Saṃyutta Nikāya · Discourse 44.6

With Sāriputta and Koṭṭhita (4th)

Sāriputtakoṭṭhikasutta — Abyākatavagga

Setting
Isipatana's deer park, near Varanasi (continuing directly from SN 44.5)
Speakers
Venerable Sāriputta questioning Venerable Mahākoṭṭhita — the roles reversed from SN 44.3–5
Form
The fourth reason, then pressed three more times for further reasons, escalating to a famous closing line
Length
~2 minutes to read
Northern parallel
No individual parallel confirmed by this project's own check
Difficulty
★★☆☆☆ — four reformulations, building to a sharp close

Why this discourse

The roles reverse: Sāriputta now questions Mahākoṭṭhita, confirmed by direct reading rather than assumed to repeat SN 44.3–5's own direction. Where the previous three discourses each stopped at one explanation, this one is pressed four times over — “could there be another way of explaining” — escalating from liking the aggregates, to liking continued existence, to liking grasping, to liking craving itself, before Mahākoṭṭhita finally cuts the questioning off with this run's own most quoted line.

Reading guide

The questioner and the questioned, reversed

SN 44.3–5 each have Mahākoṭṭhita asking and Sāriputta answering; here Sāriputta asks and Mahākoṭṭhita answers, confirmed by reading this discourse's own opening directly — the run's own structure is not simply repeated with the same speaker roles held constant throughout.

Pressed four times, not stopping at one reason

“Liking, loving, and enjoying” the aggregates without seeing their cessation is Mahākoṭṭhita's own first answer, matching SN 44.3–5's own pattern of stopping at one explanation — but Sāriputta keeps asking, “could there be another way of explaining,” and receives three further reformulations: liking continued existence, liking grasping, and liking craving itself, each a progressively more fundamental restatement of the same underlying point.

A fourth press, met with a different kind of answer

Asked a fourth time for yet another explanation, Mahākoṭṭhita does not supply one — “Seriously, reverend, what more could you want?” — and closes instead with this run's own most quoted line: “for one who is freed due to the ending of craving, there is no cycle of rebirths to be found.” The questioning itself has run out of further ground, not because the topic is exhausted but because craving's ending has removed what the question would even be about.

Key terms

abhinandati abhivadati ajjhosāya tiṭṭhati — “likes, loves, and enjoys” — the first of four progressively deeper reformulations, applied first to the five aggregates directly
bhavanirodhaṁ — “the cessation of continued existence” — the second reformulation's own target, one step more abstract than the aggregates themselves
upādānanirodhaṁ — “the cessation of grasping” — the third reformulation
taṇhānirodhaṁ — “the cessation of craving” — the fourth and final reformulation, the deepest layer this run of escalating questions reaches
taṇhākkhayavimuttassa natthi vaṭṭaṁ paññāpanāya — “for one who is freed due to the ending of craving, there is no cycle of rebirths to be found” — this run of four discourses' own closing and most quoted line

The text

The complete discourse, as genuinely translated, organized under section headings by each of the four reformulations. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).

Setting and the four questions

§1At one time Venerable Sāriputta and Venerable Mahākoṭṭhita were staying near Varanasi, in the deer park at Isipatana. Then in the late afternoon, Venerable Sāriputta came out of retreat, went to Venerable Mahākoṭṭhita, and they greeted each other. When the greetings and polite conversation were over, he sat down to one side and said to Mahākoṭṭhita: “Reverend Koṭṭhita, does a realized one still exist after death?” … “Reverend, when asked these questions, you say that this has not been declared by the Buddha. What’s the cause, what’s the reason why this has not been declared by the Buddha?”

First reason: liking the aggregates, not seeing their cessation

§2“Reverend, if you like, love, and enjoy form, and don’t truly see the cessation of form, you think ‘a realized one still exists after death’ or ‘A realized one no longer exists after death’ or ‘a realized one both still exists and no longer exists after death’ or ‘a realized one neither still exists nor no longer exists after death.’ If you like, love, and enjoy feeling … perception … choices … consciousness, and don’t truly see the cessation of consciousness, you think ‘a realized one still exists after death’ … ‘a realized one neither still exists nor no longer exists after death.’ If you don’t like, love, and enjoy form … feeling … perception … choices … consciousness, and you truly see the cessation of consciousness, you don’t think ‘a realized one still exists after death’ … ‘a realized one neither still exists nor no longer exists after death.’ This is the cause, this is the reason why this has not been declared by the Buddha.”

Pressed three times more, for further reasons

§3“But reverend, could there be another way of explaining why this was not declared by the Buddha?” “There could, reverend. If you like, love, and enjoy existence, and don’t truly see the cessation of continued existence, you think ‘a realized one still exists after death’ … ‘a realized one neither still exists nor no longer exists after death.’ If you don’t like, love, and enjoy existence, and you truly see the cessation of continued existence, you don’t think ‘a realized one still exists after death’ … ‘a realized one neither still exists nor no longer exists after death.’ This too is a way of explaining why this was not declared by the Buddha.” “But reverend, could there be another way of explaining why this was not declared by the Buddha?” “There could, reverend. If you like, love, and enjoy grasping, and don’t truly see the cessation of grasping, you think ‘a realized one still exists after death’ … ‘a realized one neither still exists nor no longer exists after death.’ If you don’t like, love, and enjoy grasping, and you truly see the cessation of grasping, you don’t think ‘a realized one still exists after death’ … ‘a realized one neither still exists nor no longer exists after death.’ This too is a way of explaining why this was not declared by the Buddha.” “But reverend, could there be another way of explaining why this was not declared by the Buddha?” “There could, reverend. If you like, love, and enjoy craving, and don’t truly see the cessation of craving, you think ‘a realized one still exists after death’ … ‘a realized one neither still exists nor no longer exists after death.’ If you don’t like, love, and enjoy craving, and you truly see the cessation of craving, you don’t think ‘a realized one still exists after death’ … ‘a realized one neither still exists nor no longer exists after death.’ This too is a way of explaining why this was not declared by the Buddha.”

A fourth press, and this run's own closing line

§4“But reverend, could there be another way of explaining why this was not declared by the Buddha?” “Seriously, reverend, what more could you want? For one who is freed due to the ending of craving, there is no cycle of rebirths to be found.”

· · ·

Self-check quiz

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

Question 1 of 3
Whose roles are reversed in this discourse, compared to SN 44.3-5?
Correct: A. Confirmed by reading the discourse's own opening directly, not assumed from the previous three discourses' pattern.
Question 2 of 3
How many times is Mahākoṭṭhita pressed for "another way of explaining" in this discourse?
Correct: A. Escalating from the aggregates, to continued existence, to grasping, to craving itself.
Question 3 of 3
How does Mahākoṭṭhita respond to a fourth request for "another way of explaining"?
Correct: A. "For one who is freed due to the ending of craving, there is no cycle of rebirths to be found" — the questioning has run out of further ground.
Answered 0 of 3 · Correct 0