BTTPITISM. 



121 



" Bikhus, the body does not constitute a soul, the sensa- 

 tions do not constitute a soul, the perceptions do not con- 

 stitute a soul, the reasonings do not constitute a soul, the 

 consciousness or understanding does not constitute a soul." 

 Thus he affirms of each of the khanda that it is not a soul. 

 Again he says tf\C3o eB 5*2)^8 f?£0<?)5)D @>cca8 @K)3^^c3o8 



OSDVCOD <5\033C3 GdOJe^cS ®CQj8 £f&3Z$5)l £?£OOVb) 00© 



ZTio 6x&° <££<§^:>cp:5j&o cat'e^es^S rupan bhikkhawey, anat- 

 ta yopi hetu yopi pachchayo rupassa uppadaya sopi anattil 

 anatta sambhutan rupan kuto atta bhawissati. " Bikhus, 

 body is not a soul : if there be any kind of cause for the 

 production of body, that cause also is without a soul : how 

 can body become a soul since it is produced by soul-less 

 causes ?" He repeats the same verbatim concerning the 

 sensations, the perceptions and the reasonings : and although 

 some unlearned Budhists have supposed that the S^l^^o 

 winnyanan is a transmigrating soul, Budha says. (40) "The 

 understanding or consciousness (pc85^^^*i winnyanan) is not 

 a soul : if there be any cause by which the S-asc^^o win- 

 nyanan is produced, that cause also is without a soul : how 

 can 8«3saa6^<s^o winnyanan be a soul, seeing it is produced 

 by soul-less causes. ?" 



To remove all doubt respecting his doctrine being that a 

 soul does not exist, we refer to his conversation with £38 

 ®&o cSQod"^ ^553 Susimo Paribbajiko. Budha says, " Susimo, 

 the body, the sensations, the perceptions, the reasonings, 

 the understanding or consciousness (enumerating each dis- 

 tinctly) whether past, future or present, whether internal or 

 external, whether gross or minute, base or excellent, remote 

 or near, are not mine; none of them constitute "I." None of 



(40.) See Sa'ayatana section of Sanyut Nikaya, 



