Chapter One
Dependent co-arising — paṭicca samuppāda — is the Buddha’s most complete analysis of the conditions leading to suffering, together with the conditions leading to suffering’s end. A passage in the Canon states that this was the topic he contemplated on emerging from his first week of meditation after his Awakening.
§ 3. I have heard that on one occasion, when the Blessed One was newly Awakened — staying at Uruvela by the banks of the Nerañjarā River in the shade of the Bodhi tree, the tree of Awakening — he sat in the shade of the Bodhi tree for seven days in one session, sensitive to the bliss of release. At the end of seven days, after emerging from that concentration, in the third watch of the night, he gave close attention to dependent co-arising in forward and reverse order, thus:
When this is, that is.
From the arising of this comes the arising of that.
When this isn’t, that isn’t.
From the cessation of this comes the cessation of that.
In other words:
From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications.
From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness.
From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form.
From name-and-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media.
From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact.
From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling.
From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving.
From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance.
From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming.
From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth.
From birth as a requisite condition, then aging-and-death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress and suffering.
Now from the remainderless fading and cessation of that very ignorance comes the cessation of fabrications. From the cessation of fabrications comes the cessation of consciousness. From the cessation of consciousness comes the cessation of name-and-form. From the cessation of name-and-form comes the cessation of the six sense media. From the cessation of the six sense media comes the cessation of contact. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of feeling. From the cessation of feeling comes the cessation of craving. From the cessation of craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging-and-death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of stress and suffering. — Ud 1:3
Another passage states that even the first stage of Awakening — stream entry — involves a fourfold insight into any one of the factors of dependent co-arising: knowing the factor, knowing how the origination of its requisite condition leads to its origination, knowing how the cessation of its requisite condition leads to its cessation, and knowing the path of practice leading to its cessation. Here, for example, is how the passage treats the factor of fabrication:
§ 4. “Which fabrications? These three fabrications: bodily fabrications, verbal fabrications, mental fabrications. These are called fabrications. From the origination of ignorance comes the origination of fabrications. From the cessation of ignorance comes the cessation of fabrications. And precisely this noble eightfold path is the way of practice leading to the cessation of fabrications: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.
“And when a disciple of the noble ones discerns the requisite condition in this way, discerns the origination of the requisite condition in this way, discerns the cessation of the requisite condition in this way, discerns the way of practice leading to the cessation of the condition in this way, he is called a disciple of the noble ones who is ‘one consummate in view,’ ‘one consummate in vision,’ ‘one who has come to this true Dhamma,’ ‘one who sees this true Dhamma,’ ‘one endowed with the knowledge of one in training,’ ‘one endowed with the clear knowing of one in training,’ ‘one who has attained the stream of Dhamma,’ ‘a noble one of penetrating discernment,’ ‘one who stands squarely in the door of the deathless.’” — SN 12:27
This is why Ven. Sāriputta equated vision of the Dhamma with vision of dependent co-arising:
§ 5. Ven. Sāriputta: “Now, the Blessed One has said, ‘Whoever sees dependent co-arising sees the Dhamma; whoever sees the Dhamma sees dependent co-arising.’” — MN 28
For anyone who aims at Awakening to the Dhamma that provides release from suffering and stress, these facts can prove daunting. Dependent co-arising is an extremely complex topic, so complex that the Buddha compared its effects to tangles and knots:
§ 6. Ven. Ānanda: It’s amazing, lord, it’s astounding, how deep this dependent co-arising is, and how deep its appearance, and yet to me it seems as clear as clear can be.
The Buddha: Don’t say that, Ānanda. Don’t say that. Deep is this dependent co-arising, and deep its appearance. It’s because of not understanding and not penetrating this Dhamma that this generation is like a tangled skein, a knotted ball of string, like matted rushes and reeds, and does not go beyond the cycle of the planes of deprivation, woe, and bad destinations. — DN 15
However, the complexity of dependent co-arising does not have to act as a deterrent to the practice. Many of the aspects of dependent co-arising that are most useful to know for the purpose of putting an end to suffering appear right on the surface. In fact, they are so obvious that they are often overlooked. And even the complexity of dependent co-arising, although it may be initially confusing, is actually an aid in bringing suffering to an end. So it’s good to look both for the obvious features of the process and for the ways in which the complexity is actually a friend in disguise.
First, the obvious features:
• When the conditions give rise to one another, they lead to suffering. Unlike later Buddhist teachers, the Buddha did not see the interconnectedness of conditions as something to celebrate. He saw that it inevitably leads to stress, suffering, and pain. This is because:
• The causal system is essentially unstable. Nothing caused can be permanent, for there are no permanent causes. Any happiness based on impermanent causes will have to be impermanent as well. When a cause passes away, its effect will — either immediately or over time — pass away, too. This point may seem obvious, but it is a sharp break from the causal teachings of other philosophies in the Buddha’s time, and from any philosophy in which impermanent events owe their existence to a timeless, permanent cause or emanate from a metaphysical ground of being. For example, the Upaniṣads — Indian religious texts that predated the Buddha — proposed many explanations for how the visible world came into being, and although the explanations differ in their details, they all follow a pattern in which Being, as an abstract, timeless principle, gives rise to a series of other powers and principles that in turn produce the world we experience. Theories of this sort cannot adequately explain how a permanent cause can lead to an impermanent effect. They also give no practical guidance on how undesirable effects can be alleviated.
Because dependent co-arising begins with unstable causes, any happiness produced by the causal process will have to be unstable, inconstant, and unreliable. This is the downside of dependent co-arising. The Buddha conveyed this point by likening the causal process to the act of eating; effects feed off their causes. Inter-being is inter-eating. Although we may think that the suffering inherent in feeding is primarily felt by those forced into the role of food, the Buddha points out that it’s also stressful for those who need to feed. Their continued survival is uncertain, requiring that they continually look for new sources of nutriment.
However, the instability of dependent co-arising has its upside as well. To put an end to an effect, you simply have to put an end to its cause. This means that:
• The suffering caused by this system can be ended. The Buddha’s solution to the problem of suffering was not to accept suffering as an inevitable part of life. It was to find the causes of suffering and to bring them to total cessation, so that suffering could be brought to total cessation as well.
• The causal system follows a pattern. It is possible to point to a cause for each factor in dependent co-arising, and the particular relationship between each cause and effect holds true over time. It is not dependent on the vagaries of time, culture, or place. Unlike some thinkers who state that each moment is so radically new that lessons learned from the past obscure it, the Buddha saw that knowledge of dependent co-arising can fruitfully be applied to every moment of suffering. Thus dependent co-arising provides a precise body of knowledge that can be applied to the problem of suffering in all times and all places.
• The factors most important in leading to stress and suffering occur prior to sensory contact. This means that suffering is not caused primarily by unpleasant sensory contact; it is caused by the attitudes and views that are brought to any sensory contact, pleasant or not. This further means that the crucial causes for stress and suffering are internal, and thus not dependent on outside circumstances. They are subject to one’s knowledge and will. In this way, the quest for the end of suffering is primarily an internal matter of training the mind.
• Ignorance is the primary cause of suffering; knowledge is the primary factor leading to its cessation. As passage §14 shows, ignorance here means not seeing events in terms of the four noble truths: stress, its origination, its cessation, and the path of practice leading to its cessation. These four noble truths are best understood, not as a body of facts about stress, but as categories for framing any and all experiences in a way that allows you to diagnose and cure the problem of stress. Instead of looking at an experience, for instance, in terms of self or other, of what your true nature is, or of what you like and dislike, you look at it in terms of where there’s stress, what’s causing it, and how to put an end to the cause. Once you can divide the territory of experience in this way, you realize that each of these categories is an activity. The word “stress” may be a noun, but the experience of stress is shaped by your intentions. It’s something you do. The same holds true with the other truths, too. Seeing this, you can work on perfecting the skill appropriate for each activity. The skill with regard to stress is to comprehend it to the point where you have no more passion, aversion, or delusion toward doing it. To perfect this skill, you also have to abandon the cause of stress, to realize its cessation, and to develop the path to its cessation. Once you have fully mastered these skills, you have developed the knowledge that puts a total end to the ignorance underlying all the other factors in dependent co-arising.
• All the factors of dependent co-arising are processes and events that are immediately present in one’s awareness. There is no need to search outside of your immediate present awareness for any hidden causes underlying these factors. Every factor is right here to be observed. Even the factor of becoming — the sense of identity within a world of experience fashioned from the data of the senses — is a process, a sense of being that comes from doing and that can be observed to change as your intentional actions change.
