Nibbānasutta — Ānisaṁsavagga — the tenth chapter of the Sixes, continuing the Second Fifty
Setting
None stated in the source
Speakers
The Buddha alone, addressing the mendicants
Form
The same three-link chain as AN 6.98–100, spelled out in full rather than elided, and applied uniquely to the unconditioned rather than to conditions
Length
under 1 minute to read
Northern parallel
The claim that extinguishment is peaceful rather than a form of suffering or annihilation recurs widely across the Chinese Āgamas' polemic against nihilist misreadings of nibbāna; this reading guide does not assert a specific matching sutra number
Difficulty
★★☆☆☆ — closes this four-discourse set with its most conceptually distinct variation, applied to the unconditioned rather than the conditioned
Why this discourse
AN 6.101 closes this four-discourse set with a genuine departure from its pattern: rather than misregarding a conditioned thing, this discourse addresses regarding extinguishment itself — the unconditioned — as suffering, spelling out the full chain again rather than eliding it, since its opening clause no longer matches AN 6.98's template closely enough for simple abbreviation.
Reading guide
The teaching in one sentence
A mendicant who regards extinguishment as suffering cannot accept views conforming with the teaching, step onto the sure path, or realize any of the four fruits; regarding extinguishment as pleasurable makes all three possible.
Why this discourse is spelled out, not elided
AN 6.99 and 6.100 could be compressed because their opening clauses shared AN 6.98's exact grammatical structure, applied to saṅkhāra or dhamma. This discourse's opening — regarding nibbāna, not any conditioned or general thing, as suffering — departs enough from that template that the source spells out both halves in full rather than eliding them.
A misperception in the opposite direction from the first three
AN 6.98–100 each named a positive misperception applied wrongly to something impermanent (seeing permanence, pleasure, or self where none exists). This discourse instead names a negative misperception applied wrongly to something genuinely peaceful: seeing suffering in what this literature holds to be the supreme peace.
Guarding against a specific, recurring misreading
Regarding extinguishment as a form of suffering, loss, or annihilation is addressed elsewhere in this literature as a common misreading of what extinguishment actually is; this discourse treats correcting that specific misperception as itself a precondition for the sure path, alongside the three characteristics named in the discourses immediately before it.
Key terms
nibbānaṁ dukkhato samanupassati — “regards extinguishment as suffering” — this discourse's opening misperception, a departure from AN 6.98–100's template significant enough to be spelled out in full rather than elided.
nibbānaṁ sukhato samanupassati — “regards extinguishment as pleasurable” — the reversal, correcting the opening misperception.
saṅkhata, asaṅkhata — “conditioned, unconditioned” — the underlying distinction this discourse turns on, applying the same chain to the unconditioned that AN 6.98–100 applied to conditioned things.
santaṁ — “peaceful” — a standard descriptor for extinguishment elsewhere in this literature, directly opposed to the misperception this discourse corrects.
dhammānudhammappaṭipadā — “views that conform with the teaching” — the chain's first link, spelled out here identically to AN 6.98's full version.
The text
The discourse in full: regarding extinguishment as suffering, blocking the path, and the reversal. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).
Regarding extinguishment as suffering blocks the path
§1“Mendicants, it is quite impossible for a mendicant who regards extinguishment as suffering to accept views that conform with the teaching. …
Regarding extinguishment as peaceful enables it
§2It’s quite possible for a mendicant who regards extinguishment as pleasurable to accept views that conform with the teaching. …”
· · ·
Self-check quiz
6 questions. Click an answer to see immediate feedback. No score is recorded — this is for your own checking.
Question 1 of 6
How does this discourse's target differ from AN 6.98, 6.99, and 6.100's?
Correct: B. A genuine departure from this set's pattern, applied to the unconditioned.
Question 2 of 6
Why is this discourse spelled out in full rather than elided like AN 6.99 and 6.100, according to the guide?
Correct: B. A structural difference significant enough to require full spelling-out.
Question 3 of 6
How does this discourse's misperception differ in direction from AN 6.98–100's, according to the guide?
Correct: B. A misperception running the opposite way — seeing suffering where there is peace, not seeing stability where there is none.
Question 4 of 6
What common misreading does this discourse address, according to the guide?
Correct: B. A misreading addressed elsewhere in this literature, corrected here as a precondition for the sure path.
Question 5 of 6
Is a setting stated for AN 6.101?
Correct: B. A bare formula, matching this chain's other discourses.
Question 6 of 6
What does santaṁ mean, and how does it relate to this discourse?
Correct: B. The reversal's implicit standard for how extinguishment is properly regarded.
