---
title: "Middle Discourses · Majjhima Nikāya"
author: "The Buddha"
translator: "Bhikkhu Sujato"
languages: [pi, en]
shelf: "Pali Canon"
section: 59 of 165
url: https://scriptura.si/works/pali-majjhima-nikaya/59/
cite: "The Buddha, tr. Bhikkhu Sujato, Middle Discourses · Majjhima Nikāya, section 59. Scriptura (scriptura.si), https://scriptura.si/works/pali-majjhima-nikaya/59/"
---

# Middle Discourses · Majjhima Nikāya

*The Buddha, tr. Bhikkhu Sujato*

The 152 middle-length discourses: the simile of the saw, the snake and the raft, mindfulness of breathing, Aṅgulimāla, and the Buddha’s own account of his awakening.

> Pali: the Mahāsaṅgīti Tipiṭaka (Buddha Jayanti edition, 2500), from SuttaCentral’s bilara-data, dedicated to the public domain (CC0).

> English: Bhikkhu Sujato, from SuttaCentral’s bilara-data, dedicated to the public domain (CC0). Notes are not included.

> Rows follow the segment numbers the two texts share, gathered into paragraphs; verse keeps its lines.

## 59. MN 56 · With Upāli · part 1

Source: https://scriptura.si/works/pali-majjhima-nikaya/59/ · cite a paragraph as https://scriptura.si/works/pali-majjhima-nikaya/59/#p-N

[¶0] MN 56 · With Upāli

> Pali: MN 56 · Upālisutta

[¶1] So I have heard. At one time the Buddha was staying near Nāḷandā in Pāvārika’s Mango Grove.

> Pali: Evaṁ me sutaṁ— ekaṁ samayaṁ bhagavā nāḷandāyaṁ viharati pāvārikambavane.

[¶2] At that time the Jain ascetic of the Ñātika clan was residing at Nāḷandā together with a large assembly of Jain ascetics. Then the Jain ascetic Dīgha Tapassī wandered for alms in Nāḷandā. After the meal, on his return from almsround, he went to Pāvārika’s Mango Grove. There he approached the Buddha, and exchanged greetings with him.

> Pali: Tena kho pana samayena nigaṇṭho nāṭaputto nāḷandāyaṁ paṭivasati mahatiyā nigaṇṭhaparisāya saddhiṁ. Atha kho dīghatapassī nigaṇṭho nāḷandāyaṁ piṇḍāya caritvā pacchābhattaṁ piṇḍapātapaṭikkanto yena pāvārikambavanaṁ yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā bhagavatā saddhiṁ sammodi.

[¶3] When the greetings and polite conversation were over, he stood to one side. The Buddha said to him, “There are seats, Tapassī. Please sit if you wish.”

> Pali: Sammodanīyaṁ kathaṁ sāraṇīyaṁ vītisāretvā ekamantaṁ aṭṭhāsi. Ekamantaṁ ṭhitaṁ kho dīghatapassiṁ nigaṇṭhaṁ bhagavā etadavoca: “saṁvijjanti kho, tapassi, āsanāni; sace ākaṅkhasi nisīdā”ti.

[¶4] When he said this, Dīgha Tapassī took a low seat and sat to one side. The Buddha said to him, “Tapassī, how many kinds of deed does the Jain ascetic of the Ñātika clan describe for performing bad deeds?”

> Pali: Evaṁ vutte, dīghatapassī nigaṇṭho aññataraṁ nīcaṁ āsanaṁ gahetvā ekamantaṁ nisīdi. Ekamantaṁ nisinnaṁ kho dīghatapassiṁ nigaṇṭhaṁ bhagavā etadavoca: “kati pana, tapassi, nigaṇṭho nāṭaputto kammāni paññapeti pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyā”ti?

[¶5] “Reverend Gotama, the Jain Ñātika doesn’t usually speak in terms of ‘deeds’. He usually speaks in terms of ‘rods’.”

> Pali: “Na kho, āvuso gotama, āciṇṇaṁ nigaṇṭhassa nāṭaputtassa ‘kammaṁ, kamman’ti paññapetuṁ; ‘daṇḍaṁ, daṇḍan’ti kho, āvuso gotama, āciṇṇaṁ nigaṇṭhassa nāṭaputtassa paññapetun”ti.

[¶6] “Then how many kinds of rod does the Jain Ñātika describe for performing bad deeds?”

> Pali: “Kati pana, tapassi, nigaṇṭho nāṭaputto daṇḍāni paññapeti pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyā”ti?

[¶7] “The Jain Ñātika describes three kinds of rod for performing bad deeds: the physical rod, the verbal rod, and the mental rod.”

> Pali: “Tīṇi kho, āvuso gotama, nigaṇṭho nāṭaputto daṇḍāni paññapeti pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyāti, seyyathidaṁ— kāyadaṇḍaṁ, vacīdaṇḍaṁ, manodaṇḍan”ti.

