Viyahapannatti 18.1: Uddeśaka 1: prathama

1. The First, 2. Viśākha, 3. and Mākandika, 4. Injury to living beings, 5. and Asura,
6. Molasses, 7. Kevalin, 8. Homeless ascetic, 9. Capable [of liberation], and 10. Somila in the eighteenth.

At that time, in that period, in Rājagṛha, and so on, [Gautama] spoke thus: “Venerable Sir! In terms of soul-nature, is a soul first or not-first?”
“Gautama! It is not first; it is not-first. Thus from an inhabitant of hell up to a celestial being [dwelling in a celestial abode].
Venerable Sir! In terms of liberated-nature, is a liberated soul first or not-first?”
“Gautama! It is first, not not-first.”
“Venerable Sir! In terms of soul-nature, are souls first or not-first?”
“Gautama! They are not first; they are not-first. Thus up to celestial beings [dwelling in celestial abodes].
Venerable Sir! Liberated souls—” [the same] question.
“Gautama! They are first, not not-first.”
“Venerable Sir! In terms of nourishment-nature, is a nourishing soul first or not-first?”
“Gautama! It is not first; it is not-first. Thus up to a celestial being [dwelling in a celestial abode]. In the plural, just the same.”
“Venerable Sir! In terms of non-nourishment-nature, a non-nourishing soul—” [the same] question.
“Gautama! It is sometimes first, sometimes not-first.”
“Venerable Sir! In terms of non-nourishment-nature, an inhabitant of hell—” [the same] question.
“Thus from an inhabitant of hell up to a celestial being [dwelling in a celestial abode] it is not first, but not-first. A liberated soul is first, not not-first.”
“Venerable Sir! In terms of non-nourishment-nature, non-nourishing souls—” [the same] question.
“Gautama! They are both first and not-first. From inhabitants of hell up to celestial beings [dwelling in celestial abodes], they are not first; they are not-first. Liberated souls are first, not not-first—the question is to be stated for each individually.”
For a soul capable of liberation, in singularity and plurality, [it is] just as for a nourishing [soul]; likewise also for one incapable of liberation. “Venerable Sir! In terms of the nature of being neither-capable-of-liberation-nor-incapable-of-liberation, is a soul that is neither capable of liberation nor incapable of liberation—” [the same] question.
“Gautama! It is first, not not-first. Venerable Sir! In terms of the nature of being neither-capable-of-liberation-nor-incapable-of-liberation, a liberated soul that is neither capable of liberation nor incapable of liberation—” [the same] question. Thus also in plurality for both.
“Venerable Sir! In terms of the nature of having a mind, is a minded soul first—” [the same] question.
“Gautama! It is not first; it is not-first. Thus, excluding beings with deficient senses, up to a celestial being [dwelling in a celestial abode]. Thus also in plurality. Unminded [souls are] just the same in singularity and plurality, with the exception that [this applies only] up to Vāṇamantara [deities]. A soul that is neither minded nor unminded, [namely] a human [ascetic in the final state] or a liberated soul, is first, not not-first. Thus also in plurality.
“Venerable Sir! One possessing a leśyā—” [the same] question.
“Gautama! Just as for a nourishing [soul], thus also in plurality. From black leśyā up to white leśyā it is just the same, with the exception [that one applies] whichever leśyā belongs to whom. For a soul without leśyā, [namely] a soul, a human, [or] a liberated soul, [it is] just as for [one who is] neither minded nor unminded.
“Venerable Sir! In terms of the nature of right view, is a soul with right view first—” [the same] question.
“Gautama! It is sometimes first, sometimes not-first. Thus, excluding one-sensed souls, up to a celestial being [dwelling in a celestial abode]. A liberated soul is first, not not-first. In plurality, souls are both first and not-first. Thus up to celestial beings [dwelling in celestial abodes]. Liberated souls are first, not not-first. A soul with wrong view, in singularity and plurality, is just as nourishing [souls]. A soul with mixed right-and-wrong view, in singularity and plurality, is just as [a soul] with right view, with the exception [that it applies to] whoever has mixed right-and-wrong view.
A restrained soul and a [restrained] human, in singularity and plurality, are just as [a soul] with right view. An unrestrained [soul is] just as a nourishing [soul]. A partially restrained soul, five-sensed animals, and humans, in singularity and plurality, are just as [a soul] with right view. A soul that is neither restrained, nor unrestrained, nor partially restrained, and a liberated soul, in singularity and plurality, is first, not not-first.
One with passions, one with anger-passion up to one with greed-passion—these, in singularity and plurality, are just as a nourishing [soul]. A passionless soul is sometimes first, sometimes not-first. Thus also a human. A liberated soul is first, not not-first. In plurality, passionless souls and humans are both first and not-first. Liberated souls are first, not not-first.
A knowledgeable soul, in singularity and plurality, is just as [a soul] with right view. Souls possessing sensory knowledge up to mental-representation knowledge, in singularity and plurality, are just the same, with the exception [that one applies] whichever belongs to whom. Omniscient souls, [namely] a soul, a human, and a liberated soul, in singularity and plurality, are first, not not-first. Souls with non-knowledge, with sensory non-knowledge, scriptural non-knowledge, and vibhaṅga knowledge, in singularity and plurality, are just as a nourishing [soul].
Souls possessing activity, mind-activity, speech-activity, [or] body-activity, in singularity and plurality, are just as a nourishing [soul], with the exception [that one applies] whichever activity belongs to whom. Inactive souls, [namely] a soul, a human, [or] a liberated soul, in singularity and plurality, are first, not not-first.
Souls endowed with determinate application [or] indeterminate application, in singularity and plurality, are just as a non-nourishing [soul].
Souls possessing gender up to neuter gender, in singularity and plurality, are just as a nourishing [soul], with the exception [that one applies] whichever gender belongs to whom. A genderless soul, in singularity and plurality, in all three cases, is just as a passionless [soul].
A soul possessing a body is just as a nourishing [soul], and thus up to one possessing a karmic body, [according to] whichever body belongs to whom, with the exception that one possessing a transmutable body, in singularity and plurality, is just as [a soul] with right view. A bodiless soul and a liberated soul, in singularity and plurality, is first, not not-first.
With respect to the five completions and the five non-completions, in singularity and plurality, [they are] just as a nourishing [soul], with the exception [that one applies] whichever belongs to whom, up to celestial beings [dwelling in celestial abodes] they are not first, but not-first. Here is the verse of definition:

Whatever state was previously attained by someone, through that [state] one is not-first; / in the remaining states that were not previously attained, one is first.

"Venerable Sir! Is a jīva, by state of being a jīva, final or non-final?"
"Gautama! Not final; it is non-final."
"Venerable Sir! Is an inhabitant of hell, by state of being an inhabitant of hell—" [the query is repeated.]
"Gautama! It may be final, it may be non-final. In this manner up to [celestial beings of] celestial abodes. Liberated souls are just like jīvas."
"Jīvas—" [the query is repeated.]
"Gautama! Not final; they are non-final. Inhabitants of hell are both final and non-final. In this manner up to [celestial beings of] celestial abodes. Liberated souls are just like jīvas.
An intake-taking [soul] everywhere in the singular may be final, may be non-final; in the plural, they are both final and non-final. A non-intake-taking jīva and a liberated soul, both in the singular and in the plural, are not final; they are non-final. In the remaining states, in the singular and in the plural, they are just like the intake-taking [soul].
A soul capable of liberation, under the category of jīva, in the singular and in the plural, is final, not non-final. In the remaining states, it is just like the intake-taking [soul]. A soul incapable of liberation everywhere, in the singular and in the plural, is not final; it is non-final. Jīvas neither-capable-of-liberation-nor-incapable-of-liberation and liberated souls, in the singular and in the plural, are just like the soul incapable of liberation.
A sentient [soul] is just like the intake-taking [soul]; likewise also a non-sentient [soul]. Neither-sentient-nor-non-sentient under the category of jīva and under the category of liberated souls is non-final; under the category of human beings, it is final, in the singular and in the plural.
With lesyā up to with white lesyā is just like the intake-taking [soul], with the distinction: whichever belongs to whichever. Devoid of lesyā is just like neither-sentient-nor-non-sentient.
Possessing right view is just like the non-intake-taking [soul]. Possessing wrong view is just like the intake-taking [soul]. Possessing mixed right-and-wrong view, excluding one-sensed and incomplete-sensed [beings], may be final, may be non-final; in the plural, they are both final and non-final.
A self-restrained jīva and human being are just like the intake-taking [soul]. The non-self-restrained is also just like that. The partially self-restrained is also just like that, with the distinction: whichever belongs to whichever. Neither-self-restrained-nor-non-self-restrained-nor-partially-self-restrained is just like neither-capable-of-liberation-nor-incapable-of-liberation.
With passions up to with greed passion in all states is just like the intake-taking [soul]. Passionless under the category of jīva and liberated soul is not final; it is non-final. Under the category of human beings, it may be final, it may be non-final.
With knowledge everywhere is just like possessing right view. With sensory knowledge up to with mind-reading knowledge is just like the intake-taking [soul], with the distinction: whichever belongs to whichever. With omniscient knowledge is just like neither-sentient-nor-non-sentient. With non-knowledge up to with erroneous clairvoyance is just like the intake-taking [soul].
With activity up to with body activity is just like the intake-taking [soul], whichever activity belongs to whichever. Devoid of activity is just like neither-sentient-nor-non-sentient.
Applied with determinate consciousness and applied with indeterminate consciousness are just like the non-intake-taking [soul].
With gender up to with neuter gender is just like the intake-taking [soul]. Devoid of gender is just like the passionless.
With body up to with karmic body is just like the intake-taking [soul], with the distinction: whichever belongs to whichever. Devoid of body is just like neither-capable-of-liberation-nor-incapable-of-liberation.
With the five developable completions and with the five non-developable completions, it is just like the intake-taking [soul]; the series should be stated everywhere in the singular and plural. This is the defining verse:

Whichever state a soul will attain again, by that [state] it is non-final;
that state from which one has absolute cessation, by that [state] one is final.

"So it is, Venerable Sir! So it is, Venerable Sir!", and so saying, he continues to dwell.