Reading guide
The teaching in one sentence
A disciple who cannot read minds should not take their teacher’s awakening on faith — they should scrutinize the Realized One through what can be seen and heard, over time and under the pressure of fame, until their confidence rests on evidence rather than belief.
The structure of the discourse
| Section | What happens |
|---|---|
| 1. The problem | An inquiring mendicant who cannot encompass another’s mind should still scrutinize the Realized One to determine whether he is fully awakened. The monks ask the Buddha to explain how. |
| 2. The two channels | The Buddha is to be examined for “two things — things that can be seen and heard”: his observable conduct and his observable speech. |
| 3. Corrupt, mixed, clean | Three successive questions: are there corrupt states in him? mixed states? clean states? The inquirer finds nothing corrupt, nothing mixed — only clean states. |
| 4. Long-established | Has he had these clean states for a long time, or only recently? They are long-established — not a passing or recent show. |
| 5. The test of fame | Fame and renown bring dangers that expose a person. Does this venerable, now famous, show those dangers? He does not. |
| 6. Secure, not insecure | Is his restraint “securely stilled” — the freedom of one in whom greed has truly ended — or merely held in check? It is secure: greed has ended. |
| 7. Asking the teacher directly | The inquirer puts the same questions to the Realized One himself, who confirms them — adding that he is “the scope and the range” of clean states “but not determined by that.” |
| 8. Grounded faith | The disciple then listens to the teaching, directly knows part of it for themselves, and arrives at confidence. This is “grounded faith based on evidence” — unshakeable. |
The two channels: seen and heard
The Buddha frames the whole investigation around diṭṭha-suta — what is seen and what is heard. The inquirer cannot peer inside the teacher’s mind, so they work entirely from the outside: from how he behaves and how he speaks. This is a deliberately empirical method. It does not ask the disciple to take anything on report or intuition. It asks them to watch and listen, and to keep watching and listening, because a single impressive moment proves little. Character reveals itself across time and circumstance.
The three-fold filter — corrupt, mixed, clean — is a graduated test. First the gross fault: is there anything plainly defiled in his conduct or speech? Then the subtle fault: is there anything mixed, where good and bad alternate, the mark of someone not yet fully purified? Only when both come back empty does the inquirer look for the positive sign: clean states, consistently present. The order matters. Disqualifying faults are ruled out before any positive verdict is allowed.
Why fame is the crucial test
The most psychologically acute step is the test of fame. The Buddha observes that “so long as a mendicant has not achieved fame and renown, certain dangers are not found in them; but when they achieve fame and renown, those dangers appear.” Obscurity protects a person from temptation. Recognition, a following, gifts, and praise are the conditions under which hidden flaws surface — pride, the craving for status, the exploitation of devotees. A teacher who remains unchanged by fame has passed a test that an unknown person never even faces. This is one of the discourse’s sharpest contributions to the question of how to judge a spiritual teacher.
“Securely stilled, not insecurely stilled”
The final check distinguishes two reasons a person might abstain from sensual pleasure. One is suppression — desire is still present but held down by willpower or circumstance; this is “insecurely stilled,” and it can collapse. The other is eradication — greed has actually ended, so there is nothing left to indulge; this is “securely stilled.” From the outside these can look identical, which is why the inquirer must observe the teacher across situations — in community and alone, surrounded by people in every condition — and note whether his evenness is genuine or merely a performance that pressure would crack.
Grounded faith, not blind faith
The discourse’s destination is its key term: ākāravatī saddhā dassanamūlikā, “grounded faith that is based on evidence” — literally, faith that has reasons and is rooted in seeing. This is not credulity. The disciple investigated the teacher, then listened to the teaching, then verified a portion of it in their own experience. Faith built this way “cannot be shifted by any ascetic or brahmin or god or Māra or divinity or by anyone in the world.” The strength of the conviction comes from the rigor of the testing. MN 47 is the canonical answer to the charge that faith and inquiry are opposed: here, faith is the result of inquiry.
“The scope and the range, but not determined by that”
When the inquirer asks the Buddha directly about his clean states, he confirms them but adds a striking qualification: “I am the scope and the range of that, but I am not determined by that.” The clean qualities are fully his — he embodies them — yet he does not identify with them or grasp them as “mine.” Even the purest states are not made into a self. It is a quiet reminder that the awakened mind holds its own virtues without clinging, the very non-grasping that makes them clean in the first place.
Key terms
The text
The inquirer’s task
§1So I have heard. At one time the Buddha was staying near Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery. There the Buddha addressed the mendicants, “Mendicants!” “Venerable sir,” they replied. The Buddha said this:
§2“Mendicants, a mendicant who is an inquirer, unable to encompass another’s mind, should scrutinize the Realized One to understand whether he is a fully awakened Buddha or not.”