[¶8] “But are these kinds of rod all distinct from each other?”

> Pali: “Kiṁ pana, tapassi, aññadeva kāyadaṇḍaṁ, aññaṁ vacīdaṇḍaṁ, aññaṁ manodaṇḍan”ti?

[¶9] “Yes, each is quite distinct.”

> Pali: “Aññadeva, āvuso gotama, kāyadaṇḍaṁ, aññaṁ vacīdaṇḍaṁ, aññaṁ manodaṇḍan”ti.

[¶10] “Of the three rods thus analyzed and differentiated, which rod does the Jain Ñātika describe as being the most blameworthy for performing bad deeds: the physical rod, the verbal rod, or the mental rod?”

> Pali: “Imesaṁ pana, tapassi, tiṇṇaṁ daṇḍānaṁ evaṁ paṭivibhattānaṁ evaṁ paṭivisiṭṭhānaṁ katamaṁ daṇḍaṁ nigaṇṭho nāṭaputto mahāsāvajjataraṁ paññapeti pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyā, yadi vā kāyadaṇḍaṁ, yadi vā vacīdaṇḍaṁ, yadi vā manodaṇḍan”ti?

[¶11] “The Jain Ñātika describes the physical rod as being the most blameworthy for performing bad deeds, not so much the verbal rod or the mental rod.”

> Pali: “Imesaṁ kho, āvuso gotama, tiṇṇaṁ daṇḍānaṁ evaṁ paṭivibhattānaṁ evaṁ paṭivisiṭṭhānaṁ kāyadaṇḍaṁ nigaṇṭho nāṭaputto mahāsāvajjataraṁ paññapeti pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyā, no tathā vacīdaṇḍaṁ, no tathā manodaṇḍan”ti.

[¶12] “Do you say the physical rod, Tapassī?”

> Pali: “Kāyadaṇḍanti, tapassi, vadesi”?

[¶13] “I say the physical rod, Reverend Gotama.”

> Pali: “Kāyadaṇḍanti, āvuso gotama, vadāmi”.

[¶14] “Do you say the physical rod, Tapassī?”

> Pali: “Kāyadaṇḍanti, tapassi, vadesi”?

[¶15] “I say the physical rod, Reverend Gotama.”

> Pali: “Kāyadaṇḍanti, āvuso gotama, vadāmi”.

[¶16] “Do you say the physical rod, Tapassī?”

> Pali: “Kāyadaṇḍanti, tapassi, vadesi”?

[¶17] “I say the physical rod, Reverend Gotama.”

> Pali: “Kāyadaṇḍanti, āvuso gotama, vadāmī”ti.

[¶18] Thus the Buddha made Dīgha Tapassī stand by this point up to the third time.

> Pali: Itiha bhagavā dīghatapassiṁ nigaṇṭhaṁ imasmiṁ kathāvatthusmiṁ yāvatatiyakaṁ patiṭṭhāpesi.

[¶19] When this was said, Dīgha Tapassī said to the Buddha, “But Reverend Gotama, how many kinds of rod do you describe for performing bad deeds?”

> Pali: Evaṁ vutte, dīghatapassī nigaṇṭho bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: “tvaṁ panāvuso gotama, kati daṇḍāni paññapesi pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyā”ti?

[¶20] “Tapassī, the Realized One doesn’t usually speak in terms of ‘rods’. He usually speaks in terms of ‘deeds’.”

> Pali: “Na kho, tapassi, āciṇṇaṁ tathāgatassa ‘daṇḍaṁ, daṇḍan’ti paññapetuṁ; ‘kammaṁ, kamman’ti kho, tapassi, āciṇṇaṁ tathāgatassa paññapetun”ti?

[¶21] “Then how many kinds of deed do you describe for performing bad deeds?”

> Pali: “Tvaṁ panāvuso gotama, kati kammāni paññapesi pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyā”ti?

[¶22] “I describe three kinds of deed for performing bad deeds: physical deeds, verbal deeds, and mental deeds.”

> Pali: “Tīṇi kho ahaṁ, tapassi, kammāni paññapemi pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyā, seyyathidaṁ— kāyakammaṁ, vacīkammaṁ, manokamman”ti.

[¶23] “But are these kinds of deed all distinct from each other?”

> Pali: “Kiṁ panāvuso gotama, aññadeva kāyakammaṁ, aññaṁ vacīkammaṁ, aññaṁ manokamman”ti?

[¶24] “Yes, each is quite distinct.”

> Pali: “Aññadeva, tapassi, kāyakammaṁ, aññaṁ vacīkammaṁ, aññaṁ manokamman”ti.

[¶25] “Of the three deeds thus analyzed and differentiated, which deed do you describe as being the most blameworthy for performing bad deeds: physical deeds, verbal deeds, or mental deeds?”

> Pali: “Imesaṁ panāvuso gotama, tiṇṇaṁ kammānaṁ evaṁ paṭivibhattānaṁ evaṁ paṭivisiṭṭhānaṁ katamaṁ kammaṁ mahāsāvajjataraṁ paññapesi pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyā, yadi vā kāyakammaṁ, yadi vā vacīkammaṁ, yadi vā manokamman”ti?

[¶26] “I describe mental deeds as being the most blameworthy for performing bad deeds, not so much physical deeds or verbal deeds.”

> Pali: “Imesaṁ kho ahaṁ, tapassi, tiṇṇaṁ kammānaṁ evaṁ paṭivibhattānaṁ evaṁ paṭivisiṭṭhānaṁ manokammaṁ mahāsāvajjataraṁ paññapemi pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyā, no tathā kāyakammaṁ, no tathā vacīkamman”ti.

[¶27] “Do you say mental deeds, Reverend Gotama?”

> Pali: “Manokammanti, āvuso gotama, vadesi”?

[¶28] “I say mental deeds, Tapassī.”

> Pali: “Manokammanti, tapassi, vadāmi”.

[¶29] “Do you say mental deeds, Reverend Gotama?”

> Pali: “Manokammanti, āvuso gotama, vadesi”?

[¶30] “I say mental deeds, Tapassī.”

> Pali: “Manokammanti, tapassi, vadāmi”.

[¶31] “Do you say mental deeds, Reverend Gotama?”

> Pali: “Manokammanti, āvuso gotama, vadesi”?

[¶32] “I say mental deeds, Tapassī.”

> Pali: “Manokammanti, tapassi, vadāmī”ti.

[¶33] Thus the Jain ascetic Dīgha Tapassī made the Buddha stand by this point up to the third time, after which he rose from his seat and went to see the Jain Ñātika.

> Pali: Itiha dīghatapassī nigaṇṭho bhagavantaṁ imasmiṁ kathāvatthusmiṁ yāvatatiyakaṁ patiṭṭhāpetvā uṭṭhāyāsanā yena nigaṇṭho nāṭaputto tenupasaṅkami.

[¶34] Now at that time the Jain Ñātika was sitting together with a large assembly of Bālaki laypeople headed by Upāli. The Jain Ñātika saw Dīgha Tapassī coming off in the distance and said to him, “So, Tapassī, where are you coming from in the middle of the day?”

> Pali: Tena kho pana samayena nigaṇṭho nāṭaputto mahatiyā gihiparisāya saddhiṁ nisinno hoti bālakiniyā parisāya upālipamukhāya. Addasā kho nigaṇṭho nāṭaputto dīghatapassiṁ nigaṇṭhaṁ dūratova āgacchantaṁ; disvāna dīghatapassiṁ nigaṇṭhaṁ etadavoca: “handa kuto nu tvaṁ, tapassi, āgacchasi divā divassā”ti?

[¶35] “Just now, sir, I’ve come from the presence of the ascetic Gotama.”

> Pali: “Ito hi kho ahaṁ, bhante, āgacchāmi samaṇassa gotamassa santikā”ti.

[¶36] “But did you have some discussion with him?”

> Pali: “Ahu pana te, tapassi, samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ kocideva kathāsallāpo”ti?

[¶37] “I did.”

> Pali: “Ahu kho me, bhante, samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ kocideva kathāsallāpo”ti.

[¶38] “And what kind of discussion did you have with him?” Then Dīgha Tapassī informed the Jain Ñātika of all they had discussed. When he had spoken, the Jain Ñātika said to him, “Good, good, Tapassī! The Jain ascetic Dīgha Tapassī has answered the ascetic Gotama like a learned disciple who rightly understands their teacher’s instructions. For how significant is the measly mental rod when compared with the solid physical rod? Rather, the physical rod is the most blameworthy for performing bad deeds, not so much the verbal rod or the mental rod.”

> Pali: “Yathā kathaṁ pana te, tapassi, ahu samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ kocideva kathāsallāpo”ti? Atha kho dīghatapassī nigaṇṭho yāvatako ahosi bhagavatā saddhiṁ kathāsallāpo taṁ sabbaṁ nigaṇṭhassa nāṭaputtassa ārocesi. Evaṁ vutte, nigaṇṭho nāṭaputto dīghatapassiṁ nigaṇṭhaṁ etadavoca: “sādhu sādhu, tapassi. Yathā taṁ sutavatā sāvakena sammadeva satthusāsanaṁ ājānantena evameva dīghatapassinā nigaṇṭhena samaṇassa gotamassa byākataṁ. Kiñhi sobhati chavo manodaṇḍo imassa evaṁ oḷārikassa kāyadaṇḍassa upanidhāya. Atha kho kāyadaṇḍova mahāsāvajjataro pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyā, no tathā vacīdaṇḍo, no tathā manodaṇḍo”ti.

