English
'it is' is its reckoning, 'it is' is its designation, 'it is' is its declaration; not its reckoning 'it was', not its reckoning 'it will be'. These, monks, are the three ways of expression, ways of designation, ways of declaration, unmixed, unmixed in the past, not mixed now, not mixed in the future, not criticized by recluses, brahmins, or the wise. "Even those, monks, who were Ukkalā, Vassabhaññā, proponents of no cause, no action, no existence, even they did not consider these three ways of expression, ways of designation, ways of declaration to be blameworthy or objectionable. For what reason? For fear of blame, anger, and reproach." Is there a discourse? Yes. Therefore, it should not be said – "the past exists, the future exists." Does the past exist? Yes. Did not Venerable Phagguna say this to the Blessed One – "Is there, indeed, O Bhante, an eye by which eye, past Buddhas, who have attained final Nibbāna, whose proliferation is cut off, whose entanglement is cut off, whose cycle is exhausted, who have transcended all suffering, could be made known, could be pointed out? Is there, indeed, O Bhante, a tongue... Is there, indeed, O Bhante, a mind by which mind, past Buddhas, who have attained final Nibbāna, whose proliferation is cut off, whose entanglement is cut off, whose cycle is exhausted, who have transcended all suffering, could be made known, could be pointed out?" "There is not, O Phagguna, an eye by which eye, past Buddhas, who have attained final Nibbāna, whose proliferation is cut off, whose entanglement is cut off, whose cycle is exhausted, who have transcended all suffering, could be made known, could be pointed out. There is not, O Phagguna, a tongue... There is not, O Phagguna, a mind by which mind, past Buddhas, who have attained final Nibbāna, whose proliferation is cut off, whose entanglement is cut off, whose cycle is exhausted, who have transcended all suffering, could be made known, could be pointed out." Is there such a discourse? Yes. Therefore, it should not be said – "the past exists." Does the past exist? Yes. Did not Venerable Nandaka say this – "Formerly there was greed; that was unwholesome. Now it does not exist; this is wholesome. Formerly there was hatred... Formerly there was delusion; that was unwholesome. Now it does not exist; this is wholesome." Is there such a discourse? Yes. Therefore, it should not be said – "the past exists." Should it not be said – "the future exists"? Yes. Did not the Blessed One say – "If, monks, in edible food there is passion, there is delight, there is craving; consciousness becomes established there, it grows. Where consciousness is established and grows, there is a descent of name-and-form. Where there is a descent of name-and-form, there is growth of volitional formations. Where there is growth of volitional formations, there is future rebirth. Where There is in the future rebirth, there is there in the future birth, old age, death. Where there is in the future birth, old age, death, sorrowful is that, monks, with defilement, with despair, I say. "If in contact, monks, as nutriment... if in mental volition, monks, as nutriment... if in consciousness, monks, as nutriment, there is passion, there is delight... with defilement, with despair, I say." Is there such a discourse? Yes. Then indeed, the future exists. Does the future exist? Yes. Has it not been said by the Blessed One – "If in edible food, monks, there is no passion, no delight, no craving; consciousness is not established there, not grown. Where consciousness is not established, not grown, there is no descent of name-and-form there. Where there is no descent of name-and-form, there is no growth of formations there. Where there is no growth of formations, there is no future rebirth there. Where there is no future rebirth, there is no future birth, old age, death there. Where there is no future birth, old age, death, sorrowless is that, monks, stainless, without despair, I say. "If in contact, monks, as nutriment... if in mental volition, monks, as nutriment... if in consciousness, monks, as nutriment, there is no passion, no delight... stainless, without despair, I say." Is there such a discourse? Yes. Then indeed, it should not be said – "the future exists." The discussion on "All Exists" is concluded.