The Questions of King Milinda
BOOK III.
VIMATI-KKHEDANA-PAÑHO
THE REMOVAL OF DIFFICULTIES
Chapter 5
1. The king said: 'Have you, Nāgasena, seen the Buddha?'
'No, Sire.'
'Then have your teachers seen the Buddha?'
'No, Sire.'
'Then, venerable Nāgasena, there is no Buddha!'[1]
'But, great king, have you seen the river Ûhā in the Himālaya mountains?'
'No, Sir.'
'Or has your father seen it?'
'No, Sir.'
'Then, your Majesty, is there therefore no such river?'
'It is there. Though neither I nor my father has seen it, it is nevertheless there.'
'Just so, great king, though neither I nor my teachers have seen the Blessed One, nevertheless there was such a person.'
'Very good, Nāgasena!'
§
2. The king said: 'Is the Buddha, Nāgasena, pre-eminent?'
'Yes, he is incomparable.'
'But how do you know of one you have never seen that he is pre-eminent.'
'Now what do you think, O king? They who have never seen the ocean would they know concerning
[110]it: "Deep, unmeasurable, unfathomable is the mighty ocean. Into it do the five great rivers flow--the Ganges, the Jumna, the Akiravatī, the Sarabhū, and the Mahī--and yet is there in it no appearance of being more empty or more full!"?'
'Yes, they would know that.'
'Just so, great king, when I think of the mighty disciples who have passed away then do I know that the Buddha is incomparable.'
'Very good, Nāgasena!'
§
3. The king said: 'Is it possible, Nāgasena, for others to know how incomparable the Buddha is?'
'Yes, they may know it.'
'But how can they?'
'Long, long ago, O king, there was a master of writing, by name Tissa the Elder, and many are the years gone by since he has died. How can people know of him?'
'By his writing, Sir.'
'Just so, great king, whosoever sees what the Truth[2] is, he sees what the Blessed One was, for the Truth was preached by the Blessed One.'
'Very good, Nāgasena!'
§
4. The king said: 'Have you, Nāgasena, seen what the Truth is?'
'Have not we disciples, O king, to conduct ourselves our lives long as under the eye of the Buddha, and under his command?'[3]
'Very good, Nāgasena!'
[111] 5. The king said: 'Where there is no transmigration, Nāgasena, can there be rebirth?'
'Yes, there can.'
'But how can that be? Give me an illustration.'
'Suppose a man, O king, were to light a lamp from another lamp, can it be said that the one transmigrates from, or to, the other?'
'Certainly not.'
'Just so, great king, is rebirth without transmigration.'
'Give me a further illustration.'
'Do you recollect, great king, having learnt, when you were a boy, some verse or other from your teacher?'
'Yes, I recollect that.'
'Well then, did that verse transmigrate from your teacher?'
'Certainly not.'
'Just so, great king, is rebirth without transmigration.'
'Very good, Nāgasena!'
§
6. The king said: 'Is there such a thing, Nāgasena, as the soul?'[4]
'In the highest sense, O king, there is no such thing.'[5]
[112] 'Very good, Nāgasena!'
§
7. The king said: 'Is there any being, Nāgasena, who transmigrates from this body to another?'
'No, there is not.'
'But if so, would it not get free from its evil deeds.'
'Yes, if it were not reborn; but if it were, no.'[6]
'Give me an illustration.'
'Suppose, O king, a man were to steal another man's mangoes, would the thief deserve punishment?'
'Yes.'
'But he would not have stolen the mangoes the other set in the ground. Why would he deserve punishment?'
'Because those he stole were the result of those that were planted.'
'Just so, great king, this name-and-form commits deeds, either pure or impure, and by that Karma another name-and-form. is reborn. And therefore is it not set free from its evil deeds?'
'Very good, Nāgasena!'
§
8. The king said: 'When deeds are committed, Nāgasena, by one name-and-form, what becomes of those deeds?'
'The deeds would follow it, O king, like a shadow that never leaves it.'[7]
'Can any one point out those deeds, saying: "Here are those deeds, or there"?'
'No.'
[113] 'Give me an illustration.'
'Now what do you think, O king? Can any one point out the fruits which a tree has not yet produced, saying: "Here they are, or there"?'
'Certainly not, Sir.'
'Just so, great king, so long as the continuity of life is not cut off, it is impossible to point out the deeds that are done.'
'Very good, Nāgasena!'
§
9. The king said: 'Does he, Nāgasena, who is about to be reborn know that he will be born?'
'Yes, he knows it, O king.'
'Give me an illustration.'
'Suppose a farmer, O king, a householder, were to put seed in the ground, and it were to rain well, would he know that a crop would be produced.'
'Yes, he would know that.'
'Just so, great king, does he who is about to be reborn know[8] that he will be born.'
'Very good, Nāgasena!'[9]
§
10. The king said: 'Is there such a person as the Buddha, Nāgasena?'
'Yes.'
'Can he then, Nāgasena, be pointed out as being here or there?'
'The Blessed One, O king, has passed away by that kind of passing away in which nothing remains which could tend to the formation of another
[114] individual.[10] It is not possible to point out the Blessed One as being here or there.'
'Give me an illustration.'
'Now what do you think, O king? When there is a great body of fire blazing, is it possible to point out any one flame that has gone out, that it is here or there?'
'No, Sir. That flame has ceased, it has vanished.'
'Just so, great king, has the Blessed One passed away by that kind of passing away in which no root remains for the formation of another individual. The Blessed One has come to an end, and it cannot be pointed out of him, that he is here or there. But in the body of his doctrine he can, O king, be pointed out. For the doctrine[11] was preached by the Blessed One?'
'Very good, Nāgasena!'
Here ends the Fifth Chapter
[1] This dialogue is so far identical with VI, 1, 1. It is a kind of parody on Gotama's own argument about the Brahmans and Brahma ('Have they seen God,' &c.) in the Tevigga Sutta I, 12-15, translated in my 'Buddhist Suttas,' pp. 172-174.
[2] Dhammaɱ, here nearly = Buddhism. See below, III, 5, 10.
[3] Mr. Trenckner thinks there is a lacuna here; and Hīnaṭi-kumburê's version perhaps supports this. He renders the passage, How can a man use a path he does not know? And have not we our lives long to conduct ourselves according to the Vinaya (the rules of the Order), which the Buddha preached, and which are called the eye of the Buddha, and according to the Sikkhāpada (ethics) which be laid down, and which are called his command?' But there are other passages, no less amplified in the Siɱhalese, where there is evidently no lacuna in the Pāli; and the passage may well have been meant as a kind of riddle, to which the Siɱhalese supplies the solution.
[4] Vedagū. See above, II, 3, 6, p. 86 (note).
[5] Mr. Trenckner thinks there is a lacuna here. The Siɱhalese follow the Pāli word for word.
[6] This is an exact repetition of what we had above, II, 2, 6.
[7] These last words are a quotation of those that recur at Saɱyutta III, 2, 10, 10, and Dhammapada, verse 2.
[8] That is before he is born.
[9] This is all very parallel to II, 2, 2.
[10] Anupādisesāya nibbānadhātuyā.
[11] Dhamma. See above, III, 5, 3.
