Emperor's Three Questions in Buddhist Canon?

[Vaddha]

Hello!

I am wondering if there is a parallel to a story/teaching somewhere in the Buddhist canon. The story is the Emperor’s Three Questions, based on a short-story by Leo Tolstoy. These have been taught by both Ajahn Brahm and Thich Nhat Hanh for Buddhists. For those not familiar, the emperor wants to find the answer to three questions: how to determine when is the right time, who is the most important person to listen to, and what is the most important task to do. The answers that the story provides are:

1. The most important time is now.
2. The most important person is the one before you, who you are with.
3. The most important task is to do them good.

Ajahn Brahm often broadens out the answers some, so that rather than person it sometimes becomes the most important thing to attend to. And the task becomes to care. This makes the teaching not just an approach to dealing with people but also an approach to meditation and so on.

While the suttas themselves don’t tend to present generalized teachings in this manner, individually, each of these answers does have some traces in the Buddhist tradition. The emphasis on the present moment for example is found at SN 1.10 or MN 131. Putting your attention on the person before you in the idea of sampajañña or listening to what some people say carefully without immediately approving or disapproving. And the teaching to care and be kind is of course found in the teachings on mettā and on sīla, intending not to hurt yourself or others.

What I’m curious about is if there is a presentation—even in the Jātaka or Dhammapada commentaries, for example—which conveys a similar idea. I suspect the commentarial stories would be more likely to have something of this sort. Does anyone have any ideas or suggestions of teachings and stories in the Pāḷi tradition which present something similar? Alternatively, are there stories which you feel contain parts of the answers? If there’s something in the Mahāyāna canon that would also be interesting to hear of, though maybe a bit beyond the immediate scope of the forum.

Thanks, everyone!

[Vaddha]

One thread is Dhammapada v.286, the story in the commentary of Mahādhana the Merchant. He decides he’ll set up shop for a year, but the Buddha sees he will die in seven days’ time:

Ānanda asked the Buddha why he smiled and the Buddha replied, “Ānanda, do you see that merchant? He is thinking that he would stay here and sell his goods the whole year. He is not aware that he would die here in seven days’ time. What should be done should be done today. Who would know that one would die tomorrow?

[Source]

Here the idea in the story, based off the verse, is not to get stuck in plans but to do what needs to be done today, or ‘now.’ This resembles some aspects of the three questions story.

[Vaddha]

Another connection, albeit a bit weaker than the previous.

The story of Magha before he became Sakka, found in the commentary to Dhp v. 30. There, he essentially takes on the practice of constantly doing good works and making merit even when threatened or mistreated. When an elephant is going to trample him and his friends, he tells them their refuge is in loving kindness. And they continue taking up works to make more merit, saying their duty is to perform meritorious works.

This fits somewhat the idea of the most important task being to care or do good. In a sense, you could say that the story of Magha becoming Sakka through diligence in making merit is a story of someone who took that idea very seriously. Not quite a perfect match though.

[Vaddha]

The idea of the ‘golden rule,’ of treating all beings as one oneself wants to be treated, also fits some of the mold when we combine the suttas’ idea that we are most dear to ourself. If I am most dear to myself, and I should treat others how I want to be treated, then I should treat each person very dearly and with great importance. We see these ideas in such suttas as SN 3.8 and SN 55.7.

[Vaddha]

The Buddha says:

Yo, bhikkhave, maṁ upaṭṭhaheyya so gilānaṁ upaṭṭhaheyya. (Kd 8)

“Whoever would attend to me, he should attend to the sick.”

The suttas also say the Buddha is the best of people in various ways, so we could translate that to meaning the Buddha is the “most important person.” The arahants in general are also considered the highest of people (‘uttamapurisa/paramapurisa’ for example).

And the Buddha said that there are two kinds of illness, physical and mental, the second kind only being fully cured in the awakened ones (AN 4.157). So in a broader sense, all beings who are not arahants are “sick.” … You might see where I’m going with this.

Now, the word ‘to attend to’ is the same basic word as found in ‘satipaṭṭhāna,’ and seems to also be used for meaning being present with or attending with the mind, as ‘attend’ can mean in English. So, in the above quotation, when the Buddha says ‘attend to,’ the same verb should also allow for simply meaning ‘heed, attend with the mind.’

Taking all of this together then, since the Buddha & arahants are the most important people, and the Buddha says that one should attend to the sick just as one would attend to him, and because all other people are sick, we can conclude… :

You should attend to all beings just as if you were attending to the most important person.
And so whichever being is before you now, being attended to, should be treated like the Buddha, the most important person. (Accounting for the socially appropriate differences of course!)

This also has the added bonus of the “care” component, because attending to or nursing the sick is specifically about attending to them with care or kindness, not just attention itself. So it’s kind of a double-whammy for the emperor’s three questions.

To be clear: This is not accounting for the original context of all these statements of course. It is a creative response to the material, not the exact same message as the originals.

Nonetheless, I find the idea of caring for others as you would care for the Buddha quite beautiful.

