I have heard that on one occasion, when the Blessed One was on a
wandering tour among the Kosalans with a large Saṅgha of monks, he
arrived at the brahman village of the Kosalans called Sāla.
The brahman householders heard, “Master Gotama the contemplative—the
son of the Sakyans, having gone forth from the Sakyan clan—on a
wandering tour among the Kosalans with a large Saṅgha of monks—has
arrived at Sāla. And of that master Gotama this fine reputation has
spread: ‘He is indeed a Blessed One, worthy & rightly self-awakened,
consummate in clear-knowing & conduct, well-gone, an expert with
regard to the cosmos, unexcelled trainer of people fit to be tamed,
teacher of devas & human beings, awakened, blessed. He makes
known—having realized it through direct knowledge—this world with its
devas, Māras, & Brahmās, this generation with its contemplatives &
brahmans, its royalty & commonfolk; he explains the Dhamma admirable
in the beginning, admirable in the middle, admirable in the end; he
expounds the holy life both in its particulars & in its essence,
entirely perfect, surpassingly pure. It is good to see such a worthy
one.’”
So the brahman householders of Sāla went to the Blessed One. On
arrival, some of them bowed down to the Blessed One and sat to one
side. Some of them exchanged courteous greetings with him and, after
an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, sat to one side. Some
of them sat to one side having saluted him with their hands
palm-to-palm over their hearts. Some of them sat to one side having
announced their name & clan. Some of them sat to one side in silence.
As they were sitting there, the Blessed One asked them, “Householders,
is there any teacher agreeable to you, in whom you have found grounded
conviction?”
“No, lord, there is no teacher agreeable to us, in whom we have found
grounded conviction.”
“As you have not found an agreeable teacher, you should adopt and
practice this safe-bet teaching, for this safe-bet teaching—when
accepted and adopted—will be to your long-term welfare & happiness.
“And what is the safe-bet teaching? Existence & Non-existence
A. “There are some contemplatives & brahmans who hold this doctrine,
hold this view: ‘There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing
sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There
is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no
spontaneously reborn beings; no contemplatives or brahmans who, faring
rightly and practicing rightly, proclaim this world and the next after
having directly known and realized it for themselves.’1
B. “Some contemplatives & brahmans, speaking in direct opposition to
those contemplatives & brahmans, say this: ‘There is what is given,
what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of
good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is
mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are
contemplatives & brahmans who, faring rightly & practicing rightly,
proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized
it for themselves.’
“What do you think, householders? Don’t these contemplatives &
brahmans speak in direct opposition to each other?”
“Yes, lord.”
A1. “Now, householders, of those contemplatives & brahmans who hold
this doctrine, hold this view—’There is nothing given, nothing
offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or
bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no
father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no contemplatives or brahmans
who, faring rightly and practicing rightly, proclaim this world and
the next after having directly known and realized it for
themselves’—it can be expected that, shunning these three skillful
activities—good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, good mental
conduct—they will adopt & practice these three unskillful activities:
bad bodily conduct, bad verbal conduct, bad mental conduct. Why is
that? Because those venerable contemplatives & brahmans do not see, in
unskillful activities, the drawbacks, the degradation, and the
defilement; nor in skillful activities the rewards of renunciation,
resembling cleansing.
A2. “Because there actually is the next world, the view of one who
thinks, ‘There is no next world’ is his wrong view. Because there
actually is the next world, when he is resolved that ‘There is no next
world,’ that is his wrong resolve. Because there actually is the next
world, when he speaks the statement, ‘There is no next world,’ that is
his wrong speech. Because there actually is the next world, when he
says that ‘There is no next world,’ he makes himself an opponent to
those arahants who know the next world. Because there actually is the
next world, when he persuades another that ‘There is no next world,’
that is persuasion in what is not true Dhamma. And in that persuasion
in what is not true Dhamma, he exalts himself and disparages others.
Whatever good habituation he previously had is abandoned, while bad
habituation is manifested. And this wrong view, wrong resolve, wrong
speech, opposition to the arahants, persuasion in what is not true
Dhamma, exaltation of self, & disparagement of others: These many
evil, unskillful activities come into play, in dependence on wrong
view.
