This essay is to revisit this topic of vinanna anidassana in DN11 but more generally to look at the role of The Five Aggregates in the suttas.
TLDR:
The Five Aggregates (TFA) describe the faculties or capacities, attributes of the mind (citta). This is true regardless of whether your mind is defiled or undefiled. However, in the presence of the asavas (karmic tendencies, ignorance, becoming) they present themselves to the unawakened person as The Five Clinging Aggregates (FCA). FCA’s are subsequently conditioned by Sankharas.
Ignorance (the driving force behind Dependent Origination (DO)) is the underlying ‘glue’ that causes TFCA’s to bind-up with each other.
The simile of the rope appearing as a snake is an easy way to understand the relationship of The Five Aggregates to The Five Clinging Aggregates. The ‘snake’ appears because we fail to recognize that it is a rope. When the snake is discovered to be simply a piece of rope, the snake disappears but the rope is still a rope – it does not cease to exist along with the snake.
In the same way, in the presence of ignorance, The Five Aggregates (rope) appear as The Five Clinging Aggregates (snake) – that constantly bind-up with each other giving rise to ‘The All’. When ignorance ceases, ‘The All’ (snake) is simply seen to have been The Five Aggregates (rope) all along. The Five Aggregates (rope) do not cease to exist – rather they are no longer conditioned by the asavas.
What is the undefiled citta? As far as I know, the Buddha left it undefined.
The structure of this essay is as follows:
All Translations are Interpretations
Just looking at some Pali terms that will come up in this discussion.
How some Suttas Describe the Aggregates
Looking at sutta references that support the view outlined in the TLDR above. Specifically, that The Five Aggregates represent the five faculties of the mind (citta) - that in the presence of the assavas (ignorance, becoming, karmic tendencies) they become the Five Clinging Aggregates - which are then further conditioned by Sankharas.
In the absence of the asavas, dependent origination ceases taking with it the Five Clinging Aggregates - which only arise under the influence of the asavas. For something to arise in the presence of ignorance then there must be something that ignorance acts on and this is The Five Aggregates that for the Arahat have been abandoned, put down, scattered. These terms are used so as to describe that ‘done is what needs to be done’ - the five aggregates are no longer subject to being grasped and thus future arising of ‘the all’.
When consciousness (the fifth aggregate) is freed from name-and-form it no longer finds a footing on the other four aggregates. For the Arahat there is neither arising nor passing because consciousness no longer lands anywhere. Thus it is said to be un-established and non-manifestative.
Context of DN11
Does it point to the awakened experience of the Arahat? Or a monk looking for advice on how to practice the formless states?
Summary
Let’s Begin:
1) All Translations are Interpretations
Several Pali terms:
The following represents my understanding of these terms based on the Pali Text Society Dictionary and the Sutta Central dictionary. If you have more knowledge of Pali (almost everyone probably does) feel free to help me out.
uparujjhati: to be stopped, broken, annihilated, destroyed.
The term ‘uparujjhati’ is often used in the suttas with regard to the ceasing of consciousness. ‘Cease’ is a good translation because it also can be interpreted as ‘stopped’ (the motor stopped running) or ‘destroyed’ (the motor was destroyed).
Sujato:
there the cycle spins no more; (ettha vaṭṭaṁ na vattati;)
and there it is that name and form (Ettha nāmañca rūpañca,)
cease with nothing left over.” (asesaṁ uparujjhatī”ti.)
Bhikkhu Bodhi:
Here that the round no longer revolves;
Here name-and-form ceases,
Stops without remainder.”
Which is it: stopped or destroyed? You will have to decide the meaning of uparajhati: does it mean that The Five Clinging Aggregates cease to exist entirely or does it mean that without the presence of the asavas that they revert to being The Five Aggregates - that are now scattered and abandoned (not subject to being picked up, grasped).
Nirodena: ceasing, cessation; the being no more; stopping, shutting off
Apacināti: diminishes, makes less; dismantles, does away with.
This term is used in SN22.79 with regard to how the Arahat relates to the five aggregates.
Here this term is translated by Ven. Sujato as ‘get rid of’:
This is called a mendicant who neither gets rid of things nor accumulates them, but remains after getting rid of them. They neither give things up nor grasp them, but remain after giving them up. They neither discard things nor amass them, but remain after discarding them. They neither dissipate things nor get clouded by them, but remain after dissipating them.”
