The Long Āgama Sūtra 13: 大緣方便經

13.1

（一三）佛說長阿含第二分大緣方便經第九

(13) The Long Āgama Sūtra Expounded by the Buddha, Section Two: Great Sūtra on Causes and Conditions, the Ninth

Thus I have heard: One time, the Buddha was staying in Kuru at Kalmāṣa’s Residence. He was accompanied by a large assembly of 1,250 monks.

13.2

如是我聞：

Thus have I heard:

13.3

一時，佛在拘流沙國劫摩沙住處，與大比丘眾千二百五十人俱。

At one time, the Buddha was staying in the Kuru country at Kammāssadhamma, together with a great assembly of one thousand two hundred and fifty bhikṣus.

13.4

爾時，阿難在閑靜處，作是念言：「甚奇！甚特！世尊所說十二因緣法之光明，甚深難解，如我意觀，猶如目前，以何為深？」於是，阿難即從靜室起，至世尊所，頭面禮足，在一面坐，白世尊言：「我向於靜室，默自思念：『甚奇！甚特！世尊所說十二因緣法之光明，甚深難解，如我意觀，如在目前，以何為深？』」

At that time, Ānanda was in a quiet place and had this thought: 'How wonderful! How extraordinary! The illumination of the Dharma of the twelve links of dependent origination expounded by the Bhagavat is profound and difficult to understand, yet as I contemplate it in my mind, it seems right before my eyes. Why is it considered profound?' Thereupon, Ānanda arose from his quiet room, went to the Bhagavat, bowed his head at his feet, sat to one side, and said to the Bhagavat: 'Just now in my quiet room, I silently reflected: "How wonderful! How extraordinary! The illumination of the Dharma of the twelve links of dependent origination expounded by the Bhagavat is profound and difficult to understand, yet as I contemplate it in my mind, it seems right before my eyes. Why is it considered profound?"'

It was then that Ānanda was staying in a quiet place and thought, “Amazing! Extraordinary! The twelve dependent originations that are taught by the Bhagavān are the light of the teaching\! They are profound and difficult to understand, but my mind observes them as though they were right in front of my eyes. Why are they so profound?”

Ānanda then emerged from his quiet room, went to the Bhagavān, bowed his head at his feet, and sat to one side. He said to the Bhagavān, “I was in a quiet room and thought to myself, ‘Amazing! Extraordinary! The twelve dependent originations that are taught by the Bhagavān are the light of the teaching! They are profound and difficult to understand, but my mind observes them as though they were right in front of my eyes. Why are they so profound?’”

13.5

爾時，世尊告阿難曰：「止！止！勿作此言：『十二因緣法之光明，甚深難解！』阿難！此十二因緣難見難知，諸天、魔、梵、沙門、婆羅門、未見緣者，若欲思量觀察分別其義者，則皆荒迷，無能見者。阿難！我今語汝老死有緣，若有問言：『何等是老死緣？』應答彼言：『生是老死緣！』若復問言：『誰是生緣？』應答彼言：『有是生緣。』若復問言：『誰是有緣？』應答彼言：『取是有緣。』若復問言：『誰是取緣？』應答彼言：『愛是取緣。』若復問言：『誰是愛緣？』應答彼言：『受是愛緣。』若復問言：『誰是受緣？』應答彼言：『觸是受緣。』若復問言：『誰為觸緣？』應答彼言：『六入是觸緣。』若復問言：『誰為六入緣？』應答彼言：『名色是六入緣。』若復問言：『誰為名色緣？』應答彼言：『識是名色緣。』若復問言：『誰為識緣？』應答彼言：『行是識緣。』若復問言：『誰為行緣？』應答彼言：『癡是行緣。』阿難！如是緣癡有行，緣行有識，緣識有名色，緣名色有六入，緣六入有觸，緣觸有受，緣受有愛，緣愛有取，緣取有有，緣有有生，緣生有老、死、憂、悲、苦惱，大患所集，是為此大苦陰緣。」

At that time, the Bhagavat told Ānanda: "Stop! Stop! Do not say: 'The illumination of the Dharma of the twelve links of dependent origination is [not] profoundly deep and difficult to understand!' Ānanda! These twelve links of dependent origination are difficult to see and difficult to know. The devas, Māra, Brahmā, śramaṇas, and brāhmaṇas who have not seen conditionality, if they wish to deliberate, observe, and distinguish its meaning, will all become bewildered and confused, with none able to see it. Ānanda! I now tell you that old age and death have a condition. If someone were to ask: 'What is the condition for old age and death?' one should reply to them: 'Birth is the condition for old age and death!' If they ask again: 'What is the condition for birth?' one should reply to them: 'Existence is the condition for birth.' If they ask again: 'What is the condition for existence?' one should reply to them: 'Grasping is the condition for existence.' If they ask again: 'What is the condition for grasping?' one should reply to them: 'Craving is the condition for grasping.' If they ask again: 'What is the condition for craving?' one should reply to them: 'Feeling is the condition for craving.' If they ask again: 'What is the condition for feeling?' one should reply to them: 'Contact is the condition for feeling.' If they ask again: 'What is the condition for contact?' one should reply to them: 'The six sense bases are the condition for contact.' If they ask again: 'What is the condition for the six sense bases?' one should reply to them: 'Name-and-form is the condition for the six sense bases.' If they ask again: 'What is the condition for name-and-form?' one should reply to them: 'Consciousness is the condition for name-and-form.' If they ask again: 'What is the condition for consciousness?' one should reply to them: 'Volitional formations are the condition for consciousness.' If they ask again: 'What is the condition for volitional formations?' one should reply to them: 'Ignorance is the condition for volitional formations.' Ānanda! Thus, conditioned by ignorance are volitional formations; conditioned by volitional formations is consciousness; conditioned by consciousness is name-and-form; conditioned by name-and-form are the six sense bases; conditioned by the six sense bases is contact; conditioned by contact is feeling; conditioned by feeling is craving; conditioned by craving is grasping; conditioned by grasping is existence; conditioned by existence is birth; conditioned by birth are old age, death, sorrow, lamentation, suffering, and distress—the accumulation of great troubles. Such is the condition for this great mass of suffering."

