25b: The 7th Year (Slander)
The Female Wanderer Ciñcā Māṇavikā
The Buddha, after emancipating the 500 disciples of Ven. Sāriputta and the 300 million Devas and humans through the realization of the four noble truths, proceeded to Sāvatthī to take up residence at the Jetavana monastery and to resume teaching the Dhamma to the sentient beings who went there.
It was at that time, a lowly, wily, female wandering ascetic by the name of Ciñcā Māṇavikā made a malicious, slanderous charge against the Buddha. The following is an account of that calumniatory attack.
During the first 20 years of his Dispensation, termed the first period after Awakening (paṭhama-bodhi) the number of disciples of the Buddha increased by leaps and bounds, like a rising tide. And the number of humans, Devas and Brahmas who attained the four stages of fruition (ariya-bhūmi) also increased with time; and the attributes of the Buddha, such as being worthy, spread right up to the roof of the world; the volume of offerings made to the Buddha and the Saṅgha grew so much the greater, while the power of the heretics waned and the offerings made to them dwindled to a vanishing point, just like the diminishing glow of fireflies as the sun rises up in the morning.
Sectarians stood at road junctions and made attempts to induce or court the people to make offerings to them, saying: “Devotees, the ascetic Gotama is not the only one who has become a Buddha; we have become Buddhas as well! Is merit gained by making offerings to the ascetic Gotama only? You can gain merit by making offerings to us as well!”
Their appeals were of no avail, and they therefore assembled for a secret meeting to devise ways and means to calumniate the ascetic Gotama, so that people might not make offerings to him through a lack of respect and esteem.
At that time, there lived in Sāvatthī, a wandering female ascetic by the name of Ciñcā Māṇavikā. She was so named because she was born of a moisture-laden tamarind (ciñcā) tree, and she was born in a Brahmin family, and was young (māṇavikā); hence she was popularly known as the Brahmin damsel who took conception in a tamarind tree, Ciñcā Māṇavikā. She was said to be as pretty and gracious as a Devakaññā and her body emitted rays that spiralled around her body.
As the discussion was in progress, a cruel, stupid sectarian put forward a plot to slander the Buddha and bring about his destruction by employing Ciñcā Māṇavikā as an instrument to achieve their selfish ends. This plot was approved and accepted as an effective device for cutting off the flow of gifts to the ascetic Gotama.
When the wandering ascetic, Ciñcā Māṇavikā, went to their parks and stood before them in a worshipping posture, she was totally ignored by the heretics. She was anxious to know what was held against her. She, therefore, addressed them: “Good Sirs, I worshipped you three times, what wrong have I done to you? What is my offence? What is the cause of your silence?”
This was their censorious reply: “Sister Ciñcā, don’t you know that the ascetic Gotama has been going round and doing harm to us by depriving us of gifts?”
Whereupon, Ciñcā said: “What can I do for you in this matter?” They gave her this express reply: “Ciñcā, if you have our welfare at heart, you might calumniate the ascetic Gotama by using your personal charm as an instrument to destroy his fame, honour and gifts.” She was thus charged with the task of performing a dirty job.
Ciñcā pledged boldly: “Very well, good sirs, you may rest assured that I will accomplish the task entrusted to me. Have no more worries over this matter,” and she left the heretics’ park. She then started to put her wily ways into action. She dressed herself in a costume that was as red as the colour of a flying insect and made her way towards Jetavana monastery with a bouquet in her hand, at about the time when people were leaving the monastery after hearing the discourses. People casually asked her: “Where are you headed for?” she replied: “What would you gain from knowing my destination?” arousing people’s suspicion on her.
She actually went her way into the parks of the heretics in the proximity of Jetavana monastery and spent her nights there. At the time people were arriving from the city of Sāvatthī to pay homage to the Buddha early in the morning, she prepared herself to look as if she had spent the night at the Jetavana monastery and was making her way back to Sāvatthī. When asked as to where she had passed the night, she gave a similar answer: “What would you gain from knowing where I slept last night?” to create suspicion in their minds.
She kept up the same routine everyday. After a lapse of one and a half months she began her campaign of imputation by replying: “I passed the night with the ascetic Gotama in his scented chamber.” That caused the ordinary people to wonder whether she might be speaking the truth. Some three or four months later, she pretended pregnancy by tying her abdomen with rags and covering herself with a red dress. And she started telling people that she got pregnant by the ascetic Gotama, an accusation wrongly believed by unthinking people.
After a lapse of eight or nine months, Ciñcā Māṇavikā tied a block of wood, which was cut into the shape of half a bowl, round her body and wore a red costume to assume the form of a pregnant woman. She struck her hands and feet with the jaw bones of a cow to appear like a worn-out and fatigued expectant mother. She then made her way one evening to where the Buddha was sitting on the Dhamma throne and teaching the four assemblies.
