22.82 The Full-Moon Night

SN 22:82 Full-Moon

Translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Nanananda

Once the Exalted One was staying near Savatthi in East Park at the palace of Migara’s mother, with a great gathering of monks.

Now, on that occasion—it was the Uposatha day of the fifteenth on the night when the moon was full—the Exalted One was seated in the open air surrounded by the community of monks.

Then a certain monk rose from his seat, and arranging his robe on one shoulder, bowed before the Exalted One with folded hands and thus addressed the Exalted One: “Lord, I would fain question the Exalted One on a certain point, if the Exalted One would grant me an answer to the question.”

“Then sit in your own seat, monk, and ask what you like.”

“Even so lord,” replied that monk to the Exalted One, and having sat down in his own seat, thus addressed the Exalted One: “Are these the five aggregates of grasping, lord, to wit: the form-aggregate of grasping, the feeling-aggregate of grasping, the perception-aggregate of grasping, the formations-aggregate of grasping and the consciousness-aggregate of grasping?”

“That is so, monk. Those are the five aggregates of grasping, as you say.”

“It is well, lord,” said that monk rejoicing in and appreciating the words of the Exalted One, and put another question: “But these five aggregates of grasping, lord, in what are they rooted?”

“These five aggregates of grasping, monk, have their root in desire.”

“It is well, lord,” said that monk… and put another question: “Lord, are just these five aggregates of grasping the whole of grasping or is there any grasping apart from these five aggregates of grasping?”

“No indeed, monk, these five aggregates of grasping are not the whole of grasping, and yet there is no grasping apart from those five aggregates of grasping. But it is the desire and lust in these five aggregates of grasping that is the grasping therein.

“It is well, lord,” said that monk… and put another question:

“Might there be, lord, a variety of desire and lust in the five aggregates of grasping?”

“There might be, monk,” replied the Exalted One. “Herein, monks, one thinks thus: ’May I be of such a form in the future. May I be of such a feeling in the future. May I be of such a perception in the future. May I be of such a formation in the future.’ In this way, monk, there might be a variety of desire and lust in the five aggregates of grasping.”

“It is well, lord,” said that monk… and put another question:

“Pray, lord, how far does the definition of the term ’aggregate’ go, in the case of the aggregates?”

“Any kind of form, whatever, whether past, future or present, in oneself or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near—this is called the aggregate of form.

<p style="text-align:justify">“Any kind of feeling…

<p style="text-align:justify">“Any kind of perception…

<p style="text-align:justify">“Any kind of formations…

<p style="text-align:justify">“Any kind of consciousness, whatever, whether past, future or present, in oneself or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near—this is called the aggregate of consciousness.

<p style="text-align:justify">“Thus far, monk, does the definition of ’aggregate’ go, in the case of aggregates.”

<p style="text-align:justify">“It is well, lord,” said that monk… and put another question:

<p style="text-align:justify">“What, lord, is the reason, what is the condition, for designating the form-aggregate? What is the reason, what is the condition, for designating the feeling-aggregate? What is the reason, what is the condition for designating the formations-aggregate? What is the reason, what is the condition, for designating the consciousness aggregate?”

<p style="text-align:justify">“The four great elements, monk, are the reason, the four great elements are the condition for designating the form-aggregate. Contact is the reason, contact is the condition for designating the feeling-aggregate. Contact is the reason, contact is the condition for designating the perception-aggregate. Contact is the reason, contact is the condition for designating the formations-aggregate. Name-and-form is the reason, name-and-form is the condition, for designating the consciousness-aggregate.”

<p style="text-align:justify">“It is well, lord,” said that monk… and put another question:

<p style="text-align:justify">“Pray, lord, how does there come to be the personality-view?”

<p style="text-align:justify">“Herein, monk, the untaught average person, taking no account of the noble ones, unskilled in the doctrine of the noble ones, untrained in the doctrine of the noble ones, taking no account of the good men, unskilled in the doctrine of the good men, untrained in the doctrine of the good men, regards form as self or self as having form, or form as being in self, or self as being in form (and so with feeling, perception, the formations and consciousness)… he regards consciousness as self, or self as having consciousness, or consciousness as being in self, or self as being in consciousness. That is how, monk, there comes to be the personality-view.”

<p style="text-align:justify">“It is well, lord,” said that monk… and he put another question:

<p style="text-align:justify">“But, lord, how does there not come to be the personality-view?”

