Itivuttaka · Discourse 31

Not Mortifying

Atapanīyasutta

Setting
None given — the text opens directly with the Itivuttaka’s fixed formula of attribution and moves straight to the teaching, with no location, audience, or occasion named
Speaker
The Buddha alone, addressing “mendicants” in general
Form
A brief two-part prose statement, restated in a short verse — the Itivuttaka’s signature structure
Position
The Book of the Twos (Dukanipāta), Chapter One, the 4th of its ten discourses
Length
< 1 minute to read
Difficulty
★☆☆☆☆ — plain and short, though its key word rewards a slower look

Why this short teaching earns its place

One word does most of the work in this discourse: what is atapanīya, “not-mortifying” or “not scorching” — free of the private, low-grade burn of remorse. It is a small, exact claim about the psychological aftermath of an ethical life, not a claim about outer reward, and its plainness is exactly the point: a clean conscience needs no argument to justify itself.

Reading guide

The teaching in one sentence

Two things keep a person free of self-recrimination: having done what is good and safe, and not having done what is violent or wrong — and the discourse is content to let that plain description of a good life stand entirely on its own, without threat or reward attached to it.

Two negatives that add up to something positive

Notice the shape of the claim: it names two things that are absent (mortification, self-torment) rather than a feeling a person is said to have. The two supporting facts are named directly — someone “has done good and skillful things that keep them safe” and “has not done bad things, violence and sin” — and the text pairs each with its own matching thought: “I have done good things,” “I haven’t done bad things.” Nothing here promises pleasure or praise. What is promised is simply the absence of a specific inner burn.

What atapanīya is naming

The word translated “not mortifying” shares its root with tapati, “to burn, to scorch” — the same root that gives the ascetic term tapo, austerity-by-burning-off. Here the sense runs the other way: this is about what does not scorch a person from within. Remorse over undone good, or over harm actually done, is pictured as a kind of private fire; its opposite in this teaching is not bliss but simply its absence.

The verse: the same claim, once more, aimed at death

The prose statement is about a state of mind available now, in daily reflection. The verse that restates it shifts the frame slightly to the moment of death: someone who has given up bad conduct of body, speech, and mind, who has done no bad deeds and done much good, is, “when their body breaks up,” reborn in heaven. The verse doesn’t abandon the earlier point about remorse — it simply extends the same clean accounting forward into what a good record makes possible at the next threshold.

A companion piece, not a stand-alone claim

This is the fourth discourse of ten making up the Twos’ first chapter, and its neighbors develop the same accounting in other directions: the next two discourses (Iti 32 and Iti 33) return to a stark hell/heaven pairing built on conduct and view together, and Iti 34, three places along, turns from what has already been done to the ongoing effort still required. Read together, the four sketch a fuller picture: a good record leaves no residue of guilt, a bad one does, and either way the outcome carries forward.

Key terms

atapanīya — “not scorching, not mortifying”: from the same root as tapati, “to burn”; here, freedom from the private burn of remorse over a bad record or undone good.
katakalyāṇa — “one who has done good, has done what is skillful”: the first of the discourse’s two supporting conditions.
akatapāpa — “one who has not done bad, has not done violence and sin”: the second condition, framed as an absence rather than an achievement.
kāyassa bhedā — “when the body breaks up”: the standard idiom throughout the Itivuttaka and the wider canon for death, used here to link the verse’s ethical account of the mind directly to what follows at the next rebirth.
the twofold formula — the discourse’s structure of naming exactly two conditions (“these two things, mendicants…”); one of the most common expository patterns across the entire Book of the Twos, recurring nearly unchanged in several of its immediate neighbors.

The text

The discourse in full — a single two-part teaching and its restating verse, all that the Itivuttaka gives for this occasion, with no narrative setting supplied. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).

§1This was said by the Buddha, the Perfected One: that is what I heard.

§2“These two things, mendicants, are not mortifying. What two? It’s when someone has done good and skillful things that keep them safe, but has not done bad things, violence and sin. Thinking, ‘I have done good things’, they’re not mortified. Thinking, ‘I haven’t done bad things’, they’re not mortified. These are the two things that are not mortifying.” The Buddha spoke this matter. On this it is said:

§3–4“Having given up bad conduct
by way of body,
speech, and mind,
and whatever else is corrupt;
not having done bad deeds,
and having done many good,
when their body breaks up, that wise person
is reborn in heaven.”

§5This too is a matter that was spoken by the Blessed One: that is what I heard.

· · ·

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
According to this discourse, what two things are described as “not mortifying”?
Correct: C. The discourse names exactly these two supporting facts, with no third factor.
Question 2 of 10
What two thoughts does the text pair with these two facts?
Correct: B. Each supporting fact is matched with its own reflective thought.
Question 3 of 10
According to the reading guide, what does the word atapanīya (“not mortifying”) share a root with?
Correct: A. Here the sense is reversed: this is about what does not scorch a person from within.
Question 4 of 10
What structure does this discourse follow?
Correct: D. This is the Itivuttaka’s signature two-part form.
Question 5 of 10
According to the verse, what happens to someone who has given up bad conduct of body, speech, and mind, done no bad deeds, and done much good?
Correct: B. The verse extends the prose statement’s accounting forward to the moment of death.
Question 6 of 10
Is any location, audience member, or occasion named in this discourse?
Correct: A. Almost none of the Itivuttaka’s discourses carry a narrative frame, and this one is typical.
Question 7 of 10
Where does this discourse fall within the Book of the Twos?
Correct: C. Chapter One of the Twos runs ten discourses, ending at Iti 37.
Question 8 of 10
What is this discourse’s exact opening attribution formula?
Correct: B. This fixed formula opens every discourse in the Itivuttaka.
Question 9 of 10
What is this discourse’s exact closing attribution formula?
Correct: D. This closing formula, mirroring the opening one, ends every discourse in the collection.
Question 10 of 10
According to the reading guide, how do this discourse and its near neighbors (Iti 32–34) relate to one another?
Correct: B. Reading a run of these short discourses together reveals how they build on one another.
Answered 0 of 10 · Correct 0