Saṃyutta Nikāya · Discourse 35.140

Interior and Cause Are Impermanent

Ajjhattaaniccahetusutta — Devadahavagga

Setting
Not restated
Speakers
The Buddha, addressing the mendicants
Form
The six internal sense bases and their own cause declared impermanent, closing on the full disillusionment-to-freedom formula
Length
~1 minute 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
★★☆☆☆ — a familiar mark, argued in a new way

Why this discourse

This discourse opens a six-piece matrix closing out Devadahavagga: three marks (impermanence, suffering, not-self) applied first to the six internal sense bases (this discourse and the next two) and then to their six external objects (the matrix's second half, three discourses ahead). Its own twist goes beyond Aniccavagga's opening discourse (SN 35.1, already published on this site), which simply declares the eye impermanent, therefore suffering, therefore not-self, in a single deductive chain per base. Here, each base's own cause and reason for arising (hetu, paccaya) is separately declared impermanent as well — and, since a thing produced by what is impermanent cannot itself be permanent, the base's own impermanence follows twice over.

Reading guide

Not just impermanent — caused by what's impermanent

The discourse doesn't stop at “the eye is impermanent.” It adds, for each base in turn, “the cause and reason that gives rise to the eye is also impermanent” — and then draws the conclusion explicitly: since the eye is produced by what is impermanent, how could it be permanent? Two steps of reasoning, not one assertion.

The full liberation formula, spelled out

Unlike four of its five siblings ahead in this same matrix (SN 35.141–144), which compress their own closing lines to a bare “seeing this …,” this discourse gives the complete chain in full: disillusionment, the fading of desire, freedom, the knowledge of freedom, and the full declaration — matching its own position as the matrix's opening discourse.

A six-piece matrix begins

Three marks (impermanence here, then suffering, then not-self) will run across the six internal bases through the next two discourses, before the same three marks run again across the six external objects, closing this vagga.

Key terms

yopi hetu, yopi paccayo cakkhussa uppādāya, sopi anicco — the cause and reason that gives rise to the eye is also impermanent — this matrix's own added layer, absent from Aniccavagga's simpler chain
aniccasambhūtaṁ...cakkhu kuto niccaṁ bhavissati — since the eye is produced by what is impermanent, how could it be permanent? — the discourse's own rhetorical question, drawing the conclusion
nibbindati...virajjati...vimuccati...vimuttamiti ñāṇaṁ hoti — disillusioned...desire fades...freed...knows they're freed — the full chain, given here unabbreviated
khīṇā jāti, vusitaṁ brahmacariyaṁ, kataṁ karaṇīyaṁ, nāparaṁ itthattāyā — rebirth is ended, the spiritual journey completed, what had to be done done, nothing further for this place — the closing declaration, in full
cf. SN 35.1 — already published on this site: Aniccavagga's own opening discourse chains impermanence, suffering, and not-self for each base in a single discourse, with no cause clause — the comparison point this discourse's own added twist stands against

The text

The complete discourse: the six internal bases and their own cause declared impermanent, then the full disillusionment-to-freedom formula. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).

§1“Mendicants, the eye is impermanent. The cause and reason that gives rise to the eye is also impermanent. Since the eye is produced by what is impermanent, how could it be permanent? The ear … nose … tongue … body … mind is impermanent. The cause and reason that gives rise to the mind is also impermanent. Since the mind is produced by what is impermanent, how could it be permanent?

§2Seeing this, a learned noble disciple grows disillusioned with the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind. Being disillusioned, desire fades away. When desire fades away they’re freed. When they’re freed, they know they’re freed. They understand: ‘Rebirth is ended, the spiritual journey has been completed, what had to be done has been done, there is nothing further for this place.’”

· · ·

Self-check quiz

5 questions. Click an answer to see immediate feedback. No score is recorded — this is for your own checking.

Question 1 of 5
Beyond declaring the eye itself impermanent, what additional claim does this discourse make?
Correct: A. A two-step argument this matrix adds beyond Aniccavagga's simpler chain.
Question 2 of 5
How does this discourse's closing formula compare to four of its five siblings ahead in the same matrix (SN 35.141-144)?
Correct: A. Matching this discourse's own position as the matrix's opening piece.
Question 3 of 5
How does this discourse's own reasoning differ from Aniccavagga's opening discourse, SN 35.1?
Correct: A. Already published on this site, SN 35.1 gives the simpler comparison point.
Question 4 of 5
What six-piece structure does this discourse open?
Correct: A. Closing out Devadahavagga in two matched halves of three discourses each.
Question 5 of 5
What rhetorical question does this discourse use to draw its own conclusion?
Correct: A. Applied to each of the six internal bases in turn.
Answered 0 of 5 · Correct 0