Samyutta Nikaya Masthead


[Site Map]  [Home]  [Sutta Indexes]  [Glossology]  [Site Sub-Sections]

The Pali is transliterated as IAST Unicode (āīūṃṅñṭḍṇḷ). Alternatives:
[ ASCII (aiumnntdnl) | Mobile (āīūŋńñţđņļ) | Velthuis (aaiiuu.m'n~n.t.d.n.l) ]

 

Saɱyutta Nikāya
II. Nidāna Vagga
XII. Nidāna Saɱyutta
III. Dasabalā Vagga

The Book of the Kindred Sayings
Part II. The Book Called the Nidāna-Vagga
Containing Kindred sayings on Cause
and Other Subjects
XII. The Kindred Sayings on Cause
III. The 'Ten Powers' Suttas

Sutta 25

Bhūmija Suttaṃ

Bhūmija

Translated by Mrs. Rhys Davids
Assisted by F. L. Woodward

Originally Published by
The Pali Text Society
Public Domain

 


[37] [30]

[1][than][bodh] Thus have I heard:

The Exalted One was once staying near Sāvatthī.

Now the venerable Bhūmija,
arising at eventide from solitary meditation,
came into the presence of the venerable Sāriputta,
and exchanging greetings with him
and compliments of friendship and courtesy
sat down at one side,
and so seated spoke thus to him:

"There are, friend Sāriputta,
certain recluses and brahmins,
believers in karma,
who declare that ill is self-wrought;
certain others[1] of them
declare ill is wrought by some one other [than one's self];
certain others declare that ill is wrought by both,
and certain others
that ill is wrought by neither,
but happens by chance.

[31] Herein, friend Sāriputta, the Exalted One, what has he to tell us?

And how, if we were answering,
should we be repeating his views correctly
and would not be misrepresenting him
by what is not correct,
but would be answering by a doctrine
in conformity with his doctrine,
and one whereby no one who is of his doctrine,
a follower of his views,
would render himself open to blame?

"Friend, the Exalted One has said
that ill comes to pass through a cause.

Because of what?

Because of contact.

He who so spoke would be repeating the views of the Exalted One,
and would not be misrepresenting him
by what is not correct,
but would be answering by a doctrine
in conformity with his doctrine,
and one whereby no one who is of his doctrine,
a follower of his views,
would render himself open to blame.

In the case of those recluses and brahmins, friend,
who believing in karma
declare that ill has been wrought by one's own self,
this ill was caused by contact.

In the case of those of them
who declare that ill has been wrought by a different self,
this ill too was caused by contact.

In the case of those of them
who declare that ill has been wrought by both one's own self
and by a different self,
this ill too was caused by contact.

In the case also of those
who declare that ill has been wrought by neither,
but has happened by chance,
this ill too was caused by contact.

[29] In no one of these four views
of those who believe in karma
is it possible to show
that those recluses and brahmins
will experience feeling without contact."

 


 

Now the venerable Ānanda was listening
to Sāriputta's talk with the venerable Bhūmija.

And the venerable Ānanda,
came into the presence of the Exalted One,
saluted him,
sat down at one side,
and so seated told the Exalted One what that talk had been,
saying:

Now the venerable Bhūmija,
arising at eventide from solitary meditation,
came into the presence of the venerable Sāriputta,
and exchanging greetings with him
and compliments of friendship and courtesy
sat down at one side,
and so seated spoke thus to him:

"There are, friend Sāriputta,
certain recluses and brahmins,
believers in karma,
who declare that ill is self-wrought;
certain others of them
declare ill is wrought by some one other [than one's self];
certain others declare that ill is wrought by both,
and certain others
that ill is wrought by neither,
but happens by chance.

Herein, friend Sāriputta, the Exalted One, what has he to tell us?

And how, if we were answering,
should we be repeating his views correctly
and would not be misrepresenting him
by what is not correct,
but would be answering by a doctrine
in conformity with his doctrine,
and one whereby no one who is of his doctrine,
a follower of his views,
would render himself open to blame?

"Friend, the Exalted One has said
that ill comes to pass through a cause.

Because of what?

Because of contact.

He who so spoke would be repeating the views of the Exalted One,
and would not be misrepresenting him
by what is not correct,
but would be answering by a doctrine
in conformity with his doctrine,
and one whereby no one who is of his doctrine,
a follower of his views,
would render himself open to blame.

In the case of those recluses and brahmins, friend,
who believing in karma
declare that ill has been wrought by one's own self,
this ill was caused by contact.

In the case of those of them
who declare that ill has been wrought by a different self,
this ill too was caused by contact.

