1At Sāvatthī. "Bhikkhus, those ascetics and brahmins who recollect their manifold past abodes all recollect the five aggregates subject to clinging or a certain one among them. [n.108] Spk says that this does not refer to recollection by direct knowledge (i.e., by retrocognition of the past) but to the recollection of one's past abodes by way of insight. Spk seems to understand the purport of the Buddha’s statement to be that they deliberately recollect the past in terms of the aggregates. I take the point differently, i.e., that though these ascetics imagine they are recalling the past experience of a permanent self, they are only recollecting past configurations of the five aggregates. This interpretation seems to be confirmed by the next paragraph, which reduces first-person memories (evaṁrūpo ahosiṁ) to experiences framed solely in terms of the aggregates (rūpaṁ yeva). It can also draw support from the parallel paragraph opening SN22.47. Spk entitles this passage "the emptiness section" (suññatāpabba). A parallel commentary on the passage, slightly more elaborate, is at Vibh-a 3–6. What five?

"When recollecting thus, bhikkhus: ‘I had such form in the past,’ it is just form that one recollects. When recollecting: ‘I had such a feeling in the past,’ it is just feeling that one recollects. When recollecting: ‘I had such a perception in the past,’ it is just perception that one recollects. When recollecting: ‘I had such volitional formations in the past,’ it is just volitional formations that one recollects. When recollecting: ‘I had such consciousness in the past,’ it is just consciousness that one recollects.

2"And why, bhikkhus, do you call it form? [n.109] Spk: Even though emptiness has been discussed, the discussion is not yet definitive because the characteristic of emptiness (suññatālakkhaṇa) has not been discussed. The present passage is introduced to show the characteristic of emptiness. Spk-pṭ: Since form, etc., are neither a self nor the belongings of a self, but are insubstantial and ownerless, they are empty of that (self). Their nature is emptiness, their characteristic is "being deformed," etc. ‘It is deformed,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called form. [n.110] Ruppatī ti kho bhikkhave tasmā rūpan ti vuccati. I have tried, though clumsily, to capture the subtle word play of the Pali, which capitalizes on the apparent correspondence between the verb ruppati and the noun rūpa. Etymologically, the two are not related. Ruppati is a passive verb from the root rup (= Skt lup), "to break, injure, spoil." MW lists rupyate (s.v. rup), "to suffer violent or racking pain." See too PED, s.v. ruppati. Spk glosses: Ruppatī ti kuppati ghaṭṭīyati pīḷīyati, bhijjatī ti attho; "It is deformed: it is disturbed, stricken, oppressed, meaning ‘it is broken.’"
At KS 2:73, n. 1, Woodward has misunderstood the point of the commentary. It is not the case that Buddhaghosa misconstrues "these various contacts not as referring to this life, but as ‘informing’ creatures in other spheres." Rather, he merely cites the cold hells, hot hells, etc., as the realms where the different types of "deformation" are most evident (pākaṭa). Spk adds that being "deformed" is the specific characteristic, of form, which distinguishes it from feeling and the other aggregates; but the general characteristics (samaññalakkhaṇa) are what they have in common, namely, impermanence, suffering, and nonself. Deformed by what? Deformed by cold, deformed by heat, deformed by hunger, deformed by thirst, deformed by contact with flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun, and serpents. ‘It is deformed,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called form.

3"And why, bhikkhus, do you call it feeling? ‘It feels,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called feeling. [n.111] Spk: It is feeling itself that feels, not another—a being or a person. And what does it feel? It feels pleasure, it feels pain, sn.iii.87 it feels neither-pain-nor-pleasure. ‘It feels,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called feeling.

4"And why, bhikkhus, do you call it perception? ‘It perceives,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called perception. And what does it perceive? It perceives blue, it perceives yellow, it perceives red, it perceives white. ‘It perceives,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called perception.

