhiṁ abhavissa.

When Vacchagotta asked me whether the self survives, if I had answered that ‘the self survives’ would that have helped give rise to the knowledge that

Ahañcānanda, vacchagottassa paribbājakassa ‘atthattā’ti puṭṭho samāno ‘atthattā’ti byākareyyaṁ, api nu me taṁ, ānanda, anulomaṁ abhavissa ñāṇassa uppādāya:

all things are not-self?”

‘sabbe dhammā anattā’”ti?

“No, sir.”

“No hetaṁ, bhante”.

“When Vacchagotta asked me whether the self does not survive, if I had answered that ‘the self does not survive’, Vacchagotta—who is already confused—would have got even more confused, thinking:

“Ahañcānanda, vacchagottassa paribbājakassa ‘natthattā’ti puṭṭho samāno ‘natthattā’ti byākareyyaṁ, sammūḷhassa, ānanda, vacchagottassa paribbājakassa bhiyyo sammohāya abhavissa:

‘It seems that the self that I once had no longer survives.’”

‘ahuvā me nūna pubbe attā, so etarahi natthī’”ti.