In this section of this sutta it describes each of the five aggregates from the point of view of the Arahat. The phrase ‘getting rid of them’ doesn’t fit with the meaning of the other terms – it implies that they are no longer present. I think ‘dismantles’ is a better fit as Bhikkhu Bodhi shows:
Bhikkhu Bodhi translation:
“This is called, bhikkhus, a noble disciple who neither builds up nor dismantles, but who abides having dismantled; who neither abandons nor clings, but who abides having abandoned; who neither scatters nor amasses, but who abides having scattered; who neither extinguishes nor kindles, but who abides having extinguished.”
Think about it: If I tell you my car stopped working so I got rid of it and you went out back and saw the car sitting covered in weeds – wouldn’t you ask me something like: “Hey, I thought you told me you got rid of that thing”. But if I told you I abandoned it and you saw it out back – “Sure enough, he abandoned it”.
Anidassana:
The term nidassana is defined as: “pointing at” evidence, example, comparison, apposition, attribute, characteristic; sign. Another meaning given is ‘visible’.
So anidassana means something like ‘not pointing at/not able to point at (one of these terms) or alternatively ‘invisible’.
In MN21 We have an example of anidassana that clarifies the meaning more. In this sutta, the Buddha gives a number of similes describing how monks should remain basically imperturbable when confronted by others using abusive or challenging language.
He asks the monks:
“Suppose someone comes along with some colored markers and says ‘I will draw pictures in space, such that they appear there – is that possible?’ (Compare this with SN12.64)
Monks: “No”
Buddha: “Why is that?”
Monks: “Because empty space has no surface, no mark can be made there” (this is my translation).
Sujato’s translation:
Monks (answering the question ‘why is that?’):
“Because space is formless and invisible. [ Formless and invisible: arūpī anidassano ]
Note: If I ask you to take a pen and sign your name in the empty space in front of you, I don’t think you would say “I can’t, its invisible”. Considering the meaning of nidassana above, the term should be understood more like un-impressionable – as in nothing has an impact on it or nothing can make a mark on it. Than. Geoff translates it here as surface-less.
Monks (continued):
“It’s not easy to draw pictures there.
That person will eventually get weary and frustrated.”
This sutta points to the impurturbility of the mind of the Arahat – it’s kind of a ‘fake it until you make it’ teaching.
In SN43 the term is used as a synonym for the deathless (nibanna):
“Monks, I will also teach you the surfaceless (Sujato: invisible) and the path leading to the surfaceless…”
(Anidassanañca vo, bhikkhave, desessāmi anidassanagāmiñca maggaṁ. Taṁ suṇātha. Katamañca, bhikkhave, anidassanaṁ…)
I am not sure why Ven. Sujato translates this term as ‘invisible’ because just a couple lines up both he and Than Geoff translate a line that describes the deathless as ‘hard to see’ – if something is invisible then you can’t see it no matter how hard you look.
This reference in SN43 is very important – because it links how the Arahat experiences the deathless with DN11’s use of the term as a modifier for the consciousness aggregate (as one of The Five Aggregates not as one of the Clinging Aggregates).
These translation issues may seem small but they add up and can shift the meaning away from the original text.
Sankharas: The act and consequence of identification with intent to create personal experience of pleasure through acts of body, speech and mind and the resulting construction. - Buddha Dust
2) How Some Suttas Describe the Aggregates
SN22.48 defines The Five Aggregates as well as The Five Clinging Aggregates (which come about in the presence of the asavas (karmic tendencies, becoming, ignorance). These are always present for the worldly person where they provide a landing place for consciousness - where as they are absent for the awakened person. The difference between the two is –the asavas:
“And what, bhikkhus, are the five aggregates subject to clinging? Whatever kind of form [feeling, perception, choices, consciousness] there is, whether past, future, or present … far or near, that is tainted, that can be clung to: this is called the form [etc.] aggregate subject to clinging.”
SN22.79
Describes:
- How The Five Clinging Aggregates (that arise from the presence of the asavas are further conditioned by Sankharas.
Choices produce conditioned phenomena; that’s why they’re called ‘choices’. And what are the conditioned phenomena that they produce?