5"And why, bhikkhus, do you call them volitional formations? ‘They construct the conditioned,’ bhikkhus, therefore they are called volitional formations. [n.112] Saṅkhataṃ abhisaṅkharontī ti bhikkhave tasmā saṅkhārā ti vuccanti. Unfortunately English is a poor medium for capturing the interconnections of this sentence in the Pali, with the object (saṅkhataṁ), the verb (abhisaṅkharonti), and the subject (saṅkhārā) all derived from the same stem. See my discussion of saṅkhāra in the General Introduction, pp. 44–47. To replicate the Pali we might have rendered it, "They construct the constructed, therefore they are called volitional constructions," though this would bear certain connotations quite alien to the original. It is also an unfortunate coincidence that "volitional formations," my rendering for saṅkhāra, is related to "form," my rendering for rūpa. In Pali there is no etymological tie between rūpa and saṅkhārā. To capture the several nuances of the verb abhisaṅkharoti we might have taken the liberty of rendering it, in this passage, by two verbs: "to generate," which conveys the idea that the volitional formations actually produce the other aggregates (see the following note); and "to form," which makes apparent the correspondence with the noun "formations."
This passage shows the active role of cetana, volition, in constructing experienced reality. Not only does volition influence the objective content of the experience, but it also shapes the psychophysical organism within which it has arisen and, via its role as kamma, shapes the future configurations of the five aggregates to be produced by kamma. In this connection see SN35.146, on the six sense bases as "old kamma." And what is the conditioned that they construct? They construct conditioned form as form; [n.113] All three printed eds. of SN read, rūpaṁ rūpattāya saṅkhataṁ abhisaṅkharonti, and so for the other aggregates, except viññāṇa, where Ee reads, viññāṇatthaya; however, since Ee has no note on vv.ll., this is almost certainly an editorial inconsistency rather than a meaningful variant. Spk (Se and Ee) reads rūpatthāya in its lemma, implying that the termination -atthāya should apply to every aggregate, and apparently old Sinhalese mss of SN had this reading. Spk (Be), however, has rūpattāya. The explanation in Spk is equally intelligible on either reading of SN.
I follow Be here: "As one is said to cook conjee as conjee, to bake a cake as a cake, so it (Spk-pṭ: the collection of states headed by volition) constructs, builds up, amasses (abhisaṅkharoti āyūhati sampiṇḍati) form itself—called ‘the conditioned’ because it is made by a combination of conditions—so that it becomes ‘conditioned form’ in accordance with its nature, for its formness (tathattāya rūpabhāvāya); the meaning is that it produces it (nipphādeti ti attho). This is the sense in brief: It constructs, produces the form arising along with itself and the associated feeling, etc. Here, too, the Blessed One shows just the specific characteristic of volitional formations, whose characteristic is volition. (Spk-pṭ: This is said because volition is the chief of the states belonging to the aggregate of volitional formations.)" they construct conditioned feeling as feeling; they construct conditioned perception as perception; they construct conditioned volitional formations as volitional formations; they construct conditioned consciousness as consciousness. ‘They construct the conditioned,’ bhikkhus, therefore they are called volitional formations.

6"And why, bhikkhus, do you call it consciousness? ‘It cognizes, ’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called consciousness. And what does it cognize? It cognizes sour, it cognizes bitter, it cognizes pungent, it cognizes sweet, it cognizes sharp, it cognizes mild, it cognizes salty, it cognizes bland. ‘It cognizes,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called consciousness. [n.114] The eight flavours are: ambila, tittaka, kaṭuka, madhuka, khārika, akhārika, loṇaka, aloṇaka; see too SN47.8. The explanation of viññāṇa here is very similar to that of saññā, the difference being only in the type of sense object they cognize. Spk explains that the difference in object highlights a difference in their cognitive functions: "Perception is analysed by way of the eye door because it is evident in grasping the appearance and shape of the object; consciousness is analysed by way of the tongue door because it can grasp particular distinctions in an object even when there is no appearance and shape." Spk continues with an explanation (also found at Vism 437; Ppn 14:3–5) according to which saññā, viññāṇa, and paññā are cognitive functions of increasing depth, discriminative acumen, and power of comprehension; this, however, is difficult to reconcile with the account of these factors found in the Nikāyas. Usually in the suttas viññāṇa is presented simply as the basic awareness of an object through one of the sense bases, i.e., as bare "consciousness of" rather than as a discriminative capacity. A parallel treatment of viññāṇa at MN I 292,26–29 defines it through its ability to cognize the three types of feelings (pleasant, painful, neutral); this just shifts the problem to that of distinguishing between viññāṇa and vedanā. Hamilton discusses the problem posed by these passages (Identity and Experience, pp. 53–55, 92–93). She offers the helpful suggestion that although viññāṇa is here defined in a way that encroaches upon the domain of saññā, we should understand that saññā does the actual discrimination (of objects at all five senses) while viññāṇa "is the awareness by which we experience every stage of the cognitive process, including the process of discriminating" (p. 92). From the commentarial standpoint, saññā is discussed more fully at As 110–11 and viññāṇa (under the name citta) at As 63–64.

