Majjhima Nikāya · Discourse 54

With Potaliya

Potaliyasutta

Setting
The land of the Aṅguttarāpans, near their town of Āpaṇa; in a forest grove
Speakers
The Buddha and Potaliya, a proud householder who believes he has renounced the world
Form
A dialogue that overturns an assumption — the Buddha distinguishes two senses of “cutting off business,” lists eight things to give up, and drives the lesson home with seven famous similes for the danger in sensual pleasures.
Length
~16 minutes to read
Northern parallel
MĀ 203 (Madhyama-āgama 203, “Potaliya”), with a Sanskrit fragment
Difficulty
★★★☆☆ — the narrative and similes are vivid and accessible; the contrast of “equanimity of diversity” and “equanimity of unity” near the end rewards a careful reading.

Why this discourse, fifty-fourth

Potaliya is a man who is sure he has already renounced the world. He has handed his entire fortune to his children and lives on “nothing more than food and clothes,” and he is offended — three times over — when the Buddha addresses him as “householder.” The discourse is the Buddha’s gentle, devastating reply: what you call cutting off business is one thing; what it means in the training of the Noble One is something else entirely.

The Pali word at the heart of the exchange, voh. āra-samuccheda, means “the cutting off of transactions, affairs, business.” Potaliya hears it as the legal and economic disengagement he has performed: no more property, no more management of the estate. The Buddha redirects the phrase inward. The real “business” to be cut off is not commerce but the whole inner economy of harm and craving — first the eight unwholesome activities of body, speech, and mind, and then, at the deepest level, the grasping at sensual pleasures itself.

To show how thoroughly that grasping must be released, the Buddha offers seven of the most memorable similes in all the discourses: the starving dog and the bare bone, the bird chased for its scrap of meat, the wind-blown torch, the pit of coals, the dream that vanishes on waking, the borrowed finery reclaimed, and the fruit tree felled with the climber still in it. Each says the same thing in a different key — that sensual pleasures “give little gratification and much suffering and distress, and are all the more full of drawbacks.” By the end, the proud renouncer who resented being called a householder humbly takes refuge as exactly that — a lay follower for life.

Reading guide

The teaching in one sentence

Potaliya prides himself on having “cut off all business” by giving away his wealth, but the Buddha shows that the noble cutting-off of business means abandoning eight harmful activities and — through seven similes exposing how little sensual pleasures give and how much they cost — releasing all grasping, until the path opens into the three knowledges.

The offended householder

The opening is a small comedy of manners with a serious point. The Buddha, finding Potaliya standing, offers him a seat and calls him “householder” (gahapati). Potaliya bristles — for he no longer thinks of himself as a householder at all — and only after the third time speaks up: it is “neither proper nor appropriate” to call him that, because he has “turned down all work and cut off all business.” He has divided his entire estate among his children and now lives simply, advising no one, managing nothing. By his own lights he is a renunciant. The Buddha does not argue the point about manners; he uses Potaliya’s own phrase — “cutting off business” — as the doorway to a far deeper teaching.

Two kinds of “cutting off business”

“The cutting off of business as you describe it is one thing, householder, but the cutting off of business in the training of the Noble One is quite different.” This is the hinge of the discourse. Potaliya has performed an outward renunciation — a transfer of assets. It is real and not to be despised, but it leaves the inner life untouched. One can give away every coin and still be ruled by greed, anger, and conceit. The renunciation the Buddha teaches is the cutting off of the inner transactions — the deals the mind is always making with craving. That is a renunciation no inheritance document can accomplish.

The eight things to give up

The Buddha first names eight unwholesome activities, each abandoned by relying on its opposite:

  1. Killing — relying on not killing
  2. Stealing — relying on not stealing
  3. Lying — relying on truthful speech
  4. Backbiting — relying on not slandering
  5. Greed and lust — relying on not being greedy
  6. Blaming and insulting — relying on not reviling
  7. Anger and distress — relying on not being angry
  8. Arrogance — relying on not being arrogant

For each, the noble disciple reflects in the same way: “If I were to do this, I would reprimand myself, sensible people would criticize me, and I could expect a bad rebirth. And the act is itself a fetter and a hindrance.” The list moves from the grossest harms (killing, stealing) through speech to the subtle inner faults (anger, arrogance) — a graded purification. But the Buddha then says something important: even all of this “does not constitute the cutting off of business in each and every respect.” Ethical purity is necessary but not yet complete. Something deeper remains.