She stood right in front of the Buddha and made the following malicious accusation: “Ascetic, you have been calmly teaching the people with compressed lips! As for me, I have become an expectant mother through association with you. You have a heart to remain without thinking about the arrangements for confinement or for the collection of butter-oil. If you don’t care to do such things yourself, you should have charged King Kosala or Anāthapiṇḍika or Visākhā, the supporters of your monastery with the task to do the needful for me. You have been irresponsible and callous towards your own blood, but you know how to amuse yourself by sensual pleasures.”
Ciñcā thus levelled a malicious accusation against the Buddha in the presence of a huge congregation like a stupid woman trying to destroy the moon with a lump of faeces in her hand!
Whereupon, the Buddha suspended his teaching and, like a lion king, refuted her charge with a raised voice: “Sister Ciñcā, only you and I know whether what you have just said is true or false.”
Ciñcā was not to be daunted, she made another attack with these words:
Whereupon, the emerald throne of Sakka began to grow warm causing him to deliberate as to its cause; he perceived that: “Ciñcā had made a malicious allegation against the Buddha.” Thinking: “I will go and sort out the matter myself in the presence of the people,” he therefore descended to where the Buddha was teaching, accompanied by four Devas. These four Devas transformed themselves into four rats and bit off the strings on the wooden disc, and as the wind blew Ciñcā’s clothes upwards, the wooden disc dropped right on top of her ten toes, breaking them off.
All those present condemned her and spat on her; holding stones, spears and sticks, they dragged her out of the precincts of the monastery. Once she was out of sight of the Buddha, the earth split into two to claim her body. She was soon wrapped up in the flaming tongues of the fires that covered her in the bottom of the great hell, Mahā Avīci.
When the people saw the heretics in their true colours, they made even less offerings to them, while the alms received by Buddha grew again without limitation.
On the following day, all the monastics assembled in the central hall and were discussing the topic of the day: “Friends, Ciñcā had been ruined for her false allegations against the most exalted Buddha, who is worthy of all homage that the world could make.” The Buddha went to the hall and asked: “Monastics, what is the subject of your discussion?” On being informed by the monastics that they were discussing the fate of Ciñcā, the Buddha recounted her past story making reference to the Birth Story about Prince Mahā Paduma (Mahā-paduma-jātaka, Ja 472) saying: “This is not the first time that she had made false allegations against me and suffered in consequence thereof,” and he proceeded to tell the story.
The Birth Story about Prince Mahā Paduma
Once upon a time, King Brahmadatta was ruling the country of Bārāṇasī when the Bodhisatta took conception in the womb of the queen. When he was born, he was named Prince Mahā Paduma, as his face resembled a newly blossomed Sacred Lotus (paduma) species.
When he came of age, he was sent to Takkasilā to learn the arts and crafts; and on completion of his studies, he returned to his country and found that his mother had passed away and that his father had made another woman his Chief Queen. He was formally declared as the Crown Prince, and the sole heir to the throne.
Sometime later, the king had to go to the border areas to suppress some insurrections. He told the queen: “Chief Queen, I am going to the border areas to suppress insurrections and you shall remain in this royal palace with ease and comfort.” Whereupon, the queen said: “I do not like to stay behind, I would like to accompany you to the front line.” The King explained to her the dangers of battlefields: “Chief Queen, you had better stay in the royal palace until my return without any feeling of melancholy through lonesomeness; I will leave instructions with the Crown Prince to attend on you with due diligence.”
The king then went to the disturbed areas, and returned after driving away the rebels, and rehabilitating the affected areas, but he did not immediately enter the city on arrival instead, he stayed in a temporary accommodation outside the city for a time, until the auspicious time for re-entering the city would come about.
When the Bodhisatta, Crown Prince Mahā Paduma, heard of the news of his father’s return, he made arrangements to welcome his father by decorating the city and setting the palace in order. Having done all this, he entered the apartment of the Chief Queen all alone. On seeing the amazing beauty of the prince, the Chief Queen felt an intense attraction towards him. The prince paid his respects to the queen and asked: “Royal mother, how can I be of help to you?” The queen replied: “Don’t you call me mother,” and so saying she got up and held the prince by the hands and ordered him to get up on to
As one who treasured his morality, the prince gave a firm reply: “Royal Queen mother! You have become my mother ever since the demise of my own mother. You are a married woman, I have never in all my life looked at a woman with a legal husband with concupiscence, and how would a self-restrained person like me commit such a hideous crime in collusion with you?”
After making three or four vain attempts to make the prince yield to her temptations, the queen resorted to threatening him, asking: “Will you not obey my order?” – “No, I will not,” replied the prince boldly and bluntly. Whereupon, she made it plain to him: “I will lodge a false allegation against you with the king, so that he will break your head into pieces.” – “You may slander me as you like but I won’t yield to your temptations.” He left her chamber after putting her to shame.