The Bhagavān then told Ānanda, “Stop, stop! Don’t say, ‘The twelve dependent originations are the light of the teaching. They are profound and difficult to understand.’ Ānanda, these twelve dependent originations are difficult to see and difficult to know. Dependent origination is unknown to the gods, Māra, Brahmā, ascetics, and priests. If they were to ponder, investigate, and discern its meaning, they would become confused, being unable to see it.

“Ānanda, I’ll discuss it with you now. There’s a condition for old age and death. Suppose someone were to ask, ‘What’s the condition for old age and death?’ They should be answered, ‘Birth is the condition for old age and death.’

“Suppose they also ask, ‘What’s the condition for birth?’ They should be answered, ‘Existence is the condition for birth.’

“Suppose they also ask, ‘What’s the condition for existence?’ They should be answered, ‘Grasping is the condition for existence.’

“Suppose they also ask, ‘What’s the condition for grasping?’ They should be answered, ‘Craving is the condition for grasping.’

“Suppose they also ask, ‘What’s the condition for craving?’ They should be answered, ‘Feeling is the condition for craving.’

“Suppose they also asked, ‘What’s the condition for feeling?’ They should be answered, ‘Contact is the condition for feeling.’

“Suppose they also ask, ‘What’s the condition for contact?’ They should be answered, ‘The six sense fields are the condition for contact.’

“Suppose they also ask, ‘What’s the condition for the six sense fields?’ They should be answered, ‘Name and form are the condition for the six sense fields.’

“Suppose they also ask, ‘What’s the condition for name and form?’ They should be answered, ‘Consciousness is the condition for name and form.’

“Suppose they also ask, ‘What’s the condition for consciousness?’ They should be answered, ‘Action is the condition for consciousness.’

“Suppose they also ask, ‘What’s the condition for action?’ They should be answered, ‘Delusion is the condition for action.’

“Thus, Ānanda, action exists conditioned by delusion. Consciousness exists conditioned by action. Name and form exist conditioned by consciousness. The six sense fields exist conditioned by name and form. Contact exists conditioned by the six sense fields. Feeling exists conditioned by contact. Craving exists conditioned by feeling. Grasping exists conditioned by craving. Existence exists conditioned by grasping. Birth exists conditioned by existence. The formation of the great calamity of old age, death, grief, sorrow, pain, and trouble exists conditioned by birth. These are the conditions for this great mass of suffering.”

13.6

佛告阿難：「緣生有老死，此為何義？若使一切眾生無有生者，寧有老死不？」

The Buddha told Ānanda: "Conditioned by birth are old age and death—what is the meaning of this? If all sentient beings were completely without birth, would there still be old age and death?"

The Buddha told Ānanda, “‘Old age and death exist conditioned by birth.’ What does this mean? Suppose that no sentient being was subject to birth. Would there be old age and death?”

13.7

阿難答曰：「無也。」

Ānanda answered: "No."

Ānanda replied, “There wouldn’t be.”

13.8

「是故，阿難！以此緣，知老死由生，緣生有老死，我所說者，義在於此。」

"Therefore, Ānanda! By this condition it is known that old age and death arise from birth; conditioned by birth are old age and death. This is the meaning of what I have stated."

“Therefore, Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know old age and death comes from birth. ‘Old age and death exist conditioned by birth.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

13.9

又告阿難：「緣有有生，此為何義？若使一切眾生無有欲有、色無色有者，寧有生不？」

He further told Ānanda: "Conditioned by existence is birth—what is the meaning of this? If all sentient beings were completely without sensual existence, form existence, or formless existence, would there still be birth?"

He also told Ānanda, “‘Birth exists conditioned by existence.’ What does this mean? Suppose that no sentient being had any existence in the desire realm or in the form or formless realms. Would there be birth?”

13.10

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.11

「阿難！我以此緣，知生由有，緣有有生，我所說者，義在於此。」

"Ānanda! By this condition I know that birth arises from existence; conditioned by existence is birth. This is the meaning of what I have stated."

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know birth comes from existence. ‘Birth exists conditioned by existence.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

13.12

又告阿難：「緣取有有，此為何義？若使一切眾生無有欲取、見取、戒取、我取者，寧有有不？」

He further told Ānanda: "Conditioned by grasping is existence—what is the meaning of this? If all sentient beings were completely without grasping at sensuality, grasping at views, grasping at rules and vows, or grasping at a self, would there still be existence?"

He also told Ānanda, “‘Existence exists conditioned by grasping.’ What does this mean? Suppose that no sentient being had any grasping of desires, views, precepts, or self. Would there be existence?”

13.13

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.14

「阿難！我以此緣，知有由取，緣取有有，我所說者，義在於此。」

"Ānanda! By this condition I know that existence arises from grasping; conditioned by grasping is existence. This is the meaning of what I have stated."

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know existence comes from grasping. ‘Existence exists conditioned by grasping.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

13.15

又告阿難：「緣愛有取，此為何義？若使一切眾生無有欲愛、有愛、無有愛者，寧有取不？」

He further told Ānanda: "Conditioned by craving is grasping—what is the meaning of this? If all sentient beings were completely without craving for sensuality, craving for existence, or craving for non-existence, would there still be grasping?"

He also told Ānanda, “‘Grasping exists conditioned by craving.’ What does this mean? Suppose that no sentient being had any craving for desires, existences, or non-existence. Would there be clinging?”

13.16

答曰：「無有。」

He answered: "There would not be."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.17

「阿難！我以此緣，知取由愛，緣愛有取，我所說者，義在於此。」

"Ānanda! By this condition I know that grasping arises from craving; conditioned by craving is grasping. This is the meaning of what I have stated."

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know grasping comes from craving. ‘Grasping exists conditioned by craving.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

13.18

又告阿難：「緣受有愛，此為何義？若使一切眾生無有樂受、苦受、不苦不樂受者，寧有愛不？」

He further told Ānanda: "Conditioned by feeling is craving—what is the meaning of this? If all sentient beings were completely without pleasant feeling, painful feeling, or neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, would there still be craving?"

He also told Ānanda, “‘Craving exists conditioned by feeling.’ What does this mean? Suppose that no sentient being had any pleasant, painful, or neither pleasant nor painful feelings. Would there be craving?”

