(3) The Base Consisting of Nothingness

32. When he wants to develop the base consisting of nothingness, he must first achieve mastery in the five ways in the attainment in the base consisting of boundless consciousness. Then he should see the danger in the base consisting of boundless consciousness in this way: “This attainment has the base consisting of boundless space as its near enemy, and it is not as peaceful as the base consisting of nothingness.” So having ended his attachment to that, he should give his attention to the base consisting of nothingness as peaceful. He should give attention to the [present] non-existence, voidness, secluded aspect, of that same [past] consciousness belonging to the base consisting of boundless space, which became the object of [the consciousness belonging to] the base consisting of boundless consciousness. How does he do this?

33. Without giving [further] attention to that consciousness, he should [now] advert again and again in this way, “there is not, there is not,” or “void, void,” or “secluded, secluded,” and give his attention to it, review it, and strike at it with thought and applied thought.

34. As he directs his mind on to that sign thus, the hindrances are suppressed, mindfulness is established, and his mind becomes concentrated in access. He cultivates that sign again and again, develops and repeatedly practices it. As he does so, consciousness belonging to the base consisting of nothingness arises in absorption, making its object the void, secluded, non-existent state of that same [past] exalted consciousness that occurred in pervading the space, just as the [consciousness belonging to the] base consisting of boundless consciousness did the [then past] exalted consciousness that had pervaded the space. And here too the method of explaining the absorption should be understood in the way already described.

35. But there is this difference. Suppose a man sees a community of bhikkhus gathered together in a meeting hall or some such place and then goes elsewhere; then after the bhikkhus have risen at the conclusion of the business for which they had met and have departed, the man comes back, and as he stands in the doorway looking at that place again, he sees it only as void, he sees it only as secluded, he does not think, “So many bhikkhus have died, so many have left the district,” but rather [334] he sees only the non-existence thus, “This is void, secluded”—so too, having formerly dwelt seeing with the jhāna eye belonging to the base consisting of boundless consciousness the [earlier] consciousness that had occurred making the space its object, [now] when that consciousness has disappeared owing to his giving attention to the preliminary work in the way beginning, “There is not, there is not,” he dwells seeing only its nonexistence, in other words, its departedness when this consciousness has arisen in absorption.

[Text and Commentary]

36. And at this point it is said: “By completely surmounting the base consisting of boundless consciousness, [aware that] ‘There is nothing,’ he enters upon and dwells in the base consisting of nothingness” (Vibh 245).

37. Herein, completely is as already explained. By … surmounting the base consisting of boundless consciousness: here too the jhāna is called the “base consisting of boundless consciousness” in the way already stated, and its object is so-called too. For the object too is “boundless consciousness” (viññāṇañcaṃ) in the way already stated, and then, because it is the object of the second immaterial jhāna, it is its “base” in the sense of habitat, as the “deities’ base” is for deities, thus it is the “base consisting of boundless consciousness.” Likewise it is “boundless consciousness,” and then because it is the cause of the jhāna’s being of that species, it is its “base” in the sense of locality of the species, as Kambojā is the “base” of horses, thus it is the “base consisting of boundless consciousness” in this way also. So it should be understood that the words, “By … surmounting the base consisting of boundless consciousness” include both [the jhāna and its object] together, since this base consisting of nothingness is to be entered upon and dwelt in precisely by surmounting, by causing the nonoccurrence of, by not giving attention to, both jhāna and its object.

38. There is nothing (natthi kiñci): what is meant is that he gives his attention thus, “there is not, there is not,” or “void, void,” or “secluded, secluded.” It is said in the Vibhaṅga: “‘There is nothing’: he makes that same consciousness non-existent, makes it absent, makes it disappear, sees that ‘there is nothing’, hence ‘there is nothing’ is said” (Vibh 262), which is expressed in a way that resembles comprehension [by insight] of liability to destruction, nevertheless the meaning should be understood in the way described above. For the words “He makes that same consciousness non-existent, makes it absent, makes it disappear” are said of one who does not advert to it or gives attention to it or review it, and only gives attention to its non-existence, its voidness, its secludedness; they are not meant in the other way (Cf. XXI.17).

39. He enters upon and dwells in the base consisting of nothingness: it has no owning (kiñcana),^[1] this it is non-owning (akiñcana);what is meant is that it has not even the mere act of its dissolution remaining. The state (essence) of non-owning is nothingness (ākiñcañña). This is a term for the disappearance of the consciousness belonging to the base consisting of boundless space. [335] That nothingness is the “base” in the sense of foundation for that jhāna, as the “deities’ base” is for deities, thus it is the “base consisting of nothingness.” The rest is as before.

This is the detailed explanation of the base consisting of nothingness as a meditation subject.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

There is a play on the words natthi kiñci (“there is nothing”) and akiñcana (“non-owning”). At M I 298 there occurs the expression “Rāgo kho āvuso kiñcano (greed, friend, is an owning),” which is used in connection with this attainment. The commentary (M-a II 354) says “Rāgo uppajjitvā puggalaṃ kiñcati, maddati, palibujjhati, tasmā kiñcano ti vutto (greed having arisen owns, presses, impedes, a person, that is why it is called an owning)” (Cf. M-a I 27;also XXI.53 and note 19). Vism-mhṭ (p. 327) here says “Kiñcanan ti kiñci pi.” The word kiñcati is not in PED.