The queen, being conscious of her own guilt, made up her mind to save her skin by lodging a false allegation against the prince with the king without delay, as her life was at stake, lest the prince might reveal her secret before she could see the king. She scratched her body all over with her own fingernails and lay on her bed without taking any food, feigning illness. She instructed her attendants how they should answer the king when he asked them about her in due course.
The king entered the city after circumambulating it and sat on the throne. When he could not see his queen, he enquired about her and her attendant reported that she was not well. He went to her chamber and asked: “My dear queen, what ails you?” She pretended not to hear his words two or three times and, at last, she made this reply: “King, what has made you to press for an answer that I am loath to give? Please keep silent and save me from shame. My case is quite different from those of other married women!” On hearing such an insinuation, the king asked her in a severe tone: “Do tell me at once who has done wrong to you and I will break the head of the criminal.”
In response to the king, she asked this question: “King, under whose charge was this city kept when you left?” – “It was left under the charge of my son, the Crown Prince,” replied the king. The queen then started to tell her fabricated story to calumniate the Crown Prince: “Your majesty, the very person you left in charge of the city, Prince Paduma, entered my room all alone and tried to make me yield to his temptations, and when I beseeched him meekly not to offend his mother, he retorted rudely: ‘Is there any other king than myself, I will keep you in house and enjoy sexual pleasures with you to the full.’ When I refused to yield to him, he pulled me by my hair, beat me all over my body and then, throwing me down on the floor, he outraged me and left my chamber.”
The King Orders the Execution of Mahā Paduma
The king lost his sense of reasoning through anger, like a venomous cobra, and ordered the execution of the prince. The executioners entered the residence of the prince, beat him most severely, bound his hands at the back and brought him out of his house with a ring of red-primrose round his neck, like a prisoner given the death sentence.
The prince knew that the queen was responsible for the whole affair, and he followed the executioners complaining: “Executors, I have done nothing against the king, I am innocent.” The whole city was shocked and tense with fear, and the citizens exchanged views among themselves: “The king has misunderstood Prince Mahā Paduma, and ordered his execution on the strength of his wife’s false allegation.” They rallied round at the feet of the prince, crying and sobbing aloud: “Crown Prince, the kind of sentence passed upon you is not just and reasonable,” and they wept and cried at the top of their voices around him.
When the executioners had brought the prince before him, the king, in a fit of temper, at once ordered the execution of the prince, by throwing him into a steep chasm which was the usual place where robbers were thrown with their heads down. In passing the order, the king remarked that the prince, though his own son, was guilty of impersonating him and offending the queen. Whereupon, the Crown Prince protested: “Royal father, I am not
The citizens were not alone in weeping over the fate of the prince but 16,000 courtiers, also wept, muttering: “Darling son, Mahā Paduma, it is a great pity that such a punishment has been meted on you for no fault of your own.”
All the princes, princesses, ministers, Brahmins, rich men, all rank and file made joint appeal to the king: “Your majesty, Mahā Paduma has a peerless character, he is a righteous heir to the throne, both by right and by tradition, do not cause the destruction of the heir to the throne on the strength of your wife’s allegation, without investigating into the matter in the name of justice, this is our prayer.” Their appeal was made in seven verses as follows:
1. Noble King, a ruler should not order the destruction of life and limbs of an accused person without personal knowledge; without investigation into the allegation against the accused.
In the time of Mahā Sammata, the one raised to the status of a supreme ruler by the people, there was no order or penalty exacting more than 100 pieces of money; no penalty demanding the destruction of life and limbs beyond corporeal punishment or banishment. Punishments of more severe forms were adopted by cruel rulers in later times. Therefore, the ministers had made the above appeal with reference to the said precedence.
2. A noble king, who happened to cause the destruction of life and limbs of an accused without proper investigation being made into the allegation, is likened to a person born blind who swallowed a fly-contaminated, unwholesome food with attendant troubles; such an act is tantamount to partaking of food enmeshed with thorns.
3. A king who happened to punish an innocent person, who does not deserve any punishment, and has allowed a guilty person to escape unpunished, through power-intoxication, is considered to have taken an uneven path full of dangers, like a person born blind. He does not discriminate between the even path of the ten meritorious paths and the uneven path of demerit and is destined to be punished in the plane of misery.
4. A king who examines cases according to correct procedure, and adjudges or adjudicates the guilt or otherwise of cases, trivial or great, in the name of
5. Noble King, it is not possible for anyone to remain forever in a position of responsibility when he always exercises extreme measures, either soft or rough. A ruler needs a carefully balanced judgement to discriminate between what requires gentle handling and what demands stern treatment.
6. Noble King, one who governs his people with kindly disposition is constantly open to contempt and disrespect from his subjects. On the other hand, a ruler who governs his subjects harshly and oppressively is liable to provoke hostility and hatred in the people he governs. A king should be able to discriminate between the two extremes and resort to the middle course in the interest of peace and tranquillity.