13.19

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.20

「阿難！我以此緣，知愛由受，緣受有愛，我所說者，義在於此。阿難！當知因愛有求，因求有利，因利有用，因用有欲，因欲有著，因著有嫉，因嫉有守，因守有護。阿難！由有護故，有刀杖、諍訟、作無數惡，我所說者，義在於此。阿難！此為何義，若使一切眾生無有護者，當有刀杖、諍訟，起無數惡不？」

"Ānanda! By this condition I know that craving arises from feeling; conditioned by feeling is craving. This is the meaning of what I have stated. Ānanda! You should know that dependent on craving there is seeking; dependent on seeking there is gain; dependent on gain there is enjoyment; dependent on enjoyment there is desire; dependent on desire there is attachment; dependent on attachment there is jealousy; dependent on jealousy there is keeping; dependent on keeping there is guarding. Ānanda! Because there is guarding, there are swords and staves, quarrels and disputes, and the committing of countless evils. This is the meaning of what I have stated. Ānanda! What is the meaning of this? If all sentient beings were completely without guarding, would there be swords and staves, quarrels and disputes, giving rise to countless evils?"

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know craving comes from feeling. ‘Craving exists conditioned by feeling.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

“Ānanda, you should know that seeking exists because of craving. Profit exists because of seeking. Use exists because of profit. Desire exists because of use. Attachment exists because of desire. Jealousy exists because of attachment. Guarding exists because of jealousy. Safeguards exist because of guarding. Ānanda, weapons, fighting, and the making of countless evils come from the existence of safeguards. That’s the meaning of what I said.

“Ānanda, what does this mean? Suppose that no sentient being had any safeguards. Would there be weapons, fighting, and the arising of countless evils?”

13.21

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.22

「是故，阿難！以此因緣，知刀杖、諍訟由護而起，緣護有刀杖、諍訟。阿難！我所說者，義在於此。」

"Therefore, Ānanda! By this causal condition it is known that swords and staves, quarrels and disputes arise from guarding; conditioned by guarding there are swords and staves, quarrels and disputes. Ānanda! This is the meaning of what I have stated."

“Therefore, Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know weapons and fighting are produced from safeguards. ‘Weapons and fighting exist conditioned by safeguards.’ Ānanda, that’s the meaning of what I said.

13.23

又告阿難：「因守有護，此為何義？若使一切眾生無有守者，寧有護不？」

He further told Ānanda: "Dependent on keeping there is guarding—what is the meaning of this? If all sentient beings were completely without keeping, would there still be guarding?"

He also told Ānanda, “‘Safeguards exist conditioned by guarding.’ What does this mean? Suppose that no sentient being had anything to guard. Would there be safeguards?”

13.24

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.25

「阿難！我以此緣，知護由守，因守有護，我所說者，義在於此。阿難！因嫉有守，此為何義？若使一切眾生無有嫉者，寧有守不？」

"Ānanda! By this condition I know that guarding arises from keeping; dependent on keeping there is guarding. This is the meaning of what I have stated. Ānanda! Dependent on jealousy there is keeping—what is the meaning of this? If all sentient beings were completely without jealousy, would there still be keeping?"

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know safeguards come from guarding. ‘Safeguards exist conditioned by guarding.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

“Ānanda, ‘guarding exists conditioned by jealousy.’ What does this mean? Suppose that no sentient being had any jealousy. Would there be guarding?”

13.26

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.27

「阿難！我以此緣，知守由嫉，因嫉有守，我所說者，義在於此。阿難！因著有嫉，此為何義？若使一切眾生無有著者，寧有嫉不？」

"Ānanda! By this condition I know that keeping arises from jealousy; dependent on jealousy there is keeping. This is the meaning of what I have stated. Ānanda! Dependent on attachment there is jealousy—what is the meaning of this? If all sentient beings were completely without attachment, would there still be jealousy?"

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know guarding comes from jealousy. ‘Guarding exists conditioned by jealousy.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

“Ānanda, ‘jealousy exists conditioned by attachment.’ What does this mean? Suppose that no sentient being had any attachments. Would there be jealousy?”

13.28

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.29

「阿難！我以此緣，知嫉由著，因著有嫉，我所說者，義在於此。阿難！因欲有著，此為何義？若使一切眾生無有欲者，寧有著不？」

"Ānanda! By this condition I know that jealousy arises from attachment; dependent on attachment there is jealousy. This is the meaning of what I have stated. Ānanda! Dependent on desire there is attachment—what is the meaning of this? If all sentient beings were completely without desire, would there still be attachment?"

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know jealousy comes from attachment. ‘Jealousy exists conditioned by attachment.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

“Ānanda, ‘attachment exists conditioned by desire.’ What does this mean? Suppose that no sentient being had any desire. Would there be attachment?”

13.30

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.31

「阿難！我以此緣，知著由欲，因欲有著，我所說者，義在於此。阿難！因用有欲，此為何義？若使一切眾生無有用者，寧有欲不？」

"Ānanda! By this condition I know that attachment arises from desire; dependent on desire there is attachment. This is the meaning of what I have stated. Ānanda! Dependent on enjoyment there is desire—what is the meaning of this? If all sentient beings were completely without enjoyment, would there still be desire?"

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know attachment comes from desire. ‘Attachment exists conditioned by desire.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

“Ānanda, ‘desire exists conditioned by use.’ What does this mean? Suppose that no sentient being had use [for anything]. Would there be desire?”

13.32

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.33

「阿難，我以此義，知欲由用，因用有欲，我所說者，義在於此。阿難！因利有用，此為何義，若使一切眾生無有利者，寧有用不？」

"Ānanda, by this meaning I know that desire arises from enjoyment; dependent on enjoyment there is desire. This is the meaning of what I have stated. Ānanda! Dependent on gain there is enjoyment—what is the meaning of this? If all sentient beings were completely without gain, would there still be enjoyment?"

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know desire comes from use. ‘Desire exists conditioned by use.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

“Ānanda, ‘use exists conditioned by profit.’ What does this mean? Suppose that no sentient being had any profit. Would there be something to use?”

13.34

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.35

「阿難！我以此義，知用由利，因利有用，我所說者，義在於此。阿難！因求有利，此為何義？若使一切眾生無有求者，寧有利不？」

"Ānanda! By this meaning I know that enjoyment arises from gain; dependent on gain there is enjoyment. This is the meaning of what I have stated. Ānanda! Dependent on seeking there is gain—what is the meaning of this? If all sentient beings were completely without seeking, would there still be gain?"

