4:11 Quarrels & Disputes
“From where have there arisen
quarrels, disputes,
lamentation, sorrows, along with stinginess,
conceit & pride, along with divisiveness?
From where have they arisen?
Please tell me.”
“From what is dear
there have arisen
quarrels, disputes,
lamentation, sorrows, along with stinginess,
conceit & pride, along with divisiveness.
Tied up with stinginess
are quarrels & disputes.
In the arising of disputes
is divisiveness.”
“Where is the cause
of things dear in the world,
along with the greeds that go about in the world?
And where is the cause
of the hopes & aims
for the sake of a person’s next life?”
“Desires are the cause
of things dear in the world,
along with the greeds that go about in the world.
And here too is the cause
of the hopes & aims
for the sake of a person’s next life.”
“Now where is the cause
of desire in the world?
And from where have there arisen
decisions, anger, lies, & perplexity,
and all the qualities
described by the Contemplative?”
“What they call
‘appealing’ &
‘unappealing’
in the world:
In dependence on that,
desire arises.
Having seen becoming & not-
with regard to forms,
a person gives rise to decisions in the world;
anger, lies, & perplexity:
these qualities, too,
when there exists
that very pair.
A person perplexed
should train for the path of knowledge,
for it’s in having known
that the Contemplative has spoken
of qualities/dhammas.”1
“Where is the cause
of appealing & un-?
When what isn’t
do they not exist?
And whatever is meant
by becoming & not- :
Tell me,
Where is their cause?”
“Contact is the cause
of appealing & un-.
When contact isn’t,
they do not exist,
along with what’s meant
by becoming & not- :
I tell you,
from here is their cause.”
“Now where is the cause
of contact in the world,
and from where have graspings,
possessions, arisen?
When what isn’t
does there not exist mine-ness?
When what has disappeared
do contacts not touch?”
“Conditioned by name-&-form
is contact.
In longing do graspings,
possessions have their cause.
When longing isn’t,
mine-ness doesn’t exist.
When forms have disappeared
contacts don’t touch.”
“For one how-arriving
does form disappear?
How do pleasure & pain disappear?
Tell me this.
My heart is set
on knowing how
they disappear.”
“One not percipient of perceptions
not percipient of aberrant perceptions,
not unpercipient,
nor percipient of what’s disappeared2:
For one thus-arriving,
form disappears3—
for objectification-classifications4
have their cause in perception.”
“What we have asked,
you’ve expounded to us.
We ask one thing more.
Please tell it.
Do some of the wise
say that just this much is the utmost,
that purity of spirit5 is here?
Or do they say
that it’s other than this?”
“Some of the wise
say that just this much is the utmost,
that purity of spirit is here.
But some of them,
who say they are skilled,
say it’s the moment
with no clinging remaining.
But knowing,
‘Having known, they still are dependent,’6
the sage ponders dependencies.
On knowing them, released,
he doesn’t get into disputes,
doesn’t meet with becoming & not-
: He’s enlightened.”
vv. 862–877
Notes
1. As other passages in this poem indicate (see note 6, below), the goal is not measured in terms of knowledge, but as this passage points out, knowledge is a necessary part of the path to the goal.
2. According to Nd I, “percipient of perceptions” means having ordinary perceptions. “Percipient of aberrant perceptions” means being insane. “Unpercipient” means either having entered the cessation of perception and feeling (see AN 9:33) or the dimension of beings without perception (DN 1 and DN 15). “Percipient of what’s disappeared” (or: having perceptions that have disappeared) means having entered any of the four formless states. Of these four explanations, the last is the least likely, for as the next lines show, this passage is describing the stage of concentration practice in which one is transcending the fourth jhāna and entering the formless attainment of the infinitude of space. A more likely explanation of “percipient of what’s disappeared” would be the act of holding to perceptions of the breath and of pleasure and pain, even though these phenomena have all disappeared in the fourth jhāna (see SN 36:11, AN 9:31, AN 10:20, and AN 10:72).
3. This is the point where the meditator leaves the fourth jhāna and enters the perception of the infinitude of space.
4. Objectification-classifications (papañca-saṅkhā): Nd I defines papañca simply as craving, views, and conceit. A survey of how the term papañca is actually used in the suttas, however, shows that it denotes the mind’s tendency to objectify itself as a being. Then, from that objectification, it searches for nourishment to keep that being in existence, classifying experience in terms conducive to that search and thus giving rise to conflict. As Sn 4:14 points out, the root of the objectification-classifications is the perception, “I am the thinker.” For further discussion of this point, see note 1 to that sutta and the introduction to MN 18.
5. “Spirit” is the usual rendering of the Pali word, yakkha. According to Nd I, however, in this context the word yakkha means person, individual, human being, or living being.
6. In other words, the sage knows that both groups in the previous verse fall back on their knowledge as a measure of the goal, without comprehending the dependency still latent in their knowledge. The sages in the first group are mistaking the experience of neither perception nor non-perception as the goal, and so they are still dependent on that state of concentration. The sages in the second group, by the fact that they claim to be skilled, show that there is still a latent conceit in their experience of not-clinging, and thus it is not totally independent of clinging. (For more on this point, see MN 102.) Both groups still maintain the concept of a “spirit” that is purified in the realization of purity. Once these dependencies are comprehended, one gains release from disputes and from states of becoming and not-becoming. It is in this way that knowledge is a means to the goal, but the goal itself is not measured or defined in terms of knowledge.
