“Sir, is perception a person’s self, or are perception and self different things?”

“But Poṭṭhapāda, do you believe in a self?”

“I believe in a substantial self, sir, which is physical, made up of the four primary elements, and consumes solid food.”

“Suppose there were such a substantial self, Poṭṭhapāda. In that case, perception would be one thing, the self another. Here is another way to understand how perception and self are different things. So long as that substantial self remains, still some perceptions arise in a person and others cease. That is a way to understand how perception and self are different things.”

“Sir, I believe in a mind-made self which is complete in all its various parts, not deficient in any faculty.”

“Suppose there were such a mind-made self, Poṭṭhapāda. In that case, perception would be one thing, the self another. Here is another way to understand how perception and self are different things. So long as that mind-made self remains, still some perceptions arise in a person and others cease. That too is a way to understand how perception and self are different things.”

“Sir, I believe in a non-physical self which is made of perception.”

“Suppose there were such a non-physical self, Poṭṭhapāda. In that case, perception would be one thing, the self another. Here is another way to understand how perception and self are different things. So long as that non-physical self remains, still some perceptions arise in a person and others cease. That too is a way to understand how perception and self are different things.”

“But, sir, am I able to know whether perception is a person’s self, or whether perception and self are different things?”

“It’s hard for you to understand this, since you have a different view, creed, preference, practice, and tradition.”

“Well, if that’s the case, sir, then is this right: ‘The cosmos is eternal. This is the only truth, anything else is wrong’?”

“This has not been declared by me, Poṭṭhapāda.”

“Then is this right: ‘The cosmos is not eternal. This is the only truth, anything else is wrong’?”

“This too has not been declared by me.”

“Then is this right: ‘The cosmos is finite …’ … ‘The cosmos is infinite …’ … ‘The soul and the body are the same thing …’ … ‘The soul and the body are different things …’ … ‘A Realized One exists after death …’ … ‘A Realized One doesn’t exist after death …’ … ‘A Realized One both exists and doesn’t exist after death …’ … ‘A Realized One neither exists nor doesn’t exist after death. This is the only truth, anything else is wrong’?”

“This too has not been declared by me.”

“Why haven’t these things been declared by the Buddha?”

“Because they’re not beneficial or relevant to the fundamentals of the spiritual life. They don’t lead to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment. That’s why I haven’t declared them.”

“Then what has been declared by the Buddha?”

“I have declared this: ‘This is suffering’ … ‘This is the origin of suffering’ … ‘This is the cessation of suffering’ … ‘This is the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering’.”

“Why have these things been declared by the Buddha?”

“Because they are beneficial and relevant to the fundamentals of the spiritual life. They lead to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment. That’s why I have declared them.”

“That’s so true, Blessed One! That’s so true, Holy One! Please, sir, go at your convenience.” Then the Buddha got up from his seat and left.

Soon after the Buddha left, those wanderers gave Poṭṭhapāda a comprehensive tongue-lashing, “No matter what the ascetic Gotama says, Poṭṭhapāda agrees with him: ‘That’s so true, Blessed One! That’s so true, Holy One!’ We understand that the ascetic Gotama didn’t make any definitive statement at all regarding whether the cosmos is eternal and so on.”

When they said this, Poṭṭhapāda said to them, “I too understand that the ascetic Gotama didn’t make any definitive statement at all regarding whether the cosmos is eternal and so on. Nevertheless, the practice that he describes is true, real, and accurate. It is the regularity of natural principles, the invariance of natural principles. So how could a sensible person such as I not agree that what was well spoken by the ascetic Gotama was in fact well spoken?”