[32] Bhikkhus, therein, those worthy ascetics and brahmins who declare the self to be neither percipient nor non-percipient and free of disease (aroga) after death: those worthy ascetics and brahmins declare a self that is neither percipient nor non-percipient, free of disease after death, either as having form; or those worthy ascetics and brahmins declare a self that is neither percipient nor non-percipient, free of disease after death, as formless; or those worthy ascetics and brahmins declare a self that is neither percipient nor non-percipient, free of disease after death, as both having form and formless; or those worthy ascetics and brahmins declare a self that is neither percipient nor non-percipient, free of disease after death, as neither having form nor formless.
Therein, bhikkhus, those ascetics and brahmins who declare the self to be percipient and free of disease after death — these [the neither-percipient-nor-non-percipient theorists] reject them; and even those worthy ascetics and brahmins who declare the self to be non-percipient and free of disease after death — these reject them too. For what reason? Because perception (saññā) is a disease, perception is a boil, perception is a dart; non-perception is stupefaction (sammoha); this is peaceful, this is sublime, namely, neither-perception-nor-non-perception.
Bhikkhus, the Tathāgata directly knows this. Those worthy ascetics and brahmins who declare the self to be neither percipient nor non-percipient, free of disease after death: those worthy ascetics and brahmins declare a self that is neither percipient nor non-percipient, free of disease after death, either as having form; or those worthy ascetics and brahmins declare a self that is neither percipient nor non-percipient, free of disease after death, as formless; or those worthy ascetics and brahmins declare a self that is neither percipient nor non-percipient, free of disease after death, as both having form and formless; or those worthy ascetics and brahmins declare a self that is neither percipient nor non-percipient, free of disease after death, as neither having form nor formless.
Bhikkhus, whatever ascetics or brahmins declare the attainment of this base (āyatana) merely by means of formations connected with what is seen, heard, sensed, and cognizable — this, bhikkhus, is declared to be a disaster for the attainment of this base. For this base, bhikkhus, is declared not to be attainable through an attainment accompanied by formations; this base, bhikkhus, is declared to be attainable through an attainment with only a residue of formations.
'That is conditioned and gross; but there is indeed the cessation (nirodha) of formations — that exists.' Having known thus, seeing the escape from it, the Tathāgata has gone beyond it.
English translation from the Pali (Siam Raṭṭha edition) — under review, not for citation.