The Long JourneyContinuity of Dhamma 1. “He who is reborn, Nāgasena, is he the same person or another?”
“Neither the same nor another.”
“Give me an illustration.”
“In the case of a pot of milk that turns first to curds, then to butter, then to
ghee; it would not be right to say that the ghee, butter and curds were the same as the milk but they have come from that so neither would it be right to say that they are something else.” 2. “Is the man who will not be reborn aware of the fact?”
“Yes, O king.” “How does he know it?”
“By the cessation of all that is cause or condition of rebirth. As a farmer who does not plough or sow or reap would know that his granary is not getting filled up.” 3. “In one, Nāgasena, in whom knowledge (ñāna) arises does wisdom (paññā) also arise?”
“Yes, O king.” “Is knowledge the same as wisdom?”
“Yes, O king.” “Then would he with his knowledge and wisdom be in ignorance about anything?”
“He would still be in ignorance about the things he had not yet learnt but regarding what had been
accomplished by wisdom — that is the perception of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and soullessness — he would not be ignorant.” “Then what would have happened to his delusions on those points?”
“From the moment when knowledge arises, delusion passes away. As when the light comes, darkness disappears.” “But then what has become of his wisdom?”
“When wisdom has accomplished its task then it disappears; but his understanding of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and soullessness does not disappear.” “Give me an illustration.”
“As a man who wants to write a letter at night would have a lamp lit and then write the letter. Then he would put out the lamp, but though the lamp had been put out the letter would remain.” 4. “Does he who will not be reborn feel any painful feeling?”
“He may feel physical pain, O king, but not mental pain.” “If he feels painful feelings then why doesn’t he just die and attain the extinction of grasping, and put an end to suffering?”
“The Arahant has no fondness for or aversion to life. He does not shake down the unripe fruit but awaits the time of its maturity. For this was said by Venerable Sāriputta, the Buddha’s chief disciple: “It is not death, nor life I cherish;
As the hireling his wage, so I bide my time.
It is not death nor life I long for,
Mindful and clearly comprehending, I bide my time.”1
5. “Is a pleasant feeling wholesome, unwholesome, or neutral?”
“It may be any one of the three.” “But surely, venerable sir, if wholesome conditions are not painful and painful ones are not wholesome, then there can be no wholesome condition that is at the same time painful.”2 “What do you think, O king? If a man were to hold in one hand a hot iron ball and in the other a ball of ice, would they both hurt him?”
“Indeed they would.” “Then your hypothesis must be wrong. If they are not both hot but the heat hurts, and they are not both cold but the cold hurts then the pain does not come from the heat or the cold.”
“I am not able to argue with you. Please explain the matter.” Then the elder taught the king the Abhidhamma: “There are six pleasures connected with the world and
six of renunciation; six worldly sorrows and six of renunciation; and six neutral feelings in each case, altogether thirty-six. Then there are thirty-six feelings in the past, present, and future so altogether there are one hundred and eight feelings.” 6. “What is it, Nāgasena, that is reborn?”
“Mind and matter.” “Is it this very mind and matter that is reborn?”
“No, it is not, but by this mind and matter deeds are done and because of those deeds another mind and matter is reborn; but that mind and matter is not thereby released from the results of its previous deeds.” “Give me an illustration.”
“It is like a fire that a man might kindle and, having warmed himself, he might leave it burning and go away. Then if that fire were to set light to another man’s field and the owner were to seize him and accuse him before the king, and he were to say, ‘Your majesty, I did not set this man’s field on fire. The fire that I left burning was different to that which burnt his field. I am not guilty’. Would he deserve punishment?” “Indeed, yes, because whatever he might say the latter fire resulted from the former one.”
“Just so, O king, by this mind and matter deeds are done and because of those deeds another mind and matter is reborn; but that mind and matter is not thereby released from the results of its previous deeds.” 7. “Will you, Nāgasena, be reborn?”
“What is the use of asking that question again? Have I not already told you that if I die with attachment in my mind I shall be reborn, if not I shall not.” 8. “You were explaining just now about mind and matter. Therein what is mind and what is matter?”
“Whatever is gross is materiality, whatever is subtle and mind or mental-states is mentality.” “Why are they not born separately?”
“These conditions are related like the yolk of an egg and its shell, they always arise together and thus they have been related through time immemorial.”3 9. “Nāgasena, when you say, ‘Time immemorial’, what does time mean? Is there any such thing?”
“Time means past, present, and future. There are some for whom time exists and some for whom it
doesn’t. Where there are beings who will be reborn, for them time exists; where there are beings who will not be reborn, for them time does not exist.” “Well put Nāgasena, you are clever in reply.” In this chapter there are nine questions | 
