Marks of existence sutta

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5006
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Marks of existence sutta

Post by Kim OHara » Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:52 am

Dhammanando wrote:
Mon Sep 10, 2018 9:41 am
Kim OHara wrote:
Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:49 am
There was a thread here, on this topic, eons ago, and the conclusion I remember from it was that the familiar grouping of the Three Marks did not date to the time of the suttas but to the time of the commentaries.
We did once have a thread pointing out that the convention of referring to aniccatā, dukkhatā and anattatā as the "three characteristics" (tilakkhaṇaṃ or tīṇi lakkhaṇāni) is a post-canonical development, unexampled anywhere in the Tipiṭaka.
I'm sure that's the thread I remembered - however imperfectly.
Thank you for the clarification.
But I don't recall any thread relating the bolder hypothesis that you describe, though I am familiar with it (and I've no doubt missed many threads). The claim that Theravādins inserted dukkhatā later and that in earliest Buddhism the lakṣaṇa probably conformed to one of the Mahāyāna-favoured formulations (e.g., "samskāras are anitya, dharmas are anātmān, nirvāṇa is peace", or something like that) was advanced by Thich Nhat Hanh and Hsing Yun. As with most of this duo's revisionist hypotheses, it's very poorly argued and afaik no scholar in early Buddhist studies takes it seriously.
Nor did I intend to make any such claim. All I intended was what I said, and I said it in response - primarily - to the OP since (as far as I could see) none of the earlier responses had answered the question:
TRobinson465 wrote:
Sun Sep 09, 2018 4:27 am
Hello all. I am trying to find the sutta where the Buddha says the phrases

sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā
sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā
sabbe dhammā anattā
I reasoned simply that if the grouping of the Three Marks as such is commentarial, there was no likelihood of finding anything close to those three phrases - together - in the suttas.
Now that I have had a bit more time - and encouragement :tongue: - I have looked again at Volovsky's list and DooDoot's post viewtopic.php?f=13&t=32741#p486198 and I see that in fact AN 3:136 does in fact group them almost as closely as one could expect:
“Mendicants, whether Realized Ones arise or not, this law of nature persists, this regularity of natural principles, this invariance of natural principles: all conditions are impermanent. A Realized One understands this and comprehends it, then he explains, teaches, asserts, establishes, clarifies, analyzes, and reveals it: ‘All conditions are impermanent.’ Whether Realized Ones arise or not, this law of nature persists, this regularity of natural principles, this invariance of natural principles: all conditions are suffering. A Realized One understands this and comprehends it, then he explains, teaches, asserts, establishes, clarifies, analyzes, and reveals it: ‘All conditions are suffering.’ Whether Realized Ones arise or not, this law of nature persists, this regularity of natural principles, this invariance of natural principles: all things are not-self. A Realized One understands this and comprehends it, then he explains, teaches, asserts, establishes, clarifies, analyzes, and reveals it: ‘All things are not-self.’”

That's from https://suttacentral.net/an3.136/en/sujato.

So the OP's question had already been answered pretty well and my contribution wasn't very relevant - sorry!

:namaste:
Kim

User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 4227
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Ban Sri Pradu Rubber Forest, Phrao, Chiangmai

Re: Marks of existence sutta

Post by Dhammanando » Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:00 am

Kim OHara wrote:
Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:52 am
Nor did I intend to make any such claim.
Nor was I accusing you of doing so; nor even suspecting it.

:toast:

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 3151
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Marks of existence sutta

Post by DooDoot » Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:02 am

Kim OHara wrote:
Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:52 am
I see that in fact AN 3:136 does in fact group them almost as closely as one could expect:
They are also grouped throughout Chapter 22 of the SN. In Theravada monasteries, two of the characteristics are chanted every morning as the wisdom climax of the chanting, as follows. Thus they are drummed into the heads of monastics.
Idha tathāgato lokē uppanno arahang sammā-sambuddho,
here, One attained to the Truth, Worthy and Rightly
self-Awakened, has appeared in the world,
Dhammo ca dēsito niyyāniko upasamiko Parinibbāniko,
and Dhamma is explained; leading out of samsara,
calming; tending toward total Nibbana,
sambodhagāmī sugatap-pavēdito,
going to self-awakening, declared by
one who has gone the good way.

