Aṅguttara Nikāya · Discourse 6.44

With Migasālā

Migasālāsutta — Dhammikavagga — the fifth chapter of the Sixes

Setting
None stated in the source
Speakers
The laywoman Migasālā, questioning Ānanda; then the Buddha, correcting Ānanda's own answer
Form
A puzzled lay question, an honest but insufficient reply, and the Buddha's correction built from six paired individuals
Length
~4 minutes to read
Northern parallel
Warnings against judging spiritual attainment by outward conduct alone recur across the Chinese Āgamas; this reading guide does not assert a specific matching sutra number
Difficulty
★★★#9734;☆ — genuinely difficult doctrinal territory, worth reading slowly rather than reduced to a simple moral

Why this discourse

Migasālā's question is a real puzzle, not a rhetorical one: her chaste father and her unchaste uncle were both declared once-returners, reborn in exactly the same heavenly realm, despite living very differently. Even Ānanda, pressed to explain, can only confirm the fact without resolving it — “that's how the Buddha declared it.” The Buddha's own answer to Ānanda afterward is stern and, notably, does not fully resolve the puzzle either: it redirects the whole question away from comparing outward conduct and toward something only a Realized One can actually assess.

Reading guide

The teaching in one sentence

Six kinds of individuals are found in the world — gentle or difficult in temperament, each either having or lacking learning and even temporary freedom — and outward similarity between two people conceals a real difference that “only a Realized One” can actually assess, so ordinary people should not pass judgment on where anyone is headed.

A real puzzle, honestly left partly open

Migasālā's question deserves to be taken at face value: it is not confused or unreasonable to wonder why two people who lived so differently — her father chaste, her uncle openly not — received the identical declared outcome. Ānanda's reply, “that's how the Buddha declared it,” is honest but genuinely insufficient, and the Buddha's later correction to Ānanda, while sharp in tone, does not supply a simple resolution either — it explains why the puzzle cannot be resolved from outside.

Six individuals, distinguished by two variables

The Buddha's six-fold answer crosses two dimensions: temperament (gentle and pleasant, or angry, conceited, and prone to greedy thoughts or inappropriate speech) and spiritual development (having listened, learned, and found even temporary freedom, or not). Someone gentle without development and someone difficult with development can, on this analysis, arrive at very different outcomes despite superficial temperament suggesting otherwise — and the reverse holds too.

Judgment as active harm, not mere error

The Buddha's instruction to Ānanda is unusually forceful: “don't be judgmental about individuals… those who pass judgment on individuals harm themselves.” This is not framed as advice against a minor social vice but as a warning that the act of comparative judgment itself — not merely getting the judgment wrong — causes real harm to the one making it.

The closing line about Purāṇa and Isidatta

The discourse's final observation is easy to miss but central: “if Isidatta had achieved Purāṇa's level of ethical conduct, Purāṇa could not have even known Isidatta's destination. And if Purāṇa had achieved Isidatta's level of wisdom, Isidatta could not have even known Purāṇa's destination. So both individuals were lacking in one respect.” Neither man is praised as simply superior; each possessed something the other lacked, and their identical outcome does not erase that difference — it simply lies beyond what an outside observer, including Migasālā, could see.

Key terms

sakadāgāmī — “once-returner” — the attainment declared for both Purāṇa and Isidatta, the shared outcome that prompts Migasālā's question.
tāvakālika vimutti — “temporary freedom” — one of the qualities distinguishing the six individuals, alongside having listened, learned, and understood theoretically.
puggalavemattatā — not a single compound in this translation but the underlying subject: the real variation between individuals that outward similarity can conceal.
dhammasota — “the stream of the teaching” — what is said to carry along the individual who has developed skillful qualities, explaining why they fare better despite apparent similarity to another.
takkī — “judgmental,” “a reasoner” — the quality the Buddha warns Ānanda against, of those who compare and pass judgment on individuals.

The text

The discourse in full: Migasālā's question, Ānanda's report to the Buddha, and the Buddha's correction built from six individuals. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).

Migasālā's question to Ānanda

§1Then Venerable Ānanda robed up in the morning and, taking his bowl and robe, went to the home of the laywoman Migasālā, where he sat on the seat spread out. Then the laywoman Migasālā went up to Ānanda, bowed, sat down to one side, and said to him, “Honorable Ānanda, how on earth are we supposed to understand the teaching taught by the Buddha, when the chaste and the unchaste are both reborn in exactly the same place in the next life? My father Purāṇa was chaste, set apart, avoiding the vulgar act of sex. When he passed away the Buddha declared that, since he was a once-returner, he was reborn in the host of joyful gods. But my uncle Isidatta was not chaste; he lived content with his wife. When he passed away the Buddha declared that, since he was also a once-returner, he was reborn in the host of joyful gods. How on earth are we supposed to understand the teaching taught by the Buddha, when the chaste and the unchaste are both reborn in exactly the same place in the next life?” “You’re right, sister, but that’s how the Buddha declared it.” Then Ānanda, after receiving almsfood at Migasālā’s home, rose from his seat and left. Then after the meal, on his return from almsround, Ānanda went to the Buddha, bowed, sat down to one side, and told him what had happened.

