Reading guide
The teaching in one sentence
Here is how you check a teaching without appealing to any authority, and here is the check being carried out in front of you.
The ten grounds
The list is the same one AN 3.65 gives the Kālāmas, and it is worth reading slowly because it is more specific than its reputation. Do not go by oral transmission, by lineage, by testament, or by canonical authority. Do not rely on logic, on inference, on a reasoned train of thought, or on the acceptance of a view after deliberation. Do not go by the appearance of competence. Do not think the ascetic is our respected teacher.
Four of the ten are about tradition, four are about reasoning, and two are about the person in front of you. That balance is the part most often lost when the passage is quoted. It is not a recommendation to think for yourself instead of trusting scripture; reasoning and inference are on the list too, and so is the conclusion you reached after careful deliberation.
What is left, once all ten are excluded, is stated positively and it is narrow: when you know for yourselves that these things are unskillful, blameworthy, criticized by sensible people, and lead when undertaken to harm and suffering. Four tests, and one of them — criticized by sensible people — is not private at all.
So the instruction is not “believe nothing you cannot verify.” It is “decide this particular kind of question — whether something is worth doing — by what it does, and check your answer against what sensible people think.” That is a much more usable rule and a much less dramatic one.
Who is speaking, and to whom
Nandaka is a senior disciple, best known elsewhere for a discourse of instruction to the nuns. Sāḷha is Migāra’s grandson — the family that built the monastery they are sitting in — and Rohaṇa is Pekhuṇiya’s grandson. Two young men from wealthy donor families, receiving instruction from a monk.
That setting matters more than it looks. The most famous statement in Buddhism about not accepting things on authority is being made here by an authority, to two young people who have every social reason to agree with him, in a building their family paid for. Nandaka’s tenth ground — don’t think ‘the ascetic is our respected teacher’ — is aimed directly at his own position in the room.
AN 3.65 gets quoted because the Kālāmas are a memorable audience. This version deserves to be better known because the speaker disqualifies himself in the first sentence and then does the work anyway.
The procedure, carried out
What follows is a cross-examination with only one kind of move in it, repeated. Is greed real? Yes. What I mean by that is covetousness — and a greedy person kills, steals, commits adultery, lies, and encourages others to do the same. Is that for their lasting harm? Yes. The same for hate, glossed as malice. The same for delusion, glossed as ignorance.
Then the four tests, asked one at a time: are these things skillful or unskillful? Blameworthy or blameless? Criticized or praised by sensible people? Do they lead to harm or not? Sāḷha answers each. And then Nandaka says the sentence the whole discourse is built around: that’s what I said, and this is why I said it.
The point is that nothing has been asserted. Every step of the conclusion came out of the two young men’s mouths, and the only thing Nandaka supplied was the order of the questions. He does not tell them greed is bad; he asks them whether it is real, tells them what he means by the word, describes what a greedy person does, and lets them draw the inference.
The whole thing is then run again in the positive: contentment, love, and understanding, with the same four tests and the same closing sentence. Reading both halves takes several minutes and feels excessive, which is the point — the instruction was not to accept a principle but to run a procedure, and the discourse runs it twice so that the reader cannot mistake the principle for the teaching.
The ending, which goes somewhere unexpected
Having established the method, the discourse does not stop with a well-founded ethical conclusion. It goes on: such a noble disciple, rid of desire and ill will, spreads a heart of love, compassion, rejoicing, and equanimity in all directions; understands there is this, there is what is worse than this, there is what is better than this, and there is an escape beyond the scope of perception; and is freed.
That formula in the middle is genuinely obscure and it is better to say so than to produce a confident gloss. The plainest reading is that it describes a mind that can place any state on a scale — this one, worse ones, better ones — and also knows that the scale is not the whole story, since there is a way out that is not another position on it. Other readings are defensible.
The closing lines are clearer and worth having: formerly there was greed, which was unskillful. Now there is none, so that’s skillful. Three times, and then: so they live without wishes in this very life, quenched, cooled, experiencing bliss, with self become divine.
Brahmabhūtena attanā, with self become divine, is a striking phrase in a tradition careful about the word self, and it is used positively. The canon does that occasionally; it is not a doctrine of a self but an idiom for a person whose condition has been transformed, and a class that has been taught not-self as a slogan should meet it.
Using it
Teach this rather than AN 3.65 if the class has time for one of them, or teach both and put this one second. The famous version states the principle; this one demonstrates it, and the demonstration is what stops the principle from turning into a license.
The usable structure is the sequence of questions. Is the thing real? What exactly do we mean by the word? What does someone in that condition actually do? Is that good for them? A teacher can run that on almost any topic, and it produces conclusions the class owns rather than conclusions they have been handed — which is the whole of Nandaka’s method and the reason he could disqualify his own authority and still get somewhere.
Key terms
The text
The ten grounds
§1So I have heard. Now at that time Venerable Nandaka was staying near Sāvatthī in the stilt longhouse of Migāra’s mother in the Eastern Monastery. Then Sāḷha, Migāra’s grandson, and Rohaṇa, Pekhuṇiya’s grandson went up to Venerable Nandaka, bowed, and sat down to one side. Then Venerable Nandaka said to Sāḷha:
§2“Please, Sāḷha and friend, don’t go by oral transmission, don’t go by lineage, don’t go by testament, don’t go by canonical authority, don’t rely on logic, don’t rely on inference, don’t go by reasoned train of thought, don’t go by the acceptance of a view after deliberation, don’t go by the appearance of competence, and don’t think ‘The ascetic is our respected teacher.’ But when you know for yourselves: ‘These things are unskillful, blameworthy, criticized by sensible people, and when you undertake them, they lead to harm and suffering’, then you should give them up.
