English
in their three phases and twelve aspects, was not thoroughly purified as it really is, so long, monks, I did not declare to the world with its devas, Māras, and Brahmās, to the generation with its recluses and brahmins, with its devas and humans, that I had awakened to the unsurpassed perfect enlightenment. But when, monks, my knowledge and vision of these Four Noble Truths, in their three phases and twelve aspects, was thoroughly purified as it really is, then, monks, I declared to the world with its devas, Māras, and Brahmās, to the generation with its recluses and brahmins, with its devas and humans, that I had awakened to the unsurpassed perfect enlightenment. And knowledge and vision arose in me: ‘My liberation is unshakeable; this is my last birth; now there is no more renewed existence.’’’ This is what the Blessed One said. Delighted, the group of five monks rejoiced in the Blessed One’s words. is not in the Pāli and Burmese editions]. And while this exposition was being spoken, to Venerable Koṇḍañña arose the dustless, stainless Dhamma-eye: “Whatever is of the nature to arise, all that is of the nature to cease.” 17. And when the Wheel of Dhamma had been set in motion by the Blessed One, the Earth-dwelling devas proclaimed the sound: “This unsurpassed Wheel of Dhamma has been set in motion by the Blessed One at Isipatana, the Deer Park, near Bārāṇasī, a Wheel that cannot be turned back by any ascetic or brahmin, deva or Māra, Brahmā or anyone in the world.” Hearing the sound of the Earth-dwelling devas, the devas of the Four Great Kings proclaimed the sound… Hearing the sound of the devas of the Four Great Kings, the Tāvatiṃsa devas… the Yāma devas… the Tusita devas… the Nimmānaratī devas… the Paranimmita-vasavattī devas… the Brahmā-group devas proclaimed the sound: “This unsurpassed Wheel of Dhamma has been set in motion by the Blessed One at Isipatana, the Deer Park, near Bārāṇasī, a Wheel that cannot be turned back by any ascetic or brahmin, deva or Māra, Brahmā or anyone in the world.” Thus, in that moment, in that instant [the two words ‘tena layena’ are not in the Sinhalese and Siamese editions], in that twinkling, the sound ascended up to the Brahmā-world. And this ten-thousand-world-system quaked, shook, and trembled; and an immeasurable, glorious radiance appeared in the world, surpassing the divine power of the devas. Then the Blessed One uttered this inspired utterance: “Koṇḍañña has indeed understood, friends! Koṇḍañña has indeed understood, friends!” Thus, this was how the name ‘Aññāsikoṇḍañña’ (Koṇḍañña Who Has Understood) came to be for Venerable Koṇḍañña. 18. Then Venerable Aññāsikoṇḍañña, having seen the Dhamma, attained the Dhamma, understood the Dhamma, penetrated the Dhamma, crossed over doubt, dispelled perplexity, gained confidence, and become independent of others in the Teacher’s Dispensation, said to the Blessed One: “May I receive, venerable sir, the going forth in the presence of the Blessed One, may I receive the full ordination?” “Come, monk!” said the Blessed One. he said – ‘‘The Dhamma is well-proclaimed, lead the holy life for the complete ending of suffering.’’ That was the ordination for that venerable one. 19. Then the Blessed One instructed and exhorted the remaining bhikkhus with a Dhamma talk. Then for Venerable Vappa and Venerable Bhaddiya, as they were being instructed and exhorted by the Blessed One with a Dhamma talk, the dust-free, stainless Dhamma-eye arose – Whatever is of the nature to arise, all that is of the nature to cease. They, having seen the Dhamma, attained the Dhamma, understood the Dhamma, penetrated the Dhamma, having crossed over doubt, having dispelled perplexity, having gained confidence, independent of others in the Teacher's Dispensation, said to the Blessed One – ‘‘May we, Venerable Sir, receive the going forth in the Blessed One’s presence, may we receive ordination?’’ ‘‘Come, bhikkhus,’’ the Blessed One said – ‘‘The Dhamma is well-proclaimed, lead the holy life for the complete ending of suffering.’’ That was the ordination for those venerable ones. Then the Blessed One, after his meal, instructed and exhorted the remaining bhikkhus with a Dhamma talk. What three bhikkhus brought back after going for alms, with that the group of six sustained themselves. Then for Venerable Mahānāma and Venerable Assaji, as they were being instructed and exhorted by the Blessed One with a Dhamma talk, the dust-free, stainless Dhamma-eye arose – Whatever is of the nature to arise, all that is of the nature to cease. They, having seen the Dhamma, attained the Dhamma, understood the Dhamma, penetrated the Dhamma, having crossed over doubt, having dispelled perplexity, having gained confidence, independent of others in the Teacher's Dispensation, said to the Blessed One – ‘‘May we, Venerable Sir, receive the going forth in the Blessed One’s presence, may we receive ordination?’’ ‘‘Come, bhikkhus,’’ the Blessed One said – ‘‘The Dhamma is well-proclaimed, lead the holy life for the complete ending of suffering.’’ That was the ordination for those venerable ones. 20. Then the Blessed One, the group of five... He then addressed the monks: Form, monks, is not-self. If form, monks, were self, this form would not lead to affliction, and one could say of form: ‘Let my form be thus, let my form not be thus.’ But since, monks, form is not-self, therefore form leads to affliction, and one cannot say of form: ‘Let my form be thus, let my form not be thus.’ Feeling, not-self. If feeling, monks, were self, this feeling would not lead to affliction, and one could say of feeling: ‘Let my feeling be thus, let my feeling not be thus.’ But since, monks, feeling is not-self, therefore feeling leads to affliction, and one cannot say of feeling: ‘Let my feeling be thus, let my feeling not be thus.’ Perception, not-self. If perception, monks, were self, this perception would not lead to affliction, and one could say of perception: ‘Let my perception be thus, let my perception not be thus.’ But since, monks, perception is not-self, therefore perception leads to affliction, and one cannot say of perception: ‘Let my perception be thus, let my perception not be thus.’ Formations, not-self. If formations, monks, were self, these formations would not lead to affliction, and one could say of formations: ‘Let my formations be thus, let my formations not be thus.’ But since, monks, formations are not-self, therefore formations lead to affliction, and one cannot say of formations: ‘Let my formations be thus, let my formations not be thus.’ Consciousness, not-self. If consciousness, monks, were self, this consciousness would not lead to affliction, and one could say of consciousness: ‘Let my consciousness be thus, let my consciousness not be thus.’ But since, monks, consciousness is not-self, therefore consciousness leads to affliction, leads to affliction, and it is not obtained in consciousness: 'Let my consciousness be thus, let my consciousness not be thus.' 21. "What do you think, monks, is form permanent or impermanent?" "Impermanent, venerable sir." "But what is impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?" "Suffering, venerable sir." "But what is impermanent, suffering, subject to change, is it fit to regard it thus: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'?" "No, venerable sir." "Is feeling permanent or impermanent?" "Impermanent, venerable sir." "But what is impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?" "Suffering, venerable sir." "But what is impermanent, suffering, subject to change, is it fit to regard it thus: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'?" "No, venerable sir." "Is perception permanent or impermanent?" "Impermanent, venerable sir." "But what is impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?" "Suffering, venerable sir." "But what is impermanent, suffering, subject to change, is it fit to regard it thus: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'?" "No, venerable sir." "Are volitional formations permanent or impermanent?" "Impermanent, venerable sir." "But what is impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?" "Suffering, venerable sir." "But what is impermanent, suffering, subject to change, is it fit to regard it thus: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'?" "No, venerable sir." "Is consciousness permanent or impermanent?" "Impermanent, venerable sir." "But what is impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?" "Suffering, venerable sir." "But what is impermanent, suffering, subject to change, is it fit to regard it thus: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'?" "No, venerable sir." 22. "Therefore, monks, whatever form there is, past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all form – 'This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self' – thus should it be seen as it really is with right wisdom." Whatever feeling, past, future, present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all feeling – "This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self" – thus should this be seen as it really is with right wisdom. Whatever perception, past, future, present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all perception – "This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self" – thus should this be seen as it really is with right wisdom. Whatever formations, past, future, present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all formations – "This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self" – thus should this be seen as it really is with right wisdom. Whatever consciousness, past, future, present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all consciousness – "This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self" – thus should this be seen as it really is with right wisdom. 23. "Seeing thus, monks, the instructed noble disciple becomes disenchanted with form,