Milindapanha (questions of King Milinda)

by T. W. Rhys Davids | 1890 | 204,651 words

The English translation of the Milindapanha (lit. “questions of King Milinda”) an ancient Buddhist text originally written in Northern India around the 1st century BCE. It became significant in Ceylon (Sri Lanka), where it has been preserved, translated into Pali and Sinhalese, and widely respected. The Milindapanha presents dialogues between King ...

Go directly to: Footnotes.

Chapter 4g: Devadatta

17. 'Venerable Nāgasena, is the consequence the same to him who does good and to him who does evil, or is there any difference in the two cases?'

'There is a difference, O king, between good and evil. Good works have a happy result, and lead to Sagga [1], and evil works have an unhappy result, and lead to Niraya [2].'

'But, venerable Nāgasena, your people say that Devadatta was altogether wicked, full of wicked dispositions, and that the Bodisat [3] was altogether pure, full of pure dispositions [4]. And yet Devadatta, through successive existences [5], was not only quite equal to the Bodisat, but even sometimes superior to him, both in reputation and in the number of his adherents.

18. 'Thus, Nāgasena, when Devadatta became the Purohita (family Brāhman, royal chaplain) of Brahmadatta, the king, in the city of Benares, then the Bodisat was a wretched Kaṇḍāla (outcast) [6] who knew by heart a magic spell. And by repeating his spell he produced mango fruits out of season [7]. This is one case in which the Bodisat was inferior to Devadatta in birth, [201] inferior to him in reputation.'

19. 'And again, when Devadatta became a king, a mighty monarch of the earth [8], living in the enjoyment of all the pleasures of sense, then the Bodisat was an elephant, decked with all manner of ornaments that the king might make use of them. And the king, being put out of temper at the sight of his graceful and pleasant style of pace and motion, said to the elephant trainer with the hope of bringing about the death of the elephant: "Trainer, this elephant has not been properly trained, make him perform the trick called 'Sky walking.'" In that case too the Bodisat was inferior to Devadatta,—was a mere foolish animal [9].'

20. 'And again, when Devadatta became a man who gained his living by winnowing grain [10], then the Bodisat was a monkey called "the broad earth." Here again we have the difference between an animal and a man, and the Bodisat was inferior in birth to Devadatta [11].'

21. 'And again, when Devadatta became a man, by name Soṇuttara, a Nesāda (one of an outcast tribe of aborigines, who lived by hunting), and was of great strength and bodily power, like an elephant, then the Bodisat was the king of elephants under the name of the "Six-tusked." And in that birth, the hunter slew the elephant. In that case too Devadatta was the superior [12].'

22. 'And again, when Devadatta became a man, a wanderer in the woods, without a home, then the Bodisat was a bird, a partridge who knew the Vedic hymns. And in that birth too the woodman killed the bird. So in that case also Devadatta was the superior by birth [13].'

23. 'And again, when Devadatta became the king of Benares, by name Kalābu, then the Bodisat was an ascetic who preached kindness to animals. And the king (who was fond of sport), enraged with the ascetic, had his hands and feet cut off like so many bambū sprouts [14]. In that birth, too, Devadatta was the superior, both in birth and in reputation among men.'

24. 'And again, when Devadatta became a man, a woodman, then the Bodisat was Nandiya the monkey king. And in that birth too the man killed the monkey, and his mother besides, and his younger brother. So in that case also it was Devadatta who was the superior in birth [15].'

25. 'And again, when Devadatta became a man, a naked ascetic, by name Kārambhiya, then the Bodisat was a snake king called "the Yellow one." So in that case too it was Devadatta [202] who was the superior in birth [16].'

26. 'And again, when Devadatta became a man, a crafty ascetic with long matted hair, then the Bodisat was a famous pig, by name "the Carpenter." So in that case too it was Devadatta who was the superior in birth [17].'

27. 'And again, when Devadatta became a king among the Cetas, by name Sura Paricara [18], who had the power of travelling through the air at a level above men’s heads [19], then the Bodisat was a Brahman named Kapila. So in that case too it was Devadatta who was the superior in birth and in reputation.'

28. 'And again, when Devadatta became a man, by name Sāma, then the Bodisat was a king among the deer, by name Ruru. So in that case too it was Devadatta who was the superior in birth [20].'

29. 'And again, when Devadatta became a man, a hunter wandering in the woods, then the Bodisat was a male elephant, and that hunter seven times broke off and took away the teeth of the elephant. So in that case too it was Devadatta who was the superior in respect of the class of beings into which he was born [21].'

30. 'And again, when Devadatta became a jackal who wanted to conquer the world [22], and brought the kings of all the countries in India under his control, then the Bodisat was a wise man, by name Vidhura. So in that case too it was Devadatta who was the superior in glory.'

31. 'And again, when Devadatta became the elephant who destroyed the young of the Chinese partridge, then the Bodisat was also an elephant, the leader of his herd. So in that case they were both on a par [23].'

32. 'And again, when Devadatta became a, yakkha, by name Unrighteous, then the Bodisat too was a yakkha, by name Righteous. So in that case too they were both on a par [24].'

33. 'And again, when Devadatta became a sailor, the chief of five hundred families, then the Bodisat too was a sailor, the chief of five hundred families. So in that case too they were both on a par [25].'

34. 'And again, when Devadatta became a caravan leader, the lord of five hundred waggons, then the Bodisat too was a caravan leader, the lord of five hundred waggons. So in that case too they were both on a par [26].'

35. [203] 'And again, when Devadatta became a king of deer, by name Sākha, then the Bodisat was a king of deer, by name Nigrodha. So in that case too they were both on a par [27].'

36. 'And again, when Devadatta became a commander-in-chief by name Sākha, then the Bodisat was a king, by name Nigrodha. So in that case too they were both on a par [28].'

37. 'And again, when Devadatta became a brahman, by name Khaṇḍahāla, then the Bodisat was a prince, by name Canda. So in that case that Khaṇḍahāla was the superior [29].'

38. 'And again, when Devadatta became a king, by name Brahmadatta, then the Bodisat was his son, the prince called Mahā Paduma. In that case the king had his son cast down seven times, from the precipice from which robbers were thrown down. And inasmuch as fathers are superior to and above their sons, in that case too it was Devadatta was the superior [30].'

39. 'And again, when Devadatta became a king, by name Mahā Patāpa, then the Bodisat was his son, Prince Dhamma-pāla; and that king had the hands and feet and head of his son cut off. So in that case too Devadatta was the superior [31].'

40. 'And now again, in this life, they were in the Sākya clan, and the Bodisat became a Buddha, all wise, the leader of the world, and Devadatta having left the world to join the Order founded by Him who is above the god of gods, and having attained to the powers of Iddhi, was filled with lust to become himself the Buddha. Come now, most venerable Nāgasena! Is not all that I have said true, and just, and accurate?'

41. 'All the many things which you, great king, have now propounded, are so, and not otherwise.'

'Then, Nāgasena, unless black and white are the same in kind, it follows that good and evil bear equal fruit.'

'Nay, not so, great king! Good and evil have not the same result. Devadatta was opposed by everybody. No one was hostile to the Bodisat. And the hostility which Devadatta felt towards the Bodisat, that came to maturity and bore fruit in each successive birth. And so also as Devadatta, when he was established in lordship over the world, [204] was a protection to the poor, put up bridges and courts of justice and rest-houses for the people, and gave gifts according to his bent to Samanas and Brahmans, to the poor and needy and the wayfarers, it was by the result of that conduct that, from existence to existence, he came into the enjoyment of so much prosperity. For of whom, O king, can it be said that without generosity and self-restraint, without self-control and the observance of the Upasatha [32], he can reach prosperity?

'And when, O king, you say that Devadatta and the Bodisat accompanied one another in the passage from birth to birth, that meeting together of theirs took place not, only at the end of a hundred, or a thousand, or a hundred thousand births, but was in fact constantly and frequently taking place through an immeasurable period of time [33]. For you should regard that matter in the light of the comparison drawn by the Blessed One between the case of the purblind tortoise and the attainment of the condition of a human being. And it was not only with Devadatta that such union took place. Sāriputta the Elder also, O king, was through thousands of births the father, or the grandfather, or the uncle [34], or the brother, or the son, or the nephew, or the friend of the Bodisat; and the Bodisat was the father, or the grandfather, or the uncle, or the brother, or the son, or the nephew, or the friend of Sāriputta the Elder.

'All beings in fact, O king, who, in various forms as creatures, are carried down the stream of transmigration, meet, as they are whirled along in it, both with pleasant companions and with disagreeable ones-just as water whirled along in a stream meets with pure and impure substances, with the beautiful and with the ugly.

'And when, O king, Devadatta as the god, had been himself Unrighteous, and had led others into unrighteousness of life, he was burnt in purgatory for an immeasurable period of time [35]. [205] But the Bodisat, who, as the god, had been himself Righteous, and had led others into righteousness of life, lived in all the bliss of heaven for a like immeasurable period of time. And whilst in this life, Devadatta, who had plotted injury against the Buddha, and had created a schism in the Order, was swallowed up by the earth, the Tathāgata, knowing all that can be known, arrived at the insight of Buddhahood [36], and was completely set free (from the necessity of becoming) by the destruction of all that leads to re-existence.'