The ability to see all of these factors simply as processes and events, without any reference to the question of whether there is anything underlying them, is an important skill in learning how to see them in terms of the four noble truths. This point is emphasized in many passages where the Buddha refuses to entertain the question of whether there are substances or agents — such as a world outside or a self or soul inside — underlying the direct experience of the factors of dependent co-arising.
For example, he refuses to entertain such questions as, “Who feels?” or “Who clings?” “Whose is the aging-and-death?” (Or, “The aging-and-death of what?)” or “The birth/rebirth of what?” because such questions lead inevitably to related questions of how to define the “who” or “what” being affirmed or denied, a process that leads further and further away from a direct vision of the processes of suffering and stress as processes, in and of themselves, as they occur.
§ 7. The Buddha: “From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact.’”
Ven. Moliyaphagguna: “Lord, who makes contact?”
“Not a valid question,” the Blessed One said. “I don’t say ‘makes contact.’ If I were to say ‘makes contact,’ then ‘Who makes contact?’ would be a valid question. But I don’t say that. When I don’t say that, the valid question is ‘From what as a requisite condition comes contact?’ And the valid answer is, ‘From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling.’”
“Lord, who feels?”
“Not a valid question,” the Blessed One said. “I don’t say ‘feels.’ If I were to say ‘feels,’ then ‘Who feels?’ would be a valid question. But I don’t say that. When I don’t say that, the valid question is ‘From what as a requisite condition comes feeling?’ And the valid answer is, ‘From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving.’”
“Lord, who craves?”
“Not a valid question,” the Blessed One said. “I don’t say ‘craves.’ If I were to say ‘craves,’ then ‘Who craves?’ would be a valid question. But I don’t say that. When I don’t say that, the valid question is ‘From what as a requisite condition comes craving?’ And the valid answer is, ‘From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance.’”
“Lord, who clings?”
“Not a valid question,” the Blessed One said. “I don’t say ‘clings.’ If I were to say ‘clings,’ then ‘Who clings?’ would be a valid question. But I don’t say that. When I don’t say that, the valid question is ‘From what as a requisite condition comes clinging?’ And the valid answer is, ‘From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging. From clinging as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress and suffering.” — SN 12:12
§ 8. The Blessed One said, “From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications…. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging-and-death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress and suffering.”
When this was said, a certain monk said to the Blessed One: “Which is the aging-and-death, lord, and whose is the aging-and-death?”
“Not a valid question,” the Blessed One said. “If one were to ask, ‘Which is the aging-and-death, and whose is the aging-and-death?’ and if one were to say, ‘Aging-and-death is one thing, and the aging-and-death is something/someone else’s,’ both of them would have the same meaning, even though their words would differ. It’s not the case that when one is of the view that the soul is the same as the body there is the leading of the holy life. And it’s not the case that when one is of the view that the soul is one thing and the body another there is the leading of the holy life. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathāgata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From birth as a requisite condition comes aging-and- death.”
“Which is the birth, lord, and whose is the birth?”
“Not a valid question,” the Blessed One said…. “From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth.”
“Which is the becoming, lord, and whose is the becoming?”
“Not a valid question,” the Blessed One said…. “From clinging as a requisite condition comes becoming.”
“Which is the clinging, lord, and whose is the clinging?”
“Not a valid question,” the Blessed One said…. “From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging.”
“Which is the craving, lord, and whose is the craving?”
“Not a valid question,” the Blessed One said…. “From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving.”
“Which is the feeling, lord, and whose is the feeling?”
“Not a valid question,” the Blessed One said…. “From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling.”
“Which is the contact, lord, and whose is the contact?”
“Not a valid question,” the Blessed One said…. “From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact.”
“Which are the six sense media, lord, and whose are the six sense media?”
“Not a valid question,” the Blessed One said…. “From name-and-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media.”
“Which is the name-and-form, lord, and whose is the name-and-form?”
“Not a valid question,” the Blessed One said…. “From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form.”
“Which is the consciousness, lord, and whose is the consciousness?”
“Not a valid question,” the Blessed One said…. “From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness.”
“Which are the fabrications, lord, and whose are the fabrications?”
“Not a valid question,” the Blessed One said. “If one were to ask, ‘Which are the fabrications, and whose are the fabrications?’ and if one were to say, ‘Fabrications are one thing, and the fabrications are something/someone else’s,’ both of them would have the same meaning, even though their words would differ. It’s not the case that when one is of the view that the soul is the same as the body there is the leading of the holy life. And it’s not the case that when one is of the view that the soul is one thing and the body another there is the leading of the holy life. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathāgata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications.
“Now from the remainderless fading and cessation of that very ignorance, all of these writhings and wrigglings and wigglings — ‘Which is the aging-and-death, and whose is the aging-and-death?’ or ‘Aging-and-death are one thing, and this aging-and- death are something/someone else’s’ or ‘The soul is the same as the body,’ or ‘The soul is one thing and the body another’ — are abandoned, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of existence, not destined for future arising.
“From the remainderless fading and cessation of that very ignorance, all of these writhings and wrigglings and wigglings — ‘Which is the birth…. Which is the becoming…. Which is the clinging…. Which is the craving…. Which is the feeling…. Which is the contact…. Which are the six sense media…. Which is the name-and-form…. Which is the consciousness…. Which are the fabrications, and whose are the fabrications?’ or ‘Fabrications are one thing, and these fabrications are something/someone else’s’ or ‘The soul is the same as the body,’ or ‘The soul is one thing and the body another’ — are abandoned, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of existence, not destined for future arising.” — SN 12:35
The ability to remain focused on the processes of dependent co-arising also works at cross-purposes with any attempt to posit the existence or nonexistence, the oneness or the plurality, of the cosmos as a whole.
§ 9. Then a brāhman cosmologist went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings and courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One, “Now, then, Master Gotama, does everything exist?”
“‘Everything exists’ is the senior form of cosmology, brāhman.”
“Then, Master Gotama, does everything not exist?”
“‘Everything does not exist’ is the second form of cosmology, brāhman.”
“Then is everything a Oneness?”
“‘Everything is a Oneness’ is the third form of cosmology, brāhman.”
“Then is everything a plurality?”
“‘Everything is a plurality is the fourth form of cosmology, brāhman.
Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathāgata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications….” — SN 12:48
§ 10. “By and large, Kaccāyana, this world is supported by/takes as its object a polarity, that of existence and non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world with right discernment as it has come to be, ‘non-existence’ with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world with right discernment as it has come to be, ‘existence’ with reference to the world does not occur to one.
“By and large, Kaccāyana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings/sustenances, and biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases, or obsessions; nor is he resolved on ‘my self.’ He has no uncertainty or doubt that mere stress, when arising, is arising; stress, when passing away, is passing away. In this, his knowledge is independent of others. It’s to this extent, Kaccāyana, that there is right view.” — SN 12:15
The ability to remain focused on the processes of dependent co-arising also requires abandoning any questions of who is the agent behind the process or the subject experiencing the process. To overcome ignorance, there has to be an exclusive focus on the process as a causal process, in and of itself, as it is actually happening.
§ 11. Then a certain brāhman went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings and courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: “What now, Master Gotama? Is the one who acts the same one who experiences (the results of the act)?”
“(To say,) brāhman, ‘The one who acts is the same one who experiences,’ is one extreme.”
“Then, Master Gotama, is the one who acts someone other than the one who experiences?”
“(To say,) brāhman, ‘The one who acts is someone other than the one who experiences,’ is the second extreme. Avoiding both of these extremes, the Tathāgata teaches the Dhamma via the middle:
“From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications….” — SN 12:46
§ 12. “Whatever brāhmans and contemplatives, teachers of kamma, who declare that pleasure and pain are self-made, even that is dependent on contact. Whatever brāhmans and contemplatives, teachers of kamma, who declare that pleasure and pain are other-made… self-made and other-made… neither self-made nor other-made, but arise spontaneously, even that is dependent on contact.
“That any brāhmans and contemplatives — teachers of kamma who declare that pleasure and pain are self-made — would be sensitive to pleasure and pain otherwise than through contact, that isn’t possible. That any brāhmans and contemplatives — teachers of kamma who declare that pleasure and pain are other-made… self-made and other-made… neither self-made nor other-made, but arise spontaneously — would be sensitive to pleasure and pain otherwise than through contact, that isn’t possible.
“When there is a body, pleasure and pain arise internally with bodily intention as the cause; or when there is speech, pleasure and pain arise internally with verbal intention as the cause; or when there is intellect, pleasure and pain arise internally with intellectual intention as the cause.