[¶39] When he said this, the householder Upāli said to him, “Good, sir! Well done, Dīgha Tapassī! The Honorable Tapassī has answered the ascetic Gotama like a learned disciple who rightly understands their teacher’s instructions. For how significant is the measly mental rod when compared with the solid physical rod? Rather, the physical rod is the most blameworthy for performing bad deeds, not so much the verbal rod or the mental rod.

> Pali: Evaṁ vutte, upāli gahapati nigaṇṭhaṁ nāṭaputtaṁ etadavoca: “sādhu sādhu, bhante dīghatapassī. Yathā taṁ sutavatā sāvakena sammadeva satthusāsanaṁ ājānantena evamevaṁ bhadantena tapassinā samaṇassa gotamassa byākataṁ. Kiñhi sobhati chavo manodaṇḍo imassa evaṁ oḷārikassa kāyadaṇḍassa upanidhāya. Atha kho kāyadaṇḍova mahāsāvajjataro pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyā, no tathā vacīdaṇḍo, no tathā manodaṇḍo.

[¶40] I’d better go and refute the ascetic Gotama’s doctrine regarding this point. If he stands by the position that he stated to Dīgha Tapassī, I’ll take him on in debate and drag him to and fro and round about, like a strong man would grab a fleecy sheep and drag it to and fro and round about! Taking him on in debate, I’ll drag him to and fro and round about, like a strong brewer’s worker would toss a large brewer’s sieve into a deep lake, grab it by the corners, and drag it to and fro and round about! Taking him on in debate, I’ll shake him down and about and give him a beating, like a strong brewer’s mixer would grab a strainer by the corners and shake it down and about, and give it a beating! I’ll play a game of hemp-washing with the ascetic Gotama, like a sixty-year-old elephant would plunge into a deep lotus pond and play a game of hemp-washing! Sir, I’d better go and refute the ascetic Gotama’s doctrine on this point.”

> Pali: Handa cāhaṁ, bhante, gacchāmi samaṇassa gotamassa imasmiṁ kathāvatthusmiṁ vādaṁ āropessāmi. Sace me samaṇo gotamo tathā patiṭṭhahissati yathā bhadantena tapassinā patiṭṭhāpitaṁ; seyyathāpi nāma balavā puriso dīghalomikaṁ eḷakaṁ lomesu gahetvā ākaḍḍheyya parikaḍḍheyya samparikaḍḍheyya; evamevāhaṁ samaṇaṁ gotamaṁ vādena vādaṁ ākaḍḍhissāmi parikaḍḍhissāmi samparikaḍḍhissāmi. Seyyathāpi nāma balavā soṇḍikākammakāro mahantaṁ soṇḍikākilañjaṁ gambhīre udakarahade pakkhipitvā kaṇṇe gahetvā ākaḍḍheyya parikaḍḍheyya samparikaḍḍheyya; evamevāhaṁ samaṇaṁ gotamaṁ vādena vādaṁ ākaḍḍhissāmi parikaḍḍhissāmi samparikaḍḍhissāmi. Seyyathāpi nāma balavā soṇḍikādhutto vālaṁ kaṇṇe gahetvā odhuneyya niddhuneyya nipphoṭeyya; evamevāhaṁ samaṇaṁ gotamaṁ vādena vādaṁ odhunissāmi niddhunissāmi nipphoṭessāmi. Seyyathāpi nāma kuñjaro saṭṭhihāyano gambhīraṁ pokkharaṇiṁ ogāhetvā sāṇadhovikaṁ nāma kīḷitajātaṁ kīḷati; evamevāhaṁ samaṇaṁ gotamaṁ sāṇadhovikaṁ maññe kīḷitajātaṁ kīḷissāmi. Handa cāhaṁ, bhante, gacchāmi samaṇassa gotamassa imasmiṁ kathāvatthusmiṁ vādaṁ āropessāmī”ti.

[¶41] “Go, householder, refute the ascetic Gotama’s doctrine on this point. For either I should do so, or Dīgha Tapassī, or you.”

> Pali: “Gaccha tvaṁ, gahapati, samaṇassa gotamassa imasmiṁ kathāvatthusmiṁ vādaṁ āropehi. Ahaṁ vā hi, gahapati, samaṇassa gotamassa vādaṁ āropeyyaṁ, dīghatapassī vā nigaṇṭho, tvaṁ vā”ti.

[¶42] When he said this, Dīgha Tapassī said to the Jain Ñātika, “Sir, I don’t believe it’s a good idea for the householder Upāli to rebut the ascetic Gotama’s doctrine. For the ascetic Gotama is deceitful. He knows a conversion trick, and uses it to convert the disciples of other religions.”

> Pali: Evaṁ vutte, dīghatapassī nigaṇṭho nigaṇṭhaṁ nāṭaputtaṁ etadavoca: “na kho metaṁ, bhante, ruccati yaṁ upāli gahapati samaṇassa gotamassa vādaṁ āropeyya. Samaṇo hi, bhante, gotamo māyāvī āvaṭṭaniṁ māyaṁ jānāti yāya aññatitthiyānaṁ sāvake āvaṭṭetī”ti.

