Ekaṁ samayaṁ bhagavā bārāṇasiyaṁ viharati isipatane migadāye. Tatra kho bhagavā pañcavaggiye bhikkhū āmantesi:
At one time, the Blessed One was staying in the Deer Park at Isipatana near Varanasi. There, the Blessed One addressed the group of five bhikkhus:
“bhikkhavo”ti.
“Bhikkhus!”
“Bhadante”ti te bhikkhū bhagavato paccassosuṁ. Bhagavā etadavoca:
“Venerable sir,” those bhikkhus responded to the Blessed One. The Blessed One said this:
“Rūpaṁ, bhikkhave, anattā. Rūpañca hidaṁ, bhikkhave, attā abhavissa, nayidaṁ rūpaṁ ābādhāya saṁvatteyya, labbhetha ca rūpe: ‘evaṁ me rūpaṁ hotu, evaṁ me rūpaṁ mā ahosī’ti. Yasmā ca kho, bhikkhave, rūpaṁ anattā, tasmā rūpaṁ ābādhāya saṁvattati, na ca labbhati rūpe: ‘evaṁ me rūpaṁ hotu, evaṁ me rūpaṁ mā ahosī’ti.
“|Form::materiality, material existence, experience of the material world, i.e. encompassing both one’s body and external objects, whether near or far, gross or subtle, deficient or refined; first of the five aggregates [rūpa]|, bhikkhus, is |not-self::impersonal, not oneself, non-subjective, not suitable to identify with, coreless, essenceless [anatta]|. And if, bhikkhus, this form were self, then this form would not lead to |affliction::disease, sickness, illness [ābādha]|, and it would be possible [for one] to say with regard to form: ‘Let my form be like this, let my form not be like that.’ But because, bhikkhus, form is not-self, therefore form leads to affliction, and one cannot truly say regarding form: ‘Let my form be like this, let my form not be like that.’
Vedanā anattā. Vedanā ca hidaṁ, bhikkhave, attā abhavissa, nayidaṁ vedanā ābādhāya saṁvatteyya, labbhetha ca vedanāya: ‘evaṁ me vedanā hotu, evaṁ me vedanā mā ahosī’ti. Yasmā ca kho, bhikkhave, vedanā anattā, tasmā vedanā ābādhāya saṁvattati, na ca labbhati vedanāya: ‘evaṁ me vedanā hotu, evaṁ me vedanā mā ahosī’ti.
|Felt experience::pleasant, neutral, or painful sensation, feeling felt on contact through eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind; second of the five aggregates [vedanā]|, bhikkhus, is not-self. And if, bhikkhus, this felt experience were self, then this felt experience would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible [for one] to say with regard to felt experience: ‘Let my felt experience be like this, let my felt experience not be like that.’ But because, bhikkhus, felt experience is not-self, therefore felt experience leads to affliction, and one cannot truly say regarding felt experience: ‘Let my felt experience be like this, let my felt experience not be like that.’
Saññā anattā. Saññā ca hidaṁ, bhikkhave, attā abhavissa, nayidaṁ saññā ābādhāya saṁvatteyya, labbhetha ca saññāya: 'evaṁ me saññā hotu, evaṁ me saññā mā ahosī'ti. Yasmā ca kho, bhikkhave, saññā anattā, tasmā saññā ābādhāya saṁvattati, na ca labbhati saññāya: 'evaṁ me saññā hotu, evaṁ me saññā mā ahosī'ti.
|Perception::The mental process of recognizing and giving meaning to experience. It marks sensory information by signs, labels, or associations drawn from memory and the field of contact. Perception shapes how one experiences the world; third of the five aggregates [sañña]|, bhikkhus, is not-self. And if, bhikkhus, this perception were self, then this perception would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible [for one] to say with regard to perception: ‘Let my perception be like this, let my perception not be like that.’ But because, bhikkhus, perception is not-self, therefore perception leads to affliction, and one cannot truly say regarding perception: ‘Let my perception be like this, let my perception not be like that.’