“From ignorance as a requisite condition, then either of one’s own accord one fabricates the bodily fabrication on account of which that pleasure and pain arise internally, or because of others one fabricates the bodily fabrication on account of which that pleasure and pain arise internally. Either alert one fabricates the bodily fabrication on account of which that pleasure and pain arise internally, or unalert one fabricates the bodily fabrication on account of which that pleasure and pain arise internally. [Similarly with verbal and intellectual fabrications.] “Now, ignorance is bound up in these things. From the remainderless fading and cessation of that very ignorance, there no longer exists (the sense of) the body on account of which that pleasure and pain internally arise. There no longer exists the speech… the intellect on account of which that pleasure and pain internally arise. There no longer exists the field, the site, the dimension, or the issue on account of which that pleasure and pain internally arise.” — SN 12:25
These, then, are some of the important features of dependent co-arising that are immediately apparent. The arising of conditions leads to suffering and stress. The causal system is unstable but follows a pattern. The primary causes giving rise to suffering and stress occur prior to sensory contact. Ignorance — not seeing things in terms of the four noble truths — is foremost among these primary causes. And the ability to see things in terms of the four noble truths — which involves seeing the factors of dependent co-arising simply as processes and events immediately experienced — is the knowledge that puts an end to ignorance and thus to all suffering and stress. What’s important to note is that these features are not simply facts about suffering; they are also ways of viewing suffering that aid in bringing about its cessation. The ability to see dependent co-arising as dependent co-arising is a first step in developing the clear knowledge that brings ignorance to an end.
* * *
Complexity is another obvious feature of dependent co-arising. What is less obvious is that this complexity is precisely the feature that allows for the causal connections leading to suffering to become undone. Even though, as the Buddha noted, the many complexities of dependent co-arising have caused people to be entangled and trapped in the cycle of suffering, they actually explain why it is possible to unravel the chain of factors leading to suffering. To understand why, it is useful first to understand a few points about the nature of complexity as displayed in nonlinear systems such as the weather, turbulence in air or liquids, the rise and fall of animal populations or predators and prey, and the behavior of physical structures, such as bridges. These systems are apt analogues for dependent co-arising in that — despite the fact that their behavior sometimes seems chaotic — their behavior actually contains deep, regular patterns. Furthermore, in some cases, these patterns can be utilized so that the system will behave in a desired way.
In a nonlinear system, the behavior of the system as a whole is more than the simple sum of the individual behavior of its component parts. When such a system is sufficiently large, and its members sufficiently interrelated, it can organize itself into new and complex patterns of behavior. The interrelations that underlie these patterns often take the form of feedback loops, which are patterns of the sort where A influences B, B influences C, and C influences A. In a complex nonlinear system, these feedback loops interact with one another, causing further feedback loops on larger and larger scales. These interactions can either amplify any change occurring in them — causing “positive feedback” — or they can dampen it — causing “negative feedback.” An example of a positive feedback loop would be the one created by a speaker placed next to a microphone feeding into it. The howl created by this loop simply grows stronger and stronger until the equipment can no longer handle it. An example of a negative feedback loop would be the action of a thermostat that turns off a heater when the temperature in a room is too high, and turns it on again when it gets too low.
Scientists studying nonlinear systems simply to observe and understand their internal dynamics tend to be interested in the deterministic side of these systems: the fact that given a certain set of parameter values, the systems will invariably behave in a certain way. However, doctors and engineers working with such systems tend to be more interested in their non-deterministic side: the fact that the parameters affecting the system can be adjusted to certain values to achieve a desired effect. In this regard, the Buddha falls clearly into the second category: He taught dependent co-arising not simply for its own sake, but to show how its factors can be manipulated to lead to the end of suffering. This is why he argued against strict determinism (AN 3:62) and why he often compared himself to a doctor, curing the illnesses of the mind (Iti 100; AN 3:22; AN 10:108).
Thus, in looking among complex nonlinear systems for useful parallels for dependent co-arising, it is important to focus on the areas where their behavior can be changed. And although not all complex nonlinear systems display the same behavior, many of them provide useful parallels of just this sort. For instance:
• In some of these systems, the feedback loops are so persistently interconnected that changes caused by a small feedback loop can affect the system very quickly or over longer stretches of time.
• In some of these systems — called “scale free” or “scale invariant” — the behavior of their many intersecting feedback loops follows the same pattern on larger and smaller scales. These systems are thus said to be “self-similar” across scale. For instance, in a Mandelbrot set — the famous fractal set used to illustrate chaos theory — the “bug” shape of the set as a whole is found repeatedly as one zooms into the fractal at smaller and smaller spatial scales. Another example is turbulence in water or gases, which can be fruitfully studied on many different scales.
• When subject to different parameter values, the behavior of these systems can change radically, yielding different results, even though they continue to follow the same underlying causal patterns. When the parameter values governing them approach certain threshold or tipping points, the behavior of some complex nonlinear systems can shift from one “basin of attraction” to another, in which its behavior will exhibit a qualitatively different pattern. An example is water flowing through a pipe, which will display a certain pattern of turbulence when subjected to one set of parameter values, such as the width of the pipe and the speed and pressure of the flow, and other patterns when the parameter values are increased or decreased to certain threshold levels. In systems such as population dynamics or the behavior of financial markets, where these patterns of behavior can be either desirable or undesirable, certain parameter values can cause the feedback loops to form “vicious” cycles, where they make the overall behavior progressively more undesirable, while other parameter values can turn the same feedback loops into “virtuous” cycles, where they make the overall behavior progressively more desirable.
• When the crucial parameter values shift back and forth over a threshold or tipping point, the system can shift back and forth between the corresponding basins of attraction.
• When settled in some sets of parameter values, these systems are stable — in other words, their internal feedback loops tend to reinforce the stability of the system — but when settled in others, those same feedback loops can drive the system toward collapse. A classic example here is the interactions among the structural elements of a bridge. In most situations, the elements are mutually stabilizing. But when the bridge is subjected to rhythmic pressures — as from wind, an earthquake, or a marching column of soldiers — those same structural interactions can amplify those disturbances. If the frequency of the disturbances reaches a resonance point — determined by the frequencies at which the whole bridge vibrates — the equations expressing the bridge’s response to the disturbances will contain a factor divided by zero. This, of course, produces an undefined result, which breaks the feedback loops described by those equations. If the rhythmic pressure is persistent enough to bring a crucial number of individual feedback loops into the resonance, their cascading effect can cause the whole bridge to collapse.
These five characteristics are analogous to features of dependent co-arising that play an important role in the quest to reduce or put an end to suffering:
• Because all the feedback loops in dependent co-arising interact in a persistent way, changes in a momentary sequence of dependent co-arising can have both immediate and long-lasting effects on the longer sequences. For example, when an unskillful intention is replaced with a skillful one, it can immediately lessen suffering, at the same time creating conditions for more skillful intentions in the future. Similarly, when the causes leading to the rebirth of attachment in the mind are severed, suffering is immediately ended; at the same time, the causes leading to future rebirth on the physical level are severed as well.
• Dependent co-arising can be observed at many scales. This means that lessons drawn from observing the world can be applied to the mind, and lessons drawn from observing the mind can be applied to one’s interactions with the world. Lessons about the process of death and rebirth on the physical level, for example, can be gained from observing the present-moment death and rebirth of attachments in the mind.
• Dependent co-arising can be influenced, without breaking the causal patterns underlying the system, so that the factors of the system can function not as causes of suffering, but as factors of a path leading to the end of suffering. The main parameter exerting this influence is knowledge in terms of the four noble truths. Where this knowledge is absent, the factors of dependent co-arising lead invariably to suffering. Where it is present in varying degrees, it can turn the vicious cycle of suffering into a more virtuous cycle of the path. In particular, if the factor of fabrication is informed by knowledge, it can be gradually fashioned into the central factor of the noble eightfold path: right concentration. Similarly, if the sub-factor of intention, under name, is informed by appropriate attention — another sub-factor under name — it can be gradually fashioned into all eight factors of the path.
• When ignorance of the four noble truths alternates with knowledge of those truths, the relationships within dependent co-arising will alternate between a pattern in which they produce suffering and one in which they put an end to suffering. Knowledge in terms of the four noble truths is not an all-or-nothing affair. Each of the truths has a task appropriate to it: Stress is to be comprehended, its origination abandoned, its cessation realized, and the path to its cessation developed. Because these tasks need to be mastered as skills, their mastery will follow the gradual path of any skill, growing by fits and starts, with setbacks alternating with periods of progress.
• When the skills appropriate to the noble eightfold path are consistently and masterfully applied to dependent co-arising, they can cause the entire system of suffering and its causes to collapse. This is because this knowledge brings about a form of vision that inclines neither to becoming nor to non-becoming. This mode of vision functions as a resonance in that it causes the many feedback loops connected with becoming or non-becoming to become undefined. If applied consistently enough, this mode of vision can have a cascading effect, causing all the feedback loops in dependent co-arising to become undefined, thus bringing about the collapse of the entire system.
