At that time the enlightened one, the lord, was staying at Sāvatthī in the Jeta Grove in Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery. Now at that time Hatthaka, the son of the Sakyans, came to be overthrown in debate. He, talking with followers of sects holding other views, having denied, acknowledged, having acknowledged, denied, he shelved the question by (asking) another, he told a conscious lie, having made a rendezvous, he deceived with words. The followers of sects holding other views looked down upon, criticised, spread it about, saying:

“How can this Hatthaka, the son of the Sakyans, talking together with us, having denied, acknowledge, having acknowledged, deny, shelve the question by (asking) another, tell a conscious lie, having made a rendezvous, deceive with words?”

Monks heard these followers of sects holding other views who looked down upon, criticised, spread it about. Then these monks approached Hatthaka, the son of the Sakyans, and having approached, they spoke thus to Hatthaka, the son of the Sakyans:

“Is it true, as is said, that you, reverend Hatthaka, talking together with followers of sects holding other views, having denied, acknowledged … deceived with words?”

“Your reverences, these followers of sects holding other views should be vanquished in some way; victory should not be given to them thus.”

Those who were modest monks looked down upon, criticised, spread it about, saying: “How can this Hatthaka, the son of the Sakyans, talking together with followers of sects holding other views, having denied, acknowledge, having acknowledged, deny, shelve the question by (asking) another, tell a conscious lie, having made a rendezvous, deceive with words?”

Then these monks told this matter to the lord. Then the lord on this occasion, in this connection, having had the Order of monks convened, questioned Hatthaka, the son of the Sakyans:

“Is it true, as is said, that you, Hatthaka, talking together with followers of sects holding other views, having denied, acknowledged … deceived with words?”

“It is true, lord,” he said.

The enlightened one, the lord, rebuked him, saying:

“How can you, foolish man, talking together with followers of sects holding other views, having denied, acknowledge … having made a rendezvous, deceive with words? It is not, foolish man, for pleasing those who are not (yet) pleased … And thus, monks, this rule of training should be set forth:

“In telling a conscious lie, there is an offence of expiation.”

Telling a conscious lie means: the words, the utterance, the speech, the talk, the language, the intimation, the un-ariyan statements of one intent upon deceiving with words, saying: “I have seen what I have not seen, heard what I have not heard, sensed what I have not sensed, cognised what I have not cognised. I have not seen what I have seen, not heard what I have heard, not sensed what I have sensed, not cognised what I have cognised.”

Not seen means: not seen by the eye. Not heard means: not heard by the ear. Not sensed means: not smelt by the nose, not tasted by the tongue, not felt by the body. Not cognised means: not cognised by the mind.

Seen means: seen by the eye. Heard means: heard by the ear. Sensed means: smelt by the nose, tasted by the tongue, felt by the body. Cognised means: cognised by the mind.

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In three ways I have seen what I have not seen”: before he has lied he knows, “I am going to lie”; while lying he knows, “I am lying”; having lied he knows, “I lied.”

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In four ways I have seen what I have not seen”: before he has lied he knows, “I am going to lie”; while lying he knows, “I am lying”; having lied he knows, “I lied,” misrepresenting his opinion.

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In five ways … I lied,” misrepresenting his opinion, misrepresenting his approval.

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In six ways … I lied,” misrepresenting his opinion, misrepresenting his approval, misrepresenting his pleasure.

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In seven ways … I lied,” misrepresenting his opinion, misrepresenting his approval, misrepresenting his pleasure, misrepresenting his intention.

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In three ways I have heard what I have not heard” … “… sensed what I have not sensed” … “… cognised what I have not cognised”: before he has lied he knows, “I am going to lie”; while lying he knows, “I am lying”; having lied he knows, “I lied.”

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In four ways … in five ways … in six ways … in seven ways …” misrepresenting his intention.

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In three ways I have seen and heard what I have not seen “… for telling the conscious lie that, “In three ways I have seen and sensed what I have not seen” … “… I have seen and cognised what I have not seen” … “… I have seen and heard and sensed what I have not seen” … “… I have seen and heard and cognised what I have not seen” … “… I have seen and heard and sensed and cognised what I have not seen.”

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In three ways I have heard and sensed what I have not heard” … “… I have heard and cognised what I have not heard” … “… I have heard and seen what I have not heard” … “… I have heard and sensed and cognised and seen what I have not heard.”

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In three ways I have sensed and cognised what I have not sensed” … “… I have sensed and cognised and heard and seen what I have not sensed.”

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In three ways I have cognised and seen what I have not cognised” … “… In three ways I have cognised and seen and heard and sensed what I have not cognised.”

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In three ways I have seen what I have not seen … heard what I have not heard … sensed what I have not sensed … cognised what I have not cognised.”

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In three ways I have seen what I have heard … I have seen what I have sensed … I have seen what I have cognised.”

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In three ways I have seen what I have heard and what I have sensed … I have seen what I have heard and what I have cognised … I have seen what I have heard and what I have sensed and what I have cognised” … “… I have cognised what’I have seen and what I have heard and what I have sensed.”

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In three ways he is in doubt as to what he has seen: he does not trust what he has seen, he does not remember what he has seen, he becomes confused as to what he has seen. He is in doubt as to what he has heard: he does not trust what he has heard, he does not remember what he has heard, he becomes confused as to what he has heard. He is in doubt as to what he has sensed … He is in doubt as to what he has cognised … he becomes confused as to what he has cognised, saying: ‘It was cognised and seen by me’; he becomes confused as to what he has cognised, saying: ‘It was cognised and heard by me’; he becomes confused as to what he has cognised, saying: ‘It was cognised and sensed by me’; he becomes confused as to what he has cognised, saying: ‘It was cognised and seen and heard by me’; he becomes confused as to what he has cognised, saying: ‘It was cognised and seen and sensed by me’; he becomes confused as to what he has cognised, saying: ‘It was cognised and seen and heard and sensed by me.’”

There is an offence of expiation for telling the conscious lie that, “In four ways … in five ways … in six ways … in seven ways he is confused as to what he has cognised, saying: ‘It was cognised and seen and heard and sensed by me.’” (These are the seven ways): before he has lied he knows, “I am going to lie”; while he is lying he knows, “I am lying”; having lied he knows, “I lied,” misrepresenting his opinion, misrepresenting his approval, misrepresenting his pleasure, misrepresenting his intention

There is no offence if he speaks in jest, if he speaks in fun. He speaks in jest means he speaks in haste; he speaks in fun means, saying: ‘I will speak of this,’ he speaks of that; if he is mad, if he is the first wrong-doer.

The First