SN 22.82

Puṇṇamasutta

Ekaṁ samayaṁ bhagavā sāvatthiyaṁ viharati pubbārāme migāramātupāsāde mahatā bhikkhusaṅghena saddhiṁ. Tena kho pana samayena bhagavā tadahuposathe pannarase puṇṇāya puṇṇamāya rattiyā bhikkhusaṅghaparivuto ajjhokāse nisinno hoti.

A Full Moon Night

At one time the Buddha was staying near Sāvatthī in the stilt longhouse of Migāra’s mother in the Eastern Monastery, together with a large Saṅgha of monks. Now, at that time it was the sabbath—the full moon on the fifteenth day—and the Buddha was sitting in the open surrounded by the Saṅgha of monks.

Atha kho aññataro bhikkhu uṭṭhāyāsanā ekaṁsaṁ uttarāsaṅgaṁ karitvā yena bhagavā tenañjaliṁ paṇāmetvā bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: “puccheyyāhaṁ, bhante, bhagavantaṁ kiñcideva desaṁ, sace me bhagavā okāsaṁ karoti pañhassa veyyākaraṇāyā”ti? “Tena hi tvaṁ, bhikkhu, sake āsane nisīditvā puccha yadākaṅkhasī”ti. “Evaṁ, bhante”ti kho so bhikkhu bhagavato paṭissutvā sake āsane nisīditvā bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: “ime nu kho, bhante, pañcupādānakkhandhā, seyyathidaṁ— rūpupādānakkhandho, vedanupādānakkhandho, saññupādānakkhandho, saṅkhārupādānakkhandho, viññāṇupādānakkhandho”ti.

Then one of the monks rose from his seat, arranged his robe over one shoulder, raised his cupped palms toward the Buddha, and said: “Sir, I’d like to ask the Buddha about a certain point, if you’d take the time to answer.” “Well then, monk, take your own seat and ask what you wish.” “Yes, sir,” replied that monk. He took his seat and said to the Buddha: “Sir, are these the five grasping aggregates, that is: form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness?”

“Ime kho, bhikkhu, pañcupādānakkhandhā; Seyyathidaṁ—rūpupādānakkhandho …pe… viññāṇupādānakkhandho”ti. “Sādhu, bhante”ti kho so bhikkhu bhagavato bhāsitaṁ abhinanditvā anumoditvā bhagavantaṁ uttariṁ pañhaṁ apucchi:

“Yes, they are,” replied the Buddha. Saying “Good, sir”, that monk approved and agreed with what the Buddha said. Then he asked another question:

“Ime kho pana, bhante, pañcupādānakkhandhā kiṁmūlakā”ti? “Ime kho, bhikkhu, pañcupādānakkhandhā chandamūlakā”ti …pe… taññeva nu kho, bhante, upādānaṁ te pañcupādānakkhandhā udāhu aññatra pañcahi upādānakkhandhehi upādānan”ti? “Na kho, bhikkhu, taññeva upādānaṁ te pañcupādānakkhandhā nāpi aññatra pañcahi upādānakkhandhehi upādānaṁ, api ca yo tattha chandarāgo taṁ tattha upādānan”ti. “Sādhu, bhante”ti kho so bhikkhu …pe… uttariṁ pañhaṁ apucchi:

“But sir, what is the root of these five grasping aggregates?” “These five grasping aggregates are rooted in desire.” … “But sir, is that grasping the exact same thing as the five grasping aggregates? Or is grasping one thing and the five grasping aggregates another?” “Neither. Rather, the desire and greed for them is the grasping there.” Saying “Good, sir”, that monk asked another question:

“Siyā pana, bhante, pañcupādānakkhandhesu chandarāgavemattatā”ti? “Siyā, bhikkhū”ti bhagavā avoca: “idha, bhikkhu, ekaccassa evaṁ hoti: ‘evaṁrūpo siyaṁ anāgatamaddhānaṁ, evaṁvedano siyaṁ anāgatamaddhānaṁ, evaṁsañño siyaṁ anāgatamaddhānaṁ, evaṁsaṅkhāro siyaṁ anāgatamaddhānaṁ, evaṁviññāṇo siyaṁ anāgatamaddhānan’ti. Evaṁ kho, bhikkhu, siyā pañcupādānakkhandhesu chandarāgavemattatā”ti. “Sādhu, bhante”ti kho so bhikkhu …pe… uttariṁ pañhaṁ apucchi:

“But sir, can there be disparity in desire and greed for the five grasping aggregates?” “There can,” said the Buddha. “It’s when someone thinks: ‘In the future, may I be of such form, such feeling, such perception, such choices, and such consciousness!’ That’s how there can be disparity in desire and greed for the five grasping aggregates.” Saying “Good, sir”, that monk asked another question:

“Kittāvatā nu kho, bhante, khandhānaṁ khandhādhivacanan”ti? “Yaṁ kiñci, bhikkhu, rūpaṁ atītānāgatapaccuppannaṁ ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṁ vā sukhumaṁ vā hīnaṁ vā paṇītaṁ vā yaṁ dūre santike vā, ayaṁ vuccati rūpakkhandho. Yā kāci vedanā … yā kāci saññā … ye keci saṅkhārā … yaṁ kiñci viññāṇaṁ atītānāgatapaccuppannaṁ ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṁ vā sukhumaṁ vā hīnaṁ vā paṇītaṁ vā yaṁ dūre santike vā, ayaṁ vuccati viññāṇakkhandho. Ettāvatā kho, bhikkhu, khandhānaṁ khandhādhivacanan”ti. “Sādhu, bhante”ti kho so bhikkhu …pe… apucchi:

“Sir, what is the scope of the term ‘aggregates’ as applied to the aggregates?” “Any kind of form at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; solid or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near: this is called the aggregate of form. Any kind of feeling at all … Any kind of perception at all … Any kind of choices at all … Any kind of consciousness at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; solid or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near: this is called the aggregate of consciousness. That’s the scope of the term ‘aggregates’ as applied to the aggregates.” Saying “Good, sir”, that monk asked another question:

“Ko nu kho, bhante, hetu ko paccayo rūpakkhandhassa paññāpanāya; ko hetu ko paccayo vedanākkhandhassa paññāpanāya; ko hetu ko paccayo saññākkhandhassa paññāpanāya; ko hetu ko paccayo saṅkhārakkhandhassa paññāpanāya; ko hetu ko paccayo viññāṇakkhandhassa paññāpanāyā”ti? “Cattāro kho, bhikkhu, mahābhūtā hetu, cattāro mahābhūtā paccayo rūpakkhandhassa paññāpanāya. Phasso hetu phasso paccayo vedanākkhandhassa paññāpanāya. Phasso hetu phasso paccayo saññākkhandhassa paññāpanāya. Phasso hetu, phasso paccayo saṅkhārakkhandhassa paññāpanāya. Nāmarūpaṁ hetu, nāmarūpaṁ paccayo viññāṇakkhandhassa paññāpanāyā”ti. “Sādhu, bhante”ti kho so bhikkhu …pe… apucchi:

“What is the cause, sir, what is the reason why the aggregate of form is found? What is the cause, what is the reason why the aggregate of feeling … perception … choices … consciousness is found?” “The four principal states are the reason why the aggregate of form is found. Contact is the reason why the aggregates of feeling, perception, and choices are found. Name and form are the reasons why the aggregate of consciousness is found.” Saying “Good, sir”, that monk asked another question:

“Kathaṁ nu kho, bhante, sakkāyadiṭṭhi hotī”ti? “Idha, bhikkhu, assutavā puthujjano ariyānaṁ adassāvī ariyadhammassa akovido ariyadhamme avinīto, sappurisānaṁ adassāvī sappurisadhammassa akovido sappurisadhamme avinīto rūpaṁ attato samanupassati, rūpavantaṁ vā attānaṁ; attani vā rūpaṁ, rūpasmiṁ vā attānaṁ; vedanaṁ … saññaṁ … saṅkhāre … viññāṇaṁ attato samanupassati, viññāṇavantaṁ vā attānaṁ; attani vā viññāṇaṁ, viññāṇasmiṁ vā attānaṁ. Evaṁ kho, bhikkhu, sakkāyadiṭṭhi hotī”ti. “Sādhu, bhante”ti kho so bhikkhu …pe… apucchi:

“Sir, how does substantialist view come about?” “It’s when an unlearned ordinary person has not seen the noble ones, and is neither skilled nor trained in the teaching of the noble ones. They’ve not seen true persons, and are neither skilled nor trained in the teaching of the true persons. They regard form as self, self as having form, form in self, or self in form. They regard feeling … perception … choices … consciousness as self, self as having consciousness, consciousness in self, or self in consciousness. That’s how substantialist view comes about.” Saying “Good, sir”, that monk … asked another question:

“Kathaṁ pana, bhante, sakkāyadiṭṭhi na hotī”ti? “Idha, bhikkhu, sutavā ariyasāvako ariyānaṁ dassāvī ariyadhammassa kovido ariyadhamme suvinīto, sappurisānaṁ dassāvī sappurisadhammassa kovido sappurisadhamme suvinīto na rūpaṁ attato samanupassati, na rūpavantaṁ vā attānaṁ; na attani vā rūpaṁ, na rūpasmiṁ vā attānaṁ; na vedanaṁ … na saññaṁ … na saṅkhāre … na viññāṇaṁ attato samanupassati, na viññāṇavantaṁ vā attānaṁ; na attani vā viññāṇaṁ, na viññāṇasmiṁ vā attānaṁ. Evaṁ kho, bhikkhu, sakkāyadiṭṭhi na hotī”ti. “Sādhu, bhante”ti kho so bhikkhu …pe… apucchi:

“But sir, how does substantialist view not come about?” “It’s when a learned noble disciple has seen the noble ones, and is skilled and trained in the teaching of the noble ones. They’ve seen true persons, and are skilled and trained in the teaching of the true persons. They don’t regard form as self, self as having form, form in self, or self in form. They don’t regard feeling … perception … choices … consciousness as self, self as having consciousness, consciousness in self, or self in consciousness. That’s how substantialist view does not come about.” Saying “Good, sir”, that monk … asked another question:

“Ko nu kho, bhante, rūpassa assādo, ko ādīnavo, kiṁ nissaraṇaṁ; ko vedanāya … ko saññāya … ko saṅkhārānaṁ … ko viññāṇassa assādo, ko ādīnavo, kiṁ nissaraṇan”ti? “Yaṁ kho, bhikkhu, rūpaṁ paṭicca uppajjati sukhaṁ somanassaṁ—ayaṁ rūpassa assādo. Yaṁ rūpaṁ aniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ—ayaṁ rūpassa ādīnavo. Yo rūpasmiṁ chandarāgavinayo chandarāgappahānaṁ—idaṁ rūpassa nissaraṇaṁ. Yaṁ vedanaṁ paṭicca … yaṁ saññaṁ paṭicca … ye saṅkhāre paṭicca … yaṁ viññāṇaṁ paṭicca uppajjati sukhaṁ somanassaṁ—ayaṁ viññāṇassa assādo. Yaṁ viññāṇaṁ aniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ—ayaṁ viññāṇassa ādīnavo. Yo viññāṇasmiṁ chandarāgavinayo chandarāgappahānaṁ—idaṁ viññāṇassa nissaraṇan”ti. “Sādhu, bhante”ti kho so bhikkhu bhagavato bhāsitaṁ abhinanditvā anumoditvā bhagavantaṁ uttariṁ pañhaṁ apucchi:

“Sir, what’s the gratification, the drawback, and the escape when it comes to form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness?” “The pleasure and happiness that arise from form: this is its gratification. That form is impermanent, suffering, and perishable: this is its drawback. Removing and giving up desire and greed for form: this is its escape. The pleasure and happiness that arise from feeling … perception … choices … consciousness: this is its gratification. That consciousness is impermanent, suffering, and perishable: this is its drawback. Removing and giving up desire and greed for consciousness: this is its escape.” Saying “Good, sir”, that monk approved and agreed with what the Buddha said. Then he asked another question:

“Kathaṁ nu kho, bhante, jānato, kathaṁ passato imasmiñca saviññāṇake kāye bahiddhā ca sabbanimittesu ahaṅkāramamaṅkāramānānusayā na hontī”ti? “Yaṁ kiñci, bhikkhu, 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 passati. Yā kāci vedanā … yā kāci saññā … ye keci saṅkhārā … 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 passati. Evaṁ kho, bhikkhu, jānato evaṁ passato imasmiñca saviññāṇake kāye bahiddhā ca sabbanimittesu ahaṅkāramamaṅkāramānānusayā na hontī”ti.

“Sir, how does one know and see so that there’s no I-making, mine-making, or underlying tendency to conceit for this conscious body and externally for all signs?” “One truly sees any kind of form at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; solid or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near: all form—with right understanding: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’ One truly sees any kind of feeling … perception … choices … consciousness at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; solid or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near: all consciousness—with right understanding: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’ That’s how to know and see so that there’s no I-making, mine-making, or underlying tendency to conceit for this conscious body and externally for all signs.”

Tena kho pana samayena aññatarassa bhikkhuno evaṁ cetaso parivitakko udapādi: “iti kira bho rūpaṁ anattā, vedanā … saññā … saṅkhārā … viññāṇaṁ anattā; anattakatāni kammāni kathamattānaṁ phusissantī”ti. Atha kho bhagavā tassa bhikkhuno cetasā ceto parivitakkamaññāya bhikkhū āmantesi:

Now at that time one of the monks had the thought: “So it seems, worthy sir, that form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness are not-self. Then how will the deeds done by not-self affect the self?” Then the Buddha, knowing that monk’s train of thought, addressed the monks:

“Ṭhānaṁ kho panetaṁ, bhikkhave, vijjati yaṁ idhekacco moghapuriso avidvā avijjāgato taṇhādhipateyyena cetasā satthusāsanaṁ atidhāvitabbaṁ maññeyya. ‘Iti kira, bho, rūpaṁ anattā, vedanā … saññā … saṅkhārā … viññāṇaṁ anattā. Anattakatāni kammāni kathamattānaṁ phusissantī’ti? Paṭipucchāvinītā kho me tumhe, bhikkhave, tatra tatra tesu tesu dhammesu.

“It’s possible that some futile person here—unknowing and ignorant, his mind dominated by craving—thinks he can overstep the Teacher’s instructions. He thinks: ‘So it seems, worthy sir, that form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness are not-self. Then how will the deeds done by not-self affect the self?’ Now, monks, you have been educated by me in questioning with regard to all these things in all such cases.

Taṁ kiṁ maññatha, bhikkhave, rūpaṁ niccaṁ vā aniccaṁ vā”ti? “Aniccaṁ, bhante”. “Vedanā … saññā … saṅkhārā … viññāṇaṁ niccaṁ vā aniccaṁ vā”ti? “Aniccaṁ, bhante”. “Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vā taṁ sukhaṁ vā”ti? “Dukkhaṁ, bhante”. “Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ, kallaṁ nu taṁ samanupassituṁ: ‘etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’”ti? “No hetaṁ, bhante”. Tasmātiha …pe… evaṁ passaṁ …pe… nāparaṁ itthattāyāti pajānātī”ti.

What do you think, monks? Is form permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, sir.” “Is feeling … perception … choices … consciousness permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, sir.” “But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?” “Suffering, sir.” “But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?” “No, sir.” “So you should truly see … Seeing this … They understand: ‘… there is nothing further for this place.’”

“Dve khandhā taññeva siyaṁ, adhivacanañca hetunā; Sakkāyena duve vuttā, assādaviññāṇakena ca; Ete dasavidhā vuttā, hoti bhikkhu pucchāyā”ti.

“Two on the aggregates; exactly the same; and can there be; on the term; and on the cause; two questions on substantial reality; gratification; and that with consciousness: these are the ten questions the monk came to ask.”