The Buddha alone, addressing the assembled mendicants
Form
A single prose sentence, the wind simile stated and applied, with no verse whatsoever
Length
Under 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
★☆☆☆☆ — brief enough to read in one breath
Why this discourse
This discourse restates SN 36.12's own wind simile word for word in its prose portion, then stops — no verse, no closing formula about understanding feelings or becoming a knowledge master, nothing beyond the bare comparison itself. Where SN 36.8 compressed its shared material with SN 36.7 using peyyāla markers and an explicit note to the reciter, this discourse simply omits an entire structural component (the verse) rather than compressing it, a different kind of twin relationship from the ones this project has met so far.
Reading guide
The identical simile, minus its own conclusion
Every word of the prose wind simile matches SN 36.12 exactly: four directions, three paired qualities, and the direct comparison to feelings arising in the body. What's absent is everything that follows in the previous discourse — the verses restating the simile and drawing out its liberative conclusion.
Omission, not compression
Unlike SN 36.8's own peyyāla-compressed twin of SN 36.7, which preserves an editorial note directing the reciter to “tell in full as in the previous discourse,” this discourse's own bilara-data file simply ends after the prose — no marker, no instruction, nothing indicating an omitted verse is assumed.
A comparison that stands complete without its own moral
The prose simile alone — winds vary unpredictably, so do feelings — makes its point without needing the verse's added conclusion about understanding and liberation, suggesting the comparison itself was considered sufficient content for a discourse on its own.
A different kind of twin from this project's earlier pairs
SN 35.241/242's tree-trunk twins varied their questioner; SN 36.7/8's infirmary twins varied their named dependency (body vs. contact). This pair varies neither content nor variable — only completeness, one discourse simply shorter than its twin by an entire structural component.
Key terms
vividhā vātā vāyanti — “various winds blow” — the simile's own opening phrase, identical to SN 36.12's
imasmiṁ kāyasmiṁ vividhā vedanā uppajjanti — “various feelings arise in this body” — the discourse's own direct application, matching SN 36.12's prose exactly
…pe… — the peyyāla (repetition) marker compressing the middle two directions (west, north) in the wind description itself, though not the verse's own absence
tatiyaṁ — “third” — this discourse's own untranslated closing marker, its position within Rahogatavagga
dukkhāpi vedanā uppajjati, adukkhamasukhāpi vedanā uppajjati — “painful feeling also arises, neutral feeling also arises” — the discourse's own closing clause, ending on the application itself with no verse to follow
The text
The complete discourse: a single sentence, the wind simile stated and applied. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).
§1“Mendicants, various winds blow in the atmosphere. Winds blow from the east, the west, the north, and the south. There are winds that are dusty and dustless, cool and warm, weak and strong. In the same way, various feelings arise in this body: pleasant, painful, and neutral feelings.”
· · ·
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
How does this discourse's prose compare to SN 36.12's own prose simile?
Correct: A. Four directions, three paired qualities, the same direct comparison to feeling.
Question 2 of 5
What does this discourse lack that SN 36.12 includes?
Correct: A. The prose stands alone, with nothing following it.
Question 3 of 5
How does this discourse's relationship to SN 36.12 differ from SN 36.8's relationship to SN 36.7?
Correct: A. SN 36.8 preserves an explicit "tell in full as before" instruction; this discourse's file simply ends.
Question 4 of 5
How does this pairing differ from SN 35.241/242's own tree-trunk twins?
Correct: A. A different kind of twin relationship from the questioner-variation and dependency-variation twins met earlier.
Question 5 of 5
What point does the prose simile make on its own, without the verse's added conclusion?
Correct: A. The comparison alone makes its point, without needing the verse's conclusion about understanding and liberation.