7. Noble King, one who is inflamed by passion may speak in many different ways; one who is inflamed by malice may also speak in many different ways. Therefore, there is no justification in causing the death of the Crown Prince without proper consideration and mainly on the strength of false accusations made by a woman acting under the influence of burning passion and malice.
The minister’s submissions and solicitations failed to move the king. Prince Paduma himself tried several times for the revocation of the royal order in different ways, but to no avail. The king stood firm on his judgement and ordered: “All of you go to the chasm and throw down this ignorant blunderer forthwith.”
All the citizens took sides with the man of standing, the Crown Prince, and my Chief Queen is all alone, and in the circumstances, I will take the side of the queen. Go ye all to the chasm and get the traitor, Prince Paduma, thrown into the robbers’ pit forthwith.
Upon hearing this summary order, the female members of the crowd could not help crying. All the people raised their arms in protest and shouted out as they followed the prince with their hair spread over their bodies in distress. The foolish king was under the impression that the people would stand in the way of throwing the prince into the pit; so he went along with the weeping crowd under escort right up to the pit. He caused the prince to be borne with his head down and the feet up and flung cruelly into the
The Bodhisatta’s Loving-Kindness
Under the influence of the Bodhisatta’s loving-kindness (mettā), the guardian deity of the mountain made himself visible and consoled the prince: “Prince Paduma, don’t worry,” and he held him in his arms close to his chest, so that the prince might be comforted by the pervading warmth of the deity. He then descended the cliff and placed the prince on the expanded hood of a Nāga King who was dwelling at the foot of the mountain.
The Nāga King took the prince to the Nāga kingdom and shared with him the ease and comfort in the country of the Nāgas. Having stayed in the company of Nāgas for a whole year, the Bodhisatta intimated his desire to leave: “I am going to the world of humans.” The Nāga King asked: “To which place do you intend going?” – “To the Himālayas,” was the reply. The Nāga King took the prince to the Himālayas and after providing him with the requisites of recluses and ascetics, he returned to his country. The Bodhisatta spent his days as a recluse developing absorption and the super knowledges (jhāna-abhiññā) and living on herbs, fruits and roots.
After some time, a hunter of the city of Bārāṇasī came upon the abode of the recluse and recognized that he was the Crown Prince. He asked the recluse: “Noble Prince, are you not Prince Mahā Paduma?” – “Yes, I am, my dear man,” was the reply. The hunter paid homage to the Bodhisatta and stayed with him for a few days before he returned to the city of Bārāṇasī. On arrival, he went to the king and reported: “Your majesty, your son, Prince Mahā Paduma is living in the forest in the Himālayas as a recluse. I have seen him and stayed with him for a few days.” Whereupon, the king asked: “Have you seen him personally?” – “Yes, your majesty, I have,” was the hunter’s response.
The king proceeded to the place in the company of a great number of army personnel and halted at the edge of the forest in a temporary shed hoping to see his son. When he met face to face with the recluse sitting in front of his hut, like a golden image, he paid his respects and sat in a suitable spot. The ministers exchanged greetings with the recluse. The Bodhisatta presented the king with fruits and exchanged greetings in an amicable manner.
The king began to ask, by means of a verse:
Aneka-tāle narake, gambhīre ca suduttare,
pātito giri-duggasmiṁ, kena tvaṁ tattha nāmari?
Dear son, how did you manage to survive after you had been thrown upside down into a precipice with a depth of several lengths of palm trees that was difficult to escape?
Then a dialogue between the father and the son ensured:
Nāgo jāta-phaṇo tattha, thāmavā giri-sānujo,
paccaggahi maṁ bhogehi, tenāhaṁ tattha nāmariṁ.
Royal father, a powerful Nāga that sprang into being on the sides of the mountain valleys received me on its expanded hood from the hands of a guardian deity of that locality. That was how I escaped from the danger of being smashed to death after I had been thrown into the precipice of unfathomable depth.
The royal father was greatly delighted by the Bodhisatta’s reply and said solemnly: “I am a vile person to have offended a righteous son like you at the instigation of my wife. I humbly plead for favour and your pardon for my blundering offence against you,” with his head bent at the feet of the Bodhisatta.
Whereupon, the Bodhisatta convinced his father:
Ehi taṁ paṭinessāmi, rāja-putta sakaṁ gharaṁ,
rajjaṁ kārehi bhaddante, kiṁ araññe karissasi?
My royal son, Prince Mahā Paduma, I am taking you back as the rightful heir to the throne of the kingdom of Bārāṇasī. May you reign with glory and greatness. Can you accept the kingship and sovereignty over the domains? How will you promote the welfare and prosperity of the citizens in such a wilderness cut off from civilization?
