Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1(that is, being skinned alive from the neck downwards, and having each strip of 1 Bilanga-thalikam. * Sankha-muadikam. > Rahu-mukham. * Goti-malakam. 5 Hattha-paggotikam. * Eraka-vattikam. ™ Kfraka-vasikam. IV, 4, 18. SUICIDE, : 277 skin as soon as removed tied to the hair, so that these strips form a veil around one)—or to the Spotted Antelope! (that is, having one’s knees and elbows tied together, and being made to squat on a plate of iron under which a fire is lit)—or to the Flesh-hooks? (that is, being hung up on a row of iron hooks)—or to the Pennies ® (that is, having bits cut out of the flesh, all over the body, of the size of pennies)—or to the Brine Slits * (that is, having cuts made all over one’s body by means of knives or sharp points, and then having salt and caustic liquids poured over the wounds)—or to the Bar Turn® (that is, being transfixed to the ground by a bar of iron passing through the root of the ear, and then being dragged round and round by the leg)—or to the Straw Seat® (that is, being so beaten with clubs that 1 Eneyyakam. * Balisa-mamsikam (so the Simhalese, Mr. Trenckner reads Balisa). * Kahapanakam. * Kharapatishhakam. 5 Paligha-parivattikam. ® Paldla-pithakam. I follow throughout Hina/i-kumburé’s interpretation (pp. 260, 261) of these pretty names, which could be well matched in the West. That some Indian kings were cruel in the extreme is no doubt true. But it must not be supposed that this list gives the names of well-known punishments. Itis merely a string of technical terms which is repeated by rote whenever tortures have to be specified. And the meaning of its terms was most likely unknown to the very people who so used them. For the whole list (which is taken by our author from the Pali Pi/akas) is explained by Buddhaghosa in his commentary, te Manoratha Pfrani, on Anhguttara II, 1, 1, as edited by Dr. Morris at pp. 113, 114 of the first edition of his Anguttara for the Pali Text Society, 1884. But Buddhaghosa’s explanations differ from Hinasi-kumburé’s in several details; and to nearly half the names he gives alternative meanings, quite contradictory to those that he gives first. So the list had its origin some centuries (say 400-500) B.c., and was certainly 278 THE QUESTIONS OF KING MILINDA. IV, 4, 15.
2So the list had its origin some centuries (say 400-500) B.c., and was certainly 278 THE QUESTIONS OF KING MILINDA. IV, 4, 15. the bones are broken, and the body becomes like a heap of straw)—or to be anointed with boiling oil, or to be eaten by dogs, or to be impaled alive, or to be beheaded. Such and such, O king, are the manifold and various pains which a being caught in the whirlpool of births and rebirths has to endure. Just, O king, as the water rained down upon the Himalaya mountain flows, in its course along the Ganges, through and over rocks and pebbles and gravel, whirlpools and eddies and rapids', and the stumps and branches of trees which obstruct and oppose its passage,—just so has each being caught in the succession of births and rebirths to endure such and such manifold and various pains. Full of pain, then, is the continual succession of rebirths, a joy is it when that succession ends. And it was in pointing out the advantage of that end, the disaster involved in that succession, that the Blessed One, great king, instigated us to get beyond birth, and old age, and disease, and death by the realisation of the final end of that succession of rebirths. This is the sense, O king, which led the Blessed One to instigate us (to put an end to life).’ ‘Very good, Nagasena! Well solved is the puzzle (I put), well set forth are the reasons (you alleged). That is so, and I accept it as you say.’ [Here ends the problem as to suicide. ] not understood in the fifth century a. p.; and was probably therefore unintelligible also, at least in part, to our author. 1 Umika-vanka-kadika. I don’t pretend to understand this last word. Dr. Morris, at p. 92 of the ‘ Pali Text Society’s Journal ’ for 1884, suggests velika. Perhaps it was simply adika after all, with or without m euphonic. IV, 4, 16. LOVE. 279 [A LOVING DISPOSITION. ] 16, [198] ‘ Venerable NAgasena, it has been said by the Blessed One: “Eleven advantages, O brethren, may be anticipated from practising, making a habit of, enlarging within one, using as a means of advancement, and as a basis of conduct, pursuing after, accumulating, and rising well up to the very heights of the emancipation of heart, arising from a feeling of love (towards all beings) And what are these eleven? Hewho does so sleeps in peace, and in peace does he awake. He dreams no sinful dreams. He becomes dear to men, and to the beings who are not men*. The gods watch over him. Neither fire, nor poison, nor sword works any harm to him. Quickly and easily does he become tranquillised. The aspect of his countenance is calm. Undismayed does he meet death, and should he not press through to the Supreme Condition (of Arahatship), then is he sure of rebirth in the Brahma world’.” But on the other hand you (members of
