1

Yamaka Sutta
To Yamaka
Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu For free distribution only

I have heard that on one occasion Ven. Shariputra was stayin near Savatthi at !eta"s #rove$ %nathapindika"s monastery. &ow$ at that time this evil supposition had arisen to Ven. Yamaka' (%s I understand the Teachin e)plained by the Blessed *ne$ a monk with no more +mental, effluents$ on the break-up of the body$ is annihilated$ perishes$ and does not e)ist after death.( % lar e number of monks heard$ (They say that this evil supposition has arisen to Ven. Yamaka' "%s I understand the Teachin e)plained by the Blessed *ne$ a monk with no more effluents$ on the break-up of the body$ is annihilated$ perishes$ and does not e)ist after death."( So they went to Ven. Yamaka and on arrival e)chan ed courteous reetin s. %fter an e)chan e of friendly reetin s and courtesies$ they sat to one side. %s they were sittin there$ they said to Ven. Yamaka$ (Is it true$ friend Yamaka$ that this evil supposition has arisen to you' "%s I understand the Teachin e)plained by the Blessed *ne$ a monk with no more effluents$ on the break-up of the body$ is annihilated$ perishes$ and does not e)ist after death." (Yes$ friends. %s I understand the Teachin e)plained by the Blessed *ne$ a monk with no more effluents$ on the break-up of the body$ is annihilated$ perishes$ and does not e)ist after death.( (.on"t say that$ friend Yamaka. .on"t misrepresent the Blessed *ne. It"s not ood to misrepresent the Blessed *ne$ for the Blessed *ne would not say$ "% monk with no more effluents$ on the break-up of the body$ is annihilated$ perishes$ and does not e)ist after death."( But even thou h Ven. Yamaka was thus rebuked by those monks$ he -from stubbornness and attachment -- maintained his adherence to that evil supposition' "%s I understand the Teachin e)plained by the Blessed *ne$ a monk with no more effluents$ on the break-up of the body$ is annihilated$ perishes$ and does not e)ist after death." /hen those monks could not pry Ven. Yamaka loose from his evil supposition$ they ot up from their seats and went to Ven. Shariputra. *n arrival they said to him' (Friend Shariputra$ this evil supposition has arisen to Ven. Yamaka' "%s I understand the Teachin e)plained by the Blessed *ne$ a monk with no more effluents$ on the break-up of the

2 body$ is annihilated$ perishes$ and does not e)ist after death." It would be ood if you would o to Ven. Yamaka out of sympathy for his sake.( Ven. Shariputra consented by remainin silent. Then in the evenin Ven. Shariputra left his seclusion$ went to Ven. Yamaka$ and on arrival e)chan ed courteous reetin s. %fter an e)chan e of friendly reetin s and courtesies$ he sat to one side. %s he was sittin there$ he said to Ven. Yamaka$ (Is it true$ my friend Yamaka$ that this evil supposition has arisen to you' "%s I understand the Teachin e)plained by the Blessed *ne$ a monk with no more effluents$ on the break-up of the body$ is annihilated$ perishes$ and does not e)ist after death." (Yes$ my friend Shariputra. %s I understand the Teachin e)plained by the Blessed *ne$ a monk with no more effluents$ on the break-up of the body$ is annihilated$ perishes$ and does not e)ist after death.( (0ow do you construe this$ my friend Yamaka' Is form constant or inconstant1( (Inconstant$ my friend.( (%nd is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful1( (Stressful$ my friend.( (%nd is it proper to re ard what is inconstant$ stressful$ sub2ect to chan e as' "This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am"1( (&o$ my friend.( (Is feelin constant or inconstant1( (Inconstant$ my friend.(... (Is perception constant or inconstant1( (Inconstant$ my friend.(... (%re fabrications constant or inconstant1( (Inconstant$ my friend.(... (Is consciousness constant or inconstant1

3 (Inconstant$ my friend.( (%nd is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful1( (Stressful$ my friend.( (%nd is it proper to re ard what is inconstant$ stressful$ sub2ect to chan e as' "This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am"1( (&o$ my friend.( (0ow do you construe this' .o you re ard form as the Tath3 ata1( (&o$ my friend.( (.o you re ard feelin as the Tath3 ata1( (&o$ my friend.( (.o you re ard perception as the Tath3 ata1( (&o$ my friend.( (.o you re ard fabrications as the Tath3 ata1( (&o$ my friend.( (.o you re ard consciousness as the Tath3 ata1( (&o$ my friend.( (0ow do you construe this' .o you re ard the Tath3 ata as bein in form... 4lsewhere than form... In feelin ... 4lsewhere than feelin ... In perception... 4lsewhere than perception... In fabrications... 4lsewhere than fabrications... In consciousness... 4lsewhere than consciousness1( (&o$ my friend.( (0ow do you construe this' .o you re ard the Tath3 ata as formfeelin -perception-fabrications-consciousness1( (&o$ my friend.( (.o you re ard the Tath3 ata as that which is without form$ without feelin $ without perception$ without fabrications$ without consciousness1(

4 (&o$ my friend.( (%nd so$ my friend Yamaka -- when you can"t pin down the Tath3 ata as a truth or reality even in the present life -- is it proper for you to declare$ "%s I understand the Teachin e)plained by the Blessed *ne$ a monk with no more effluents$ on the break-up of the body$ is annihilated$ perishes$ and does not e)ist after death"1 (Previously$ my friend Shariputra$ I did foolishly hold that evil supposition. But now$ havin heard your e)planation of the .hamma$ I have abandoned that evil supposition$ and have broken throu h to the .hamma. (Then$ friend Yamaka$ how would you answer if you are thus asked' % monk$ a worthy one$ with no more mental effluents' what is he on the break-up of the body$ after death1 (Thus asked$ I would answer$ "Form is inconstant... Feelin ... Perception... Fabrications... 5onsciousness is inconstant. That which is inconstant is stressful. That which is stressful has ceased and one to its end.( (Very ood$ my friend Yamaka. Very ood. In that case I will ive you an analo y for the sake of takin your understandin of this point even further. Suppose there were a householder or householder"s son -- rich$ wealthy$ with many possessions -- who was thorou hly well uarded. Then suppose there came alon a certain man$ desirin what was not his benefit$ desirin what was not his welfare$ desirin his loss of security$ desirin to kill him. The thou ht would occur to this man' "It would not be easy to kill this person by force. /hat if I were to sneak in and then kill him1" (So he would o to the householder or householder"s son and say$ "6ay you take me on as a servant$ lord." /ith that$ the householder or householder"s son would take the man on as a servant. (0avin been taken on as a servant$ the man would rise in the mornin before his master$ o to bed in the evenin only after his master$ doin whatever his master ordered$ always actin to please him$ speakin politely to him. Then the householder or householder"s son would come to re ard him as a friend and companion$ and would fall into his trust. /hen the man reali7es$ "This householder or householder"s son trusts me$" then encounterin him in a solitary place$ he would kill him with a sharp knife.

5 (&ow what do you think$ my friend Yamaka1 /hen that man went to the householder or householder"s son and said$ "6ay you take me on as a servant$ lord"' wasn"t he even then a murderer1 %nd yet althou h he was a murderer$ the householder or householder"s son did not know him as "my murderer." %nd when$ taken on as a servant$ he would rise in the mornin before his master$ o to bed in the evenin only after his master$ doin whatever his master ordered$ always actin to please him$ speakin politely to him' wasn"t he even then a murderer1 %nd yet althou h he was a murderer$ the householder or householder"s son did not know him as "my murderer." %nd when he encountered him in a solitary place and killed him with a sharp knife' wasn"t he even then a murderer1 %nd yet althou h he was a murderer$ the householder or householder"s son did not know him as "my murderer."( (Yes$ my friend.( (In the same way$ an uninstructed$ run-of-the-mill person -- who has no re ard for noble ones$ is not well-versed or disciplined in their .hamma8 who has no re ard for men of inte rity$ is not well-versed or disciplined in their .hamma -- assumes form +the body, to be the self$ or the self as possessin form$ or form as in the self$ or the self as in form. (0e assumes feelin to be the self... (0e assumes perception to be the self... (0e assumes +mental, fabrications to be the self... (0e assumes consciousness to be the self$ or the self as possessin consciousness$ or consciousness as in the self$ or the self as in consciousness. (0e does not discern inconstant form$ as it actually is present$ as "inconstant form." 0e does not discern inconstant feelin $ as it actually is present$ as "inconstant feelin ." 0e does not discern inconstant perception... 0e does not discern inconstant fabrications... 0e does not discern inconstant consciousness$ as it actually is present$ as "inconstant consciousness." (0e does not discern stressful form$ as it actually is present$ as "stressful form." 0e does not discern stressful feelin ... 0e does not discern stressful perception... 0e does not discern stressful fabrications... 0e does not discern stressful consciousness$ as it actually is present$ as "stressful consciousness."