Mayan-tang dhammang sutvā ēvang jānāma,
Having heard the Dhamma, we know this,

Jātipi dukkhā, birth is suffering,
Jarāpi dukkhā, aging is suffering,
Maranampi dukkhang, death is suffering,
Soka-paridēva-dukkha-domanas-supāyāsāpi dukkhā,
Sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress,
and despair are suffering,
Appiyēhi sampayogo dukkho,
association with things disliked is suffering,
piyēhi vippayogo dukkho,
separation from things liked is suffering,
Yampicchang na labhati tampi dukkhang,
not getting what one wishes is suffering,
Sankkhittēna pañcuppādā-nakkhandhā dukkhā,
in short; the five aggregates for clinging are sufferings,

Seyyathīdang:
Rūpūpādā-nakkhandho,
namely, form as an aggregate for clinging,
Vēdanūpādā-nakkhandho,
feeling as an aggregate for clinging,
Saññūpādā-nakkhandho,
perception as an aggregate for clinging,
Sankkhārūpādā-nakkhandho,
mental processes as an aggregrate for clinging,
Viññānū-pādānakkhandho,
consciousness as an aggregate for clinging,

Yēsang pariññāya, Dharamāno so bhagavā,
so that they might fully understand this,
the Blessed One, while still alive,
Ēvang bahulang sāvakē vinēti,
often instructed his disciples in this way,
Ēvang bhāgā ca panassa bhagavato sāvakēsu
Anusāsanī, Bahulā pavattati,
Many times, did he emphasize this part of his admonition,

Rūpang aniccang, form is impermanent,
Vēdanā aniccā, feeling is impermanent,
Saññā aniccā, perception is impermanent,
Sangkhārā aniccā, mental processes are impermanent,
Viññānang aniccang, consciousness is impermanent,
Rūpang anattā, form is not-self,
Vēdanā anattā, feeling is not-self,
Saññā anattā, perception is not-self,
Sangkhārā anattā, mental processes are not-self,
Viññānang anattā, consciousness is not-self,
Sabbē sangkhārā aniccā, all processes are impermanent,
Sabbē dhammā anattāti, all phenomenon are not-self,

Tē (women: Tā) mayang, all of us,
Otinnāmaha jātiyā, beset by birth,
Jarā-maranēna, aging and death,
Sokēhi, Paridēvēhi, by sorrows, lamentations,
Dukkhēhi, Domanassēhi, suffering, distresses,
Upāyāsēhi, and despairs,
Dukkhotinnā, bound by sufferings,
Dukkha-parētā, obstructed by sufferings,
Appēvanā-mimassa kēvalassa
Dukkhak-khandhassa antakiriyā paññāyēthāti.
(Think) Oh; that the end of this entire mass of
suffering and stress might be known.


http://www.stlthaitemple.org/books/Chanting_English.pdf
Last edited by DooDoot on Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:05 am, edited 2 times in total.
Never ordained... not an anonymous-online-bhikkhu or ex-bhikkhu...

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5006
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Marks of existence sutta

Post by Kim OHara » Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:04 am

DooDoot wrote:
Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:56 pm
Kim OHara wrote:
Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:49 pm
One of the three does not equal the group. Can you provide a better reference?
I am struggling to follow what you are writing. Are you are newbie to Buddhism or are you a Noble One asking us lowly students a very deep question? Is possibly Wikipedia a trusted media to find the answer to this question? :shrug: SN 22.59 appears to definitely refer to the three characteristics. However, it appears to not answer the OP question because SN 22.59 only appears to apply anatta to sankhara (conditioned things) rather than to sabbe dhamma (all things). It seems SN 22.59 does not answer/include sabbe dhammā anattā.
"What do you think of this, O monks? Is form permanent or impermanent?"

"Impermanent, O Lord."

"Now, that which is impermanent, is it unsatisfactory or satisfactory?"

"Unsatisfactory, O Lord."

"Now, that which is impermanent, unsatisfactory, subject to change, is it proper to regard that as: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'?"

"Indeed, not that, O Lord."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .mend.html
...
Simple: SN 22.59 is explicitly "The Characteristic of Not-Self", the "Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta" and is all about anatta. Read it: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html.
If you want to find the other two marks there, you probably can - but only as pointers to anatta.

And there is no call to place me either on Mount Meru or under the wheels of your chariot.

:namaste:
Kim

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 3151
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Marks of existence sutta

Post by DooDoot » Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:07 am

Kim OHara wrote:
Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:04 am
Simple: SN 22.59 is explicitly "The Characteristic of Not-Self", the "Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta" and is all about anatta. Read it: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html.
If you want to find the other two marks there, you probably can - but only as pointers to anatta.
I have read it many times; thanks. It is a sutta every aspirant should know intimately; as the monastery chanting I posted shows. The (belated) title of the sutta does not appear to negate the interrelationship of the three marks of worldly phenomena. Again, I struggle to discern whatever point you are attempting to make. As was posted, the suttas say in many places that whatever is anicca is dukkha; whatever is dukkha is anatta.
What’s impermanent is suffering (unsatisfactory).
Yadaniccaṃ taṃ dukkhaṃ;

What’s suffering (unsatisfactory) is not-self.
yaṃ dukkhaṃ tadanattā;

https://suttacentral.net/sn22.15/en/sujato
As for impermanence, it appears to be a very important teaching and not to be trivialized. The final words of the Buddha were about impermanence.
8. And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

This was the last word of the Tathagata.

17. Then, when the Blessed One had passed away, some bhikkhus, not yet freed from passion, lifted up their arms and wept; and some, flinging themselves on the ground, rolled from side to side and wept, lamenting: "Too soon has the Blessed One come to his Parinibbana! Too soon has the Happy One come to his Parinibbana! Too soon has the Eye of the World vanished from sight!"

But the bhikkhus who were freed from passion, mindful and clearly comprehending, reflected in this way: "Impermanent are all compounded things. How could this be otherwise?"

18. And the Venerable Anuruddha addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Enough, friends! Do not grieve, do not lament! For has not the Blessed One declared that with all that is dear and beloved there must be change, separation, and severance? Of that which is born, come into being, compounded and subject to decay, how can one say: 'May it not come to dissolution!'?

DN 16
If the mind cannot fully embrace impermanence then I struggle to fathom how the mind accommodate anatta. The perception of impermanence and unsatisfactoriness (the inherent incapacity of the world to bring happiness) is crucial for the development of dispassion. The suttas say by developing the perception of impermanence; the conceit "I am" is abandoned. I imagine it is difficult to regard things the mind is passionate towards as anatta.

In the Anapanasati Sutta, only experiencing "impermanence" is mentioned because the Buddha-Dhamma takes it for granted that when impermanence is discerned, unsatisfactoriness or not-self as also discerned.

Below is the from the 1st dhamma book i ever bought and read on that day. Right media. Truthful media (rather than fake dharma). :)
Now, observe that in the realization of impermanence there is the realization of many other things simultaneously. When impermanence is truly seen, this characteristic of impermanence is also the characteristic of dukkham, namely, it is ugly and unbearable. We will see the characteristic of not-self in it, also. Because these things are always changing, impermanent, unsatisfactory, and beyond our control, we realize anatta, also. Then we will see that they are void of selfhood, which is sunnata. We will see that they are just thus like that. Impermanence is just thus, just like that, thusness. And so, tathata is seen as well.

Please understand that the realizations of these truths are interrelated. From seeing impermanence, we see unsatisfactoriness, see anatta, see sunnata; see tathata, and see idappaccayata (conditionality, the law of cause and effect), also. Each continues into the next. A complete realization of impermanence must include un­satisfactoriness, not-self, voidness, thusness, and the law of conditionality. When all of these are seen, then impermanence is seen completely in the most profound way. This is how we realize fully the impermanence of the sankhara.

Never ordained... not an anonymous-online-bhikkhu or ex-bhikkhu...

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5006
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Marks of existence sutta

Post by Kim OHara » Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:51 am

DooDoot wrote:
Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:07 am
Kim OHara wrote:
Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:04 am
Simple: SN 22.59 is explicitly "The Characteristic of Not-Self", the "Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta" and is all about anatta. Read it: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html.
If you want to find the other two marks there, you probably can - but only as pointers to anatta.
I have read it many times; thanks. It is a sutta every aspirant should know intimately; as the monastery chanting I posted shows. The (belated) title of the sutta does not appear to negate the interrelationship of the three marks of worldly phenomena. Again, I struggle to discern whatever point you are attempting to make.
A very simple point: SN 22.59 is not about the Three Marks but about one of them, anatta.
"SN 22.59" is therefore not an answer to the OP's question, although (as I said here viewtopic.php?f=13&t=32741&start=15#p486293) "AN 3:136" is.

As for the rest of your post, it's fine but (again) not entirely relevant to the OP.

I will leave it at that.

:namaste:
Kim

[edited for clarity]

User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 4227
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Ban Sri Pradu Rubber Forest, Phrao, Chiangmai

Re: Marks of existence sutta

Post by Dhammanando » Tue Sep 11, 2018 1:26 am

DooDoot wrote:
Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:46 am
what would you call or how would you described anicca, dukkha & anatta using sutta terminology? In other words, how would the 2nd sermon (SN 22.59) be described so it has a title or description similar to the ‘Four Noble Truths’ or ‘Seven Factors of Enlightenment’? Thanks
If ‘lakkhaṇa’ wasn’t available to me, then the only sutta terms I can think of are those found in the AN’s Uppādāsutta.

