Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1254), gaya-grrhita-krtya-sura-panayen. * It will be noticed that there is no mention here (in a connection where, if it had then existed, it would almost certainly have been referred to) of any Esoteric Buddhism. So above, at 268 THE QUESTIONS OF KING MILINDA. IV, 4,9- ‘Very good, Nagasena! That is so, and I accept it as you say.’ {Here ends the problem as to the secrecy in which the Vinaya is kept.] [THE TWO KINDS OF FALSEHOOD.] 9. ‘Venerable Nagasena, it has been said by the Blessed One that a deliberate lie is an offence of the greatest kind (involving exclusion from the Order '). IV, 1, 8, it is stated that a good Buddhist teacher should keep nothing secret from his pupil. And even in so old a text as the ‘Book of the Great Decease’ (Chap. II, § 32, p. 36 of my translalation in the ‘ Buddhist Suttas’), it is said of the Buddha himself that he had ‘no such thing as the closed fist of a teacher who keeps some things back.’ This passage is itself quoted above ' at IV, 2, 4, as the basis of one of Milinda’s questions; and is entirely accepted by Nagasena, that is, by our author. The fact is that there has never been any such thing as esoteric teaching in Buddhism, and that the modern so called esoteric Buddhism is neither esoteric nor Buddhism. Its tenets, so far as they are Indian at all, are perfectly accessible, are well known to all those who choose to study the books of Indian mysticism, and are Hindu, not Buddhist. They are, indeed, quite contradictory to Buddhism, of which the authors of what they ignorantly call Esoteric Buddhism know but very little—that little being only a portion of those beliefs which have been common ground to all religious teachers in India. If one doctrine—more than any other—is distinctive of Buddhism, it is the ignoring, in ethics, of the time-honoured belief in a soul—that is, in the old sense, in a separate creature inside the body, which flies out of it, like a bird out of a cage, when the body dies. Yet the Theosophists, who believe, I am told, in seven souls inside each human body (which would be worse according to true Buddhism than seven devils), still venture to call themselves Buddhists, and do not see the absurdity of their position ! ? Sampag4na-mus4vada p&ragik4. This is curious as according to the Patimokkha it is Pafittiya, not Parégika. Compare Paragika 4 with P4fittiya 1. (‘Vinaya Texts,’ S. B. E,, vol. iii, Pp. 5 and 32.) IV, 4,10. FALSEHOOD, 269
2? Sampag4na-mus4vada p&ragik4. This is curious as according to the Patimokkha it is Pafittiya, not Parégika. Compare Paragika 4 with P4fittiya 1. (‘Vinaya Texts,’ S. B. E,, vol. iii, Pp. 5 and 32.) IV, 4,10. FALSEHOOD, 269 And again he said: “ By a deliberate lie a Bhikkhu commits a minor offence, one that ought to be the subject of confession made before another (member of the Order)”. Now, venerable N4gasena, what is herein the distinction, what the reason, that by one lie a Bhikkhu is cast out of the Order, and by another he is guilty only of an offence that can be atoned for. If the first decision be right, then the second must be wrong; but if the second be right, then the first must be wrong. This too is a doubleedged problem now put to you, and you have to. solve it.’ 10. [198]?‘ Both your quotations, O king, are correct *, But a falsehood is a light or heavy offence according to the subject matter. For what do you think, great king ? Suppose a man were to give another a slap with his hand, what punishment. would you inflict upon him ?’ ‘If the other refused to overlook the matter, then neither should we be able to pardon his assailant ¢, but should mulct him in a penny or so °,’ ‘But on the other hand, suppose it had been you 1 I cannot trace these identical words in the Pi/aka texts. But the general sense of them is exactly in agreement with the first PA&kittiya rule. , ’ ® Hfnafi-kumburé here inserts a summary of the Introductory Story (in the Sutta Vibhanga) to the 4th Paragika. All this (pp. 254-256) stands in his version for lines 1-3 on p. 193 of the Pali text. * The P&li repeats them word for word. As I have pointed out above, they are not really correct. * So HinaA-kumburé, who must have had a different reading, and I think a better one, before him. 5 Akahapana. See the discussion of the value of this coin in my ‘ Ancient Coins and Measures,’ pp. 3, 4. 270 THE QUESTIONS OF KING MILINDA. IV, 4, 11. yourself that he had given the blow to, what would then be the punishment ?’ ‘We should condemn him to have his hands cut off, and his feet cut off, and to be skinned alive ?, and we should confiscate all the goods in his house, and put to death all his family to the seventh generation on both sides.’ ‘ But, great king, what is the distinction? Why is it that for one slap of the hand there should be a gentle fine of a penny, while for a slap given to you there should be so fearful a retribution ?’ ‘Because of the difference in the person (assaulted).’ ‘Well! just so, great king, is a falsehood a light or a heavy offence according to the attendant circumstances,’ ‘Very good, Nagasena! That is so, and I accept it as you say.’ ; [Here ends the problem as to the degree of offence in falsehood.] [THE BODISAT'S CONSIDERATION. ]
3just so, great king, is a falsehood a light or a heavy offence according to the attendant circumstances,’ ‘Very good, Nagasena! That is so, and I accept it as you say.’ ; [Here ends the problem as to the degree of offence in falsehood.] [THE BODISAT'S CONSIDERATION. ] 11. ‘Venerable Nagasena, it has been said by the Blessed One in the discourse on the essential conditions?: “Long ago have his parents been destined for each Bodisat, and the kind of tree he is to select for his Bo tree, and the 1 Yava sisam kalirakkheggam khedfpeyyama, which the Simhalese merely repeats. It is literally ‘We should have him “ bambfi-sprout-cut ” up to his head.’ What this technical term may mean is not exactly known—possibly having slits the shape of a bambfi sprout cut all over his body. * Dhammaté-dhamma-pariydye. I don’t know where this is to be found, ’ IV, 4, 11. THE BODISAT. 271 Bhikkhus who are to be his two chief disciples, and the lad who is to be his son, and the member of the Order who is to be his special attendant.” But on the other hand he said: “When yet in the condition of a god in the Tusita heaven the Bodisat makes the eight Great Investigations—he investigates the time (whether the right moment had come at which he ought to be re-born as a man), and the continent (in which his birth is to take place), and the country (where he is to be re-born), and the family (to which he is to belong), and the mother (who is to bear him), and the period (during which he was to remain in the womb), and the month (in which his birthday shall come), and his renunciation (when it shall be)*. [194] Now, Nagasena, before knowledge is ripe there is no understanding, but when it has reached its summit there is no longer any need to wait for thinking a matter over’, for there is nothing outside the ken of the omniscient mind. Why then should the Bodisat investigate the time, thinking to himself: “In what moment shall I be born??” And for the same reason why should he investigate the family, thinking to him- ’ These eight Investigations (Vilokandni) have not yet been found in the Pifaka texts. But, when relating the birth of the historical Buddha, the G&taka commentary (vol. i, p. 48, of Professor Fausbéll’s edition) mentions the first six of them (substituting ok4sa for desa), and calls them, oddly enough, the Five Great Investigations. In the corresponding passage in the Lalita Vistara only the first four are mentioned. The last two of the above eight seem very forced. ? Nimesantaram na 4gameti, for which HinaAé-kumburé (p. 256 at the end) has nivesantara. Neither word occurs elsewhere. 272 THE QUESTIONS OF KING MILINDA. IV, 4, 12. self: “In what family shall I be born?” And if, NAgasena, it is a settled matter who shall be the parents of the Bodisat, then it must be false that he “investigated the family.” But if that be true, then must the other saying be wrong. This too is a double-edged problem now put to you, and you have to solve it.’