The following is the prince’s reply in verse:
Yathā gilitvā baḷisaṁ, uddhareyya salohitaṁ,
uddharitvā sukhī assa, evaṁ passāmi attanaṁ.
O king father, just like a man who had accidently swallowed a hook brought it out immediately together with the blood before it went far enough to reach the vital heart, so that he might keep his mind and body in a state of peace and tranquillity, so I see myself as a person who had accidentally swallowed a hook but had removed it in time to live in peace and tranquillity.
Kiṁ nu tvaṁ baḷisaṁ brūsi? Kiṁ tvaṁ brūsi salohitaṁ?
Kiṁ nu tvaṁ ubbhataṁ brūsi? Taṁ me akkhāhi pucchito.
Dear son, what do you mean by hook? What do you mean by blood? What do you mean by removing? I beseech you to enlighten me by answering these questions for me!
Kāmāhaṁ baḷisaṁ brūmi, hatthi-assaṁ salohitaṁ,
cattāhaṁ ubbhataṁ brūmi, evaṁ jānāhi khattiya.
O royal father, I have seen, by way of wisdom, the five sensual pleasures as a hook; worldly wealth or possessions, such as elephants and horses as blood; renunciation of the five sensual pleasures as removing, try to understand these things discriminately by contemplative knowledge.
After he had given the above answer, he continued to give his father instructions for guidance in administering justice: “Noble King, as already mentioned above, I have nothing to do whatsoever with the kingship of Bārāṇasī, and what I wish to commend to you is to rule by strict adherence to the ten codes of conduct for a ruling monarch, without
The ten codes of conduct of a king: alms giving, morality, charity, straightness, gentleness, self-restraint, non-anger, forbearance, austerity and non-opposition. The wrong courses of action are those dominated by desire, ill-will, delusion and fear.
The King Punished the Queen
The king, after several vain attempts to persuade his son to return to his country, made his way back to his capital, crying and weeping all along the route. In the course of his journey, he questioned his ministers: “Who is responsible for the severance of my son from me?” They all unanimously replied: “You have sustained the loss of such a worthy and honourable son through your Chief Queen.” On his arrival at the city, he immediately caused the queen to be flung over the precipice upside down before he entered the royal palace. He ruled over the country and the people wisely and justly ever after.
The Buddha, after teaching the above discourse, proceeded to say: “Monks, in this manner Ciñcā had decried me by abusive language in a previous existence also.”
Ciñcā-māṇavikā mātā, Devadatto ca me pitā,
Ānando paṇḍito nāgo, Sāriputto ca devatā,
rāja-putto ahaṁ āsiṁ, evaṁ dhāretha Jātakaṁ.
Monks, Ciñcā was then the queen, the stepmother; my brother-in-law Devadatta was then the king; Ānanda was then the wise Nāga; Sāriputta was then the guardian deity of the mountain, and I was then Prince Mahā Paduma, remember the Birth Story (Jātaka) thus.
The Birth Story was brought to a close with this verse. The Buddha proceeded to reveal the fact that there is no immoral act that a liar dare not commit: “Monks, one who has abandoned the course of telling the truth and pursued the course of telling lies, has also forsaken the advantages of the attainment of Nibbāna and rebirth in the worlds of Devas and humans, and as such, there is no immoral act that they loath to perform!”
Ekaṁ dhammaṁ atītassa, musā-vādissa jantuno,
vitiṇṇa-para-lokassa, natthi pāpaṁ akāriyaṁ.
Monks, one who has breached the course of not telling lies has also forsaken the advantages of Nibbāna and rebirths in the realms of Devas and humans, and as such, there is no immoral act that these people, destined for planes of woes, will not dare to perform.
At the conclusion of the discourse, a large multitude of beings attained Stream-entry (Sotāpatti) and other noble states.
The following is an exposition of the original cause that actuated wicked Ciñcā to make the accusation: Prior to an infinite period of four immeasurable periods and 100,000 aeons before the definite prophecy of Awakening had been made, the Bodhisatta was a person of distracted mind, with wrong attitudes through constant association with bad people of the most hopeless type. On one occasion, he chanced to slander an Arahat named Nanda, a disciple of Buddha Sabbābhibhū, by accusing him of having unlawful association with a woman. This was a very grave offence of slandering a noble person (ariya).
As a result of such a false accusation against a noble person (ariyūpavāda), he had to suffer in the plane of misery for many a year, and once released from it and reborn in the world of humans, he was subjected to false accusations, existence after existence, and in the last existence as a Buddha, he was accused by the wicked Ciñcā Māṇavikā in the presence of the four assemblies.
Apadāna 39.10 gives a full account on this matter as expounded by the Buddha himself.