Greed, hate, delusion
§3–14What do you think, Sāḷha? Is greed real?” “Yes, sir.” “‘Covetousness’ is what I mean by this. A person who is greedy and covetous kills living creatures, steals, commits adultery, lies, and encourages others to do the same. Is that for their lasting harm and suffering?” “Yes, sir.” “What do you think, Sāḷha? Is hate real?” “Yes, sir.” “‘Malice’ is what I mean by this. A hateful and malicious person kills living creatures, steals, commits adultery, lies, and encourages others to do the same. Is that for their lasting harm and suffering?” “Yes, sir.” “What do you think, Sāḷha? Is delusion real?” “Yes, sir.” “‘Ignorance’ is what I mean by this. A person who is deluded and ignorant kills living creatures, steals, commits adultery, lies, and encourages others to do the same. Is that for their lasting harm and suffering?” “Yes, sir.”
§15–22“What do you think, Sāḷha, are these things skillful or unskillful?” “Unskillful, sir.” “Blameworthy or blameless?” “Blameworthy, sir.” “Criticized or praised by sensible people?” “Criticized by sensible people, sir.” “When you undertake them, do they lead to harm and suffering, or not? Or how do you see this?” “When you undertake them, they lead to harm and suffering. That’s how we see it.”
§23“So, Sāḷha and friend, when I said: ‘Please, don’t go by oral transmission, don’t go by lineage, don’t go by testament, don’t go by canonical authority, don’t rely on logic, don’t rely on inference, don’t go by reasoned train of thought, don’t go by the acceptance of a view after deliberation, don’t go by the appearance of competence, and don’t think “The ascetic is our respected teacher.” But when you know for yourselves: “These things are unskillful, blameworthy, criticized by sensible people, and when you undertake them, they lead to harm and suffering”, then you should give them up.’ That’s what I said, and this is why I said it.
And the same again, the other way
§24Please, Sāḷha and friend, don’t go by oral transmission, don’t go by lineage, don’t go by testament, don’t go by canonical authority, don’t rely on logic, don’t rely on inference, don’t go by reasoned train of thought, don’t go by the acceptance of a view after deliberation, don’t go by the appearance of competence, and don’t think ‘The ascetic is our respected teacher.’ But when you know for yourselves: ‘These things are skillful, blameless, praised by sensible people, and when you undertake them, they lead to welfare and happiness’, then you should acquire them and keep them.
§25–36What do you think? Is contentment real?” “Yes, sir.” “‘Satisfaction’ is what I mean by this. A person who is content and satisfied doesn’t kill living creatures, steal, commit adultery, lie, or encourage others to do the same. Is that for their lasting welfare and happiness?” “Yes, sir.” What do you think? Is love real?” “Yes, sir.” “‘Kindness’ is what I mean by this. A loving and kind-hearted person doesn’t kill living creatures, steal, commit adultery, lie, or encourage others to do the same. Is that for their lasting welfare and happiness?” “Yes, sir.” “What do you think, Sāḷha? Is understanding real?” “Yes, sir.” “‘Knowledge’ is what I mean by this. A person who understands and knows doesn’t kill living creatures, steal, commit adultery, lie, or encourage others to do the same. Is that for their lasting welfare and happiness?” “Yes, sir.”
§37–44“What do you think, Sāḷha, are these things skillful or unskillful?” “Skillful, sir.” “Blameworthy or blameless?” “Blameless, sir.” “Criticized or praised by sensible people?” “Praised by sensible people, sir.” “When you undertake them, do they lead to welfare and happiness, or not? Or how do you see this?” “When you undertake them, they lead to welfare and happiness. That’s how we see it.”
§45“So, Sāḷha and friend, when I said: ‘Please, don’t go by oral transmission, don’t go by lineage, don’t go by testament, don’t go by canonical authority, don’t rely on logic, don’t rely on inference, don’t go by reasoned train of thought, don’t go by the acceptance of a view after deliberation, don’t go by the appearance of competence, and don’t think “The ascetic is our respected teacher.” But when you know for yourselves: “These things are skillful, blameless, praised by sensible people, and when you undertake them, they lead to welfare and happiness”, then you should acquire them and keep them.’ That’s what I said, and this is why I said it.
Where it ends
§46Then that noble disciple is rid of desire, rid of ill will, unconfused, aware, and mindful. They meditate spreading a heart full of love … compassion … rejoicing … equanimity to one direction, and to the second, and to the third, and to the fourth. In the same way above, below, across, everywhere, all around, they spread a heart full of equanimity to the whole world—abundant, expansive, limitless, free of enmity and ill will. They understand: ‘There is this, there is what is worse than this, there is what is better than this, and there is an escape beyond the scope of perception.’ Knowing and seeing like this, their mind is freed from the defilements of sensuality, desire to be reborn, and ignorance. When they’re freed, they know they’re freed. They understand: ‘Rebirth is ended, the spiritual journey has been completed, what had to be done has been done, there is nothing further for this place.’
§47They understand: ‘Formerly there was greed, which was unskillful. Now there is none, so that’s skillful. Formerly there was hate, which was unskillful. Now there is none, so that’s skillful. Formerly there was delusion, which was unskillful. Now there is none, so that’s skillful.’ So they live without wishes in this very life, quenched, cooled, experiencing bliss, with self become divine.”
Self-check quiz
Ten questions. Click an answer to see immediate feedback. No score is recorded — this is for your own checking.