saṅkhārā anattā. Saṅkhārā ca hidaṁ, bhikkhave, attā abhavissaṁsu, nayidaṁ saṅkhārā ābādhāya saṁvatteyyuṁ, labbhetha ca saṅkhāresu: ‘evaṁ me saṅkhārā hontu, evaṁ me saṅkhārā mā ahesun’ti. Yasmā ca kho, bhikkhave, saṅkhārā anattā, tasmā saṅkhārā ābādhāya saṁvattanti, na ca labbhati saṅkhāresu: ‘evaṁ me saṅkhārā hontu, evaṁ me saṅkhārā mā ahesun’ti.
|intentional constructs::intentions, volitions, choices; mental and bodily volitional activities; thought formations and constructed experiences (including proliferative tendencies); kamma-producing processes; fourth of the five aggregates [saṅkhāra]|, bhikkhus, are not-self. And if, bhikkhus, these intentional constructs were self, then these intentional constructs would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible [for one] to say with regard to intentional constructs: ‘Let my intentional constructs be like this, let my intentional constructs not be like that.’ But because, bhikkhus, intentional constructs are not-self, therefore intentional constructs lead to affliction, and one cannot truly say regarding intentional constructs: ‘Let my intentional constructs be like this, let my intentional constructs not be like that.’
Viññāṇaṁ anattā. Viññāṇañca hidaṁ, bhikkhave, attā abhavissa, nayidaṁ viññāṇaṁ ābādhāya saṁvatteyya, labbhetha ca viññāṇe: ‘evaṁ me viññāṇaṁ hotu, evaṁ me viññāṇaṁ mā ahosī’ti. Yasmā ca kho, bhikkhave, viññāṇaṁ anattā, tasmā viññāṇaṁ ābādhāya saṁvattati, na ca labbhati viññāṇe: ‘evaṁ me viññāṇaṁ hotu, evaṁ me viññāṇaṁ mā ahosī’ti.
|consciousness::quality of awareness — distinctive knowing that arises in dependence on the meeting of eye and form, ear and sound, nose and odor, tongue and taste, body and tangible object, mind and mind object; fifth of the five aggregates [viññāṇa]|, bhikkhus, is not-self. And if, bhikkhus, this consciousness were self, then this consciousness would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible [for one] to say with regard to consciousness: ‘Let my consciousness be like this, let my consciousness not be like that.’ But because, bhikkhus, consciousness is not-self, therefore consciousness leads to affliction, and one cannot truly say regarding consciousness: ‘Let my consciousness be like this, let my consciousness not be like that.’”
Taṁ kiṁ maññatha, bhikkhave, rūpaṁ niccaṁ vā aniccaṁ vā”ti?
What do you |think::presume, suppose, imagine, conceive [maññati]|, bhikkhus, is form |permanent::stable, not in flux [nicca]| or |impermanent::not lasting, transient, unreliable [anicca]|?”
“Aniccaṁ, bhante”.
“Impermanent, venerable sir.”
“Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vā taṁ sukhaṁ vā”ti?
“And that which is impermanent—is it |dissatisfactory::uncomfortable, unpleasant [dukkha]| or |happiness::contentment, ease, pleasant abiding [sukha]|?”
“Dukkhaṁ, bhante”.
“Dissatisfactory, venerable sir.”
“Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ, kallaṁ nu taṁ samanupassituṁ: ‘etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’”ti?
“And that which is impermanent, dissatisfactory, and |subject to change::of the nature of alteration, decay [vipariṇāmadhamma]|—is it fitting to regard that as: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“Indeed not, venerable sir.”
“Vedanā … saññā … saṅkhārā … viññāṇaṁ niccaṁ vā aniccaṁ vā”ti?
What do you think, bhikkhus, is felt experience ... perception ... intentional constructs ... consciousness permanent or impermanent?”
“Aniccaṁ, bhante”.
