Itivuttaka · Book of the Threes, Chapter Two · Iti 64
Bad Conduct
Duccaritasutta
Setting
None given — no place, audience beyond “mendicants,” or occasion, in keeping with the Itivuttaka’s spare form throughout
Speakers
The Buddha alone; the Itivuttaka’s bipartite form never includes an interlocutor
Form
A one-line list of three items, restated and extended in a single two-stanza verse
Length
Under a minute to read the passage itself
Parallels
No complete Chinese Itivuttaka survives; a partial parallel collection exists in Tibetan translation, with scattered individual parallels across the Āgamas, none specifically identified for this short discourse
Difficulty
★☆☆☆☆ — the plainest possible statement of a very familiar three-part scheme
Why this discourse
This is one of the most basic ethical claims in the entire canon, reduced to its barest form: there are three doors through which conduct happens — body, speech, and mind — and bad conduct through any of them, uncorrected by good deeds, leads at death to hell. Nothing here is subtle; the discourse’s real interest is structural. It is the first of a matched pair, its very next companion in the collection restating the same three-part scheme with every value flipped — and together with two further discourses just after it, it opens a short run of four suttas in this chapter built on exactly the same body-speech-mind template.
Reading guide
Three doors, one conduct
The prose could not be more direct: there are three kinds of bad conduct (duccarita), “by way of body, speech, and mind” (kāyaduccarita, vacīduccarita, manoduccarita). This threefold division of action — what one does, says, and thinks or intends — is one of the most basic organizing schemes in the entire tradition’s account of ethics, and this discourse states it with no further gloss at all.
The verse: cumulative bad, single result
The verse does not multiply the three into three separate outcomes. Instead, it piles them into a single cumulative portrait — “having done bad things by way of body, speech, and mind, and whatever else is corrupt” — and adds a further, distinct failing: not having done good deeds at all, on top of having done many bad ones. The result is stated once, for the whole pattern together: “when their body breaks up, that witless person is reborn in hell.” The Pali word for “witless” here, duppañña, literally means one lacking wisdom (paññā) — tying this discourse’s ethical failure back to the language of insight used two suttas earlier in The Eye.
Its mirror twin, next
What makes this discourse worth reading alongside its immediate neighbor is how exactly it is mirrored there. Good Conduct, the very next sutta in the collection, restates this same structure — three doors, a cumulative verse, a single result — with every term flipped: good conduct instead of bad, giving up wrongdoing instead of doing it, a wise person instead of a witless one, heaven instead of hell. Read together, the pair reads almost like a single teaching split into a negative and positive half.
Where this fits: a quartet of body-speech-mind suttas
This discourse also opens a short run of four suttas in this chapter — Bad Conduct, Good Conduct, Purity, and Sagacity — all four built on the identical “three, by way of body, speech, and mind” template, though the last two shift from conduct and its rebirth-consequences to purity and sagehood, ending not in heaven or hell but in a state described as having “given up everything.” Seeing the four side by side makes the compiler’s method visible: the same grammatical mold, filled four different ways.
The form itself
As throughout this collection, Bad Conduct opens with “This was said by the Buddha, the Perfected One: that is what I heard,” states its teaching in prose, restates it in verse, and closes with a near-mirror of the opening line. No place, occasion, or listener is named beyond “mendicants” — nothing narrative frames it at all.
Key terms
duccarita — “bad conduct” or misconduct, of three kinds: by body, speech, and mind.
kāya-, vacī-, manoduccarita — misconduct “by way of body,” “by way of speech,” and “by way of mind” respectively; the three doors through which action happens.
kusala / akusala — “skillful” and “unskillful” deeds; the verse contrasts not having done the former with having done much of the latter.
duppañña — “witless,” literally lacking wisdom (paññā); the verse’s description of the person reborn in hell.
niraya — hell, or a place of loss; the stated destination when the cumulative pattern of bad conduct goes uncorrected.
The text
The discourse in full — a one-line prose list of three kinds of bad conduct, followed by a two-stanza verse describing their cumulative result. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).
§1This was said by the Buddha, the Perfected One: that is what I heard.
The teaching
§2“Mendicants, there are these three kinds of bad conduct. What three? Bad conduct by way of body, speech, and mind. These are the three kinds of bad conduct.” The Buddha spoke this matter. On this it is said:
The verse
§3“Having done bad things by way of body, speech, and mind, and whatever else is corrupt;
§4not having done good deeds, and having done many bad, when their body breaks up, that witless person is reborn in hell.”
§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
What three kinds of bad conduct does the prose statement name?
Correct: B. This threefold division — body, speech, mind — is stated with no further elaboration.
Question 2 of 10
Besides doing bad things by body, speech, and mind, what additional failing does the verse mention?
Correct: C. The verse pairs the absence of good deeds with an abundance of bad ones.
Question 3 of 10
What word does the verse use for the person reborn in hell, and what does it literally mean?
Correct: A. The reading guide notes this ties the ethical failure to the language of insight used elsewhere in this chapter.
Question 4 of 10
According to the reading guide, how does the very next discourse in the collection relate to this one?
Correct: D. Iti 64 and Iti 65 form a matched negative-positive pair.
Question 5 of 10
Which four discourses in this chapter share the identical “three, by way of body, speech, and mind” template, according to the reading guide?
Correct: B. These four form a short run built on the same grammatical mold, filled differently.
Question 6 of 10
What happens “when their body breaks up,” according to the verse, to the person the discourse describes?
Correct: C. This is the verse’s single, cumulative outcome for the whole pattern of bad conduct.
Question 7 of 10
Is any specific place, listener, or occasion named in this discourse?
Correct: A. Only the standing address “mendicants” appears; nothing else frames the teaching.
Question 8 of 10
How many verse stanzas restate the prose statement in this discourse?
Correct: B. The verse unfolds across two stanzas before the closing formula.
Question 9 of 10
What is the three-part scheme of “body, speech, and mind” generally used for in early Buddhist ethical teaching, according to the reading guide?
Correct: D. This is one of the most basic organizing schemes in the tradition’s account of ethics.
Question 10 of 10
What closing formula does this discourse share with the rest of the Itivuttaka?
Correct: C. This near-mirror of the opening formula closes every discourse in the collection.