Using Bhikkhu Bodhi’s translation, that would mean ‘three laws’ (dhātu), ‘three stablenesses of the Dhamma’ (dhammaṭṭhitatā), or ‘three fixed courses of the Dhamma’ (dhammaniyāmatā).

Using Ajahn Thanissaro’s: ‘properties’, ‘steadfastnesses of the Dhamma’, ‘orderlinesses of the Dhamma’.

And the second sermon might then be Khandhadhammaṭṭhitatā or Khandhadhammaniyāmatā Sutta.

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 3151
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Marks of existence sutta

Post by DooDoot » Tue Sep 11, 2018 10:40 am

Dhammanando wrote:
Tue Sep 11, 2018 1:26 am
And the second sermon might then be Khandhadhammaṭṭhitatā or Khandhadhammaniyāmatā Sutta.
How brilliant Venerable for pointing out the obvious to those that overreach. Just as if one were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way Venerable Dhammanando — through many lines of reasoning — made the Dhamma clear. :candle:
Kim OHara wrote:
Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:51 am
A very simple point: SN 22.59 is not about the Three Marks but about one of them, anatta.
No, it does not appear to be a "simple point". As Venerable Dhammanando and my researched self have suggested; the title of SN 22.59 appears to have no basis in the language of the suttas. The title, namely, the Anattalakkhana Sutta, appears probably a later contrivance. Thus, I doubt it is beneficial to hold dogmatic opinions and assert them in such a unbending manner; particularly when those views appear to be without substantiation and appear tenuous.

In SN 22.59, it appears said the aggregates are anatta because they ultimately cannot be controlled and they cannot bring true/lasting happiness due to their impermanence (anicca) & susceptibility to sickness (ābādhāya). Thus, the reality of impermanence & decay appears inseparable from the reality of anatta. I suggest to read the sermon, thoroughly.
Kim OHara wrote:
Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:51 am
As for the rest of your post, it's fine but (again) not entirely relevant to the OP. I will leave it at that.
Thanks but it appears by the tenuous views posted here than one might not be in a position to provide the above assessment. It seems the rest of my post is both fine & entirely relevant to the OP. Lets go over the OP to show the three marks written in the OP are related & relevant to eachother because they each bring the same result. OK>
277. "All conditioned things are impermanent" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification.

278. "All conditioned things are unsatisfactory" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification.

279. "All things are not-self" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .budd.html
SN 22.59 says for the mind that sees the three marks in this way (evaṃ passaṃ); dispassion and Nibbana are attained. Let's review it again rather than hold rebellious views:
"Now, what is impermanent, unsatisfactory, subject to change, is it proper to regard it as: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'?"

"Indeed, not that, O Lord."

"O monks, the well-instructed noble disciple, seeing thus, gets wearied of form, gets wearied of feeling, gets wearied of perception, gets wearied of mental formations, gets wearied of consciousness. Being wearied he becomes passion-free. In his freedom from passion, he is emancipated. Being emancipated, there is the knowledge that he is emancipated. He knows: 'birth is exhausted, lived is the holy life, what had to be done is done, there is nothing more of this becoming.'"

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .mend.html
Let us together, as potential heirs to Dhamma, reflect upon the above. If the aggregates were permanent & sukha (rather than dukkha) but where also not-self; could the realisation of not-self towards those aggregates bring weariness & dispassion? :shrug: Personally, I doubt it.

It appears for the realisation of anatta to bring disenchantment (wearniness & revulsion) and dispassion; those aggregates must also be "dukkha". It seems 'anatta' alone is not sufficient for the realisation of the goal.

Ajahn Buddhadasa explained 'dukkha' as follows:
A. Dukkha× as "Enduring Suffering": In the word dukkha×, many meanings can be inferred. It is composed of two components: du and kha (or kha×). If we take du to mean "difficult: and khama to mean "endure," then dukkha× means "difficult to endure." We will see this clearly when we observe that impermanence means jŒti, jŒra, and maraöa (birth, old age, and death). If there was permanence and no change, then how could there be birth, decrepitude, and death? The dukkha that arises through birth, old age, and death arises directly out of impermanence and change. Further forms of dukkha, such as sorrow, lamentation, grief, and despair are all due to the fact that things don't happen as we wish. We don't get the things that we desire, we experience things that we do not want, and we are always separated from the things we do want. The cause of this comes from the fact that all animals and all conditioned things are constantly changing according to their causes and conditions.