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know use comes from profit. ‘Use exists conditioned by profit.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

“Ānanda, ‘profit exists conditioned by seeking.’ What does this mean? Suppose that no sentient being had [anything to] seeking. Would there be profit?”

13.36

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.37

「阿難！我以此緣，知利由求，因求有利，我所說者，義在於此。阿難！因愛有求，此為何義？若使一切眾生無有愛者，寧有求不？」

"Ānanda! By this condition I know that gain arises from seeking; dependent on seeking there is gain. This is the meaning of what I have stated. Ānanda! Dependent on craving there is seeking—what is the meaning of this? If all sentient beings were completely without craving, would there still be seeking?"

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know profit comes from seeking. ‘Profit exists conditioned by seeking.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

He also told Ānanda, “‘Seeking exists conditioned by craving.’ What does this mean? Suppose that no sentient being had any craving. Would there be seeking?”

13.38

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.39

「阿難！我以此緣，知求由愛，因愛有求，我所說者，義在於此。」

"Ānanda! By this condition I know that seeking arises from craving; dependent on craving there is seeking. This is the meaning of what I have stated."

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know seeking comes from craving. ‘Seeking exists conditioned by craving.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

13.40

又告阿難：「因愛有求，至於守護，受亦如是，因受有求，至於守護。」

He further told Ānanda: "Dependent on craving there is seeking, and so on up to guarding; with feeling it is also like this: dependent on feeling there is seeking, and so on up to guarding."

He also told Ānanda, “Seeking exists conditioned by craving up to guarding and safeguards. Feeling is likewise. Seeking exists because of feeling up to guarding and safeguards.

13.41

佛告阿難：「緣觸有受，此為何義？阿難！若使無眼、無色、無眼識者，寧有觸不？」

The Buddha told Ānanda: "Conditioned by contact is feeling—what is the meaning of this? Ānanda! If there were no eye, no forms, and no eye-consciousness, would there still be contact?"

The Buddha told Ānanda, “‘Feeling exists conditioned by contact.’ What does this mean? Suppose that there were no eye, form, and visual consciousness. Would there be contact?”

13.42

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.43

「若無耳、聲、耳識，鼻、香、鼻識，舌、味、舌識，身、觸、身識，意、法、意識者，寧有觸不？」

"If there were no ear, sound, or ear-consciousness; no nose, odor, or nose-consciousness; no tongue, taste, or tongue-consciousness; no body, tangible, or body-consciousness; no mind, mental phenomena, or mind-consciousness, would there still be contact?"

“Suppose that there were no ear, sound, or auditory consciousness … no nose, odor, or olfactory consciousness … no tongue, flavor, or gustatory consciousness … no body, touch, or somatic consciousness … no mind, notion, or cognitive consciousness. Would there be contact?”

13.44

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.45

「阿難！若使一切眾生無有觸者，寧有受不？」

"Ānanda! If all sentient beings were completely without contact, would there still be feeling?"

“Ānanda, suppose that no sentient being had any contact. Would there be feeling?”

13.46

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.47

「阿難！我以是義，知受由觸，緣觸有受，我所說者，義在於此。阿難！緣名色有觸，此為何義？若使一切眾生無有名色者，寧有心觸不？」

"Ānanda! By this meaning I know that feeling arises from contact; conditioned by contact is feeling. This is the meaning of what I have stated. Ānanda! Conditioned by name-and-form is contact—what is the meaning of this? If all sentient beings were completely without name-and-form, would there still be mental contact?"

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know feeling comes from contact. ‘Feeling exists conditioned by contact.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

“Ānanda, ‘contact exists conditioned by name and form.’ What does this mean? Suppose that no sentient being had any name and form. Would there be mental contact?”

13.48

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.49

「若使一切眾生無形色相貌者，寧有身觸不？」

"If all sentient beings were without bodily forms or appearances, would there still be bodily contact?"

“Suppose that no sentient being had any physical form or appearance. Would there be physical contact?

13.50

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.51

「阿難！若無名色，寧有觸不？」

"Ānanda! If there were no name-and-form, would there still be contact?"

“Ānanda, suppose that there were no name and form. Would there be contact?

13.52

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.53

「阿難！我以是緣，知觸由名色，緣名色有觸，我所說者，義在於此。阿難！緣識有名色，此為何義？若識不入母胎者，有名色不？」

"Ānanda! By this condition I know that contact arises from name-and-form; conditioned by name-and-form is contact. This is the meaning of what I have stated. Ānanda! Conditioned by consciousness is name-and-form—what is the meaning of this? If consciousness did not enter the mother's womb, would there be name-and-form?"

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know contact comes from name and form. ‘Contact exists conditioned by name and form.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

“Ānanda, ‘name and form exist conditioned by consciousness.’ What does this mean? Suppose that consciousness didn’t enter the mother’s womb. Would there be name and form?”

13.54

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.55

「若識入胎不出者，有名色不？」

"If consciousness entered the womb and did not emerge, would there be name-and-form?"

“Suppose that consciousness entered the womb but didn’t come out. Would there be name and form?”

13.56

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.57

「若識出胎，嬰孩壞敗，名色得增長不？」

"If consciousness emerged from the womb, but the infant perished, would name-and-form attain growth?"

“Suppose that consciousness left the womb, but the infant perished. Would name and form grow?”

13.58

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“It wouldn’t.”

13.59

「阿難！若無識者，有名色不？」

"Ānanda! If there were no consciousness, would there be name-and-form?"

“Ānanda, suppose there was no consciousness. Would there be name and form?”

13.60

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.61

「阿難！我以是緣，知名色由識，緣識有名色，我所說者，義在於此。阿難！緣名色有識，此為何義？若識不住名色，則識無住處；若無住處，寧有生、老、病、死、憂、悲、苦惱不？」

"Ānanda! By this condition I know that name-and-form arises from consciousness; conditioned by consciousness is name-and-form. This is the meaning of what I have stated. Ānanda! Conditioned by name-and-form is consciousness—what is the meaning of this? If consciousness did not dwell in name-and-form, consciousness would have no dwelling place. If it had no dwelling place, would there still be birth, old age, sickness, death, sorrow, lamentation, suffering, and distress?"

