In the Khemakabhikṣusūtra, 差摩比丘經, Sermon of the Monk Chà Mó , T99.29c06 Saṁyuktāgama sūtra #103, readable in Pāli at 22.89 of the Saṁyuttamikāya, Venerable Chà Mó, who is Khemakabhikkhu in Pāli, gives a sermon to “many elder monks”. This has to-do with Ven Chà Mó’s yet-having-attained severance from pernicious and subtle self-view.
To illustrate his quandary, and in so seemingly educating himself to overcome his fetter, he delivers the simile of the flower’s scent and the simile of the perfumed rag. The simile of the flower’s scent challenges the elders to locate the locus of the scent of a flower. The simile of the perfumed rag speaks of a launderer who hides the filth introduced to a piece of fabric with a skilled application of perfumes.
What do these mean?
Khemakabhikṣusūtra 差摩比丘經 *Sermon of the Monk Chà Mó* T99.29c06 Saṁyuktāgama sūtra #103
Like this I heard:
One day, there were myriad elder monks dwelling in Kauśambī at Ghoṣitārāma.
At that time, there was the monk Chà Mó dwelling also in Kauśambī by the badarikā orchard, his body was increasing in iterations of woe and sicknesses.
At that time, there was the monk Tuó Suō keeping watch over the sick. At that time, Tuó Suō came to the myriad elder monks, bowed to the myriad elder monks’s feet, then to one side retreated to reside there.
The myriad elder monks spoke to the monk Tuó Suō: “You, go to the monk Chà Mó, speak: ‘The myriad elders implore you: Does your body slowly come to find peace? Do suffering and misery not increase, is it yes?’”
At that time, the monk Tuó Suō, subject to the myriad elder monks’ dispensation, came to the monk Chà Mó and told to Chà Mó their tellings, saying: “The myriad elders beseech you, your body slowly comes to find peace, sufferings and miseries do not increase, yes?”
Chà Mó spoke to Tuó Suō saying: “I am sick and not recovering, I do not find peace, myriad hardships accumulate without salvation, tremendous and mighty suffering aches me, I presently suffer and endure much. It is like the slaughter of a bull, the sharp knife having cut into the live stomach, to fetch its inner organs, that bull’s stomach pain is the very same as what I am enduring! My present stomach pain is greater than that of the bull’s. It is as if two warriors clutched one weak man, suspended him attached above a fire, burning his two feet, my present two feet’s burnings are greater than his.”
At that time, Tuó Suō returned to the elders, according to what Chà Mó had said, he told them of his great sickness, entirely explaining to the elders.
At that time, the elders returned Tuó Suō, dispatching him to come to Chà Mó, that he might speak to Chà Mó, to say: “The Bhagavān has taught these five aggregates of binding, which of these five? The rūpaskandha, vedanā, saṃjñā, saṃskāra, vijñānaskandha, you, Chà Mó, can only poorly observe that these five aggregates of binding are without you, and are nothing to you belonging resolutely.”
At that time, Tuó Suō subject to the elders taught likewise thereafter, went forth to speak to Chà Mó, saying: “The elders speak to you, the Bhagavān speaks of these five aggregates of binding, you poorly observe they are without you, and are nothing to you belonging resolutely.”
Chà Mó spoke to Tuó Suō, saying: “I, in these five aggregates of binding, am able to find no me, and they are nothing to me belonging.”
Tuó Suō returned to address the elders: “The monk Chà Mó spoke, saying: ‘I, in these five aggregates of binding, observe and find no me, and they are nothing I own.’”
The elders again dispatched Tuó Suō to speak to Chà Mó, to say: “You, in these five aggregates of binding observe and find no me, and they are nothing I own, thus āsravāḥ are all-ended, and you are an arhat, resolutely?”
At that time, Tuó Suō, subject to the elders’s teachings, came closer to the monk Chà Mó, speaking to Chà Mó, saying: “The monk is able to thusly observe the five aggregates of binding, thus his āsravāḥ are all ended, an arhat he is, resolutely?”
Chà Mó replied to Tuó Suō, saying: “I observe these five aggregates of binding and find no me, and are nothing I own, but it is not that my āsravāḥ are all ended and it is not that I am an arhat resolutely.”
At that time, Tuó Suō left and returned to the elders, addressed the eldesr: “Chà Mó spoke: ‘I observe these five aggregates of binding and find no me, and are nothing I own, and yet it is not that my āsravāḥ are all ended and it is not that I am an arhat resolutely.’”
At that time, the elderes spoke to Tuó Suō: “You will again return to speak with Chà Mó: ‘You say: “I observe these five aggregates of binding and find no me, and are nothing I own, and yet it is not that my āsravāḥ are all ended [and it is not] that I am an arhat.” The front and end of your notion are incoherent.’”
Tuó Suō, subject to the elders’s teachings, went forth to Chà Mó: “You say: ‘I observe these five aggregates of binding and find no me, nothing to me belonging, and yet it is not that my āsravāḥ are all ended and it is not that I am an arhat.’ The front and end of your notion are incoherent.”
Chà Mó spoke to Tuó Suō saying: “I in these five aggregates of binding, observe and find no me, and nothing to me belonging, meanwhile I am not an arhat, I with my pride, my desiring, this I-making. I am not yet resolute, not yet knowing it, not yet having severed from it, not yet having vomited it out.”
Tuó Suō left and returned to the elders, himself speaking to the elders: “Chà Mó said: ‘I in these five aggregates of binding, observe and find no me, and nothing to me belonging, meanwhile I am not an arhat, I with my pride, my desiring, I-making, I am not yet resolute, not yet knowing, not yet having severed, not yet having vomited.
The elders once more dispatched Tuó Suō to speak to Chà Mó, to say: “You speak of having ātman, how to you have ātman? It is that your form is ātman? It is that ātman is other than your form? Feelings, thoughts, formations, consciousness, this is “me?” Am I other than consciousness?”
Chà Mó spoke to Tuó Suō saying: “I do not say that my form is me, nor am I other than form; nor that feelings, thoughts, formations, consciousness, are me and mine, nor that I am other than consciousness, thus in these five aggregates of binding I have pride, I have desiring, these are I-makings. I am not yet resolute, not yet knowing, not yet having severed from it, not yet having vomited it out.”
Chà Mó spoke to Tuó Suō saying: “What vexation moves you, spurring you on to directions contrary? You fetch a cane, that I may come, I myself with my cane, will approach the elders, I beseech you, give me my cane.”
At that time, the myriad elders, in the distance, saw Chà Mó with his staff on his way coming, themselves spread out a seat for him, found a place to rest his feet, themselves went forth to greet him, to take his robe and alms bowl, ordering that he promptly sit, exchanging words to reassure the weary, speaking to Chà Mó saying:
“You speak of having ātman, how to you have ātman? It is that your form is ātman? It is that ātman is other than your form? Feelings, thoughts, formations, consciousness, this is “me?” Am I other than consciousness?”
Chà Mó Bhikṣu spoke:
“It is not that form is me, but it is not that I am other than form; there is no feeling, thought, formation, or consciousness that is mine, yet I am not other than consciousness, thus in these five aggregates of binding I have my pride, I have my desiring, this I-making. I am not yet resolute, I am not yet knowing, not yet having severed, not yet having vomited. It is like the flowers. The utpala, paduma, kumuda, or puṇḍarīka flower’s. It is like these flowers’ scent. Is it the roots’ scent? Is the scent other than the roots? Is it the stem’s, the leaf’s, the whiskers’, the fine constituents’ or the coarse constituents’ scent? Are the fine constituents other than the coarse constituents? It is so said, no?"
The elders responded: “No, resolutely, Chà Mó! It is not the utpala’s, the paduma’s, the kumuda’s, the puṇḍarīka’s roots’ scent, but it is not that the scent is other than root, so too also it is not the stem’s, the leaf’s, the whiskers’, the fine constituents’, or the coarse constituents’ scent, so too also it is not that the fine constituents are other than the coarse constituents.”
