Itivuttaka · Book of the Threes, Chapter Three · Iti 70

Having Wrong View

Micchādiṭṭhikasutta

Setting
None given — no place, audience beyond “mendicants,” or occasion, in keeping with the Itivuttaka’s spare form throughout
Speakers
The Buddha alone, speaking unusually in the first person about his own direct knowledge, not merely stating a teaching
Form
A first-person claim of what the Buddha has “seen,” with an explicit epistemological aside, followed by a 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
★★☆☆☆ — plain in its individual sentences, but structurally the least tidy of the ten discourses covered here

Why this discourse

This discourse opens Chapter Three of the Book of the Threes, and it opens differently from every discourse in the chapter before it. There is no “there are these three X, what three?” formula here — instead the Buddha speaks in the first person about beings he has personally “seen,” and pauses partway through to make an unusual, direct epistemological claim: he is not repeating hearsay from some other ascetic or brahmin, but reporting only what he has “known, seen, and realized” for himself. The threefold structure is still present — misconduct “by body, speech, and mind” — but folded into a longer, more discursive list than the tidy triads that filled the previous chapter.

Reading guide

A different opening: Chapter Three begins in the first person

Every discourse in the previous chapter opened its teaching with some version of “there are these three X.” This one opens differently: “Mendicants, I’ve seen beings who engaged in misconduct by body, speech, and mind, who denounced the noble ones, who had wrong views and acted accordingly.” The claim is personal and observational — something the Buddha reports having witnessed — rather than a category simply announced for definition.

Where are the “three”? Body, speech, mind — folded into a longer list

This is, honestly, the least tidy of the ten discourses covered in this set as a specimen of “the Book of the Threes.” The familiar threefold structure is present — misconduct “by body, speech, and mind,” the same vocabulary used in Bad Conduct several suttas earlier — but it is only one item in a longer description that also includes denouncing the noble ones, holding wrong views, and acting on those wrong views. Readers coming from the crisp “three eyes” or “three periods” formula of Chapter Two should expect something looser here.

“I only say it because I’ve known, seen, and realized it for myself”

The discourse’s most distinctive moment is a direct aside about its own authority: “Now, I don’t say this because I’ve heard it from some other ascetic or brahmin. I only say it because I’ve known, seen, and realized it for myself.” Few discourses in this collection pause to make a claim like this so explicitly. It is a related, though not identical, point to the one for which the Kālāma Sutta is famous: that one asks its listeners to test teachings against their own experience, while this one is the Buddha asserting that his own teaching rests on direct knowledge rather than secondhand report.

A grim, plain verse

The verse restates the same scenario without the personal framing: “when the mind has been misdirected, and words wrongly spoken, and wrong bodily deeds have been done,” an “unlearned” (appassuta) “doer of bad deeds,” “though their life may be short,” is reborn in hell when the body breaks up. Notably, this final line — “that witless person is reborn in hell” — is word for word the same closing line used in Bad Conduct, tying this new chapter’s opening discourse back to a line from the one just finished.

The form, mostly intact

Having Wrong View still opens with “This was said by the Buddha, the Perfected One: that is what I heard” and closes with a near-mirror of that line, still moves from prose to verse, and still names no place, audience, or occasion beyond “mendicants.” What has changed is everything in between: a first-person claim in place of a clean list, and an explicit statement about the source of the Buddha’s own knowledge that has no real parallel among the other nine discourses gathered here.

Key terms

micchādiṭṭhi — “wrong view”: the specific fault named in this discourse’s title, held together with misconduct and denouncing the noble ones.
kāyaduccarita, vacīduccarita, manoduccarita — misconduct by body, speech, and mind: the same threefold vocabulary used in Iti 64, here folded into a longer description.
ariyānaṁ upavādaka — “one who denounces the noble ones”: a specific, serious fault named alongside wrong view.
sāmaṁ ñātaṁ, sāmaṁ diṭṭhaṁ, sāmaṁ viditaṁ — “known, seen, and realized for myself”: the Buddha’s explicit claim to direct, first-hand knowledge rather than hearsay.
appassuta — “unlearned”: the verse’s description of the wrongdoer, someone who has not taken in the teaching.

The text

The discourse in full — a first-person claim of direct observation, an explicit statement about the source of that knowledge, and a two-stanza verse. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).

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

The teaching

§2“Mendicants, I’ve seen beings who engaged in misconduct by body, speech, and mind, who denounced the noble ones, who had wrong views and acted accordingly. At the breaking up of the body, after death, they were reborn in a place of loss, a bad place, the underworld, hell.

A claim of direct knowledge

§3Now, I don’t say this because I’ve heard it from some other ascetic or brahmin. I only say it because I’ve known, seen, and realized it for myself.”

§4The Buddha spoke this matter. On this it is said:

The verse

§5“When the mind has been misdirected, and words wrongly spoken, and wrong bodily deeds have been done, an individual here

§6unlearned, doer of bad deeds, though their life may be short, when their body breaks up, that witless person is reborn in hell.”

§7This 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
How does this discourse’s opening differ from every discourse in the previous chapter?
Correct: B. This is a genuine structural shift from the tidy triads of Chapter Two.
Question 2 of 10
Where, according to the reading guide, is the threefold structure of “the Book of the Threes” actually located in this discourse?
Correct: D. Unlike the tidy triads of Chapter Two, this discourse’s threefold element is embedded in a longer description.
Question 3 of 10
What does the Buddha explicitly say about the source of this teaching?
Correct: C. This direct epistemological aside is one of the discourse’s most distinctive features.
Question 4 of 10
According to the reading guide, how does this claim relate to the theme of the Kālāma Sutta (AN 3.65)?
Correct: A. The reading guide is careful to distinguish the two rather than treat them as identical.
Question 5 of 10
Besides misconduct by body, speech, and mind, what other faults does the Buddha say he has seen in these beings?
Correct: B. These additional faults make this discourse’s list longer and less tidy than a simple triad.
Question 6 of 10
What happens to these beings “at the breaking up of the body, after death,” according to the prose?
Correct: C. This is the stated consequence in the prose.
Question 7 of 10
What does the reading guide note about the verse’s closing line, “that witless person is reborn in hell”?
Correct: D. This verbal echo links Chapter Three’s opening discourse to Chapter Two’s.
Question 8 of 10
What word does the verse use to describe the wrongdoer, translated as “unlearned”?
Correct: B. Appassuta describes someone who has not taken in the teaching.
Question 9 of 10
Does this discourse name a specific place or audience beyond “mendicants”?
Correct: A. Even with its unusual first-person framing, this discourse still has no place, audience, or occasion beyond the standing address.
Question 10 of 10
What elements of the standard Itivuttaka form does this discourse still retain, according to the reading guide?
Correct: C. What changes is the content in between — a first-person claim and an epistemological aside — not the surrounding frame.
Answered 0 of 10 · Correct 0