In this very famous sutta, the Buddha expounds for the first time his teaching on anatta.

Pāḷi English

Ekaṃ samayaṃ bhagavā bārāṇasiyaṃ viharati isipatane miga·dāye. Tatra kho bhagavā pañca·vaggiye bhikkhū āmantesi: On one occasion, the Bhagavā was staying at Bārāṇasi in the Deer Grove at Isipatana. There, he addressed the group of five bhikkhus:

– Bhikkhavo ti. – Bhadante ti te bhikkhū bhagavato paccassosuṃ. Bhagavā etad·avoca:



– Bhikkhus. – Bhadante, the bhikkhus replied. The Bhagavā said:





– Rūpaṃ, bhikkhave, anattā. Rūpañ·ca h·idaṃ, bhikkhave, attā abhavissa, na·y·idaṃ rūpaṃ ābādhāya saṃvatteyya, labbhetha ca rūpe: ‘evaṃ me rūpaṃ hotu, evaṃ me rūpaṃ mā ahosī’ti. Yasmā ca kho, bhikkhave, rūpaṃ anattā, tasmā rūpaṃ ābādhāya saṃvattati, na ca labbhati rūpe: ‘evaṃ me rūpaṃ hotu, evaṃ me rūpaṃ mā ahosī’ti.



– Rūpa, bhikkhus, is anatta. And if this rūpa were atta, bhikkhus, this rūpa would not lend itself to dis·ease, and it could [be said] of rūpa: 'Let my rūpa be thus, let my rūpa not be thus.' But it is because rūpa is anatta that rūpa lends itself to dis·ease, and that it cannot [be said] of rūpa: 'Let my rūpa be thus, let my rūpa not be thus.'





Vedanā anattā. Vedanā ca h·idaṃ, bhikkhave, attā abhavissa, na·y·idaṃ vedanā ābādhāya saṃvatteyya, labbhetha ca vedanāya: ‘evaṃ me vedanā hotu, evaṃ me vedanā mā ahosī’ti. Yasmā ca kho, bhikkhave, vedanā anattā, tasmā vedanā ābādhāya saṃvattati, na ca labbhati vedanāya: ‘evaṃ me vedanā hotu, evaṃ me vedanā mā ahosī’ti.



Vedanā, bhikkhus, is anatta. And if this vedanā were atta, bhikkhus, this vedanā would not lend itself to dis·ease, and it could [be said] of vedanā: 'Let my vedanā be thus, let my vedanā not be thus.' But it is because vedanā is anatta that vedanā lends itself to dis·ease, and that it cannot [be said] of vedanā: 'Let my vedanā be thus, let my vedanā not be thus.'





Saññā bhikkhave, anattā, saññañ·ca h·idaṃ bhikkhave, attā abhavissa na·y·idaṃ saññaṃ ābādhāya saṃvatteyya, labbhetha ca saññāya: ‘evaṃ me saññā hotu, evaṃ me saññaṃ mā ahosī’ti. Yasmā ca kho bhikkhave, saññaṃ anattā, tasmā saññaṃ ābādhāya saṃvattati, na ca labbhati saññāya: ‘evaṃ me saññā hotu, evaṃ me saññaṃ mā ahosī’ti.



Saññā, bhikkhus, is anatta. And if this saññā were atta, bhikkhus, this saññā would not lend itself to dis·ease, and it could [be said] of saññā: 'Let my saññā be thus, let my saññā not be thus.' But it is because saññā is anatta that saññā lends itself to dis·ease, and that it cannot [be said] of saññā: 'Let my saññā be thus, let my saññā not be thus.'





Saṅkhārā bhikkhave, anattā, saṅkhārañ·ca h·idaṃ bhikkhave, attā abhavissa na·y·idaṃ saṅkhāraṃ ābādhāya saṃvatteyya, labbhetha ca saṅkhāresu: ‘evaṃ me saṅkhāraṃ hotu, evaṃ me saṅkhāraṃ mā ahosī’ti. Yasmā ca kho bhikkhave, saṅkhāraṃ anattā, tasmā saṅkhāraṃ ābādhāya saṃvattati, na ca labbhati saṅkhāresu: ‘evaṃ me saṅkhāraṃ hotu, evaṃ me saṅkhāraṃ mā ahosī’ti.