[¶43] “It is impossible, Tapassī, it cannot happen that Upāli could become Gotama’s disciple. But it is possible that Gotama could become Upāli’s disciple. Go, householder, refute the ascetic Gotama’s doctrine on this point. For either I should do so, or Dīgha Tapassī, or you.”

> Pali: “Aṭṭhānaṁ kho etaṁ, tapassi, anavakāso yaṁ upāli gahapati samaṇassa gotamassa sāvakattaṁ upagaccheyya. Ṭhānañca kho etaṁ vijjati yaṁ samaṇo gotamo upālissa gahapatissa sāvakattaṁ upagaccheyya. Gaccha tvaṁ, gahapati, samaṇassa gotamassa imasmiṁ kathāvatthusmiṁ vādaṁ āropehi. Ahaṁ vā hi, gahapati, samaṇassa gotamassa vādaṁ āropeyyaṁ, dīghatapassī vā nigaṇṭho, tvaṁ vā”ti.

[¶44] For a second time … and a third time, Dīgha Tapassī said to the Jain Ñātika, “Sir, I don’t believe it’s a good idea for the householder Upāli to rebut the ascetic Gotama’s doctrine. For the ascetic Gotama is deceitful. He knows a conversion trick, and uses it to convert the disciples of other religions.”

> Pali: Dutiyampi kho dīghatapassī …pe… tatiyampi kho dīghatapassī nigaṇṭho nigaṇṭhaṁ nāṭaputtaṁ etadavoca: “na kho metaṁ, bhante, ruccati yaṁ upāli gahapati samaṇassa gotamassa vādaṁ āropeyya. Samaṇo hi, bhante, gotamo māyāvī āvaṭṭaniṁ māyaṁ jānāti yāya aññatitthiyānaṁ sāvake āvaṭṭetī”ti.

[¶45] “It is impossible, Tapassī, it cannot happen that Upāli could become Gotama’s disciple. But it is possible that Gotama could become Upāli’s disciple. Go, householder, refute the ascetic Gotama’s doctrine on this point. For either I should do so, or Dīgha Tapassī, or you.”

> Pali: “Aṭṭhānaṁ kho etaṁ, tapassi, anavakāso yaṁ upāli gahapati samaṇassa gotamassa sāvakattaṁ upagaccheyya. Ṭhānañca kho etaṁ vijjati yaṁ samaṇo gotamo upālissa gahapatissa sāvakattaṁ upagaccheyya. Gaccha tvaṁ, gahapati, samaṇassa gotamassa imasmiṁ kathāvatthusmiṁ vādaṁ āropehi. Ahaṁ vā hi, gahapati, samaṇassa gotamassa vādaṁ āropeyyaṁ, dīghatapassī vā nigaṇṭho, tvaṁ vā”ti.

[¶46] “Yes, sir,” replied the householder Upāli to the Jain Ñātika. He rose from his seat, bowed, and respectfully circled him, keeping him on his right. Then he went to the Buddha, bowed, sat down to one side, and said to him, “Sir, did the Jain ascetic Dīgha Tapassī come here?”

> Pali: “Evaṁ, bhante”ti kho upāli gahapati nigaṇṭhassa nāṭaputtassa paṭissutvā uṭṭhāyāsanā nigaṇṭhaṁ nāṭaputtaṁ abhivādetvā padakkhiṇaṁ katvā yena pāvārikambavanaṁ yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā bhagavantaṁ abhivādetvā ekamantaṁ nisīdi. Ekamantaṁ nisinno kho upāli gahapati bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: “āgamā nu khvidha, bhante, dīghatapassī nigaṇṭho”ti?

[¶47] “He did, householder.”

> Pali: “Āgamā khvidha, gahapati, dīghatapassī nigaṇṭho”ti.

[¶48] “But did you have some discussion with him?”

> Pali: “Ahu kho pana te, bhante, dīghatapassinā nigaṇṭhena saddhiṁ kocideva kathāsallāpo”ti?

[¶49] “I did.”

> Pali: “Ahu kho me, gahapati, dīghatapassinā nigaṇṭhena saddhiṁ kocideva kathāsallāpo”ti.

[¶50] “And what kind of discussion did you have with him?”

> Pali: “Yathā kathaṁ pana te, bhante, ahu dīghatapassinā nigaṇṭhena saddhiṁ kocideva kathāsallāpo”ti?

[¶51] Then the Buddha informed Upāli of all they had discussed.

> Pali: Atha kho bhagavā yāvatako ahosi dīghatapassinā nigaṇṭhena saddhiṁ kathāsallāpo taṁ sabbaṁ upālissa gahapatissa ārocesi.

[¶52] When he said this, the householder Upāli said to him, “Good, sir, well done by Tapassī! The Jain ascetic Dīgha Tapassī has answered the ascetic Gotama like a learned disciple who rightly understands their teacher’s instructions. For how impressive is the measly mental rod when compared with the solid physical rod? Rather, the physical rod is the most blameworthy for performing bad deeds, not so much the verbal rod or the mental rod.”

