A Discourse on Paticcasamuppada

by Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw | 62,614 words

The Paticcasamuppada refers to “The Doctrine of Dependent Origination”. This is the English translation done by U Aye Maung Published by U Min Swe Buddhasasana Nuggaha Organization Rangoon, Burma....

Chapter 8 - The Story Of Cakkhupala Thera

The Dhammapada verse that we have referred to was uttered by the Buddha in connection with the story of Cakkhupala thera. The thera was a physician in one of his previous lives. He cured a blind woman and restored her sight. The woman had promised to serve him as his slave should she recover her sight. But, she did not keep her promise and lied that she was worse off than before. Seeing her trick, the physician gave her an eye lotion that destroyed her eyes completely. For his evil kamma the man suffered in many lives and in his last existence he became Cakkhupala thera. He practised meditation as instructed by the Buddha with 60 other monks at a forest retreat. He never lay down while meditating and soon he had an eye infection. He refused to lie down to apply the eye lotion and so the doctor gave up the attempt to cure him. Reminding himself of certain death, the thera redoubled his effort and at midnight he became blind and attained Arahatship.

To an ordinary observer, the theras blindness may appear to be the price that he had to pay for the over exertion of his energy. But the main cause was the evil deed he had committed in his previous life as a doctor. Even if he had not practised meditation, he might have become blind somehow or other. But the attainment of Arahatship was an immense benefit that accrued to him from his overzealous and strenuous exertion.

There are two lessons that we can learn from the story of Cakkhupala thera. As an energetic monk, he continued to practise vipassana after he became an Arahat. As he paced on the ground while meditating, the insects that lay in his path were trampled to death. When the matter was brought to the notice of the Buddha, the Lord said that since the thera had no intention to kill the insects, he was free from any moral responsibility for their destruction.

So we should note that causing death without cetana or volition is not a kammic act and that the body of an Arahat has weight if he has no psychic power or, if despite his iddhi he walks without exercising it to control his weight. Some Buddhists have doubt about their moral purity when they cook vegetables or drink water that harbours microbes. They should, of course, remove living beings that they can see. But, they need not have qualms about the destruction of creatures that may be accidentally connected with their actions. Some Jains are said to feel guilty over the death of insects that rush against a burning lamp. Theirs is an extreme view and cetana (volition) as the keystone of moral problems in the context of kammic law is borne out by Moggaliputtatissa theras verdict in his reply to king Asoka.

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: