Saṃyutta Nikāya · Discourse 22.8

Anxiety Because of Grasping (2nd)

Dutiyaupādāparitassanāsutta — Nakulapituvagga

Setting
Sāvatthī
Speakers
The Buddha alone, addressing the assembled mendicants
Form
A direct restatement of SN 22.7's contrast, using a shorter three-phrase formula in place of the previous discourse's fourfold one
Length
~2 minutes to read
Northern parallel
A rough counterpart may exist in the Chinese Saṃyukta-āgama (T99), though this reading guide does not assert a specific matching sutra number
Difficulty
★★☆☆☆ — shorter and more direct than SN 22.7, though best read as its companion

Why this discourse

This discourse makes the same claim as SN 22.7 — grasping leads to anxiety, freedom from grasping leads to freedom from anxiety — but reaches it through a shorter, more colloquial formula: “this is mine, I am this, this is my self,” applied to each aggregate in turn. Where SN 22.7 spelled out the technical four-way logical structure of identity view, this discourse gives the same underlying attitude in the plain first-person voice a person might actually use about their own body or mind. Read together, the pair shows the aggregates literature working at two registers at once: a precise doctrinal formula for analysis, and an ordinary self-talk formula for recognition in daily experience.

Reading guide

The same two-part promise, restated

As in SN 22.7, the Buddha opens by naming both halves of his subject together: how grasping leads to anxiety, and how not grasping leads to freedom from anxiety. The repetition of this exact framing across two consecutive discourses signals that what follows is a deliberate restatement, not a new topic.

"This is mine, I am this, this is my self"

An unlearned ordinary person regards each aggregate with this three-part claim: mama (mine, a claim of possession), eso'ham asmi (I am this, a claim of identity), and eso me attā (this is my self, a claim of essential selfhood). The three phrases are not presented as logically distinct configurations the way SN 22.7's fourfold formula was; they read instead as three ways of voicing the same underlying grip.

A more direct route to the same sorrow

When an aggregate held with this claim decays and perishes, the result named here is simply “sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress” — the discourse skips SN 22.7's intermediate step of consciousness “latching on” to the perishing, moving straight from the claim to its painful consequence. This is a shorter causal account than SN 22.7's, not a contradictory one.

Two formulas, one lesson repeated at two speeds

A learned noble disciple regards each aggregate with the negated version — “this is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self” — and when that aggregate decays, no sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, or distress arises. Placed immediately after SN 22.7, this discourse functions as a compressed, more memorable version of the same lesson, well suited to recitation or to a listener less prepared for SN 22.7's more technical fourfold analysis.

Key terms

etaṁ mama — “this is mine” — the first of the three phrases, a claim of possession over an aggregate.
esohamasmi — “I am this” — the second phrase, a claim of direct identity rather than mere possession.
eso me attā — “this is my self” — the third phrase, a claim of essential, core selfhood.
sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā — “sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress” — the standard compound naming the consequence that follows directly from the threefold claim, once its object decays.
n'etaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā — “this is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self” — the negated formula the learned noble disciple applies instead, producing the discourse's opposite outcome.

The text

The discourse in full. Three elided repetitions (feeling, perception, and choices, each following the same threefold formula spelled out in full for form and consciousness) are given exactly as bilara-data preserves them. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).

§1At Sāvatthī. “Mendicants, I will teach you how grasping leads to anxiety, and how not grasping leads to freedom from anxiety. Listen and apply your mind well, I will speak. And how does grasping lead to anxiety? It’s when an unlearned ordinary person regards form like this: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self.’ But that form of theirs decays and perishes, which gives rise to sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress.

§2They regard feeling … perception … choices … consciousness like this: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self.’ But that consciousness of theirs decays and perishes, which gives rise to sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress. That’s how grasping leads to anxiety.

§3And how does not grasping lead to freedom from anxiety? It’s when a learned noble disciple regards form like this: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’ When that form of theirs decays and perishes, it doesn’t give rise to sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress.

§4They regard feeling … perception … choices … consciousness like this: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’ When that consciousness of theirs decays and perishes, it doesn’t give rise to sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress. That’s how not grasping leads to freedom from anxiety.”

· · ·

Self-check quiz

Ten questions. Click an answer to see immediate feedback. No score is recorded — this is for your own checking.

Question 1 of 10
What three-phrase formula does an unlearned ordinary person apply to each aggregate in this discourse?
Correct: A. A shorter, more colloquial formula than SN 22.7's four-way configuration.
Question 2 of 10
How does this discourse's causal account differ from SN 22.7's?
Correct: A. A shorter causal chain, not a contradictory one — the discourses complement rather than conflict.
Question 3 of 10
What formula does the learned noble disciple use instead?
Correct: A. The direct negation of the ordinary person's threefold claim.
Question 4 of 10
What happens when a noble disciple's aggregate decays, given the negated formula?
Correct: A. The mirror-image outcome to the ordinary person's suffering.
Question 5 of 10
What relationship does this discourse have to SN 22.7?
Correct: A. Both discourses share the same title, opening framing, and underlying claim.
Question 6 of 10
What does "esohamasmi" mean?
Correct: A. The second of the three claims, distinct from mere possession.
Question 7 of 10
How many aggregates does the threefold formula apply to?
Correct: A. Form and consciousness are spelled out in full; feeling, perception, and choices are elided but follow the same pattern.
Question 8 of 10
Where is this discourse set?
Correct: A. Continuing the same setting as SN 22.7.
Question 9 of 10
What register does this discourse's formula read in, compared to SN 22.7's?
Correct: A. The pair works at two different registers on the same underlying claim.
Question 10 of 10
What follows this discourse, closing the vagga's middle section?
Correct: A. A shift to a new triplet closing out Nakulapituvagga.
Answered 0 of 10 · Correct 0