True DhammaLibrary · Community
SN 22.62PTS SN 3.711 min read

The Scope of Definition

Niruttipathasutta

All philosophers must accept that the five aggregates are described in language that refers to either the past, future, or present.

Translated by Bhikkhu Sujato · Pāli: Mahāsaṅgīti Tipiṭaka · Public domain (CC0) via SuttaCentral

  • 0.1Saṁyutta Nikāya 22.62Linked Discourses 22.62
  • 0.26. Upayavagga6. Involvement

0.3NiruttipathasuttaThe Scope of Definition

1.1Sāvatthinidānaṁ.At Sāvatthī.

1.2“Tayome, bhikkhave, niruttipathā adhivacanapathā paññattipathā asaṅkiṇṇā asaṅkiṇṇapubbā, na saṅkīyanti, na saṅkīyissanti, appaṭikuṭṭhā samaṇehi brāhmaṇehi viññūhi.“Mendicants, there are these three scopes of definition, labeling, and description. They’re uncorrupted, as they have been since the beginning. They’re not being corrupted now, nor will they be. Sensible ascetics and brahmins don’t look down on them.11.3Katame tayo?What three?1.4Yaṁ, bhikkhave, rūpaṁ atītaṁ niruddhaṁ vipariṇataṁ ‘ahosī’ti tassa saṅkhā, ‘ahosī’ti tassa samaññā, ‘ahosī’ti tassa paññatti;When form has passed, ceased, and perished, its designation, label, and description is ‘was’.1.5na tassa saṅkhā ‘atthī’ti, na tassa saṅkhā ‘bhavissatī’ti.It’s not ‘is’ or ‘will be’.2

2.1Yā vedanā atītā niruddhā vipariṇatā ‘ahosī’ti tassā saṅkhā, ‘ahosī’ti tassā samaññā, ‘ahosī’ti tassā paññatti;When feeling …2.2na tassā saṅkhā ‘atthī’ti, na tassā saṅkhā ‘bhavissatī’ti.

3.1Yā saññā …perception …

3.2ye saṅkhārā atītā niruddhā vipariṇatā ‘ahesun’ti tesaṁ saṅkhā, ‘ahesun’ti tesaṁ samaññā, ‘ahesun’ti tesaṁ paññatti;choices …3.3na tesaṁ saṅkhā ‘atthī’ti, na tesaṁ saṅkhā ‘bhavissantī’ti.

4.1PTS 3.72Yaṁ viññāṇaṁ atītaṁ niruddhaṁ vipariṇataṁ, ‘ahosī’ti tassa saṅkhā, ‘ahosī’ti tassa samaññā, ‘ahosī’ti tassa paññatti;consciousness has passed, ceased, and perished, its designation, label, and description is ‘was’.4.2na tassa saṅkhā ‘atthī’ti, na tassa saṅkhā ‘bhavissatī’ti.It’s not ‘is’ or ‘will be’.

5.1Yaṁ, bhikkhave, rūpaṁ ajātaṁ apātubhūtaṁ, ‘bhavissatī’ti tassa saṅkhā, ‘bhavissatī’ti tassa samaññā, ‘bhavissatī’ti tassa paññatti;When form is not yet born, and has not yet appeared, its designation, label, and description is ‘will be’.5.2na tassa saṅkhā ‘atthī’ti, na tassa saṅkhā ‘ahosī’ti.It’s not ‘is’ or ‘was’.

6.1Yā vedanā ajātā apātubhūtā, ‘bhavissatī’ti tassā saṅkhā, ‘bhavissatī’ti tassā samaññā, ‘bhavissatī’ti tassā paññatti;When feeling …6.2na tassā saṅkhā ‘atthī’ti, na tassā saṅkhā ‘ahosī’ti.

7.1Yā saññā …perception …

7.2ye saṅkhārā ajātā apātubhūtā, ‘bhavissantī’ti tesaṁ saṅkhā, ‘bhavissantī’ti tesaṁ samaññā, ‘bhavissantī’ti tesaṁ paññatti;choices …7.3na tesaṁ saṅkhā ‘atthī’ti, na tesaṁ saṅkhā ‘ahesun’ti.

8.1Yaṁ viññāṇaṁ ajātaṁ apātubhūtaṁ, ‘bhavissatī’ti tassa saṅkhā, ‘bhavissatī’ti tassa samaññā, ‘bhavissatī’ti tassa paññatti;consciousness is not yet born, and has not yet appeared, its designation, label, and description is ‘will be’.8.2na tassa saṅkhā ‘atthī’ti, na tassa saṅkhā ‘ahosī’ti.It’s not ‘is’ or ‘was’.

9.1Yaṁ, bhikkhave, rūpaṁ jātaṁ pātubhūtaṁ, ‘atthī’ti tassa saṅkhā, ‘atthī’ti tassa samaññā, ‘atthī’ti tassa paññatti;When form has been born, and has appeared, its designation, label, and description is ‘is’.9.2na tassa saṅkhā ‘ahosī’ti, na tassa saṅkhā ‘bhavissatī’ti.It’s not ‘was’ or ‘will be’.