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know name and form comes from consciousness. ‘Name and form exist conditioned by consciousness.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

“Ānanda, “‘Consciousness exists conditioned by name and form.’ What does this mean? If consciousness didn’t abide in name and form, then consciousness would have nowhere to reside. If it had nowhere to reside, would there be birth, old age, illness, death, grief, sorrow, pain, and trouble?”

13.62

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.63

「阿難！若無名色，寧有識不？」

"Ānanda! If there were no name-and-form, would there still be consciousness?"

“Ānanda, if there were no name and form, would there be consciousness?”

13.64

答曰：「無也。」

He answered: "No."

“There wouldn’t be.”

13.65

「阿難！我以此緣，知識由名色，緣名色有識，我所說者，義在於此。阿難！是故名色緣識，識緣名色，名色緣六入，六入緣觸，觸緣受，受緣愛，愛緣取，取緣有，有緣生，生緣老、死、憂、悲、苦、惱，大苦陰集。

"Ānanda, it is by this causal condition that one knows consciousness originates from name-and-form, that conditioned by name-and-form there is consciousness. The meaning of what I have said lies in this. Ānanda, therefore, conditioned by consciousness is name-and-form; conditioned by name-and-form is consciousness; conditioned by name-and-form are the six sense bases; conditioned by the six sense bases is contact; conditioned by contact is feeling; conditioned by feeling is craving; conditioned by craving is grasping; conditioned by grasping is becoming; conditioned by becoming is birth; and conditioned by birth are old age, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, and distress. Thus is the origin of this whole mass of suffering.

“Ānanda, it’s for this reason that we know consciousness comes from name and form. ‘Consciousness exists conditioned by name and form.’ That’s the meaning of what I said.

“Therefore, Ānanda, name and form conditions consciousness. Consciousness conditions name and form. Name and form conditions the six sense fields. The six sense fields condition contact. Contact conditions feeling. Feeling conditions craving. Craving conditions grasping. Grasping conditions existence. Existence conditions birth. Birth conditions old age, death, grief, sorrow, pain, and trouble, which forms the great mass of suffering.

13.66

「阿難！齊是為語，齊是為應，齊是為限，齊此為演說，齊是為智觀，齊是為眾生。阿難！諸比丘於此法中，如實正觀，無漏心解脫。阿難！此比丘當名為慧解脫，如是解脫比丘如來終亦知，如來不終亦知，如來終不終亦知，如來非終非不終亦知，何以故？阿難！齊是為語，齊是為應，齊是為限，齊是為演說，齊是為智觀，齊是為眾生；如是盡知已，無漏心解脫比丘不知不見如是知見。阿難！夫計我者，齊幾名我見，名色與受，俱計以為我。有人言：『受非我，我是受。』或有言：『受非我，我非受，受法是我。』或有言：『受非我，我非受，受法非我，但愛是我。』

"Ānanda, this is the extent of language; this is the extent of correspondence; this is the extent of designation; this is the extent of exposition; this is the extent of wise observation; this is the extent of sentient beings. Ānanda, when bhikṣus rightly observe with wisdom according to reality within this teaching, their minds are liberated without effluents. Ānanda, such a bhikṣu is called one liberated through wisdom. Regarding such a liberated bhikṣu, if someone asks whether the Tathāgata exists after death, [he knows]; whether the Tathāgata does not exist after death, he knows; whether the Tathāgata both exists and does not exist after death, he knows; whether the Tathāgata neither exists nor does not exist after death, he knows. Why is that? Ānanda, this is the extent of language; this is the extent of correspondence; this is the extent of designation; this is the extent of exposition; this is the extent of wise observation; this is the extent of sentient beings. Having completely known all this, the bhikṣu whose mind is liberated without effluents neither knows nor sees such views. Ānanda, as for those who postulate a self: how far does the view of self extend? Both name-and-form and feeling are postulated as the self. Someone might say: 'Feeling is not the self; the self experiences feeling.' Or someone might say: 'Feeling is not the self, nor does the self experience feeling; the phenomenon of feeling is the self.' Or someone might say: 'Feeling is not the self, nor does the self experience feeling, nor is the phenomenon of feeling the self; craving alone is the self.'

“Ānanda, this is the extent of language, the extent of answers, the extent of limits, the extent of explanations, the extent of wise observation, and the extent of sentient beings.

“Ānanda, when monks truly and correctly observe this [series of] principles, their minds will be uncontaminated and liberated. Ānanda, these monks should be called ‘those liberated by wisdom.’ Such a liberated monk also knows that the Tathāgata has an end, knows that the Tathāgata doesn’t have an end, knows that the Tathāgata has and doesn’t have an end, and knows that the Tathāgata neither has nor doesn’t have an end. Why?

“Ānanda, this is the extent of language, the extent of answers, the extent of limits, the extent of explanations, the extent of wise observation, and the extent of sentient beings. Thus, having fully known it, a liberated monk whose mind is uncontaminated doesn’t know or see such knowing and seeing [of those four alternatives].

“Ānanda, how many views are there that postulate a self? Name and form and feeling are both taken to be the self.

“Some people say, ‘Feeling is not self, but the self is feeling.’ Others say, ‘Feeling is not self, the self is not feeling, but what feels is the self.’ Others say, ‘Feeling is not self, the self is not feeling, and what feels is not self. Only craving [for feeling] is the self.’

13.67

「阿難！彼見我者，言受是我，當語彼言：『如來說三受，樂受、苦受、不苦不樂受。當有樂受時，無有苦受、不苦不樂受；有苦受時，無有樂受、不苦不樂受；有不苦不樂受時，無有苦受、樂受。』所以然者？阿難！樂觸緣生樂受，若樂觸滅受亦滅。阿難！苦觸緣生苦受，若苦觸滅受亦滅；不苦不樂觸緣生不苦不樂受，若不苦不樂觸滅受亦滅。阿難！如兩木相攢則有火生，各置異處則無有火。此亦如是，因樂觸緣故生樂受，若樂觸滅受亦俱滅；因苦觸緣故生苦受，若苦觸滅受亦俱滅；因不苦不樂觸緣生不苦不樂受，若不苦不樂觸滅受亦俱滅。阿難！此三受有為無常，從因緣生，盡法、滅法，為朽壞法。彼非我有，我非彼有，當以正智如實觀之。阿難！彼見我者，以受為我，彼則為非。

