Anattalakkhana Sutta
The Discourse on the
Characteristic of
Non-Self Exhistence
(the
first oration of the Heart of Perfected Wisdom)
Thus I have heard...
At one time the Buddha
[awakened one] was
staying in
the Deer Park at
Isipatana, near Benares.
There, he addressed the group of five
monks [bhikkhus]...
Form (matter) [rùpa] is not self.
If form were self, form would not lead to
affliction.
It would be possible to say, regarding
form...
‘Let
form be like this. Let form not be like that.’
However, since form is not self, form does
lead to affliction.
And so, it is not possible to say,
regarding form...
‘Let
form be like this. Let form not be like that.’
Feeling (sensation) [vedana] is not self.
If feeling were self, feeling would not
lead to affliction.
It would be possible to say, regarding feeling...
‘Let
feeling be like this. Let feeling not be like that.’
However, since
feeling is not self, feeling does lead to affliction.
And so, it is not possible to say,
regarding feeling...
‘Let
feeling be like this. Let feeling not be like that.’
Perception (conception) [sañña] is not self.
If perception were
self, perception would not lead to affliction.
It would be possible to say,
regarding perception...
‘Let perception be like this. Let perception not be like that.’
However, since perception is not self, perception does lead to affliction.
And so, it is not
possible to say, regarding perception...
‘Let perception be like this. Let perception not be like that.’
Mental formations (volition) [sankharas] are not self.
If mental formations
were self, mental formations would not lead to affliction.
It would be possible
to say, regarding mental formations...
‘Let mental formations be like this. Let mental formations not be like
that.’
However, since mental
formations are not self, mental formations do lead to affliction.
And so, it is not
possible to say, regarding mental formations...
‘Let mental formations be like this. Let mental formations not be like
that.’
Consciousness [viññana] is not self.
If consciousness were
self, consciousness would not lead to affliction.
It would be possible
to say, regarding consciousness...
‘Let consciousness be like this. Let consciousness not be like that.’
However, since
consciousness is not self, consciousness does lead to affliction.
And so, it is not
possible to say, regarding consciousness...
‘Let consciousness be like this. Let
consciousness not be like that.’
What do you think, monks [bhikkhus]...
Is Form permanent [nicca] or impermanent [anicca]?
“Impermanent
[anicca], Venerable sir [bhante].”
Is that, which is impermanent [anicca], pleasant [sukha] or unpleasant [dukkha]?
“Unpleasant
[dukkha], Venerable sir [bhante].”
Is it fitting to regard what is
impermanent [anicca],
unpleasant [dukkha],
and subject to change as:
‘This
is mine. This is my self. This is what I am.?’
“No,
Venerable sir [bhante].”
What do you think, monks [bhikkhus]...
Is Feeling permanent [nicca] or impermanent [anicca]?
“Impermanent
[anicca], Venerable sir [bhante].”
Is that, which is impermanent [anicca], pleasant [sukha],or unpleasant [dukkha]?
“Unpleasant
[dukkha], Venerable sir [bhante].”
Is it fitting to regard what is
impermanent [anicca],
unpleasant [dukkha],
and subject to change as:
‘This
is mine. This is my self. This is what I am.?’
“No,
Venerable sir [bhante].”
What do you think, monks [bhikkhus]...
Is Perception permanent [nicca] or impermanent [anicca]?
“Impermanent
[anicca], Venerable sir [bhante].”
Is that, which is impermanent [anicca], pleasant [sukha] or unpleasant [dukkha]?
“Unpleasant
[dukkha], Venerable sir [bhante].”
Is it fitting to regard what is
impermanent [anicca],
unpleasant [dukkha],
and subject to change as:
‘This
is mine. This is my self. This is what I am.?’
“No,
Venerable sir [bhante].”
What do you think, monks [bhikkhus]...
Are Mental Formations permanent [nicca] or impermanent [anicca]?
“Impermanent
[anicca], Venerable sir [bhante].”
Is that, which is impermanent [anicca], pleasant [sukha] or unpleasant [dukkha]?
“Unpleasant
[dukkha], Venerable sir [bhante].”
Is it fitting to regard what is
impermanent [anicca],
unpleasant [dukkha],
and subject to change as:
‘This
is mine. This is my self. This is what I am.?’
“No,
Venerable sir [bhante].”
What do you think, monks [bhikkhus]...
Is Consciousness permanent [nicca] or impermanent [anicca]?
“Impermanent
[anicca], Venerable sir [bhante].”
Is that, which is impermanent [anicca], pleasant [sukha] or unpleasant [dukkha]?
“Unpleasant
[dukkha], Venerable sir [bhante].”
Is it fitting to regard what is
impermanent [anicca],
unpleasant [dukkha],
and subject to change as:
‘This
is mine. This is my self. This is what I am.?’
“No,
Venerable sir [bhante].”
And so, monks [bhikkhus]...
All Form [rùpa],
whether in the past, present, or future; whether internal or external to
oneself &/or others; whether gross or subtle; whether inferior or superior;
whether far or near... must, through Right Understanding
[Samma-Ditthi], be regarded thusly:
‘This is not mine. This is not my self.
This is not what I am.’
All Feeling [vedana], whether in the past,
present, or future; whether internal or external to oneself &/or others; whether
gross or subtle; whether inferior or superior; whether far or near... must,
through Right Understanding
[Samma-Ditthi],
be regarded thusly:
‘This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.’
All Perception [sañña], whether in the past,
present, or future; whether internal or external to oneself &/or others; whether
gross or subtle; whether inferior or superior; whether far or near... must,
through Right Understanding
[Samma-Ditthi],
be regarded thusly:
‘This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.’
All Mental Formations [sankharas], whether in the past, present, or
future; whether internal or external to oneself &/or others; whether gross or
subtle; whether inferior or superior; whether far or near... must, through
Right Understanding
[Samma-Ditthi],
be regarded thusly:
‘This is not mine.
This is not my self. This is not what I am.’
All Consciousness [viññana], whether in the past,
present, or future; whether internal or external to oneself &/or others; whether
gross or subtle; whether inferior or superior; whether far or near... must,
through Right Understanding
[Samma-Ditthi],
be regarded thusly:
‘This is not mine.
This is not my self. This is not what I am.’
Seeing thus, a learned disciple of the
Noble One becomes...
weary and
disenchanted with Form (matter) [rùpa];
weary and
disenchanted with Feeling (sensation)
[vedana];
weary and
disenchanted with Perception (conception) [sañña];
weary and
disenchanted with Mental formations (volition) [sankharas];
weary and
disenchanted with Consciousness [viññana].
Weary and disenchanted, one becomes
dispassionate.
Dispassionate, one becomes detached.
Through detachment, one becomes free.
With freedom, there comes the knowledge, ‘I am free.’
One then knows...
‘Birth
has become no more.’
‘The
holy life of purity has been fulfilled.’
‘What
should be done has been done.’
‘There
is nothing further to be done here, in this world.’
This is what the Buddha [awakened one] said.
Delighted, the group of five monks [bhikkhus] rejoiced in the words
of the Buddha [awakened one].
While this discourse
was being given, the minds of the five monks [bhikkhus]
were fully liberated from their defilements, without any remainder of
clinging.
No comments:
Post a Comment