The specific features of dependent co-arising as described in the Pali Canon show how these general principles operate in practice.
To begin with, the causal principle underlying the processes of dependent co-arising is a complex principle, allowing for feedback loops to develop, to interact persistently, and to intersect on different time scales. The principle is this:
§ 13. “[1] When this is, that is.
“[2] From the arising of this comes the arising of that.
“[3] When this isn’t, that isn’t.
“[4] From the cessation of this comes the cessation of that.” — Ud 1:3
This pattern is called this/that conditionality — idappaccayatā — because it describes the interaction of events that can be pointed to as “this” or “that” in immediate experience. It is best understood as the interaction of two principles. The more obvious of the two, expressed in [2] and [4], connects events over time. The arising of A will, at some point in time, cause the arising of B. The ceasing of A will, at some point in time, cause the ceasing of B. An example here would be the relation between a physical feeling of pleasure or pain and a complex emotion (or, to use the Buddhist technical term, saṅkhāra, a fabrication) based on the feeling. There can be a lapse in time between the arising of the feeling and the arising of the emotion, just as there can be a lapse in time between their ceasing.
The second principle, expressed in [1] and [3], connects two events in the present moment. When A is present, B exists. When A is absent, B doesn’t exist. This principle operates primarily on the level of subtle mind states persistently arising and passing away. An example would be the way in which the process of each moment of attachment’s aging-and-death occurs simultaneously with the process of its taking birth. The Buddha stated that his ability to detect this level of causality was a “breakthrough of discernment” (SN 12:10; SN 12:65), which suggests how difficult it is to perceive. Nevertheless, the principle can be readily observed in the relation between contact and feeling. When contact is present at any of the senses, a corresponding feeling tone immediately comes into being; when the contact is absent, the feeling tone is immediately gone.
These two causal principles intersect, so that any particular experience will be conditioned by both past and present events. Applied to dependent co-arising, this fact means that events included in any one factor of the list can be affected not only by past events in the factors that act as their conditions, but also by the persistent on-going, interacting presence of whole streams of events in those factors. All factors can be present at once, and even though two particular conditions may be separated by several steps in the list, they can be immediately present to each other. Thus they can create the possibility for the feedback loops to behave in unexpected ways. This is what allows for the complexity of dependent co-arising, and for the fact that it contains many feedback loops, operating on different time scales.
The feedback loops in dependent co-arising are most clearly shown in the Buddha’s most complete analysis of its individual factors, although even this analysis does not show all the feedback loops that can be discovered when the factors are pursued in greater detail. To illustrate the principle of feedback, the most important fact to note about the following passage is the number of times feeling appears, both as a factor on its own and as a subfactor of fabrication and name-and-form.
Given that suffering is also a feeling, this means that the suffering produced by one sequence of influences can feed back into the system at several places. If it feeds back at the factor of feeling, it would simply condition more craving. If it feeds back at the factor of fabrication, it could be subjected to verbal fabrications (directed thought and evaluation) and even to the physical fabrication of the way one breathes around them. If these fabrications are unskillful — applied with ignorance — they could lead to another sequence culminating in more suffering and stress. If skillful — applied with knowledge — they would dampen the tendency for this suffering to lead to more suffering in the present or future. If supremely skillful, they could cut the fabric of suffering once and for all. If the feeling feeds back at the factor of name-and-form, it would be subjected to an act of attention, which could be inappropriate, appropriate, or supremely appropriate, inciting unskillful, skillful, or supremely skillful intentions, yielding a similar range of possibilities. The feeling that results directly from contact at the six senses could feed back into fabrication or name-and-form in similar ways. Thus the precise way in which these factors could play through the system shows not only the complexity of the system, but also the precise way in which the system offers opportunities for amplifying suffering, mitigating suffering, or putting suffering to an end.
§ 14. “Now which aging-and-death? Whatever aging, decrepitude, brokenness, graying, wrinkling, decline of life-force, weakening of the faculties of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called aging. Whatever deceasing, passing away, breaking up, disappearance, dying, death, completion of time, break-up of the aggregates, casting off of the body, interruption in the life faculty of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called death.
“And which birth? Whatever birth, taking birth, descent, coming-to-be, coming-forth, appearance of aggregates, and acquisition of sense media of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called birth.
“And which becoming? These three becomings: sensuality-becoming, form-becoming, and formless-becoming. This is called becoming.
“And which clinging/sustenance? These four clingings: sensuality-clinging, view-clinging, habit-and-practice-clinging, and doctrine-of-self-clinging. This is called clinging.
“And which craving? These six classes of craving: craving for forms, craving for sounds, craving for aromas, craving for tastes, craving for tactile sensations, craving for ideas. This is called craving.
“And which feeling? These six classes of feeling: feeling born from eye-contact, feeling born from ear-contact, feeling born from nose-contact, feeling born from tongue-contact, feeling born from body-contact, feeling born from intellect-contact. This is called feeling.
“And which contact? These six classes of contact: eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, intellect-contact. This is called contact.
“And which six sense media? These six sense media: the eye-medium, the ear-medium, the nose-medium, the tongue-medium, the body-medium, the intellect-medium. These are called the six sense media.
“And which name-and-form? Feeling, perception, intention, contact, and attention: This is called name. The four great elements [earth, water, wind, and fire] and the form dependent on the four great elements: This is called form. This name and this form are called name-and-form.
“And which consciousness? These six classes of consciousness: eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, intellect-consciousness. This is called consciousness.
“And which fabrications? These three fabrications: bodily fabrications [in-and-out breathing], verbal fabrications [directed thought and evaluation], mental fabrications [feeling and perception]. These are called fabrications.
“And which ignorance? Not knowing in terms of stress, not knowing in terms of the origination of stress, not knowing in terms of the cessation of stress, not knowing in terms of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: This is called ignorance.” — SN 12:2
In addition to the feedback loops involving feeling, there are other feedback loops in dependent co-arising that are not explicitly shown in the above passage. MN 18 shows that consciousness, in addition to preceding name-and-form, can also follow on the six sense media. Perception, in addition to its appearance in fabrications and name-and-form, can also follow on feeling and, as shown in § 110, form an alternative locus for craving.
§ 15. “Dependent on eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives [labels in the mind]. What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one objectifies. Based on what a person objectifies, the perceptions and categories of objectification assail him/her with regard to past, present, and future forms cognizable via the eye. [Similarly with the other sense media.]” — MN 18
Thus the many interlocking feedback loops in dependent co-arising show clear parallels with complex, nonlinear systems. For practical purposes, this point is extremely important. Many later schools of Buddhism depicted dependent co-arising as a circle or a wheel of causes, with the bewilderment caused by stress and suffering looping back into ignorance, thus setting up the conditions for another round of stress. But any system described by a circle offers no pathways for deviating from the circle. When subjected to different parameter values, the sequences of cause and effect simply go faster or slower around the circle but cannot leave it. A system with many feedback loops, however, does offer alternative pathways for intensifying or lessening the effects of the system by shifting it into alternative basins of attraction, in which it exhibits distinct modes of behavior. It also offers the possibility of using different parameter values to nudge the system from one basin of attraction to another until it gets nudged consistently into a resonance where it comes to a point of collapse. (We will further explore the ways in which the factors of dependent co-arising can influence one another in this way, thus acting as the path to the end of suffering, in Chapters Two and Three.)
As we have already noted, the primary parameters that have this influence on dependent co-arising are measured in terms of the presence and absence of knowledge in terms of the four noble truths. This is why ignorance of the four noble truths is listed as the first factor in dependent co-arising. This is not because ignorance is an uncaused cause for the system (see §61), but because it is the factor that can be manipulated into a new set of parameter values that can cause the entire system to break down. This is why the standard description of the end of stress invariably describes the ending of stress as a result of severing the first link, ignorance. Only then do the other conditions cease.
However, the feedback loops in dependent co-arising are so arranged that, in practice, the knowledge that puts an end to stress can be applied to any one of the factors. When that factor is no longer conditioned by ignorance at all, it reaches a resonance point. Its cessation, combined with the cessation of ignorance, can send ramifications through the entire sequence, bringing the entire sequence to cessation. When people speak of cutting dependent co-arising at one of its links — such as the link between feeling and craving — what is actually happening is that full knowledge with regard to that link has replaced ignorance with regard to that link. With the ceasing of ignorance, fabrications cease, and so cessation cascades throughout the entire sequence.