"Ānanda, to those holding the view of a self who say that feeling is the self, one should say to them: 'The Tathāgata speaks of three feelings: pleasant feeling, painful feeling, and neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. When there is pleasant feeling, there is no painful feeling or neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. When there is painful feeling, there is no pleasant feeling or neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. When there is neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, there is no painful feeling or pleasant feeling.' Why is that? Ānanda, pleasant feeling arises conditioned by pleasant contact; if pleasant contact ceases, feeling also ceases. Ānanda, painful feeling arises conditioned by painful contact; if painful contact ceases, feeling also ceases. Neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling arises conditioned by neither-painful-nor-pleasant contact; if neither-painful-nor-pleasant contact ceases, feeling also ceases. Ānanda, it is just like two pieces of wood being rubbed together, whereby fire is produced; if they are placed apart in different places, there is no fire. It is just the same here: conditioned by pleasant contact, pleasant feeling arises, and if pleasant contact ceases, the feeling also ceases alongside it; conditioned by painful contact, painful feeling arises, and if painful contact ceases, the feeling also ceases alongside it; conditioned by neither-painful-nor-pleasant contact, neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling arises, and if neither-painful-nor-pleasant contact ceases, the feeling also ceases alongside it. Ānanda, these three feelings are conditioned, impermanent, arisen from causes and conditions, of a nature to end, of a nature to cease, and of a nature to decay and perish. They are not mine, nor am I theirs; one should observe them according to reality with correct wisdom. Ānanda, those holding the view of self who take feeling to be the self are in error.

“Ānanda, someone who has a view of self and says that feeling is self should be told, ‘The Tathāgata teaches that there are three feelings: Pleasant feelings, painful feelings, and feelings that are neither pleasant nor painful. When there’s pleasant feeling, there isn’t any feeling that’s painful or neither pleasant nor painful. When there’s painful feeling, there isn’t any feeling that’s pleasant or neither pleasant nor painful. When there’s feeling that’s neither pleasant nor painful, there isn’t any feeling that’s painful or pleasant.’

“Why is that? Ānanda, pleasant contact is the condition that gives rise to pleasant feeling. If pleasant contact ceases, the feeling also ceases. Ānanda, painful contact is the condition that gives rise to painful feeling. If painful contact ceases, the feeling also ceases. Contact that’s neither pleasant nor painful is the condition that gives rise to feeling that’s neither pleasant nor painful. If contact that’s neither pleasant nor painful ceases, the feeling also ceases.

“Ānanda, it’s like rubbing a pair of sticks together to start a fire. When each stick is put in a different place, there won’t be any fire. This is likewise. Because of the condition of pleasant contact, pleasant feeling arises. If pleasant contact ceases, both it and the feeling cease. Because of the condition of painful contact, painful feeling arises. If painful contact ceases, both it and the feeling cease. Because of the condition of contact that’s neither pleasant nor painful, feeling that’s neither pleasant nor painful arises. If contact that’s neither pleasant nor painful ceases, both it and the feeling cease.

“Ānanda, these three feelings are created and impermanent. They are things that arise from causes and conditions, that end, that cease, and that disintegrate. When truly examined with right knowledge, they are not possessed by self, and the self isn’t possessed by them. Ānanda, the view that takes feeling to be the self is incorrect.

13.68

「阿難！彼見我者，言受非我，我是受者，當語彼言：『如來說三受，苦受、樂受、不苦不樂受。若樂受是我者，樂受滅時，則有二我，此則為過。若苦受是我者，苦受滅時，則有二我，此則為過。若不苦不樂受是我者，不苦不樂受滅時，則有二我，此則為過。』阿難！彼見我者，言：『受非我，我是受。』彼則為非。阿難！彼計我者，作此說：『受非我，我非受，受法是我。』當語彼言：『一切無受。汝云何言有受法？汝是受法耶？』對曰：『非是。』是故，阿難！彼計我者，言：『受非我，我非受，受法是我。』彼則為非。

"Ānanda, to those holding the view of self who say, 'Feeling is not the self; the self experiences feeling,' one should say to them: 'The Tathāgata speaks of three feelings: painful feeling, pleasant feeling, and neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. If pleasant feeling were the self, then when pleasant feeling ceases, there would be two selves, which would be a fallacy. If painful feeling were the self, then when painful feeling ceases, there would be two selves, which would be a fallacy. If neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling were the self, then when neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling ceases, there would be two selves, which would be a fallacy.' Ānanda, those holding the view of self who say, 'Feeling is not the self; the self experiences feeling,' are in error. Ānanda, to those who postulate a self and make this assertion: 'Feeling is not the self, nor does the self experience feeling; the phenomenon of feeling is the self,' one should say to them: 'Where there is no feeling whatsoever, how could you say there is a phenomenon of feeling? Are you a phenomenon of feeling?' They would answer: 'No.' Therefore, Ānanda, those who postulate a self and say, 'Feeling is not the self, nor does the self experience feeling; the phenomenon of feeling is the self,' are in error.

“Ānanda, some have a view of self and say feeling is not self, but self is feeling. They should be told, ‘The Tathāgata teaches that there are three feelings: Painful feeling, pleasant feeling, and feeling that’s neither pleasant nor painful. If pleasant feeling were the self, then there would be a second self when that pleasant feeling ceases. This then is in error. If painful feeling were the self, then there would be a second self when that painful feeling ceases. This then is in error. If feeling that’s neither pleasant nor painful were the self, then there would be a second self when that feeling that’s neither pleasant nor painful ceases. This then is in error.’ Ānanda, some have a view of a self that says feeling is not self, but self is feeling. It’s not correct.

Ānanda, some who postulate a self make this statement: ‘Feeling is not self, and the self is not feeling, but what feels is the self.’ They should be told, ‘If everything is without feeling, how can you say there’s something that feels? Are you the thing that feels?’ The answer would be, ‘No.’

“Therefore, Ānanda, some postulate a self and say feeling is not self, and self is not feeling, but what feels is self. They are incorrect.