7"Therein, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple reflects thus: ‘I am now being devoured by form. [n.115] Spk: The first two sections—the emptiness section and the section on the characteristic of emptiness—have discussed the characteristic of nonself. Now he will discuss the characteristic of suffering. Therein, form does not devour one as a dog does a piece of meat, by tearing one apart, but rather in the way a soiled garment might cause discomfort, as when one says, "This shirt is devouring me." The lines following the reflection incorporate the conclusion of 22:9–11. In the past too I was devoured by form in the very same way that I am now being devoured by present form. If I were to seek delight in future form, then in the future too I shall be devoured by form in the very same way that I am now being devoured by present form.’ Having reflected thus, he becomes indifferent towards past form, he does not seek delight in future form, and he is practising for revulsion towards present form, for its fading away and cessation.

---

8–10"He reflects thus: ‘I am now being devoured by feeling.’ … sn.iii.88 … ‘I am now being devoured by perception.’ … ‘I am now being devoured by volitional formations.’ … ‘I am now being devoured by consciousness. In the past too I was devoured by consciousness in the very same way that I am now being devoured by present consciousness. If I were to seek delight in future consciousness, then in the future too I shall be devoured by consciousness in the very same way that I am now being devoured by present consciousness.’ Having reflected thus, he becomes indifferent towards past consciousness, he does not seek delight in future consciousness, and he is practising for revulsion towards present consciousness, for its fading away and cessation.

---

11"What do you think, bhikkhus, is form permanent or impermanent? … Is feeling … perception … volitional formations … sn.iii.89 consciousness permanent or impermanent?" [n.116] Spk: This passage is stated to show the characteristic of impermanence, and to do so by bringing the three characteristics together.
"Impermanent, venerable sir."
"Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness?"
"Suffering, venerable sir."
"Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?"
"No, venerable sir."

"Therefore, bhikkhus, any kind of form whatsoever … Any kind of feeling whatsoever … Any kind of perception whatsoever … Any kind of volitional formations whatsoever … Any kind of consciousness whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all consciousness should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’

---

12"This is called, bhikkhus, a noble disciple who dismantles and does not build up; who abandons and does not cling; who scatters and does not amass; who extinguishes and does not kindle. [n.117] I render this passage with the aid of Spk, which glosses the last two pairs of terms thus: Visineti na ussinetī ti vikirati na sampiṇḍeti; vidhūpeti na sandhūpetī ti nibbāpeti na jālāpeti (some texts read viseneti, usseneti); cp. AN II 214–16. The present passage describes the sekha, who is still in the process of dismantling the round.

"And what is it that he dismantles and does not build up? He dismantles form and does not build it up. He dismantles feeling … perception … volitional formations … consciousness and does not build it up.

"And what is it that he abandons and does not cling to? He abandons form and does not cling to it. He abandons feeling … perception … volitional formations … consciousness and does not cling to it.

"And what is it that he scatters and does not amass? He scatters form and does not amass it. He scatters feeling … perception … volitional formations … consciousness and does not amass it. sn.iii.90

"And what is it that he extinguishes and does not kindle? He extinguishes form and does not kindle it. He extinguishes feeling … perception … volitional formations … consciousness and does not kindle it.

13"Seeing thus, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple experiences revulsion towards form, revulsion towards feeling, revulsion towards perception, revulsion towards volitional formations, revulsion towards consciousness. Experiencing revulsion, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion his mind is liberated. When it is liberated there comes the knowledge: ‘It's liberated.’ He understands: ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being.’

