Part 4 - The Discourse on The Cha-pañcaka

This is an account of the Forest of the Blind.

Summary: The Buddha then entered the Andhavana and sat on the seat prepared under a certain tree by Rāhula, who, having done obeisance respectfully to the Buddha, took a proper seat. To Rāhula, who had thus taken his seat, the Buddha gave the following Dhamma-talk.

(1) Buddha: “My dear son Rāhula, how do you think of what I am going to ask you now? Is the sensitive matter called ‘eye’, permanent or impermanent?”

Rāhula: “Impermanent, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Is the impermanent sensitive matter called 'eye' unsatisfactory or satisfactory?”

Rāhula: “Unsatisfactory, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Should the impermanent, unsatisfactory and changeable sensitive matter called ‘eye’ be taken falsely (through craving) as ‘mine’ (etam mama), (through conceit) as ‘I’ (eso'ham asmi), and (through wrong view) as ‘my self’ (eso me attā)?"

Rāhula: “No, Venerable Sir.”

(2) Buddha: “My dear son Rāhula, how do you think of what I am going to ask you now? Is this or that form called ‘object’, permanent or impermanent?” Rāhula: “Impermanent, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Is this impermanent form called ‘object’ unsatisfactory or satisfactory?” Rāhula: “Unsatisfactory, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Should this or that impermanent, unsatisfactory and changeable form called ‘object’ be taken falsely (through craving) as ‘mine,’ (through conceit) as ‘I’, and (through wrong view): as ‘my self’?” Rāhula: “No, Venerable Sir.”

(3) Buddha: “My dear son Rāhula, how do you think of what I am going to ask you now? Is eye consciousness or consciousness depending on the eye (cakkhu-viññāna)

(the element of seeing), permanent or impermanent?” Rāhula: “Impermanent, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Is the impermanent eye-consciousness unsatisfactory or satisfactory?” Rāhula: “Unsatisfactory, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Should the impermanent, unsatisfactory and changeable consciousness

depending on the eye be taken falsely (through craving) as ‘mine’, (through conceit) as ‘I’, and (through wrong view) as ‘my self’?” Rāhula: “No, Venerable Sir.”

(4) Buddha: “My dear son Rāhula, how do you think of what I am going to ask you now? Is eye-contact or contact depending on the eye (cakkhu-samphassa), permanent or impermanent?”

Rāhula: “Impermanent, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Is the impermanent eye-contact unsatisfactory or satisfactory?” Rāhula: “Unsatisfactory, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Should the impermanent, unsatisfactory and changeable eye-contact be taken falsely (through craving) as ‘mine’, (through conceit) as ‘I’, and (through wrong view) as ‘my self’?”

Rāhula: “No, Venerable Sir.”

(5) Buddha: “My dear son Rāhula, how do you think of what I am going to ask you now? Are the four mental aggregates of feeling (vedanā), perception (saññā), mental formations (saṅkhāra) and particular consciousness (viññāṇa), depending on the contact of the eye, permanent or impermanent?”

Rāhula: “Impermanent. Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Should the four impermanent, unsatisfactory and changeable mental elements be taken falsely (through craving) as ‘mine’, (through conceit) as ‘I’, and (through wrong view) as ‘my self’?”

Rāhula: “No, Venerable Sir.”

This is the teaching on the five items concerning the eye (cakkhu-pañcaka).

(1) Buddha: “My dear son Rāhula, how do you think of what I am going to ask you now? Is the sensitive matter called ‘ear’ permanent or impermanent?”

Rāhula: “Impermanent, Venerable Sir.”..... This is the teaching on the five items concerning the ear (sota-pañcaka).

Buddha: “My dear son Rāhula, how do you think of what I am going to ask you now? Is the sensitive matter called ‘nose” permanent or impermanent?”

Rāhula: “Impermanent, Venerable Sir.”..... This is the teaching on the five items concerning the nose (ghāna-pañcaka).

Buddha: “My dear son Rāhula, how do you think of what I am going to ask you now? Is the sensitive matter called ‘tongue’ permanent or impermanent?”

Rāhula: “Impermanent, Venerable Sir.”..... This is the teaching on the five items concerning the tongue (jivhā-pañcaka).

Buddha: “My dear son Rāhula, how do you think of what I am going to ask you now? Is the sensitive matter called ‘body’ permanent or impermanent?”

Rāhula: “Impermanent, Venerable Sir.”..... This is the teaching on the five items concerning the body (kāya-pañcaka).

Buddha: “My dear son Rāhula, how do you think of what I am going to ask you now? Is the sensitive matter called ‘mind’ permanent or impermanent?”

Rāhula: “Impermanent, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Is the impermanent sensitive element called ‘mind’ unsatisfactory or satisfactory?”

Rāhula: “Unsatisfactory, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Should the impermanent, unsatisfactory and changeable sensitive element called ‘mind’ be taken falsely (through craving) as ‘mine’, (through conceit) as ‘I’ and (through wrong view) as ‘my self’?”

Rāhula: “No, Venerable Sir.”

(2) Buddha: “My dear son Rāhula, how do you think of what I am going to ask you now? Is mind and matter called ‘object of ideas’ (dhammā-rammaṇa) permanent or impermanent? ”

Rāhula: “Impermanent, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Is the impermanent mind and matter called ‘object of ideas’ unsatisfactory or satisfactory?”

Rāhula: “Unsatisfactory, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Should the impermanent, unsatisfactory and changeable mind and matter called ‘object of ideation’ be taken falsely (through craving) as ‘mine’, (through conceit) as ‘I’ and (through wrong view) as ‘my self’?”

Rāhula: “No, Venerable Sir.”

(3) Buddha: “My dear son Rāhula, how do you think of what I am going to ask you now?” Is mind-consciousness (māno-vinnāna) permanent or impermanent?”

Rāhula: “Impermanent, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Is the impermanent mind consciousness unsatisfactory or satisfactory?”

Rāhula: “Unsatisfactory, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Should the impermanent, unsatisfactory and changeable mind consciousness be taken falsely (through craving) as ‘mine’, (through conceit) as ‘I’, and (through wrong view) ‘my self’?”

Rāhula: “No, Venerable Sir.”

(4) Buddha: “My dear son Rāhula, how do you think of what I am going to ask you now? Is mind contact or contact depending on the mind (mano-samphassa) permanent or impermanent?”

Rāhula: “Impermanent, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Is the impermanent mind contact unsatisfactory or satisfactory?”

Rāhula: “Unsatisfactory, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Should the impermanent, unsatisfactory and changeable mind-contact be taken falsely (through craving) as ‘mine’, (through conceit) as ‘I’, and (through wrong view) as ‘my self’?”

Rāhula: “No, Venerable Sir.”

(5) Buddha: “My dear son Rāhula, how do you think of what I am going to ask you now? Are the four mental aggregates, such as sensation (vedanā), perception (saññā), mental formations (saṅkhāra) and consciousness (viññāṇa), arising from mind-contact (mano-samphassa), permanent or impermanent?”

Rāhula: “Impermanent, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Are the four impermanent mental aggregates unsatisfactory or satisfactory?” Rāhula: “Unsatisfactory, Venerable Sir.”

Buddha: “Should the four impermanent, unsatisfactory and changeable mental aggregates be taken falsely (through craving) as ‘mine’, (through conceit) as ‘I’, and (through wrong view) as ‘my self’?”

Rāhula: “No, Venerable Sir.” This is the teaching on the five items concerning the mind (mano-pañcaka).

(Such a discourse delivered by asking three times so that the three points of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and non-self might become clear is called “Teparivaṭṭa Dhamma Desanā”.)

(Conclusion) “My dear son, Rāhula, when a knowledgeable disciple of mine views thus, he becomes weary of the sensitive matter called ‘eye’, he becomes weary of various forms and objects of seeing, he becomes weary of eye-consciousness, he becomes weary of eyecontact, he becomes weary of the four mental aggregates, such as sensation, perception, mental formation and consciousness, arising from eye-contact. He becomes weary of the sensitive matter called ‘ear’; he becomes weary of various sounds and objects of hearing..... He becomes weary of the sensitive matter called ‘nose’; he becomes weary of various odours and objects of smelling..... He becomes weary of the sensitive matter called ‘tongue’; he becomes weary of various tastes and objects of savouring..... He becomes weary of the sensitive matter called ‘body’ he becomes weary of various contacts and objects of touching..... He becomes weary of the sensitive element called ‘mind’; he becomes weary of the objects of ideation..... He becomes weary of cognition;he becomes weary of mind-contact; he becomes weary of the four mental aggregates, such as sensation, perception, mental formations and consciousness, arising from mind-contact. On becoming weary he is free from attachment, on being free from attachment, he is liberated from mental defilements; on being liberated from mental defilements, he knows by reflection that he is “liberated from mental defilements. He gains knowledge through successive reflections thus: ‘Rebirth for me is over.’ The noble practice has been finished. The task (for the Path) has been carried out. There is nothing more to be done (for the Path).” When the Buddha has delivered this Cūla Rāhulovāda Sutta, the Venerable Rāhula became established in arahatship. Among thousands of devas and Brahmās, some become sotāpanna, some sakadāgāmin, and the rest anāgāmin and some arahats (according to their pāramīs).

(Then follow the themes for meditation given in Pāli prose & Myanmar verse which we propose to leave out from our translation as they are helpful only to Myanmar meditators.)