The fact that the ending of ignorance can occur by developing knowledge in terms of the four noble truths with reference to any of the factors of dependent co-arising is explored in great detail in two discourses: MN 9 and Sn 3:12. The ways in which these discourses make this point can be illustrated by the way each approaches the factor of feeling.
§ 16. Ven. Sāriputta: “When a disciple of the noble ones discerns feeling, the origination of feeling, the cessation of feeling, and the way of practice leading to the cessation of feeling, then he is a person of right view, one whose view is made straight, who is endowed with verified confidence in the Dhamma, and who has arrived at this true Dhamma.”
“And what is feeling? What is the origination of feeling? What is the cessation of feeling? What is the way of practice leading to the cessation of feeling?
“There are these six feelings: feeling born from eye-contact, feeling born from ear-contact, feeling born from nose-contact, feeling born from tongue-contact, feeling born from body-contact, feeling born from intellect-contact. This is called feeling.
“From the origination of contact comes the origination of feeling. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of feeling. And the way of practice leading to the cessation of feeling is just this very noble eightfold path: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.
“Now, when a disciple of the noble ones discerns feeling, the origination of feeling, the cessation of feeling, and the way of practice leading to the cessation of feeling in this way, when — having entirely abandoned passion-obsession, having abolished aversion-obsession, having uprooted the view-and-conceit obsession ‘I am’; having abandoned ignorance and given rise to clear knowing — he has put an end to suffering and stress right in the here-and-now, it is to this extent, too, that a disciple of the noble ones is a person of right view, one whose view is made straight, who is endowed with verified confidence in the Dhamma, and who has arrived at this true Dhamma.” — MN 9
§ 17. “‘Whatever stress comes into play is all from feeling as a requisite condition’; this is one contemplation. ‘From the remainderless fading and cessation of that very feeling, there is no coming into play of stress’; this is a second contemplation. For a monk rightly contemplating this duality in this way — heedful, ardent, and resolute — one of two fruits can be expected: either gnosis right here and now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging/sustenance — non-return.”
That is what the Blessed One said. Having said that, the One Well-gone, the Teacher, said further:
“Knowing that
whatever is felt —
pleasure, pain,
neither pleasure nor pain,
within or without —
is stressful,
deceptive,
dissolving,
seeing its passing away
at each contact,
each
contact,
he knows it right there.
With just the ending of feeling,
there is no stress
coming into play.” — Sn 3:12
The knowledge described in MN 9 is more explicitly related to the four noble truths than is the knowledge described in Sn 3:12, yet even the latter knowledge implicitly follows the same basic pattern, seeing the arising of stress as coming from a cause, and the cessation of stress as coming from the cessation of the cause. MN 9 simply provides greater detail in describing the path of practice leading to that cessation.
Sn 3:12 applies this analysis to seven of the factors of dependent co-arising: ignorance, fabrications, consciousness, contact, feeling, craving, and clinging. MN 9 applies this analysis to all twelve of the factors. This means in practice that there is no need to know the entire sequence of factors in order to put an end to suffering and stress. A person merely needs to focus on a particular factor or relationship within the sequence — whichever is easiest to focus on — and to apply knowledge in terms of the four noble truths to that spot. This is why the Buddha, in teaching the way to the end of suffering and stress, did not have to explain the entire sequence every time to every student. He could focus simply on whichever factor or set of factors was most transparent to the student, recommend a relevant meditative practice, and that would be enough for the student to bring suffering to an end. This tactic will be explored in further detail in Chapter Three, where different aspects of Buddhist practice are listed under the factors of dependent co-arising to which they are most closely related.
The complexity of the feedback loops in dependent co-arising not only allowed the Buddha and his students to focus attention on particular factors as appropriate to his audience. It also allowed them to explore further feedback loops within the loops, and alternative ways of expressing the sequence as a whole. For example, in DN 15 the Buddha plays two changes on the basic sequence. On the “results” end of the sequence, he explores another way in which feeling can lead to suffering. On the “cause” end, he replaces the standard sequence of ignorance, fabrication, consciousness, and name-and-form with another pattern in which name-and-form and consciousness condition one another. This latter change is less radical than it may appear at first glance, because name-and-form contains the sub-factor of attention. Inappropriate attention is a synonym for ignorance; appropriate attention is a synonym for knowledge. Thus in both patterns, ignorance is the prime cause for stress, and knowledge is the prime cause for bringing stress to an end.
§ 18. “If one is asked, ‘From what requisite condition does name-and-form come?’ one should say, ‘Name-and-form comes from consciousness as its requisite condition.’…
“If one is asked, ‘From what requisite condition does consciousness come?’ one should say, ‘Consciousness comes from name-and-form as its requisite condition.’
“Thus, Ānanda, from name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form. From name-and-form as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging. From clinging as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, aging-and-death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress….
“Now, craving is dependent on feeling,
seeking is dependent on craving,
acquisition is dependent on seeking,
ascertainment is dependent on acquisition,
desire and passion is dependent on ascertainment,
attachment is dependent on desire and passion,
possessiveness is dependent on attachment,
stinginess is dependent on possessiveness,
defensiveness is dependent on stinginess,
and because of defensiveness, dependent on defensiveness, various evil, unskillful phenomena come into play: the taking up of sticks and knives; conflicts, quarrels, and disputes; accusations, divisive speech, and lies….
Thus, Ānanda, these two phenomena [the chain of conditions leading from craving to birth, aging, and death, and the chain of conditions leading from craving to quarrels, etc.], as a duality, flow back into one place at feeling….
“‘From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form.’ Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form. If consciousness were not to descend into the mother’s womb, would name-and-form take shape in the womb?”
“No, lord.”
“If, after descending into the womb, consciousness were to depart, would name-and-form be produced for this world?”
“No, lord.”
“If the consciousness of the young boy or girl were to be cut off, would name-and-form ripen, grow, and reach maturity?”
“No, lord.”
“Thus this is a cause, this is a reason, this is an origination, this is a requisite condition for name-and-form, i.e., consciousness.
“‘From name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness.’ Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness. If consciousness were not to gain a foothold in name-and-form, would a coming-into-play of the origination of birth, aging, death, and stress in the future be discerned?”
“No, lord.”
“Thus this is a cause, this is a reason, this is an origination, this is a requisite condition for consciousness, i.e., name-and-form.
“This is the extent to which there is birth, aging, death, passing away, and rearising. This is the extent to which there are means of designation, expression, and delineation. This is the extent to which the dimension of discernment extends, the extent to which the cycle revolves for the manifesting/discernibility of this world, i.e., name-and-form together with consciousness.” — DN 15
§ 19. On one occasion Ven. Sāriputta and Ven. MahāKoṭṭhita were staying near Vārāṇasī in the Deer Park at Isipatana. Then in the evening, arising from his seclusion, Ven. MahāKoṭṭhita went to Ven. Sāriputta and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings and courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to Ven. Sāriputta: “Now tell me, Sāriputta my friend: Is aging-and-death self-made or other-made or both self-made and other-made, or — without self-making or other-making — does it arise spontaneously?”
“It’s not the case, Koṭṭhita my friend, that aging-and-death is self-made, that it is other-made, that it is both self-made and other-made, or that — without self-making or other-making — it arises spontaneously. However, from birth as a requisite condition comes aging-and-death.”
“Now tell me, friend Sāriputta, is birth…. is becoming…. is clinging/sustenance… is craving…. is feeling…. is contact… are the six sense media self-made or other-made or both self-made and other-made, or — without self-making or other-making — do they arise spontaneously?”
“It’s not the case, Koṭṭhita my friend, that the six sense media are self-made, that they are other-made, that they are both self-made and other-made, or that — without self-making or other-making — they arise spontaneously. However, from name and form as a requisite condition come the six sense media.”
“Now tell me, friend Sāriputta, is name-and-form self-made or other-made or both self-made and other-made, or — without self-making or other-making — does it arise spontaneously?”
“It’s not the case, Koṭṭhita my friend, that name-and-form is self-made, that it is other-made, that it is both self-made and other-made, or that — without self-making or other-making — it arises spontaneously. However, from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form.”
“Now tell me, friend Sāriputta, is consciousness self-made or other-made or both self-made and other-made, or — without self-making or other-making - does it arise spontaneously?”
“It’s not the case, Koṭṭhita my friend, that consciousness is self-made, that it is other-made, that it is both self-made and other-made, or that — without self-making or other-making — it arises spontaneously. However, from name-and- form as a requisite condition comes consciousness.”