A3. “With regard to this, an observant person considers thus: ‘If
there is no next world, then—with the breakup of the body, after
death—this venerable person has made himself safe. But if there is the
next world, then this venerable person—on the breakup of the body,
after death—will reappear in a plane of deprivation, a bad
destination, a lower realm, hell. Even if we didn’t speak of the next
world, and there weren’t the true statement of those venerable
contemplatives & brahmans, this venerable person is still criticized
in the here & now by the observant as a person of bad habits & wrong
view2: one who holds to a doctrine of non-existence.’ If there really
is a next world, then this venerable person has made a bad throw
twice: in that he is criticized by the observant here & now, and in
that—with the breakup of the body, after death—he will reappear in a
plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell. Thus
this safe-bet teaching, when poorly grasped & poorly adopted by him,
covers (only) one side, and leaves behind the possibility of the
skillful.
B1. “Now, householders, of those contemplatives & brahmans who hold
this doctrine, hold this view—’There is what is given, what is
offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad
actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother &
father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are
contemplatives & brahmans who, faring rightly & practicing rightly,
proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized
it for themselves’—it can be expected that, shunning these three
unskillful activities—bad bodily conduct, bad verbal conduct, bad
mental conduct—they will adopt & practice these three skillful
activities: good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, good mental
conduct. Why is that? Because those venerable contemplatives &
brahmans see in unskillful activities the drawbacks, the degradation,
and the defilement; and in skillful activities the rewards of
renunciation, resembling cleansing.
B2. “Because there actually is the next world, the view of one who
thinks, ‘There is a next world’ is his right view. Because there
actually is the next world, when he is resolved that ‘There is a next
world,’ that is his right resolve. Because there actually is the next
world, when he speaks the statement, ‘There is a next world,’ that is
his right speech. Because there actually is the next world, when he
says that ‘There is a next world,’ he doesn’t make himself an opponent
to those arahants who know the next world. Because there actually is
the next world, when he persuades another that ‘There is a next
world,’ that is persuasion in what is true Dhamma. And in that
persuasion in what is true Dhamma, he doesn’t exalt himself or
disparage others. Whatever bad habituation he previously had is
abandoned, while good habituation is manifested. And this right view,
right resolve, right speech, non-opposition to the arahants,
persuasion in what is true Dhamma, non-exaltation of self, &
non-disparagement of others: These many skillful activities come into
play, in dependence on right view.
B3. “With regard to this, an observant person considers thus: ‘If
there is the next world, then this venerable person—on the breakup of
the body, after death—will reappear in a good destination, a heavenly
world. Even if we didn’t speak of the next world, and there weren’t
the true statement of those venerable contemplatives & brahmans, this
venerable person is still praised in the here & now by the observant
as a person of good habits & right view: one who holds to a doctrine
of existence.’ If there really is a next world, then this venerable
person has made a good throw twice, in that he is praised by the
observant here & now; and in that—with the breakup of the body, after
death—he will reappear in a good destination, a heavenly world. Thus
this safe-bet teaching, when well grasped & adopted by him, covers
both sides, and leaves behind the possibility of the unskillful.
