English
is there no intoxicating drinks and drugs, a basis for heedlessness, there? Yes. Is there among humans abstinence from intoxicating drinks and drugs, a basis for heedlessness, is there no intoxicating drinks and drugs, a basis for heedlessness, there? It should not be said thus... Is there no restraint among devas? Yes. Are all devas killers of living beings, takers of what is not given, wrongdoers in sensual pleasures, liars, indulging in intoxicating drinks and drugs, a basis for heedlessness? It should not be said thus... Then indeed, there is restraint among devas. The discourse on restraint is concluded. 3. The Third Chapter (31) 11. Discourse on Non-percipient Beings 381. Among non-percipient beings, is there perception? Yes. Is it a state of perception, a destination of perception, an abode of percipient beings, a cycle of perception, a birth-place of perception, the obtaining of a percipient state of being? It should not be said thus... Is it not a state of non-perception, a destination of non-perception, an abode of non-percipient beings, a cycle of non-perception, a birth-place of non-perception, the obtaining of a non-percipient state of being? Yes. If indeed it is a state of non-perception, a destination of non-perception, an abode of non-percipient beings, a cycle of non-perception, a birth-place of non-perception, the obtaining of a non-percipient state of being, then indeed it should not be said: "Among non-percipient beings, there is perception." Among non-percipient beings, is there perception? Yes. Is it a five-constituent existence, a destination, an abode of beings, a cycle of existence, a birth-place, the obtaining of a state of being? It should not be said thus... Is it not a one-constituent existence, a destination, an abode of beings, Is it rebirth, origin, acquisition of self-existence? Yes. If the one-constituent existence, destination, abode of beings, cycle of rebirths, origin, acquisition of self-existence (is so), then it should not be said – "There is perception in non-percipient beings." Is there perception in non-percipient beings? Yes. Does it perform the function of perception by that perception? It should not be said so. 382. There is perception in humans, and is that a perceptual existence, perceptual destination, perceptual abode of beings, perceptual cycle of rebirths, perceptual origin, perceptual acquisition of self-existence? Yes. There is perception in non-percipient beings, and is that a perceptual existence, perceptual destination, abode of beings, cycle of rebirths, origin, acquisition of self-existence? It should not be said so. There is perception in humans, and is that a five-constituent existence, destination, abode of beings, cycle of rebirths, origin, acquisition of self-existence? Yes. There is perception in non-percipient beings, and is that a five-constituent existence, destination, abode of beings, cycle of rebirths, origin, acquisition of self-existence? It should not be said so. There is perception in humans, does it perform the function of perception by that perception? Yes. There is perception in non-percipient beings, does it perform the function of perception by that perception? It should not be said so. There is perception in non-percipient beings, and is that a non-perceptual existence, non-perceptual destination, non-perceptual abode of beings, non-perceptual cycle of rebirths, non-perceptual origin, non-perceptual acquisition of self-existence? Yes. There is perception in humans, and is that a non-perceptual existence, non-perceptual destination, non-perceptual abode of beings, non-perceptual cycle of rebirths, non-perceptual origin, non-perceptual acquisition of self-existence? It should not be said so. There is perception in non-percipient beings, and is that a one-constituent existence, destination, abode of beings, cycle of rebirths, origin, acquisition of self-existence? Yes. There is perception in humans, and is that a one-constituent existence, destination, abode of beings, cycle of rebirths, origin, acquisition of self-existence? It should not be said so. There is perception in non-percipient beings, and does it not perform the function of perception by that perception? Yes. There is perception in humans, and does it not perform the function of perception by that perception? It should not be said so. 383. Should it not be said – "There is perception in non-percipient beings"? Yes. Has it not been said by the Blessed One A – "Monks, there are gods called non-percipient beings; and when perception arises, those gods pass away from that body." Is there such a Sutta? Yes. Then, among non-percipient beings, is there perception? Among non-percipient beings, is there perception? At some times there is, at some times there is not. At some times percipient beings, at some times non-percipient beings? At some times a percipient existence, at some times a non-percipient existence? At some times a five-constituent existence, at some times a one-constituent existence? It should not be said thus... (etc.) Among non-percipient beings, is perception at some times, and not at some times? Yes. At what time is it, at what time is it not? At the time of decease and rebirth it is, at the time of abiding it is not. At the time of decease and rebirth, percipient beings, at the time of abiding, non-percipient beings? At the time of decease and rebirth, a percipient existence, at the time of abiding, a non-percipient existence? At the time of decease and rebirth, a five-constituent existence, at the time of abiding, a one-constituent existence? It should not be said thus... (etc.) The discourse on non-perception is finished. 3. The Third Chapter (32) 12. Discourse on the Sphere of Neither Perception Nor Non-Perception 384. In the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, should it not be said, "there is perception"? Yes. A non-percipient existence, a non-percipient destination, an abode of non-percipient beings, a non-percipient wandering, a non-percipient birth, the attainment of a non-percipient state of being? It should not be said thus... (etc.) Is it not a percipient existence, a percipient destination, an abode of percipient beings, a percipient wandering, a percipient birth, the attainment of a percipient state of being? Yes. If it is a percipient existence, a percipient destination... (etc.) the attainment of a percipient state of being, then indeed it should not be said, "In the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, it should not be said, 'there is perception'." In the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, should it not be said, "there is perception"? Yes. A one-constituent existence, a destination... (etc.) the attainment of a state of being? It should not be said thus... (etc.) Is it not a four-constituent existence, a destination... (etc.) the attainment of a state of being? Yes. If it is a four-constituent existence, a destination... (etc.) the attainment of a state of being, then indeed it should not be said, "In the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, it should not be said..." — that ‘perception exists.’ In the non-percipient beings, it should not be said, ‘Perception exists.’ And is that a non-percipient existence, a non-percipient destination, a dwelling of non-percipient beings, a non-percipient cycle of existence, a non-percipient birth, an attainment of a non-percipient state of being? Yes. In the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, it should not be said, ‘Perception exists.’ And is that a non-percipient existence, a non-percipient destination, a dwelling of non-percipient beings, a non-percipient cycle of existence, a non-percipient birth, an attainment of a non-percipient state of being? It should not be said thus... etc. In the non-percipient beings, it should not be said, ‘Perception exists.’ And is that an existence of one constituent, a destination... etc. ...an attainment of a state of being? Yes. In the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, it should not be said, ‘Perception exists.’ And is that an existence of one constituent, a destination, a dwelling of beings, a cycle of existence, a birth, an attainment of a state of being? It should not be said thus... etc. In the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, it should not be said, ‘Perception exists.’ And is that a percipient existence, a percipient destination... etc. ...an attainment of a percipient state of being? Yes. In the non-percipient beings, it should not be said, ‘Perception exists.’ And is that a percipient existence, a percipient destination... etc. ...an attainment of a percipient state of being? It should not be said thus... etc. In the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, it should not be said, ‘Perception exists.’ And is that an existence of four constituents, a destination... etc. ...an attainment of a state of being? Yes. In the non-percipient beings, it should not be said, ‘Perception exists.’ And is that an existence of four constituents, a destination... etc. ...an attainment of a state of being? It should not be said thus... etc. In the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, it should not be said, ‘Perception exists’? Yes. Is not the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception an existence of four constituents? Yes. If the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception is an existence of four constituents, then surely it should not be said, "In the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, it should not be said, ‘Perception exists.’" The sphere of neither perception nor non-perception is an existence of four constituents. In the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, it should not be said, ‘Perception exists’? Yes. The sphere of infinite space is an existence of four constituents. In the sphere of infinite space, it should not be said, ‘Perception exists’? It should not be said thus... etc.