Vesak Discussion on the Mahaaraahulovaada sutta Part 2.
Rahula had to apply himself to mental development similar to the elements.
We read in another Sutta that Sariputta, who was Rahula's preceptor, said
that he was like the elements, unshakable by undesirable objects. We read in
the Gradual Sayings, Book of the Nines, Ch II, § 1 (IV, 373) that
Sariputta was falsely accused by another monk, but that he had no ill-will.
We read that he said:
³Lord, just as on the earth they cast things, clean and foul, dung, urine,
spittle, pus and blood, yet for all that the earth is not filled with
horror, loathing, or disgust; even so, lord, like the earth I abide with
heart, large, abundant, measureless, feeling no hatred, nor ill-will. ³
We then read that he was like the elements of water, fire and wind. After
that Sariputta compared himself with a duster:
³Lord, just as a duster wipes up things, clean and foul, dung, urine,
spittle, pus and blood, yet for all that the duster is not filled with
horror, loathing, or disgust; even so, lord, like the duster I abide with
heart, large, abundant, measureless, feeling no hatred, nor ill-will. ³
Sariputta had no conceit and he could forgive whomever offended him.
As we read in the Mahaaraahulovaadasutta, <For when you apply yourself to
the mental development that is like the earth, Rahula, agreeable and
disagreeable impressions that have arisen, will not take a lasting hold on
the mind.
pathaviisama.m, raahula, bhaavana.m bhaavehi. pathaviisama~nhi te,
raahula, bhaavana.m bhaavayato uppannaa manaapaamanaapaa phassaa citta.m na
pariyaadaaya .thassanti.>
The Subcommentary explains that through vipassana desirable and undesirable
impressions do not persist. This causes me to think of another sutta. We
read in the ³Kindred Sayings² (IV, Kindred Sayings on Sense, Fourth Fifty,
ch V, § 202, Lustful) that Mahaamoggallaana spoke to the monks about a monk
who has unwise attention to the objects impinging on the senses and the
mind. Objects overcome a monk, he does not overcome objects.
We read about the monk who is free from lust:
³Herein, friends, a monk, seeing an object with the eye, is not attached to
objects that charm, nor averse from objects that displease...²
The same is said about the objects experienced through the other doorways.
We read:
³With mind cognizing a mind-state, he is not attached to mind-states that
charm, nor averse from mind-states that displease, but dwells, having
established mindfulness of the body and his thought is boundless, so that he
realizes in its true nature that emancipation of heart, that emancipation of
wisdom, wherein those evil unprofitable states that have arisen come to
cease without remainder.
This monks, friends, is called not lustful after objects cognizable by the
eye... not lust ful after objects cognizable by the mind.¹ Thus dwelling,
friends, if Mara come upon him by way of the eye, of the tongue, of the
mind... Mara gets no access, gets no opportunity...
Moreover, friends, so dwelling a monk conquers objects, objects do not
conquer him. He conquers sounds, scents savours, tangibles, mind-states.
They do not conquer him. Such a monk, friends, is called conqueror of
objects, sounds, scents savours, tangibles, mind-states.¹ He is conqueror,
not conquered. He conquers those evil, unprofitable states, passion-fraught,
inciting to lust, leading to rebirth, states unhappy, whose fruit is pain,
rebirth, decay and death. Thus, friends, is one free from lust.²
(to be continued).
Nina.