---

14"This is called, bhikkhus, a noble disciple who neither builds up nor dismantles, but who abides having dismantled; who neither abandons nor clings, but who abides having abandoned; who neither scatters nor amasses, but who abides having scattered; who neither extinguishes nor kindles, but who abides having extinguished. [n.118] Spk: This shows the arahant, who abides having dismantled the round.

---

"And what is it, bhikkhus, that he neither builds up nor dismantles, but abides having dismantled? He neither builds up nor dismantles form, but abides having dismantled it. He neither builds up nor dismantles feeling … perception … volitional formations … consciousness, but abides having dismantled it.

"And what is it that he neither abandons nor clings to, but abides having abandoned? He neither abandons nor clings to form, but abides having abandoned it. He neither abandons nor clings to feeling … perception … volitional formations … consciousness, but abides having abandoned it.

"And what is it that he neither scatters nor amasses, but abides having scattered? He neither scatters nor amasses form, but abides having scattered it. He neither scatters nor amasses feeling … perception … volitional formations … consciousness, but abides having scattered it.

"And what is it that he neither extinguishes nor kindles, but abides having extinguished? He neither extinguishes nor kindles form, but abides having extinguished it. He neither extinguishes nor kindles feeling … perception … volitional formations … consciousness, but abides having extinguished it.

"When, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu is thus liberated in mind, the devas together with Indra, Brahma, and Pajapati pay homage to him from afar: sn.iii.91

---

1Sāvatthinidānaṁ. "Ye hi keci, bhikkhave, samaṇā vā brāhmaṇā vā anekavihitaṁ pubbenivāsaṁ anussaramānā anussaranti sabbete pañcupādānakkhandhe anussaranti etesaṁ vā aññataraṁ. Katame pañca?

‘Evaṁrūpo ahosiṁ atītamaddhānan’ti – iti vā hi, bhikkhave, anussaramāno rūpaṁyeva anussarati. ‘Evaṁvedano ahosiṁ atītamaddhānan’ti – iti vā hi, bhikkhave, anussaramāno vedanāṁyeva anussarati. ‘Evaṁsañño ahosiṁ atītamaddhānan’ti … ‘evaṁsaṅkhāro ahosiṁ atītamaddhānan’ti … ‘evaṁviññāṇo ahosiṁ atītamaddhānan’ti – iti vā hi, bhikkhave, anussaramāno viññāṇameva anussarati.

2Kiñca, bhikkhave, rūpaṁ vadetha? Ruppatīti kho, bhikkhave, tasmā ‘rūpan’ti vuccati. Kena ruppati? Sītenapi ruppati, uṇhenapi ruppati, jighacchāyapi ruppati, pipāsāyapi ruppati, ḍaṁsamakasavātātapasarīsapasamphassenapi ruppati. Ruppatīti kho, bhikkhave, tasmā ‘rūpan’ti vuccati.

3Kiñca, bhikkhave, vedanāṁ vadetha? Vedayatīti kho, bhikkhave, tasmā ‘vedanā’ti vuccati. Kiñca vedayati? Sukhampi vedayati, dukkhampi vedayati, adukkhamasukhampi vedayati. Vedayatīti kho, bhikkhave, tasmā ‘vedanā’ti vuccati.

4Kiñca, bhikkhave, saññaṁ vadetha? Sañjānātīti kho, bhikkhave, tasmā ‘saññā’ti vuccati. Kiñca sañjānāti? Nīlampi sañjānāti, pītakampi sañjānāti, lohitakampi sañjānāti, odātampi sañjānāti. Sañjānātīti kho, bhikkhave, tasmā ‘saññā’ti vuccati.

5Kiñca, bhikkhave, saṅkhāre vadetha? Saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharoti kho, bhikkhave, tasmā ‘saṅkhārā’ti vuccati. Kiñca saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharoti? Rūpaṁ rūpattāya saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharoti, vedanāṁ vedanattāya saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharoti, saññaṁ saññattāya saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharoti, saṅkhāre saṅkhārattāya saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharoti, viññāṇaṁ viññāṇattāya saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharoti. Saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharoti kho, bhikkhave, tasmā ‘saṅkhārā’ti vuccati.