> Pali: Evaṁ vutte, upāli gahapati bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: “sādhu sādhu, bhante tapassī. Yathā taṁ sutavatā sāvakena sammadeva satthusāsanaṁ ājānantena evamevaṁ dīghatapassinā nigaṇṭhena bhagavato byākataṁ. Kiñhi sobhati chavo manodaṇḍo imassa evaṁ oḷārikassa kāyadaṇḍassa upanidhāya? Atha kho kāyadaṇḍova mahāsāvajjataro pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyā, no tathā vacīdaṇḍo, no tathā manodaṇḍo”ti.

[¶53] “Householder, so long as you debate on the basis of truth, we can have some discussion about this.”

> Pali: “Sace kho tvaṁ, gahapati, sacce patiṭṭhāya manteyyāsi siyā no ettha kathāsallāpo”ti.

[¶54] “I will debate on the basis of truth, sir. Let us have some discussion about this.”

> Pali: “Sacce ahaṁ, bhante, patiṭṭhāya mantessāmi; hotu no ettha kathāsallāpo”ti.

[¶55] “What do you think, householder? Take a Jain ascetic who is sick, suffering, gravely ill. They turn down cold water and use only hot water. Not getting cold water, they might die. Now, where does the Jain Ñātika say they would be reborn?”

> Pali: “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, gahapati, idhassa nigaṇṭho ābādhiko dukkhito bāḷhagilāno sītodakapaṭikkhitto uṇhodakapaṭisevī. So sītodakaṁ alabhamāno kālaṁ kareyya. Imassa pana, gahapati, nigaṇṭho nāṭaputto katthūpapattiṁ paññapetī”ti?

[¶56] “Sir, there are gods called ‘mind-bound’. They would be reborn there. Why is that? Because they died with mental attachment.”

> Pali: “Atthi, bhante, manosattā nāma devā tattha so upapajjati”. “Taṁ kissa hetu”? “Asu hi, bhante, manopaṭibaddho kālaṁ karotī”ti.

[¶57] “Think about it, householder! You should think before answering. What you said before and what you said after don’t match up. But you said that you would debate on the basis of truth.”

> Pali: “Manasi karohi, gahapati, manasi karitvā kho, gahapati, byākarohi. Na kho te sandhiyati purimena vā pacchimaṁ, pacchimena vā purimaṁ. Bhāsitā kho pana te, gahapati, esā vācā: ‘sacce ahaṁ, bhante, patiṭṭhāya mantessāmi, hotu no ettha kathāsallāpo’”ti.

[¶58] “Even though the Buddha says this, still the physical rod is the most blameworthy for performing bad deeds, not so much the verbal rod or the mental rod.”

> Pali: “Kiñcāpi, bhante, bhagavā evamāha, atha kho kāyadaṇḍova mahāsāvajjataro pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyā, no tathā vacīdaṇḍo, no tathā manodaṇḍo”ti.

[¶59] “What do you think, householder? Take a Jain ascetic who is restrained in the fourfold constraint, is restrained in all that is to be restrained, is bridled in all that is to be restrained, has shaken off evil in all that is to be restrained, and is curbed in all that is to be restrained. When going out and coming back they injure many little creatures. Now, what result does the Jain Ñātika say they would incur?”

> Pali: “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, gahapati, idhassa nigaṇṭho nāṭaputto cātuyāmasaṁvarasaṁvuto sabbavārivārito sabbavāriyutto sabbavāridhuto sabbavāriphuṭo. So abhikkamanto paṭikkamanto bahū khuddake pāṇe saṅghātaṁ āpādeti. Imassa pana, gahapati, nigaṇṭho nāṭaputto kaṁ vipākaṁ paññapetī”ti?

[¶60] “Sir, the Jain Ñātika says that unintentional acts are not very blameworthy.”

> Pali: “Asañcetanikaṁ, bhante, nigaṇṭho nāṭaputto no mahāsāvajjaṁ paññapetī”ti.

[¶61] “But if they are intentional?”

> Pali: “Sace pana, gahapati, cetetī”ti?

[¶62] “Then they are very blameworthy.”

> Pali: “Mahāsāvajjaṁ, bhante, hotī”ti.

[¶63] “But where does the Jain Ñātika say that intention is classified?”

> Pali: “Cetanaṁ pana, gahapati, nigaṇṭho nāṭaputto kismiṁ paññapetī”ti?

[¶64] “In the mental rod, sir.”

> Pali: “Manodaṇḍasmiṁ, bhante”ti.

[¶65] “Think about it, householder! You should think before answering. What you said before and what you said after don’t match up. But you said that you would debate on the basis of truth.”