The seven similes for sensual pleasures

That something deeper is the release of grasping at sensual pleasures themselves — and here the Buddha turns to imagery. Seven similes, each ending in the same refrain, build a cumulative case that the pleasures we chase cost far more than they give:

SimileWhat it shows
The bare boneA starving dog gnaws a fleshless, blood-smeared skeleton — never satisfied, only wearied. Pleasures promise nourishment they cannot give.
The scrap of meatA hawk seizes a scrap of meat and is chased and clawed by the others — it must drop it or be torn apart. What we grasp makes us a target.
The grass torchCarrying a blazing torch against the wind — hold on and you are burned. Pleasures held onto turn back on the one who holds them.
The pit of coalsDragged toward a pit of glowing coals, one writhes and struggles away — for the body knows what we will not admit: this leads to ruin.
The dreamLovely parks and ponds seen in a dream vanish on waking. Pleasures are insubstantial, gone the moment they are grasped.
The borrowed goodsA man parades in borrowed carriage and jewels; the owners reclaim them and he is left exposed. Nothing we enjoy is truly ours to keep.
The fruit treeA man up a fruit-laden tree; another, unable to climb, fells it at the root — climb down fast or die in the fall. Clinging to pleasures invites disaster.

The refrain: little gratification, much danger

Every simile resolves into the same recognition: “sensual pleasures give little gratification and much suffering and distress, and they are all the more full of drawbacks.” This is not a denial that pleasures are pleasant — the Buddha grants there is some gratification, “little.” The teaching is one of honest accounting: weighed against the chasing, the guarding, the loss, and the suffering they breed, the pleasures come out badly. Seeing this “with right understanding” is not a grim renunciation forced from outside; it is the natural release of a grip that one finally sees was never worth keeping.

Two equanimities: diversity and unity

After each of the framing similes comes a subtle and important line: having truly seen the danger, the disciple “shuns the equanimity based on diversity and develops only the equanimity based on unity.” Equanimity based on diversity (nānatta-upekkhā) is the scattered, even-tempered ordinariness we bring to the many objects of the five senses — a kind of low-grade neutrality spread across sights, sounds, and tastes. Equanimity based on unity (ekatta-upekkhā) is the gathered, unified equanimity of deep meditation, no longer dispersed among sense-objects. The movement of the path is from the first to the second: withdrawing equanimity from its scatter among sensual things and collecting it into the single, bright stillness from which insight can see.

The three knowledges, and Potaliya’s turnaround

“Relying on this supreme purity of mindfulness and equanimity” — the unified equanimity just described — the disciple’s path opens into the three knowledges: recollection of past lives, the divine eye, and the ending of the defilements. That is the cutting off of business “in each and every respect.” The Buddha then asks Potaliya whether he regards himself as having done anything comparable, and the proud renouncer is humbled: “Who am I? I am far from that.” He confesses he had it backwards — honoring wanderers of other paths as “thoroughbreds” and dismissing the Buddha’s mendicants — and now sees the truth reversed. The man who would not be called a householder goes for refuge as a lay follower for life. The arc is the discourse’s quiet masterstroke: real humility, not the title, is the beginning of the path.