Chà Mó again asked: “It is what’s scent?”
The elders replied: “It is the flower’s.”
Chà Mó again replied: "I, too, am thus so. It is not that my form is me, yet I am not other than form; there is no feeling, thought, formation, or consciousness that is resolutely mine, yet I am not apart from consciousness. So I in these five aggregates of binding see no me, and they are nothing I own, as such is my pride, my desiring, I-making, not yet resolute, not yet knowing, not yet having severed, not yet having vomited. Elders, hear my exposition of analogy. Worldlings and sages, on account of metaphor attain to understanding. Such an analogy is this: The wet-nurse has a cloth, she pays the launderer to wash it, he washes it with all kinds of grey broth, he rinses until glistening. The filth still remainders lingering in fumes, there must be applied to it all kinds of incenses & perfumes, he knows how to cause these fumes to vanish. Like this, one must inquire into what extent the sage disciple severs from these five aggregates of binding, with true insight there is no me, and there is nothing I own, enduring these five aggregates of binding I have pride, I have desiring, I-making, not yet resolute, not yet knowing, not yet having severed, not yet having vomited. Afterwards, in these five aggregates of binding, further investigation is undertook, profound insight into saṃsāra is attained, this form, this form’s origin, this form’s cessation, this feeling, thought, formation, consciousness, this consciousness’s origin, this consciousness’s cessation. And so, in these five aggregates of binding, with profound insight into saṃsāra, after that, my pride, my desiring, these I-makings, are all entirely cast away, this is called penetrating insight into the true aspect.”
When Chà Mó spoke the dharma, those elders’s manifold contaminants became immaculate with their attainment of the pure dharma eye.
Venerable Anālayo translation
this have i heard. At one time a group of many elder monks were staying at Kosambī in Ghosita’s Park. Then the monk Khemaka was dwelling at Kosambī in the Jujube Tree Park. His body had become seriously ill. Then the monk Dāsaka was looking after the sick. Then the monk Dāsaka approached the elder monks, paid respect at the feet of the elder monks, and stood at one side.
The elder monks said to the monk Dāsaka: “Approach the monk Khemaka and say: The elder monks ask you: ‘Is your body recovering a little and at ease, is the severity of your painful afflictions not increasing?’”
Then the monk Dāsaka, having received the instructions from the elder monks, approached the monk Khemaka. He said to the monk Khemaka: “The elder monks ask you: ‘Are you gradually recovering from your painful afflictions? Are the multitude of pains not increasing?’”
The monk Khemaka said to the monk Dāsaka: “I have not recovered from the illness and my body is not at ease, the pains keep increasing and there is no relief. It is just as if many strong men were to grab a weak man, put a rope around his head and with both hands pull it tight, so that he is in extreme pain. My pain now exceeds that. It is just as if a cow butcher with a sharp knife cuts open a living [cow’s] belly to take its internal organs. How could that cow endure the pains in its belly? My belly is now more painful than that cow’s. It is just as if two strong men grabbed one weak person and hung him over a fire, roasting both his feet. The heat of both my feet now exceeds that.”
Then the monk Dāsaka approached the elders. He completely told the elders what the monk Khemaka had said about the condition of his illness.
Then the elders sent the monk Dāsaka back to approach the monk Khemaka, to say to the monk Khemaka: “There are five aggregates of clinging, taught by the Blessed One. What are the five? They are the bodily form aggregate of clinging, the feeling … perception … formations … consciousness aggregate of clinging. Khemaka, are you just able to examine these five aggregates of clinging as not self and not belonging to the self?”
Then the monk Dāsaka, having received the instructions from the elder monks, approached the monk Khemaka and said: “The elders say to you: ‘The Blessed One has taught the five aggregates of clinging. Are you just able to examine them as not self and not belonging to the self?’”