The Female Wanderer Sundarī
As stated above, heretics outside the teaching, because of a paucity of offerings being made to them, had the wicked woman Ciñcā slander the Buddha. They made another attempt to slander the Buddha by a similar ruse when they engaged a good looking sectarian woman named Sundarī at a time when the Buddha was residing in Sāvatthī (Sundarī-sutta, Ud 4.8).
While the Buddha was residing at Jetavana monastery, all humans, Devas and Brahmas paid homage to him and the Saṅgha; they revered, honoured and made offerings to them. The four requisites of robes, food, accommodation and medicine were always in ample supply for them. For the Buddha and the Saṅgha, their accumulation of meritorious deeds in the past was immense and also their practice of the true path in the present existence was productive of merit. The beneficial results from these two wholesome sources, combined together to produce an incessant flow of requisites and offerings for them, just like the huge volume of water pouring forth from the confluence of two big rivers.
In sharp contrast, the heretics suffered from a deficiency of the four requisites and other offerings. This is attributed to their lack of meritorious deeds in the past and the wrong practice they followed in the present.
At that time, there lived in Sāvatthī a young heretic maiden who was in her most impressive youth excelling others in comely appearance; hence she was named Sundarī which means Lovely, though her behaviour by deed, word and thought were not lovely, but deplorable.
The heretics gathered together to devise ways and means to slander the Buddha and the Saṅgha out of covetousness. They all took part in the discussions with that end in view: “Dear sirs, we have been ruined beyond redemption since the coming of the ascetic Gotama and we have suffered much from a paucity of gifts, because people have almost forgotten about our existence. What has prompted the people to make such wonderful offerings to the ascetic Gotama with such profound respect and enthusiasm?”
One of the heretics present at the meeting offered his opinion: “Dear sirs, the ascetic Gotama is a direct descendant of the noble Mahā Sammata, through an uninterrupted royal lineage in the pure Sakya clan. That must be the reason why people have honoured him and made offerings so profusely.” Another heretic had this to say: “It is because of a variety of miraculous events that took place at the time of his birth.”
Likewise many heretic leaders presented their individual views: “It is because, when his father, King Suddhodana made him pay homage by raising his two hands in a worshipping gesture towards the recluse Asita, just after his birth, the baby’s feet miraculously flew aloft and rested on the matted hair of the ascetic. And when his parents placed him under the cool shade of a rose-apple tree during the ploughing ceremony, while the shades of many other trees moved with the sun, the shade of the rose-apple tree under which the prince reposed stood unchanged even after noon-tide.”
“It is because he is extraordinarily handsome,” said another, while yet another speculated: “It might be because he had forsaken the throne of the Universal Monarch with all its glories and renounced the world through seeing the four great signs, that the people have been paying homage and making offerings in greater volumes.”
They went about speculating, but without finding the real cause of the immense respect being paid to the Buddha by the people because they were totally ignorant of the Buddha’s
After an exchange of fruitless discussions, one of the fiercest heretics came forward with a plot to destroy the fame and gains of Gotama with the aid of a woman, saying: “Dear sirs, there is no one in this world who is immune from the desire for sexual pleasures derived from a woman and the ascetic Gotama, being young and good looking like a Deva, will certainly get entangled with a maiden of his own age and appearance, if and when available. Even when he cannot be completely tempted, people will begin to have doubt about his moral uprightness. Come let us send the wandering woman Sundarī on a mission to bring ruin to the ascetic Gotama’s reputation throughout the land.”
Upon hearing this suggestion, all the heretics spoke in support of him: “Your plan is excellent, indeed. This will bring about the downfall of the ascetic Gotama. He will have no alternative but to run away with his head hanging down.” They all decided to turn the resolution into action and went in a group to Sundarī.
On seeing the heretics, Sundarī asked: “Why have you all come here in a group?” They went to a corner and sat there without giving her any reply. She approached them in a submissive manner and asked them again and again: “Have I done any thing wrong and, if so, what is my offence?”
At last, they gave this reply: “We have not given you any reply since you have neglected us when we have been oppressed by someone.” Sundarī asked them: “Who has oppressed you?” Whereupon, they revealed their case: “Don’t you see the ascetic Gotama wandering around and depriving us of offerings, to our great disadvantage?” – “Good Sirs, in this matter, how can I be of assistance?” They replied: “Sister, can you really work for the good of your own relatives?” They tried to tie her to a commitment.
They had employed the word “relatives” to win her over, though there was no blood relationship. The heretics are indeed very terrible in their deception.
Whereupon, Sundarī said: “Good Sirs, what should I do for you, there is nothing that I cannot do. I am prepared to sacrifice my own life to do anything that would be of advantage to relatives like you.”
She had thus pledged herself to fulfil their wishes and she could not shrink back, like a deer that had got itself entangled in a bush.
The heretics told her: “Sister, you have pledged to do anything that would be of advantage to us. As you are in your most impressive youth, at the first stage of life, do anything to the best of your ability that will ruin the ascetic Gotama by means of your own irresistible personality.” Thus encouraging her vanity, they sent her away on a mission with a hint that she should pay constant visits to the Jetavana monastery.