§3“Our teachings are rooted in the Buddha. He is our guide and our refuge. Sir, may the Buddha himself please clarify the meaning of this. The mendicants will listen and remember it.” “Well then, mendicants, listen and apply your mind well, I will speak.” “Yes, sir,” they replied. The Buddha said this:
Things that can be seen and heard
§4“Mendicants, a mendicant who is an inquirer, unable to encompass another’s mind, should scrutinize the Realized One for two things—things that can be seen and heard: ‘Can anything corrupt be seen or heard in the Realized One or not?’ Scrutinizing him they find that nothing corrupt can be seen or heard in the Realized One.
§5They scrutinize further: ‘Can anything mixed be seen or heard in the Realized One or not?’ Scrutinizing him they find that nothing mixed can be seen or heard in the Realized One.
§6They scrutinize further: ‘Can anything clean be seen or heard in the Realized One or not?’ Scrutinizing him they find that clean things can be seen and heard in the Realized One.
§7They scrutinize further: ‘Did the venerable attain this skillful state a long time ago, or just recently?’ Scrutinizing him they find that the venerable attained this skillful state a long time ago, not just recently.
§8They scrutinize further: ‘Are certain dangers found in that venerable mendicant who has achieved fame and renown?’ For, mendicants, so long as a mendicant has not achieved fame and renown, certain dangers are not found in them. But when they achieve fame and renown, those dangers appear. Scrutinizing him they find that those dangers are not found in that venerable mendicant who has achieved fame and renown.
§9They scrutinize further: ‘Is this venerable securely stilled or insecurely stilled? Is the reason they don’t indulge in sensual pleasures that they’re free of greed because greed has ended?’ Scrutinizing him they find that that venerable is securely stilled, not insecurely stilled. The reason they don’t indulge in sensual pleasures is that they’re free of greed because greed has ended.
§10If others should ask that mendicant, ‘But what reason and evidence does the venerable have for saying this?’ Answering rightly, the mendicant should say, ‘Because, whether that venerable is staying in a community or alone, some people there are in a good state or a sorry state, some instruct a group, and some are seen among pleasures of the flesh while others remain unsullied. Yet that venerable doesn’t look down on them for that. Also, I have heard and learned this in the presence of the Buddha: “I am securely stilled, not insecurely stilled. The reason I don’t indulge in sensual pleasures is that I’m free of greed because greed has ended.”’
Asking the Realized One directly
§11Next, they should ask the Realized One himself about this, ‘Can anything corrupt be seen or heard in the Realized One or not?’ The Realized One would answer, ‘Nothing corrupt can be seen or heard in the Realized One.’
§12‘Can anything mixed be seen or heard in the Realized One or not?’ The Realized One would answer, ‘Nothing mixed can be seen or heard in the Realized One.’
§13‘Can anything clean be seen or heard in the Realized One or not?’ The Realized One would answer, ‘Clean things can be seen and heard in the Realized One. I am the scope and the range of that, but I am not determined by that.’
Confidence grounded in evidence
§14A disciple ought to approach a teacher who has such a doctrine in order to listen to the teaching. The teacher explains Dhamma with its higher and higher stages, with its better and better stages, with its dark and bright sides. When they directly know a certain principle of those teachings, in accordance with how they were taught, the mendicant comes to a conclusion about the teachings. They have confidence in the teacher: ‘The Blessed One is a fully awakened Buddha! The teaching is well explained! The Saṅgha is practicing well!’
§15If others should ask that mendicant, ‘But what reason and evidence does the venerable have for saying this?’ Answering rightly, the mendicant should say, ‘Reverends, I approached the Buddha to listen to the teaching. He explained Dhamma with its higher and higher stages, with its better and better stages, with its dark and bright sides. When I directly knew a certain principle of those teachings, in accordance with how I was taught, I came to a conclusion about the teachings. I had confidence in the Teacher: “The Blessed One is a fully awakened Buddha! The teaching is well explained! The Saṅgha is practicing well!”’
§16When someone’s faith is settled, rooted, and planted in the Realized One in this manner, with these words and phrases, it’s said to be grounded faith that’s based on evidence. It is strong, and cannot be shifted by any ascetic or brahmin or god or Māra or divinity or by anyone in the world. That is how there is legitimate scrutiny of the Realized One, and that is how the Realized One is legitimately well-scrutinized.”
That is what the Buddha said. Satisfied, the mendicants approved what the Buddha said.
Self-check quiz
Ten questions. Click an answer to see immediate feedback. No score is recorded — this is for your own checking.