Saṃyutta Nikāya · Discourse 11.24

Transgression

Accayasutta

Setting
Sāvatthī, a monastery — a present-day dispute among the monks themselves
Speakers
The Buddha, addressing a group of mendicants who report a conflict; Sakka's verse is quoted within the teaching
Form
A direct teaching responding to a real dispute, closed with a quoted verse from Sakka
Length
~2.5 minutes to read
Northern parallel
A rough counterpart may exist in the Chinese Saṃyukta-āgama (T99), though this reading guide does not assert a specific matching sutra number
Difficulty
★☆☆☆☆ — grounded in an ordinary community dispute rather than a mythic episode

Why this discourse

Unlike almost every other discourse in this saṃyutta, this one doesn't recount a story about gods and titans; it responds to an actual dispute among the monks themselves. One mendicant transgresses against another, confesses sincerely, and is refused — the other simply won't accept the confession. The Buddha's response names two mirrored kinds of fool, one who can't recognize their own fault and one who won't accept another's honest admission of fault, before quoting Sakka's own verse on controlling anger as the underlying remedy for exactly this kind of impasse.

Reading guide

A real dispute, not a mythic episode

Nearly every discourse in this saṃyutta narrates events among gods and titans; this one instead responds directly to a conflict between two ordinary mendicants, grounding Sakka's teaching in the monastic community's actual present-day life.

Fault symmetrically distributed, not placed on one side

The Buddha doesn't simply side with the transgressor who confessed or the one who was wronged; he identifies a specific failure on each side — one failing to recognize their own fault, the other failing to accept a sincere confession.

Two pairs of fools and wise, precisely mirrored

The teaching's structure is deliberately symmetrical: each kind of foolishness names is answered by exactly one corresponding kind of astuteness, with nothing left asymmetric between the two categories.

Refusing a confession named as its own kind of fault

The discourse doesn't treat only the original transgression as blameworthy; refusing a properly offered confession is named as an equally serious failure, not merely an understandable reaction to being wronged.

A borrowed verse applied to a new situation

Sakka's verse on controlling anger wasn't composed for this dispute; the Buddha recalls it from an earlier occasion among the gods and applies it here, showing the same teaching reaching across entirely different audiences.

Key terms

accayaṁ accayato deseti… nappaṭiggaṇhāti — “confessed… but they didn't accept it” — the monastic dispute at the discourse's center.
yo ca accayaṁ accayato na passati — “one who doesn't recognize when they've made a mistake” — the first of two mirrored kinds of fool.
yo ca accayaṁ desentassa yathādhammaṁ nappaṭiggaṇhāti — “one who doesn't properly accept the confession of someone who's made a mistake” — the second fool, refusing a sincere admission of fault.
kodho vo vasamāyātu — “control your anger” — the opening line of Sakka's quoted verse.
atha pāpajanaṁ kodho, pabbatovābhimaddati — “anger crushes bad people like a mountain” — the verse's closing image, on anger's destructive weight.

The text

The discourse in full. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).

§1Now at that time two mendicants had clashed. One of them transgressed against the other. The transgressor confessed to the other mendicant, but they didn’t accept it. Then several mendicants went up to the Buddha, bowed, sat down to one side, and told him what had happened.

§2

§3“Mendicants, there are two fools. One who doesn’t recognize when they’ve made a mistake. And one who doesn’t properly accept the confession of someone who’s made a mistake. These are the two fools. There are two who are astute. One who recognizes when they’ve made a mistake. And one who properly accepts the confession of someone who’s made a mistake. These are the two who are astute.

§4Once upon a time, mendicants, Sakka, lord of gods, guiding the gods of the thirty-three, spoke this verse: ‘Control your anger; don’t let friendships decay. Don’t blame the blameless, and don’t backbite. For anger crushes bad people like a mountain.’”

· · ·

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 setting differ from most others in this saṃyutta?
Correct: A. Grounded in the monastic community's present-day life.
Question 2 of 10
What happens between the two mendicants at the discourse's opening?
Correct: A. The real dispute prompting the Buddha's teaching.
Question 3 of 10
How does the Buddha distribute fault in this situation?
Correct: A. Neither side is treated as simply blameless.
Question 4 of 10
What is the first kind of fool the Buddha names?
Correct: A. The first half of a deliberately mirrored pair.
Question 5 of 10
What is the second kind of fool the Buddha names?
Correct: A. The precise mirror of the first kind of fool.
Question 6 of 10
How does the discourse treat refusing a sincere confession?
Correct: A. Named as equally blameworthy as the original transgression.
Question 7 of 10
Where does Sakka's quoted verse originally come from, according to the text?
Correct: A. A teaching recalled from a separate context and applied here.
Question 8 of 10
What does Sakka's verse instruct regarding friendships?
Correct: A. One of several practical instructions within the verse.
Question 9 of 10
What image closes Sakka's verse, describing anger's effect on bad people?
Correct: A. A vivid image of anger's destructive weight.
Question 10 of 10
What kind of person does the discourse call astute (paṇḍita)?
Correct: A. The precise mirror of the two kinds of fool.
Answered 0 of 10 · Correct 0