3Quickly and easily does he become tranquillised. The aspect of his countenance is calm. Undismayed does he meet death, and should he not press through to the Supreme Condition (of Arahatship), then is he sure of rebirth in the Brahma world’.” But on the other hand you (members of ‘ This same string of words, except the first, is used of the Iddhi-padas in the Book of the Great Decease, III, 3 (p. 40 of vol. xi of the S.B.E.). The words ‘towards all beings’ are not in the text. But this is the meaning of the phrase used, and not love to men only, as would be understood if they were not inserted in the translation. * Amanussa. This means, not the gods, but the various spirits on the earth, nayads, dryads, fairies, &c. &c. As here, so again below, IV, 4, 41, the amanuss4 are opposed to the devat4, mentioned in the next clause here. In older texts the devata include the amanussé4. ? From the Anguttara Nikaya, Ekaédasa Nipdta; quoted in full, with the context, in the Introductory Story to the 169th Gataka (vol. ii, pp. 60, 61 of Professor Fausbéll’s edition). 280 THE QUESTIONS OF KING MILINDA. _ IV, 4, 16. the Order) say that “SA&ma the Prince, while dwelling in the cultivation of a loving disposition toward all beings, and when he was (in consequence thereof) wandering in the forest followed by a herd of deer, was hit by a poisoned arrow shot by Piliyakkha the king, and there, on the spot, fainted and fell *.” Now, venerable NAgasena, if the passage I have quoted from the words of the Blessed One be right, then this statement of yours must be wrong. But if the story of Prince Sama be right, then it cannot be true that neither fire, nor poison, nor sword can work harm to him who cultivates the habit of love to all beings. This too is a double-edged problem, so subtle, so abstruse, so delicate, and so profound, that the thought of having to solve it might well bring out sweat over the body even of the most subtle-minded of mortals. This problem is now put to you. Unravel this mighty knot? Throw light upon this matter® to the accomplishment of the desire of those sons of the Conqueror who shall arise hereafter 4.’ ‘The Blessed One spake, O king, as you have quoted. And Prince Sama dwelling in the cultivation of love, and thus followed by a herd of deer when he was wandering in the forest, was hit by the poisoned arrow shot by king Piliyakkha, and then and there fainted and fell. But there is a reason for that. [199] And what is the reason? Simply that those virtues (said in the passage you quoted * Mr. Trenckner points out that this story is given in the 540th Gataka. 2 See p. 105 of the text. * Kakkhum dehi. So also p. gg of the text. * Nibbahana; not in Childers, but see p.119 of the text. IV, 4, 16. LOVE. 281
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.
1(that is, being skinned alive from the neck downwards, and having each strip of 1 Bilanga-thalikam. * Sankha-muadikam. > Rahu-mukham. * Goti-malakam. 5 Hattha-paggotikam. * Eraka-vattikam. ™ Kfraka-vasikam. IV, 4, 18. SUICIDE, : 277 skin as soon as removed tied to the hair, so that these strips form a veil around one)—or to the Spotted Antelope! (that is, having one’s knees and elbows tied together, and being made to squat on a plate of iron under which a fire is lit)—or to the Flesh-hooks? (that is, being hung up on a row of iron hooks)—or to the Pennies ® (that is, having bits cut out of the flesh, all over the body, of the size of pennies)—or to the Brine Slits * (that is, having cuts made all over one’s body by means of knives or sharp points, and then having salt and caustic liquids poured over the wounds)—or to the Bar Turn® (that is, being transfixed to the ground by a bar of iron passing through the root of the ear, and then being dragged round and round by the leg)—or to the Straw Seat® (that is, being so beaten with clubs that 1 Eneyyakam. * Balisa-mamsikam (so the Simhalese, Mr. Trenckner reads Balisa). * Kahapanakam. * Kharapatishhakam. 5 Paligha-parivattikam. ® Paldla-pithakam. I follow throughout Hina/i-kumburé’s interpretation (pp. 260, 261) of these pretty names, which could be well matched in the West. That some Indian kings were cruel in the extreme is no doubt true. But it must not be supposed that this list gives the names of well-known punishments. Itis merely a string of technical terms which is repeated by rote whenever tortures have to be specified. And the meaning of its terms was most likely unknown to the very people who so used them. For the whole list (which is taken by our author from the Pali Pi/akas) is explained by Buddhaghosa in his commentary, te Manoratha Pfrani, on Anhguttara II, 1, 1, as edited by Dr. Morris at pp. 113, 114 of the first edition of his Anguttara for the Pali Text Society, 1884. But Buddhaghosa’s explanations differ from Hinasi-kumburé’s in several details; and to nearly half the names he gives alternative meanings, quite contradictory to those that he gives first. So the list had its origin some centuries (say 400-500) B.c., and was certainly 278 THE QUESTIONS OF KING MILINDA. IV, 4, 15.
2So the list had its origin some centuries (say 400-500) B.c., and was certainly 278 THE QUESTIONS OF KING MILINDA. IV, 4, 15. the bones are broken, and the body becomes like a heap of straw)—or to be anointed with boiling oil, or to be eaten by dogs, or to be impaled alive, or to be beheaded. Such and such, O king, are the manifold and various pains which a being caught in the whirlpool of births and rebirths has to endure. Just, O king, as the water rained down upon the Himalaya mountain flows, in its course along the Ganges, through and over rocks and pebbles and gravel, whirlpools and eddies and rapids', and the stumps and branches of trees which obstruct and oppose its passage,—just so has each being caught in the succession of births and rebirths to endure such and such manifold and various pains. Full of pain, then, is the continual succession of rebirths, a joy is it when that succession ends. And it was in pointing out the advantage of that end, the disaster involved in that succession, that the Blessed One, great king, instigated us to get beyond birth, and old age, and disease, and death by the realisation of the final end of that succession of rebirths. This is the sense, O king, which led the Blessed One to instigate us (to put an end to life).’ ‘Very good, Nagasena! Well solved is the puzzle (I put), well set forth are the reasons (you alleged). That is so, and I accept it as you say.’ [Here ends the problem as to suicide. ] not understood in the fifth century a. p.; and was probably therefore unintelligible also, at least in part, to our author. 1 Umika-vanka-kadika. I don’t pretend to understand this last word. Dr. Morris, at p. 92 of the ‘ Pali Text Society’s Journal ’ for 1884, suggests velika. Perhaps it was simply adika after all, with or without m euphonic. IV, 4, 16. LOVE. 279 [A LOVING DISPOSITION. ] 16, [198] ‘ Venerable NAgasena, it has been said by the Blessed One: “Eleven advantages, O brethren, may be anticipated from practising, making a habit of, enlarging within one, using as a means of advancement, and as a basis of conduct, pursuing after, accumulating, and rising well up to the very heights of the emancipation of heart, arising from a feeling of love (towards all beings) And what are these eleven? Hewho does so sleeps in peace, and in peace does he awake. He dreams no sinful dreams. He becomes dear to men, and to the beings who are not men*. The gods watch over him. Neither fire, nor poison, nor sword works any harm to him. Quickly and easily does he become tranquillised. The aspect of his countenance is calm. Undismayed does he meet death, and should he not press through to the Supreme Condition (of Arahatship), then is he sure of rebirth in the Brahma world’.” But on the other hand you (members of
3Quickly and easily does he become tranquillised. The aspect of his countenance is calm. Undismayed does he meet death, and should he not press through to the Supreme Condition (of Arahatship), then is he sure of rebirth in the Brahma world’.” But on the other hand you (members of ‘ This same string of words, except the first, is used of the Iddhi-padas in the Book of the Great Decease, III, 3 (p. 40 of vol. xi of the S.B.E.). The words ‘towards all beings’ are not in the text. But this is the meaning of the phrase used, and not love to men only, as would be understood if they were not inserted in the translation. * Amanussa. This means, not the gods, but the various spirits on the earth, nayads, dryads, fairies, &c. &c. As here, so again below, IV, 4, 41, the amanuss4 are opposed to the devat4, mentioned in the next clause here. In older texts the devata include the amanussé4. ? From the Anguttara Nikaya, Ekaédasa Nipdta; quoted in full, with the context, in the Introductory Story to the 169th Gataka (vol. ii, pp. 60, 61 of Professor Fausbéll’s edition). 280 THE QUESTIONS OF KING MILINDA. _ IV, 4, 16. the Order) say that “SA&ma the Prince, while dwelling in the cultivation of a loving disposition toward all beings, and when he was (in consequence thereof) wandering in the forest followed by a herd of deer, was hit by a poisoned arrow shot by Piliyakkha the king, and there, on the spot, fainted and fell *.” Now, venerable NAgasena, if the passage I have quoted from the words of the Blessed One be right, then this statement of yours must be wrong. But if the story of Prince Sama be right, then it cannot be true that neither fire, nor poison, nor sword can work harm to him who cultivates the habit of love to all beings. This too is a double-edged problem, so subtle, so abstruse, so delicate, and so profound, that the thought of having to solve it might well bring out sweat over the body even of the most subtle-minded of mortals. This problem is now put to you. Unravel this mighty knot? Throw light upon this matter® to the accomplishment of the desire of those sons of the Conqueror who shall arise hereafter 4.’ ‘The Blessed One spake, O king, as you have quoted. And Prince Sama dwelling in the cultivation of love, and thus followed by a herd of deer when he was wandering in the forest, was hit by the poisoned arrow shot by king Piliyakkha, and then and there fainted and fell. But there is a reason for that. [199] And what is the reason? Simply that those virtues (said in the passage you quoted * Mr. Trenckner points out that this story is given in the 540th Gataka. 2 See p. 105 of the text. * Kakkhum dehi. So also p. gg of the text. * Nibbahana; not in Childers, but see p.119 of the text. IV, 4, 16. LOVE. 281
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.