True DhammaLibrary · Community
SN 44.10PTS SN 4.4001 min read

With Ānanda

Ānandasutta

Vacchagotta asks the Buddha whether a self exists, but the Buddha is silent. When Ānanda later asks him why he didn’t answer, the Buddha replied that it was to avoid misunderstanding.

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

  • 0.1Saṁyutta Nikāya 44.10Linked Discourses 44.10
  • 0.21. Abyākatavagga1. The Undeclared Points

0.3ĀnandasuttaWith Ānanda

1.1Atha kho vacchagotto paribbājako yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā bhagavatā saddhiṁ sammodi.Then the wanderer Vacchagotta went up to the Buddha and exchanged greetings with him.1.2Sammodanīyaṁ kathaṁ sāraṇīyaṁ vītisāretvā ekamantaṁ nisīdi. Ekamantaṁ nisinno kho vacchagotto paribbājako bhagavantaṁ etadavoca:When the greetings and polite conversation were over, he sat down to one side and said to the Buddha:

1.3“kiṁ nu kho, bho gotama, atthattā”ti?“Worthy Gotama, does the self survive?”11.4Evaṁ vutte, bhagavā tuṇhī ahosi.But when he said this, the Buddha kept silent.

1.5“Kiṁ pana, bho gotama, natthattā”ti?“Then does the self not survive?”1.6Dutiyampi kho bhagavā tuṇhī ahosi.But for a second time the Buddha kept silent.1.7Atha kho vacchagotto paribbājako uṭṭhāyāsanā pakkāmi.Then the wanderer Vacchagotta rose from his seat and left.2

2.1PTS 4.401Atha kho āyasmā ānando acirapakkante vacchagotte paribbājake bhagavantaṁ etadavoca:And then, not long after Vacchagotta had left, Venerable Ānanda said to the Buddha:

2.2“kiṁ nu kho, bhante, bhagavā vacchagottassa paribbājakassa pañhaṁ puṭṭho na byākāsī”ti?“Sir, why didn’t you answer Vacchagotta’s question?”3

2.3“Ahañcānanda, vacchagottassa paribbājakassa ‘atthattā’ti puṭṭho samāno ‘atthattā’ti byākareyyaṁ, ye te, ānanda, samaṇabrāhmaṇā sassatavādā tesametaṁ saddhiṁ abhavissa.“Ānanda, when Vacchagotta asked me whether the self survives, if I had answered that ‘the self survives’ I would have been siding with the ascetics and brahmins who are eternalists.42.4Ahañcānanda, vacchagottassa paribbājakassa ‘natthattā’ti puṭṭho samāno ‘natthattā’ti byākareyyaṁ, ye te, ānanda, samaṇabrāhmaṇā ucchedavādā tesametaṁ saddhiṁ abhavissa.When Vacchagotta asked me whether the self does not survive, if I had answered that ‘the self does not survive’ I would have been siding with the ascetics and brahmins who are annihilationists.5

2.5Ahañcānanda, vacchagottassa paribbājakassa ‘atthattā’ti puṭṭho samāno ‘atthattā’ti byākareyyaṁ, api nu me taṁ, ānanda, anulomaṁ abhavissa ñāṇassa uppādāya:When Vacchagotta asked me whether the self survives, if I had answered that ‘the self survives’, would that have facilitated the arising of the knowledge that62.6‘sabbe dhammā anattā’”ti?all things are not-self?”

2.7“No hetaṁ, bhante”.“No, sir.”

2.8“Ahañcānanda, vacchagottassa paribbājakassa ‘natthattā’ti puṭṭho samāno ‘natthattā’ti byākareyyaṁ, sammūḷhassa, ānanda, vacchagottassa paribbājakassa bhiyyo sammohāya abhavissa:“When Vacchagotta asked me whether the self does not survive, if I had answered that ‘the self does not survive’, Vacchagotta—who is already confused—would have got even more confused, thinking:2.9‘ahuvā me nūna pubbe attā, so etarahi natthī’”ti.‘It seems that the self that I once had no longer survives.’”7

2.10Dasamaṁ.

Translator’s notes

  1. For “does the self survive” (atthattā, resolving to atthi attā), compare “my self survives” (atthi me attā, MN 2:8.2) and “do gods survive” (atthi devā, MN 90:13.2). In each case the question is whether the self continues to exist (atthi) or not (natthi) after death. We find a similar usage in Kaṭha Upaniṣad 1.20, where Naciketa wonders what happens to a man after he dies, as “some say he survives, while others say he does not survive” (astīty eke nāyam astīti caike).

    ↩ sn44.10:1.3

  2. Compare the behavior of Mogharāja at Snp 5.16. He has asked his question twice, but the Buddha was silent. Patiently, he asks a third time, and is answered at last. We have seen ample evidence of Vacchagotta’s relentless questioning. Here it is not the Buddha who loses patience, but Vacchagotta, who is so used to getting the answers he wants. It seems he is at some sort of crisis point.

    ↩ sn44.10:1.7

  3. The Buddha gives four answers. In the first pair he explains his theoretical objections: a straight yes/no answer would have aligned him with the eternalists or annihilationists. In the second pair, he considers what would have been helpful for Vacchagotta in his current state.

    ↩ sn44.10:2.2

  4. Things that atthi (“exist”, here to “continue to exist” or “survive”) were truly real and hence immortal. Thus “existence” or “survival” of the self implies eternalism. See SN 12.15:2.1 and note.

    ↩ sn44.10:2.3

  5. That is to say, there is currently a self that will cease to exist.

    ↩ sn44.10:2.4

  6. The existence or survival of the self is incompatible with the Buddha’s teaching of not-self.

    ↩ sn44.10:2.5

  7. That is, he would have taken it for the annihilationist view.

    ↩ sn44.10:2.9