'Very good, Nāgasena! That is so, and I accept it as you say [37].'

[Here ends the dilemma as to Devadatta’s superiority to the Bodisat in previous births.]

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

That is to a temporary life in heaven.

[2]:

That is to life in a temporary hell (or purgatory).

[3]:

Bodhi-satto (Wisdom-Child). The individual who (through virtue practised in successive lives) was becoming the Buddha.

[4]:

'Wicked' and 'pure' are in the Pāli kaṇhe and sukka, literally, 'dark' and light.' The only other passage I recollect where these names of colours are used in an ethical sense is the 87th verse of the Dhammapada. Professor Max Müller there renders: 'A wise man should leave the dark state (of ordinary life), and follow the bright state (of the Bhikshu),' (S. B. E., Vol. X, p. 26.) But the words should certainly be translated: 'A wise man should put away wicked dispositions, and cultivate purity of heart.' Bhāvetha could never refer to adopting or following any outward profession. It is exclusively used of the practice, cultivation, of inward feelings. And the commentary, which is quoted by Professor Fausböll, takes the passage in the Dhammapada in that sense, just as Hīnaṭi-kumburē (p. 271) does here.

[5]:

Bhave bhave, which would be more accurately rendered 'in the course of his gradual becoming.'

[6]:

Kavaka-kaṇḍāla. The Kaṇḍālas are a well-known caste still existing in India—if indeed that can rightly be called a caste which is beneath all others. Chavaka is not in Childers, but is applied below (p. 256 of our text) to Māra, the Buddhist Satan. See also the next note.

[7]:

This is not a summary of the 309th Jātaka, for it differs from that story as published by Professor Fausböll (vol. iii, pp. p. 285 217-30), and also from the older and shorter version contained in the Old Commentary on the Pātimokkha (on the 69th Sakhiya, Vinaya IV, pp. 203, 204). [The name of that story in Professor Fausböll’s edition is Khavaka-Jātaka, but throughout the story itself the word Kaṇḍāla is used in the passages corresponding to those in which Professor Fausböll has Chapaka (sic),—a coincidence which throws light on our author, Chavaka-kaṇḍāla.] The story here referred to is the Amba Jātaka (No. 474) in which the word Khavaka does not occur.

[8]:

'Of Magadha,' says Hīnaṭi-kumburē (p. 272).

[9]:

This is the 122nd Jātaka, there called the Dummedha Jātaka. The king has the elephant taken to the top of the Vepulla mountain outside Rājagaha. Then having made him stand first on three feet, then on two, then on one, he demands of the trainer to make him stand in the air. Then the elephant flies away to Benares!

[10]:

Pavane naṭṭhāyiko. But as Hīnaṭi-kumburē renders all this: 'a farmer in Benares who gained his living by husbandry,' I would suggest pavanena ṭṭhāyiko as the right reading.

[11]:

I cannot unfortunately trace this story among the Jātakas.

[12]:

I do not know which Jātaka is here referred to.

[13]:

This must be the 438th Jātaka, there called the Tittira Jātaka. In the summary Devadatta is identified with the hypocritical ascetic who killed and ate the wise partridge.

[14]:

This is the 313th Jātaka, there called the Khanti-vadi Jātaka. The royal sportsman has first the skin, and then the hands and feet of the sage cut off to alter his opinions. But the sage simply says that his love to animals is not in his skin, or in his limbs, but in his heart. Then the earth swallows up the cruel monarch, and the citizens bury the body of the sage with all honour. In the summary Kalābu, the king, is identified with Devadatta.

[15]:

This is the 222nd Jātaka, there called the Kūla Nandiya Jātaka.

[16]:

This is probably the 518th Jātaka. See Mr. Trenckner’s note.

[17]:

This must be the 492nd Jātaka, the Takkha-sūkara Jātaka, in which the hero is a learned pig who helps the carpenter in his work, and the villain of the story is a hypocrite ascetic with matted hair. But it should be added that though in the summary (Fausböll, vol. iv, p. 350) Devadatta is identified with the ascetic, the Bodisat is identified, not with the learned pig, but with the dryad.

[18]:

He is called Upacara both in the 422nd Jātaka (of which this is a summary) and in the Sumangala (p. 258). The Jātaka (III, 454) also gives a third variation, Apacara.

[19]:

Purisamatto gagane vehāsaṅgamo. The Jātaka says simply uparicaro, which must mean about the same.

[20]:

This must be the 482nd Jātaka. It is true that the man is there called Mahā Dhanaka (Fausböll, vol. iii, p. 255), and the Bodisat is not specially named Ruru, nor is he a king of the herd, but is only a stag of the kind of deer called Ruru, who alone. But a comparison of the poetical version of the same story in the Cariyā Piṭaka II, 6 (p. 87 of Dr. Morris’s edition for the Pāli Text Society) shows that the same story is here referred to.

[21]:

This is the 72nd Jātaka, the Sīlava Nāga Jātaka. (Fausböll, vol. i, p. 319.)

[22]:

Khattiya-dhammo; literally, 'who had the nature of a Kshatriya.' This expression is not found in the Jātaka referred to, No. 241 (Vol. ii, p. 242 and foll. in Professor Fausböll’s edition), and the Bodisat is there called purdhita not paṇḍita, and his name is not given as Vidhura. The jackal also came to grief in his attempt to conquer Benares. But there is no doubt as to that story, the Sabba Dāṭha Jātaka being the one here quoted.

[23]:

This is the 357th Jātaka (Fausböll, vol. iii, pp. 174) and which is one of those illustrated on the Bharhut Tope (Cunningham, Plate 109).

[24]:

In the Jātaka text (No. 457, Fausböll, vol. iv, pp. 100 and foll.), there are both devaputtā, 'gods,' not yakkhā. This is by no means the only instance of the term yakkha being used of gods.

[25]:

I cannot trace this story in the printed text of the Jātakas.

[26]:

This is the Apaṇṇaka Jātaka (No. i, vol. i, pp. 98 and foll. in Professor Fausböll’s edition), translated in the 'Buddhist Birth Stories,' vol. i, pp. 138-145.

[27]:

The Nigrodha Miga Jātaka (No. 12, vol. i, pp. 145 and foll. in Fausböll), translated in 'Buddhist Birth Stories,' vol. i, pp. 198 and following.

[28]:

The Nigrodha Jātaka (No. 445, Fausböll, vol. iv, pp. 37 and foll.).

[29]:

I cannot trace this story among the published Jātakas.

[30]:

This is the Mahā Paduma Jātaka (No. 472, Fausböll, vol. iv, pp. 187-195). It was a case of Joseph and Potiphar’s wife.

[31]:

This tragical story is No. 358 in the Jātaka collection (Fausböll, vol. iii, pp. 177-182).

[32]:

The Buddhist Sabbath, on which see my 'Manual of Buddhism,' pp. 139-141.

[33]:

So also above, IV, 2, 64, and IV, 3, 28.

[34]:

That is 'father’s younger brother.' The Pāli has no word for uncle generally, the whole scheme of relationship being different from ours, and the various sorts of uncles having, in the Pāli scheme, different and distinct names.

[35]:

'Fifty-seven koṭis and sixty hundreds of thousands of years,' says the text, with touching accuracy.

[36]:

So Hīnaṭi-kumburē, who takes sabbadhamme as accusative to bujjhitvā, and understands the phrase as above translated.

[37]:

This discussion is very interesting, both as a specimen of casuistry, and as an exposition of orthodox Buddhist belief. And it is full of suggestion if taken as a statement of the kind of reason which led the Buddhist editors of the earlier folk-lore to identify Devadatta with the characters referred to by king Milinda. But the facts are that those editors, in using the old stories and legends for their ethical purposes, always identified Devadatta with the cruel person in the story, and paid no heed to the question whether be was superior or not in birth or in the consideration of the world, to the person they identified with the Bodisat. In searching through the four volumes of the published Jātakas, and the proof-sheets of the fifth volume with which Professor Fausböll has favoured me, for the purpose of tracing the stories referred to by our author, I find that Devadatta appears in sixty-four of them, and that in almost every one of these sixty-four he is either superior in birth, or equal to the character identified with the Bodisat. This is not surprising, for it is not unusually the superiors in birth who are guilty of the kind of cruelty and wickedness which the Buddhist editors would ascribe to Devadatta. So that our author, had he chosen to do so, might have adduced many other instances of a similar kind to those he actually quotes. I add in an appendix the full list of the Devadatta stories in the Jātakas. It is clear our author had before him a version of the Jātaka book slightly different from our own, as will be seen from the cases pointed out in the notes in which, as to names or details, the story known to him differs from the printed text. And also that here (as at III, 6, 2) he would have been able to solve his own dilemma much better if he had known more of the history of those sacred books on the words of which it is based.

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: