Skip to content
Tidipa

Anattalakkhaṇasutta (The Discourse on the Characteristic of Not-self)

· 28 min read

13S3/1.2.1.7, the Bhagavā's second discourse to the group of five at Bārāṇasī: each of the five collections is not-self, impermanent and suffering, and seeing this the five bhikkhū were liberated.

Original text: 13S3/1.2.1.7 Anattalakkhaṇasutta 297–309 in the World Tipitaka Edition

Summary

Section titled “Summary”

At Bārāṇasī the Bhagavā teaches the group of five bhikkhū that each of the five collections is anattā (not-self): were any of them a self, it would not lead to affliction and could be made to be as one wishes. Through the catechism of impermanent, suffering and subject to change, and the formula for regarding all form, feeling, apperception, mental constructions and consciousness as not mine, not I, not my self, the learned disciple is disenchanted, detached and liberated. While the exposition was spoken, the five were liberated from the defilements.

Diagram

Section titled “Diagram”
flowchart LR
    K["each of the five collections"] --> A["anattā (not-self)"]
    A --> R1["leads to affliction"]
    A --> R2["cannot be made to be as one wishes"]
    K --> C["impermanent"] --> D["suffering"] --> E["subject to change"] --> F["not fit to regard as mine, I, my self"]
    F --> G["seen in reality with correct understanding"]
    G --> N["disenchantment"] --> V["detachment"] --> L["liberation"] --> Z["birth finished, the optimal life lived"]

Text

Section titled “Text”

(59.)

297. At one time the Bhagavā was dwelling at Bārāṇasī, at Isipatana in the Deer Park. There the Bhagavā addressed the group of five bhikkhū: “Bhikkhavo!” “Bhadante,” those bhikkhū replied to the Bhagavā. The Bhagavā said this:

298. “rūpa (form), Bhikkhave, is anattā (not-self). And indeed here, Bhikkhave, if rūpa were attā (self), this rūpa would not lead to ābādha (affliction), and rūpa could be obtained: ‘May my rūpa be thus, may my rūpa not be thus.’ And because indeed, Bhikkhave, rūpa is anattā, therefore rūpa leads to affliction, and it cannot be obtained: ‘May my rūpa be thus, may my rūpa not be thus.’

299. vedanā (feeling) is anattā (not-self). And indeed here, Bhikkhave, if vedanā were attā (self), this vedanā would not lead to ābādha (affliction), and vedanā could be obtained: ‘May my vedanā be thus, may my vedanā not be thus.’ And because indeed, Bhikkhave, vedanā is anattā, therefore vedanā leads to affliction, and it cannot be obtained: ‘May my vedanā be thus, may my vedanā not be thus.’

300. saññā (apperception) is anattā (not-self) … and so on … saṅkhārā (mental constructions) are anattā (not-self). And indeed here, Bhikkhave, if saṅkhārā were attā (self), these saṅkhārā would not lead to ābādha (affliction), and saṅkhārā could be obtained: ‘May my saṅkhārā be thus, may my saṅkhārā not be thus.’ And because indeed, Bhikkhave, saṅkhārā are anattā, therefore saṅkhārā lead to affliction, and they cannot be obtained: ‘May my saṅkhārā be thus, may my saṅkhārā not be thus.’

301. viññāṇa (consciousness) is anattā (not-self). And indeed here, Bhikkhave, if viññāṇa were attā (self), this viññāṇa would not lead to ābādha (affliction), and viññāṇa could be obtained: ‘May my viññāṇa be thus, may my viññāṇa not be thus.’ And because indeed, Bhikkhave, viññāṇa is anattā, therefore viññāṇa leads to affliction, and it cannot be obtained: ‘May my viññāṇa be thus, may my viññāṇa not be thus.’

302. Bhikkhave, what do you consider: is rūpa (form) nicca (permanent) or anicca (impermanent)?” “Anicca, Bhante.” “Now, is that which is impermanent dukkha (suffering) or sukha (happiness)?” “Dukkha, Bhante.” “Now, is it proper to regard that which is anicca, dukkha, and vipariṇāmadhamma (subject to change), as: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my attā (self)’?” “Of course not, Bhante.” “Is vedanā … saññā … saṅkhārā … viññāṇa permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, Bhante.” “Now, is that which is impermanent suffering or happiness?” “Suffering, Bhante.” “Now, is it proper to regard that which is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change, as: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my attā’?” “Of course not, Bhante.”

303. “Therefore, Bhikkhave, whatever rūpa there is, atītānāgatapaccuppanna (past, future, or present), ajjhatta (internal) or bahiddhā (external), oḷārika (coarse) or sukhuma (fine), hīna (inferior) or paṇīta (superior), far or near, all rūpa should be regarded yathābhūta (in reality), with sammappaññā (correct understanding), thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my attā.’