“Just now, friend Sāriputta, I understood your statement as, ‘It’s not the case, Koṭṭhita my friend, that name-and-form is self-made, that it is other-made, that it is both self-made and other-made, or that — without self-making or other-making — it arises spontaneously. However, from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form’ But then I understood your statement as, ‘It’s not the case, Koṭṭhita my friend, that consciousness is self-made, that it is other-made, that it is both self-made and other-made, or that — without self-making or other-making — it arises spontaneously. However, from name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness.’ Now how is the meaning of these statements to be understood?”
“Very well then, Koṭṭhita my friend, I will give you an analogy, for there are cases where it is through the use of an analogy that intelligent people can understand the meaning of what is being said. It is as if two sheaves of reeds were to stand leaning against one another. In the same way, from name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness, from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form. From name and form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging-and-death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of suffering and stress.
“If one were to pull away one of those sheaves of reeds, the other would fall; if one were to pull away the other, the first one would fall. In the same way, from the cessation of name-and-form comes the cessation of consciousness, from the cessation of consciousness comes the cessation of name-and-form. From the cessation of name-and-form comes the cessation of the six sense media. From the cessation of the six sense media comes the cessation of contact. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of feeling. From the cessation of feeling comes the cessation of craving. From the cessation of craving comes the cessation of clinging/ sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging-and-death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering and stress.”
“It’s amazing, friend Sāriputta. It’s astounding, friend Sāriputta, how well that was said by Ven. Sāriputta. And I rejoice in Ven. Sāriputta’s good statements with regard to these 36 topics [the three qualities—teaching, practice, and attainment — Ven. MahāKoṭṭhita is about to mention with regard to each factor in the twelve-factored formula for dependent co-arising]. If a monk teaches the Dhamma for the sake of disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation with regard to aging-and-death, he deserves to be called a monk who is a speaker of Dhamma. If he practices for the sake of disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation with regard to aging-and-death, he deserves to be called a monk who practices the Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma. If — through disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, and lack of clinging/sustenance with regard to aging-and-death — he is released, then he deserves to be called a monk who has attained Unbinding in the here-and-now.
“If a monk teaches the Dhamma for the sake of disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation with regard to birth, he deserves to be called a monk who is a speaker of Dhamma. If he practices for the sake of disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation with regard to birth, he deserves to be called a monk who practices the Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma. If — through disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, and lack of clinging/sustenance with regard to birth — he is released, then he deserves to be called a monk who has attained Unbinding in the here-and-now.
[Similarly with becoming, clinging/sustenance, craving, feeling, contact, the six sense media, name and form, and consciousness.]
“If a monk teaches the Dhamma for the sake of disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation with regard to fabrications, he deserves to be called a monk who is a speaker of Dhamma. If he practices for the sake of disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation with regard to fabrications, he deserves to be called a monk who practices the Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma. If — through disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, and lack of clinging/sustenance with regard to fabrications — he is released, then he deserves to be called a monk who has attained Unbinding in the here-and-now.
“If a monk teaches the Dhamma for the sake of disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation with regard to ignorance, he deserves to be called a monk who is a speaker of Dhamma. If he practices for the sake of disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation with regard to ignorance, he deserves to be called a monk who practices the Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma. If — through disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, and lack of clinging/sustenance with regard to ignorance — he is released, then he deserves to be called a monk who has attained Unbinding in the here-and-now.” — SN 12:67
The primary constant throughout the various formulations of dependent co-arising is that the knowledge applied to each factor — the knowledge leading to disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation — invariably follows the pattern of the four noble truths. Viewed in terms of the general pattern of complex nonlinear systems, this knowledge induces something like a resonance, a point at which a relationship within a system becomes undefined in terms of the forces constituting the system as a whole. The reason why this knowledge would function in this way can be explained by a paradox found in the second noble truth.
§ 20. “And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination of stress, the craving that makes for renewed becoming — accompanied by passion and delight, relishing now here and now there — i.e., craving for sensuality, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming.” — SN 56:11
The paradox here is that craving for non-becoming — the desire for the ending of one’s identity in the world of one’s experience — is actually a cause for further becoming. This is because craving combined with passion and delight — a synonym for clinging — is a cause for becoming, regardless of whether it aims at building a new becoming out of the raw material of what has come to be, or at destroying whatever becoming has come to be. Iti 49 shows the way out of this impasse, which is to crave neither becoming nor non-becoming, but to simply have vision of what has come to be as having come to be.
§ 21. “Overcome by two viewpoints, some human and divine beings adhere, other human and divine beings slip right past, while those with vision see. “And how do some adhere? Human and divine beings delight in becoming, enjoy becoming, are satisfied with becoming. When the Dhamma is being taught for the sake of the cessation of becoming, their minds do not take to it, are not calmed by it, do not settle on it, or become resolved on it. This is how some adhere.
“And how do some slip right past? Some, feeling horrified, humiliated, and disgusted with that very becoming, delight in non-becoming; ‘When this self, at the break-up of the body, after death, perishes and is destroyed, and does not exist after death, that is peaceful, that is exquisite, that is sufficiency!’ This is how some slip right past.
“And how do those with vision see? There is the case where a monk sees what’s come to be as what’s come to be. Seeing this, he practices for disenchantment with what’s come to be, dispassion for what’s come to be, and the cessation of what’s come to be. This is how those with vision see….
Those, having seen
what’s come to be
as what’s come to be,
and what’s gone beyond
what’s come to be,
are released in line
with what’s come to be,
through the exhaustion of craving for becoming.
If they’ve comprehended what’s come to be —
and are free from craving
for becoming and not -,
with the non-becoming
of what’s come to be —
monks come to no renewed becoming. — Iti 49
In other words, the ability to put an end to stress depends not on views, but on a type of vision that sees things simply as they arise, without trying to make a world or a self out of them, and without trying to destroy them. Knowledge in terms of the four noble truths leads to this sort of vision in several steps. To begin with, it divides experience into four useful categories for understanding stress. Then it recommends tasks appropriate for mastering each category as a skill: stress is to be comprehended to the point of dispassion, its cause abandoned, its cessation realized, and the path to its cessation developed. The knowledge gained while following these tasks takes advantage of the opportunity to convert the factors of dependent co-arising into factors of the path, thus inducing a new pattern for their behavior.
The pattern of dependent co-arising places this knowledge at two strategic points, replacing ignorance on the one hand, and converting inappropriate attention to appropriate attention on the other. These factors are immediately adjacent to the factors responsible for the element of choice: fabrication in the first instance, and intention (as attention’s co-sub-factor under name) in the second. Thus this knowledge is in an excellent place to convert unskillful potentials into skillful ones with an immediate effect for reducing suffering and stress.
When the tasks appropriate to the four truths are fully mastered as skills, they arrive at a point where there is nothing further to be done, nothing further to develop, nothing further to abandon, nothing further to comprehend. The factors responsible for choice thus have nothing to choose from. The ability to see this situation as it has arisen induces dispassion for any and all types of craving and clinging, whether for the causes of stress or for the path to its cessation. This combination of knowledge and dispassion fully replaces ignorance, thus preventing fabrication from functioning; it also induces a supremely appropriate form of attention, thus preventing intention from functioning as well. The whole fabric of dependent co-arising then begins to unravel, revealing total Unbinding. Which is why — as the Buddha noted in his first sermon — the complete knowledge and vision of the four noble truths as they have come to be constitutes full Awakening.
§ 22. “Vision arose, insight arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before: ‘This is the noble truth of stress’…. ‘This noble truth of stress is to be comprehended’…. ‘This noble truth of stress has been comprehended.’
“Vision arose, insight arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before: ‘This is the noble truth of the origination of stress’…. ‘This noble truth of the origination of stress is to be abandoned’…. ‘This noble truth of the origination of stress has been abandoned.’
“Vision arose, insight arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before: ‘This is the noble truth of the cessation of stress’…. ‘This noble truth of the cessation of stress is to be directly realized’…. ‘This noble truth of the cessation of stress has been directly realized.’
“Vision arose, insight arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before: ‘This is the noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress’…. ‘This noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress is to be developed’…. ‘This noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress has been developed.’
“And, monks, as long as this — my three-round, twelve-permutation knowledge and vision concerning these four noble truths as they have come to be — was not pure, I did not claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its devas, Māras, and Brahmās, with its contemplatives and priests, its royalty and commonfolk. But as soon as this — my three-round, twelve-permutation knowledge and vision concerning these four noble truths as they have come to be — was truly pure, then I did claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its devas, Māras, and Brahmās, with its contemplatives and priests, its royalty and commonfolk. Knowledge and vision arose in me: ‘Unprovoked is my release. This is the last birth. There is now no renewed becoming.’” — SN 56:11
As one is no longer obsessed either with building the raw materials of the aggregates into a state of becoming or with destroying them, one is no longer defined in terms of any of the factors of dependent co-arising.