Saṅkhāras, bhikkhus, are anatta. And if these saṅkhāras were atta, bhikkhus, these saṅkhāras would not lend themselves to dis·ease, and it could [be said] of saṅkhāras: 'Let my saṅkhāras be thus, let my saṅkhāras not be thus.' But it is because saṅkhāras are anatta that saṅkhāras lend themselves to dis·ease, and that it cannot [be said] of saṅkhāras: 'Let my saṅkhāras be thus, let my saṅkhāras not be thus.'





Viññāṇaṃ bhikkhave, anattā, viññāṇañ·ca h·idaṃ bhikkhave, attā abhavissa na·y·idaṃ viññāṇaṃ ābādhāya saṃvatteyya, labbhetha ca viññāṇe: ‘evaṃ me viññāṇaṃ hotu, evaṃ me viññāṇaṃ mā ahosī’ti. Yasmā ca kho bhikkhave, viññāṇaṃ anattā, tasmā viññāṇaṃ ābādhāya saṃvattati, na ca labbhati viññāṇe: ‘evaṃ me viññāṇaṃ hotu, evaṃ me viññāṇaṃ mā ahosī’ti.



Viññāṇa, bhikkhus, is anatta. And if this viññāṇa were atta, bhikkhus, this viññāṇa would not lend itself to dis·ease, and it could [be said] of viññāṇa: 'Let my viññāṇa be thus, let my viññāṇa not be thus.' But it is because viññāṇa is anatta that viññāṇa lends itself to dis·ease, and that it cannot [be said] of viññāṇa: 'Let my viññāṇa be thus, let my viññāṇa not be thus.'





Taṃ kiṃ maññatha, bhikkhave: rūpaṃ niccaṃ vā aniccaṃ vā ti? What do you think of this, bhikkhus: is Rūpa permanent or anicca?

– Aniccaṃ, bhante. – Yaṃ pan·āniccaṃ dukkhaṃ vā taṃ sukhaṃ vā ti? – Anicca, Bhante. – And that which is anicca, is it dukkha or sukha?{1}

– Dukkhaṃ, bhante. – Yaṃ pan·āniccaṃ dukkhaṃ vipariṇāma·dhammaṃ, kallaṃ nu taṃ samanupassituṃ: ‘etaṃ mama, eso·ham·asmi, eso me attā’ti? – Dukkha, Bhante. – And that which is anicca, dukkha, by nature subject to change, is it proper to regard it as: 'This is mine. I am this. This is my atta?'

– No h·etaṃ, bhante.



– Vedanā niccā vā aniccā vā ti? – No, Bhante.



– Is Vedanā permanent or anicca?

– Aniccā, bhante. – Yaṃ pan·āniccaṃ dukkhaṃ vā taṃ sukhaṃ vā ti? – Anicca, Bhante. – And that which is anicca, is it dukkha or sukha?

– Dukkhaṃ, bhante. – Yaṃ pan·āniccaṃ dukkhaṃ vipariṇāma·dhammaṃ, kallaṃ nu taṃ samanupassituṃ: ‘etaṃ mama, eso·ham·asmi, eso me attā’ti? – Dukkha, Bhante. – And that which is anicca, dukkha, by nature subject to change, is it proper to regard it as: 'This is mine. I am this. This is my atta?'

– No h·etaṃ, bhante.



– Saññā niccā vā aniccā vā ti? – No, Bhante.



– Is Saññā permanent or anicca?

– Aniccā, bhante. – Yaṃ pan·āniccaṃ dukkhaṃ vā taṃ sukhaṃ vā ti? – Anicca, Bhante. – And that which is anicca, is it dukkha or sukha?

– Dukkhaṃ, bhante. – Yaṃ pan·āniccaṃ dukkhaṃ vipariṇāma·dhammaṃ, kallaṃ nu taṃ samanupassituṃ: ‘etaṃ mama, eso·ham·asmi, eso me attā’ti? – Dukkha, Bhante. – And that which is anicca, dukkha, by nature subject to change, is it proper to regard it as: 'This is mine. I am this. This is my atta?'

– No h·etaṃ, bhante.



– Saṅkhārā niccā vā aniccā vā ti? – No, Bhante.



– Are Saṅkhāras permanent or anicca?

– Aniccā, bhante. – Yaṃ pan·āniccaṃ dukkhaṃ vā taṃ sukhaṃ vā ti? – Anicca, Bhante. – And that which is anicca, is it dukkha or sukha?

