[728] [S.] Is the power of the Tathāgata (tathāgatabala) — the knowledge (ñāṇa), as it really is, of the passing away and reappearance (cutūpapāta) of beings — noble (ariya), yet not to be said to have emptiness (suññatā) as its object (ārammaṇa) … to have the signless (animitta) as its object … to have the desireless (appaṇihita) as its object?
[P.] Yes.
[S.] Are the establishments of mindfulness (satipaṭṭhāna) noble, yet not to be said to have the desireless as their object?
[P.] It should not be said thus. …
English translation from the Pali (Siam Raṭṭha edition) — under review, not for citation.