The monk Khemaka said to Dāsaka: “I am able to examine these five aggregates of clinging as not self and not belonging to the self.”
The monk Dāsaka returned and said to the elders: “The monk Khemaka says: ‘I am able to examine these five aggregates of clinging as not self and not belonging to the self.’”
The elders again sent the monk Dāsaka to say to the monk Khemaka: “Being able to examine these five aggregates of clinging as not self and not belonging, are you thus an arahant, with the influxes being eradicated?”
Then the monk Dāsaka, having received the instructions from the elder monks, approached the monk Khemaka. He said to Khemaka: “A monk who is able to contemplate the five aggregates of clinging in this way, is he thus an arahant, with the influxes being eradicated?”
The monk Khemaka said to the monk Dāsaka: “I contemplate the five aggregates of clinging as not self and not belonging to the self, [yet] I am not an arahant, with the influxes being eradicated.”
Then the monk Dāsaka returned to the elders. He said to the elders: “The monk Khemaka says: ‘I contemplate the five aggregates of clinging as not self and not belonging to the self, yet I am not an arahant, with the influxes being eradicated.”
Then the elders said to the monk Dāsaka: “Return again to say to the monk Khemaka: You say: ‘I contemplate the five aggregates as not self and not belonging to the self, yet I am not an arahant, with the influxes being eradicated.’ The former and the latter [statement]contradict each other.’”
Then the monk Dāsaka, having received the instructions from the elder monks, approached the monk Khemaka and said: “You say: ‘I contemplate the five aggregates of clinging as not self and not belonging to the self, yet I am not an arahant, with the influxes being eradicated.’ The former and the latter [statement] contradict each other.”
The monk Khemaka said to the monk Dāsaka: “I examine these five aggregates of clinging as not self and not belonging to the self, yet I am not an arahant, [with the influxes being eradicated]. I have not yet abandoned the ‘I am’ conceit, the desire [related to the notion] ‘I am’, and the underlying tendency towards ‘I am’, have not yet [fully] understood it, not yet become separated from it, not yet vomited it out.”
The monk Dāsaka returned to the elders. He said to the elders: “The monk Khemaka says: ‘I examine these five aggregates of clinging as not self and not belonging to the self, yet I am not an arahant, with the influxes being eradicated. I have not yet abandoned the ‘I am’ conceit, the desire [related to the notion] ‘I am’, and the underlying tendency towards ‘I am’, have not yet [fully] understood it, not yet become separated from it, not yet vomited it out.’”
The elders again sent the monk Dāsaka to say to the monk Khemaka: “You [seem] to affirm that there is a self. Where is that self? Is bodily form the self? Or is the self distinct from bodily form? Is feeling … perception … formations … consciousness the self? Or is the self distinct from consciousness?”
The monk Khemaka said to the monk Dāsaka: “I do not say that bodily form is the self, or that the self is distinct from bodily form; that feeling … perception … formations … consciousness is the self, or that the self is distinct from consciousness. Yet in relation to these five aggregates of clinging I have not yet abandoned the ‘I am’ conceit, the desire [related to the notion] ‘I am’, and the underlying tendency towards ‘I am’, have not yet [fully]understood it, not yet become separated from it, not yet vomited it out.”
The monk Khemaka said to the monk Dāsaka: “Why trouble you now, making you run back and forth? Bring my walking stick. Supporting myself with the walking stick, I will approach the elders. [So] I ask you to give me the walking stick for my use.”
The monk Khemaka, supporting himself with the walking stick, approached the elders. Then the elders saw from afar that the monk Khemaka was coming, supported by a walking stick. They themselves prepared a seat for him and set up a foot rest. They came forward themselves to welcome him, took his robe and bowl, and told him to sit down right away. They exchanged polite greetings with each other. Having exchanged polite greetings, the [elders] said to the monk Khemaka:
“You speak of the conceit ‘I am’. Where do you see a self? Is bodily form the self? Or is the self distinct from bodily form? Is feeling … perception … formations … consciousness the self? Or is the self distinct from consciousness?”
