This Sutra is not part of any canon, nor does it pretends to be a “true” Sutra. This is obviously a free and creative adaptation of MN1 and MN63, SN 15.3, SN 22.9. It is also programmatically generated, and if you’re into matikas, you should check out the code behind it.

Thus have I heard.
On one occasion the Blessed One was living at the Saddle Mountain State park, near Portland, Oregon, with a large group of Bhikkhunis and Bhikkhus and non-binary Bhikkhux.

The views left undeclared

Then, while the lay follower Scott was alone in meditation, the following thought arose in his mind: “These speculative views have been left undeclared by the Blessed One, set aside and rejected by him, namely: ‘this tradition is Original Buddhism’ and ‘this tradition is not Original Buddhism’;’this Sutta is authentic’ and ‘this Sutta is not authentic’;’this meditation technique is authentically Buddhist’ and ‘this meditation technique is not authentically Buddhist’.
The Blessed One does not declare these to me, and I do not approve of and accept the fact that he does not declare these to me, so I shall go to the Blessed One and ask him the meaning of this. If he declares to me either ‘this tradition is Original Buddhism’ or ‘this tradition is not Original Buddhism’, either ‘this Sutta is authentic’ or ‘this Sutta is not authentic’, either ‘this meditation technique is authentically Buddhist’ or ‘this meditation technique is not authentically Buddhist’, then I will lead the holy life under him; if he does not declare these to me, then I will abandon the training and return to the low life.”

Then, when it was evening, the lay follower Scott rose from meditation and went to the Blessed One. After paying homage to him, he sat down at one side and told him: “Here, venerable sir, while I was alone in meditation, the following thought arose in my mind: ‘These speculative views have been left undeclared by the Blessed One… If he does not declare these to me, then I will abandon the training and return to the low life.’

If the Blessed One knows ‘this tradition is Original Buddhism’ let the Blessed One declare to me ‘this tradition is Original Buddhism’; if the Blessed One knows ‘this tradition is not Original Buddhism’, let the Blessed One declare to me ‘this tradition is not Original Buddhism’. If the Blessed One does not know either ‘this tradition is Original Buddhism’ or ‘this tradition is not Original Buddhism’ then it is straightforward for one who does not know and does not see to say: ‘I do not know, I do not see.’
If the Blessed One knows ‘this Sutta is authentic’ let the Blessed One declare to me ‘this Sutta is authentic’; if the Blessed One knows ‘this Sutta is not authentic’, let the Blessed One declare to me ‘this Sutta is not authentic’. If the Blessed One does not know either ‘this Sutta is authentic’ or ‘this Sutta is not authentic’ then it is straightforward for one who does not know and does not see to say: ‘I do not know, I do not see.’
If the Blessed One knows ‘this meditation technique is authentically Buddhist’ let the Blessed One declare to me ‘this meditation technique is authentically Buddhist’; if the Blessed One knows ‘this meditation technique is not authentically Buddhist’, let the Blessed One declare to me ‘this meditation technique is not authentically Buddhist’. If the Blessed One does not know either ‘this meditation technique is authentically Buddhist’ or ‘this meditation technique is not authentically Buddhist’ then it is straightforward for one who does not know and does not see to say: ‘I do not know, I do not see.’

“How then, Scott, did I ever say to you: ‘Come, Scott, lead the holy life under me and I will declare to you “this tradition is Original Buddhism”… or “this meditation technique is not authentically Buddhist”’? – “No, venerable sir.” – “Did you ever tell me: ‘I will lead the holy life under the Blessed One, and the Blessed One will declare to me “this tradition is Original Buddhism”… or “this meditation technique is not authentically Buddhist”?’” – “No, venerable sir.” – “That being so, misguided man, who are you and what are you abandoning?”

“Suppose, Scott, a man were wounded by an arrow thickly smeared with poison, and his friends and companions, his kinsmen and relatives, brought a surgeon to treat him. The man would say: ‘I will not let the surgeon pull out this arrow until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble or a brahmin or a merchant or a worker.’ And he would say: ‘I will not let the surgeon pull out this arrow until I know the name and clan of the man who wounded me; … until I know whether the man who wounded me was tall or short or of middle height; … until I know whether the man who wounded me was dark or brown or golden-skinned; … until I know whether the man who wounded me lives in such a village or town or city; … until I know whether the bow that wounded me was a long bow or a cross-bow; … until I know whether the bowstring that wounded me was fibre or reed or sinew or hemp or bark; … until I know whether the shaft that wounded me was wild or cultivated; … until I know with what kind of feathers the shaft that wounded me was fitted—whether those of a vulture or a heron or a hawk or a peacock or a stork; … until I know with what kind of sinew the shaft that wounded me was bound—whether that of an ox or a buffalo or a deer or a monkey; … until I know what kind of arrowhead it was that wounded me—whether spiked or razor-tipped or curved or barbed or calf-toothed or lancet-shaped.’”

