There are some who dispute
    corrupted at heart,
and those who dispute
    their hearts set on truth,
but a sage doesn't enter into
a dispute that's arisen,
which is why he is
    nowhere constrained.

Now, how would one
    led on by desire,
    entrenched in his likes,
    forming his own conclusions,
overcome his own views?
He'd dispute in line
with the way that he knows.

Whoever boasts to others, unasked,
of his practices, precepts,
is, say the wise,
ignoble by nature --
    he who speaks of himself
    of his own accord.

But a monk at peace,
    fully unbound in himself,
who doesn't boast of his precepts
    -- "That's how I am" --
he, say the wise,
is noble by nature --
    he with no vanity
    with regard to the world.

One whose doctrines aren't clean --    
fabricated, formed, given preference
when he sees it to his own reward --
    relies on a peace
    dependent
    on what can be shaken.

When one's convinced
of what has been grasped among doctrines,
entrenchments in views
aren't easily overcome.
    That's why
a person takes up or rejects a doctrine --
in light of these very
entrenchments.

Now, one who is cleansed
    has no view
formed about states of becoming
                or non-
    anywhere in the world.
Having abandoned conceit & illusion,
by what means would he go
    anywhere in the world?
        He isn't involved.

For one who's involved
    gets into disputes
    over doctrines,
but how -- through what means --
would you argue
with one uninvolved?
    He has nothing
taken up or rejected,
has sloughed off every view
    right here -- every one.