6Kiñca, bhikkhave, viññāṇaṁ vadetha? Vijānātīti kho, bhikkhave, tasmā ‘viññāṇan’ti vuccati. Kiñca vijānāti? Ambilampi vijānāti, tittakampi vijānāti, kaṭukampi vijānāti, madhurampi vijānāti, khārikampi vijānāti, akhārikampi vijānāti, loṇikampi vijānāti, aloṇikampi vijānāti. Vijānātīti kho, bhikkhave, tasmā ‘viññāṇan’ti vuccati.

7Tatra, bhikkhave, sutavā ariyasāvako iti paṭisañcikkhati: ‘Ahaṁ kho etarahi rūpena khajjāmi. Atītampāhaṁ addhānaṁ evameva rūpena khajjiṁ, seyyathāpi etarahi paccuppannena rūpena khajjāmi. Ahañceva kho pana anāgataṁ rūpaṁ abhinandeyyaṁ, anāgatampāhaṁ addhānaṁ evameva rūpena khajjeyyaṁ, seyyathāpi etarahi paccuppannena rūpena khajjāmī’ti. So iti paṭisaṅkhāya atītasmiṁ rūpasmiṁ anapekkho hoti; anāgataṁ rūpaṁ nābhinandati; paccuppannassa rūpassa nibbidāya virāgāya nirodhāya paṭipanno hoti.

---

8‘Ahaṁ kho etarahi vedanāya khajjāmi. Atītampāhaṁ addhānaṁ evameva vedanāya khajjiṁ, seyyathāpi etarahi paccuppannāya vedanāya khajjāmi. Ahañceva kho pana anāgataṁ vedanāṁ abhinandeyyaṁ; anāgatampāhaṁ addhānaṁ evameva vedanāya khajjeyyaṁ, seyyathāpi etarahi paccuppannāya vedanāya khajjāmī’ti. So iti paṭisaṅkhāya atītāya vedanāya anapekkho hoti; anāgataṁ vedanāṁ nābhinandati; paccuppannāya vedanāya nibbidāya virāgāya nirodhāya paṭipanno hoti.

9‘Ahaṁ kho etarahi saññāya khajjāmi … pe … ahaṁ kho etarahi saṅkhārehi khajjāmi. Atītampāhaṁ addhānaṁ evameva saṅkhārehi khajjiṁ, seyyathāpi etarahi paccuppannehi saṅkhārehi khajjāmīti. Ahañceva kho pana anāgate saṅkhāre abhinandeyyaṁ; anāgatampāhaṁ addhānaṁ evameva saṅkhārehi khajjeyyaṁ, seyyathāpi etarahi paccuppannehi saṅkhārehi khajjāmī’ti. So iti paṭisaṅkhāya atītesu saṅkhāresu anapekkho hoti; anāgate saṅkhāre nābhinandati; paccuppannānaṁ saṅkhārānaṁ nibbidāya virāgāya nirodhāya paṭipanno hoti.

10‘Ahaṁ kho etarahi viññāṇena khajjāmi. Atītampi addhānaṁ evameva viññāṇena khajjiṁ, seyyathāpi etarahi paccuppannena viññāṇena khajjāmi. Ahañceva kho pana anāgataṁ viññāṇaṁ abhinandeyyaṁ; anāgatampāhaṁ addhānaṁ evameva viññāṇena khajjeyyaṁ, seyyathāpi etarahi paccuppannena viññāṇena khajjāmī’ti. So iti paṭisaṅkhāya atītasmiṁ viññāṇasmiṁ anapekkho hoti; anāgataṁ viññāṇaṁ nābhinandati; paccuppannassa viññāṇassa nibbidāya virāgāya nirodhāya paṭipanno hoti.

---

11Taṁ kiṁ maññatha, bhikkhave, rūpaṁ niccaṁ vā aniccaṁ vā"ti? "Aniccaṁ, bhante". "Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vā taṁ sukhaṁ vā"ti? "Dukkhaṁ, bhante". "Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ, kallaṁ nu taṁ samanupassituṁ: ‘etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’"ti? "No hetaṁ, bhante".