§ 23. Then Ven. Rādha went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: “‘A being,’ lord. ‘A being,’ it’s said. To what extent is one said to be ‘a being’?”
“Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Rādha: When one is caught up [satta] there, tied up [visatta] there, one is said to be ‘a being [satta].’
“Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for feeling… perception… fabrications… consciousness, Rādha; When one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be ‘a being.’” — SN 23:2
§ 24. “If one stays obsessed with form, that’s what one is measured/limited by. Whatever one is measured by, that’s how one is classified.
“If one stays obsessed with feeling…
obsessed with perception…
“If one stays obsessed with fabrications…
“If one stays obsessed with consciousness, that’s what one is measured/limited by. Whatever one is measured by, that’s how one is classified.
“But if one doesn’t stay obsessed with form, monk, that’s not what one is measured/limited by. Whatever one isn’t measured by, that’s not how one is classified.
“If one doesn’t stay obsessed with feeling….
“If one doesn’t stay obsessed with perception….
“If one doesn’t stay obsessed with fabrications….
“If one doesn’t stay obsessed with consciousness, that’s not what one is measured/limited by. Whatever one isn’t measured by, that’s not how one is classified.” — SN 22:36
In this way, one is freed from the system. However, as stated before, this freedom is found not by defying the causal relationships underlying the system, but by consistently changing the system’s parameter values. This is accomplished by consistently applying knowledge to the system as it is immediately experienced. This is where the principle of self-similarity across different scales comes into play. Several discourses point out that dependent co-arising explains not only the origination of suffering, but also the origination of the cosmos (SN 12:44). The factors of dependent co-arising — and in particular, the factor of intention — can operate not only in the immediate present, but also over enormous time scales of many eons.
§ 25. “Monks, don’t be afraid of acts of merit. This is another way of saying what is blissful, desirable, pleasing, endearing, charming — i.e., acts of merit. I am cognizant that, having long performed acts of merit, I long experienced desirable, pleasing, endearing, charming results. Having developed a mind of good will for seven years, then for seven eons of contraction and expansion I didn’t return to this world. Whenever the eon was contracting, I went to the realm of Streaming Radiance. Whenever the eon was expanding, I reappeared in an empty Brahmā-abode. There I was the Great Brahmā, the Conqueror Unconquered, All-seeing, Wielder of Power. Then for thirty-six times I was Sakka, ruler of the gods. For many hundreds of times I was a king, a wheel-turning emperor, a righteous king of Dhamma, conqueror of the four corners of the earth, maintaining stable control over the countryside, endowed with the seven treasures—to say nothing of the times I was a local king. The thought occurred to me: ‘Of what action of mine is this the fruit, of what action the result, that I now have such great power and might?’ Then the thought occurred to me: ‘This is the fruit of my three [types of] action, the result of three types of action, that I now have such great power and might: i.e., generosity, self-control, and restraint.’” — Iti 22
Although the Buddha would occasionally explain the workings of intention on the cosmic scale in this way (see, for instance, DN 1, DN 26, and DN 27), there is no need to examine the entire cosmos to master the processes of dependent co-arising. Because these processes operate in the same way on the micro level as they do on the macro level, one can examine them and master them completely through one’s immediate experience in the here-and-now.
§ 26. On one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthī, in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's monastery. Then Rohitassa, the son of a deva, in the far extreme of the night, his extreme radiance lighting up the entirety of Jeta’s Grove, went to the Blessed One. On arrival, having bowed down to the Blessed One, he stood to one side. As he was standing there he said to the Blessed One, “Is it possible, lord, by traveling, to know or see or reach a far end of the cosmos where one doesn’t take birth, age, die, pass away or reappear?”
“I tell you, friend, that it isn’t possible by traveling to know or see or reach a far end of the cosmos where one doesn’t take birth, age, die, pass away, or reappear.”
“It is amazing, lord, and awesome, how well that has been said by the Blessed One…. Once I was a seer named Rohitassa, a student of Bhoja, a powerful skywalker. My speed was as fast as that of a strong archer — well trained, a practiced hand, a practiced sharpshooter — shooting a light arrow across the shadow of a palmyra tree. My stride stretched as far as the east sea is from the west. To me, endowed with such speed, such a stride, there came the desire, ‘I will go traveling to the end of the cosmos.’ I — with a one-hundred year life, a one-hundred year span — spent one hundred years traveling — apart from the time spent on eating, drinking, chewing and tasting, urinating and defecating, and sleeping to fight off weariness — but without reaching the end of the cosmos I died along the way. So it is amazing, lord, and awesome, how well that has been said by the Blessed One,‘I tell you, friend, that it isn’t possible by traveling to know or see or reach a far end of the cosmos where one doesn’t take birth, age, die, pass away, or reappear.’”
[When this was said, the Blessed One responded:] “I tell you, friend, that it isn’t possible by traveling to know or see or reach a far end of the cosmos where one doesn’t take birth, age, die, pass away, or reappear. But at the same time, I tell you that there is no making an end of suffering and stress without reaching the end of the cosmos. Yet it is just within this fathom-long body, with its perception and intellect, that I declare that there is the cosmos, the origination of the cosmos, the cessation of the cosmos, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of the cosmos.”
It’s not to be reached by traveling,
the end of the cosmos—
regardless.
And it’s not without reaching
the end of the cosmos
that there is release
from suffering and stress.
So, truly, the wise one,
an expert with regard to the cosmos,
a knower of the end of the cosmos,
having fulfilled the holy life,
calmed,
knowing the cosmos’ end,
doesn’t long for this cosmos
or for any other. — AN 4:45
In fact, when the Buddha uses the term “world” or “cosmos” (loka), his primary meaning is the cosmos as experienced in terms of the six senses. As with the other factors of dependent co-arising, there is no need to study the cosmos “out there” behind our experience of the senses. It is enough simply to understand the cosmos as directly experienced for that experience to be brought to an end.
§ 27. Then a certain monk went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One: “‘The cosmos, the cosmos [loka],’ it is said. In what respect does the word ‘cosmos’ apply?
“Insofar as it disintegrates [lujjati], monk, it is called the ‘cosmos.’ Now what disintegrates? The eye disintegrates. Forms disintegrate. Eye-consciousness disintegrates. Eye-contact disintegrates. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on eye-contact — experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor- pain — that too disintegrates.
“The ear disintegrates. Sounds disintegrate….
“The nose disintegrates. Aromas disintegrate….
“The tongue disintegrates. Tastes disintegrate….
“The body disintegrates. Tactile sensations disintegrate….
“The intellect disintegrates. Ideas disintegrate. Intellect-consciousness
disintegrates. Intellect-contact disintegrates. And whatever there is that arises in
dependence on intellect-contact—experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-
nor-pain—that too disintegrates.
“Insofar as it disintegrates, it is called the ‘cosmos.’” — SN 35:82
* * *
The concept of the cessation of the experience of the cosmos naturally sparks the question, “What then is left?” This question, however, assumes the dimensions of space and time — something existing in space after a certain point in time — but because these dimensions do not apply beyond the experience of space and time, the question is invalid.
§ 28. Ven. MahāKoṭṭhita: “With the remainderless dispassion-cessation of the six contact-media is there anything else?”
Ven. Sāriputta: “Don’t say that, my friend.”
Ven. MahāKoṭṭhita: “With the remainderless dispassion-cessation of the six contact-media, is there not anything else?”
Ven. Sāriputta: “Don’t say that, my friend.”
Ven. MahāKoṭṭhita: “… is it the case that there both is and is not anything else?”
Ven. Sāriputta: “Don’t say that, my friend.”
Ven. MahāKoṭṭhita: “… is it the case that there neither is nor is not anything else?”
Ven. Sāriputta: “Don’t say that, my friend.”
Ven. MahāKoṭṭhita: “Being asked… if there is anything else, you say, ‘Don’t say that, my friend’. Being asked… if there is not anything else… if there both is and is not anything else… if there neither is nor is not anything else, you say, ‘Don’t say that, my friend.’ Now, how is the meaning of this statement to be understood?”
Ven. Sāriputta: “Saying, ‘… is there anything else?’… ‘… is there not anything else?‘… ‘… is it the case that there both is and is not anything else?‘… ‘… is it the case that there neither is nor is not anything else?’ one is objectifying nonobjectification. However far the six contact-media go, that is how far objectification goes. However far objectification goes, that is how far the six contact-media go. With the remainderless dispassion/cessation of the six contact media, there comes to be the cessation, the allaying of objectification.” — AN 4:173
The allaying of objectification is experienced by a type of consciousness that — because it lies beyond the dimensions of space and time — is not classified as sensory consciousness under the five aggregates.
