Aṅguttara Nikāya · Discourse 4.209

Bad Character (3rd)

Tatiyapāpadhammasutta — Sappurisavagga — the twenty-first chapter of the Fours

Setting
None stated; the Sappurisavagga gives no location for this discourse, and it is addressed to the mendicants directly
Speakers
The Buddha alone, addressing the mendicants
Form
The same ladder, the ten courses of action reused a third time, and a new vocabulary of character rather than quality
Length
~1 minute to read
Northern parallel
See AN 4.204; this reading guide does not assert a specific matching sutra number for this discourse
Difficulty
★★☆☆☆ — the grid’s third cell, and the one word in it worth pausing on

Why this discourse

The ten courses of action, filed for a third time, now under pāpadhamma, ‘bad character’, rather than the plain adjective pāpa that AN 4.207 used for the same content. The word is a compound, not a simple negation, and it is worth stopping on before this chapter’s last discourse completes the pattern.

Reading guide

The teaching in one sentence

The identical ten courses of action, filed a third time under a compound noun naming a whole character rather than a single quality.

A third vocabulary, and what makes it different

Pāpadhamma is built from pāpa, bad, and dhamma, here in its sense of nature, quality, or state — something closer to ‘of a bad nature’ or ‘possessing a bad character’ than to the bare adjective pāpa used alone at AN 4.207. Sujato’s ‘bad character’ and ‘worse character’ catch that difference: not simply someone who is bad, but someone whose dhamma, their basic constitution, is bad.

This is a real semantic shift, however small, and it is worth naming rather than treating the three vocabularies — sappurisa, pāpa, pāpadhamma — as pure synonyms. Sappurisa names a kind of person. Pāpa names a quality a person has. Pāpadhamma names something closer to the underlying nature that quality expresses.

The same ten deeds, for the third time

Beyond the vocabulary, nothing here is new: killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, the four kinds of bad speech, covetousness, malice, wrong view, and their positive opposites, exactly as given at AN 4.204 and again at AN 4.207. By this point in the chapter the manuscript trusts the reciter completely, compressing to the barest skeleton of what a person listening would already know by heart.

A reader coming to this page after AN 4.204 and AN 4.207 will find nothing surprising in the content and everything to notice in the label. That is precisely the discourse’s function within the set of four it belongs to.

Whether the difference in word matters to the classification itself

It is worth asking directly whether this semantic nuance changes anything about how the four-level ladder works, and the honest answer is no. An untrue person, a bad person, and someone of bad character are all sorted by the identical structure: base conduct, then base conduct plus encouraging others, mirrored on the positive side.

What the word choice changes is not the logic of the classification but its connotation — whether the text is naming a person, a quality, or an underlying nature. That the tradition preserved all three ways of naming the same structure, rather than settling on one, suggests the ladder itself was considered portable across several different ways of talking about what it sorts.

One discourse left

AN 4.210 will do to the tenfold path what this discourse has just done to the ten deeds: apply the pāpadhamma vocabulary to it, completing every cell of the grid this chapter has been filling in since AN 4.207, and closing both the grid and the chapter in the same discourse.

Key terms

pāpadhamma — “bad character” — a compound of pāpa, bad, and dhamma in its sense of nature or quality; closer to ‘of a bad nature’ than the bare adjective pāpa.
pāpadhammatara — “worse character” — the comparative, marking the same encourages-others escalation as every earlier discourse in this chapter.
dhamma — here, “nature”, “quality”, or “state” — one of the word’s many senses across this collection, distinct from its use for ‘the teaching’ elsewhere.
dasa kammapatha — “the ten courses of action” — filed here for the third time in this chapter, under its third vocabulary.
kalyāṇadhamma — “good character” — not the exact term used in this discourse’s English rendering, but the natural mirror of pāpadhamma on the positive side.

The text

The discourse in full: bad character, worse character, good character, and better character, defined by the ten courses of action. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).

Bad character, worse character, good character, better character

§1“Mendicants, I will teach you bad character and worse character, good character and better character.

Who has bad character

§2And who has bad character? It’s someone who kills living creatures, steals, and commits sexual misconduct. They use speech that’s false, backbiting, harsh, or nonsensical. And they’re covetous, malicious, with wrong view. This is called bad character.

Who has worse character

§3And who has worse character? It’s someone who kills living creatures, steals, and commits sexual misconduct. They use speech that’s false, backbiting, harsh, or nonsensical. They’re covetous, malicious, with wrong view. And they encourage others to do these things. This is called worse character.

Who has good character

§4And who has good character? It’s someone who doesn’t kill living creatures, steal, or commit sexual misconduct. They don’t use speech that’s false, backbiting, harsh, or nonsensical. And they’re contented, kind-hearted, with right view. This is called good character.

Who has better character

§5And who has better character? It’s someone who doesn’t kill living creatures, steal, or commit sexual misconduct. They don’t use speech that’s false, backbiting, harsh, or nonsensical. They’re contented, kind-hearted, with right view. And they encourage others to do these things. This is called better character.”

· · ·

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
What content defines the four levels in this discourse?
Correct: B. Identical to AN 4.204 and AN 4.207.
Question 2 of 10
What does pāpadhamma mean, compared to the plain adjective pāpa?
Correct: B. A compound of pāpa and dhamma in its sense of nature or state.
Question 3 of 10
How do the three vocabularies — sappurisa, pāpa, pāpadhamma — differ in what they name?
Correct: B. Worth naming rather than treating as identical.
Question 4 of 10
Does this semantic nuance change how the four-level ladder itself works?
Correct: B. The word choice changes connotation, not the classification’s logic.
Question 5 of 10
What does the guide suggest the preservation of three different vocabularies for one structure indicates?
Correct: B. Rather than the tradition settling on one fixed vocabulary.
Question 6 of 10
How does the manuscript treat the ten-item content by this point in the chapter?
Correct: B. The third time this exact content has been given in this chapter.
Question 7 of 10
What will AN 4.210 do?
Correct: B. Closing both the grid and the chapter in one discourse.
Question 8 of 10
What is dhamma doing in the word pāpadhamma, as distinct from its use elsewhere in this collection?
Correct: B. Distinct from its more familiar sense of ‘the teaching’.
Question 9 of 10
Where has this exact ten-item content already appeared in this chapter?
Correct: B. This is the third filing of the identical content.
Question 10 of 10
What is the discourse’s function, on the guide’s reading, within this closing set of four?
Correct: B. One cell of the grid remains, filled by AN 4.210.
Answered 0 of 10 · Correct 0