10.1Yā vedanā jātā pātubhūtā, ‘atthī’ti tassā saṅkhā, ‘atthī’ti tassā samaññā, ‘atthī’ti tassā paññatti;When feeling …10.2na tassā saṅkhā ‘ahosī’ti, na tassā saṅkhā ‘bhavissatī’ti.

11.1Yā saññā …perception …

11.2ye saṅkhārā jātā pātubhūtā, ‘atthī’ti tesaṁ saṅkhā, ‘atthī’ti tesaṁ samaññā, ‘atthī’ti tesaṁ paññatti;choices …11.3na tesaṁ saṅkhā ‘ahesun’ti, na tesaṁ saṅkhā, ‘bhavissantī’ti.

12.1Yaṁ viññāṇaṁ jātaṁ pātubhūtaṁ, ‘atthī’ti tassa saṅkhā, ‘atthī’ti tassa samaññā, ‘atthī’ti tassa paññatti;consciousness has been born, and has appeared, its designation, label, and description is ‘is’.12.2na tassa saṅkhā ‘ahosī’ti, na tassa saṅkhā ‘bhavissatī’ti.It’s not ‘was’ or ‘will be’.

13.1PTS 3.73Ime kho, bhikkhave, tayo niruttipathā adhivacanapathā paññattipathā asaṅkiṇṇā asaṅkiṇṇapubbā, na saṅkīyanti, na saṅkīyissanti, appaṭikuṭṭhā samaṇehi brāhmaṇehi viññūhi.These are the three scopes of definition, labeling, and description. They’re uncorrupted, as they have been since the beginning. They’re not being corrupted now, nor will they be. Sensible ascetics and brahmins don’t look down on them.

13.2Yepi te, bhikkhave, ahesuṁ ukkalā vassabhaññā ahetukavādā akiriyavādā natthikavādā, tepime tayo niruttipathe adhivacanapathe paññattipathe na garahitabbaṁ nappaṭikkositabbaṁ amaññiṁsu.Even those who were loud and bold advocates of the doctrines of no-cause, inaction, and nihilism, didn’t imagine that these three scopes of definition should be criticized or rejected.313.3Taṁ kissa hetu?Why is that?13.4Nindāghaṭṭanabyārosaupārambhabhayā”ti.For fear of being blamed, attacked, provoked, and faulted.”

13.5Majjhimapaṇṇāsakassa upayavaggo paṭhamo.

14.0Tassuddānaṁ

14.1Upayo bījaṁ udānaṁ,14.2Upādānaparivattaṁ;14.3Sattaṭṭhānañca sambuddho,14.4Pañcamahāli ādittā;14.5Vaggo niruttipathena cāti.

Translator’s notes

  1. The three “scopes” or “ranges” (patha) are the past, present, and future, each of which is indicated by the appropriate grammatical tense.

    Nirutti means the “clear expression” or “definition” of a word. In the pre-Buddhist literature, that which is “undefined” is the mystical truth to be muttered under the breath, whereas that which is “defined” is clearly expressed in language. A list of such definitions is a nirukti, a glossary or dictionary. See DN 15:32.11, MN 139:13.55, and AN 5.169:3.6.

    ↩ sn22.62:1.2

  2. The purpose of this argument is to rebut the idea that “being” or “existence” is eternal, and change an illusion. The Buddha points out that ordinary usage describes things that exist as impermanent, and thus the eternalist thesis contradicts the commonly-agreed truth. This passage is cited in Kv 1.7 against the Sarvāstivādin thesis that all phenomena of past, present, and future, exist (also discussed at Kv 1.6 and Kv 1.8).

    ↩ sn22.62:1.5

  3. The phrase ukkalā vassabhaññā occurs regarding different teachings at MN 117:38.1 and SN 22.62:13.2. The commentary says it refers to two individuals named Vassa and Bhañña from a distant land on the Bay of Bengal, Ukkalā (Sanskrit oḍra, modern Odisha). But this seems quite unlikely. Ukkalā was distant and largely unknown, mentioned only once elsewhere in the Pali canon (Kd 1:4.2.1). These teachers with their odd names (“Rain” and “Speak”) appear nowhere else, yet the the phrase yepi te ahesuṁ suggests they were well known; it is elsewhere used only of “those who were” Buddhas of the past. There seems no reason the Buddha should abruptly allude to such obscure figures as if they were an authority. Read ukkalā from root kal (“to sound”) with prefix ud (“up”), “with raised voice” (cf. Sanskrit kalabhāṣin, “with pleasing voice”). Then vassa from vṛṣa (“bull, chief”), for which compare the expression, uḷārā āsabhī vācā bhāsitā, “spoke a lofty bull’s word”, i.e. made a proud and bold statement. Bhañña is used elsewhere of speaking “out of faith” (pasādabhañña, Bu Pj 4:8.11.8) or of the intoned recitation used for Buddhist texts (sarabhañña, Ud 5.6:18.2 = Kd 15:3.2.1, Kd 15:3.2.1, Kd 22:1.10.5). Thus the sense would be, “those who loudly and boldly assert”.

    ↩ sn22.62:13.2