The monk Khemaka said: “Bodily form is not self and there is no self that is distinct from bodily form. Feeling … perception … formations … consciousness is not self, and there is no self that is distinct from consciousness. However, in relation to these five aggregates of clinging I have not yet abandoned the ‘I am’ conceit, the desire [related to the notion] ‘I am’, and the underlying tendency towards ‘I am’, have not yet [fully] understood it, not yet become separated from it, not yet vomited it out.
“It is just like the fragrance of uppala lotuses, paduma lotuses, kumuda lotuses, puṇḍarīka lotuses ― is the fragrance in the roots? Is the fragrance distinct from the roots? Is the fragrance in the stalks, the leafs, the stamen, its finer and coarser parts? Or is it distinct from … its finer and coarser parts? Is this correctly spoken?”
The elders replied: “No, monk Khemaka. The fragrance is not in the roots of uppala lotuses, paduma lotuses, kumuda lotuses, puṇḍarīka lotuses, nor is the fragrance distinct from the roots. The fragrance is also not in the stalks, the leafs, the stamen, its fine and coarse parts, and the fragrance is also not distinct from … its fine and coarse parts.”
The monk Khemaka asked again: “Where is the fragrance?”
The elders replied: “The fragrance is in the flower.”
The monk Khemaka said again: “With me it is in the same way. Bodily form is not self and there is no self distinct from bodily form. Feeling … perception … formations … consciousness is not self, and there is no self distinct from consciousness. Although in relation to these five aggregates of clinging I see no self and nothing belonging to the self, still I have not yet abandoned the ‘I am’ conceit, the desire [related to the notion] ‘I am’, and the underlying tendency towards ‘I am’, have not yet [fully] understood it, not yet become separated from it, not yet vomited it out.
“Elders, allow me to speak a simile. Wise ones usually gain understanding because of a comparison through a simile. It is just like a wet-nurse who gives a cloth [used as diaper] to the launderer. With various kinds of lye and soap he washes out the dirt, yet there is still a remainder of smell. By mixing it with various kinds of fragrance he makes that disappear.
“In the same way, although the learned noble disciple rightly contemplates these five aggregates of clinging as not self and not belonging to a self, still he has not yet abandoned the ‘I am’ conceit in relation to these five aggregates of clinging, the desire [related to the notion] ‘I am’, and the underlying tendency towards ‘I am’, has not yet [fully] understood it, not yet become separated from it, not yet vomited it out.
“Yet at a later time he progresses in giving attention to these five aggregates of clinging by examining their rise and fall: this is bodily form, this is the arising of bodily form, this is the cessation of bodily form, this is feeling … perception … formations … consciousness, this is the arising of consciousness, this is the cessation of consciousness. Having contemplated the rise and fall of these five aggregates of clinging in this way, he completely relinquishes all ‘I am’ conceit, desire [related to the notion] ‘I am’, and the underlying tendency towards ‘I am’. This is called truly and rightly contemplating.”
When the monk Khemaka spoke this teaching, the elders attained the pure eye of Dharma that is remote from [mental] stains and free from [mental] dust, and the monk Khemaka by not clinging attained liberation from the influxes in his mind. Because of the benefit of the joy of Dharma, his body got completely rid of the illness.
Then the elder monks said to the monk Khemaka: “When we heard what [our] friend said for the first time, we already understood and already delighted in it, what to say of hearing him again and again. When asking [further] we wished that [our] friend manifests his refined eloquence. Not to harass you, [but] for you to be willing and able to teach in detail the Dharma of the Tathāgata, the arahant, the fully awakened one.”
Then the elders, hearing what the monk Khemaka had said, were delighted and received it respectfully.
Pāli parallel, Ven Bodhi translation
On one occasion a number of elder bhikkhus were dwelling at Kosambi in Ghosita’s Park. Now on that occasion the Venerable Khemaka was living at Jujube Tree Park, sick, afflicted, gravely ill.
Then, in the evening, those elder bhikkhus emerged from seclusion and addressed the Venerable Dasaka thus: “Come, friend Dasaka, approach the bhikkhu Khemaka and say to him: ‘The elders say to you, friend Khemaka: We hope that you are bearing up, friend, we hope that you are getting better. We hope that your painful feelings are subsiding and not increasing, and that their subsiding, not their increase, is to be discerned.’”
“Yes, friends,” the Venerable Dasaka replied, and he approached the Venerable Khemaka and delivered his message.
The Venerable Khemaka answered: “I am not bearing up, friend, I am not getting better. Strong painful feelings are increasing in me, not subsiding, and their increase, not their subsiding, is to be discerned.”
Then the Venerable Dasaka approached the elder bhikkhus and reported what the Venerable Khemaka had said. They told him: “Come, friend Dasaka, approach the bhikkhu Khemaka and say to him: ‘The elders say to you, friend Khemaka: These five aggregates subject to clinging, friend, have been spoken of by the Blessed One; that is, the form aggregate subject to clinging, the feeling aggregate subject to clinging, the perception aggregate subject to clinging, the volitional formations aggregate subject to clinging, the consciousness aggregate subject to clinging. Does the Venerable Khemaka regard anything as self or as belonging to self among these five aggregates subject to clinging?’”
“Yes, friends,” the Venerable Dasaka replied, and he approached the Venerable Khemaka and delivered his message.
The Venerable Khemaka replied: “These five aggregates subject to clinging have been spoken of by the Blessed One; that is, the form aggregate subject to clinging … the consciousness aggregate subject to clinging. Among these five aggregates subject to clinging, I do not regard anything as self or as belonging to self.”
Then the Venerable Dasaka approached the elder bhikkhus and reported what the Venerable Khemaka had said. They replied: “Come, friend Dasaka, approach the bhikkhu Khemaka and say to him: ‘The elders say to you, friend Khemaka: These five aggregates subject to clinging, friend, have been spoken of by the Blessed One; that is, the form aggregate subject to clinging … the consciousness aggregate subject to clinging. If the Venerable Khemaka does not regard anything among these five aggregates subject to clinging as self or as belonging to self, then he is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed.’”
“Yes, friends,” the Venerable Dasaka replied, and he approached the Venerable Khemaka and delivered his message.
The Venerable Khemaka replied: “These five aggregates subject to clinging have been spoken of by the Blessed One; that is, the form aggregate subject to clinging … the consciousness aggregate subject to clinging. I do not regard anything among these five aggregates subject to clinging as self or as belonging to self, yet I am not an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed. Friends, the notion ‘I am’ has not yet vanished in me in relation to these five aggregates subject to clinging, but I do not regard anything among them as ‘This I am.’”
Then the Venerable Dasaka approached the elder bhikkhus and reported what the Venerable Khemaka had said. They replied: “Come, friend Dasaka, approach the bhikkhu Khemaka and say to him: ‘The elders say to you, friend Khemaka: Friend Khemaka, when you speak of this “I am”—what is it that you speak of as “I am”? Do you speak of form as “I am,” or do you speak of “I am” apart from form? Do you speak of feeling … of perception … of volitional formations … of consciousness as “I am,” or do you speak of “I am” apart from consciousness? When you speak of this “I am,” friend Khemaka, what is it that you speak of as “I am”?’”
“Yes, friends,” the Venerable Dasaka replied, and he approached the Venerable Khemaka and delivered his message.
“Enough, friend Dasaka! Why keep running back and forth? Bring me my staff, friend. I’ll go to the elder bhikkhus myself.”
Then the Venerable Khemaka, leaning on his staff, approached the elder bhikkhus, exchanged greetings with them, and sat down to one side. The elder bhikkhus then said to him: “Friend Khemaka, when you speak of this ‘I am’ … what is it that you speak of as ‘I am’?”
