English
might settle down with understanding" (Pārā. 164), for reason. Here it is used for reason. Therefore, the meaning here should be understood thus: "Indeed, brahmin, there is this reason; by which reason, a person who says 'Venerable Gotama is tasteless' would speak correctly, and would be counted as a truthful speaker. And what is that? Those, brahmin, are the tastes of forms… (etc.)… the tastes of tangibles – these are abandoned by the Tathāgata." What is meant by this? Those objects of form, which are considered supreme by ordinary people, whether by birth or by rebirth… For those who taste, who delight, who are attached, there arise the flavors of sensual pleasure, the flavors of forms, sounds, smells, tastes, and touches, which are called sensual delights. Which, as if binding this world by the neck, drag it along. And because they arise from the confluence of object and support, they are called "confluence-flavors." All these are abandoned for the Tathāgata. Even when saying "They are abandoned for me," he teaches the Dhamma without exalting himself in a self-centered way. Or this is the Lord's skill in teaching. Here, "abandoned" means removed from the mind-continuum, or forsaken. In this sense, the instrumental case should be understood. "Uprooted" means their root, made of craving and ignorance, is cut off by the sword of the Noble Path. "Made like a palm-stump" means their basis is made like a palm-stump. Just as, having uprooted a palm tree with its root, when only its stump is made in that place, the reappearance of that palm is not perceived; so too, having uprooted the flavors of forms and so on with their roots by the sword of the Noble Path, when only their basis in the mind-continuum is made, by their former state of having arisen before, all of them are called "made like a palm-stump." Or, because they are of a non-growing nature, they are made like a palm whose crown is cut off, thus "made like a palm-stump." And because those made like a palm-stump are made to be non-existent, made so that there is no future existence for them; therefore it is said: "made to be non-existent." Here is the word division: anu-abhāvaṃ katā becomes anabhāvaṃkatā. "Gone to non-existence" is also a reading, its meaning is "gone not to be." There the word division is: anu-abhāvaṃ gatā becomes anabhāvaṃ gatā, just as anu-acchariyā becomes anacchariyā. "Of a nature not to arise in the future" means of a nature not to arise in the future. For those who have gone to non-existence, how will they arise again? Therefore it is said: "gone to non-existence, of a nature not to arise in the future." "This, indeed, O brahmin, is the way," This, indeed, O brahmin, is the reason by which one speaking rightly would say of me: "The recluse Gotama is without flavor." But not, indeed, in the sense that you mean, when you say... that which you refer to, that way is not. Why then did the Blessed One say this? Is it not that when this is said, the flavor of harmony spoken of by the brahmin, its presence in oneself is acknowledged? It is said, it is not. For he who, being capable of making that flavor of harmony, does not make it, he should be called one who is without flavor due to its absence. But the Blessed One is indeed incapable of making this, and so, revealing his incapability of making it, he said – "but not that which you refer to." The way you refer to, by which you call me "without flavor," that is not to be said of us. 4. Thus, the brahmin, being unable to attribute to himself the intended state of being without flavor, then said, "Furthermore, Gotama is without enjoyment," and so on. In all these ways, having understood the method of connection in the manner stated, it should be understood that only what is spoken with reference to it is thus. The brahmin, considering that very act of saluting elders and so on in the world to be the enjoyment of harmony, called the Blessed One "without enjoyment" due to its absence. But the Blessed One, seeing in himself the absence of that enjoyment which is the desire and lust of beings for forms and so on, acknowledges another way. 5. Again, the brahmin, seeing the non-performance of that worldly custom of saluting elders and so on, which worldly people do, called the Blessed One "a teacher of non-action." But the Blessed One, because he speaks of the non-performance of bodily misconduct and so on, seeing that non-action in himself, acknowledges another way. And there, "bodily misconduct" should be understood as the intention to kill, to take what is not given, and sexual misconduct. "Verbal misconduct" should be understood as the intention to lie, slanderous speech, harsh speech, and frivolous talk. "Mental misconduct" should be understood as covetousness, ill-will, and wrong view. Apart from these qualities, the remaining unwholesome qualities should be understood as "various kinds of evil, unwholesome qualities." 