Action & Non-action
A. “There are some contemplatives & brahmans who hold this doctrine,
hold this view: ‘In acting or getting others to act, in mutilating or
getting others to mutilate, in torturing or getting others to torture,
in inflicting sorrow or in getting others to inflict sorrow, in
tormenting or getting others to torment, in intimidating or getting
others to intimidate, in taking life, taking what is not given,
breaking into houses, plundering wealth, committing burglary,
ambushing highways, committing adultery, speaking falsehood—one does
no evil. If with a razor-edged disk one were to turn all the living
beings on this earth to a single heap of flesh, a single pile of
flesh, there would be no evil from that cause, no coming of evil. Even
if one were to go along the right bank of the Ganges, killing and
getting others to kill, mutilating and getting others to mutilate,
torturing and getting others to torture, there would be no evil from
that cause, no coming of evil. Even if one were to go along the left
bank of the Ganges, giving and getting others to give, making
sacrifices and getting others to make sacrifices, there would be no
merit from that cause, no coming of merit. Through generosity,
self-control, restraint, and truthful speech there is no merit from
that cause, no coming of merit.’3
B. “Some contemplatives & brahmans, speaking in direct opposition to
those contemplatives & brahmans, say this: ‘In acting or getting
others to act, in mutilating or getting others to mutilate, in
torturing or getting others to torture, in inflicting sorrow or in
getting others to inflict sorrow, in tormenting or getting others to
torment, in intimidating or getting others to intimidate, in taking
life, taking what is not given, breaking into houses, plundering
wealth, committing burglary, ambushing highways, committing adultery,
speaking falsehood—one does evil. If with a razor-edged disk one were
to turn all the living beings on this earth to a single heap of flesh,
a single pile of flesh, there would be evil from that cause, there
would be a coming of evil. If one were to go along the right bank of
the Ganges, killing and getting others to kill, mutilating and getting
others to mutilate, torturing and getting others to torture, there
would be evil from that cause, there would be a coming of evil. If one
were to go along the left bank of the Ganges, giving and getting
others to give, making sacrifices and getting others to make
sacrifices, there would be merit from that cause, there would be a
coming of merit. Through generosity, self-control, restraint, and
truthful speech there is merit from that cause, there is a coming of
merit.’
“What do you think, householders? Don’t these contemplatives &
brahmans speak in direct opposition to each other?”
“Yes, lord.”
A1. “Now, householders, of those contemplatives & brahmans who hold
this doctrine, hold this view—’In acting or getting others to act, in
mutilating or getting others to mutilate, in torturing or getting
others to torture… one does no evil … Through generosity,
self-control, restraint, and truthful speech there is no merit from
that cause, no coming of merit’—it can be expected that, shunning
these three skillful activities—good bodily conduct, good verbal
conduct, good mental conduct—they will adopt & practice these three
unskillful activities: bad bodily conduct, bad verbal conduct, bad
mental conduct. Why is that? Because those venerable contemplatives &
brahmans do not see, in unskillful activities, the drawbacks, the
degradation, and the defilement; nor in skillful activities the
rewards of renunciation, resembling cleansing.
A2. “Because there actually is action, the view of one who thinks,
‘There is no action’ is his wrong view. Because there actually is
action, when he is resolved that ‘There is no action,’ that is his
wrong resolve. Because there actually is action, when he speaks the
statement, ‘There is no action,’ that is his wrong speech. Because
there actually is action, when he says that ‘There is no action,’ he
makes himself an opponent to those arahants who teach action. Because
there actually is action, when he persuades another that ‘There is no
action,’ that is persuasion in what is not true Dhamma. And in that
persuasion in what is not true Dhamma, he exalts himself and
disparages others. Whatever good habituation he previously had is
abandoned, while bad habituation is manifested. And this wrong view,
wrong resolve, wrong speech, opposition to the arahants, persuasion in
what is not true Dhamma, exaltation of self, & disparagement of
others: These many evil, unskillful activities come into play, in
dependence on wrong view.
A3. “With regard to this, an observant person considers thus: ‘If
there is no action, then—with the breakup of the body, after
death—this venerable person has made himself safe. But if there is
action, then this venerable person—on the breakup of the body, after
death—will reappear in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a
lower realm, hell. Even if we didn’t speak of action, and there
weren’t the true statement of those venerable contemplatives &
brahmans, this venerable person is still criticized in the here & now
by the observant as a person of bad habits & wrong view: one who holds
to a doctrine of non-action.’ If there really is action, then this
venerable person has made a bad throw twice: in that he is criticized
by the observant here & now; and in that—with the breakup of the body,
after death—he will reappear in a plane of deprivation, a bad
destination, a lower realm, hell. Thus this safe-bet teaching, when
poorly grasped & poorly adopted by him, covers (only) one side, and
leaves behind the possibility of the skillful.