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1254), gaya-grrhita-krtya-sura-panayen. * It will be noticed that there is no mention here (in a connection where, if it had then existed, it would almost certainly have been referred to) of any Esoteric Buddhism. So above, at 268 THE QUESTIONS OF KING MILINDA. IV, 4,9- ‘Very good, Nagasena! That is so, and I accept it as you say.’ {Here ends the problem as to the secrecy in which the Vinaya is kept.] [THE TWO KINDS OF FALSEHOOD.] 9. ‘Venerable Nagasena, it has been said by the Blessed One that a deliberate lie is an offence of the greatest kind (involving exclusion from the Order '). IV, 1, 8, it is stated that a good Buddhist teacher should keep nothing secret from his pupil. And even in so old a text as the ‘Book of the Great Decease’ (Chap. II, § 32, p. 36 of my translalation in the ‘ Buddhist Suttas’), it is said of the Buddha himself that he had ‘no such thing as the closed fist of a teacher who keeps some things back.’ This passage is itself quoted above ' at IV, 2, 4, as the basis of one of Milinda’s questions; and is entirely accepted by Nagasena, that is, by our author. The fact is that there has never been any such thing as esoteric teaching in Buddhism, and that the modern so called esoteric Buddhism is neither esoteric nor Buddhism. Its tenets, so far as they are Indian at all, are perfectly accessible, are well known to all those who choose to study the books of Indian mysticism, and are Hindu, not Buddhist. They are, indeed, quite contradictory to Buddhism, of which the authors of what they ignorantly call Esoteric Buddhism know but very little—that little being only a portion of those beliefs which have been common ground to all religious teachers in India. If one doctrine—more than any other—is distinctive of Buddhism, it is the ignoring, in ethics, of the time-honoured belief in a soul—that is, in the old sense, in a separate creature inside the body, which flies out of it, like a bird out of a cage, when the body dies. Yet the Theosophists, who believe, I am told, in seven souls inside each human body (which would be worse according to true Buddhism than seven devils), still venture to call themselves Buddhists, and do not see the absurdity of their position ! ? Sampag4na-mus4vada p&ragik4. This is curious as according to the Patimokkha it is Pafittiya, not Parégika. Compare Paragika 4 with P4fittiya 1. (‘Vinaya Texts,’ S. B. E,, vol. iii, Pp. 5 and 32.) IV, 4,10. FALSEHOOD, 269
2? Sampag4na-mus4vada p&ragik4. This is curious as according to the Patimokkha it is Pafittiya, not Parégika. Compare Paragika 4 with P4fittiya 1. (‘Vinaya Texts,’ S. B. E,, vol. iii, Pp. 5 and 32.) IV, 4,10. FALSEHOOD, 269 And again he said: “ By a deliberate lie a Bhikkhu commits a minor offence, one that ought to be the subject of confession made before another (member of the Order)”. Now, venerable N4gasena, what is herein the distinction, what the reason, that by one lie a Bhikkhu is cast out of the Order, and by another he is guilty only of an offence that can be atoned for. If the first decision be right, then the second must be wrong; but if the second be right, then the first must be wrong. This too is a doubleedged problem now put to you, and you have to. solve it.’ 10. [198]?‘ Both your quotations, O king, are correct *, But a falsehood is a light or heavy offence according to the subject matter. For what do you think, great king ? Suppose a man were to give another a slap with his hand, what punishment. would you inflict upon him ?’ ‘If the other refused to overlook the matter, then neither should we be able to pardon his assailant ¢, but should mulct him in a penny or so °,’ ‘But on the other hand, suppose it had been you 1 I cannot trace these identical words in the Pi/aka texts. But the general sense of them is exactly in agreement with the first PA&kittiya rule. , ’ ® Hfnafi-kumburé here inserts a summary of the Introductory Story (in the Sutta Vibhanga) to the 4th Paragika. All this (pp. 254-256) stands in his version for lines 1-3 on p. 193 of the Pali text. * The P&li repeats them word for word. As I have pointed out above, they are not really correct. * So HinaA-kumburé, who must have had a different reading, and I think a better one, before him. 5 Akahapana. See the discussion of the value of this coin in my ‘ Ancient Coins and Measures,’ pp. 3, 4. 270 THE QUESTIONS OF KING MILINDA. IV, 4, 11. yourself that he had given the blow to, what would then be the punishment ?’ ‘We should condemn him to have his hands cut off, and his feet cut off, and to be skinned alive ?, and we should confiscate all the goods in his house, and put to death all his family to the seventh generation on both sides.’ ‘ But, great king, what is the distinction? Why is it that for one slap of the hand there should be a gentle fine of a penny, while for a slap given to you there should be so fearful a retribution ?’ ‘Because of the difference in the person (assaulted).’ ‘Well! just so, great king, is a falsehood a light or a heavy offence according to the attendant circumstances,’ ‘Very good, Nagasena! That is so, and I accept it as you say.’ ; [Here ends the problem as to the degree of offence in falsehood.] [THE BODISAT'S CONSIDERATION. ]
3just so, great king, is a falsehood a light or a heavy offence according to the attendant circumstances,’ ‘Very good, Nagasena! That is so, and I accept it as you say.’ ; [Here ends the problem as to the degree of offence in falsehood.] [THE BODISAT'S CONSIDERATION. ] 11. ‘Venerable Nagasena, it has been said by the Blessed One in the discourse on the essential conditions?: “Long ago have his parents been destined for each Bodisat, and the kind of tree he is to select for his Bo tree, and the 1 Yava sisam kalirakkheggam khedfpeyyama, which the Simhalese merely repeats. It is literally ‘We should have him “ bambfi-sprout-cut ” up to his head.’ What this technical term may mean is not exactly known—possibly having slits the shape of a bambfi sprout cut all over his body. * Dhammaté-dhamma-pariydye. I don’t know where this is to be found, ’ IV, 4, 11. THE BODISAT. 271 Bhikkhus who are to be his two chief disciples, and the lad who is to be his son, and the member of the Order who is to be his special attendant.” But on the other hand he said: “When yet in the condition of a god in the Tusita heaven the Bodisat makes the eight Great Investigations—he investigates the time (whether the right moment had come at which he ought to be re-born as a man), and the continent (in which his birth is to take place), and the country (where he is to be re-born), and the family (to which he is to belong), and the mother (who is to bear him), and the period (during which he was to remain in the womb), and the month (in which his birthday shall come), and his renunciation (when it shall be)*. [194] Now, Nagasena, before knowledge is ripe there is no understanding, but when it has reached its summit there is no longer any need to wait for thinking a matter over’, for there is nothing outside the ken of the omniscient mind. Why then should the Bodisat investigate the time, thinking to himself: “In what moment shall I be born??” And for the same reason why should he investigate the family, thinking to him- ’ These eight Investigations (Vilokandni) have not yet been found in the Pifaka texts. But, when relating the birth of the historical Buddha, the G&taka commentary (vol. i, p. 48, of Professor Fausbéll’s edition) mentions the first six of them (substituting ok4sa for desa), and calls them, oddly enough, the Five Great Investigations. In the corresponding passage in the Lalita Vistara only the first four are mentioned. The last two of the above eight seem very forced. ? Nimesantaram na 4gameti, for which HinaAé-kumburé (p. 256 at the end) has nivesantara. Neither word occurs elsewhere. 272 THE QUESTIONS OF KING MILINDA. IV, 4, 12. self: “In what family shall I be born?” And if, NAgasena, it is a settled matter who shall be the parents of the Bodisat, then it must be false that he “investigated the family.” But if that be true, then must the other saying be wrong. This too is a double-edged problem now put to you, and you have to solve it.’
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.