“All this would still not be known to that man and meanwhile he would die. So too, Scott, if anyone should say thus: ‘I will not lead the holy life under the Blessed One until the Blessed One declares to me: “this tradition is Original Buddhism”… or “this meditation technique is not authentically Buddhist”’, that would still remain undeclared by the Tathagatha and meanwhile that person would die.

“Scott, if there is the view ‘this tradition is Original Buddhism’, the holy life cannot be lived; and if there is the view ‘this tradition is not Original Buddhism’, the holy life cannot be lived. Whether there is the view ‘this tradition is Original Buddhism’ or the view ‘this tradition is not Original Buddhism’, there is birth, there is ageing, there is death, there are sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair, the destruction of which I prescribe here and now.

“Scott, if there is the view ‘this Sutta is authentic’, the holy life cannot be lived; and if there is the view ‘this Sutta is not authentic’, the holy life cannot be lived. Whether there is the view ‘this Sutta is authentic’ or the view ‘this Sutta is not authentic’, there is birth, there is ageing, there is death, there are sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair, the destruction of which I prescribe here and now.

“Scott, if there is the view ‘this meditation technique is authentically Buddhist’, the holy life cannot be lived; and if there is the view ‘this meditation technique is not authentically Buddhist’, the holy life cannot be lived. Whether there is the view ‘this meditation technique is authentically Buddhist’ or the view ‘this meditation technique is not authentically Buddhist’, there is birth, there is ageing, there is death, there are sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair, the destruction of which I prescribe here and now.

“Therefore, Scott, remember what I have left undeclared as undeclared, and remember what I have declared as declared. And what have I left undeclared? ‘this tradition is Original Buddhism’ – I have left undeclared. ‘this tradition is not Original Buddhism’ – I have left undeclared.’this Sutta is authentic’ – I have left undeclared. ‘this Sutta is not authentic’ – I have left undeclared.’this meditation technique is authentically Buddhist’ – I have left undeclared. ‘this meditation technique is not authentically Buddhist’ – I have left undeclared.

“Why have I left that undeclared? Because it is unbeneficial, it does not belong to the fundamentals of the holy life, it does not lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbana. That is why I have left it undeclared

“And what have I declared? ‘This is suffering’ – I have declared. ‘This is the origin of suffering’ – I have declared. ‘This is the cessation of suffering’ – I have declared. ‘This is the path leading to the cessation of suffering’ – I have declared.

“Why have I declared that? Because it is beneficial, it belongs to the fundamentals of the holy life, it leads to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbana. That is why I have declared it.

“Therefore, Scott, remember what I have left undeclared as undeclared, and remember what I have declared as declared.

The root of all trolling

“Bhikkhux, and Scott, I shall teach you a discourse on the Quest Contradictory to both Facts and Theory. Listen and attend closely to what I shall say.” – “Yes, venerable sir,” the bhikkhux replied. – “Okay,” Scott replied. The Blessed one said this:

“Here, Bhikkhux, the untaught ordinary person who has no regard for noble ones and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, who has no regard for true women and men and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, perceives tradition as tradition. Having perceived tradition as tradition, they conceive tradition, they conceive themselves in tradition, they conceive themselves apart from tradition, they conceive tradition to be ‘mine’, they delight in tradition. Why is that? Because they have not fully understood it, I say.

“They perceive scripture as scripture. Having perceived scripture as scripture, they conceive scripture, they conceive themselves in scripture, they conceive themselves apart from scripture, they conceive scripture to be ‘mine’, they delight in scripture. Why is that? Because they have not fully understood it, I say.

“They perceive practice as practice. Having perceived practice as practice, they conceive practice, they conceive themselves in practice, they conceive themselves apart from practice, they conceive practice to be ‘mine’, they delight in practice. Why is that? Because they have not fully understood it, I say.

“Here, Bhikkhux, the disciple of higher training whose mind has not yet reached the goal, and who is still aspiring to the supreme security from bondage, should not perceive tradition as tradition. Having not perceived tradition as tradition, they should not conceive tradition, they should not conceive themselves in tradition, they should not conceive themselves apart from tradition, they should not conceive tradition to be ‘mine’, they should not delight in tradition. Why is that? Because they must fully understood it, I say.

“They should not perceive scripture as scripture. Having not perceived scripture as scripture, they should not conceive scripture, they should not conceive themselves in scripture, they should not conceive themselves apart from scripture, they should not conceive scripture to be ‘mine’, they should not delight in scripture. Why is that? Because they must fully understood it, I say.

“They should not perceive practice as practice. Having not perceived practice as practice, they should not conceive practice, they should not conceive themselves in practice, they should not conceive themselves apart from practice, they should not conceive practice to be ‘mine’, they should not delight in practice. Why is that? Because they must fully understood it, I say.

“Here, Bhikkhux, the Tathagatha accomplished and fully enlightened, does not perceive tradition as tradition. Having not perceived tradition as tradition, they do not conceive tradition, they do not conceive themselves in tradition, they do not conceive themselves apart from tradition, they do not conceive tradition to be ‘mine’, they do not delight in tradition. Why is that? Because they have fully understood it, I say.

“They do not perceive scripture as scripture. Having not perceived scripture as scripture, they do not conceive scripture, they do not conceive themselves in scripture, they do not conceive themselves apart from scripture, they do not conceive scripture to be ‘mine’, they do not delight in scripture. Why is that? Because they have fully understood it, I say.

“They do not perceive practice as practice. Having not perceived practice as practice, they do not conceive practice, they do not conceive themselves in practice, they do not conceive themselves apart from practice, they do not conceive practice to be ‘mine’, they do not delight in practice. Why is that? Because they have fully understood it, I say.

That is what the Blessed One said. But Scott did not delight in the Blessed One’s words.

Dhamma has no past, no present, no future

The Blessed One having mastered the Sublime Dhamma Eye that leads to Enlightenment, saw clearly Scott’s lack of delight on his face. The Blessed One addressed the Bhikkhux thus:

“Bhikkhux, this Dhamma is without discoverable beginning. A first point is not discerned of beings hearing this Dhamma, memorizing, practicing, reciting, speaking, writing, commenting, organizing, systematizing, synthesizing, elaborating on, expanding on, transporting, translating, adapting, appropriating this Dhamma . What do you think, Scott, which is more: the stream of perspiration that buddhists have sweat while hearing this Dhamma, memorizing, practicing, reciting, speaking, writing, commenting, organizing, systematizing, synthesizing, elaborating on, expanding on, transporting, translating, adapting, appropriating this Dhamma – this or the water in the four great oceans?”
“As we understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, venerable sir, the stream of perspiration that we have sweat while hearing this Dhamma, memorizing, practicing, reciting, speaking, writing, commenting, organizing, systematizing, synthesizing, elaborating on, expanding on, transporting, translating, adapting, appropriating this Dhamma – this alone is more than the water in the four great oceans.”
“Good, good, bhikkhux!, It is good that you understand the Dhamma taught by me in such a way. The stream of perspiration that buddhists have sweat while hearing this Dhamma, memorizing, practicing, reciting, speaking, writing, commenting, organizing, systematizing, synthesizing, elaborating on, expanding on, transporting, translating, adapting, appropriating this Dhamma – this alone is more than the water in the four great oceans. For a long time, bhikkhux, you have experienced teachings, scriptures and practices; as you have experienced those, sweating by exertion of right effort, the stream of perspiration that you have sweat is more than the water in the four great oceans. For what reason? Because, bhikkhux, this Dhamma is without discoverable beginning. A first point is not discerned of beings hearing this Dhamma, memorizing, practicing, reciting, speaking, writing, commenting, organizing, systematizing, synthesizing, elaborating on, expanding on, transporting, translating, adapting, appropriating this Dhamma.”

“Bhikkhux, tradition is impermanent, both of the past and the future, not to speak of the present. The cause and condition for the arising of tradition is also impermanent. As tradition has originated from what is impermanent, how could it be permanent? Thus, tradition is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, subject to destruction, to vanishing, to fading away, to cessation. Seeing thus, Bhikkhux, the instructed noble disciple experiences distancing towards tradition of the past, they do not seek delight in tradition of the future, and they are practicing equanimity towards tradition of the present, for its fading away and cessation. Experiencing distancing they become dispassionate. Through dispassion their mind is liberated. When it is liberated there comes the knowledge: ‘It’s liberated.’ They understands: ‘Destroyed it birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being.’”

“Bhikkhux, scripture is impermanent, both of the past and the future, not to speak of the present. The cause and condition for the arising of scripture is also impermanent. As scripture has originated from what is impermanent, how could it be permanent? Thus, scripture is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, subject to destruction, to vanishing, to fading away, to cessation. Seeing Thus … They understands: ‘… there is no more for this state of being.’”

“Bhikkhux, practice is impermanent, both of the past and the future, not to speak of the present. The cause and condition for the arising of practice is also impermanent. As practice has originated from what is impermanent, how could it be permanent? Thus, practice is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, subject to destruction, to vanishing, to fading away, to cessation. Seeing thus, Bhikkhux, the instructed noble disciple experiences distancing towards practice of the past, they do not seek delight in practice of the future, and they are practicing equanimity towards practice of the present, for its fading away and cessation. Experiencing distancing they become dispassionate. Through dispassion their mind is liberated. When it is liberated there comes the knowledge: ‘It’s liberated.’ They understands: ‘Destroyed it birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being.’”

Final Verses

About this it was said:

True Buddhism is an illusion,
False Buddhism is real.
Buddhism is an ocean,
Traditions are waves.
Traditions of the past, present and future,
like all phenomenons,
they are interdependent,
they are impermanent,
they are empty of self-existence.
Illusion about that leads to suffering.
Traditions, Scriptures and Practices are contingent.
Buddhism is not two, not one.

That is what the Blessed One said. Elated, the bhikkhux and Scott delighted in the Blessed One’s statement. And while this discourse was being spoken, the minds of the bhikkhux were liberated from the taints by non-clinging. Scott’s mind started clinging to non-clinging.