"Vedanā … saññā … saṅkhārā … viññāṇaṁ niccaṁ vā aniccaṁ vā"ti? "Aniccaṁ, bhante". "Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vā taṁ sukhaṁ vā"ti? "Dukkhaṁ, bhante". "Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ, kallaṁ nu taṁ samanupassituṁ: ‘etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’"ti? "No hetaṁ, bhante". "Tasmātiha, bhikkhave, yaṁ kiñci rūpaṁ atītānāgatapaccuppannaṁ ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṁ vā sukhumaṁ vā hīnaṁ vā paṇītaṁ vā yaṁ dūre santike vā, sabbaṁ rūpaṁ: ‘netaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṁ yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṁ. Yā kāci vedanā … yā kāci saññā … ye keci saṅkhārā … yaṁ kiñci viññāṇaṁ atītānāgatapaccuppannaṁ … pe … yaṁ dūre santike vā, sabbaṁ viññāṇaṁ: ‘netaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṁ yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṁ.

---

12Ayaṁ vuccati, bhikkhave, ariyasāvako apacināti, no ācināti; pajahati, na upādiyati; visineti, na ussineti; vidhūpeti, na sandhūpeti.

Kiñca apacināti, no ācināti? Rūpaṁ apacināti, no ācināti; vedanāṁ … saññaṁ … saṅkhāre … viññāṇaṁ apacināti, no ācināti.

Kiñca pajahati, na upādiyati? Rūpaṁ pajahati, na upādiyati; vedanāṁ … saññaṁ … saṅkhāre … viññāṇaṁ pajahati, na upādiyati.

Kiñca visineti, na ussineti? Rūpaṁ visineti, na ussineti; vedanāṁ … saññaṁ … saṅkhāre … viññāṇaṁ visineti, na ussineti.

Kiñca vidhūpeti, na sandhūpeti? Rūpaṁ vidhūpeti, na sandhūpeti; vedanāṁ … saññaṁ … saṅkhāre … viññāṇaṁ vidhūpeti, na sandhūpeti.

13Evaṁ passaṁ, bhikkhave, sutavā ariyasāvako rūpasmimpi nibbindati, vedanāyapi … saññāyapi … saṅkhāresupi … viññāṇasmimpi nibbindati. Nibbindaṁ virajjati; virāgā vimuccati. Vimuttasmiṁ vimuttamiti ñāṇaṁ hoti. ‘Khīṇā jāti, vusitaṁ brahmacariyaṁ, kataṁ karaṇīyaṁ, nāparaṁ itthattāyā’ti pajānāti.

---

14Ayaṁ vuccati, bhikkhave, bhikkhu nevācināti na apacināti, apacinitvā ṭhito neva pajahati na upādiyati, pajahitvā ṭhito neva visineti na ussineti, visinetvā ṭhito neva vidhūpeti na sandhūpeti.

---

Vidhūpetvā ṭhito kiñca nevācināti na apacināti? Apacinitvā ṭhito rūpaṁ nevācināti na apacināti; apacinitvā ṭhito vedanāṁ … saññaṁ … saṅkhāre … viññāṇaṁ nevācināti na apacināti.

Apacinitvā ṭhito kiñca neva pajahati na upādiyati? Pajahitvā ṭhito rūpaṁ neva pajahati na upādiyati; pajahitvā ṭhito vedanāṁ … saññaṁ … saṅkhāre … viññāṇaṁ neva pajahati na upādiyati.

Pajahitvā ṭhito kiñca neva visineti na ussineti? Visinetvā ṭhito rūpaṁ neva visineti na ussineti; visinetvā ṭhito vedanāṁ … saññaṁ … saṅkhāre … viññāṇaṁ neva visineti na ussineti.

Visinetvā ṭhito kiñca neva vidhūpeti na sandhūpeti? Vidhūpetvā ṭhito rūpaṁ neva vidhūpeti na sandhūpeti; vidhūpetvā ṭhito vedanāṁ … saññaṁ … saṅkhāre … viññāṇaṁ neva vidhūpeti na sandhūpeti.

Vidhūpetvā ṭhito evaṁvimuttacittaṁ kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhuṁ saindā devā sabrahmakā sapajāpatikā ārakāva namassanti:

---

---

Sattamaṁ.