Saṃyutta Nikāya · Discourse 35.150

A Practice Conducive to Extinguishment

Nibbānasappāyapaṭipadāsutta — Navapurāṇavagga

Setting
Not restated in this discourse
Speakers
The Buddha and the assembled mendicants, in call and response
Form
The standard three-mark catechism, run in full for the eye and compressed by peyyāla for the remaining five sense fields and their feelings
Length
~2 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
★★☆☆☆ — a familiar catechism, closing a four-part quartet

Why this discourse

This discourse closes the quartet SN 35.147 opened: where the previous three discourses stated impermanence, suffering, and not-self as three separate declarations, this one restores the catechism form this project has met many times before and explicitly performs the derivation the trio left implicit — what's impermanent is suffering, what's suffering and perishable is unfit to be regarded as self, run first for the eye in full and then compressed by peyyāla across the remaining five sense fields. The same fivefold enumeration as SN 35.147-149 (field, object, consciousness, contact, and feeling) is carried through the questioning here as well, not abandoned for the catechism's more familiar four-part version.

Reading guide

The chain, drawn out explicitly at last

"Is the eye permanent or impermanent?" — "Impermanent, sir." — "But if it's impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?" — "Suffering, sir." — the derivation SN 35.147-149 each left as three separate statements is here performed step by step, in the question-and-answer form this project has already met many times.

The standard threefold negation

"This is mine, I am this, this is my self"? — "No, sir." — the same formula this project has traced since Book III, now applied to the quartet's own fivefold enumeration per sense field rather than the five aggregates.

Five elements, carried through the catechism

Unlike many of this project's earlier catechisms, which typically question four elements per sense field (field, object, consciousness, contact), this one preserves the quartet's own fifth element — feeling — questioned in exactly the same three-step form as the other four.

A quartet completed, not a new claim

This discourse doesn't introduce new content so much as complete the logical work its own three predecessors deliberately deferred — the quartet's own structure (three separate statements, then one full derivation) mirrors this project's already-familiar pattern of stating marks separately before showing how they connect.

Key terms

aniccaṁ...dukkhaṁ...anattā — impermanent...suffering...not-self — the three-step chain performed explicitly here, after standing separately across the quartet's own first three discourses
‘etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’ti — 'this is mine, I am this, this is my self' — the standard threefold negation, already familiar from this project's own Book III
nibbindati — grows disillusioned — the pivot from seeing correctly to the closing liberation sequence
nibbānasappāyapaṭipadā — a practice conducive to extinguishment — this discourse's own title term, closing the quartet SN 35.147 began
…pe… — an ellipsis marking bilara-data's own peyyāla compression — the full catechism given once for the eye, then abbreviated across the remaining five sense fields

The text

The complete discourse, following bilara-data's own peyyāla compression: the full catechism given for the eye, then its result restated for all six sense fields and their feelings together. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).

§1“Mendicants, I will teach you a practice that’s conducive to extinguishment. Listen … And what is that practice that’s conducive to extinguishment? What do you think, mendicants? Is the eye permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, sir.” “But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?” “Suffering, sir.” “But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?” “No, sir.”

§2“Are sights … eye consciousness … eye contact … The pleasant, painful, or neutral feeling that arises dependent on mind contact: is that permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, sir.” “But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?” “Suffering, sir.” “But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?” “No, sir.”

§3“Seeing this, a learned noble disciple grows disillusioned with the eye, sights, eye consciousness, and eye contact. And they grow disillusioned with the painful, pleasant, or neutral feeling that arises dependent on eye contact. They grow disillusioned with the ear … nose … tongue … body … mind … painful, pleasant, or neutral feeling that arises dependent on mind contact. Being disillusioned, desire fades away. When desire fades away they’re freed. … They understand: ‘… there is nothing further for this place.’ This is that practice that’s conducive to extinguishment.”

· · ·

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
What does this discourse do that SN 35.147-149 each left undone?
Correct: A. Where the trio stated each mark separately, this discourse performs the derivation step by step.
Question 2 of 5
What form does this discourse use, compared to the three statement-form discourses before it?
Correct: A. Restoring the call-and-response structure the trio's three statement-form discourses set aside.
Question 3 of 5
How many elements per sense field does this catechism question, matching the quartet's own earlier discourses?
Correct: A. Unlike many of this project's other catechisms, this one preserves feeling as a fifth questioned element.
Question 4 of 5
What threefold negation does this discourse apply, once impermanence and suffering are established?
Correct: A. The same formula this project has traced since Book III, now applied to the quartet's fivefold enumeration.
Question 5 of 5
How is the eye's own full catechism handled for the remaining five sense fields?
Correct: A. The full form given once for the eye, then abbreviated across the remaining fields, as this project has seen many times before.
Answered 0 of 5 · Correct 0