In the case of those of them
who declare that ill has been wrought by both one's own self
and by a different self,
this ill too was caused by contact.

In the case also of those
who declare that ill has been wrought by neither,
but has happened by chance,
this ill too was caused by contact.

In no one of these four views
of those who believe in karma
is it possible to show
that those recluses and brahmins
will experience feeling without contact."

 


 

"Well done, well done, Ānanda!

Sāriputta so answering
would be answering rightly.

I have said that ill happens through a cause.

Because of what?

Because of contact.

So saying
one would be a repeater of my sayings;
he would not be misrepresenting me
by what is not correct,
and no one who is of my doctrine,
a follower of my views,
would thereby render himself open to blame.

In the case of those recluses and brahmins, Ānanda,
who believing in karma
declare that ill has been wrought by one's own self,
this ill was caused by contact.

In the case of those of them
who declare that ill has been wrought by a different self,
this ill too was caused by contact.

In the case of those of them
who declare that ill has been wrought by both one's own self
and by a different self,
this ill too was caused by contact.

In the case also of those
who declare that ill has been wrought by neither,
but has happened by chance,
this ill too was caused by contact.

In no one of these four cases
is it possible to show
that those recluses and brahmins
who believe in karma
will experience ill without contact.

 


 

13.[ed1] Where there have been deeds, Ānanda,
personal weal and woe arise
in consequence of the will there was in the deeds.

Where there has been speech,
personal weal and woe arise
in consequence of the will there was in the speech.

Where there has been thought,
personal weal and woe arise
in consequence of the will there was in the thought.

Either we of ourselves, Ānanda,
plan those planned deeds conditioned by ignorance,
whence so caused
arises personal weal and woe,
or others plan those planned deeds
that we do conditioned by ignorance,
whence so conditioned
arises personal weal and woe.

Either they are done deliberately,
or we do them unwittingly.[2]

Thence both ways arises personal weal and woe.

Either we of ourselves, Ānanda,
plan planned speech conditioned by ignorance,
whence so caused
arises personal weal and woe,
or others plan that planned speech
that we do conditioned by ignorance,
whence so conditioned
arises personal weal and woe.

Either that planned speech is done deliberately,
or that planned speech is done unwittingly.

Thence both ways arises personal weal and woe.

Either we of ourselves, Ānanda,
plan planned thought conditioned by ignorance,
whence so caused
arises personal weal and woe,
or others plan that planned thought
that we do conditioned by ignorance,
whence so conditioned
arises personal weal and woe.

Either that planned thought is done deliberately,
or that planned thought is done unwittingly.

Thence both ways arises personal weal and woe.|| ||

In these six cases[3] ignorance is followed after.

[32] But from the utter fading away and cessation of ignorance,
Ānanda,
those deeds are not
whence so conditioned
arises personal weal and woe;

that speech is not
whence so conditioned
arises personal weal and woe;

that thought is not
whence so conditioned
arises personal weal and woe.

As field they are not;
as base they are not;
as wherewithal they are not;
as occasion[4] they are not,
that so conditioned there might arise personal weal and woe.

 


[1] In this Sutta the wording at first follows the preceding Sutta verbatim. 'Another,' here, is apparently not the 'other' of ĪĪ 17, 18. Cf. p. 31.

[2] Not knowing the consequences, like children imitating their parents' actions in religious services, etc. Their actions are instigated (sasankhārena). So Comy. Cf. Bud. Pay. Eth. 34, n. 1, and Expositor, 207.

[3] 3x2, viz. deed, word, thought; deliberate, unwitting.

[4] The Comy. elucidates these three terms thus: as field for growth, ... as base for building, ... as wherewithal for a cause, as occasion for a reason.

 


[ed1] The Pali text in some versions ends this section with 'avijjāpaccayā va' and in some versions has this phrase as beginning the next section. Woodward, in AN 4.171 has opted to use it both at the end of this section and the beginning of the next. Mrs. Rhys Davids has put it at the beginning of the next section per the PTS text. Put at the beginning of the second section, it should also be at the beginning of the next two sections which is how I have reconstructed it here. Bhk. Thanissaro abridges, but appears to indicate that he would follow this plan. Bhk. Bodhi has it only at the end of the first section. It makes bad sense in this position. The idea described there is that it is intent (Bhk. Bodhi's 'volition') that is the basis for the arising of pleasant or painful consequences of deeds. Intent can be ignorant or not, ignorance is not an alternative to intent. The BJT Pali is a complete mess.

 


 

References:

See also: AN 4.171


Contact:
E-mail
Copyright Statement   Webmaster's Page