MN 147The Shorter Advice to Rāhula
Pāli / Sanskrit:Cūḷarāhulovādasutta
The Buddha takes Rāhula with him to a secluded spot in order to lead him on to liberation.
Save your scripture progress
Create a free account to save scriptures, track progress, and continue your daily learning path.
– Middle Discourses 147
The Shorter Advice to Rāhula
So I have heard. At one time the Buddha was staying near Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery.
Then as he was in private retreat this thought came to his mind, “The qualities that ripen in freedom have ripened in Rāhula. Why don’t I lead him further to the ending of defilements?”
Then the Buddha robed up in the morning and, taking his bowl and robe, entered Sāvatthī for alms.
Then, after the meal, on his return from almsround, he addressed Venerable Rāhula, “Rāhula, get your sitting cloth. Let’s go to the Dark Forest for the day’s meditation.”
“Yes, sir,” replied Rāhula. Taking his sitting cloth he followed behind the Buddha.
Now at that time many thousands of deities followed the Buddha, thinking, “Today the Buddha will lead Rāhula further to the ending of defilements!”
Then the Buddha plunged deep into the Dark Forest and sat at the root of a tree on the seat spread out. Rāhula bowed to the Buddha and sat down to one side. The Buddha said to him:
“What do you think, Rāhula? Is the eye permanent or impermanent?”
“Impermanent, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?”
“Suffering, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”
“No, sir.”
“What do you think, Rāhula? Are sights permanent or impermanent?”
“Impermanent, sir.”
“But if they’re impermanent, are they suffering or happiness?”
“Suffering, sir.”
“But if they’re impermanent, suffering, and perishable, are they fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”
“No, sir.”
“What do you think, Rāhula? Is eye consciousness permanent or impermanent?”
“Impermanent, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?”
“Suffering, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”
“No, sir.”
“What do you think, Rāhula? Is eye contact permanent or impermanent?”
“Impermanent, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?”
“Suffering, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”
“No, sir.”
“What do you think, Rāhula? Anything included in feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness that arises dependent on eye contact: is that permanent or impermanent?”
“Impermanent, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?”
“Suffering, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”
“No, sir.”
“What do you think, Rāhula? Is the ear … nose … tongue … body … mind permanent or impermanent?”
“Impermanent, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?”
“Suffering, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”
“No, sir.”
“What do you think, Rāhula? Are ideas permanent or impermanent?”
“Impermanent, sir.”
“But if they’re impermanent, are they suffering or happiness?”
“Suffering, sir.”
“But if they’re impermanent, suffering, and perishable, are they fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”
“No, sir.”
“What do you think, Rāhula? Is mind consciousness permanent or impermanent?”
“Impermanent, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?”
“Suffering, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”
“No, sir.”
“What do you think, Rāhula? Is mind contact permanent or impermanent?”
“Impermanent, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?”
“Suffering, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”
“No, sir.”
“What do you think, Rāhula? Anything included in feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness that arises dependent on mind contact: is that permanent or impermanent?”
“Impermanent, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?”
“Suffering, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”
“No, sir.”
“Seeing this, a learned noble disciple grows disillusioned with the eye, sights, eye consciousness, and eye contact. And they grow disillusioned with anything included in feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness that arises dependent on eye contact. They grow disillusioned with the ear … nose … tongue … body … mind, ideas, mind consciousness, and mind contact. And they grow disillusioned with anything included in feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness that arises dependent on mind contact. Being disillusioned, desire fades away. When desire fades away they’re freed. When they’re freed, they know they’re freed.
They understand: ‘Rebirth is ended, the spiritual journey has been completed, what had to be done has been done, there is nothing further for this place.’”
That is what the Buddha said. Satisfied, Venerable Rāhula approved what the Buddha said. And while this discourse was being spoken, Rāhula’s mind was freed from defilements by not grasping.
And the stainless, immaculate vision of the Dhamma arose in those thousands of deities: “Everything that is liable to arise is liable to cease.”
The “…” is an abbreviation carried over from the Pāli original itself, called peyyāla. The early canon was memorized and recited, so passages repeated verbatim from a preceding discourse were commonly contracted to an elision mark rather than written out in full. Venerable Thích Minh Châu's translation preserves this convention. Some texts therefore look short — but that is the canonical form, not missing content or a truncated translation. The elided passages can be read in full in the preceding discourses of the same chapter.
Translations belong to the translator/source credited above. The bilingual compilation, presentation, and AI translations compiled by Inti are © Inti Foundation. Please attribute when quoting; do not bulk-copy or use commercially without permission.