[156] Bhikkhus, there are these four kinds of clinging (upādāna). What four? Clinging to sensual pleasures (kāmupādāna), clinging to views (diṭṭhupādāna), clinging to rules and observances (sīlabbatupādāna), and clinging to a doctrine of self (attavādupādāna).
Bhikkhus, there are some ascetics and brahmins who claim to be proponents of the full understanding (pariññā) of all clinging, yet they do not rightly describe the full understanding of all clinging: they describe the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures, but they do not describe the full understanding of clinging to views, they do not describe the full understanding of clinging to rules and observances, and they do not describe the full understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self. For what reason? Because those honorable ascetics and brahmins do not understand these three cases as they really are. Therefore, though those honorable ascetics and brahmins claim to be proponents of the full understanding of all clinging, they do not rightly describe the full understanding of all clinging: they describe the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures, but they do not describe the full understanding of clinging to views, they do not describe the full understanding of clinging to rules and observances, and they do not describe the full understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self.
Bhikkhus, there are some ascetics and brahmins who claim to be proponents of the full understanding of all clinging, yet they do not rightly describe the full understanding of all clinging: they describe the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures, they describe the full understanding of clinging to views, but they do not describe the full understanding of clinging to rules and observances, and they do not describe the full understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self. For what reason? Because those honorable ascetics and brahmins do not understand these two cases as they really are. Therefore, though those honorable ascetics and brahmins claim to be proponents of the full understanding of all clinging, they do not rightly describe the full understanding of all clinging: they describe the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures, they describe the full understanding of clinging to views, they describe the full understanding of clinging to rules and observances, but they do not describe the full understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self.
Bhikkhus, there are some ascetics and brahmins who claim to be proponents of the full understanding of all clinging, yet they do not rightly describe the full understanding of all clinging: they describe the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures, they describe the full understanding of clinging to views, they describe the full understanding of clinging to rules and observances, but they do not describe the full understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self. For what reason? Because those honorable ascetics and brahmins do not understand this one case as it really is. Therefore, though those honorable ascetics and brahmins claim to be proponents of the full understanding of all clinging, they do not rightly describe the full understanding of all clinging: they describe the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures, they describe the full understanding of clinging to views, they describe the full understanding of clinging to rules and observances, but they do not describe the full understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self.
Bhikkhus, in a Dhamma and Discipline such as this, whatever confidence there is in the Teacher, that is declared to be not rightly directed; whatever confidence there is in the Dhamma, that is declared to be not rightly directed; whatever fulfillment of the precepts there is, that is declared to be not rightly directed; whatever love and affection there is among companions in the Dhamma, that is declared to be not rightly directed. For what reason? Because so it is, bhikkhus, when the Dhamma and Discipline is badly proclaimed, badly expounded, not emancipating, not conducive to peace, proclaimed by one who is not a fully awakened one.
English translation from the Pali (Siam Raṭṭha edition) — under review, not for citation.