English
"whatever is of the nature to arise, all that is of the nature to cease." having known, understood, weighed, determined, clarified, made clear, that it is the Dhamma. Unattached means two attachments— attachment of craving and attachment of views… this is attachment of craving… this is attachment of views. Having abandoned attachment of craving, having relinquished attachment of views, unattached to the eye, unattached to the ear, unattached to the nose, unattached to the tongue, unattached to the body, unattached to the mind, to forms… sounds… odors… tastes… tactile objects… family… group… dwelling… to things seen, heard, sensed, and cognized, unattached, unadhering, unapproaching, unobsessed, uncommitted, gone forth, released, liberated, disjoined, he dwells with a mind made boundless— having known the Dhamma, unattached. For existence or non-existence, craving in whom is not found. Craving means craving for forms, craving for sounds, craving for odors, craving for tastes, craving for tactile objects, craving for mental objects. In whom means in the Arahant, whose defilements are destroyed. For existence means for the view of existence, for non-existence means for the view of non-existence; for existence means for the eternalist view, for non-existence means for the annihilationist view; for existence means for repeated existence, repeated destination, repeated rebirth, repeated conception, repeated manifestation of self-existence. Craving in whom is not, does not exist, is not found, is not perceived, is abandoned, uprooted, calmed, tranquilized, incapable of future arising, burned by the fire of knowledge— for existence or non-existence, craving in whom is not found. Therefore the Blessed One said: “In whom there is no attachment, having known the Dhamma, unattached; For existence or non-existence, craving in whom is not found.” 92. Him I call tranquil, who is unconcerned with sensual pleasures; Bonds in him are not found, he has crossed over entanglement. Him I call tranquil. Tranquil, calmed, extinguished, pacified. Him I call, him I say, him I declare, him I explain, him I designate— him I call tranquil. Unconcerned with sensual pleasures. Sensual pleasures means, in summary, two kinds of sensual pleasures— sensual objects and defilement-sensual pleasures… ...these are called material desires... ...these are called defilement desires. Having fully understood material desires, having abandoned, given up, removed, made an end of, brought to naught defilement desires, he is unconcerned with desires, free from desire, rejected desire, vomited desire, released from desire, abandoned desire, renounced desire. He is dispassionate towards desires, free from passion, rejected passion, vomited passion, released from passion, abandoned passion, renounced passion, unthirsting, cooled, become cool, experiencing happiness, he dwells with a Brahma-like self – unconcerned with desires. "For him there are no ties." Ties are the four ties: the bodily tie of covetousness, the bodily tie of ill-will, the bodily tie of adherence to rites and rituals, the bodily tie of dogmatic adherence to "this is the truth." Attachment to one's own view is the bodily tie of covetousness. Aversion, discontent towards others' doctrines is the bodily tie of ill-will. Clinging to one's own virtue or vow or rites and rituals is the bodily tie of adherence to rites and rituals. One's own view, dogmatic adherence to "this is the truth," is the bodily tie of dogmatic adherence to "this is the truth." "For him" means for the Arahant, whose taints are destroyed. "For him there are no ties." For him, ties do not exist, are not present, are not found, are not perceived. They are abandoned, uprooted, calmed, tranquilized, incapable of future arising, burnt by the fire of knowledge – for him there are no ties. "He has crossed over the entanglement." Entanglement is called craving. That which is lust, passion... ...covetousness, greed, the root of unwholesome things. Why is it called entanglement? Because it spreads, it is entanglement. Because it is extensive, it is entanglement. Because it is diffused, it is entanglement. Because it is uneven, it is entanglement. Because it poisons, it is entanglement. Because it disunites, it is entanglement. Because it deceives, it is entanglement. Because its root is poison, it is entanglement. Because its fruit is poison, it is entanglement. Because its enjoyment is poison, it is entanglement. Or because that craving is extensive, it spreads and diffuses among forms... sounds... smells... tastes... tangibles... families... groups... dwellings... ...and among things seen, heard, sensed, and cognized – therefore it is entanglement. "He has crossed over the entanglement." He has crossed over, gone beyond, traversed, overcome this entanglement of craving. He went beyond, transcended— he crossed over attachment. Therefore, the Blessed One said: “Him I call tranquil, who has no longing for sensual pleasures; No ties exist for him, he crossed over attachment.” 93. No sons or cattle for him, no fields or property are found; Neither self nor non-self, are perceived in him. “No sons or cattle for him, no fields or property are found.” This is a negation. “For him” means for the Arahant, whose defilements are destroyed. “Sons” means four kinds of sons: a son born of oneself, a son born of the field, an adopted son, a disciple son. “Cattle” means goats, sheep, chickens, pigs, elephants, cows, horses, mares. “Fields” means rice fields, paddy fields, mung bean fields, black gram fields, barley fields, wheat fields, sesame fields. “Property” means house property, granary property, front property, back property, park property, monastery property. “No sons or cattle for him, no fields or property are found.” For him, there is no possession of sons, no possession of cattle, no possession of fields, no possession of property; they do not exist, are not present, are not perceived. They are abandoned, uprooted, calmed, tranquilized, incapable of arising again, burnt by the fire of knowledge. Thus: “No sons or cattle for him, no fields or property are found.” “Neither self nor non-self, are perceived in him.” “Self” means the view of self; “non-self” means the annihilation view. There is nothing to be grasped as self, there is nothing to be released as non-self. For whom there is nothing to be grasped, for him there is nothing to be released. For whom there is nothing to be released, for him there is nothing to be grasped. The Arahant has transcended grasping and releasing, has gone beyond growth and decline. He has completed his dwelling, fulfilled his practice... (etc.)... the cycle of birth and death, there is no rebirth for him. Thus: “Neither self nor non-self, are perceived in him.” Therefore, the Blessed One said: “No sons or cattle for him, no fields or property are found; Neither self nor non-self, are perceived in him.” 94. By which ordinary people would name him, and also ascetics and brahmins; That for him He has nothing put forward, therefore he does not waver in disputes. By which ordinary people might speak of him, and also recluses and brahmins. "Ordinary people" means: because they generate various defilements, because they have various uneradicated views of individuality, because they look to the faces of various teachers, because they have not risen from all destinations, because they accumulate various diverse volitional formations, because they are carried away by various diverse floods, because they are tormented by various diverse torments, because they are burnt by various diverse fevers, because they are attached, greedy, infatuated, deluded, immersed, stuck, clinging, bound to the five strands of sensual pleasure, because they are covered, veiled, obscured, hidden, concealed, obstructed by the five hindrances – these are ordinary people. "Recluses" are those who, outside of this (teaching), have gone forth into homelessness, have entered the homeless life. "Brahmins" are those who are "bho"-speakers. By which ordinary people might speak of him, and also recluses and brahmins. Ordinary people, by which they might speak of him with lust, by which with hatred, by which with delusion, by which with conceit, by which with wrong view, by which with restlessness, by which with doubt, by which with underlying tendencies, saying "lustful" or "hateful" or "deluded" or "bound" or "grasped" or "scattered" or "unsettled" or "fixed" – those volitional formations are abandoned. Because of the abandonment of volitional formations, by which destination they might speak of him – "as a hell-being" or "as an animal" or "as a hungry ghost" or "as a human" or "as a deva" or "as having form" or "as formless" or "as percipient" or "as non-percipient" or "as neither percipient nor non-percipient". That cause does not exist, that condition does not exist, that reason does not exist, by which they might speak of him, might tell of him, might say of him, might explain him, might designate him – by which ordinary people might speak of him, and also recluses and brahmins. That is his not having anything put forward. "His" means: of the Arahant, whose defilements are destroyed. Purek There are two kinds of fore-attachments: fore-attachment of craving, and fore-attachment of views. ... This is the fore-attachment of craving. ... This is the fore-attachment of views. For him, the fore-attachment of craving is abandoned, the fore-attachment of views is relinquished. Because the fore-attachment of craving is abandoned, and the fore-attachment of views is relinquished, he does not act by putting craving or views in front. He is not craving-bannered, not craving-emblemed, not craving-dominated. He is not view-bannered, not view-emblemed, not view-dominated. He does not act surrounded by craving or by views. That is his non-fore-attachment. Therefore, he does not waver in disputes.