Foolish Sundarī, like a person who wishes to dance with a ring of flowers on the teeth of a saw; like one who attempts to catch a bull elephant in musk by its trunk; like one who extends a warm welcome to the king of death by bowing the head besmeared herself with sweet scents and bedecked herself with flowers, and went her way towards the Jetavana monastery, at the time when people were coming out of the precincts of the monastery after hearing the discourses. When asked, she said: “I am going to the ascetic Gotama with whom I usually stay together in his own chamber.” But she dared not enter the monastery and instead, made her way to the nearby hermitage of the heretics. She returned by the same route to the city when people were going to the monastery in the morning. When asked, she told them that she had just come out of the chamber of the Buddha with whom she had stayed the night, giving him sexual gratification.
After a few days the heretics, being satisfied with the part played by Sundarī, bribed some villains and instigated them to kill Sundarī and to conceal her body under heaps of decayed flowers in a ditch adjacent to the Buddha’s chamber. The drunkards carried out their instructions. The heretics then spread the news that Sundarī was missing, and went to King Kosala and reported that their female disciple, Sundarī, was missing and could not be found. The king asked them if there was any place held in suspicion. They informed him that they suspected she was located in the Jetavana monastery. The king then ordered for a search
The heretics went with their disciples to the Jetavana monastery and pretended to look for the wandering woman Sundarī. They found the dead body of Sundarī beneath the heaps of decayed flowers in a ditch and brought the corpse into the king’s presence on a decorated bedstead. They made the king believe that the disciples of the Buddha had slain the young Sundarī and left her corpse beneath the heap of decayed flowers to conceal the evil deed of their master, ascetic Gotama. The thoughtless king passed a summary order without any formal investigation, to the effect that the corpse be carried and shown around the city, street by street, to make all the citizens aware of the case.
Encouraged by the ill-considered judgement of the king, the heretics carried the corpse of Sundarī on a decorated bier and went all over the city, from street to street, from one junction to another, announcing: “All men and women please know this. See for yourselves what the descendants of the Sakyan race have done. They are shameless; they are of evil nature, they have no morals; they are wont to tell lies; and they indulge in sexual intercourse, and, yet they make false claims pretending to be good monastics, saying without shame: ‘We observe precepts, we are virtuous, we are of good conduct, of morality, developing noble practices, speaking only what is true.’ But for these recluses there are no more precepts; noble precepts are a thing of the past, how can there be any element of virtue in them? How can there be noble practice? They are bereft of precepts, bereft of noble practices. Why has someone slain a person of the fair sex after ravishing her?”
They also made the citizens of Sāvatthī make similar slanderous charges. When the citizens saw the monastics, they made accusations against them as instigated by the heretics: “These monastic-princes of the Sakyan race are shameless, without virtue, stupid and liars. They indulge in sexual practices, pretend to be virtuous, righteous, straightforward, noble, truthful and moderate persons. In actual fact, they are without virtue, without precepts, the precepts for monastics are no more than things of the past. How can there be any noble precepts or elements of virtue in them? They have no noble qualities whatsoever. Why should a man slay a woman after he has enjoyed sex with her?” The citizens thus condemned the monastics when they were seen in the city, using vulgar language and humiliated them in an aggressive manner.
On their return from Sāvatthī, after the regular rounds for alms food, the monastics went to the Buddha and addressed him: “Most exalted lord, when the people of Sāvatthī saw the monastics they accused them, saying in vulgar language: “These monastics of Sakyan race are shameless, without virtue and liars. They indulge in sexual practices, and they pretend to be virtuous, righteous, straightforward, noble, truthful and moderate persons. But they are, in fact, without virtue, without precepts, without noble practices or habits, the precepts for monastics are no more than things of the past. How can there be any precepts or noble qualities whatsoever? Why has someone killed a woman after he has ravished her?”
Thus the monastics told the Buddha how they had been calumniated, reviled, abused, oppressed in very harsh language not fit for the ears of noble people. The Buddha explained to them that these people will reap as they sow, by offending the monastics and said: “Monastics, such voices of slander will last only for seven days and they are bound to disappear after seven days. You should refute these people who have calumniated, reviled, abused and oppressed you in very harsh language not fit for the ears of noble people by uttering the following verse:
Abhūta-vādī Nirayaṁ upeti,
yo vāpi katvā na karomi cāha,
ubho pi te pecca samā bhavanti,
nihīna-kammā manujā paratthā.
A person who is in the habit of speaking falsehood by saying, I have seen it, I have heard it, I have met with it, I know about it, though he has not personally seen it, heard it, though he has no knowledge of it; and a person who denies commission of his own offence are equally guilty. Both of these vile people who have done low, base deeds are liable to be reborn in the plane of misery after death.