(I suspect that part of Tolstoy’s original inspiration for this aspect of the three questions was the teaching in the gospel that one who cares for those in need is caring for the messiah himself. It specifically includes the idea that looking after the sick is looking after him, as in Matthew 25:31-40).

[Pasanna]

This last post makes me think of the Acrobat Sutta /Sedakasutta SN47.19 though it’s a fair way from your original question.

I suspect the satipatthana samyutta is going to yield other useful results too. Though none spring to mind presently

[Green]

Maybe AN5.170 is also interesting and relevant? Maybe it does not exactly answer what you seek but i think it shows an interesting perspective. It is about the foremost sight, foremost sound, foremost happines, the foremost perception, the foremost state of existence.

Buddha brings all this immediately to the core: He relates all this to the immediate destruction of the taints.

In that sense one could answer the list of questions in OP like this:

1. the most important moment is when the destruction of the taints happens
2. the most important person is that person that teaches the Path to the destruction of the taints
3. the most important task is the destruction of the taints.

[Vaddha]

@Pasanna

satipatthana samyutta

The suttas on the monkey and quail which emphasize not being caught in the five kinds of sensual pleasure are somewhat similar in style, with a different message.

@Green

one could answer the list of questions in OP like this:

Thank you for that contribution! That’s a nice application of the principle to see how the suttas fit in. And that’s an example of a sutta where the ‘most important person’ is the Buddha.

I mentioned the Bhaddekaratta Sutta in the post, but didn’t address exactly what it says there. I think if we were to put the Bhaddekaratta Sutta (e.g. MN 131) into the three questions, it might be:

1. When is the best time? Now.
2. What is the most important thing? What is presently arisen.
3. What is to be done? Not be shaken or caught up in it.

[Radius]

Vadda, you’re a dhamma “pro”, I want to be clear that I don’t intend to disagree or disrespect you in any way. There have been a number of comments you’ve made in other posts which have got me thinking. That said…

@Vaddha

What is the most important thing? What is presently arisen.

I’ve been reflecting often recently on AN9.20, in particular the last few considerations.

It would be more fruitful to develop the perception of impermanence—even for as long as a finger-snap—than to do all of these things, including developing a heart of love for as long as it takes to pull a cow’s udder.”

From that, I would read that the most important thing is not so much what is presently arisen, but perceiving it as it really is - impermanent. Perhaps this a variation of your answer #3 though.

[Vaddha]

Thanks for thinking along

@Radius

From that, I would read that the most important thing is not so much what is presently arisen, but perceiving it as it really is - impermanent. Perhaps this a variation of your answer #3 though.

To clarify, that was my summary of MN 131, not what I think the most important thing across all contexts is. MN 131 says do not revive the past, expect the future, but clearly know what is presently arisen without being shaken, which it defines as not getting caught up in identification.

In other contexts, we may recollect our past acts of generosity, restraint, or kindness. Or we may contemplate the future reality of death or sicknesses. And ‘clearly discerning’ the present arisen state could include impermanence for sure, as you say. But even the sutta on impermanence is one angle. There are others which emphasize different topics as the ‘most important.’

Like many suttas, the message in MN 131 is context-specific rather than a fixed absolute.

[faujidoc1]

@Radius

Perhaps this a variation of your answer #3 though

How to attend to what has arisen is elucidated in SN 12.31 (for some reason, this sutta never shows up in search . Its really hard to find. )

SN12.31

“Sāriputta, do you see that this has come to be?”

“Sir, one truly sees with right wisdom that this has come to be.Seeing this, one is practicing for disillusionment, dispassion, and cessation regarding what has come to be.One truly sees with right wisdom that it originated with that as fuel.Seeing this, one is practicing for disillusionment, dispassion, and cessation regarding the fuel for its origination.One truly sees with right wisdom that when that fuel ceases, what has come to be is liable to cease.Seeing this, one is practicing for disillusionment, dispassion, and cessation regarding what is liable to cease.

IMO, its not just that what has come to be is impermanent.

Its also about seeing that what has come to be has no solidity… its not an entity in and of itself.

Its a manifestation - a net effect - appearing and remaining evident on the basis of causes and conditions… the fuel.

We normally get caught up in the manifestation, desperately trying to hold on / raging fruitlessly against whatsoever has come to be, wishing it to continue/ be otherwise, reacting on the basis of defilements and creating yet more bad kamma for ourselves. This craving based behaviour - delighting- is the root of our suffering.

Rather, we should remain dispassionate. Analyzing correctly we can see the underlying causes. Work on the causes… when the causes cease, what has manifested disappears like the morning fog.

That’s how, IMO we can directly perceive Anicca.

**************

Just to clarify- saying that whatsoever has come to be is a manifestation of underlying causes doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist or is not real. A rainbow certainly exists and is just as real as a mountain. The apparently ephemeral nature of the rainbow vs the apparently eternal nature of the mountain is a function of the relative rate of change of the underlying causes. Both are equally Anicca phenomena… they will cease before the eon is over.