B1. “Now, householders, of those contemplatives & brahmans who hold
this doctrine, hold this view—’In acting or getting others to act, in
mutilating or getting others to mutilate, in torturing or getting
others to torture… one does evil.… Through generosity, self-control,
restraint, and truthful speech there is merit from that cause, there
is a coming of merit’—it can be expected that, shunning these three
unskillful activities—bad bodily conduct, bad verbal conduct, bad
mental conduct—they will adopt & practice these three skillful
activities: good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, good mental
conduct. Why is that? Because those venerable contemplatives &
brahmans see in unskillful activities the drawbacks, the degradation,
and the defilement; and in skillful activities the rewards of
renunciation, resembling cleansing.
B2. “Because there actually is action, the view of one who thinks,
‘There is action’ is his right view. Because there actually is action,
when he is resolved that ‘There is action,’ that is his right resolve.
Because there actually is action, when he speaks the statement, ‘There
is action,’ that is his right speech. Because there actually is
action, when he says that ‘There is action,’ he doesn’t make himself
an opponent to those arahants who teach action. Because there actually
is action, when he persuades another that ‘There is action,’ that is
persuasion in what is true Dhamma. And in that persuasion in what is
true Dhamma, he doesn’t exalt himself or disparage others. Whatever
bad habituation he previously had is abandoned, while good habituation
is manifested. And this right view, right resolve, right speech,
non-opposition to the arahants, persuasion in what is true Dhamma,
non-exaltation of self, & non-disparagement of others: These many
skillful activities come into play, in dependence on right view.
B3. “With regard to this, an observant person considers thus: ‘If
there is action, then this venerable person—on the breakup of the
body, after death—will reappear in a good destination, a heavenly
world. Even if we didn’t speak of action, and there weren’t the true
statement of those venerable contemplatives & brahmans, this venerable
person is still praised in the here & now by the observant as a person
of good habits & right view: one who holds to a doctrine of action.’
If there really is a next world, then this venerable person has made a
good throw twice, in that he is praised by the observant here & now;
and in that—with the breakup of the body, after death—he will reappear
in a good destination, a heavenly world. Thus this safe-bet teaching,
when well grasped & adopted by him, covers both sides, and leaves
behind the possibility of the unskillful. Causality & Non-causality
A. “There are some contemplatives & brahmans who hold this doctrine,
hold this view: ‘There is no causality, no requisite condition, for
the defilement of beings. Beings are defiled without causality,
without requisite condition. There is no causality, no requisite
condition, for the purification of beings. Beings are purified without
causality, without requisite condition. There is no strength, no
effort, no human energy, no human endeavor. All living beings, all
life, all beings, all souls are powerless, devoid of strength, devoid
of effort. Subject to the changes of fate, serendipity, and nature,
they experience pleasure and pain in the six great classes of birth.’4
B. “Some contemplatives & brahmans, speaking in direct opposition to
those contemplatives & brahmans, say this: ‘There is causality, there
is requisite condition, for the defilement of beings. Beings are
defiled with causality, with requisite condition. There is causality,
there is requisite condition, for the purification of beings. Beings
are purified with causality, with requisite condition. There is
strength, there is effort, there is human energy, there is human
endeavor. It’s not the case that all living beings, all life, all
beings, all souls are powerless, devoid of strength, devoid of effort;
or that subject to the changes of fate, serendipity, and nature, they
experience pleasure and pain in the six great classes of birth.’
“What do you think, householders? Don’t these contemplatives &
brahmans speak in direct opposition to each other?”
“Yes, lord.”
A1. “Now, householders, of those contemplatives & brahmans who hold
this doctrine, hold this view—’There is no cause, no requisite
condition, for the defilement of beings.… Subject to the changes of
fate, serendipity, and nature, they experience pleasure and pain in
the six great classes of birth’—it can be expected that, shunning
these three skillful activities—good bodily conduct, good verbal
conduct, good mental conduct—they will adopt & practice these three
unskillful activities: bad bodily conduct, bad verbal conduct, bad
mental conduct. Why is that? Because those venerable contemplatives &
brahmans do not see, in unskillful activities, the drawbacks, the
degradation, and the defilement; nor in skillful activities the
rewards of renunciation, resembling cleansing.