<p style="text-align:justify">“Herein, monk, the well-taught noble disciple who discerns the noble ones, who is skilled in the doctrine of the noble ones, well-trained in the doctrine of the noble ones, who discerns the good men, who is skilled in the doctrine of the good men, well-trained in the doctrine of the good men, does not regard form as self,… does not regard consciousness as self, or self as having consciousness, or consciousness as being in self, or self as being in consciousness. That is how, monk, there does not come to be the personality-view.”

<p style="text-align:justify">“It is well, lord,” said that monk… and put another question:

<p style="text-align:justify">“Pray, lord, what is the satisfaction, what is the misery, and what is the escape in the case of form? What is the satisfaction, what is the misery, what is the escape, in the case of feeling? What is the satisfaction, what is the misery, what is the escape, in the case of perception? What is the satisfaction, what is the misery, what is the escape in the case of formations? What is the satisfaction, what is the misery, what is the escape in the case of consciousness?”

<p style="text-align:justify">“The pleasure and happiness, monk, that arises in dependence on form—this is the satisfaction in the case of form. Form is impermanent, painful and subject to change—this is the misery in the case of form. The restraint of desire and lust, the abandonment of desire and lust, for form—this is the escape in the case of form.

<p style="text-align:justify">“The pleasure and happiness, monk, that arises in dependence on feeling… in dependence on perception… in dependence on formations… in dependence on consciousness… this is the escape in the case of consciousness.”

<p style="text-align:justify">“It is well, lord,” said that monk… and put another question.

<p style="text-align:justify">“How, lord, should one know, how should one see, so that in this body with its consciousness and in all external signs, there be no idea of ’I’ or ’mine,’ no latent conceits therein?”

<p style="text-align:justify">“Any kind of form, monk, whatever, whether past, future or present, in oneself or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, he sees all of it with right understanding, thus: ’This is not mine; this is not I am; this is not my self.’

<p style="text-align:justify">“Any kind of feeling…

<p style="text-align:justify">“Any kind of perception…

<p style="text-align:justify">“Any kind of formations…

<p style="text-align:justify">“Any kind of consciousness whatever… ’..this is not my self.’

<p style="text-align:justify">“It is when one knows thus, monk, and sees thus, that there come to be in him no idea of ’I’ or ’mine’ and no latent conceits, in this body with its consciousness and in all external signs.”

<p style="text-align:justify">At that moment there arose in a certain monk this train of thought:

<p style="text-align:justify">“So, it seems, form is not self, feeling is not self, perception is not self, formations are not self, consciousness is not self. Then what self will the actions done by the not self touch?”

<p style="text-align:justify">Then the Exalted One knew with his mind the thought in that monk’s mind, and he addresses the monks thus:

<p style="text-align:justify">“It is possible, monks, that some foolish man, unknowing and ignorant, with his mind dominated by craving, might fancy that he could by-pass the Master’s teaching thus: ’So, it seems, form is not self… Then what self will the actions done by the not-self touch?’ But, monks, you have been trained by me by the counter-question method on certain occasions, in regard to certain teachings. Now, what do you think, monks? Is form permanent or impermanent?”

<p style="text-align:justify">“Impermanent, lord.”

<p style="text-align:justify">“That which is impermanent, is it painful or pleasant?”

<p style="text-align:justify">“Painful, lord.”

<p style="text-align:justify">“That which is impermanent, painful and subject to change, is it fit to be regarded thus: ’This is mine, this am I, this is my self?”

<p style="text-align:justify">“Surely not, lord.”

<p style="text-align:justify">“What do you think, monks? Is feeling permanent… perception… formations… consciousness…?”

<p style="text-align:justify">“Surely not, lord.”

<p style="text-align:justify">“Therefore, monks, any kind of form, whatever, whether past, future or present, in oneself or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all form should be seen as it is with right understanding, thus: ’This is not mine, this is not I am, this is not my self.’ Any kind of feeling… perception… formations… consciousness… ’… not my self.

<p style="text-align:justify">“Thus seeing, the well-taught noble disciple becomes dispassionate towards form, becomes dispassionate towards feeling, becomes dispassionate towards perception, becomes dispassionate towards formations, becomes dispassionate towards consciousness. Being dispassionate he lusts not for it; not lusting, he is liberated; when he is liberated, there comes the knowledge: ’liberated.’ And he understands: ’Exhausted is birth, lived is the holy life, done is the task, there is nothing beyond this for (a designation of) the conditions of this existence.’”