Form [Feeling…Perception…Choices…] are a conditioned phenomenon; choices [Sankharas] are what make it into form [etc.]. Consciousness is a conditioned phenomenon; choices are what make it into consciousness. Choices produce conditioned phenomena; that’s why they’re called ‘choices’.
- How after Awakening, the Five Aggregates (Not Clinging!) are still present:
“This, monks, is called a disciple of the noble ones who neither builds up nor tears down, but who stands having torn down; who neither clings nor abandons, but who stands having abandoned; who neither pulls in nor discards, but who stands having discarded; who neither piles up nor scatters, but who stands having scattered.”
He neither builds up nor tears down form, …feeling… perception… fabrications… consciousness, but stands having torn it down.
He neither clings to nor abandons form,…feeling… perception… fabrications… consciousness, but stands having abandoned it.
He neither pulls in nor discards form, …feeling… perception… fabrications… consciousness, but stands having discarded it.
He neither piles up nor scatters form, …feeling… perception… fabrications… consciousness, but stands having scattered it.
If vinanna or any of the other Five Aggregates had ceased to exist then clearly the Buddha would just tell us that. In the absence of the assavas conciousness no longer lands on Name and Form spinning out ‘the All’. That is, the rope no longer appears as a snake. They are simply the five faculties of the mind.
With ending of the assavas, consciousness is stilled, it is freed:
SN22.53
“Apart from form, feeling, perception, and choices, I will describe the coming and going of consciousness, its passing away and reappearing, its growth, increase, and maturity.’ That is not possible.
If a mendicant has given up greed for the form element,…feeling….perception…choices…consciousness element, the support is cut off, and there is no foundation for consciousness.
Since that consciousness does not become established and does not grow, with no power to regenerate, it is freed.”
SN22.54
“Should consciousness, when standing, stand attached to (a physical) form, supported by form (as its object), landing on form, watered with delight, it would exhibit growth, increase, & proliferation. [Repeats for feelings, perceptions, fabrications, consciousness ]
“If a monk abandons passion for the property of consciousness, then owing to the abandonment of passion, the support is cut off, and there is no landing of consciousness. Consciousness, thus not having landed, not increasing, not concocting, is released. …
SN 22.47
“The five faculties remain right there, bhikkhus, but in regard to them the instructed noble disciple abandons ignorance and arouses true knowledge.
SN22.99
But the instructed noble disciple … no longer keeps running and revolving around form, around feeling, around perception, around volitional formations, around consciousness. As he no longer keeps running and revolving around them, he is freed from form, freed from feeling, freed from perception, freed from volitional formations, freed from consciousness.
AN 10.81
“Bāhuna, the Realized One has escaped from ten things, so that he lives unattached, liberated, his mind free of limits.
What ten?
Form …feeling …perception… choices…consciousness (five aggregates)
rebirth …old age …death …suffering …defilements …
Consciousness does not cease (to exist) - it is freed. Freed from what? Name-and-Form. That is to say: It is un-established and non-manifestative.
Note: There are additional sutta references more context) at the end of this essay.
3) Context of DN11
A) Where does the term vinanna anidassana occur in DN11?
It may not be immediately obvious but many suttas have a specific structure that follows a general pattern that can be summed up by “I teach suffering and the end of suffering”. That is, most suttas start with the problem of suffering, proceed to discussion of the path, and end with awakening.
Some will then go on to add a section about the nature of the awakened state. If we want to understand the context of a term we can look in several suttas where that term appears and see which section it falls under.
In DN 11 the section where the troublesome verse appears, and the story about our traveling monk, and the simile of the ship and the bird, and the Buddhas rephrasing of the question – all appear after the section on awakening.
Further more, the very closely related term unestablished consciousness (appatiṭṭhita viññāṇa) also follows at or after awakening in both suttas in which it appears: SN22.53, SN12.38.
Summary: Both terms ‘non-manifestative consciousness’ and ‘unestablished consciousness’ appear in their respective discourses at or after the section on awakening.
B) The Traveling Monk and the Land Seeking Bird (DN11):
The Traveling Monk: In this story a monk wants to know where form comes to an end without remainder so using his psychic powers he travels to many different realms – each time asking his question and then being directed to somewhere else until he reaches the highest level (the Brahma realm) where ultimately Brahma admits he doesn’t know the answer and sends him to the Buddha.
It is very common in the suttas to find a teaching which is then followed by a simile to further clarify what the teaching is telling us. Immediately following the monk story is:
The simile of the ship and the bird seeking land: A ship on the ocean when seeking land sends out a bird. If the bird finds a suitable place to land it doesn’t return, indicating to the ships crew that the bird has found a place to land. If the bird does not find land it simply returns to the ship.
The Buddha is using this simile to tell us what the monk story means: That this monk desiring to find an answer to his question keeps moving from one realm to the next seeking an answer. When none can be found he is sent to the Buddha (the fully awakened one that wanders (Samsara-ing) no more). This is about the movement of consciousness when bound up with name and form – jumping from one place to the next – landing here, then there, endlessly searching.
If the bird finds a place to land, it stays there. This is describing how consciousness - if it finds a firm place to land - just stays there until that place no longer of interest and then moves on to another spot – this is the arising and passing of phenomena experienced by a worldly person and the monk, being a worldly person, jumps from one realm to another.
Does this simile fit the dimension of infinite consciousness? The problem with infinite consciousness in this context:
The dimension of infinite consciousness is just a label describing what it feels like - that is how it is experienced by the one practicing it. The dimension of infinite consciousness is fabricated. That is, it provides a footing on which consciousness lands. The consciousness aggregate of a worldly person that is dwelling in this attainment has landed on it and used it as their object of meditation – the simile of the bird does not fit.
Summary: This story and its simile describe the Arising and Passing of the worldly persons consciousness compared to non-landing, non-establishing of the consciousness faculty of the Arahat.
C) Then the Buddha Rephrases the Question:
“Where do water and earth,
fire and air find no footing?
Where do long and short,
fine and coarse, beautiful and ugly;
where do name and form
cease with nothing left over?”
As the first four lines simply refer to name and form, the question can simply be restated as:
“Where do name and form cease with nothing left over?”
Note1: The word being translated in DN11 and elsewhere here as ‘footing’ is ‘gādhati ’ - my Pali isn’t great but according to the dictionary it means: “to stand fast, to be on firm ground, to have a firm footing.”
You aren’t going to step somewhere if you can’t find firm footing. We could also call it insufficient footing. Insufficient for what? Insufficient for consciousness to land there and grow. If consciousness has no place to land and grow then it can’t become established, nor can it give rise to ‘the all’.
Note2: These two similar terms: un-established consciousness and non-manifestative consciousness are describing the same nature of consciousness when it is freed from the defilements. Un-established because it doesn’t land and non-manifestative because having no place to land it doesn’t give rise to ‘the All’.
D) The Buddha’s answer to the rephrasing of the monks question:
Non-manifestative consciousness, endless, bright, radiant
One answer, same as in SN1.27, Ud1.10, and SN7.6
Summary
Ven Sujato’s reasoning (as I understand it):
-
He feels that this represents two separate questions with two separate answers.
Note: SN1.27 has a similar verse containing three questions with one answer regarding the same topic and Ven. Sujato translates it that way. SN1.27 does not contain the term ‘vinanna’. In other words he has in at least one other sutta translated similar verse without having to resort to breaking the verse into separate questions – so not strong support for this.
-
He infers that the word order of the verse that includes “vinanana annidassana anantam…” is this way because it is verse and that ‘anantam’ (infinite, endless) should apply to ‘vinanna’ – (such word order changes is found in Pali verse so there is some support for this view. I agree that word order does not significantly alter the meaning but it can introduce a ‘red herring’ that throws us off track.
-
He infers that the first question is about the dimension of infinite consciousness and the second is about nibanna. Support is based on 2.
-
He infers that the monk (because he uses his psychic powers to travel to the different realms) must be seeking advice on how to practice the formless attainments. Presumably this inference is based on 3 which is based on 2. There is no evidence in the sutta that this monk does not know the formless attainments. No support.
-
He infers that the second question is about nibanna. There is strong support that the entire verse is about nibanna as we shall see.
“Privileging the Hypothesis is the fallacy of singling out a particular hypothesis for attention when there is insufficient evidence already in hand to justify such special attention.”- source
“Narrative fallacy addresses our limited ability to look at sequences of facts without weaving an explanation into them, or, equivalently, forcing a logical link, an arrow of relationship upon them. Explanations bind facts together. They make them all the more easily remembered; they help them make more sense. Where this propensity can go wrong is when it increases our impression of understanding.” - source
My Reasoning:
-
Location of the term vinanna anidassana follows the section on awakening in DN11
-
The term ‘anidassana’ is used in SN 43 as a synonym for the unconditioned.