The Buddha's response: six individuals

§2“Ānanda, who is this laywoman Migasālā, a foolish incompetent aunty, with an aunty’s wit? And who is it that knows how to assess individual persons? These six individuals are found in the world. What six? Take a certain individual who is gentle and pleasant to be with. And spiritual companions enjoy living together with them. And they’ve not listened or learned or penetrated theoretically or found even temporary freedom. When their body breaks up, after death, they depart for a lower place, not a higher. They’re going to a lower place, not a higher. Take another individual who is gentle and pleasant to be with. And spiritual companions enjoy living together with them. And they’ve listened and learned and penetrated theoretically and found temporary freedom. When their body breaks up, after death, they depart for a higher place, not a lower. They’re going to a higher place, not a lower. Judgmental people compare them, saying: ‘This one has just the same qualities as the other, so why is one worse and one better?’ This will be for their lasting harm and suffering. In this case, the individual who is gentle … and has listened, learned, comprehended theoretically, and found temporary freedom is better and finer than the other individual. Why is that? Because the stream of the teaching carries them along. But who knows the difference between them except a Realized One? So, Ānanda, don’t be judgmental about individuals. Don’t pass judgment on individuals. Those who pass judgment on individuals harm themselves. I, or someone like me, may pass judgment on individuals.

Two further pairs, and the conclusion

§3Take another individual who is angry and conceited, and from time to time has greedy thoughts. And they’ve not listened or learned or penetrated theoretically or found even temporary freedom. When their body breaks up, after death, they depart for a lower place, not a higher. They’re going to a lower place, not a higher. Take another individual who is angry and conceited, and from time to time has greedy thoughts. … Because the stream of the teaching carries them along. … When their body breaks up, after death, they’re headed for a higher place, not a lower. They’re going to a higher place, not a lower. Judgmental people compare them … I, or someone like me, may pass judgment on people. Take another individual who is angry and conceited, and from time to time has the impulse to speak inappropriately. And they’ve not listened or learned or penetrated theoretically or found even temporary freedom. When their body breaks up, after death, they depart for a lower place, not a higher. They’re going to a lower place, not a higher. Take another individual who is angry and conceited, and from time to time has the impulse to speak inappropriately. But they’ve listened and learned and penetrated theoretically and found temporary freedom. When their body breaks up, after death, they depart for a higher place, not a lower. They’re going to a higher place, not a lower. Judgmental people compare them, saying: ‘This one has just the same qualities as the other, so why is one worse and one better?’ This will be for their lasting harm and suffering. In this case, the individual who is angry and conceited, but has listened, learned, comprehended theoretically, and found temporary freedom is better and finer than the other individual. Why is that? Because the stream of the teaching carries them along. But who knows the difference between them except a Realized One? So, Ānanda, don’t be judgmental about individuals. Don’t pass judgment on individuals. Those who pass judgment on individuals harm themselves. I, or someone like me, may pass judgment on individuals. Who is this laywoman Migasālā, a foolish incompetent aunty, with an aunty’s wit? And who is it that knows how to assess individual persons? These six individuals are found in the world. If Isidatta had achieved Purāṇa’s level of ethical conduct, Purāṇa could not have even known Isidatta’s destination. And if Purāṇa had achieved Isidatta’s level of wisdom, Isidatta could not have even known Purāṇa’s destination. So both individuals were lacking in one respect.”

· · ·

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 puzzle does Migasālā bring to Ānanda?
Correct: B. A real, honestly puzzling case, not a rhetorical or confused question.
Question 2 of 10
How does Ānanda respond to Migasālā's question?
Correct: B. An honest admission that he cannot resolve the puzzle himself.
Question 3 of 10
What two dimensions does the Buddha's six-fold answer cross?
Correct: B. Producing six combinations that can yield very different outcomes despite similar surface temperament.
Question 4 of 10
How forceful is the Buddha's warning to Ānanda about judging individuals?
Correct: B. The act of comparative judgment itself is treated as harmful to whoever makes it.
Question 5 of 10
What does the discourse's closing observation about Purāṇa and Isidatta say?
Correct: B. A nuanced closing that resists declaring either man simply better.
Question 6 of 10
Does this discourse fully resolve Migasālā's original puzzle, according to the guide?
Correct: B. A genuinely difficult teaching, not reducible to a tidy moral.
Question 7 of 10
What does dhammasota mean?
Correct: A. What explains why the developed individual fares better despite apparent temperamental similarity to the undeveloped one.
Question 8 of 10
Is a setting stated for AN 6.44?
Correct: B. The scene moves between Migasālā's home and wherever the Buddha is staying, without a stated location.
Question 9 of 10
What attainment had both Purāṇa and Isidatta been declared to have reached?
Correct: B. The shared outcome that prompts Migasālā's original confusion.
Question 10 of 10
Who alone, according to the Buddha, can truly assess the difference between two outwardly similar individuals?
Correct: B. The basis for the instruction that ordinary people, including Ānanda, should not pass such judgments.
Answered 0 of 10 · Correct 0