Ru-Yi Meditation Center
Saṃyutta Nikāya · Discourse 35.231

The Simile of the Latex-Producing Tree

Khīrarukkhopamasutta — Samuddavagga

Setting
Not restated in this discourse
Speakers
The Buddha alone, addressing the assembled mendicants
Form
A simile in two mirrored halves — a young, sap-filled tree and a dried, withered one — each applied to how readily sense objects overcome the mind
Length
~3 minutes to read
Northern parallel
A rough counterpart may exist in the Chinese Saṃyukta-āgama (T99), though this reading guide does not assert a specific matching sutra number
Difficulty
★★★☆☆ — a concrete, almost botanical image with a precise logical structure

Why this discourse

This discourse takes any monk or nun who still has greed, hate, and delusion — and has not given them up — and states a striking claim: if even trivial sense objects come into their range, those objects overcome the mind, let alone compelling ones. The simile that follows makes the logic concrete: a young, tender sapling of a latex-producing tree (a peepal, a banyan, a wavy leaf fig, or a cluster fig) bleeds latex the instant it's cut anywhere at all, because the latex is simply there, waiting in the wood. The discourse then reverses the claim for one who has given up greed, hate, and delusion: even compelling objects don't overcome such a mind, let alone trivial ones — because, like a tree dried up, withered, and decrepit for years, there is no latex left to draw out no matter where the axe falls.

Reading guide

Trivial overcomes, or compelling doesn't, and why

The discourse's own logic is precise, not merely poetic: it isn't that unabandoned greed, hate, and delusion make a mind vulnerable to strong objects specifically — even trivial ones suffice, “let alone those that are compelling.” The reverse claim is equally precise: an abandoned mind resists even compelling objects, “let alone those that are trivial.”

Four named tree species, not a generic tree

The simile names four specific latex-producing fig-family trees — assattho (peepal), nigrodho (banyan), pilakkho (wavy leaf fig), udumbaro (cluster fig) — the same family associated elsewhere in this canon with awakening trees for various Buddhas, chosen here simply for their latex, not for any such association.

Young and sappy, or dried and decrepit

The mirrored simile turns on a single variable, age and condition: “daharo taruṇo komārako” (tender, young, freshly grown) versus “sukkho kolāpo terovassiko” (dried up, withered, and decrepit for a year or more) — the tree's own physical state standing in directly for whether greed, hate, and delusion remain present or have been given up.

A dialogue embedded in an otherwise solitary teaching

Unlike SN 35.228–230 just before it, this discourse briefly shifts from pure monologue into a short confirming exchange — “would latex come out?”…“Yes, sir” — before the Buddha draws the parallel explicitly, a small structural variation within the vagga.

Key terms

khīrarukkho — a latex-producing tree — the source image for this discourse's own title and its central simile
daharo taruṇo komārako — tender, young, freshly grown — the condition of the sapling that bleeds latex at the lightest cut, paired with unabandoned greed, hate, and delusion
sukkho kolāpo terovassiko — dried up, withered, and decrepit for a year or more — the condition of the tree that yields no latex at all, paired with greed, hate, and delusion already given up
parittā cepi…āpāthaṁ āgacchanti pariyādiyantevassa cittaṁ — “if even trivial [objects] come into their range…they overcome their mind” — the discourse's own claim for the unabandoned mind, and its mirror-image negation for the abandoned one
ko pana vādo adhimattānaṁ — “let alone those that are compelling” (or, in the mirrored half, “let alone those that are trivial”) — the discourse's own a fortiori closing clause for each half

The text

The complete discourse: the claim and simile for the mind still gripped by greed, hate, and delusion, then the mirrored claim and simile for the mind that has given them up. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).

§1“Mendicants, take any monk or nun who, when it comes to sights known by the eye, still has greed, hate, and delusion, and has not given them up. If even trivial sights come into their range of vision they overcome their mind, let alone those that are compelling. Why is that? Because they still have greed, hate, and delusion, and have not given them up. When it comes to sounds … smells … tastes … touches … ideas known by the mind, they still have greed, hate, and delusion, and have not given them up. If even trivial thoughts come into the range of the mind they overcome their mind, let alone those that are compelling. Why is that? Because they still have greed, hate, and delusion, and have not given them up.

§2Suppose there was a latex-producing tree—such as a peepal, a banyan, a wavy leaf fig, or a cluster fig—that’s a tender young sapling. If a man were to chop it here and there with a sharp axe, would latex come out?” “Yes, sir. Why is that? Because it still has latex.” “In the same way, take any monk or nun who, when it comes to sights known by the eye, still has greed, hate, and delusion, and has not given them up. If even trivial sights come into their range of vision they overcome their mind, let alone those that are compelling. Why is that? Because they still have greed, hate, and delusion, and have not given them up.

§3When it comes to sounds … smells … tastes … touches … ideas known by the mind, they still have greed, hate, and delusion, and have not given them up. If even trivial thoughts come into the range of the mind they overcome their mind, let alone those that are compelling. Why is that? Because they still have greed, hate, and delusion, and have not given them up.

§4Take any monk or nun who, when it comes to sights known by the eye, has no greed, hate, and delusion left, and has given them up. If even compelling sights come into their range of vision they don’t overcome their mind, let alone those that are trivial. Why is that? Because they have no greed, hate, and delusion left, and have given them up. When it comes to sounds … smells … tastes … touches … ideas known by the mind, they have no greed, hate, and delusion left, and have given them up. If even compelling ideas come into the range of the mind they don’t overcome their mind, let alone those that are trivial. Why is that? Because they have no greed, hate, and delusion left, and have given them up. Suppose there was a latex-producing tree—such as a peepal, a banyan, a wavy leaf fig, or a cluster fig—that’s dried up, withered, and decrepit. If a man were to chop it here and there with a sharp axe, would latex come out?” “No, sir. Why is that? Because it has no latex left.”

§5“In the same way, take any monk or nun who, when it comes to sights known by the eye, has no greed, hate, and delusion left, and has given them up. If even compelling sights come into their range of vision they don’t overcome their mind, let alone those that are trivial. Why is that? Because they have no greed, hate, and delusion left, and have given them up. When it comes to sounds … smells … tastes … touches … ideas known by the mind, they have no greed, hate, and delusion left, and have given them up. If even compelling thoughts come into the range of the mind they don’t overcome their mind, let alone those that are trivial. Why is that? Because they have no greed, hate, and delusion left, and have given them up.”

· · ·

Self-check quiz

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

Question 1 of 5
What claim does this discourse make about a mendicant who still has unabandoned greed, hate, and delusion?
Correct: A. "If even trivial sights come into their range of vision they overcome their mind, let alone those that are compelling."
Question 2 of 5
Which four tree species does the simile name as latex-producing?
Correct: A. Assattho, nigrodho, pilakkho, udumbaro — four named members of the fig family.
Question 3 of 5
What single variable distinguishes the two halves of this simile's own tree?
Correct: A. Daharo taruṇo komārako (tender, young) versus sukkho kolāpo terovassiko (dried up, withered, decrepit).
Question 4 of 5
What claim does this discourse make about a mendicant who has already given up greed, hate, and delusion?
Correct: A. The mirrored claim: "If even compelling sights come into their range of vision they don't overcome their mind, let alone those that are trivial."
Question 5 of 5
How does this discourse's own structure differ briefly from SN 35.228–230 just before it?
Correct: A. A brief question-and-answer moment breaks the otherwise solitary teaching, before the Buddha draws the parallel explicitly.
Answered 0 of 5 · Correct 0

Further reading

← PreviousSN 35.230 · The Simile of the Angler