Etaṁ Mama, Esohamasmi, Eso Me Attā’ti

Etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’ti is a verse that appears in many suttās. It explains how taṇhā, māna, and diṭṭhi arise due to “distorted saññā.”

October 7, 2023; rewritten May 24, 2025; added #15, #16 May 25, 2025

Introduction

1. I will explain the meaning of the verse “etaṁ mama, esohamasmi (eso aham asmi), eso me attā’ti samanupassati” using a few suttās. Then I will explain that the verse explains “distorted saññā,” giving rise to attachment to sensory inputs via taṇhā, māna, and diṭṭhi.

First, a quick description of the Pali words in the verse. Here, “mama” means “mine” and “aham asmi” means “sense of me” (related to asmi māna). As shown within brackets, esohamasmi is “eso aham asmi.“
The third word, “me attā,” in this context, means “my benefit” since “me” (rhymes like “say”) means “for me.” We discussed the fact that in many situations, “attta/attā” means “benefit” or “of value”. See, for example, “Attato Samanupassati” – To View Something to be of Value.
That verse expresses the root causes for an average person’s (puthujjana) attachment to “mind-pleasing” sensory inputs.

2. That verse appears in the “Etaṁmama Sutta (SN 22.151)” among many other suttās. The incorrect English translation in that link is: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self.’

However, as discussed below, it means ‘This is mine, I am (some of) this, this is for my benefit.’ Here, “this” refers to things in the world, including one’s body.
In those suttās, the Buddha explained that not only rupa, but also vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, and viññāṇa that arise in a mind (upon experiencing a sensory input) should not be considered as ‘This is mine, I am this, this is for my benefit.’ As we will see, those entities are in the pañca upādānakkhandha.

Rupa – Not External Rupa

3. Here (as well as in most suttās), “rupa” does not refer to “external rupa” but to those that arise in the mind when experiencing an “external rupa.“

For example, when seeing the same person X, two people (A and B) may see X as their friend and an enemy, respectively. That is why different types of vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, and viññāṇa will arise in A and B (upon seeing X) in that example. The recognition of X (as a friend and an enemy) by A and B is based on the “saññā” that arises automatically based on prior experiences.
That is a critical issue to understand! Please review the following posts to make that clear: Rupa – What It Really Means, “Vedanā (Feelings) Arise in Two Ways“, Saññā – What It Really Means, Saṅkhāra – What It Really Means, Viññāṇa – What It Really Means, ‘Diṭṭhe Diṭṭhamattaṁ Bhavissati’ – Connection to Saññā, Sandiṭṭhiko – What Does It Mean?

Why Is Attachment to Sensory Inputs Bad and Fruitless?

4. For any average person (including intelligent people), it could be confusing to hear why the Buddha taught that “attachment to sensual pleasures” is bad. See “Is It Necessary for a Buddhist to Eliminate Sensual Desires?“

As pointed out in the above post, getting rid of sensual desires or kāma rāga (including sex, craving for food, etc.) with willpower is unnecessary.
As discussed there, enjoying sensual pleasures, by itself, does not lead to future suffering.
However, the deeper teachings convey the following: (i) as long as one has sensual desires or kāma rāga, it would be impossible to control oneself from engaging in immoral deeds when temptations become strong. For example, while most people do not take bribes, if one is offered a million dollars, that would be hard to resist. (ii) “sensual pleasures” are “mind-made” and are illusions in a deeper sense; see “Fooled by Distorted Saññā (Sañjānāti) – Origin of Attachment (Taṇhā).”
When the mind realizes that “sensual pleasures” are mind-made, it will voluntarily give up sensual desires. This is why rituals (silabbata parāmāsa) are unnecessary to attain Nibbāna. What is needed is to understand the “Worldview of the Buddha”.

Hidden Role of (Distorted) Saññā

5. To understand those two points (especially the second point), one must understand the concept of “(distorted) saññā.”

The “saññā” that arises automatically in a puthujjana is inherently distorted; that is, it does not convey the real nature.
Most of us have heard that the Buddha discovered the “real nature of the world” (yathābhuta ñāna), but most people are unaware that the Buddha explained it as being due to the (distorted) saññā built into our bodies. Fortunately, there are a number of critical suttās that provide enough details for us to recover this “missing piece” of Buddha’s teachings.
Relevant suttās include “Mūlapariyāya Sutta – The Root of All Things.” The name says it all: “The Root of All Things.” It is all about saññā!

What is Avijjā?

6. Most people (especially those exposed to at least the mundane versions of Buddha’s teachings) understand that rāga, dosa, and moha (or avijjā) are the root causes for future suffering.

They also know that one attaches to sensory inputs with rāga and dosa because of avijjā. Here, avijjā has several definitions, but most people have heard that avijjā means “ignorance about the Four Noble Truths.” That is one explanation of avijjā; see “Avijjā Sutta (SN 56.17).”
However, over 99% of them do not know other revealing ways to describe avijjā. For example, in the “Avijjā Sutta (SN 22.113),” avijjā is explained as follows: “… assutavā puthujjano rūpaṁ nappajānāti, rūpa samudayaṁ nappajānāti, rūpa nirodhaṁ nappajānāti, rūpa nirodha gāminiṁ paṭipadaṁ nappajānāti.” The English translation in the link is: “… it’s when an unlearned ordinary person doesn’t understand form, its origin, its cessation, and the practice that leads to its cessation.” Most people think “rupa” means the “external rupa,” and the translator also implies that.
The correct translation of the verse (that defines avijjā) is: “… it’s when an unlearned ordinary person doesn’t understand rupa (rupa upādāna khandha), its origin, its cessation, and the practice that leads to its cessation.”

Rupa – Rupa Upādānakkhandha

7. Let us discuss why that English translation in the link “Avijjā Sutta (SN 22.113)” is wrong. “Rupa” in that verse refers to the “mind-made rupa” that arises in the mind. For the same “external rupa,” different versions of “rupa” arise in the minds of any number of people experiencing the same “rupa” at the same time. That is why different types of vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, and viññāṇa arise in them, i.e., people may respond differently to the same sensory input (for example, seeing the same person).

We already discussed an example in #3 above. In that example, A and B recognize X (as a friend and an enemy) based on the “saññā” that arises automatically based on prior experiences. That recognition is a complex process, which requires the minds of A and B to recall prior experiences with X; that means the mind does that scan in a split second!
It involves “rupakkhandha” or “many prior sights/associations with X.” Since their minds attach to the sight of X (with rāga and dosa), it is not “rupakkhandha” but “rupa upādānakkhandha” that comes to play.
In other words, upon receiving a “snapshot” of person X, the mind of A or B would instantly scan through past “snapshots of X” to recognize X. It is actually more than that. That mind will also scan emotions (vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, and viññāṇa) associated with such past encounters; that is, when the mind recognizes X as friend or foe.
This is why a sensory event triggers all “five grasping aggregates” or pañca upādānakkhandha. See “Purāna and Nava Kamma – Sequence of Kamma Generation.”

Rupa (Rupa Upādānakkhandha) Does Not Arise in Arahants

8. Arahants have entirely removed avijjā from their minds. So, they must have understood “form” and its origin and attained its cessation via the Noble Path, per the “Avijjā Sutta (SN 22.113)” (see #6 above).

Now, it must be clear why “rupa” does not refer to the “external rupa” in question (for example, consider “seeing X” discussed above).
An Arahant would also recognize X (if they had past encounters with X). Whether X had been a friend or foe, the Arahant‘s mind would not form an attachment to it via like or dislike, i.e., rupa (rupa upādānakkhandha) would not arise. That is what is meant by “rupa nirodha.”
That is why “seeing by an Arahant” is stated as “diṭṭhe diṭṭhamattaṁ bhavissati”. See “‘Diṭṭhe Diṭṭhamattaṁ Bhavissati’ – Connection to Saññā,” and “Rupa – What It Really Means.”
Thus, “nirodha” (“cessation“) in #6 above does not refer to the destruction of an “external rupa” but only to stopping the arising of rupa upādānakkhandha.

Paṭicca Samuppāda Does Not Operate for an Arahant

9. It should also be clear that not only rupa upādānakkhandha, but all five (pañca upādānakkhandha) would not arise in an Arahant. Another way to say that is Paṭicca Samuppāda cycles do not operate for an Arahant. As we know, each sensory input initiates a Paṭicca Samuppāda cycle for a puthujjana. See #12 of “Loka Sutta – Origin and Cessation of the World.”

To initiate a Paṭicca Samuppāda cycle, the mind must automatically and instantaneously attach to the sensory input in the “purana kamma” stage. See “Purāna and Nava Kamma – Sequence of Kamma Generation.”
As I have emphasized, spending a weekend (or more) going through the above links is necessary to understand the key concepts.
With that background, we can now go back to discuss the verse, “etaṁ mama, esohamasmi (eso aham asmi), eso me attā’ti samanupassati.“

Different Emotions Are Not Associated With “External Rupa“

10. As we have discussed above, sensory pleasures involve external rupa in the world coming into contact with the mind, leading to the arising of a set of mental phenomena. The Buddha summarized the mental aspects into four categories: vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, and viññāṇa.

In the “Avijjā Sutta (SN 22.113),” (see #6 above) the Buddha stated the requirements to achieve “rupa nirodha.” The first is to understand “rupa.” As the verse states, a puthujjana does not understand rupa to be rupa upādāna khandha.
A puthujjana believes that the “external rupa” brings joy or stress to the mind.
In the example discussed in #3 above, A and B recognize X as a friend and an enemy, respectively. So, for A, associating with X will bring more pleasure. On the other hand, for B, even the sight of X brings stress to the mind; thus, he desires to avoid seeing X. In the worst case, in a confrontation with X, B could kill X if things get out of hand!

Different Emotions Arise Due to (Distorted/False) Saññā

11. However, the Buddha taught that both A and B are mistaken.

A sense of joy arises in A upon seeing X, while a dislike arises in B. But both those emotions arise due to saññā (which is a “distorted/false saññā“).
I have outlined the process that gives rise to the “distorted/false saññā.” As I emphasized, it is a complex process, but it is the key to understanding Buddha’s teachings at the level needed to attain a magga phala.
This critical role of “distorted/false saññā” is also discussed in “Saññā Nidānā hi Papañca Saṅkhā – Immoral Thoughts Based on ‘Distorted Saññā’.” Let us discuss that to make the connection to the verse “etaṁ mama, esohamasmi (eso aham asmi), eso me attā’ti samanupassati.“

12. A puthujjana seeks external rupa that can provide sukha vedanā via the physical body and somanassa vedanā to the mind. A puthujjana also seeks to avoid external rupa that can provide dukkha vedanā via the physical body and domanassa vedanā to the mind. In both cases, they attach to the “external rupa.” They also attach via ignorance with adukkhama sukha or “neutral feelings.” We will focus on the first case to make things simple.

A puthujjana highly values any external rupa (providing mind-pleasing sights, sounds, tastes, smells, and touches). That is because they don’t understand that they are fooled by the “distorted/false saññā.” See “Fooled by Distorted Saññā (Sañjānāti) – Origin of Attachment (Taṇhā).”
Thus, they attach to it and wish to “make it mine.” That is the “etaṁ mama” part of the verse.
With repeated such attachments (through the beginningless rebirth process), the “sense of a me” (asmi māna) is established.
Of course, both happen because of the wrong view (diṭṭhi) that joy/happiness is in the “external rupa.” They believe that “external rupa” is for their benefit, i.e., they are of value (attā). That is the last part of the verse, “eso me attā.” This is discused in detail in ““Attato Samanupassati” – To View Something to be of Value.” Here, “attato samanupassati” means “to view something as atta/attā.”

13. Of course, vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, and viññāṇa arising from such experiences are highly valued as well. Those five entities are the five aggregates or pañcakkhandha. Since we tend to crave them and try to keep them close to our minds (i.e., have upādāna for them), they always become “pañca upādāna khandha” or “pañcupādānakkhandha.”

Therefore, it is natural to view such rupa and the accompanying vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, and viññāṇa as one’s own. For example, one likes to own a luxury car and enjoys driving it or even thinking about that car.
That is essentially the meaning of the verse, “etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’ti,” regarding any one of the “pañcupādānakkhandha” (or any rupa, vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, and viññāṇa that one has attachments to.)
Here, “etaṁ mama” means “it is mine” (based on taṇhā); “esohamasmi” means sense of “me” (māna) based on that taṇhā; and “eso me attā” means the wrong view (diṭṭhi) that it is fruitful/beneficial for “me.”

Connection to Sakkāya Diṭṭhi

14. Thus, attachment to sensory inputs occurs with taṇhā, māna, and diṭṭhi.

The latter (diṭṭhi) is specifically sakkāya diṭṭhi. One first removes sakkāya diṭṭhi (and the associated vicikicchā and silabbata parāmāsa) at the Sotapanna stage.
Taṇhā manifests as kāma rāga, rupa rāga, and arupa rāga. Kāma rāga (tendency to attach to sensual pleasures and associated paṭigha) is removed at the Anāgāmi stage. Rupa rāga (craving jhānic pleasures) and arupa rāga (craving arupa samāpatti pleasures) are removed at the Arahant stage.
Removal of kāma rāga and paṭigha stops rebirths in kāma loka. Removal of rupa rāga and arupa rāga also stops rebirths in rupa and arupa loka, respectively; those “jhānic/samāpatti pleasures” are also mind-made.
Finally, māna (sense of “me”) is also removed at the Arahant stage.
At that point, one is fully released from the world of 31 realms (which mostly provides suffering, with infrequent bouts of “pleasures”) that we ourselves make (for each of us) based on a false/distorted saññā!

Path Must be Cultivated Stepwise

15. Many people are afraid even to think about Nibbāna‘s final result, which is stopping the rebirth process. That final result is achieved when an Anāgāmi realizes there is no “everlasting me” (like the concept of soul in most religions) in ultimate reality.

Therefore, contemplating that idea initially is unnecessary and even unwise; focusing on it can lead to stress and even mental issues. We have discussed one such case recently in the forum. Even a Sotapanna does not need to focus on that.
Think about it this way. If the idea of a soul-type entity is the actual reality, then no matter how one tries, one would not be able to get rid of it!
First, focus on removing sakkāya diṭṭhi, attain the Sotapanna stage, and be free of rebirths in apāyās, including the animal realm. Then, one must cultivate Satipaṭṭhāna to attain the Sakadāgāmi and Anāgāmi stages and overcome rebirths in kāma loka. Only after that does one need to focus on removing the sense of “me.” By then, one will be motivated to do so, not be afraid!

No Need to Worry About Losing One’s Existence

16. The Buddha emphasized that he teaches the following: “In the past, as today, what I describe is suffering and the cessation of suffering.” See “Alagaddūpama Sutta (MN 22).” Similar statements are in several suttās. See, for example, “Titthāyatana Sutta (AN 3.61).”

As a Bodhisatta, he strived to find and stop the root causes of suffering, not whether a “self” or “me” exists in ultimate reality.
His investigations led to attaining Buddhahood. That is when he discovered the actual reality of existence, i.e., the fact that there is no “me” in ultimate reality is a byproduct of solving the root causes of suffering.
In the same way, one who cultivates the initial steps will eventually conclude that there is no “soul-type” permanent existence in reality.
In any case, there is no need to worry about it. If a “soul” really exists (if that is embedded in Nature), how can one lose it?

Note: This is a rewritten version of an old post, “Etaṁ Mama, Esohamasmi, Eso Me Attā’ti – What Does It Mean?”