English
the five lower fetters are abandoned, the five higher fetters are not abandoned, having passed away from here, having arisen there, there is the attainment of fruit; then surely it should not be said – "There is no holy life among the devas." For the non-returner person, the five lower fetters are abandoned, the five higher fetters are not abandoned. Having passed away from here, having arisen there, where is the laying down of the burden? Where is the full understanding of suffering? Where is the abandonment of defilements? Where is the realization of cessation? Where is the unshakable penetration? Right there. If for the non-returner person, the five lower fetters are abandoned, the five higher fetters are not abandoned, having passed away from here, having arisen there, there is the unshakable penetration; then surely it should not be said – "There is no holy life among the devas." For the non-returner person, the five lower fetters are abandoned, the five higher fetters are not abandoned. Having passed away from here, having arisen there, there is the attainment of fruit, there is the laying down of the burden, there is the full understanding of suffering, there is the abandonment of defilements, there is the realization of cessation, there is the unshakable penetration; for what reason do you say – "There is no holy life among the devas"? Indeed, the non-returner person, by the path developed here, realizes the fruit there. Discourse on the Holy Life of Connection Does the non-returner person, by the path developed here, realize the fruit there? Yes. Yes. Does a stream-enterer person realize the fruit here by the path developed there? It should not be said so. Does a non-returner person realize the fruit there by the path developed here? Yes. Does a once-returner person, a person who attains Nibbāna here, realize the fruit here by the path developed there? It should not be said so. Does a stream-enterer person realize the fruit here by the path developed here? Yes. Does a non-returner person realize the fruit there by the path developed there? It should not be said so. Does a once-returner person, a person who attains Nibbāna here, realize the fruit here by the path developed here? Yes. Does a non-returner person realize the fruit there by the path developed there? It should not be said so... For a person who has finished by abandoning here, is the path developed and are defilements not abandoned? Yes. For a person entered upon the realization of the fruit of stream-entry, is the path developed and are defilements not abandoned? It should not be said so... For a person who has finished by abandoning here, is the path developed and are defilements not abandoned? Yes. For a person entered upon the realization of the fruit of once-return... ...for a person entered upon the realization of Arahantship, is the path developed and are defilements not abandoned? It should not be said so... For a person entered upon the realization of the fruit of stream-entry, is the path developed and are defilements abandoned simultaneously? Yes. For a person who has finished by abandoning here, is the path developed and are defilements abandoned simultaneously? It should not be said so. For a person entered upon the realization of the fruit of once-return... ...for a person entered upon the realization of Arahantship, is the path developed and are defilements abandoned simultaneously? Yes. For a person who has finished by abandoning here, simultaneously... Is this path developed, and are defilements abandoned? It should not be said thus. Is a non-returner person, who has done what is to be done, whose development is complete, reborn there? Yes. Is an Arahant reborn? It should not be said thus. Is an Arahant reborn? Yes. Is there rebirth for an Arahant? It should not be said thus. Is there rebirth for an Arahant? Yes. Does an Arahant go from existence to existence, go from destination to destination, go from wandering to wandering, go from rebirth to rebirth? It should not be said thus. Is a non-returner person, who has done what is to be done, whose development is complete, whose burden is not laid down, reborn there? Yes. Does he again develop the path for laying down the burden? It should not be said thus. Is a non-returner person, who has done what is to be done, whose development is complete, whose suffering is not fully understood, whose defilements are not abandoned, whose cessation is not realized, whose unshakable penetration is not attained, reborn there? Yes. Does he again develop the path for the penetration of the unshakable? It should not be said thus. Is a non-returner person, who has done what is to be done, whose development is complete, whose burden is not laid down, reborn there, and does not again develop the path for laying down the burden? Yes. And does he attain final Nibbāna there with the burden not laid down? It should not be said thus. Is a non-returner person, who has done what is to be done, whose development is complete, whose suffering is not fully understood, whose defilements are not abandoned, whose cessation is not realized, whose unshakable penetration is not attained, reborn there, and does not again develop the path for the penetration of the unshakable? Yes. And does he attain final Nibbāna there with the unshakable penetration not attained? It should not be said thus. Just as a deer pierced by an arrow goes far and dies, even so, a non-returner person by the path developed here realizes the fruit there. Just as a deer pierced by an arrow goes far and dies with the arrow still in it, even so, a non-returner person by the path developed here attains final Nibbāna there with the arrow still in him? It should not be said thus... The discourse on the holy life is concluded. 3. The discourse on the gradual removal 274. Does one abandon defilements gradually, bit by bit? Yes. Question. A person entered on the path to realizing the fruit of stream-entry, by seeing suffering, what does he abandon? He abandons personality view, doubt, adherence to rites and rituals, and associated defilements, in part. Is he in part a stream-enterer, in part not a stream-enterer? Is he in part one who has attained, gained, realized, and dwells having entered the fruit of stream-entry, dwells having touched it with the body, and in part dwells not having touched it with the body? Is he in part one who will be reborn at most seven times, a family-to-family goer, a one-seeder, endowed with unwavering faith in the Buddha, in the Dhamma, in the Saṅgha, endowed with the virtues dear to the noble ones, and in part not endowed with the virtues dear to the noble ones? It should not be said thus... By seeing the origin, what does he abandon? He abandons personality view, doubt, adherence to rites and rituals, and associated defilements, in part. Is he in part a stream-enterer, in part not a stream-enterer... in part endowed with the virtues dear to the noble ones, and in part not endowed with the virtues dear to the noble ones? It should not be said thus... By seeing the cessation, what does he abandon? He abandons doubt, adherence to rites and rituals, and associated defilements, in part. Is he in part a stream-enterer, in part not a stream-enterer... in part endowed with the virtues dear to the noble ones, and in part not endowed with the virtues dear to the noble ones? It should not be said thus... By seeing the path, what does he abandon? He abandons adherence to rites and rituals, and associated defilements. Is he in part a stream-enterer, in part not a stream-enterer? Is he in part one who has attained, gained, realized, and dwells having entered the fruit of stream-entry, dwells having touched it with the body, and in part dwells not having touched it with the body? Is he in part one who will be reborn at most seven times, a family-to-family goer, a one-seeder, endowed with unwavering faith in the Buddha, in the Dhamma, in the Saṅgha, endowed with the virtues dear to the noble ones, and in part not endowed with the virtues dear to the noble ones? No. It should be said thus... ...and so on... 275. A person practicing for the realization of the Once-returner fruit, by the vision of suffering, what does he abandon? He abandons gross sensual desire, gross ill-will, and the defilements associated with them in part. Is he a Once-returner in part? Not a Once-returner in part? Has he attained, acquired, realized, entered upon the fruit of Once-returning in part, and dwells therein? Does he dwell having touched it with the body? Not having touched it with the body in part? It should not be said thus... ...and so on... By the vision of origin, what does he abandon? He abandons gross sensual desire, gross ill-will, and the defilements associated with them in part. Is he a Once-returner in part? Not a Once-returner in part? Has he attained, acquired, realized, entered upon the fruit of Once-returning in part, and dwells therein? Does he dwell having touched it with the body? Not having touched it with the body in part? It should not be said thus... ...and so on... By the vision of cessation, what does he abandon? He abandons gross ill-will, and the defilements associated with it in part. Is he a Once-returner in part? Not a Once-returner in part? Has he attained, acquired, realized, entered upon the fruit of Once-returning in part, and dwells therein? Does he dwell having touched it with the body? Not having touched it with the body in part? It should not be said thus... ...and so on... By the vision of the path, what does he abandon? He abandons gross ill-will, and the defilements associated with it. Is he a Once-returner in part? Not a Once-returner in part? Has he attained, acquired, realized, entered upon the fruit of Once-returning in part, and dwells therein? Does he dwell having touched it with the body? Not having touched it with the body in part?