“Friends, I do not speak of form as ‘I am,’ nor do I speak of ‘I am’ apart from form. I do not speak of feeling as ‘I am’ … nor of perception as ‘I am’ … nor of volitional formations as ‘I am’ … nor of consciousness as ‘I am,’ nor do I speak of ‘I am’ apart from consciousness. Friends, although the notion ‘I am’ has not yet vanished in me in relation to these five aggregates subject to clinging, still I do not regard anything among them as ‘This I am.’
“Suppose, friends, there is the scent of a blue, red, or white lotus. Would one be speaking rightly if one would say, ‘The scent belongs to the petals,’ or ‘The scent belongs to the stalk,’ or ‘The scent belongs to the pistils’?”
“No, friend.”
“And how, friends, should one answer if one is to answer rightly?”
“Answering rightly, friend, one should answer: ‘The scent belongs to the flower.’”
“So too, friends, I do not speak of form as ‘I am,’ nor do I speak of ‘I am’ apart from form. I do not speak of feeling as ‘I am’ … nor of perception as ‘I am’ … nor of volitional formations as ‘I am’ … nor of consciousness as ‘I am,’ nor do I speak of ‘I am’ apart from consciousness. Friends, although the notion ‘I am’ has not yet vanished in me in relation to these five aggregates subject to clinging, still I do not regard anything among them as ‘This I am.’
“Friends, even though a noble disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters, still, in relation to the five aggregates subject to clinging, there lingers in him a residual conceit ‘I am,’ a desire ‘I am,’ an underlying tendency ‘I am’ that has not yet been uprooted. Sometime later he dwells contemplating rise and fall in the five aggregates subject to clinging: ‘Such is form, such its origin, such its passing away; such is feeling … such is perception … such are volitional formations … such is consciousness, such its origin, such its passing away.’ As he dwells thus contemplating rise and fall in the five aggregates subject to clinging, the residual conceit ‘I am,’ the desire ‘I am,’ the underlying tendency ‘I am’ that had not yet been uprooted—this comes to be uprooted.
“Suppose, friends, a cloth has become soiled and stained, and its owners give it to a laundryman. The laundryman would scour it evenly with cleaning salt, lye, or cowdung, and rinse it in clean water. Even though that cloth would become pure and clean, it would still retain a residual smell of cleaning salt, lye, or cowdung that had not yet vanished. The laundryman would then give it back to the owners. The owners would put it in a sweet-scented casket, and the residual smell of cleaning salt, lye, or cowdung that had not yet vanished would vanish.
“So too, friends, even though a noble disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters, still, in relation to the five aggregates subject to clinging, there lingers in him a residual conceit ‘I am,’ a desire ‘I am,’ an underlying tendency ‘I am’ that has not yet been uprooted…. As he dwells thus contemplating rise and fall in the five aggregates subject to clinging, the residual conceit ‘I am,’ the desire ‘I am,’ the underlying tendency ‘I am’ that had not yet been uprooted—this comes to be uprooted.”
When this was said, the elder bhikkhus said to the Venerable Khemaka: “We did not ask our questions in order to trouble the Venerable Khemaka, but we thought that the Venerable Khemaka would be capable of explaining, teaching, proclaiming, establishing, disclosing, analysing, and elucidating the Blessed One’s teaching in detail. And the Venerable Khemaka has explained, taught, proclaimed, established, disclosed, analysed, and elucidated the Blessed One’s teaching in detail.”
This is what the Venerable Khemaka said. Elated, the elder bhikkhus delighted in the Venerable Khemaka’s statement. And while this discourse was being spoken, the minds of sixty elder bhikkhus and of the Venerable Khemaka were liberated from the taints by nonclinging.
such an audacious question - please provide the instructions to liberation 
Yes in a round about way, I think I’ve come to a simmilar place. All my life I have been under the delusion that a being can alleviate suffering in this world > Bhodisattva goals at whatever level…
thanks for your response. At this level of nuance, language plays such an important part so I will keep going over your words. But ultimately, I suppose, there is one sure way of finding out… 
