This title might sound like a controversy, especially if you have all along been exposed to a religious hierarchy that places monastics at the top and lay followers at the bottom. In many traditional environments, we are taught to honor and respect monastics as holy. In some places, even the leftovers from their meals are considered blessed!

So how could the Buddha instruct a monk to apologise to a lay follower?

In reality, the Buddhist organizational structure is not as rigid or hierarchical as people often assume. Even during the Buddha’s time, there are numerous stories of laypeople with high spiritual attainments helping monastics gain enlightenment. And in modern times, across various traditions—including Chinese Mahayana and Theravada Buddhism—there are frequent instances where monastics attend talks given by laypeople, or consult them for meditation guidance.

So, if a monastic is in the wrong, there is absolutely nothing wrong with him or her apologising to laypeople. Monastics are not entitled to a blanket superiority.

Let us look at what we can learn from this story, drawn from Dhammapada Verses 73 and 74.

The Players: Sudhamma and Citta

The dispute arose between Thera Sudhamma (an elder, unenlightened monk) and Citta the householder (who was enlightened).

First, let us get to know Citta. This layman was recognized as the foremost in explaining the Dharma amongst the Buddha’s lay disciples. His journey into Buddhism began one day when he crossed paths with Arhat Mahanama, one of the five disciples who listened to the Buddha’s first sermon at the Deer Park. Mahanama was collecting alms, and Citta invited him to a meal at his home.

After the meal, Mahanama gave a discourse, and Citta attained the first stage of enlightenment (Sotapanna). Later, Citta built a monastery in his mango grove and offered it to the Sangha. There, he looked after the needs of all bhikkhus who visited, and Elder Sudhamma was installed as the resident care-taker monk.

One day, the Buddha’s two Chief Disciples, Sariputta and Maha Moggallana, came to the monastery. After listening to a discourse by Venerable Sariputta, Citta attained the Anagami (third stage of enlightenment) level.

In the spur of the moment, Citta invited both chief disciples to a meal offering at the monastery the following day, and they consented. Citta then invited Elder Sudhamma as well.

However, Sudhamma was deeply offended. He felt sidelined, as if his invitation was an afterthought. After all, Sudhamma was the resident caretaker of the monastery where the sermon had taken place, whereas Sariputta and Maha Moggallana were “guest” monks. Shouldn’t Citta have invited him first? Moreover, shouldn’t his approval have been obtained before holding an event in “his” monastery?

From a conventional social protocol perspective, Sudhamma’s feelings might make sense on a surface level. But within this context, Citta would never have guessed it would become an issue.

Ancient Drama: Sesame Cakes and Ego

Feeling insulted, Sudhamma rejected the invitation on the spot, despite Citta’s repeated requests.

However, the next day, Sudhamma appeared anyway—not to join the meal, but to inspect the grand offerings prepared by Citta before heading out for his alms. As he passed by, he made a snide remark to Citta:

“Everything seems complete… except sesame cakes are absent.”

This sounds harmless today, but everyone present understood the insult. Citta’s ancestors had apparently earned their living selling sesame cakes (a lowly street food). The remark was a subtle, biting put-down: “No matter how wealthy you are now, remember your humble family background.”

When Citta heard this, he called out Sudhamma’s wrongdoing on the spot, though his language was quite sharp. He said something to the effect of: “Monks should know gratitude better than animals.”

Let’s put this in perspective: Citta was the main sponsor of the monastery Sudhamma lived in. Citta had built the monastery and donated the land. Yes, Citta’s parentage involved humble street food, but those sesame cakes made all of this possible, didn’t they?

That sharp retort drove Sudhamma into a frenzied rage. (Remember: Citta was already an Anagami at this point in time. So his retort wouldn’t have been driven by malice)

Sudhamma quit his role as caretaker monk on the spot and traveled all the way to Jetavana Monastery in Savatthi to complain directly to the Buddha. Talk about ancient drama!

However, the Buddha did not validate Sudhamma’s perspective at all. Instead, he strongly reproached him.

The Buddha’s Admonition (Dhammapada Verses 73–74)

Dhammapada Verse 73: “The foolish bhikkhu desires praise for qualities he does not have, precedence among bhikkhus, authority in the monasteries, and veneration from those unrelated to him.”

Put simply, the Buddha was admonishing Sudhamma for an inflated ego that has no place in spiritual life. Not even if one tries to justify it through worldly protocol. The Buddha instructed Sudhamma to go back and apologise to Citta, which Sudhamma eventually did.

In terms of leadership positions and normal circumstances, it makes sense to consult the monk-in-charge before organizing events. But Sudhamma had weaponized petty protocol and turned into a wet blanket. A far more serious matter was at stake: Sudhamma’s own spiritual development. Compared to enlightenment, worldly protocol and courtesy pale into insignificance.

Dhammapada Verse 74: “Let both laymen and monks think, ‘By myself was this done; in every work, great or small, let them refer to me.’ Such is the ambition of the fool; his desires and pride increase.”

This verse explains how a person conceited by ego inflates it further by constantly thinking they are the chief contributor. Wishing to take all the credit, they end up feeding their pride.

The Plot Twist: The First Rejection

Fortunately, Sudhamma was willing to follow the Buddha’s instruction, though reluctantly. He went to Citta to apologise.

Here, we need to remember a crucial detail: Citta was already an Anagami. An Anagami (non-returner) has completely eradicated ill-will and aversion from their mind.

So, what happened? Citta rejected Sudhamma’s apology!

Shocked and bruised, Sudhamma went back to the Buddha to report the matter. And guess what? The Buddha instructed Sudhamma to go back and apologise again. This time, Sudhamma was even more unwilling because his ego had taken a severe hit from the first rejection.

Some commentaries suggest Citta rejected the first apology out of anger because he was still harboring resentment. Personally, I find that highly unlikely given that Citta was already an advanced practitioner free of ill-will. It is much more probable that Citta was deliberately engineering a situation to help break Sudhamma’s stubborn ego—and the Buddha simply played along.

To ensure success, the Buddha told Sudhamma to go back a second time, but this time, he had a fellow monk accompany him.

With Sudhamma’s ego thoroughly subdued during this second visit, Citta graciously accepted his apology. And because his pride had finally shattered, Sudhamma attained enlightenment and became an Arhat shortly after this incident.

According to commentary, Citta also offered a reconciliatory apology during Suddhamma’s second visit. Citta asked his forgiveness in return if he had unwittingly committed any wrongdoing without realising it. This is important because it establishes how we conduct ourselves for a peaceful relationship.

Takeaway for Our Practice

The Buddha was not condemning leadership or responsibility. Rather, he warned against ego-based leadership.

The danger begins when a spiritual practitioner or leader thinks:

• “This is my temple.”
• “These are my students.”
• “This project belongs to me.”
• “People should always consult me first.”
• “Everyone should know I was responsible.”

Such thoughts strengthen conceit and craving, even when outwardly one appears to be serving the Dharma.

The irony of this story is profound: Venerable Sudhamma’s temporary attachment to status became the very catalyst that led to his awakening. By recognizing and abandoning his conceit after the Buddha’s firm guidance, he crossed the finish line to Arahantship.

As for us, it is important to keep our ego low.

May all be well and happy.