B. Dukkha× as "Disgusting to See" :shock: : If we take du to mean "ugly" or "evil" and kha (from ikkha) to mean "look," then this aspect has the meaning "once seen, it is ugly." When one really sees it, it's abhorrent and repulsive. The meaning of this aspect of dukkha× is that the more we observe it, the uglier it gets; the deeper we see, the more repulsive it becomes. No matter what group of sankhŒras is observed, it will grow more disgusting as we see more deeply into its impermanence, into the illusion of those sankhŒras. This feeling of hate or repulsion is one more side of dukkha×.

C. Dukkha× as "Uglily Void, Wickedly Empty": By separating the components of dukkha× and taking du to mean "ugly" and kha× to mean "void, empty," we arrive at the meaning "uglily void." The condition we call "wickedly empty" refers to the fact that all sankhŒras have nothing but impermanence, namely, swiftly flowing, endless spirals of change. We can go so far as to say that in these sankhŒras there is only impermanence and change, that is, the flow of change is itself these things. Besides this, we can't find any abiding substance within them. Consequently, all sankhŒras have only this condition of being "uglily empty." However, such a meaning of dukkha× as this broadens to include anattŒ. 15 Therefore, we will consider it in detail in connection with the fact that when impermanence is seen, then anattŒ must be seen.(To be discussed subsequently.) Here, we simply intend to point out that even this third meaning of dukkha× is included in the word "impermanence," because impermanence is thoroughly void. There is
only this change which stops for nothing.

https://www.dhammatalks.net/Books3/Budd ... _Tetra.pdf
:candle:
Kim OHara wrote:
Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:49 am
I'm not saying the three marks were not mentioned or discussed in the suttas, of course, because they obviously are; I'm saying they weren't seen or discussed as a group.
Sure, we can certainly say they weren't seen or discussed as a group. In a free world, free from censorship, we are free to say whatever we wish. If we wish to, we can say the three marks are in fact four marks and five marks. Without censorship & the crime of apostasy, we can say whatever we want. We will leave it at that.

:hug:
Never ordained... not an anonymous-online-bhikkhu or ex-bhikkhu...

User avatar
Nicolas
Posts: 811
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Re: Marks of existence sutta

Post by Nicolas » Tue Sep 11, 2018 1:50 pm

DooDoot wrote:
Sun Sep 09, 2018 5:50 am
TRobinson465 wrote:
Sun Sep 09, 2018 4:27 am
sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā
sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā
sabbe dhammā anattā
AN 3.136 (three phrases) and SN 22.90 (phrases #1 and #3).
Phrases #1 and #3 are also in MN 35.

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 3151
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Marks of existence sutta

Post by DooDoot » Thu Sep 13, 2018 12:39 am

Nicolas wrote:
Tue Sep 11, 2018 1:50 pm
Phrases #1 and #3 are also in MN 35.
Thank you Nicholas. This must be where the morning chanting comes from:
“Master Assaji, how does the ascetic Gotama guide his disciples? And how does instruction to his disciples generally proceed?”

“kathaṃ pana, bho assaji, samaṇo gotamo sāvake vineti, kathaṃbhāgā ca pana samaṇassa gotamassa sāvakesu anusāsanī bahulā pavattatī”ti?

“Aggivessana, this is how the ascetic Gotama guides his disciples, and how instruction to his disciples generally proceeds:

“Evaṃ kho, aggivessana, bhagavā sāvake vineti, evaṃbhāgā ca pana bhagavato sāvakesu anusāsanī bahulā pavattati:

‘Form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness are impermanent.

‘rūpaṃ, bhikkhave, aniccaṃ, vedanā aniccā, saññā aniccā, saṅkhārā aniccā, viññāṇaṃ aniccaṃ.

Form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness are not-self.

Rūpaṃ, bhikkhave, anattā, vedanā anattā, saññā anattā, saṅkhārā anattā, viññāṇaṃ anattā.

All conditions are impermanent. All things are not-self.’

Sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā, sabbe dhammā anattā’ti.

This is how the ascetic Gotama guides his disciples, and how instruction to his disciples generally proceeds.”

Evaṃ kho, aggivessana, bhagavā sāvake vineti, evaṃbhāgā ca pana bhagavato sāvakesu anusāsanī bahulā pavattatī”ti.
Never ordained... not an anonymous-online-bhikkhu or ex-bhikkhu...

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Annatar, Johnnymac, Yahoo [Bot] and 85 guests