MN 67 would Buddha really have stopped teaching because of misbehaving junior monks? Why did Sariputta and Moggallana have different reactions?

 

● MN ⁶⁷ Cātumā: (name of town)

 MN ⁶⁷ – MN 67 Cātuma: At Cātumā
    MN ^67.1 - (Buddha dismisses 500 monks led by Sāriputta and Moggallāna for being noisy)
        MN ^67.1.1 - (sakyan clansman appeal to buddha to forgive monks)
        MN ^67.1.2 - (simile of seedling and young calf ↔ inexerienced monks who were dismissed)
        MN ^67.1.3 - (Brahma Sahampati appeals to Buddha with same similes)
    MN ^67.2 - (Sariputta tells Buddha he would also live in solitude like him if monks were permanently dismissed)
    MN ^67.3 - (Moggallāna tells Buddha he would take over teaching responsibilities)
    MN ^67.4 - (four dangers of waves, crocodiles, whirlpools, and sharks.)
        MN ^67.4.1 - (danger of waves ↔ disrobing from anger and distress)
        MN ^67.4.2 - (danger of crocodiles ↔ disrobing from gluttony)
        MN ^67.4.3 - (danger of whirlpools ↔ disrobing from desiring 5kg sensual pleasures)
        MN ^67.4.4 - (danger of sharks ↔ disrobing from lust for women)

The sutta leaves out so many interesting details.

Was the Buddha seriously thinking of retiring from teaching, because it was too tiresome to deal with newly ordained monks?

I suspect if the laypeople and Brahma Sahampati had not intervened on the monks' behalf, the Buddha would have at least taken a few weeks or few months vacation to get some rest. 

It's very fascinating how Sariputta reacted. Why did he react that way?

In the Vinaya, the Buddha told some of his earliest disciples, something like, "let no two monks go in the same direction, travel far and wide to spread the Dhamma." 

Why did Sariputta want to join the Buddha in permanent retirement? Was he tired of teaching too? Did he not feel the responsibility to carry on spreading Dhamma for future generations?

Moggallana gave the answer the Buddha wanted, which was that he and Sariputta should continue to teach monks when the Buddha stopped teaching. 

I wondered though, did Moggallana really have the answer ready for the Buddha because that was his own idea, or because he read the Buddha's mind to see what he wanted (Moggallana was known as foremost in psychic powers), and also seeing Sariputta gave the wrong answer. 

Moggallana thinking to himself silently: "Damn it! I was going to say I wanted to retire too, but the Buddha just rebuked Sariputta for saying that so I better think of something else or just read the Buddha's mind."

Something else we know about these two chief disciples,  from other suttas, 

is that Sariputta is known as the guy to go to lead new disciples to stream entry,

and Moggallana was the one to lead stream enterers to arahantship.

I'm inclined to believe Mogallana sincerely felt the weight of responsibility to keep Dhamma alive in the world out of his own motivation. 

MN 32 supports that. 

Whereas all of the other major disciples described the most famous feature of themselves,

Moggallana surprises us with this response to the question of what kind of monk he finds to be most admirable:

 MN ³² – MN 32 Mahā-gosiṅga: Longer Discourse at Gosiṅga
    MN ^32.1 - (several famous senior disciples get together)
    MN ^32.2 - (Sāriputta asks each to describe their ideal monk)
    MN ^32.3 - (Ānānda → learned monk, teaches widely)
    MN ^32.4 - (Revata → monk who enjoys solitude and mastery of samādhi)
    MN ^32.5 - (Anuruddha → monk who has powerful divine eye)
    MN ^32.6 - (mahākassapa → monk who is content with little, mastery of whole Dharma program)
    MN ^32.7 - (Mahāmoggallāna → monk enjoys Dhamma discussion with back and forth questioning)
    MN ^32.8 - (Sāriputta → master of mind, abides in any attainment any time like king picking out outfit)
    MN ^32.9 - (monks report back to Buddha their conversation)
    MN ^32.10 - (Buddha tells them his ideal monk → doesn’t get up from sitting until they attain arahantship)

32.7 - (Mahāmoggallāna → monk enjoys Dhamma discussion with back and forth questioning)

Evaṃ vutte, āyasmā sāriputto āyasmantaṃ mahāmoggallānaṃ etadavoca:	When he had spoken, Sāriputta said to Mahāmoggallāna:
“byākataṃ kho, āvuso moggallāna, āyasmatā mahākassapena yathāsakaṃ paṭibhānaṃ.	“Reverend Moggallāna, Mahākassapa has answered by speaking from his heart.
Tattha dāni mayaṃ āyasmantaṃ mahāmoggallānaṃ pucchāma:	And now we ask you the same question.”
‘ramaṇīyaṃ, āvuso moggallāna, gosiṅgasālavanaṃ, dosinā ratti, sabbaphāliphullā sālā, dibbā, maññe, gandhā sampavanti;
kathaṃrūpena, āvuso moggallāna, bhikkhunā gosiṅgasālavanaṃ sobheyyā’”ti?
“Idhāvuso sāriputta, dve bhikkhū abhidhammakathaṃ kathenti, te aññamaññaṃ pañhaṃ pucchanti, aññamaññassa pañhaṃ puṭṭhā vissajjenti, no ca saṃsādenti, dhammī ca nesaṃ kathā pavattinī hoti.	“Reverend Sāriputta, it’s when two monks engage in discussion about The Dharma. They question each other and answer each other’s questions without faltering, and their discussion on The Dharma flows on.
Evarūpena kho, āvuso sāriputta, bhikkhunā gosiṅgasālavanaṃ sobheyyā”ti.	That’s the kind of monk who would beautify this park.”

It's natural people who love discussing Dhamma would not feel the urge to retire early from teaching.

One other point of reference.

Both the Buddha and Mogallana, said they had the power to extend their life to the length of (or maybe just the remainder) of the aeon.

Someone who could maintain good physical and mental health, loves to talk about Dhamma, would seem unlikely to want to retire early from teaching.

Forum discussion

https://www.reddit.com/r/theravada/comments/179aw3b/comment/k5547uc/?context=3


the-moving-finger·15 hr. ago·edited 15 hr. ago


It's difficult to know. At various points throughout the canon, the Buddha does seem to express that teaching is vexing and that his mind inclines towards silent contemplation instead. On each occasion he waivers, it is compassion that moves him to relent.

I think it's interesting that Sāriputta is asked first and responds the same way the Buddha initially did. Upon hearing the Buddha's rebuke, Moggallāna gets a second crack at the question and answers in line with the Buddha's more considered opinion. Namely, that there must always be someone who takes on the burden of teaching.

When the monks return the very first lesson he gives them is the difficulty of monastic life. I think there's significance to that. A group of rowdy, noisy monastics show up on his door and the first thing he tells them is essentially, "this is going to be difficult."

The wise desire seclusion. Only great compassion is sufficient to persuade them to teach. It is therefore incumbent on the renunciants not to waste the teacher's time. If one enters into the homeless life it must be with one's whole heart, mindful of the difficulties ahead. One should not impinge on the solitude of a Buddha if one is planning to quit or treat the practice without the proper respect.

Finally, I think the sutta is important for those who are teachers. There will be moments when you don't feel you can stand it anymore. In such times it's good to know even the Buddha thought that occasionally. However, the role of the teacher is too important to have nobody fill it. Contemplation of compassion is the way to carry on. Compassion for oneself, however, means we can also set appropriate boundaries with our students.