| Part ofa series on |
| Buddhism |
|---|
 |
| Translations of acinteyya | |
|---|---|
| English | imponderable, incomprehensible |
| Sanskrit | acintya |
| Pali | acinteyya |
| Chinese | bukesiyi |
| Japanese | fukashigi |
| Korean | pulgasaūi |
| Sinhala | අචින්ත්යය |
| Tibetan | bsam gyis mi khyab pa |
| Thai | อจินไตย |
| Vietnamese | Bất khả tư nghị |
| Glossary of Buddhism | |
InBuddhism,acinteyya (Pali), "imponderable" or "incomprehensible,"avyākṛta (Sanskrit: अव्याकृत,Pali:avyākata, "unfathomable, unexpounded,"[1]), andatakkāvacara,[2] "beyond the sphere of reason,"[2] areunanswerable questions orundeclared questions. They are sets of questions that should not be thought about, and whichthe Buddha refused to answer, since this distracts frompractice, and hinders the attainment ofliberation. Various sets can be found within the Pali and Sanskrit texts, with four, and ten (Pali texts) or fourteen (Sanskrit texts) unanswerable questions.
TheSanskrit wordacintya means "incomprehensible, surpassing thought, unthinkable, beyond thought."[web 1] In Indian philosophy,acinteyya is
[T]hat which is to be unavoidably accepted for explaining facts, but which cannot stand the scrutiny of logic.[3]
It is also defined as
That which cannot or should not be thought, the unthinkable, incomprehensible, impenetrable, that which transcends the limits of thinking and over which therefore one should not ponder.[web 2]
The term is used to describe the ultimate reality that is beyond all conceptualization.[4] Thoughts here-about should not be pursued, because they are not conducive to the attainment of liberation.[4]
Synonymous terms areavyākṛta[4] "indeterminate questions,"[5] andatakkāvacara,[2] "beyond the sphere of reason."[2]
Nirvana isatakkāvacara, "beyond logical reasoning".[6] It is difficult to comprehend with logic or reason, since it is not a concrete "thing."[6] It cannot be explained with logic or reason to someone who has not attained it by themselves.[7]
The four imponderables are identified in the Acintita Sutta, Anguttara Nikaya 4.77, as follows:[8]
TheCula-Malunkyovada Sutta,MN 63[9] and 72[10] contains a list of ten unanswered questions about certain views(ditthi):
In theAggi-Vacchagotta Sutta,[6] "Discourse to Vatsagotra on the [Simile of] Fire," Majjhima Nikaya 72,[web 3] the Buddha is questioned by Vatsagotra on the "ten indeterminate question:"[5]avyākrta[4]
The Buddha refuses to answer the questions, avoiding getting entangled in debate, but answers with a simile:[5]
"And suppose someone were to ask you, 'This fire that has gone out in front of you, in which direction from here has it gone? East? West? North? Or south?' Thus asked, how would you reply?"
"That doesn't apply, Master Gotama. Any fire burning dependent on a sustenance of grass and timber, being unnourished — from having consumed that sustenance and not being offered any other — is classified simply as 'out' (unbound)."
"Even so, Vaccha, any physical form by which one describing theTathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of form, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply.[web 3]
The extant Sanskrit tradition (and the Tibetan and Chinese texts following the Sanskrit) expand the list of imponderables to fourteen.[11][12][13][14]
1. Is the worldeternal?2. ...or not?3. ...or both?4. ...or neither?(Pali texts omit "both" and "neither")
5. Is the world finite?6. ...or not?7. ...or both?8. ...or neither?(Pali texts omit "both" and "neither")
9. Is theself identical with the body?10. ...or is it different from the body?
11. Does theTathagata (Buddha) exist after death?12. ...or not?13. ...or both?14. ...or neither?
The Sabbasava Sutta (Majjhima Nikaya 2[15]) also mentions 16 questions which are seen as "unwise reflection" and lead to attachment to views relating to aself.[16]
The Buddha states that it is unwise to be attached to both views of having and perceiving a self and views about not having a self. Any view which sees the self as "permanent, stable, everlasting, unchanging, remaining the same for ever and ever" is "becoming enmeshed in views, a jungle of views, a wilderness of views; scuffling in views, the agitation (struggle) of views, the fetter of views."[16]
Pondering over the fouracinteyya is a hindrance to the attainment of liberation.Sacca-samyutta, "The Four Noble Truths", Samyutta Nikaya 56:[web 4]
Therefore, o monks, do not brood over [any of these views] Such brooding, O monks, is senseless, has nothing to do with genuine pure conduct (s. ādibrahmacariyaka-sīla), does not lead to aversion, detachment, extinction, nor to peace, to full comprehension, enlightenment and Nibbāna, etc.[17]
And theAggi-Vacchagotta Sutta, "Discourse to Vatsagotra on the [Simile of] Fire," Majjhima Nikaya 72:
Vaccha, [any of these views] is a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. It is accompanied by suffering, distress, despair, & fever, and it does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation; to calm, direct knowledge, full Awakening, Unbinding.[web 3]
The Buddha further warns that
Whoever speculates about these things would go mad & experience vexation.[web 5]
.svg)
