Commentary on the stanza on desire (kāma)

106. What is the origin of the stanza beginning with kāmā hi citrā? It is said that a banker's son in Benares got the position of a banker while still young. To him there were three palatial mansions appropriate for the three seasons of the year. He gratified himself with all his prosperity like unto a divine youth. Then, though he was still young, requested his parents thus: “I shall renounce and become a recluse”. They prohibited him. He urged likewise even. Again his parents prohibited him in various ways thus: “Dear Son! You are delicately young; difficult to do, is renunciation; it is like promenading over the haft of a razor”. He pressed like-wise even. His parents thought thus:- “If this one, our son, renounces and becomes monk, there is displeasure for us; if we prohibit his there is displeasure to this one. Nevertheless, let there be displeasure to us but not to this one”, and gave him permission. Subsequently he, without heeding his whole retinue of people who were bewailing, went to Isipatana and became a monk in the presence of silent buddhas. He did not reach the main monastery, but spread a mat on a couch and slept. Having made himself familiar with excellent bed, he was exceedingly miserable the whole night. At dawn, he made his bodily ablutions, took his bowl and robe and entered the begging beat together with silent buddhas for alms-food. There the senior monks received the chief seat and the chief alms-food; the freshers received whatsoever poor seats and soft food. He was exceedingly distressed over poor nourishment. He therefore, became thin and pale in just a few days and got disgusted, just as an individual when he has not become thoroughly mature in the deeds of monks. Subsequently, he sent a message to his parents and disrobed himself giving up his monkhood. He regained his strength in just a few days and became desirous of becoming a monk again also. Thereafter, he became a monk for the second time and again disrobed himself, giving up his monkhood also. When he had become a monk for the third time, he regulated his life rightly, developed spiritual insight, visualised silent buddhahood, recited this stanza of joyous utterance and again in the midst of silent buddhas recited this self-same explanatory stanza also.

106.1. Kāmā, there, comprises two kinds of sense pleasures:- The sense-pleasure relating to a base, i.e. physical organ (or external object) and desire, considered subjectively. There vatthukāma, pleasure relating to a base (vatthu), namely, in such dhamma as an object of ideation, comprising lovable forms and so on; the desire considered subjectively (kilesa kāma), namely, is all kinds of lust (rāga). Here, however, pleasure relating to a base;(vatthu kāma) is meant. By way of many a variety comprising form, etc., is: citrā (variegated). By way of worldly taste is: madhura (sweet). They make the mind of foolish common people (puthujjana), delighted; thus is manoramā (delightful to the mind). Virūparūpena is: with form of different kinds; it is the statement made thus: With many a variety of character (or behaviour). Indeed, they are variegated by;way of form, etc.;Amongst the forms and so on they are of variously different forms by way of being blue and so on. In this way, having shown taste (or sweetness) like this and like that by means of those ugly and beautiful forms, mathenti cittam (agitate or) upset the mind; they do not (give or) allow to be deeply delighted in renunciation. The rest, here, is but obvious. Having interpreted the conclusion also with either two or three words, should be understood in the manner stated in the previous stanzas.

The Commentary on the stanza, beginning with Kāma (desire) has ended.