{"collection":"Majjhima Nikaya","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/suttacentral_mn109/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/suttacentral_mn109","id":"suttacentral_mn109","license":"CC0","rights_basis":"suttacentral_bilara_data_cc0","source":"suttacentral","source_url":"https://suttacentral.net/mn109/en/sujato","summary":null,"tags":["Early Buddhist Texts","Majjhima Nikaya"],"text":"So I have heard. At one time the Buddha was staying near S\u0101vatth\u012b in the stilt longhouse of Mig\u0101ra\u2019s mother in the Eastern Monastery. Now, at that time it was the sabbath\u2014the full moon on the fifteenth day\u2014and the Buddha was sitting in the open surrounded by the Sa\u1e45gha of monks. Then one of the monks rose from his seat, arranged his robe over one shoulder, raised his cupped palms toward the Buddha, and said, \u201cSir, I\u2019d like to ask the Buddha about a certain point, if you\u2019d take the time to answer.\u201d \u201cWell then, monk, take your own seat and ask what you wish.\u201d That monk took his seat and said to the Buddha: \u201cSir, are these the five grasping aggregates: form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness?\u201d \u201cYes, they are,\u201d replied the Buddha. Saying \u201cGood, sir\u201d, that monk approved and agreed with what the Buddha said. Then he asked another question: \u201cBut sir, what is the root of these five grasping aggregates?\u201d \u201cThese five grasping aggregates are rooted in desire.\u201d \u201cBut sir, is that grasping the exact same thing as the five grasping aggregates? Or is grasping one thing and the five grasping aggregates another?\u201d \u201cNeither. The desire and greed for the five grasping aggregates is the grasping there.\u201d \u201cBut sir, can there be disparity in desire and greed for the five grasping aggregates?\u201d \u201cThere can,\u201d said the Buddha. \u201cIt\u2019s when someone thinks: \u2018In the future, may I be of such form, such feeling, such perception, such choices, and such consciousness!\u2019 That\u2019s how there can be disparity in desire and greed for the five grasping aggregates.\u201d \u201cSir, what is the scope of the term \u2018aggregates\u2019 as applied to the aggregates?\u201d \u201cAny kind of form at all\u2014past, future, or present; internal or external; solid or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near: this is called the aggregate of form. Any kind of feeling at all \u2026 Any kind of perception at all \u2026 Any kind of choices at all \u2026 Any kind of consciousness at all\u2014past, future, or present; internal or external; solid or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near: this is called the aggregate of consciousness. That\u2019s the scope of the term \u2018aggregates\u2019 as applied to the aggregates.\u201d \u201cWhat is the cause, sir, what is the reason why the aggregate of form is found? What is the cause, what is the reason why the aggregate of feeling \u2026 perception \u2026 choices \u2026 consciousness is found?\u201d \u201cThe four principal states are the reason why the aggregate of form is found. Contact is the reason why the aggregates of feeling, perception, and choices are found. Name and form are the reasons why the aggregate of consciousness is found.\u201d \u201cBut sir, how does substantialist view come about?\u201d \u201cIt\u2019s when an unlearned ordinary person has not seen the noble ones, and is neither skilled nor trained in the teaching of the noble ones. They\u2019ve not seen true persons, and are neither skilled nor trained in the teaching of the true persons. They regard form as self, self as having form, form in self, or self in form. They regard feeling as self, self as having feeling, feeling in self, or self in feeling. They regard perception as self, self as having perception, perception in self, or self in perception. They regard choices as self, self as having choices, choices in self, or self in choices. They regard consciousness as self, self as having consciousness, consciousness in self, or self in consciousness. That\u2019s how substantialist view comes about.\u201d \u201cBut sir, how does substantialist view not come about?\u201d \u201cIt\u2019s when a learned noble disciple has seen the noble ones, and is skilled and trained in the teaching of the noble ones. They\u2019ve seen true persons, and are skilled and trained in the teaching of the true persons. They don\u2019t regard form as self, self as having form, form in self, or self in form. They don\u2019t regard feeling as self, self as having feeling, feeling in self, or self in feeling. They don\u2019t regard perception as self, self as having perception, perception in self, or self in perception. They don\u2019t regard choices as self, self as having choices, choices in self, or self in choices. They don\u2019t regard consciousness as self, self as having consciousness, consciousness in self, or self in consciousness. That\u2019s how substantialist view does not come about.\u201d \u201cSir, what\u2019s the gratification, the drawback, and the escape when it comes to form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness?\u201d \u201cThe pleasure and happiness that arise from form: this is its gratification. That form is impermanent, suffering, and perishable: this is its drawback. Removing and giving up desire and greed for form: this is its escape. The pleasure and happiness that arise from feeling \u2026 perception \u2026 choices \u2026 consciousness: this is its gratification. That consciousness is impermanent, suffering, and perishable: this is its drawback. Removing and giving up desire and greed for consciousness: this is its escape.\u201d \u201cSir, how does one know and see so that there\u2019s no I-making, mine-making, or underlying tendency to conceit for this conscious body and externally for all signs?\u201d \u201cOne truly sees any kind of form at all\u2014past, future, or present; internal or external; solid or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near: <em>all</em> form\u2014with right understanding: \u2018This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.\u2019 One truly sees any kind of feeling \u2026 perception \u2026 choices \u2026 consciousness at all\u2014past, future, or present; internal or external; solid or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near: <em>all</em> consciousness\u2014with right understanding: \u2018This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.\u2019 That\u2019s how to know and see so that there\u2019s no I-making, mine-making, or underlying tendency to conceit for this conscious body and externally for all signs.\u201d Now at that time one of the monks had the thought, \u201cSo it seems, worthy sir, that form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness are not-self. Then how will the deeds done by not-self affect the self?\u201d But the Buddha, knowing that monk\u2019s train of thought, addressed the monks: \u201cIt\u2019s possible that some futile person here\u2014unknowing and ignorant, his mind dominated by craving\u2014thinks he can overstep the Teacher\u2019s instructions. He thinks: \u2018So it seems, worthy sir, that form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness are not-self. Then how will the deeds done by not-self affect the self?\u2019 Now, monks, you have been educated by me in questioning with regard to all these things in all such cases. What do you think, monks? Is form permanent or impermanent?\u201d \u201cImpermanent, sir.\u201d \u201cBut if it\u2019s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?\u201d \u201cSuffering, sir.\u201d \u201cBut if it\u2019s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: \u2018This is mine, I am this, this is my self\u2019?\u201d \u201cNo, sir.\u201d \u201cWhat do you think, monks? Is feeling \u2026 perception \u2026 choices \u2026 consciousness permanent or impermanent?\u201d \u201cImpermanent, sir.\u201d \u201cBut if it\u2019s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?\u201d \u201cSuffering, sir.\u201d \u201cBut if it\u2019s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: \u2018This is mine, I am this, this is my self\u2019?\u201d \u201cNo, sir.\u201d \u201cSo you should truly see any kind of form at all\u2014past, future, or present; internal or external; solid or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near: <em>all</em> form\u2014with right understanding: \u2018This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.\u2019 You should truly see any kind of feeling \u2026 perception \u2026 choices \u2026 consciousness at all\u2014past, future, or present; internal or external; solid or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near: <em>all</em> consciousness\u2014with right understanding: \u2018This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.\u2019 Seeing this, a learned noble disciple grows disillusioned with form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness. Being disillusioned, desire fades away. When desire fades away they\u2019re freed. When they\u2019re freed, they know they\u2019re freed. They understand: \u2018Rebirth is ended, the spiritual journey has been completed, what had to be done has been done, there is nothing further for this place.\u2019\u201d That is what the Buddha said. Satisfied, the monks approved what the Buddha said. And while this discourse was being spoken, the minds of sixty monks were freed from defilements by not grasping.","title":"The Longer Discourse on the Full-Moon Night","tradition":"Majjhima Nikaya","translated_text":null,"word_count":1366}