English
for the designation of the aggregate of volitional formations? What is the cause, what is the condition for the designation of the aggregate of consciousness?” “The four great elements, bhikkhu, are the cause, the four great elements are the condition for the designation of the aggregate of form. Contact is the cause, contact is the condition for the designation of the aggregate of feeling. Contact is the cause, contact is the condition for the designation of the aggregate of perception. Contact is the cause, contact is the condition for the designation of the aggregate of volitional formations. Name-and-form, bhikkhu, is the cause, name-and-form is the condition for the designation of the aggregate of consciousness.” 87. “How then, venerable sir, does identity view arise?” “Here, bhikkhu, an uninstructed ordinary person, not seeing the noble ones, unskilled in the Dhamma of the noble ones, undisciplined in the Dhamma of the noble ones, not seeing the true men, unskilled in the Dhamma of the true men, undisciplined in the Dhamma of the true men, regards form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form; regards feeling as self, or self as possessing feeling, or feeling as in self, or self as in feeling; regards perception as self, or self as possessing perception, or perception as in self, or self as in perception; regards volitional formations as self, or self as possessing volitional formations, or volitional formations as in self... or self in the formations; perceives consciousness as self, or self as having consciousness, or consciousness in self, or self in consciousness. Thus, indeed, monk, is identity view." "But how, venerable sir, is there no identity view?" "Here, monk, a well-taught noble disciple, who sees the noble ones, skilled in the noble Dhamma, well-trained in the noble Dhamma, who sees the true men, skilled in the Dhamma of true men, well-trained in the Dhamma of true men, does not perceive form as self, nor self as having form, nor form in self, nor self in form; does not perceive feeling as self, nor self as having feeling, nor feeling in self, nor self in feeling; does not perceive perception as self, nor self as having perception, nor perception in self, nor self in perception; does not perceive formations as self, nor self as having formations, nor formations in self, nor self in formations; does not perceive consciousness as self, nor self as having consciousness, nor consciousness in self, nor self in consciousness. Thus, indeed, monk, there is no identity view." 88. "What, venerable sir, is the gratification in form, what is the danger, what is the escape? What is the gratification in feeling, what is the danger, what is the escape? What is the gratification in perception, what is the danger, what is the escape? What is the gratification in formations, what is the danger, what is the escape? What is the gratification in consciousness, what is the danger, what is the escape?" "Monk, that happiness and joy that arises dependent on form, this is the gratification in form. That form is impermanent, suffering, subject to change, this is the danger in form. The removal of desire and lust for form, the abandoning of desire and lust, this is the escape from form. Monk, that which arises dependent on feeling... dependent on perception... dependent on formations... dependent on consciousness, happiness and joy arises, this is the gratification in consciousness. That consciousness is impermanent... suffering, subject to change. This is the danger in consciousness. The removal of desire and lust for consciousness, the abandoning of desire and lust, this is the escape from consciousness. 89. "How, venerable sir, by knowing what, by seeing what, in this body with consciousness and in all external signs, do the latent tendencies of 'I-making,' 'mine-making,' and conceit not arise?" "Whatever form there is, monk – 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 one sees it as it really is with right wisdom. Whatever feeling... whatever perception... whatever volitional formations... whatever consciousness – past, future, or 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 one sees it as it really is with right wisdom. It is in this way, monk, by knowing thus, by seeing thus, that in this body with consciousness and in all external signs, the latent tendencies of 'I-making,' 'mine-making,' and conceit do not arise." 90. Then, indeed, a certain monk had this thought arise in his mind: "So then, sirs, form is not self, feeling is not self, perception is not self, volitional formations are not self, consciousness is not self; if deeds are done by what is not self, how will they affect a self?" Then the Blessed One, knowing with his mind the thought in that monk's mind, addressed the monks: "It is indeed possible, monks, that some foolish person here, ignorant, steeped in ignorance, with a mind dominated by craving, might think to overstep the Teacher's teaching, saying: 'So then, sirs, form is not self, feeling is not self, perception is not self, volitional formations are not self, consciousness is not self; if deeds are done by what is not self, how will they affect a self?'" Trained I will question you, monks, on various teachings. What do you think, monks, is form permanent or impermanent? Impermanent, venerable sir. But what is impermanent, is that 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. What do you think, monks, are feeling... perception... mental formations... consciousness permanent or impermanent? Impermanent, venerable sir. But what is impermanent, is that 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. Therefore, monks, any kind of form whatsoever— past, future, or present; internal or external; gross or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near— all form should be seen as it really is with right wisdom: 'This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self'. Any kind of feeling... any kind of perception... any kind of mental formations... any kind of consciousness whatsoever— past, future, or present; internal or external; gross or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near— all consciousness should be seen as it really is with right wisdom: 'This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self'. Seeing thus, monks, the instructed noble disciple becomes disenchanted with form, becomes disenchanted with feeling, becomes disenchanted with perception, becomes disenchanted with mental formations, becomes disenchanted with consciousness. Being disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is liberated. When liberated, there is the knowledge: 'Liberated'. 'Birth is destroyed, the holy life has been lived, what was to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being'— he understands this. This is what the Blessed One said. Delighted, those The monks rejoiced in the Blessed One's words. And as this exposition was being spoken, the minds of sixty monks were liberated from the taints, without clinging. The Mahāpuṇṇama Sutta, the ninth, is finished. 10. The Cūḷapuṇṇama Sutta 91. Thus have I heard: On one occasion the Blessed One was staying at Sāvatthī, in the Eastern Park, in Migāra's mother's palace. Now on that occasion, on the Uposatha day, the fifteenth, the night of the full moon, the Blessed One was seated in the open air, surrounded by the assembly of monks. Then the Blessed One, having surveyed the silent assembly of monks, addressed the monks: "Could an ignoble person, monks, recognize an ignoble person, 'This venerable one is ignoble'?" "No, venerable sir." "Good, monks; it is impossible, monks, there is no opportunity for an ignoble person to recognize an ignoble person, 'This venerable one is ignoble.' Could an ignoble person, monks, recognize a noble person, 'This venerable one is noble'?" "No, venerable sir." "Good, monks; this too, monks, is impossible, there is no opportunity for an ignoble person to recognize a noble person, 'This venerable one is noble.' An ignoble person, monks, is endowed with ignoble qualities, has ignoble devotion, has ignoble thoughts, has ignoble counsel, has ignoble speech, has ignoble actions, has ignoble views; he gives ignoble gifts." "And how, monks, is an ignoble person endowed with ignoble qualities? Here, monks, an ignoble person is faithless, shameless, reckless, of little learning, lazy, of confused mindfulness, unwise. Thus, monks, is an ignoble person endowed with ignoble qualities. "And how, monks, does an ignoble person have ignoble devotion? Here, monks, those ascetics who are not brahmins, who are faithless, shameless, reckless, unlearned, lazy, forgetful, and unwise, these are his friends, these are his companions. Thus, monks, an ignoble person associates with ignoble people. “And how, monks, does an ignoble person think ignoble thoughts? Here, monks, an ignoble person thinks of harming himself, thinks of harming others, thinks of harming both. Thus, monks, an ignoble person thinks ignoble thoughts. “And how, monks, does an ignoble person counsel ignoble counsel? Here, monks, an ignoble person counsels for his own harm, counsels for the harm of others, counsels for the harm of both. Thus, monks, an ignoble person counsels ignoble counsel. “And how, monks, does an ignoble person speak ignoble speech? Here, monks, an ignoble person is a liar, is a slanderer, is harsh in speech, is a frivolous talker.