§ 29. “‘Having directly known the all [the six sense media and their objects] as the all, and having directly known the extent of what has not been experienced through the allness of the all, I wasn’t the all, I wasn’t in the all, I wasn’t coming forth from the all, I wasn’t “The all is mine.” I didn’t affirm the all….
“‘Consciousness without surface,
without end,
luminous all around,
has not been experienced through the earthness of earth… the liquidity of liquid… the fieriness of fire… the windiness of wind… the being-ness of beings… the deva-ness of devas… the Pajāpati-ness of Pajāpati… the brahmā-ness of Brahmā… the radiant-ness of the radiant (devas)… the beautiful black-ness of the beautiful black (devas)… the sky-fruit-ness of the sky-fruit (devas)… the conqueror-ness of the conqueror… the allness of the all.’” — MN 49
As we have seen, a basic feature of the Buddha’s teachings on causality is that if x arises because y arises, it will cease when y ceases. Thus, for instance, the Buddha was harshly critical of any attempts to depict sensory consciousness, which arises and passes away based on conditions, as existing independently of those conditions.
§ 30. “Is it true, Sāti, that this evil view has arisen in you? — ‘As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, it is just this consciousness that runs and wanders on [from birth to birth], not another.’”
“Exactly so, lord. As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, it is just this consciousness that runs and wanders on, not another.”
“Which consciousness, Sāti, is that?”
“This speaker, this knower, lord, that is sensitive here and there to the ripening of good and evil actions.”
“And to whom, worthless man, do you understand me to have taught the Dhamma like that? Haven’t I, in many ways, said of dependently co-arisen consciousness, ‘Apart from a requisite condition, there is no coming-into-play of consciousness’? But you, through your own poor grasp, not only misrepresent me but also dig yourself up (by the root) and produce much demerit. That will be for your long-term harm and suffering.” — MN 38
But because consciousness without surface — unlike dependently co-arisen sensory consciousness — exists outside of time, it does not arise. Because it is known independently of the six sense media, it will not cease when they do. This consciousness provides no footing for any of the causal factors — personal or cosmic — that would lead to any further suffering or stress.
§ 31. “Then the monk attained to such a state of concentration that the way leading to the gods of the retinue of Brahmā appeared in his centered mind. So he approached the gods of the retinue of Brahmā and, on arrival, asked them, ‘Friends, where do these four great elements — the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, and the wind property — cease without remainder?’ “When this was said, the gods of the retinue of Brahmā said to the monk, ‘We also don’t know where the four great elements… cease without remainder. But there is Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Conqueror Unconquered, the All-Seeing, Wielder of Power, Sovereign Lord, Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be. He is higher and more sublime than we. He should know where the four great elements… cease without remainder.’ “‘But where, friends, is the Great Brahmā now?’
“‘Monk, we also don’t know where Brahmā is or in what way Brahmā is. But when signs appear, light shines forth, and a radiance appears, Brahmā will appear. For these are the portents of Brahmā’s appearance: light shines forth and a radiance appears.’
“Then it was not long before the Great Brahmā appeared. “So the monk approached the Great Brahmā and, on arrival, said, ‘Friend, where do these four great elements — the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, and the wind property — cease without remainder?’
“When this was said, the Great Brahmā said to the monk, ‘I, monk, am Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Conqueror Unconquered, the All-Seeing, Wielder of Power, Sovereign Lord, Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be.’
A second time, the monk said to the Great Brahmā, ‘Friend, I didn’t ask you if you were Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Conqueror Unconquered, the All- Seeing, Wielder of Power, Sovereign Lord, Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be. I asked you where these four great elements — the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, and the wind property — cease without remainder.’
“A second time, the Great Brahmā said to the monk, ‘I, monk, am Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Conqueror Unconquered, the All-Seeing, Wielder of Power, Sovereign Lord, Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be.’
“A third time, the monk said to the Great Brahmā, ‘Friend, I didn’t ask you if you were Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Conqueror Unconquered, the All- Seeing, Wielder of Power, Sovereign Lord, Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be. I asked you where these four great elements — the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, and the wind property — cease without remainder.’
“Then the Great Brahmā, taking the monk by the arm and leading him off to one side, said to him, ‘These gods of the retinue of Brahmā believe, “There is nothing that the Great Brahmā does not know. There is nothing that the Great Brahmā does not see. There is nothing of which the Great Brahmā is unaware. There is nothing that the Great Brahmā has not realized.” That is why I did not say in their presence that I, too, don’t know where the four great elements… cease without remainder. So you have acted wrongly, acted incorrectly, in bypassing the Blessed One in search of an answer to this question elsewhere. Go right back to the Blessed One and, on arrival, ask him this question. However he answers it, you should take it to heart.’
“Then — just as a strong man might extend his flexed arm or flex his extended arm — the monk disappeared from the Brahmā world and immediately appeared in front of me. Having bowed down to me, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to me, ‘Venerable sir, where do these four great elements — the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, and the wind property — cease without remainder?’
“When this was said, I said to him, ‘Once, monk, some sea-faring merchants took a shore-sighting bird and set sail in their ship. When they could not see the shore, they released the shore-sighting bird. It flew to the east, south, west, north, straight up, and to all the intermediate points of the compass. If it saw the shore in any direction, it flew there. If it did not see the shore in any direction, it returned right back to the ship. In the same way, monk, having gone as far as the Brahmā world in search of an answer to your question, you have come right back to my presence.
“‘Your question should not be phrased in this way: Where do these four great elements — the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, and the wind property — cease without trace? Instead, it should be phrased like this:
“‘Where do water, earth, fire, & wind
have no footing?
Where are long & short,
coarse & fine,
fair & foul,
name & form
brought to a stop without trace?
“‘And the answer to that is:
“‘Consciousness without surface,
without end,
luminous all around:
Here water, earth, fire, & wind
have no footing.
Here long & short,
coarse & fine,
fair & foul,
here name & form
are all brought to a stop without trace.
With the cessation of (the aggregate of) consciousness
each is here brought to a stop.’” — DN 11
Having experienced this type of consciousness at the time of Awakening, the arahant may return to the experience of sensory consciousness if he/she still has the kammic potential to continue living. In doing so, he/she continues to create further kamma by producing further intentions. However, because the mind is now free of the craving and clinging associated with greed, aversion, and delusion, those intentions lead to no further becoming.
§ 32. “Just as when seeds are not broken, not rotten, not damaged by wind and heat, capable of sprouting, well-buried, planted in well-prepared soil, and a man would burn them with fire and, burning them with fire, would make them into fine ashes. Having made them into fine ashes, he would winnow them before a high wind or wash them away in a swift-flowing stream. Those seeds would thus be destroyed at the root, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising.
“In the same way, any action performed with non-greed — born of nongreed, caused by non-greed, originating from non-greed: When greed is gone, that action is thus abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. “Any action performed with non-aversion …
“Any action performed with non-delusion — born of non-delusion, caused by non-delusion, originating from non-delusion: When delusion is gone, that action is thus abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising.” — AN 3:34
One of the reasons why the arahant’s intentions are free of craving, clinging, or becoming is because his/her experience of the senses is now radically different. No longer aflame with the fires of greed, aversion, and delusion, it is like a fire that has ceased to burn, but with a few embers still glowing. At the moment of death, however, the arahant is entirely freed from the stress of conditioned consciousness, like a fire so thoroughly out that all its embers have totally cooled.
§ 33. “Monks, there are these two forms of the Unbinding property. Which two? The Unbinding property with fuel remaining, and the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining.
“And what is the Unbinding property with fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is an arahant whose effluents have ended, who has reached fulfillment, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, ended the fetter of becoming, and is released through right gnosis. His five sense faculties still remain and, owing to their being intact, he is cognizant of the agreeable and the disagreeable, and is sensitive to pleasure and pain. His ending of passion, aversion, and delusion is termed the Unbinding property with fuel remaining.
“And what is the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is an arahant whose effluents have ended, who has reached fulfillment, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, ended the fetter of becoming, and is released through right gnosis. For him, all that is sensed, being unrelished, will grow cold right here. This is termed the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining.”
These two
proclaimed
by the one with vision,
Unbinding properties,
the one independent,
the one who is Such:
one property, here in this life
with fuel remaining
from the destruction
of the guide to becoming,
and that with no fuel remaining,
after this life,
in which all becoming
totally ceases.
Those who know
this unfabricated state,
their minds released
through the destruction
of the guide to becoming,
they, attaining the Teaching’s core,
pleased with ending,
have abandoned all becoming:
they, the Such. — Iti 44
