Tipitaka Studies 18: Decoding the “Lohicca Sutta” — The Standard for True Teachers and the Right to Criticize
Introduction: A Crisis of Faith and the Question of “Prophetic Privilege”
In a modern landscape crowded with spiritual “Life Coaches” and meditation centers popping up like mushrooms, a critical question often arises among seekers: “What criteria should we use to measure the quality of a teacher?” Furthermore, is a spiritual leader or a “Master” truly beyond criticism?
The answer was recorded 2,500 years ago in the Lohicca Sutta. This discourse directly addresses the ethics of those who teach the Dhamma. In it, the Buddha deconstructs authoritarian power structures and shifts the focus entirely toward the “Effectiveness” of the teaching.
1. The Intellectual Trap: When Knowledge is Viewed as Private Property
The debate began with Lohicca the Brahmin, a wealthy landowner in Kosala, who harbored a dangerous “Wrong View” (Miccha-ditthi):
“An enlightened person should not teach others. Why? Because teaching creates new obligations and burdens. Besides, what can one person really do for another? (It’s a waste of energy, or perhaps, a fear of others becoming equals).”
This mindset reflects Intellectual Stinginess. It treats knowledge as a monopoly rather than a shared resource. The Buddha countered this logic with a sharp social analogy:
- If a King who rules a country refuses to share his resources, the citizens suffer.
- Similarly, if a Teacher who knows the path to liberation refuses to share it, they are essentially “doing harm” and acting as an “enemy” to those seeking freedom from suffering.
The Buddha pointed out that such a narrow attitude not only destroys social welfare but also leads the thinker toward a “State of Deprivation” (Hell), as it obstructs the growth and well-being of others.
2. The Audit Standard: Three Types of Teachers Who “Deserve Criticism”
The most fascinating part of this Sutta is that the Buddha categorized “Teachers” or “Masters” who fail the test and should be criticized. This critique isn’t about their “holiness” but about Empirical Results:
- Type 1: “The Blind Leading the Blind” (Self knows not – Students listen not) This is a teacher who has not attained realization and does not understand the true goal, yet insists on teaching. Consequently, students do not listen or follow.
- Status: A total failure. Like a man trying to force himself on a woman who is running away—it is futile and embarrassing.
- Type 2: “Abandoning One’s Own Field to Harvest Another’s” (Self knows not – Students listen) This teacher has not attained realization and lacks practice, yet possesses great rhetoric. Students are deluded into believing and following them.
- Status (The Most Dangerous): This is the most alarming group in society. They lead many people down the wrong path without the students realizing it. The Buddha compared this to a farmer who leaves his own field overgrown (his own mind is untrained) to interfere with the fields of others.
- Type 3: “Creating New Shackles” (Self knows – Students listen not) This teacher has attained realization and possesses true knowledge but lacks the skill to transmit it. As a result, students have no faith and do not practice accordingly.
- Status: Even with knowledge, if the teaching yields no results, it is like someone who has cut their old shackles (ended defilements) but inadvertently creates new shackles (the stress and trouble of ineffective teaching) for themselves.
3. The “Uncriticizable” Teacher
If most teachers have flaws, who is the perfect one? The Buddha defined only one type of teacher who “should not be criticized”: The Tathagata (the Buddha) or those who follow His footsteps—those who are endowed with Knowledge (Vijja) and Conduct (Carana) and can actually lead students to realize spiritual fruits.
The criterion for judgment is not “miracles” or “marketing,” but “The Success of the Student.” If the teaching enables students to gain wisdom, enter Jhana, or attain the stages of enlightenment, that is the ultimate proof of a true teacher.
Conclusion: From the Edge of the Abyss to Solid Ground Upon hearing this irrefutable reasoning, Lohicca the Brahmin realized the gravity of his error. He compared his feeling at that moment to:
“A man who pulls someone about to fall into a hellish pit back onto solid ground.”
The Takeaway: The Lohicca Sutta teaches us that in the spiritual world, “Results matter more than image.” We have the legitimate right to question and audit our teachers. If a teaching does not lead to the reduction of ego or true wisdom, it should be scrutinized. Simultaneously, for those who transmit knowledge—be they teachers, coaches, or influencers—intellectual stinginess or teaching what one does not truly know is a grave danger. It not only fails to help others but may unintentionally push them into an abyss.