6 (0e does not discern not-self form$ as it actually is present$ as "not-self form." 0e does not discern not-self feelin ... 0e does not discern notself perception... 0e does not discern not-self fabrications... 0e does not discern not-self consciousness$ as it actually is present$ as "not-self consciousness." (0e does not discern fabricated form$ as it actually is present$ as "fabricated form." 0e does not discern fabricated feelin ... 0e does not discern fabricated perception... 0e does not discern fabricated fabrications... 0e does not discern fabricated consciousness$ as it actually is present$ as "fabricated consciousness." (0e does not discern murderous form$ as it actually is present$ as "murderous form." 0e does not discern murderous feelin ... 0e does not discern murderous perception... 0e does not discern murderous fabrications... 0e does not discern murderous consciousness$ as it actually is present$ as "murderous consciousness." (0e ets attached to form$ clin s to form$ and determines it to be "my self." 0e ets attached to feelin ... 0e ets attached to perception... 0e ets attached to fabrications... 0e ets attached to consciousness$ clin s to consciousness$ and determines it to be "my self." These five clin in -a re ates -- attached to$ clun to -- lead to his lon -term loss and sufferin . (&ow$ the well-instructed$ disciple of the noble ones -- who has re ard for noble ones$ is well-versed and disciplined in their .hamma8 who has re ard for men of inte rity$ is well-versed and disciplined in their .hamma -- does not assume form to be the self$ or the self as possessin form$ or form as in the self$ or the self as in form. (0e does not assume feelin to be the self... (0e does not assume perception to be the self... (0e does not assume fabrications to be the self... (0e does not assume consciousness to be the self$ or the self as possessin consciousness$ or consciousness as in the self$ or the self as in consciousness. (0e discerns inconstant form$ as it actually is present$ as "inconstant form." 0e discerns inconstant feelin ... 0e discerns inconstant perception... 0e discerns inconstant fabrications... 0e discerns inconstant consciousness$ as it actually is present$ as "inconstant consciousness."

7 (0e discerns stressful form$ as it actually is present$ as "stressful form." 0e discerns stressful feelin ... 0e discerns stressful perception... 0e discerns stressful fabrications... 0e discerns stressful consciousness$ as it actually is present$ as "stressful consciousness." (0e discerns not-self form$ as it actually is present$ as "not-self form." 0e discerns not-self feelin ... 0e discerns not-self perception... 0e discerns not-self fabrications... 0e discerns not-self consciousness$ as it actually is present$ as "not-self consciousness." (0e discerns fabricated form$ as it actually is present$ as "fabricated form." 0e discerns fabricated feelin ... 0e discerns fabricated perception... 0e discerns fabricated fabrications... 0e discerns fabricated consciousness$ as it actually is present$ as "fabricated consciousness." (0e discerns murderous form$ as it actually is present$ as "murderous form." 0e discerns murderous feelin ... 0e discerns murderous perception... 0e discerns murderous fabrications... 0e discerns murderous consciousness$ as it actually is present$ as "murderous consciousness." (0e does not et attached to form$ does not clin to form$ does not determine it to be "my self." 0e does not et attached to feelin ... 0e does not et attached to perception... 0e does not et attached to fabrications... 0e does not et attached to consciousness$ does not clin to consciousness$ does not determine it to be "my self." These five clin in -a re ates -- not attached to$ not clun to -- lead to his lon term happiness and well-bein .( (4ven so$ my friend Shariputra$ are those who have people like you as their fellows in the holy life$ teachin them$ admonishin them out of sympathy$ desirin their welfare. For now that I have heard this e)planation of the .hamma from you$ my mind -- throu h lack of clin in 9sustenance -- has been released from the effluents.(