-
The Traveling Monk story and the Land Seeking Bird simile both follow the awakening section and precede the Buddhas rephrasing of the question and both are being used to point to ‘no firm footing’ on which consciousness can land.
-
The Buddhas rephrasing of the question directly relates to the monk story, the simile and is supported by multiple suttas. In other words: The important question is not where Form ends but rather where consciousness no longer lands, where it gains no footing.
-
The Buddha’s answer to the rephrasing of the monks question where he asks where does form come to an end is Where does name and form no longer give rise to suffering – and nibanna is the answer and it is just this knowing faculty of mind that knows this.
-
There are at least three suttas (SN1.27, Ud1.10, and SN7.6 ) which state that name and form completely come to an end with awakening. Remember that it was Buddha that brought in name. Name-and-form within the context of dependent origination form a complex – that is the aggregates are said to be ‘built up’ – they provide a landing place for consciousness. Remember that for the Arahat there is neither arising (manifesting) nor passing.
-
I have included about a dozen sutta references to support the view that The Five Aggregates do not cease with the ending of dependent origination. I have shown that the Arahat is aware of all five but now they are no longer a cause of suffering as they are not capable any longer of being grasped.
Conclusion:
The Five Aggregates represent the nature of the mind – it describes the faculties of the mind – how the mind ‘knows and sees’. For the worldly unawakened person these five faculties are conditioned by ignorance and they appear to one as distinct graspable ‘things’. That is, the consciousness conditioned by ignorance (I am the thinker) identifies with the phenomena (what is seen, heard, thought, etc) as me or mine or not me, not mine. Because of this mis-identification, when these ‘things’ change (as they must – being essentially a snap-shot of the flow of phenomena) there is suffering. This is described as the arising and passing (of ‘things’) when consciousness lands on and then leaves one ‘footing’ after another (arising and passing). When the hold of ignorance finally loses its power over us, then the five clinging aggregates cease without remainder (no more objectification- papancha) because the five faculties of the mind are no longer conditioned by ignorance (neither arising nor passing).
Are there no references to vinanna in the suttas outside of dependent origination? If they are dismissed whenever they are encountered then no. But if we look at the context of these references that are there, and we see how other suttas reinforce these references then we find that yes, but the nature of that consciousness is not conditioned by the asavas, by ignorance. For the Arahat there is neither arising nor passing because the knowing (vinanna) faculty of the Arahat never ‘lands’ anywhere. It never leaves the ship. Conditioned consciousness (Clinging Aggregate) comes to an end with the cessation of dependent origination – references to it won’t be found outside of that context.
But why so few references to this non-manifestative consciousness and other related terms? Consider The Handful of Leaves sutta (SN56.31): The Buddha states that what he knows is equivalent to the leaves in the surrounding forest, but what he teaches is equivalent to a few leaves in his hand:
“This is stress … This is the origination of stress … This is the cessation of stress … This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress”.
Why not add in a bunch more leaves from the forest? Because those leaves will have no meaning to a worldly person and an Arahat needs to abandon the raft – leave the teachings behind - anyway. So why put such a demand on a precious resource (the sangha that has to commit these teachings to memory for generations to come) to record something that no one needs to know? This is why there are lots of references to consciousness ceasing/stopping for a worldly person – that is the target audience.
Some Thoughts:
Is ‘vinanna anidassana’ nibanna? I think it is the knowing faculty of the mind of an Arahat that has realized nibanna. Is it ‘vinanna anidassana’? – no, that’s just a couple of words, a label. It points to the fact that an Arahat knows – you know – stuff. Call it what ever you want. But that is what DN11 is about. It is not about the dimension of infinite consciousness. If you know stuff then there must be some way of knowing. Kind of obvious. Can you separate the knowing faculty from what it knows? I don’t know. Seems like they kind of go together like peanut butter and jelly. And yet knowing and what is known can certainly be distinguished.
Additional Sutta Resources for Section 2 Above
SN22.53
Apart from form, feeling, perception, and choices, I will describe the coming and going of consciousness, its passing away and reappearing, its growth, increase, and maturity.’ That is not possible.
If a mendicant has given up greed for the form element,…feeling….perception…choices…consciousness element, the support is cut off, and there is no foundation for consciousness.
Since that consciousness does not become established and does not grow, with no power to regenerate, it is freed.
Tadappatiṭṭhitaṁ viññāṇaṁ avirūḷhaṁ anabhisaṅkhacca vimuttaṁ.
SN 12.38
The term here is unestablished consciousness (appatiṭṭhita viññāṇa) (also see SN 12.53)
“But when one doesn’t intend, arrange, or obsess (about anything), there is no support for the stationing of consciousness. There being no support [footing?] there is no landing of consciousness. When that consciousness doesn’t land & grow, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. When there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging-&-death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering & stress.”
SN 12.64
“Where there is passion, delight, & craving for the nutriment of consciousness, consciousness lands there and increases. Where consciousness lands and increases, there is the alighting of name-&-form. Where there is the alighting of name-&-form, there is the growth of fabrications. Where there is the growth of fabrications, there is the production of renewed becoming in the future. …
Where there is no passion for the nutriment of consciousness, where there is no delight, no craving, then consciousness does not land there or increase. Where consciousness does not land or increase, there is no alighting of name-&-form. Where there is no alighting of name-&-form, there is no growth of fabrications. Where there is no growth of fabrications, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future……
"Just as if there were a roofed house or a roofed hall having windows on the north, the south, or the east. When the sun rises, and a ray has entered by way of the window, where does it land?”
“On the western wall, lord.”
“And if there is no western wall, where does it land?”
“On the ground, lord.”
“And if there is no ground, where does it land?”
“On the water, lord.”
“And if there is no water, where does it land?”
“It does not land, lord.”
“In the same way, where there is no passion for the nutriment of physical food… contact… intellectual intention… consciousness, where there is no delight, no craving, then consciousness does not land there or increase. Where consciousness does not land or increase, there is no alighting of name-&-form. Where there is no alighting of name-&-form, there is no growth of fabrications. Where there is no growth of fabrications, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future.”
SN 22.47
“The five faculties remain right there, bhikkhus, but in regard to them the instructed noble disciple abandons ignorance and arouses true knowledge. With the fading away of ignorance and the arising of true knowledge, ‘I am’ does not occur to him; ‘I am this’ does not occur to him; ‘I will be’ and ‘I will not be,’ and ‘I will consist of form’ and ‘I will be formless,’ and ‘I will be percipient’ and ‘I will be nonpercipient’ and ‘I will be neither percipient nor nonpercipient’—these do not occur to him.”
SN22.54
“Should consciousness, when standing, stand attached to (a physical) form, supported by form (as its object), landing on form, watered with delight, it would exhibit growth, increase, & proliferation.
[Repeats for feelings, perceptions, fabrications, consciousness ]
“If a monk abandons passion for the property of consciousness, then owing to the abandonment of passion, the support is cut off, and there is no landing of consciousness. Consciousness, thus not having landed, not increasing, not concocting, is released. …
SN22.99
But the instructed noble disciple … does not regard form as self … nor feeling as self … nor perception as self … nor volitional formations as self … nor consciousness as self…. He no longer keeps running and revolving around form, around feeling, around perception, around volitional formations, around consciousness. As he no longer keeps running and revolving around them, he is freed from form, freed from feeling, freed from perception, freed from volitional formations, freed from consciousness. He is freed from birth, aging, and death; freed from sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair; freed from suffering, I say.”
AN 10.81
“Sir, how many things has the Realized One escaped from, so that he lives unattached, liberated, his mind free of limits?”
“Bāhuna, the Realized One has escaped from ten things, so that he lives unattached, liberated, his mind free of limits.
What ten?
Form …feeling …perception… choices…consciousness (five aggregates)
rebirth …old age …death …suffering …defilements …
Suppose there was a blue water lily, or a pink or white lotus. Though it sprouted and grew in the water, it would rise up above the water and stand with no water clinging to it. [Note: the water didn’t cease to exist]
In the same way, the Realized One has escaped from ten things, so that he lives unattached, liberated, his mind free of limits.”
And this I tell you, is the end of this essay
