The third sutta in the Majjhima Nikaya is called Dhammadayada, which we can say is "My Heirs in Dhamma", or "My Followers in Dhamma", and in this sutta, the Buddha makes the strong statement, "My disciples should be heirs in Dhamma, not heirs in material things." And he tells an interesting story as a sort of parable for this.
He says, now, suppose that I had eaten, refused more food, had my fill, finished, had enough and yet there was some alms food left over to be thrown away. And then two other monks arrive.
They are hungry and weak. They have been traveling. And I tell them, “Friends, I have eaten what I need. There is some food left over. Take it if you wish. If you don't take it, I shall throw it away.”
Then one of the monks thinks, “Suppose that, instead of eating this food, I shall actually pass the night and day hungry and weak.”
And instead of eating the food, this first monk passes the night hungry and weak.
Yet the second monk thinks “The blessed one has eaten. He’s taken what he needs. If he doesn't eat this, it'll be thrown away.
I'll eat it and I will pass the night not feeling hungry and weak.”
The Buddha says that although neither of these monks is at fault, he would have more respect for the first monk than for the second. Why is that? Because his fewness of wishes, his contentment, his self-effacement, his easy support, his arousal of energy will stand him in good stead for a long time.
Now to fully understand this story, we have to know that the monks - the Buddha's disciples - had a rule of not eating food after noon. But there was also a clause, a compassionate clause, that if monks had been travelling, then there could be made an exception. If monks arrived hungry and weak, and there was food, then they were allowed to eat after the appointed time.
However, here we see the Buddha saying, the monk who chooses not to do so is more to be admired. And remember, the Buddha is giving this parable to emphasize that what is important to him is that his disciples take on his teaching about the cultivation of the mind, rather than that they derive some particular material benefit from him. That material benefit could include all the social benefits of belonging to a sangha.
It could include the good reputation that one hopes to have amongst other people. It could include many things. But the Buddha is saying that these things are really of no importance.
That what is important is the Dhamma. It's the state of mind. It's the willingness to follow in the Buddha's footsteps, in the Dhamma.
In the Diamond Sutra, you probably remember, there is a passage right at the end:
Thus shall ye think of all this fleeting world,
a bubble in a stream, a star at dawn,
a phantasm, a dream.
And probably most western people reading this think that he's talking about how you regard the world in the material sense, but in all probability, as in the great majority of Buddhist sutras, this is not an ontological argument. This is a social personal argument. All the things that happen in society are of little account.
If you are famous, or if people tell nasty stories about you, it is all just bubbles in a stream. This is the Dhamma that the Buddha wants us to follow. He's not setting up a social club, a social organisation from which we can get a nice feeling.
He's giving us the Dhamma, a discipline, the Dhamma Vinaya, and this will stand us in good stead for a long time. So the Buddha says, be my heirs in Dhamma, not in material things.
Namo Amida Bu.
Thank you very much.
Replies
It is, perhaps, of interest that a hundred years or so after the death of Buddha there was a council of the sangha that was concerned, inter alia, about lapses of discipline, and one of the lapses was that a practice had grown up of monks making a journey to the end of the village and back so that they could take advantage of the clause that allowed those who had travelled to have a meal in the evening.