> Pali: “Manasi karohi, gahapati, manasi karitvā kho, gahapati, byākarohi. Na kho te sandhiyati purimena vā pacchimaṁ, pacchimena vā purimaṁ. Bhāsitā kho pana te, gahapati, esā vācā: ‘sacce ahaṁ, bhante, patiṭṭhāya mantessāmi; hotu no ettha kathāsallāpo’”ti.

[¶66] “Even though the Buddha says this, still the physical rod is the most blameworthy for performing bad deeds, not so much the verbal rod or the mental rod.”

> Pali: “Kiñcāpi, bhante, bhagavā evamāha, atha kho kāyadaṇḍova mahāsāvajjataro pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyā, no tathā vacīdaṇḍo, no tathā manodaṇḍo”ti.

[¶67] “What do you think, householder? Is this Nāḷandā successful and prosperous, populous and full of people?”

> Pali: “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, gahapati, ayaṁ nāḷandā iddhā ceva phītā ca bahujanā ākiṇṇamanussā”ti?

[¶68] “Indeed it is, sir.”

> Pali: “Evaṁ, bhante, ayaṁ nāḷandā iddhā ceva phītā ca bahujanā ākiṇṇamanussā”ti.

[¶69] “What do you think, householder? Suppose a man were to come along with a drawn sword and say: ‘In one hour I will reduce all the living creatures within the bounds of Nāḷandā to one heap and mass of flesh!’ What do you think, householder? Could he do that?”

> Pali: “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, gahapati, idha puriso āgaccheyya ukkhittāsiko. So evaṁ vadeyya: ‘ahaṁ yāvatikā imissā nāḷandāya pāṇā te ekena khaṇena ekena muhuttena ekaṁ maṁsakhalaṁ ekaṁ maṁsapuñjaṁ karissāmī’ti. Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, gahapati, pahoti nu kho so puriso yāvatikā imissā nāḷandāya pāṇā te ekena khaṇena ekena muhuttena ekaṁ maṁsakhalaṁ ekaṁ maṁsapuñjaṁ kātun”ti?

[¶70] “Sir, even ten, twenty, thirty, forty, or fifty men couldn’t do that. How impressive is one measly man?”

> Pali: “Dasapi, bhante, purisā, vīsampi, bhante, purisā, tiṁsampi, bhante, purisā, cattārīsampi, bhante, purisā, paññāsampi, bhante, purisā nappahonti yāvatikā imissā nāḷandāya pāṇā te ekena khaṇena ekena muhuttena ekaṁ maṁsakhalaṁ ekaṁ maṁsapuñjaṁ kātuṁ. Kiñhi sobhati eko chavo puriso”ti.

[¶71] “What do you think, householder? Suppose an ascetic or brahmin with psychic power, who has achieved mastery of the mind, were to come along and say: ‘I will reduce Nāḷandā to ashes with a single malevolent act of will!’ What do you think, householder? Could he do that?”

> Pali: “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, gahapati, idha āgaccheyya samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā iddhimā cetovasippatto. So evaṁ vadeyya: ‘ahaṁ imaṁ nāḷandaṁ ekena manopadosena bhasmaṁ karissāmī’ti. Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, gahapati, pahoti nu kho so samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā iddhimā cetovasippatto imaṁ nāḷandaṁ ekena manopadosena bhasmaṁ kātun”ti?

[¶72] “Sir, an ascetic or brahmin with psychic power, who has achieved mastery of the mind, could reduce ten, twenty, thirty, forty, or fifty Nāḷandās to ashes with a single malevolent act of will. How significant is one measly Nāḷandā?”

> Pali: “Dasapi, bhante, nāḷandā, vīsampi nāḷandā, tiṁsampi nāḷandā, cattārīsampi nāḷandā, paññāsampi nāḷandā pahoti so samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā iddhimā cetovasippatto ekena manopadosena bhasmaṁ kātuṁ. Kiñhi sobhati ekā chavā nāḷandā”ti.

[¶73] “Think about it, householder! You should think before answering. What you said before and what you said after don’t match up. But you said that you would debate on the basis of truth.”

> Pali: “Manasi karohi, gahapati, manasi karitvā kho, gahapati, byākarohi. Na kho te sandhiyati purimena vā pacchimaṁ, pacchimena vā purimaṁ. Bhāsitā kho pana te, gahapati, esā vācā: ‘sacce ahaṁ, bhante, patiṭṭhāya mantessāmi; hotu no ettha kathāsallāpo’”ti.

[¶74] “Even though the Buddha says this, still the physical rod is the most blameworthy for performing bad deeds, not so much the verbal rod or the mental rod.”

> Pali: “Kiñcāpi, bhante, bhagavā evamāha, atha kho kāyadaṇḍova mahāsāvajjataro pāpassa kammassa kiriyāya pāpassa kammassa pavattiyā, no tathā vacīdaṇḍo, no tathā manodaṇḍo”ti.

[¶75] “What do you think, householder? Have you heard how the wildernesses of Daṇḍaka, Kaliṅga, Mejjha, and Mātaṅga came to be that way?”

> Pali: “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, gahapati, sutaṁ te daṇḍakīraññaṁ kāliṅgāraññaṁ majjhāraññaṁ mātaṅgāraññaṁ araññaṁ araññabhūtan”ti?

[¶76] “I have, sir.”

> Pali: “Evaṁ, bhante, sutaṁ me daṇḍakīraññaṁ kāliṅgāraññaṁ majjhāraññaṁ mātaṅgāraññaṁ araññaṁ araññabhūtan”ti.

[¶77] “What have you heard?”

> Pali: “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, gahapati, kinti te sutaṁ kena taṁ daṇḍakīraññaṁ kāliṅgāraññaṁ majjhāraññaṁ mātaṅgāraññaṁ araññaṁ araññabhūtan”ti?

[¶78] “I heard that it was because of a malevolent act of will by seers that the wildernesses of Daṇḍaka, Kaliṅga, Mejjha, and Mātaṅga came to be that way.”

> Pali: “Sutaṁ metaṁ, bhante, isīnaṁ manopadosena taṁ daṇḍakīraññaṁ kāliṅgāraññaṁ majjhāraññaṁ mātaṅgāraññaṁ araññaṁ araññabhūtan”ti.

[¶79] “Think about it, householder! You should think before answering. What you said before and what you said after don’t match up. But you said that you would debate on the basis of truth.”

> Pali: “Manasi karohi, gahapati, manasi karitvā kho, gahapati, byākarohi. Na kho te sandhiyati purimena vā pacchimaṁ, pacchimena vā purimaṁ. Bhāsitā kho pana te, gahapati, esā vācā: ‘sacce ahaṁ, bhante, patiṭṭhāya mantessāmi; hotu no ettha kathāsallāpo’”ti.

[¶80] “Sir, I was already delighted and satisfied by the Buddha’s very first simile. Nevertheless, I wanted to hear the Buddha’s various solutions to the problem, so I thought I’d oppose you in this way.

> Pali: “Purimenevāhaṁ, bhante, opammena bhagavato attamano abhiraddho. Api cāhaṁ imāni bhagavato vicitrāni pañhapaṭibhānāni sotukāmo, evāhaṁ bhagavantaṁ paccanīkaṁ kātabbaṁ amaññissaṁ.

[¶81] Excellent, sir! Excellent! As if he were righting the overturned, or revealing the hidden, or pointing out the path to the lost, or lighting a lamp in the dark so people with clear eyes can see what’s there, the Buddha has made the teaching clear in many ways. I go for refuge to the Buddha, to the teaching, and to the mendicant Saṅgha. From this day forth, may the Buddha remember me as a lay follower who has gone for refuge for life.”

> Pali: Abhikkantaṁ, bhante, abhikkantaṁ, bhante. Seyyathāpi, bhante, nikkujjitaṁ vā ukkujjeyya, paṭicchannaṁ vā vivareyya, mūḷhassa vā maggaṁ ācikkheyya, andhakāre vā telapajjotaṁ dhāreyya: ‘cakkhumanto rūpāni dakkhantī’ti; evamevaṁ bhagavatā anekapariyāyena dhammo pakāsito. Esāhaṁ, bhante, bhagavantaṁ saraṇaṁ gacchāmi dhammañca bhikkhusaṅghañca. Upāsakaṁ maṁ bhagavā dhāretu ajjatagge pāṇupetaṁ saraṇaṁ gatan”ti.

[¶82] “Householder, you should act after careful consideration. It’s good for well-known people such as yourself to act after careful consideration.”

> Pali: “Anuviccakāraṁ kho, gahapati, karohi, anuviccakāro tumhādisānaṁ ñātamanussānaṁ sādhu hotī”ti.

[¶83] “Now I’m even more delighted and satisfied with the Buddha, since he tells me to act after careful consideration. For if the followers of other religions were to gain me as a disciple, they’d carry a banner all over Nāḷandā, saying: ‘The householder Upāli has become our disciple!’ And yet the Buddha says: ‘Householder, you should act after careful consideration. It’s good for well-known people such as yourself to act after careful consideration.’

> Pali: “Imināpāhaṁ, bhante, bhagavato bhiyyoso mattāya attamano abhiraddho yaṁ maṁ bhagavā evamāha: ‘anuviccakāraṁ kho, gahapati, karohi, anuviccakāro tumhādisānaṁ ñātamanussānaṁ sādhu hotī’ti. Mañhi, bhante, aññatitthiyā sāvakaṁ labhitvā kevalakappaṁ nāḷandaṁ paṭākaṁ parihareyyuṁ: ‘upāli amhākaṁ gahapati sāvakattaṁ upagato’ti. Atha ca pana maṁ bhagavā evamāha: ‘anuviccakāraṁ kho, gahapati, karohi, anuviccakāro tumhādisānaṁ ñātamanussānaṁ sādhu hotī’ti.