1. I have linked to that verse in the following link: “Cūḷasaccaka Sutta (MN 35).”
- The meaning of that verse can be better written as follows: “‘Body is mine, feelings are mine, perception is mine, choices (saṅkhārā) are mine, consciousness is my own?”
2. That becomes clear when the Buddha points out that if Saccaka’s (the Buddha calls him Aggivessana) physical body is his own, he should have total control over it. The Buddha continues on that point and asks Saccaka (@marker 12.3) whether or not the King can take his life. P.S. In those days, a king could order anyone in his kingdom to be killed.
- That is when Saccaka realizes that he does not have control over his own physical body.
- Therefore, in this context, attā does refer to ‘me’/’mine.’
3. This is why we always have to look at the context (the specific situation being discussed) to extract meaning.
- In some situations, attā can mean ‘benefit.’ That meaning was pointed out in the post that you referred to in your comment on March 12, 2026 at 8:48 am above (quoted below):
“I also see a discrepancy between
Etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’ti – Connection to Taṇhā, Māna, Diṭṭhi #1 and #2
“etaṁ mama, esohamasmi (eso aham asmi), eso me attā’ti samanupassati”
…However, as discussed below, it means ‘This is mine, I am (some of) this, this is for my benefit.’”
__________
I have been thinking about writing a post on this issue. It may take some time. But I hope you get the general idea.
- This is a key problem in translating suttas. The same word can provide different meanings in different contexts. That issue is quite prominently evident with the word attā.
- Also see “Atta Hi Attano Natho.” P.P.S. Also see the English translation of that verse at Sutta Central (under ‘Kumārakassapamātuttherivatthu‘): “Attavagga“