Key terms

gahapati — householder. The term Potaliya resents, because he believes he has left the householder’s life behind. By the end he accepts it gladly, going for refuge as a lay follower.
vohāra-samuccheda — the cutting off of business, affairs, or transactions. The pun at the discourse’s heart: Potaliya means economic disengagement; the Buddha means the cutting off of the inner dealings with craving.
kāmā — sensual pleasures; the objects of the five senses and the desire for them. The seven similes all illustrate the ādīnava — the drawback or danger — in chasing them.
appassādā kāmā — “sensual pleasures give little gratification”; the refrain that closes each simile: little gratification, much suffering, all the more full of drawbacks. An honest accounting, not a denial of pleasure.
nānatta- / ekatta-upekkhā — equanimity based on diversity / on unity. The scattered neutrality spread across sense-objects, versus the gathered equanimity of deep meditation. The path moves from the first to the second.
ājanīya — a thoroughbred; one of true worth. Potaliya confesses he had mistaken who the real “thoroughbreds” were — honoring other wanderers and dismissing the Buddha’s mendicants — and now sees it reversed.

The text

The full discourse. The detailed analysis is given in full for “killing” and “arrogance”; the middle six are abbreviated, as in the source. All seven similes are given, with the closing refrain stated in full at the first and last. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).

“Do not call me householder”

§1So I have heard. At one time the Buddha was staying in the land of the Aṅguttarāpans, near the town of theirs named Āpaṇa.

§2Then the Buddha robed up in the morning and entered Āpaṇa for alms. After the meal, on his return from almsround, he went to a certain forest grove for the day’s meditation, and sat at the root of a tree.

§3Potaliya the householder also approached that forest grove while going for a walk. He was well dressed in sarong and cloak, with parasol and sandals. He went up to the Buddha, exchanged greetings, and stood to one side. The Buddha said to him, “There are seats, householder. Please sit if you wish.” When he said this, Potaliya was angry and upset. Thinking, “The ascetic Gotama addresses me as ‘householder’!” he stayed silent. For a second time, and a third time the Buddha said the same. The third time Potaliya said, “Worthy Gotama, it is neither proper nor appropriate for you to address me as ‘householder’.” “Well, householder, you have the features, attributes, and signs of a householder.” “Mister Gotama, it’s because I have turned down all work and cut off all business.” “In what way, householder?” “Worthy Gotama, all the money, grain, gold, and silver I used to have has been handed over to my children as their inheritance. And in this matter I do not advise or reprimand them, but live with nothing more than food and clothes. That’s how I have turned down all work and cut off all business.” “The cutting off of business as you describe it is one thing, householder, but the cutting off of business in the training of the Noble One is quite different.” “But what, sir, is cutting off of business in the training of the Noble One? Please teach me this.”

The eight things

§4The Buddha said: “Householder, these eight things lead to the cutting off of business in the training of the Noble One. What eight? Killing living creatures should be given up, relying on not killing. Stealing should be given up, relying on not stealing. Lying should be given up, relying on speaking the truth. Backbiting should be given up, relying on not backbiting. Greed and lust should be given up, relying on not being greedy and lustful. Blaming and insulting should be given up, relying on not blaming and insulting. Anger and distress should be given up, relying on not being angry and distressed. Arrogance should be given up, relying on not being arrogant. These are the eight things—stated in brief—that lead to the cutting off of business in the training of the Noble One.”

§5–6“Sir, please teach me these eight things in detail.” The Buddha said: “‘Killing living creatures should be given up.’ Why did I say it? It’s when a noble disciple reflects: ‘I am practicing to give up and cut off the fetters that might cause me to kill living creatures. But if I were to kill, because of that I would reprimand myself; sensible people, after examination, would criticize me; and when my body breaks up, after death, I could expect to be reborn in a bad place. And killing is itself a fetter and a hindrance. The distressing and feverish defilements that might arise because of killing do not occur in someone who does not kill.’ That’s what I said, and this is why I said it.”

The same analysis is given for the next six — stealing, lying, backbiting, greed and lust, blaming and insulting, anger and distress: each is “itself a fetter and a hindrance,” and the feverish defilements that arise from it “do not occur” in one who refrains.

§13–14“‘Arrogance should be given up, relying on not being arrogant.’ Why did I say it? A noble disciple reflects: ‘If I were to be arrogant, I would reprimand myself; sensible people would criticize me; I could expect a bad rebirth. And arrogance is itself a fetter and a hindrance. The feverish defilements that arise from arrogance do not occur in one who is not arrogant.’ These are the eight things, analyzed in detail, that lead to the cutting off of business. But just this much does not constitute the cutting off of business in each and every respect in the training of the Noble One.” “But how, sir, is there the cutting off of business in each and every respect? Please teach me this.”

The seven similes for sensual pleasures

§15“Householder, suppose a dog weak with hunger was hanging around a butcher’s shop. A deft butcher would toss them a skeleton scraped clean of flesh and smeared in blood. What do you think—gnawing on such a fleshless skeleton, would that dog get rid of its hunger?” “No, sir. Because that skeleton is scraped clean of flesh. That dog will only get weary and frustrated.” “In the same way, a noble disciple reflects: ‘With the simile of a skeleton the Buddha said that sensual pleasures give little gratification and much suffering and distress, and they are all the more full of drawbacks.’ Having truly seen this with right understanding, they shun equanimity based on diversity and develop only the equanimity based on unity, where all grasping to the worldly pleasures of the flesh ceases without remainder.

§16Suppose a vulture or crow or hawk grabbed a scrap of meat and flew away, and the other vultures, crows, and hawks kept chasing it, pecking and clawing. If it doesn’t quickly let go of that scrap of meat, wouldn’t that result in death or deadly suffering?” “Yes, sir.” …

§17Suppose a person carrying a blazing grass torch was to walk against the wind. If they don’t quickly let go of it, wouldn’t they burn their hands or arms, resulting in death or deadly suffering?” “Yes, sir.” …

§18Suppose there was a pit of glowing coals deeper than a man’s height, full of coals that neither flamed nor smoked. A person who wants to live and doesn’t want to die would be dragged towards it by two strong men. Wouldn’t they writhe and struggle to and fro?” “Yes, sir. For that person knows: ‘If I fall in, that will result in my death or deadly pain.’” …

§19Suppose a person was to see delightful parks, woods, meadows, and lotus ponds in a dream. But when they woke they couldn’t see them at all.” …

§20Suppose a man had borrowed some goods—a fine carriage and jeweled earrings—and, surrounded by these, proceeded through the middle of Āpaṇa. People seeing him would say, ‘This must be a wealthy man!’ But when the owners saw him, they’d take back what was theirs. Would that be enough for that man to get upset?” “Yes, sir. Because the owners took back what was theirs.” …

§21Suppose there was a dense forest grove near a village, with a tree laden with fruit, none of it fallen to the ground. Along came a person in need of fruit. Seeing the tree, and knowing how to climb, they’d think: ‘Why don’t I climb up, eat my fill, and fill my pouch?’ And so they did. Then a second person came, also in need of fruit, carrying a sharp axe. Not knowing how to climb, they’d think: ‘Why don’t I chop this tree down at the root?’ And so they’d chop it down. If the first person, up in the tree, doesn’t quickly come down, when the tree fell wouldn’t they break a limb, resulting in death or deadly suffering?” “Yes, sir.” “In the same way, a noble disciple reflects: ‘With the simile of the fruit tree the Buddha said that sensual pleasures give little gratification and much suffering and distress, and they are all the more full of drawbacks.’ Having truly seen this with right understanding, they shun equanimity based on diversity and develop only the equanimity based on unity, where all grasping to the worldly pleasures of the flesh ceases without remainder.

The three knowledges

§22Relying on this supreme purity of mindfulness and equanimity, that noble disciple recollects their many kinds of past lives—one, two, ten, a hundred thousand rebirths, through many eons of the world contracting and expanding… with features and details.

§23Relying on this supreme purity of mindfulness and equanimity, that noble disciple, with clairvoyance that is purified and superhuman, sees sentient beings passing away and being reborn… and understands how they pass on according to their deeds.

§24Relying on this supreme purity of mindfulness and equanimity, that noble disciple realizes the undefiled freedom of heart and freedom by wisdom in this very life, and lives having realized it with their own insight due to the ending of defilements.

