[127] Therein, Cunda, as for those ascetics and brahmins who hold such a doctrine, such a view: 'The self is formless (arūpī attā)' … 'The self is both formed and formless' … 'The self is neither formed nor formless' … 'The self is percipient' … 'The self is non-percipient' … 'The self is both percipient and non-percipient' … 'The self is neither percipient nor non-percipient' … 'The self is annihilated, destroyed; it does not exist after death — this alone is true, anything else is vain' — I approach them and say thus: 'Friends, there is indeed this that is said: "The self is annihilated, destroyed; it does not exist after death."' But as for what they say, Cunda — 'this alone is true, anything else is vain' — that I do not concede to them. Why is that? Because, Cunda, there are some beings who perceive otherwise in this matter. Even with regard to this designation (paññatti), Cunda, I do not see anyone equal to myself — how then anyone superior? Rather, it is I who am superior therein, that is to say, in the higher designation (adhipaññatti). These, Cunda, are the standpoints of view (diṭṭhinissaya) connected with the final end, which have been declared by me to you both in the way they should be declared and in the way they should not be declared. Why then should I declare them to you further in that regard?
English translation from the Pali (Siam Raṭṭha edition) — under review, not for citation.