– Dukkhaṃ, bhante. – Yaṃ pan·āniccaṃ dukkhaṃ vipariṇāma·dhammaṃ, kallaṃ nu taṃ samanupassituṃ: ‘etaṃ mama, eso·ham·asmi, eso me attā’ti? – Dukkha, Bhante. – And that which is anicca, dukkha, by nature subject to change, is it proper to regard it as: 'This is mine. I am this. This is my atta?'

– No h·etaṃ, bhante.



– Viññāṇaṃ niccaṃ vā aniccaṃ vā ti? – No, Bhante.



– Is Viññāṇa permanent or anicca?

– Aniccaṃ, bhante. – Yaṃ pan·āniccaṃ dukkhaṃ vā taṃ sukhaṃ vā ti? – Anicca, Bhante. – And that which is anicca, is it dukkha or sukha?

– Dukkhaṃ, bhante. – Yaṃ pan·āniccaṃ dukkhaṃ vipariṇāma·dhammaṃ, kallaṃ nu taṃ samanupassituṃ: ‘etaṃ mama, eso·ham·asmi, eso me attā’ti? – Dukkha, Bhante. – And that which is anicca, dukkha, by nature subject to change, is it proper to regard it as: 'This is mine. I am this. This is my atta?'

– No h·etaṃ, bhante.



– Tasmātiha, bhikkhave, yaṃ kiñci rūpaṃ atīt·ānāgata·paccuppannaṃ ajjhattaṃ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṃ vā sukhumaṃ vā hīnaṃ vā paṇītaṃ vā yaṃ dūre santike vā, sabbaṃ rūpaṃ ‘n·etaṃ mama, n·eso·ham·asmi, na m·eso attā’ti evam·etaṃ yathā·bhūtaṃ samma·p·paññāya daṭṭhabbaṃ. – No, Bhante.



– Therefore, bhikkhus, whatever rūpa, be it past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or exalted, far or near, any rūpa is to be seen yathā·bhūtaṃ with proper paññā in this way: 'This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my atta.'





Yā kāci vedanā atīt·ānāgata·paccuppannā ajjhattā vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikā vā sukhumā vā hīnā vā paṇītā vā, yaṃ dūre santike vā sabbā vedanā ‘n·etaṃ mama, n·eso·ham·asmi, na m·eso attā’ti evam·etaṃ yathā·bhūtaṃ samma·p·paññāya daṭṭhabbaṃ.



Whatever vedanā, be it past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or exalted, far or near, any vedanā is to be seen yathā·bhūtaṃ with proper paññā in this way: 'This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my atta.'





Yā kāci saññā atīt·ānāgata·paccuppannā, ajjhattā vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikā vā sukhumā vā hīnā vā paṇītā vā, yaṃ dūre santike vā sabbā saññā ‘n·etaṃ mama, n·eso·ham·asmi, na m·eso attā’ti evam·etaṃ yathā·bhūtaṃ samma·p·paññāya daṭṭhabbaṃ.



Whatever saññā, be it past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or exalted, far or near, any saññā is to be seen yathā·bhūtaṃ with proper paññā in this way: 'This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my atta.'





Ye keci saṅkhārā atīt·ānāgata·paccuppannā, ajjhattā vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikā vā sukhumā vā hīnā vā paṇītā vā, yaṃ dūre santike vā sabbā saṅkhārā ‘n·etaṃ mama, n·eso·ham·asmi, na m·eso attā’ti evam·etaṃ yathā·bhūtaṃ samma·p·paññāya daṭṭhabbaṃ.



Whatever saṅkhāras, be them past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or exalted, far or near, any saṅkhāras are to be seen yathā·bhūtaṃ with proper paññā in this way: 'This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my atta.'





Yaṃ kiñci viññāṇaṃ atīt·ānāgata·paccuppannaṃ, ajjhattaṃ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṃ vā sukhumaṃ vā hīnaṃ vā paṇītaṃ vā, yaṃ dūre santike vā sabbaṃ viññāṇaṃ ‘n·etaṃ mama, n·eso·ham·asmi, na m·eso attā’ti evam·etaṃ yathā·bhūtaṃ samma·p·paññāya daṭṭhabbaṃ.



Whatever viññāṇa, be it past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or exalted, far or near, any viññāṇa is to be seen yathā·bhūtaṃ with proper paññā in this way: 'This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my atta.'





Idam·avoca bhagavā. Attamanā pañca·vaggiyā bhikkhū bhagavato bhāsitaṃ abhinanduṃ.



This is what the Bhagavā said. Delighted, the group of five bhikkhus was pleased by his words.