Potaliya goes for refuge

§25“That’s how there is the cutting off of business in each and every respect in the training of the Noble One. What do you think, householder? Do you regard yourself as having cut off business in a way comparable to this?” “Who am I compared to one who has cut off business in each and every respect in the training of the Noble One? I am far from that. Sir, I used to think that the wanderers of other religions were thoroughbreds, and treated them accordingly, though they were not. I thought the mendicants were not thoroughbreds, and treated them accordingly, though they actually were. But now I shall understand that the wanderers of other religions are not thoroughbreds, and that the mendicants are—and treat each accordingly. The Buddha has inspired me to have love, confidence, and respect for ascetics!

§26Excellent, sir! Excellent! As if he were righting the overturned, or revealing the hidden, or pointing out the path to the lost, or lighting a lamp in the dark so people with clear eyes can see what’s there, the Buddha has made the teaching clear in many ways. I go for refuge to the Buddha, to the teaching, and to the mendicant Saṅgha. From this day forth, may the Buddha remember me as a lay follower who has gone for refuge for life.”

· · ·

Self-check quiz

Ten questions. Click an answer to see immediate feedback. No score is recorded — this is for your own checking.

Question 1 of 10
Why is Potaliya offended at the start of the discourse?
Correct: C. Potaliya has given away his fortune and lives simply, so he no longer considers himself a householder. Being called gahapati — three times — offends his sense of having already renounced the world.
Question 2 of 10
In what sense does Potaliya think he has “cut off all business”?
Correct: A. His “cutting off business” is an outward, economic disengagement: all his money, grain, gold, and silver have gone to his children as inheritance, and he neither advises nor manages them. Real, but it leaves the inner life untouched.
Question 3 of 10
What is “the cutting off of business in the training of the Noble One”?
Correct: D. The Buddha redirects Potaliya’s phrase inward. The real “business” to cut off is not commerce but the mind’s constant transactions with craving — a renunciation no transfer of property can accomplish.
Question 4 of 10
How are the “eight things” each given up?
Correct: B. For each — killing, stealing, lying, backbiting, greed, insulting, anger, arrogance — the disciple reflects that doing it would bring self-reproach, others’ criticism, and a bad rebirth, and that the act “is itself a fetter and a hindrance.” Refraining prevents the feverish defilements it would breed.
Question 5 of 10
In the simile of the starving dog, what does the bare bone represent?
Correct: C. A hungry dog gnawing a fleshless, blood-smeared skeleton can never satisfy its hunger — only tire itself out. So with sensual pleasures: they give “little gratification and much suffering,” promising a nourishment they cannot deliver.
Question 6 of 10
What common point do the similes of the scrap of meat, the grass torch, and the fruit tree all make?
Correct: A. The hawk chased for its meat, the torch carried against the wind, the climber in the felled tree — each must let go quickly or face “death or deadly suffering.” What we grip turns dangerous; release is safety.
Question 7 of 10
What is the refrain that closes each of the seven similes?
Correct: D. This is the honest accounting at the heart of the discourse. The Buddha does not deny that pleasures are pleasant — only “little.” Weighed against the chasing, guarding, loss, and suffering, they come out badly.
Question 8 of 10
What is the difference between “equanimity based on diversity” and “equanimity based on unity”?
Correct: B. Nānatta-upekkhā is even-tempered neutrality scattered across sights, sounds, and tastes; ekatta-upekkhā is the unified, bright stillness of absorption. The path withdraws equanimity from its scatter among sense-objects and collects it into the one place where insight can see.
Question 9 of 10
What does the complete “cutting off of business in each and every respect” finally open into?
Correct: C. Relying on the “supreme purity of mindfulness and equanimity” — the unified equanimity — the path culminates in the three knowledges and full liberation. That, not the giving-away of wealth, is the complete cutting-off of business.
Question 10 of 10
How does Potaliya respond by the end?
Correct: A. The proud renouncer is humbled: “Who am I? I am far from that.” He confesses he had honored other wanderers and dismissed the Buddha’s mendicants, now sees it reversed, and — the man who would not be called a householder — goes for refuge as a lay follower for life.
Answered 0 of 10 · Correct 0