Tatiyahitasutta — Balavagga — the second chapter of the Fives
Setting
None stated; the discourse continues from AN 5.1, whose setting at Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove is understood to hold
Speakers
The Buddha alone, addressing the mendicants
Form
Both halves of AN 5.17's formula negated together
Length
~1 minute to read
Northern parallel
This reading guide does not assert a specific matching sutra number for this variant beyond the parallel already noted at AN 5.17
Difficulty
★☆☆☆☆ — the simplest of the four cases, both conditions failing together
Why this discourse
The third case closes the logical square without ambiguity: a mendicant neither personally accomplished in ethics, immersion, wisdom, freedom, and the knowledge and vision of freedom, nor encouraging others toward them. Where AN 5.17 and 5.18 each offered something worth weighing — genuine private attainment against genuine outward generosity — this discourse offers nothing to weigh. It names the case where both fail at once.
Reading guide
The teaching in one sentence
A mendicant neither personally accomplished in the five, nor encouraging others in them, is practicing for neither their own welfare nor that of others.
The simplest of the four cases
AN 5.17 and AN 5.18 each required a reader to weigh something genuine against something missing — real attainment against silence, or real generosity against lack of grounding. This discourse asks nothing to be weighed. Both halves of the formula are negated together, and the outcome follows without needing any qualification.
Why the collection still gives this case its own discourse
A reader might expect this, the least interesting case logically, to be folded into one of the others or skipped. The chapter does neither. Keeping all four combinations as separate, equally weighted discourses is itself a small argument: the collection treats the logical square as worth completing in full, not only in its more psychologically interesting corners.
What this case is not saying
The discourse does not say a mendicant in this position is beyond help, or condemns them further than the bare description. It states a fact about their present practice, in the same flat register used for the other three cases, and stops there. Whatever consequence might follow is left to other discourses in this series to address, not this one.
One case remaining
AN 5.20 completes the square, and closes the chapter, with the fourth combination: personally accomplished and encouraging others. Reading all four discourses as a set makes plain that this final combination, not either of the two partial ones, is what the whole four-discourse unit has been building toward.
Key terms
neva…no — “neither…nor” — the paired negation opening this discourse, distinguishing it from AN 5.17 and 5.18's single negations.
tatiya — “third” — the ordinal in this discourse's title, marking its place in the four-part unit.
attahita — “one's own welfare” — negated here alongside parahita, both failing together for the first time in the unit.
aṅga — “factor, quality” — the word this discourse uses for the five items, in place of dhamma, the term AN 5.17 used for the identical list.
The text
The discourse in full: neither personal accomplishment nor encouraging others. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).
Neither accomplished, nor encouraging others
§1“Mendicants, a mendicant with five qualities is practicing neither for their own welfare, nor that of others. What five? It’s when a mendicant is not personally accomplished in ethics, immersion, wisdom, freedom, or the knowledge and vision of freedom. Nor do they encourage others in these qualities. A mendicant with these five qualities is practicing neither for their own welfare, nor that of others.”
· · ·
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 case does AN 5.19 describe?
Correct: B. Both halves of the formula negated together — the third of four combinations.
Question 2 of 10
How does the guide compare this case to AN 5.17 and 5.18's?
Correct: B. AN 5.17 and 5.18 each weigh something genuine against something missing; this case has no such tension.
Question 3 of 10
Why does the guide say the collection still gives this least interesting case its own discourse?
Correct: B. Completeness of the logical square, not only its more interesting corners.
Question 4 of 10
Does AN 5.19 condemn the mendicant it describes as beyond help?
Correct: B. A description, not a verdict beyond the bare fact stated.
Question 5 of 10
What word does AN 5.19 use for the five items, in place of AN 5.17's word?
Correct: B. A minor wording variation the guide notes without over-reading it.
Question 6 of 10
What does AN 5.20, the next and final discourse of the unit, complete?
Correct: B. The combination the guide says the whole four-discourse unit has been building toward.
Question 7 of 10
How many of the unit's four logical combinations remain after AN 5.19?
Correct: B. Only the both-yes case, covered at AN 5.20, remains.
Question 8 of 10
What outcome does this discourse attach to its described case?
Correct: B. The straightforward double negative outcome.
Question 9 of 10
Are the five items in this discourse newly defined, or inherited from AN 5.17?
Correct: B. The same list throughout this four-discourse unit.
Question 10 of 10
Where is AN 5.19 set?
Correct: B. Consistent with the chapter's pattern so far.