13.69

「阿難！彼計我者，作是言：『受非我，我非受，受法非我，但愛是我。』者，當語彼言：『一切無受，云何有愛？汝是愛耶？』對曰：『非也。』是故，阿難！彼計我者，言：『受非我，我非受，受法非我，愛是我。』者，彼則為非。阿難！齊是為語，齊是為應，齊是為限，齊是為演說，齊是為智觀，齊是為眾生。阿難！諸比丘於此法中如實正觀，於無漏心解脫。阿難！此比丘當名為慧解脫，如是解脫心比丘，有我亦知，無我亦知，有我無我亦知，非有我非無我亦知。何以故？阿難！齊是為語，齊是為應，齊是為限，齊是為演說，齊是為智觀，齊是為眾生；如是盡知已，無漏心解脫比丘不知不見如是知見。」

"Ānanda, to those who postulate a self and make this assertion: 'Feeling is not the self, nor does the self experience feeling, nor is the phenomenon of feeling the self; craving alone is the self,' one should say to them: 'Where there is no feeling whatsoever, how could there be craving? Are you craving?' They would answer: 'No.' Therefore, Ānanda, those who postulate a self and say, 'Feeling is not the self, nor does the self experience feeling, nor is the phenomenon of feeling the self; craving is the self,' are in error. Ānanda, this is the extent of language; this is the extent of correspondence; this is the extent of designation; this is the extent of exposition; this is the extent of wise observation; this is the extent of sentient beings. Ānanda, when bhikṣus rightly observe with wisdom according to reality within this teaching, their minds are liberated without effluents. Ānanda, such a bhikṣu is called one liberated through wisdom. For a bhikṣu whose mind is thus liberated, whether there is a self, he knows; whether there is no self, he knows; whether there both is and is not a self, he knows; whether there neither is nor is not a self, he knows. Why is that? Ānanda, this is the extent of language; this is the extent of correspondence; this is the extent of designation; this is the extent of exposition; this is the extent of wise observation; this is the extent of sentient beings. Having completely known all this, the bhikṣu whose mind is liberated without effluents neither knows nor sees such views."

“Ānanda, some postulate a self and make this claim, ‘Feel is not self, the self is not feeling, and what feels is not self. Only the craving is the self.’ They should be told, ‘If everything is without feeling, how would there be craving? Are you this craving?’ The answer would be, ‘No.’

“Therefore, Ānanda, some postulate a self and say feeling is not self, the self is not feeling, and what feels is not self, but craving is self. They are incorrect.

“Ānanda, this is the extent of language, the extent of answers, the extent of limits, the extent of explanations, the extent of wise observation, and the extent of sentient beings.

“Ānanda, when monks truly and correctly observe this [series of] principles, their minds will be uncontaminated and liberated. Ānanda, these monks should be called ‘those liberated by wisdom.’ Such a liberated monk will know the existence of the self, the non-existence of the self, both the existence and non-existence of the self, and neither the existence nor non-existence of the self. Why?

“Ānanda, this is the extent of language, the extent of answers, the extent of limits, the extent of explanations, the extent of wise observation, and the extent of sentient beings. Thus, having fully known it, a liberated monk whose mind is uncontaminated doesn’t know or see such knowing and seeing [of those four alternatives].”

13.70

佛語阿難：「彼計我者，齊已為定，彼計我者，或言少色是我，或言多色是我，或言少無色是我，或言多無色是我。阿難！彼言少色是我者，定少色是我，我所見是，餘者為非。多色是我者，定多色是我，我所見是，餘者為非。少無色是我者，定言少無色是我，我所見是，餘者為非。多無色是我者，定多無色是我，我所見是，餘者為非。」

The Buddha said to Ānanda: "Those who postulate a self define it precisely. Those who postulate a self either say that limited form is the self, or say that boundless form is the self, or say that limited formlessness is the self, or say that boundless formlessness is the self. Ānanda, those who say that limited form is the self definitely adhere to 'limited form is the self; what I see is true, and the rest is false.' Those who say that boundless form is the self definitely adhere to 'boundless form is the self; what I see is true, and the rest is false.' Those who say that limited formlessness is the self definitely assert 'limited formlessness is the self; what I see is true, and the rest is false.' Those who say that boundless formlessness is the self definitely adhere to 'boundless formlessness is the self; what I see is true, and the rest is false.'"

The Buddha told Ānanda, “Some who postulate a self have reached the extent of certainty. Postulating a self, they might say, ‘Self is a little bit of form.’ They might say, ‘Self is a large amount of form.’ They might say, ‘Self is something little and formless.’ They might say, ‘Self is something large and formless.’

“Ānanda, those who say self is a little bit of form are certain that the self is a little bit of form: ‘This is my view of it; anything else is incorrect.’ [Those who say] the self is a large amount of form are certain that the self is a large amount of form: ‘This is my view of it; anything else is incorrect.’ [Those who say] the self is something little and formless are certain the self is something little and formless: ‘This is my view of it; anything else is incorrect.’ [Those who say] the self is something large and formless are certain the self is something large and formless: ‘This is my view of it; anything else is incorrect.’”

13.71

佛告阿難：「七識住，二入處，諸有沙門、婆羅門言：『此處安隱，為救、為護、為舍、為燈、為明、為歸，為不虛妄，為不煩惱。』云何為七？或有眾生，若干種身若干種想，天及人，此是初識住處。諸沙門、婆羅門言：『此處安隱，為救、為護、為舍、為燈、為明、為歸，為不虛妄，為不煩惱。』阿難！若比丘知初識住，知集、知滅、知味、知過、知出要，如實知者。阿難！彼比丘言：『彼非我，我非彼，如實知見。』或有眾生，若干種身而一想，梵光音天是；或有眾生，一身若干種想，光音天是；或有眾生一身一想，遍淨天是；或有眾生，住空處；或有眾生，住識處；或有眾生，住不用處，是為七識住處。或有沙門、婆羅門言：『此處安隱，為救、為護、為舍、為燈、為明、為歸，為不虛妄，為不煩惱。』阿難！若比丘知七識住，知集、知滅、知味、知過、知出要，如實知見，彼比丘言：『彼非我，我非彼，如實知見。』是為七識住。