A2. “Because there actually is causality, the view of one who thinks,
‘There is no causality’ is his wrong view. Because there actually is
causality, when he is resolved that ‘There is no causality,’ that is
his wrong resolve. Because there actually is causality, when he speaks
the statement, ‘There is no causality,’ that is his wrong speech.
Because there actually is causality, when he says that ‘There is no
causality,’ he makes himself an opponent to those arahants who teach
causality. Because there actually is causality, when he persuades
another that ‘There is no causality,’ that is persuasion in what is
not true Dhamma. And in that persuasion in what is not true Dhamma, he
exalts himself and disparages others. Whatever good habituation he
previously had is abandoned, while bad habituation is manifested. And
this wrong view, wrong resolve, wrong speech, opposition to the
arahants, persuasion in what is not true Dhamma, exaltation of self, &
disparagement of others: These many evil, unskillful activities come
into play, in dependence on wrong view.
A3. “With regard to this, an observant person considers thus: ‘If
there is no causality, then—with the breakup of the body, after
death—this venerable person has made himself safe. But if there is
causality, then this venerable person—on the breakup of the body,
after death—will reappear in a plane of deprivation, a bad
destination, a lower realm, hell. Even if we didn’t speak of
causality, and there weren’t the true statement of those venerable
contemplatives & brahmans, this venerable person is still criticized
in the here & now by the observant as a person of bad habits & wrong
view: one who holds to a doctrine of non-causality.’ If there really
is a next world, then this venerable person has made a bad throw
twice: in that he is criticized by the observant here & now, and in
that—with the breakup of the body, after death—he will reappear in a
plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell. Thus
this safe-bet teaching, when poorly grasped & poorly adopted by him,
covers (only) one side, and leaves behind the possibility of the
skillful.
B1. “Now, householders, of those contemplatives & brahmans who hold
this doctrine, hold this view—’There is causality, there is requisite
condition, for the defilement of beings.… It’s not the case that all
living beings, all life, all beings, all souls are powerless, devoid
of strength, devoid of effort; or that subject to the changes of fate,
serendipity, and nature, they experience pleasure and pain in the six
great classes of birth’—it can be expected that, shunning these three
unskillful activities—bad bodily conduct, bad verbal conduct, bad
mental conduct—they will adopt & practice these three skillful
activities: good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, good mental
conduct. Why is that? Because those venerable contemplatives &
brahmans see in unskillful activities the drawbacks, the degradation,
and the defilement; and in skillful activities the rewards of
renunciation, resembling cleansing.
B2. “Because there actually is causality, the view of one who thinks,
‘There is causality’ is his right view. Because there actually is
causality, when he is resolved that ‘There is causality,’ that is his
right resolve. Because there actually causality, when he speaks the
statement, ‘There is causality,’ that is his right speech. Because
there actually is causality, when he says that ‘There is causality,’
he doesn’t make himself an opponent to those arahants who teach
causality. Because there actually is causality, when he persuades
another that ‘There is causality,’ that is persuasion in what is true
Dhamma. And in that persuasion in what is true Dhamma, he doesn’t
exalt himself or disparage others. Whatever bad habituation he
previously had is abandoned, while good habituation is manifested. And
this right view, right resolve, right speech, non-opposition to the
arahants, persuasion in what is true Dhamma, non-exaltation of self, &
non-disparagement of others: These many skillful activities come into
play, in dependence on right view.
B3. “With regard to this, an observant person considers thus: ‘If
there is causality, then this venerable person—on the breakup of the
body, after death—will reappear in a good destination, a heavenly
world. Even if we didn’t speak of causality, and there weren’t the
true statement of those venerable contemplatives & brahmans, this
venerable person is still praised in the here & now by the observant
as a person of good habits & right view: one who holds to a doctrine
of causality.’ If there really is causality, then this venerable
person has made a good throw twice, in that he is praised by the
observant here & now; and in that—with the breakup of the body, after
death—he will reappear in a good destination, a heavenly world. Thus
this safe-bet teaching, when well grasped & adopted by him, covers
both sides, and leaves behind the possibility of the unskillful.
