Ekaṁ samayaṁ sambahulā therā bhikkhū kosambiyaṁ viharanti ghositārāme. Tena kho pana samayena āyasmā khemako badarikārāme viharati ābādhiko dukkhito bāḷhagilāno.
On one occasion, several elder bhikkhus were dwelling at Kosambi, in Ghosita’s park. At that time, the venerable Khemaka was residing at the Jujube Tree Park, and he was sick, experiencing pain, and gravely ill.
Elders’ Inquiry
Health
Atha kho therā bhikkhū sāyanhasamayaṁ paṭisallānā vuṭṭhitā āyasmantaṁ dāsakaṁ āmantesuṁ: “ehi tvaṁ, āvuso dāsaka, yena khemako bhikkhu tenupasaṅkama; upasaṅkamitvā khemakaṁ bhikkhuṁ evaṁ vadehi: ‘therā taṁ, āvuso khemaka, evamāhaṁsu— kacci te, āvuso, khamanīyaṁ, kacci yāpanīyaṁ, kacci dukkhā vedanā paṭikkamanti no abhikkamanti, paṭikkamosānaṁ paññāyati no abhikkamo’”ti?
Then, in the late afternoon, those elder bhikkhus, having come out of seclusion, addressed the venerable Dāsaka: “Come, friend Dāsaka, go to the bhikkhu Khemaka and speak to him thus: ‘The elders, friend Khemaka, ask whether you are bearing up, whether you are enduring, whether your painful feelings are subsiding and not increasing, and whether there is a sign of their subsiding and not increasing.’”
“Evamāvuso”ti kho āyasmā dāsako therānaṁ bhikkhūnaṁ paṭissutvā yenāyasmā khemako tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā āyasmantaṁ khemakaṁ etadavoca:
“Yes, friends,” the venerable Dāsaka replied to the elder bhikkhus, and he went to the venerable Khemaka. Having gone there, he spoke to the venerable Khemaka thus:
“therā taṁ, āvuso khemaka, evamāhaṁsu: ‘kacci te, āvuso, khamanīyaṁ …pe… no abhikkamo’”ti?
“The elders, friend Khemaka, ask whether you are bearing up, whether you are enduring, whether your painful feelings are subsiding and not increasing, and whether there is a sign of their subsiding and not increasing.”
“Na me, āvuso, khamanīyaṁ na yāpanīyaṁ …pe… abhikkamosānaṁ paññāyati no paṭikkamo”ti.
“Friend, I am not bearing up, not enduring, my painful feelings are not subsiding but increasing, and there is no sign of their subsiding,” replied Khemaka.
Atha kho āyasmā dāsako yena therā bhikkhū tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā there bhikkhū etadavoca: “khemako, āvuso, bhikkhu evamāha: ‘na me, āvuso, khamanīyaṁ …pe… abhikkamosānaṁ paññāyati no paṭikkamo’”ti.
Then the venerable Dāsaka returned to the elder bhikkhus and reported: “Friend Khemaka said: ‘I am not bearing up, not enduring, my painful feelings are not subsiding but increasing, and there is no sign of their subsiding.’”
Five Aggregates And Self
“Ehi tvaṁ, āvuso dāsaka, yena khemako bhikkhu tenupasaṅkama; upasaṅkamitvā khemakaṁ bhikkhuṁ evaṁ vadehi: ‘therā taṁ, āvuso khemaka, evamāhaṁsu— pañcime, āvuso, upādānakkhandhā vuttā bhagavatā, seyyathidaṁ— rūpupādānakkhandho, vedanupādānakkhandho, saññupādānakkhandho, saṅkhārupādānakkhandho, viññāṇupādānakkhandho. Imesu āyasmā khemako pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu kiñci attaṁ vā attaniyaṁ vā samanupassatī’”ti?
The elders said: “Come, friend Dāsaka, go again to Khemaka and speak to him thus: ‘The elders, friend Khemaka, say that the Blessed One has spoken of five aggregates subject to clinging: the form aggregate, the feeling aggregate, the perception aggregate, the formations aggregate, and the consciousness aggregate. Do you, venerable Khemaka, regard any of these five aggregates as self or as belonging to self?'”
“Evamāvuso”ti kho āyasmā dāsako therānaṁ bhikkhūnaṁ paṭissutvā yenāyasmā khemako tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā …pe… therā taṁ, āvuso khemaka, evamāhaṁsu: “pañcime, āvuso, upādānakkhandhā vuttā bhagavatā, seyyathidaṁ— rūpupādānakkhandho …pe… viññāṇupādānakkhandho. Imesu āyasmā khemako pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu kiñci attaṁ vā attaniyaṁ vā samanupassatī”ti?
“Yes, friends,” Dāsaka replied to the elder bhikkhus and went again to Khemaka. Having gone there, he spoke to Khemaka as instructed: “The elders, friend Khemaka, say that the Blessed One has spoken of five aggregates subject to clinging: the form aggregate, the feeling aggregate, the perception aggregate, the formations aggregate, and the consciousness aggregate. Do you, venerable Khemaka, regard any of these five aggregates as self or as belonging to self?”
“Pañcime, āvuso, upādānakkhandhā vuttā bhagavatā, seyyathidaṁ— rūpupādānakkhandho …pe… viññāṇupādānakkhandho. Imesu khvāhaṁ, āvuso, pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu na kiñci attaṁ vā attaniyaṁ vā samanupassāmī”ti.
“Friend, the Blessed One has indeed spoken of five aggregates subject to clinging: the form aggregate, the feeling aggregate, the perception aggregate, the formations aggregate, and the consciousness aggregate. In these five aggregates, I do not regard anything as self or as belonging to self,” replied Khemaka.
Atha kho āyasmā dāsako yena therā bhikkhū tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā there bhikkhū etadavoca: “khemako, āvuso, bhikkhu evamāha: ‘pañcime, āvuso, upādānakkhandhā vuttā bhagavatā, seyyathidaṁ— rūpupādānakkhandho …pe… viññāṇupādānakkhandho. Imesu khvāhaṁ, āvuso, pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu na kiñci attaṁ vā attaniyaṁ vā samanupassāmī’”ti.
Then the venerable Dāsaka returned to the elder bhikkhus and reported: “Friend Khemaka said: ‘The Blessed One has spoken of five aggregates subject to clinging: the form aggregate, the feeling aggregate, the perception aggregate, the formations aggregate, and the consciousness aggregate. In these five aggregates, I do not regard anything as self or as belonging to self.’”
“Ehi tvaṁ, āvuso dāsaka, yena khemako bhikkhu tenupasaṅkama; upasaṅkamitvā khemakaṁ bhikkhuṁ evaṁ vadehi: ‘therā taṁ, āvuso khemaka, evamāhaṁsu— pañcime, āvuso, upādānakkhandhā vuttā bhagavatā, seyyathidaṁ— rūpupādānakkhandho …pe… viññāṇupādānakkhandho. No ce kirāyasmā khemako imesu pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu kiñci attaṁ vā attaniyaṁ vā samanupassati. Tenahāyasmā khemako arahaṁ khīṇāsavo’”ti.
The elders said: “Come, friend Dāsaka, go again to Khemaka and speak to him thus: ‘The elders, friend Khemaka, say that the Blessed One has spoken of five aggregates subject to clinging: the form aggregate, the feeling aggregate, the perception aggregate, the formations aggregate, and the consciousness aggregate. If you, venerable Khemaka, do not regard anything in these five aggregates as self or as belonging to self, then you are an arahant, one whose taints are exhausted.’”
“Evamāvuso”ti kho āyasmā dāsako therānaṁ bhikkhūnaṁ paṭissutvā yenāyasmā khemako …pe… therā taṁ, āvuso khemaka, evamāhaṁsu: “pañcime, āvuso, upādānakkhandhā vuttā bhagavatā, seyyathidaṁ— rūpupādānakkhandho …pe… viññāṇupādānakkhandho; no ce kirāyasmā khemako imesu pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu kiñci attaṁ vā attaniyaṁ vā samanupassati, tenahāyasmā khemako arahaṁ khīṇāsavo”ti.
“Yes, friends,” Dāsaka replied to the elder bhikkhus and went again to Khemaka. Having gone there, he spoke to Khemaka as instructed: “The elders, friend Khemaka, say that the Blessed One has spoken of five aggregates subject to clinging: the form aggregate, the feeling aggregate, the perception aggregate, the formations aggregate, and the consciousness aggregate. If you, venerable Khemaka, do not regard anything in these five aggregates as self or as belonging to self, then you are an arahant, one whose taints are exhausted.”
“Pañcime, āvuso, upādānakkhandhā vuttā bhagavatā, seyyathidaṁ— rūpupādānakkhandho …pe… viññāṇupādānakkhandho. Imesu khvāhaṁ, āvuso, pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu na kiñci attaṁ vā attaniyaṁ vā samanupassāmi, na camhi arahaṁ khīṇāsavo; api ca me, āvuso, pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu ‘asmī’ti adhigataṁ, ‘ayamahamasmī’ti na ca samanupassāmī”ti.
“Friend, the Blessed One has indeed spoken of five aggregates subject to clinging: the form aggregate, the feeling aggregate, the perception aggregate, the formations aggregate, and the consciousness aggregate. In these five aggregates, I do not regard anything as self or as belonging to self, nor am I an arahant whose taints are exhausted. However, in these five aggregates, there remains the ‘I am’ conceit, ‘I am’ desire, and ‘I am’ underlying tendency.”
Atha kho āyasmā dāsako yena therā bhikkhū …pe… there bhikkhū etadavoca: “khemako, āvuso, bhikkhu evamāha— pañcime, āvuso, upādānakkhandhā vuttā bhagavatā, seyyathidaṁ— rūpupādānakkhandho …pe… viññāṇupādānakkhandho. Imesu khvāhaṁ, āvuso, pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu na kiñci attaṁ vā attaniyaṁ vā samanupassāmi, na camhi arahaṁ khīṇāsavo; api ca me, āvuso, pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu ‘asmī’ti adhigataṁ, ‘ayamahamasmī’ti na ca samanupassāmī”ti.
Then the venerable Dāsaka returned to the elder bhikkhus and reported: “Friend Khemaka said: ‘The Blessed One has spoken of five aggregates subject to clinging: the form aggregate, the feeling aggregate, the perception aggregate, the formations aggregate, and the consciousness aggregate. In these five aggregates, I do not regard anything as self or as belonging to self, nor am I an arahant whose taints are exhausted. However, in these five aggregates, there remains the ‘I am’ conceit, ‘I am’ desire, and ‘I am’ underlying tendency.’”
“Ehi tvaṁ, āvuso dāsaka, yena khemako bhikkhu tenupasaṅkama; upasaṅkamitvā khemakaṁ bhikkhuṁ evaṁ vadehi: ‘therā taṁ, āvuso khemaka, evamāhaṁsu— yametaṁ, āvuso khemaka, asmīti vadesi, kimetaṁ asmīti vadesi? Rūpaṁ asmīti vadesi, aññatra rūpā asmīti vadesi, vedanaṁ … saññaṁ … saṅkhāre … viññāṇaṁ asmīti vadesi, aññatra viññāṇā asmīti vadesi. Yametaṁ, āvuso khemaka, asmīti vadesi. Kimetaṁ asmīti vadesī’”ti?
The elders said: “Come, friend Dāsaka, go again to Khemaka and speak to him thus: ‘The elders, friend Khemaka, ask: What do you mean by saying, ‘I am’? Do you mean that form is ‘I am,’ or do you mean something other than form? Do you mean that feeling is ‘I am,’ or something other than feeling? Do you mean that perception is ‘I am,’ or something other than perception? Do you mean that formations are ‘I am,’ or something other than formations? Do you mean that consciousness is ‘I am,’ or something other than consciousness? What exactly do you mean by saying, ‘I am’?”
“Evamāvuso”ti kho āyasmā dāsako therānaṁ bhikkhūnaṁ paṭissutvā yenāyasmā khemako tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā āyasmantaṁ khemakaṁ etadavoca— therā taṁ, āvuso khemaka, evamāhaṁsu: “yametaṁ, āvuso khemaka, ‘asmī’ti vadesi, kimetaṁ ‘asmī’ti vadesi? Rūpaṁ ‘asmī’ti vadesi aññatra rūpā ‘asmī’ti vadesi? Vedanaṁ … saññaṁ … saṅkhāre … viññāṇaṁ ‘asmī’ti vadesi aññatra viññāṇā ‘asmī’ti vadesi? Yametaṁ, āvuso khemaka, ‘asmī’ti vadesi, kimetaṁ ‘asmī’ti vadesī”ti?
“Yes, friends,” Dāsaka replied to the elder bhikkhus and went again to Khemaka. Having gone there, he spoke to Khemaka as instructed: “The elders, friend Khemaka, ask: What do you mean by saying, ‘I am’? Do you mean that form is ‘I am,’ or do you mean something other than form? Do you mean that feeling is ‘I am,’ or something other than feeling? Do you mean that perception is ‘I am,’ or something other than perception? Do you mean that formations are ‘I am,’ or something other than formations? Do you mean that consciousness is ‘I am,’ or something other than consciousness? What exactly do you mean by saying, ‘I am’?”
“Alaṁ, āvuso dāsaka, kiṁ imāya sandhāvanikāya. Āharāvuso, daṇḍaṁ; ahameva yena therā bhikkhū tenupasaṅkamissāmī”ti.
“Enough, friend Dāsaka, why this roundabout talk? Bring a staff; I will go to the elders myself,” replied Khemaka.
Atha kho āyasmā khemako daṇḍamolubbha yena therā bhikkhū tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā therehi bhikkhūhi saddhiṁ sammodi. Sammodanīyaṁ kathaṁ sāraṇīyaṁ vītisāretvā ekamantaṁ nisīdi. Ekamantaṁ nisinnaṁ kho āyasmantaṁ khemakaṁ therā bhikkhū etadavocuṁ:
Then the venerable Khemaka took a staff and went to the elders. Having approached them, he exchanged greetings with the elder bhikkhus and, after a courteous conversation, sat down to one side.
“yametaṁ, āvuso khemaka, ‘asmī’ti vadesi, kimetaṁ ‘asmī’ti vadesi? Rūpaṁ ‘asmī’ti vadesi, aññatra rūpā ‘asmī’ti vadesi? Vedanaṁ … saññaṁ … saṅkhāre … viññāṇaṁ ‘asmī’ti vadesi, aññatra viññāṇā ‘asmī’ti vadesi? Yametaṁ, āvuso khemaka, ‘asmī’ti vadesi, kimetaṁ ‘asmī’ti vadesī”ti?
The elder bhikkhus then asked him: “What do you mean by saying, ‘I am’? Do you mean that form is ‘I am,’ or do you mean something other than form? Do you mean that feeling is ‘I am,’ or something other than feeling? Do you mean that perception is ‘I am,’ or something other than perception? Do you mean that formations are ‘I am,’ or something other than formations? Do you mean that consciousness is ‘I am,’ or something other than consciousness? What exactly do you mean by saying, ‘I am’?”
“Na khvāhaṁ, āvuso, rūpaṁ ‘asmī’ti vadāmi; napi aññatra rūpā ‘asmī’ti vadāmi. Na vedanaṁ … na saññaṁ … na saṅkhāre … na viññāṇaṁ ‘asmī’ti vadāmi; napi aññatra viññāṇā ‘asmī’ti vadāmi. Api ca me, āvuso, pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu ‘asmī’ti adhigataṁ ‘ayamahamasmī’ti na ca samanupassāmi.
“Friends, I do not say that form is ‘I am,’ nor that something other than form is ‘I am.’ I do not say that feeling is ‘I am,’ nor that something other than feeling is ‘I am.’ I do not say that perception is ‘I am,’ nor that something other than perception is ‘I am.’ I do not say that formations are ‘I am,’ nor that something other than formations is ‘I am.’ I do not say that consciousness is ‘I am,’ nor that something other than consciousness is ‘I am.’ However, in these five aggregates, there remains the ‘I am’ conceit, ‘I am’ desire, and ‘I am’ underlying tendency.”
Scent of a Lotus
Seyyathāpi, āvuso, uppalassa vā padumassa vā puṇḍarīkassa vā gandho. Yo nu kho evaṁ vadeyya: ‘pattassa gandho’ti vā ‘vaṇṇassa gandho’ti vā ‘kiñjakkhassa gandho’ti vā sammā nu kho so vadamāno vadeyyā”ti?
“Friends, consider the scent of a lotus, water lily, or white lotus. If someone were to say, ‘The scent belongs to the petals,’ or ‘The scent belongs to the color,’ or ‘The scent belongs to the stamens,’ would they be correct?”
“No hetaṁ, āvuso”.
“No, friend.”
“Yathā kathaṁ, panāvuso, sammā byākaramāno byākareyyā”ti?
“Then, how, friend, would one rightly explain it?”
“‘Pupphassa gandho’ti kho, āvuso, sammā byākaramāno byākareyyā”ti.
“One would rightly explain, friend, ‘It is the scent of the flower.’”
“Evameva khvāhaṁ, āvuso, na rūpaṁ ‘asmī’ti vadāmi, napi aññatra rūpā ‘asmī’ti vadāmi. Na vedanaṁ … na saññaṁ … na saṅkhāre … na viññāṇaṁ ‘asmī’ti vadāmi, napi aññatra viññāṇā ‘asmī’ti vadāmi. Api ca me, āvuso, pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu ‘asmī’ti adhigataṁ ‘ayamahamasmī’ti na ca samanupassāmi.
“In the same way, friend, I do not say that form is ‘I am,’ nor do I say that something other than form is ‘I am.’ I do not say that feeling is ‘I am,’ nor that something other than feeling is ‘I am.’ I do not say that perception is ‘I am,’ nor that something other than perception is ‘I am.’ I do not say that formations are ‘I am,’ nor that something other than formations is ‘I am.’ I do not say that consciousness is ‘I am,’ nor that something other than consciousness is ‘I am.’ However, in these five aggregates subject to clinging, there remains the ‘I am’ conceit, ‘I am’ desire, and ‘I am’ underlying tendency.”
Kiñcāpi, āvuso, ariyasāvakassa pañcorambhāgiyāni saṁyojanāni pahīnāni bhavanti, atha khvassa hoti: ‘yo ca pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu anusahagato asmīti māno, asmīti chando, asmīti anusayo asamūhato. So aparena samayena pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu udayabbayānupassī viharati— iti rūpaṁ, iti rūpassa samudayo, iti rūpassa atthaṅgamo; iti vedanā … iti saññā … iti saṅkhārā … iti viññāṇaṁ, iti viññāṇassa samudayo, iti viññāṇassa atthaṅgamo’ti. Tassimesu pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu udayabbayānupassino viharato yopissa hoti pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu anusahagato ‘asmī’ti, māno ‘asmī’ti, chando ‘asmī’ti anusayo asamūhato, sopi samugghātaṁ gacchati.
“Friend, even though a noble disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters, still the ‘I am’ conceit, ‘I am’ desire, and ‘I am’ underlying tendency remains. Over time, he contemplates the arising and passing away of the five aggregates: ‘Such is form, such is the arising of form, such is the passing away of form; such is feeling, such is the arising of feeling, such is the passing away of feeling; such is perception, such is the arising of perception, such is the passing away of perception; such are formations, such is the arising of formations, such is the passing away of formations; such is consciousness, such is the arising of consciousness, such is the passing away of consciousness.’ Contemplating thus, the ‘I am’ conceit, ‘I am’ desire, and ‘I am’ underlying tendency is fully eradicated.”
Residual Odor
Seyyathāpi, āvuso, vatthaṁ saṅkiliṭṭhaṁ malaggahitaṁ. Tamenaṁ sāmikā rajakassa anupadajjuṁ. Tamenaṁ rajako ūse vā khāre vā gomaye vā sammadditvā acche udake vikkhāleti. Kiñcāpi taṁ hoti vatthaṁ parisuddhaṁ pariyodātaṁ, atha khvassa hoti yeva anusahagato ūsagandho vā khāragandho vā gomayagandho vā asamūhato. Tamenaṁ rajako sāmikānaṁ deti. Tamenaṁ sāmikā gandhaparibhāvite karaṇḍake nikkhipanti. Yopissa hoti anusahagato ūsagandho vā khāragandho vā gomayagandho vā asamūhato, sopi samugghātaṁ gacchati.
“Just as, friend, a cloth that is soiled and stained with dirt is given by its owners to a washer. The washer, having rubbed it with saline cleaning salt, lye, or cow dung, washes it clean in water. Even though the cloth becomes clean and bright, a residual odor of saline cleaning salt, lye, or cow dung may remain. The washer then returns the cloth to the owners, who store it in a fragrant box. Whatever residual odor remains, eventually, that too disappears.”
Evameva kho, āvuso, kiñcāpi ariyasāvakassa pañcorambhāgiyāni saṁyojanāni pahīnāni bhavanti, atha khvassa hoti yeva pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu anusahagato ‘asmī’ti, māno ‘asmī’ti, chando ‘asmī’ti anusayo asamūhato. So aparena samayena pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu udayabbayānupassī viharati. ‘Iti rūpaṁ, iti rūpassa samudayo, iti rūpassa atthaṅgamo; iti vedanā … iti saññā … iti saṅkhārā … iti viññāṇaṁ, iti viññāṇassa samudayo, iti viññāṇassa atthaṅgamo’ti. Tassa imesu pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu udayabbayānupassino viharato yopissa hoti pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu anusahagato ‘asmī’ti, māno ‘asmī’ti, chando ‘asmī’ti anusayo asamūhato, sopi samugghātaṁ gacchatī”ti.
“In the same way, friend, even though a noble disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters, still the ‘I am’ conceit, ‘I am’ desire, and ‘I am’ underlying tendency remains. Over time, he contemplates the arising and passing away of the five aggregates: ‘Such is form, such is the arising of form, such is the passing away of form; such is feeling, such is the arising of feeling, such is the passing away of feeling; such is perception, such is the arising of perception, such is the passing away of perception; such are formations, such is the arising of formations, such is the passing away of formations; such is consciousness, such is the arising of consciousness, such is the passing away of consciousness.’ Contemplating thus, the ‘I am’ conceit, ‘I am’ desire, and ‘I am’ underlying tendency is fully eradicated.”
Evaṁ vutte, therā bhikkhū āyasmantaṁ khemakaṁ etadavocuṁ: “na kho mayaṁ āyasmantaṁ khemakaṁ vihesāpekhā pucchimha, api cāyasmā khemako pahosi tassa bhagavato sāsanaṁ vitthārena ācikkhituṁ desetuṁ paññāpetuṁ paṭṭhapetuṁ vivarituṁ vibhajituṁ uttānīkātuṁ. Tayidaṁ āyasmatā khemakena tassa bhagavato sāsanaṁ vitthārena ācikkhitaṁ desitaṁ paññāpitaṁ paṭṭhapitaṁ vivaritaṁ vibhajitaṁ uttānīkatan”ti.
Having spoken thus, the elder bhikkhus said to the venerable Khemaka: “Friend Khemaka, we did not ask you these questions to trouble you, but because you are capable of explaining, teaching, establishing, revealing, analyzing, and elucidating the Blessed One’s teaching in detail. And this, venerable Khemaka, you have done: you have explained, taught, established, revealed, analyzed, and elucidated the Blessed One’s teaching in detail.”
Idamavoca āyasmā khemako. Attamanā therā bhikkhū āyasmato khemakassa bhāsitaṁ abhinanduṁ. Imasmiñca pana veyyākaraṇasmiṁ bhaññamāne saṭṭhimattānaṁ therānaṁ bhikkhūnaṁ anupādāya āsavehi cittāni vimucciṁsu, āyasmato khemakassa cāti.
The venerable Khemaka spoke these words, and the elder bhikkhus rejoiced in the venerable Khemaka’s words. As this discourse was being given, the minds of sixty elder bhikkhus were liberated from the taints without grasping, including that of the venerable Khemaka.