Viyahapannatti 17.2: Uddeśaka 2: saṃyata

“Is it so, Venerable Sir, that one who is self-restrained, abstinent, who has warded off and renounced sinful karma, is established in Dharma? That one who is unrestrained, non-abstinent, who has not warded off and not renounced sinful karma, is established in adharma? That one who is partially restrained and partially unrestrained is established in dharma-adharma?”
“Yes, Gautama! One who is self-restrained, abstinent, who has warded off and renounced sinful karma, is established in Dharma. One who is unrestrained, non-abstinent, who has not warded off and not renounced sinful karma, is established in adharma. One who is partially restrained and partially unrestrained is established in dharma-adharma.”
“Venerable Sir, in this Dharma, or in adharma, or in dharma-adharma, is anyone able to sit, or to lie down, or to stand, or to sit down, or to turn over?”
“Gautama, this meaning is not admissible.”
“For what reason, then, Venerable Sir, is it said up to: ‘One who is partially restrained and partially unrestrained is established in dharma-adharma’?”
“Gautama! One who is self-restrained, abstinent, who has warded off and renounced sinful karma, is established in Dharma, and having attained Dharma, he abides. One who is unrestrained, non-abstinent, who has not warded off and not renounced sinful karma, is established in adharma, and having attained adharma, he abides. One who is partially restrained and partially unrestrained is established in dharma-adharma, and having attained dharma-adharma, he abides. For that reason, [it is said] up to: ‘established in dharma-adharma’.
“Venerable Sir, are jīvas established in Dharma? Established in adharma? Established in dharma-adharma?”
“Gautama, jīvas are established in Dharma, also established in adharma, and also established in dharma-adharma.”
“Regarding inhabitants of hell—[the same] question.”
“Gautama, inhabitants of hell are not established in Dharma; they are established in adharma; they are not established in dharma-adharma. In this way up to four-sensed beings.”
“Regarding five-sensed beings of the animal realm—[the same] question.”
“Gautama, five-sensed beings of the animal realm are not established in Dharma; they are established in adharma, and also established in dharma-adharma. Humans are just like jīvas. Vyantara, Jyotiṣka, and Vaimānika [gods] are like inhabitants of hell.”

“Venerable Sir, the followers of other doctrines declare up to propound thus: ‘Truly, the śramaṇas are wise (paṇḍita), the lay disciples of śramaṇas are partly foolish and partly wise (bālapaṇḍita), and one who has not laid aside violence even towards a single living being should be called utterly foolish (ekāntabāla).’
How is this so, Venerable Sir?”
“Gautama, as to what those followers of other doctrines declare up to: ‘he should be called utterly foolish,’ those who have spoken thus have spoken falsely. But I, Gautama, declare up to propound thus: ‘Truly, the śramaṇas are wise, the lay disciples of śramaṇas are partly foolish and partly wise, and one who has laid aside violence towards even a single living being should not be called utterly foolish.’
“Venerable Sir, are jīvas foolish? Wise? Partly foolish and partly wise?”
“Gautama, they are foolish, also wise, and also partly foolish and partly wise.”
“Regarding inhabitants of hell—[the same] question.”
“Gautama, inhabitants of hell are foolish, not wise, not partly foolish and partly wise. In this way up to four-sensed beings.”
“Regarding five-sensed beings of the animal realm—[the same] question.”
“Gautama, five-sensed beings of the animal realm are foolish, not wise, and also partly foolish and partly wise. Humans are just like jīvas. Vyantara, Jyotiṣka, and Vaimānika [gods] are like inhabitants of hell.”

“Venerable Sir, the followers of other doctrines declare up to propound thus: ‘Truly, when one is engaged in injury to living beings, false speech, up to the dart of false belief, the jīva is one, and the individual soul (jīvātman) is another. When one is engaged in abstinence from injury to living beings up to abstinence from possessions, the discernment of anger up to the discernment of the dart of false belief, the jīva is one, and the individual soul is another. When one is engaged in innate, instructional, practical, or natural [intellect], the jīva is one, and the individual soul is another. When one is engaged in apprehension, inquiry, judgment, or retention, the jīva is one, and the individual soul is another. When one is engaged in exertion, action, strength, energy, or virile prowess, the jīva is one, and the individual soul is another. When one is engaged in the state of an inhabitant of hell, of an animal, of a human, or of a god, the jīva is one, and the individual soul is another. When one is engaged in knowledge-obscuring up to obstructive [karma], the jīva is one, and the individual soul is another. Likewise in black lesyā up to white lesyā, in right worldview, false worldview, and mixed worldview; likewise in ocular intuition, non-ocular intuition, clairvoyant intuition, and omniscient intuition; in sensory cognition, scriptural cognition, clairvoyance, telepathy, and omniscience; in sensory ignorance, scriptural ignorance, and false clairvoyance; in the notion of food, notion of fear, notion of sex, and notion of possessions; likewise in the physical body, transformational body, translocational body, fiery body, and karmic body; likewise in mental activity, vocal activity, bodily activity, determinate cognitive application, and indeterminate cognitive application, the jīva is one, and the individual soul is another.’
How is this so, Venerable Sir?”
“Gautama, as to what those followers of other doctrines declare up to: those who have spoken thus have spoken falsely. But I, Gautama, declare up to propound thus: ‘Truly, when one is engaged in injury to living beings up to the dart of false belief, it is the very same jīva, the very same individual soul; up to when one is engaged in indeterminate cognitive application, it is the very same jīva, the very same individual soul.’”

"Venerable Sir! Is a deva of great power, up to of great majesty, having formerly had form, able to transform [himself] into formless and remain [so]?"
"This matter is not tenable."
"For what reason, Venerable Sir, is it said: 'A deva of great power, up to of great majesty, having formerly had form, is not able to transform [himself] into formless and remain [so]'?"
"Gautama! I know this, I see this, I comprehend this, I fully realize this; by me this has been known, by me this has been seen, by me this has been comprehended, by me this has been fully realized: that in the case of such a jīva having form, with karma, with passion, with gender, with delusion, with lesyā, with body, and not separated from that body, such is perceived, namely: blackness or up to whiteness, fragrant odor or foul odor, bitterness or up to sweetness, hardness or up to dryness. For that reason, Gautama, it is said: 'A deva of great power, up to of great majesty, having formerly had form, is not able to transform [himself] into formless and remain [so].'"
"Venerable Sir! Is that very same jīva, having formerly been formless, able to transform [itself] into possessing form and remain [so]?"
"This matter is not tenable."
"For what reason, Venerable Sir, is it said: 'That very same jīva, having formerly been formless, is not able to transform [itself] into possessing form and remain [so]'?"
"Gautama! I know this, I see this, I comprehend this, I fully realize this; by me this has been known, by me this has been seen, by me this has been comprehended, by me this has been fully realized: that in the case of such a jīva being formless, without karma, without passion, without gender, without delusion, without lesyā, without body, and separated from that body, such is not perceived, namely: blackness or up to whiteness, fragrant odor or foul odor, bitterness or up to sweetness, hardness or up to dryness. For that reason, Gautama, it is said: 'That very same jīva, having formerly been formless, is not able to transform [itself] into possessing form and remain [so].'"
"So it is, Venerable Sir! So it is, Venerable Sir!"