Aṅguttara Nikāya · Discourse 3.26

Associates

Sevitabbasutta — Puggalavagga — the third chapter of the Threes

Setting
None stated; the discourse continues from AN 3.1, whose setting at Sāvatthī is understood to hold
Speakers
The Buddha alone, addressing the mendicants
Form
Three individuals defined by comparison with oneself, each with a stated reason, closing in verse
Length
~3 minutes to read
Northern parallel
Advice on choosing company by ethical and meditative standing is widespread in the Chinese Āgamas; this reading guide does not assert a specific matching sutra number
Difficulty
★★☆☆☆ — plain advice, with one clause that stops it being merely self-interested

Why this discourse

Sort the people around you by ethics, immersion, and wisdom, relative to yourself. Those below you: do not associate with them. Those level with you: do. Those above you: do, and with honor and respect. Stated baldly that is social climbing with a spiritual vocabulary, and the discourse would deserve the objection if it stopped there. It does not: the first case carries an exception, and the exception is the reason the discourse is worth reading.

Reading guide

The teaching in one sentence

Keep company with your equals and your betters in ethics, immersion, and wisdom — and go to your inferiors only out of kindness.

The exception in the first case

The instruction about the person inferior in ethics, immersion, and wisdom is: do not associate with, accompany, or attend them — except out of kindness and sympathy.

That clause changes the character of the whole discourse. Without it, the advice is about protecting one’s own development, and the person below you is simply a hazard. With it, there remains exactly one reason to seek them out, and it is the only reason the discourse allows: their benefit rather than yours.

So the rule is not avoid the worse. It is: do not go to them for what you would go to an equal or a better for. Company for your own sake goes upward or sideways; going downward is not company but help, and the discourse marks the difference by naming the motive.

Why equals

The reason given for keeping company with equals is unexpectedly concrete and has nothing to do with attainment. Since our ethical conduct is similar, we can discuss ethics, the conversation will flow, and we’ll both be at ease. And the same for immersion and for wisdom.

What is being valued is a conversation that works. Two people at the same level can actually talk about the thing — neither is explaining and neither is struggling to follow — and the discourse names the ease of it as the point. That is an unusually sociable reason to find in a list about spiritual company, and it is worth pointing out to students who expect the canon to recommend only vertical relationships.

It also implies something about peers that the tradition does not otherwise say much about. A teacher gives you what you lack; an equal gives you a conversation. Both are on the list.

Why betters, and what “with honor” adds

The person superior in the three is to be attended with honor and respect — the extra clause that distinguishes this case from the second. And the reason is stated as a first-person resolve: I will fulfill the ethics, immersion, and wisdom I have not yet fulfilled, or support with wisdom what I have.

Note that both halves are named. Association upward is not only for acquiring what one lacks but for consolidating what one has. That second half is easy to skip and it is the more realistic of the two: most of what a practitioner gets from someone further along is not new material but confirmation that what they already do is sound.

The closing verse

A man who associates with an inferior goes downhill, but associating with an equal, you’ll never decline; following the best, you’ll quickly rise up, so you should keep company with people better than you.

The verse compresses the prose and, in compressing it, drops the exception. Read alone it is the bare social advice; read after the prose it is a summary that assumes the qualification has already been made. That is a common relationship between a discourse’s prose and its closing verse, and it is worth knowing about, because these verses travel independently and get quoted without what preceded them.

The same verse closes AN 3.27, the next discourse. Both times it follows a fuller treatment that is more careful than the verse is.

Key terms

sevitabba — “to be associated with” — the gerundive that gives the discourse its name; the question throughout is who should be kept company with.
bhajitabba / payirupāsitabba — “to be accompanied” and “to be attended” — the two further verbs, running from casual association to sitting at someone’s feet.
anukampaṁ upādāya — “out of kindness and sympathy” — the exception that permits going to someone below one in the three, and the clause that changes the discourse’s character.
sīla, samādhi, paññā — ethics, immersion, and wisdom — the three axes of comparison, and the canon’s standard division of the training.
sakkatvā garuṁ katvā — “with honor and respect” — the addition that distinguishes attending a superior from keeping company with an equal.

The text

The discourse in full, closing in verse. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).

Three individuals

§1“These three individuals are found in the world. What three? There is an individual you shouldn’t associate with, accompany, or attend. There is an individual you should associate with, accompany, and attend. There is an individual you should associate with, accompany, and attend with honor and respect. Who is the individual you shouldn’t associate with, accompany, or attend? It’s an individual who is inferior in terms of ethics, immersion, and wisdom. You shouldn’t associate with, accompany, or attend such an individual, except out of kindness and sympathy.

The equal

§2Who is the individual you should associate with, accompany, and attend? It’s an individual who is similar in terms of ethics, immersion, and wisdom. You should associate with, accompany, and attend such an individual. Why is that? Thinking, ‘Since our ethical conduct is similar, we can discuss ethics, the conversation will flow, and we’ll both be at ease. Since our immersion is similar, we can discuss immersion, the conversation will flow, and we’ll both be at ease. Since our wisdom is similar, we can discuss wisdom, the conversation will flow, and we’ll both be at ease.’ That’s why you should associate with, accompany, and attend such an individual.

The superior

§3Who is the individual you should associate with, accompany, and attend with honor and respect? It’s an individual who is superior in terms of ethics, immersion, and wisdom. You should associate with, accompany, and attend such an individual with honor and respect. Why is that? Thinking, ‘I’ll fulfill the entire spectrum of ethical conduct I haven’t yet fulfilled, or support with wisdom in every situation the ethical conduct I’ve already fulfilled. I’ll fulfill the entire spectrum of immersion I haven’t yet fulfilled, or support with wisdom in every situation the immersion I’ve already fulfilled. I’ll fulfill the entire spectrum of wisdom I haven’t yet fulfilled, or support with wisdom in every situation the wisdom I’ve already fulfilled.’ That’s why you should associate with, accompany, and attend this individual with honor and respect. These are the three individuals found in the world.

In verse

§4A man who associates with an inferior goes downhill, but associating with an equal, you’ll never decline; following the best, you’ll quickly rise up, so you should keep company with people better than you.”

· · ·

Self-check quiz

Ten questions. Click an answer to see immediate feedback. No score is recorded — this is for your own checking.

Question 1 of 10
By what are the three individuals sorted?
Correct: B. The canon's standard division of the training, used here as a social sorting.
Question 2 of 10
What exception attaches to the first case?
Correct: B. The clause that changes the character of the whole discourse.
Question 3 of 10
How does that exception change the rule?
Correct: B. The discourse marks the difference by naming the motive.
Question 4 of 10
What reason is given for keeping company with equals?
Correct: B. An unusually sociable reason to find in a list about spiritual company.
Question 5 of 10
What does the guide say that implies about peers?
Correct: B. Worth pointing out to students who expect the canon to recommend only vertical relationships.
Question 6 of 10
What extra clause distinguishes the third case?
Correct: A. Sakkatvā garuṁ katvā.
Question 7 of 10
What two halves does the resolve behind attending a superior contain?
Correct: A. Association upward is not only for acquiring what one lacks.
Question 8 of 10
Which half does the guide call more realistic?
Correct: B. Easy to skip in the reading.
Question 9 of 10
What does the closing verse drop?
Correct: B. A summary that assumes the qualification has already been made.
Question 10 of 10
Why does the guide say that matters?
Correct: B. Both times it follows a fuller treatment that is more careful than the verse is.
Answered 0 of 10 · Correct 0