“Impermanent, venerable sir.”
“Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vā taṁ sukhaṁ vā”ti?
“And that which is impermanent—is it dissatisfactory or happiness?”
“Dukkhaṁ, bhante”.
“Dissatisfactory, venerable sir.”
“Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ, kallaṁ nu taṁ samanupassituṁ: ‘etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’”ti?
“And that which is impermanent, dissatisfactory, and subject to change—is it fitting to regard that as: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“Indeed not, venerable sir.”
“Tasmātiha, bhikkhave, yaṁ kiñci rūpaṁ atītānāgatapaccuppannaṁ ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṁ vā sukhumaṁ vā hīnaṁ vā paṇītaṁ vā yaṁ dūre santike vā, sabbaṁ rūpaṁ: ‘netaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṁ yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṁ.
“Therefore, bhikkhus, any kind of form whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, deficient or refined, far or near—all form is to be seen with proper wisdom as it truly is: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’
Yā kāci vedanā atītānāgatapaccuppannā ajjhattā vā bahiddhā vā …pe… yā dūre santike vā, sabbā vedanā: ‘netaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṁ yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṁ.
Any kind of felt experience whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, deficient or refined, far or near—all felt experience is to be seen with proper wisdom as it truly is: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’
Yā kāci saññā …pe…
Any kind of perception whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, deficient or refined, far or near—all perception is to be seen with proper wisdom as it truly is: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’
ye keci saṅkhārā atītānāgatapaccuppannā ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā …pe… ye dūre santike vā, sabbe saṅkhārā: ‘netaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṁ yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṁ.
Any kind of intentional constructs whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, deficient or refined, far or near—all intentional constructs are to be seen with proper wisdom as they truly are: ‘These are not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’
Yaṁ kiñci viññāṇaṁ atītānāgatapaccuppannaṁ ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṁ vā sukhumaṁ vā hīnaṁ vā paṇītaṁ vā yaṁ dūre santike vā, sabbaṁ viññāṇaṁ: ‘netaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṁ yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṁ.
Any kind of consciousness whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, deficient or refined, far or near—all consciousness is to be seen with proper wisdom as it truly is: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’”
Evaṁ passaṁ, bhikkhave, sutavā ariyasāvako rūpasmimpi nibbindati, vedanāyapi nibbindati, saññāyapi nibbindati, saṅkhāresupi nibbindati, viññāṇasmimpi nibbindati. Nibbindaṁ virajjati; virāgā vimuccati. Vimuttasmiṁ vimuttamiti ñāṇaṁ hoti.
Seeing thus, bhikkhus, the |learned::well-studied, instructed [sutavant]| disciple of the Noble Ones becomes |disenchanted with::disillusioned with [nibbindati]| form, becomes disenchanted with felt experience, becomes disenchanted with perception, becomes disenchanted with intentional constructs, becomes disenchanted with consciousness. Experiencing disenchantment, they become |dispassionate::detached [virajjati]|; through dispassion, there is release. When released, there arises the knowledge: ‘Released.’
‘Khīṇā jāti, vusitaṁ brahmacariyaṁ, kataṁ karaṇīyaṁ, nāparaṁ itthattāyā’ti pajānātī”ti.
He understands: ‘Birth is ended, the spiritual life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more coming to any state of existence.’
Idamavoca bhagavā. Attamanā pañcavaggiyā bhikkhū bhagavato bhāsitaṁ abhinanduṁ. Imasmiñca pana veyyākaraṇasmiṁ bhaññamāne pañcavaggiyānaṁ bhikkhūnaṁ anupādāya āsavehi cittāni vimucciṁsūti.
The Blessed One said this. The group of five bhikkhus were satisfied and rejoiced in the Blessed One’s words. And while this discourse was being spoken, the minds of the group of five bhikkhus were liberated from the |mental defilements::mental outflows, discharges, taints [āsava]| through non-clinging.