Need help locating two suttas from Kv1.1

[Dōgen]

Greetings. I’m looking for two passages mentioned in Kv and need help locating them in the suttas. My research has been unfruitful so far:

“Bhikkhus, if there were soul, should I have that which belongs to a soul? Or if there were that which belongs to soul, should I have a soul? In both cases ye would reply: Yea, lord'. But both soul and that which belongs to soul being in very truth and for ever impossible to be known, then this that is a stage of opinion, namely: that is the world, that is the soul, this I shall hereafter become, permanent, constant, eternal, unchangeable—so shall I abide even like unto the Eternal’—is not this, bhikkhus, absolutely and entirely a doctrine of fools?” “Whatever it be not, lord, it surely is, absolutely and entirely a doctrine of fools”.

and

“There are these three teachers, Seniya, to be found in the world—who are the three? There is first, Seniya, that kind of teacher who declares that there is a real, persistent soul in the life that now is, and in that which is to come; then there is the kind of teacher, Seniya, who declares that there is a real, persistent soul in the life that now is, but not a soul in a future life; lastly, there is a certain teacher who does not declare that there is a soul either in the life that now is, nor in that which is to come. The first, Seniya, of these three is called an Eternalist, the second is called an Annihilationist; the third of these, he, Seniya, is called the teacher, who is Buddha supreme. These are the three teachers to be found in the world”.

Any help would be much appreciated.

[RobertK]

@Dōgen

that is the world, that is the soul, this I shall hereafter become, permanent, constant, eternal, unchangeable—so shall I abide even like unto the Eternal’—is not this, bhikkhus, absolutely and entirely a doctrine of fools?” “Whatever it be not, lord, it surely is, absolutely and entirely a doctrine of fools

Welcome back Dogen.
To explain to others, the two quotes together are found in the Katthavatthu(KV), the Points of Controversy of the Abhidhamma pitaka under appeal to the suttas (p.62 of the Aung, Davids translation) .

[RobertK]

@Dōgen

“Bhikkhus, if there were soul, should I have that which belongs to a soul? Or if there were that which belongs to soul, should I have a soul? In both cases ye would reply: Yea, lord'. But both soul and that which belongs to soul being in very truth and for ever impossible to be known, then this that is a stage of opinion, namely: that is the world, that is the soul, this I shall hereafter become, permanent, constant, eternal, unchangeable—so shall I abide even like unto the Eternal’—is not this, bhikkhus, absolutely and entirely a doctrine of fools?” “Whatever it be not, lord, it surely is, absolutely and entirely a doctrine of fools”.

Mahjjima nikaya 22
https://suttacentral.net/mn22/en/bodhi?lang=en&reference=none&highlight=false

Bhikkhus, there being a self, would there be for me what belongs to a self?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Or, there being what belongs to a self, would there be for me a self?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Bhikkhus, since a self and what belongs to a self are not apprehended as true and established, then this standpoint for views, namely, ‘That which is the self is the world; after death I shall be permanent, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change; I shall endure as long as eternity’—would it not be an utterly and completely foolish teaching?”

“What else could it be, venerable sir, but an utterly and completely foolish teaching?”

[Dōgen]

@RobertK

Thank you for the pleasantries, and your help with the sutta is much appreciated!

The second part seems tricky - there’s a dog-ascetic Seniya in MN 75, and King Seniya Bimbisara, but the wording is peculiar. I’m sure it’ll come up though.

Thanks again for your kindness. Peace.

[Dhammanissita]

Some quotations from Kathavatthu, and, for example, Nettipakarana, are untracable, although they are very similiar to the tracable ones.

[Namyal]

@Dōgen

There are these three teachers, Seniya, to be found in the world—who are the three? There is first, Seniya, that kind of teacher who declares that there is a real, persistent soul in the life that now is, and in that which is to come; then there is the kind of teacher, Seniya, who declares that there is a real, persistent soul in the life that now is, but not a soul in a future life; lastly, there is a certain teacher who does not declare that there is a soul either in the life that now is, nor in that which is to come. The first, Seniya, of these three is called an Eternalist, the second is called an Annihilationist; the third of these, he, Seniya, is called the teacher, who is Buddha supreme. These are the three teachers to be found in the world”.

Basically the same meaning in other words can be found in anurādhasuttaSN44.2

ettha ca te, anurādha, diṭṭheva dhamme saccato thetato tathāgate anupalabbhiyamāne kallaṃ nu te taṃ veyyākaraṇaṃ – ‘yo so, āvuso, tathāgato uttamapuriso paramapuriso paramapattipatto taṃ tathāgato aññatra imehi catūhi ṭhānehi paññāpayamāno paññāpeti – hoti tathāgato paraṃ maraṇāti vā… neva hoti na na hoti tathāgato paraṃ maraṇāti vā"’ti. “no hetaṃ, bhante”.

sādhu sādhu, anurādha! pubbe cāhaṃ, anurādha, etarahi ca dukkhañceva paññapemi, dukkhassa ca nirodha"nti. catutthaṃ.

the four positions

1. hoti (sassata) -eternalist
2. na hoti (uccheda) - annihilationist
3. hoti ca na ca hoti (ekaccasassata) -partial eternalist
4. neva hoti na na hoti (amarāvikkhepa) -eel wriggler

Those who hold position 3, can be included under the sassata umbrella

Those who hold position 4(or reply in that manner), however they try to wriggle out when questioned deeply, are not exempt from the following

dvīhi, bhikkhave, diṭṭhigatehi pariyuṭṭhitā devamanussā olīyanti eke, atidhāvanti eke

diṭṭhigatasutta(Iti49)

Some come are under the sassata umbrella, some under the uccheda umbrella

Hence the four positions can be summarised by sassata and uccheda postions