6. Again, the brahmin, not seeing that very act of saluting and so on in the Blessed One, referring to this, Thinking, "This worldly tradition, this worldly custom, is being cut off," he called the Blessed One an annihilationist. But the Blessed One, because he speaks of the cutting off of the lust for the five sense pleasures in the eight consciousnesses accompanied by greed, and of the hatred arising in the two unwholesome consciousnesses, by the Anāgāmi path. And of the cutting off of all ignorance, which is the source of all unwholesome things, without remainder, by the Arahant path. Leaving aside these three, he speaks of the cutting off of the remaining evil, unwholesome states, according to their nature, by the four paths. Therefore, seeing that annihilationism in himself (in this sense), he acknowledged another interpretation. 7. Again, the brahmin, thinking, "The recluse Gotama, I think, detests this family custom of greeting and so on for elders, therefore he does not do it," called the Blessed One a detester. But the Blessed One, because he detests bodily misconduct and so on; What is meant by this? Whatever is threefold bodily misconduct, whatever is fourfold verbal misconduct, whatever is threefold mental misconduct, and whatever, apart from those misconducts, is the entry, the entering into, the being endowed with the remaining evil, unwholesome states due to their meanness, due to their arising from unskillfulness, all that, like excrement, a person fond of adornment detests and is ashamed of. Therefore, seeing that detestation in himself (in this sense), he acknowledged another interpretation. Here, "by bodily misconduct" should be understood as the instrumental case in the sense of "with respect to" or "by means of." 8. Again, the brahmin, not seeing that same act of greeting and so on in the Blessed One, thinking, "This one removes, destroys this foremost worldly custom, or rather, since he does not perform this proper act, therefore he should be disciplined, he should be restrained," called the Blessed One a discipliner / one to be disciplined. Here is the meaning of the word: "He disciplines" means "discipline," it means "he destroys." Discipline itself is a discipliner, or "one who deserves discipline" is a discipliner, it means "one who deserves restraint." But the Blessed One, because for the discipline, for the calming of lust and so on... He teaches the Dhamma, therefore he is a discipliner. And here is the meaning of the word: He teaches the Dhamma for discipline, thus he is a discipliner. Indeed, the taddhita derivation is varied! And he, seeing that discipliner-state in himself, recognizes another meaning. 9. Again, because the brahmin believes that by performing respectful acts such as salutations, one pleases and delights the elders, but by not performing them, one afflicts, harasses, and causes sorrow to them, and the Blessed One does not perform them; therefore, thinking, "This one afflicts the elders," or thinking, "This is a wretched person" due to being devoid of the conduct of good people, he called the Blessed One "ascetic" (tapassī). Here is the meaning of the word: "Afflicts" is tapo; it means "angers, harasses." This is a name for not performing respectful acts. "One who has affliction" is tapassī. In the second interpretation of the meaning, without considering the letters, a wretched person in the world is called "tapassī." But the Blessed One, because unwholesome states are called "afflictive" (tapanīya) because they afflict the world, and they have been abandoned by him, he has attained the designation "tapassī." Therefore, seeing that ascetic-state in himself, he recognizes another meaning. Here is the meaning of the word: "They afflict" are tapā; this is a designation for unwholesome states. It has also been said: "Here he is afflicted, hereafter he is afflicted." Thus, he who has no such afflictions, who has abandoned and destroyed them, is tapassī. 10. Again, the brahmin, thinking that such acts as salutation lead to the attainment of a divine realm womb, to the acquisition of rebirth in a divine realm, and seeing the absence of this in the Blessed One, called the Blessed One "womb-less" (apagabbho). Or, out of anger, he spoke thus, pointing out a fault in the Blessed One's conception in his mother's womb. Here is the meaning of the word: "Gone from the womb" is apagabbho; the intention is that he is unable to attain rebirth in a divine realm. Or, "his womb is inferior" is apagabbho; meaning, being excluded from the divine realm womb, he is destined to acquire an inferior womb in the future, or, his dwelling in his mother's womb was inferior. The Blessed One Therefore, since in the future womb-lying is gone, therefore, he, seeing that non-womb-lying in himself, understands another meaning. And there, "O brahmin, for whom in the future, womb-lying and rebirth-manifestation are abandoned" – of these words, this meaning should be understood: "O brahmin, for whom in the future, womb-lying