304. Whatever vedanā there is, past, future, or present, internal or external … and so on … far or near, all vedanā should be regarded as it really is, with correct understanding, thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my attā.’

305. Whatever saññā there is … and so on … whatever saṅkhārā there are, past, future, or present, internal or external … and so on … far or near, all saṅkhārā should be regarded as they really are, with correct understanding, thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my attā.’

306. Whatever viññāṇa there is, past, future, or present, internal or external, coarse or fine, inferior or superior, far or near, all viññāṇa should be regarded as it really is, with correct understanding, thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my attā.’

307. Thus seeing, Bhikkhave, the sutavā (learned) ariyasāvaka (disciple of the liberated) nibbindati (is disenchanted with) rūpa, is disenchanted with vedanā, is disenchanted with saññā, is disenchanted with saṅkhārā, is disenchanted with viññāṇa. Being disenchanted, he virajjati (becomes detached); from detachment he vimuccati (becomes liberated). In liberation there is the ñāṇa (knowledge): ‘liberated’. He pajānāti (knows clearly): ‘Birth (of suffering) is finished, the optimal life is lived, what had to be done is done, there is nothing further for this present state of existence.’”

308. This the Bhagavā said. The group of five bhikkhū, delighted, rejoiced in the Bhagavā’s words. And while this detailed exposition was being spoken, the cittāni (minds) of the group of five bhikkhū, anupādāya (not grasping), were liberated from the āsavā (defilements).

309. The seventh [discourse of the chapter].

Commentary

Section titled “Commentary”
  • The second discourse to the group of five, which the Vinaya tells again in the Pañcavaggiyakathā (3V/1.6, 89–105): the two tellings are twins sentence for sentence.
  • Every unit is already translated on buddhavacana, in the textbook’s chapter 7 and on the Collections page; this page keeps that wording, and the author’s note on atta as the eternal, independent self stands there.
  • anattā “not-self”, nibbindati “is disenchanted with”, virajjati “becomes detached”, ariyasāvaka “disciple of the liberated”: the glossary’s renderings.
  • The edition abbreviates saññā in 300 and the catechism of the other four collections in 302; the Vinaya telling gives them in full.

Parallels

Section titled “Parallels”

The Chinese parallel keeps the frame and the sequence: the Buddha at the sages’ dwelling in the deer park at Bārāṇasī (波羅㮈國仙人住處鹿野苑, p. 7c) addresses the “remaining five bhikkhū” (餘五比丘); form is not-self, since if it were self it would not give rise to disease and suffering and one could have it be thus and not thus, and because it is not-self it does; the catechism impermanent, suffering, of a nature to change; the formula for all form past, future or present, internal or external, coarse or fine, good or bad, far or near; the learned disciple’s liberation and the knowledge “birth is ended, the optimal life established, what was to be done done, no further existence” (p. 8a); and the five bhikkhū’s minds freed from the defilements (不起諸漏，心得解脫, p. 8a). The differences, read in CBETA’s text:

  • Abbreviation. The Chinese states the not-self argument, the catechism and the “all form” formula for form alone and dismisses the other four collections with “feeling, apperception, mental constructions and consciousness likewise” (受、想、行、識亦復如是, p. 7c, three times); the Pāḷi gives each collection in full except saññā (300) and the catechism of the last four (302).
  • The catechism’s third question. The Chinese asks whether the learned disciple would see in what is impermanent, suffering and changeable “self, something other than self, or the one in the other” (見是我、異我、相在, p. 7c), the three-fold formula, where the Pāḷi asks whether it is fit to regard as “this is mine, this I am, this is my self”.
  • The formula for all form. The Chinese has two terms, “all that is not I, not mine, to be contemplated as it really is” (彼一切非我、非我所，如實觀察, p. 7c), against the Pāḷi’s three.
  • The path to liberation. The Chinese adds that the learned disciple, seeing the five collections of fuel (五受陰) as not I and not mine, “takes up nothing in the world; not taking up, he is not attached; not attached, he realises nibbāna by himself” (於諸世間都無所取，無所取故無所著，無所著故自覺涅槃, pp. 7c–8a), where the Pāḷi has disenchantment, detachment and liberation (307).
  • The close. The Chinese puts the five bhikkhū’s liberation first and then the standard close, “the bhikkhū, hearing what the Buddha said, rejoiced and put it into practice” (歡喜奉行, p. 8a); the Pāḷi has the bhikkhū’s delight before their liberation (308) and no closing formula.
  • The opening exchange. The Pāḷi’s “Bhikkhavo!” — “Bhadante” (297) has no counterpart; the Chinese goes straight to the address (爾時，世尊告餘五比丘, p. 7c).

Go to previous page (Susimaparibbājakasutta (The Discourse on the Renunciant Susima)) / Go to parent page (Saṃyutta Nikāya) / Go to next page (Upādānaparipavattasutta (The Discourse on the Turnings Regarding Fuel))

Backlinks