The Discourse on the Characteristic of Non-Self (Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta)

The Blessed One said to the group of five monks: “Monks, form (rūpa) is not self (anattā). If form were self, then it would not lead to affliction, and one could say of form: ‘Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus.’ But because form is not self, it leads to affliction, and one cannot command: ‘Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus.’ Similarly, monks, feeling (vedanā) is not self. If feeling were self, it would not lead to affliction, and one could say: ‘Let my feeling be thus; let my feeling not be thus.’ But because feeling is not self, it leads to affliction, and one cannot command it. Perception (saññā) too is not self. If perception were self, it would not lead to affliction, and one could say: ‘Let my perception be thus; let my perception not be thus.’ But because perception is not self, it leads to affliction, and one cannot command it. Mental formations (saṅkhārā) are not self. If they were self, they would not lead to affliction, and one could say: ‘Let my mental formations be thus; let them not be thus.’ But because they are not self, they lead to affliction, and one cannot command them. Consciousness (viññāṇa) is not self. If consciousness were self, it would not lead to affliction, and one could say: ‘Let my consciousness be thus; let it not be thus.’ But because consciousness is not self, it leads to affliction, and one cannot command it.” Then the Blessed One asked: “What do you think, monks? Is form permanent or impermanent?” “It is impermanent, Lord,” they replied. “Is what is impermanent, suffering or happiness?” “It is suffering, Lord.” “Is it fitting to regard that which is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change as: ‘This is mine; this I am; this is my self’?” “No, Lord.” “Is feeling permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, Lord.” “Is what is impermanent, suffering or happiness?” “Suffering, Lord.” “Is it fitting to regard that which is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change as: ‘This is mine; this I am; this is my self’?” “No, Lord.” “And the same applies to perception, mental formations, and consciousness—is each of these permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, Lord.” “Is what is impermanent, suffering or happiness?” “Suffering, Lord.” “Is it fitting to regard what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change as: ‘This is mine; this I am; this is my self’?” “No, Lord.” “Therefore, monks, all material form—past, future, or present; internal or external; gross or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near—should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine; this I am not; this is not my self.’ All feeling, all perception, all mental formations, and all consciousness—past, future, or present; internal or external; gross or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near—should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine; this I am not; this is not my self.’ When one sees thus, monks, the noble disciple becomes disenchanted with form, with feeling, with perception, with mental formations, and with consciousness. Being disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, his mind is liberated. When it is liberated, there comes the knowledge: ‘It is liberated.’ He understands: ‘Birth is destroyed, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more coming back to any state of being.’” The Blessed One spoke this discourse. The group of five monks was glad, and they rejoiced in the Blessed One’s words. While this discourse was being given, the minds of the five monks were freed from the taints through non-clinging. Thus there were six arahants in the world. The sermon to the group of five monks was complete.