Ru-Yi Meditation Center
Saṃyutta Nikāya · Discourse 42.10

With Maṇicūḷaka

Maṇicūḷakasutta — Gāmaṇivagga

Setting
Rājagaha, the Bamboo Grove; a royal court gathering
Speakers
Maṇicūḷaka, a chief present at a royal gathering, then questioning the Buddha directly
Form
A court debate reported, then confirmed and clarified by the Buddha himself
Length
~1 minute 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 clean, historically significant ruling on monastic economics

Why this discourse

This discourse records a real live debate: at a royal gathering, someone claims that Buddhist mendicants may properly accept gold and silver. The chief Maṇicūḷaka corrects the assembly on the spot, then brings the exchange to the Buddha himself to confirm he represented the teaching accurately. The Buddha's own confirmation is unequivocal and reasoned: accepting gold and silver would put mendicants on the same footing as accepting any of the five kinds of sensual stimulation, incompatible with the ascetic life itself — and closes with a clarifying principle distinguishing ordinary practical needs (which may be sought) from money specifically (which may not, under any circumstance).

Reading guide

A public debate, checked against the source

Maṇicūḷaka does not simply assume he is right; he brings his own already-successful defense of the correct position back to the Buddha specifically to verify he “repeated what the Buddha has said” rather than misrepresenting him — a model of checking one's own teaching against its source.

An equivalence, not a special rule

The Buddha's own reasoning does not treat gold and silver as an arbitrary prohibited item; he equates accepting them with accepting any of the five kinds of sensual stimulation, making the prohibition a direct consequence of what renunciation itself already means.

A clean line: things needed, not currency itself

The closing principle — grass sought by one needing grass, wood by one needing wood, a cart by one needing a cart, a worker by one needing a worker, but never money itself — draws a precise boundary: seeking specific practical necessities is permitted; seeking or accepting currency, under any characterization, is not.

Key terms

jātarūparajataṁ — “gold and currency” — the specific item this discourse's own debate concerns
nikkhittamaṇisuvaṇṇā — “having set aside gems and gold” — Maṇicūḷaka's own correct description of Buddhist mendicants
pañca kāmaguṇā — “the five kinds of sensual stimulation” — what accepting gold and silver is directly equated with in the Buddha's own reasoning
vuttavādī... na ca abhūtena abbhācikkhati — “repeats what I have said... doesn't misrepresent me with an untruth” — the Buddha's own confirmation that Maṇicūḷaka spoke accurately
tiṇaṁ tiṇatthikena pariyesitabbaṁ — “straw may be looked for by one needing straw” — the closing principle distinguishing ordinary practical needs from money itself

The text

The complete discourse. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).

§1At one time the Buddha was staying near Rājagaha, in the Bamboo Grove, the squirrels’ feeding ground. Now at that time while the king’s retinue was sitting together in the royal compound this discussion came up among them, “Gold and currency are proper for ascetics who follow the Sakyan. They accept and receive gold and currency.”

§2Now at that time the chief Maṇicūḷaka was sitting in that assembly. He said to that retinue, “Good masters, don’t say that. Gold and currency are not proper for ascetics who follow the Sakyan. They neither accept nor receive gold and currency. They have set aside gems and gold, and quit using gold and currency.” He was able to persuade that assembly. Then Maṇicūḷaka went up to the Buddha, bowed, sat down to one side, and told him what had happened. He then said,

§3“Answering this way, I trust that I repeat what the Buddha has said, and don’t misrepresent him with an untruth. I trust my explanation is in line with the teaching, and that there are no legitimate grounds for rebuttal or criticism.” “Indeed, in answering this way you repeat what I’ve said, and don’t misrepresent me with an untruth. Your explanation is in line with the teaching, and there are no legitimate grounds for rebuttal or criticism. Gold and currency are not proper for ascetics who follow the Sakyan. They neither accept nor receive gold and currency. They have set aside gems and gold, and quit using gold and currency. If gold and currency were proper for them, then the five kinds of sensual stimulation would also be proper. And if the five kinds of sensual stimulation are proper for them, you should categorically regard them as not having the qualities of an ascetic or a follower of the Sakyan. Rather, chief, I say this: Straw may be looked for by one needing straw; wood may be looked for by one needing wood; a cart may be looked for by one needing a cart; a workman may be looked for by one needing a workman. But in any case, there is no way they can accept or look for gold and currency, I say .”

· · ·

Self-check quiz

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

Question 1 of 3
What does Maṇicūḷaka do after successfully defending the correct position at the royal gathering?
Correct: A. Checking his own teaching against its source rather than simply trusting his own judgment.
Question 2 of 3
What does the Buddha equate accepting gold and silver with?
Correct: A. Making the prohibition a direct consequence of what renunciation itself already means.
Question 3 of 3
What closing principle distinguishes what mendicants may and may not seek?
Correct: A. A precise boundary between practical necessity and currency itself, under any characterization.
Answered 0 of 3 · Correct 0

Further reading

← PreviousSN 42.9 · Families