The Buddha told Ānanda: "There are seven stations of consciousness and two spheres. There are śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas who say: 'These stations are secure; they are a refuge, a protection, a shelter, a torch, a light, a resort, not false, and without affliction.' What are the seven? There are sentient beings diverse in body and diverse in perception, namely devas and humans; this is the first station of consciousness. Śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas say: 'This station is secure; it is a refuge, a protection, a shelter, a torch, a light, a resort, not false, and without affliction.' Ānanda, if a bhikṣu knows the first station of consciousness, knows its arising, its cessation, its gratification, its danger, and the escape from it, and knows it according to reality—Ānanda, that bhikṣu says: 'That is not mine, nor am I that,' knowing and seeing according to reality. There are sentient beings diverse in body but unified in perception, namely the devas of the Brahmā and Ābhāsvara realms; there are sentient beings unified in body but diverse in perception, namely the devas of the Ābhāsvara realm; there are sentient beings unified in body and unified in perception, namely the devas of the Śubhakṛtsna realm; there are sentient beings dwelling in the sphere of infinite space; there are sentient beings dwelling in the sphere of infinite consciousness; there are sentient beings dwelling in the sphere of nothingness. These are the seven stations of consciousness. There are śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas who say: 'These stations are secure; they are a refuge, a protection, a shelter, a torch, a light, a resort, not false, and without affliction.' Ānanda, if a bhikṣu knows the seven stations of consciousness, knows their arising, their cessation, their gratification, their danger, and the escape from them, knowing and seeing according to reality, that bhikṣu says: 'They are not mine, nor am I theirs,' knowing and seeing according to reality. These are the seven stations of consciousness.

The Buddha told Ānanda, “There are seven abodes of consciousness and two spheres. Ascetics and priests say, ‘These abodes are peaceful, saving, protecting, sheltering, lamps, lights, refuges, not false, and not afflicting.’ What are the seven?

“Some sentient beings have diverse bodies and diverse notions. These gods and humans are the first abode of consciousness. Ascetics and priests say, ‘This abode is peaceful, saving, protecting, sheltering, a lamp, a light, a refuge, not false, and not afflicting.’

“Ānanda, suppose that a monk knows the first abode of consciousness and knows its formation, cessation, enjoyment, trouble, and escape. Truly knowing it, Ānanda, that monk would say, ‘Truly knowing and seeing it, that’s not self, and the self isn’t that.’

“Some sentient beings have diverse bodies but the same notions. They are Brahmas of the Ābhāsvara Heaven … Some sentient beings have the same body but diverse notions. They are in the Ābhāsvara Heaven … Some sentient beings have the same body and the same notions. They are in the Śubhakṛtsnā Heaven … Some sentient beings reside in the abode of space … Some sentient beings reside in the abode of consciousness … Some sentient beings reside in the abode of nothingness. This is the seventh abode of consciousness. Some ascetics and priests say, ‘This abode is peaceful, saving, protecting, sheltering, a lamp, a light, a refuge, not false, and not afflicting.’

“Ānanda, suppose that a monk knows the seventh abode of consciousness and knows its formation, cessation, enjoyment, trouble, and escape. Truly knowing it, Ānanda, that monk would say, ‘Truly knowing and seeing it, that’s not self, and the self isn’t that.’ These are the seven abodes of consciousness.

13.72

「云何二入處？無想入、非想非無想入。是為，阿難！此二入處，或有沙門、婆羅門言：『此處安隱，為救、為護、為舍、為燈、為明、為歸，為不虛妄，為不煩惱。』阿難！若比丘知二入處，知集、知滅、知味、知過、知出要，如實知見，彼比丘言：『彼非我，我非彼，如實知見。』是為二入。

"What are the two spheres? The sphere of non-perception and the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception. These are, Ānanda, the two spheres of which there are śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas who say: 'These spheres are secure; they are a refuge, a protection, a shelter, a torch, a light, a resort, not false, and without affliction.' Ānanda, if a bhikṣu knows the two spheres, knows their arising, their cessation, their gratification, their danger, and the escape from them, knowing and seeing according to reality, that bhikṣu says: 'They are not mine, nor am I theirs,' knowing and seeing according to reality. These are the two spheres.

“What are the two sensory abodes? They are the sense that’s without conception and sense that’s neither with nor without conception … These are the two sensory abodes, Ānanda. Some ascetics and priests say, ‘This abode is peaceful, saving, protecting, sheltering, a lamp, a light, a refuge, not false, and not afflicting.’

“Ānanda, suppose that a monk knows the two sensory abodes and knows their formation, cessation, enjoyment, trouble, and escape. Truly knowing and seeing them, Ānanda, that monk would say, ‘Truly knowing and seeing it, that’s not self, and the self isn’t that.’ These are the two senses.

13.73

「阿難！復有八解脫。云何八？色觀色，初解脫。內無色想，觀外色，二解脫。淨解脫，三解脫。度色想，滅有對想，不念雜想，住空處，四解脫。度空處，住識處，五解脫。度識處，住不用處，六解脫。度不用處，住有想無想處，七解脫。滅盡定，八解脫。阿難！諸比丘於此八解脫，逆順遊行，入出自在，如是比丘得俱解脫。」

"Ānanda, there are also eight liberations. What are the eight? Possessing form, one contemplates forms: this is the first liberation. Internally having no perception of form, one contemplates external forms: this is the second liberation. Contemplating the beautiful: this is the third liberation. Transcending perceptions of form, eliminating perceptions of sensory impact, and not attending to perceptions of diversity, one dwells in the sphere of infinite space: this is the fourth liberation. Transcending the sphere of infinite space, one dwells in the sphere of infinite consciousness: this is the fifth liberation. Transcending the sphere of infinite consciousness, one dwells in the sphere of nothingness: this is the sixth liberation. Transcending the sphere of nothingness, one dwells in the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception: this is the seventh liberation. The cessation of perception and feeling: this is the eighth liberation. Ānanda, when bhikṣus traverse these eight liberations in forward and reverse order, entering and emerging from them at will, such bhikṣus attain liberation both ways."

“Ānanda, there are also eight liberations. What are the eight? Form observed as form is the first liberation. Observing form externally without an internal perception of form is the second liberation. The liberation of purity is the third liberation. Going beyond notions of form, ceasing notions of resistance, not attending to diverse notions, and abiding in the abode of space is the fourth liberation. Going beyond the abode of space and abiding in the abode of consciousness is the fifth liberation. Going beyond the abode of consciousness and abiding in the abode of nothingness is the sixth liberation. Going beyond the abode of nothingness and abiding in the abode of with and without conception is the seventh liberation. The samādhi of complete cessation is the eighth liberation.

“Ānanda, monks who traverse these eight liberations forward and backward, entering and exiting them at will, are monks who’ve attained liberation in both ways.”