The monastics learnt the verse from the Buddha and uttered it in the presence of those citizens by way of refutation. On hearing the verse of refutation uttered by the monastics, it dawned on the citizens: “The monastics, belonging to the Sakyan race, have not committed the murder as charged by the heretics through proclamation all over the city. There is one thing that deserves consideration: These noble persons did not care to take any steps whatsoever to retaliate upon us for abusing, reviling and slandering them by using vulgar language not fit for their ears. Instead, they are seen to have put up with false allegations and have thus shown forbearance (khanti) by gently, meekly carrying on with their wholesome deeds (soracca). And, above all, they simply taught to us and explained to us, who have blindly and inconsiderately slandered them, reviled them, the evil consequences of lying and denying commission of one’s own offence, to prove that they are innocent, by way of an avowal of truth (sacca-kiriya).
The citizens had thus regained their senses and became reasonable once again. After hearing the verse, it dawned on them: “We have not personally witnessed the fatal event and what we have heard may or may not be true. And there is one point that calls for special consideration: These heretics are bent only on wishing ill to the monastics, wanting their undoing and ruination. We should not make one-sided statements believing in the words of the heretics. We really do not know the truth about these monastics.” They began to have a sense of detestation and repentance for their conduct towards the monastics. The scandalous accusations did not last long, after seven days died away completely.
The Murder of Sundarī Exposed
King Kosala had a squad of secret service personnel, who were spread throughout the city, to find those responsible for the death of Sundarī and to bring them to justice.
On one occasion, the murderers were drunk on the liquor which they bought with the money they received from the heretics for slaying Sundarī. Two murderers quarrelled with one another and started making accusations and one of them shouted at the other: “So you are enjoying drinks with the money you got from the heretics for killing Sundarī and keeping her dead body under the heap of decayed flowers.” The secret police arrested them and brought them to King Pasenadi Kosala.
The king asked: “Did you kill Sundarī?” They admitted it, saying: “Yes we did your majesty.” The king went on to ask: “Who instigated you to commit the crime?” They replied: “At the instigation of those heretics from outside the Buddha’s teaching.” The heretics were sent for and a formal investigation was made. The heretics admitted their guilt.
The king passed judgment, ordering the heretics to go round the city and proclaim: “We engaged the murderers to kill Sundarī with the sole purpose of bringing about the ruination of the ascetic Gotama. Ascetic Gotama is innocent; his disciples are also absolutely faultless. We are solely responsible for the killing of Sundarī.” You must go all over the city and get this message announced by word of mouth.
In obedience to the order of the king, the heretics did as they were bid. The citizens lost their
Buddha’s Utterance of Joy
Then a great number of monastics approached the Buddha and sat in a suitable place after paying obeisance to him. They then addressed him: “Most exalted lord, it is indeed an unprecedented event deserving of praise by the snapping of the fingers. Most exalted Buddha, your prophecy that those voices would not last long; that they would last only for seven days and would disappear after a period of seven days has proved to be true, the voices are no more.”
The Buddha was well aware of the fact that there never was a case where a wise, virtuous person could not tolerate even the most heinous accusation by lowly, stupid persons. This feeling of supreme confidence led to repeated development of joy and satisfaction so much so that it reached the point of bursting forth in an utterance of an exalted utterance (Ud 4.8):
Tudanti vācāya janā asaññatā,
sarehi saṅgāma-gataṁ va kuñjaraṁ,
sutvāna vākyaṁ pharusaṁ udīritaṁ,
adhivāsaye bhikkhu aduṭṭha-citto.
Monks, a monastic who has renounced the world for fear of the evil consequences of transient existence should overcome evil forces by toleration, like a war elephant that resists and repulses the arrows from the side of its foe in a battlefield, when attacked by those lowly, stupid persons without any restraint in deed, word and thought, who employ stupid abusing, slandering and accusing, as if attacking you with a double edged sword.
Here a question might arise as to why the Buddha had not revealed the fact that the heretics were at the bottom of the whole affair, though he had full knowledge of this case of conspiracy? The answer is as follows: there is no point in telling this to noble persons (ariya-puggala). The noble persons have, from the outset, complete faith in the nobility of the Buddha and the Saṅgha. And there might be certain persons amongst the ordinary worldlings who would not accept the words of the Buddha when he was revealing the facts of the case. Disbelief in the Buddha amounts to an unwholesome act in thought, which may cause them untold harm and suffering for a long time to come, hence the Buddha’s reticence at the time.
In other words, it was not a natural law (dhammatā-aciṇṇa) to foretell the events and their related sequences. They are not wont to point out a particular person as a culprit in a criminal case. They deal with such matters only in an objective way as in the verse for refutation mentioned above. They were not in a position to deter the misfortune that was destined to befall them either. They had, therefore, taken up an indifferent attitude towards accusations by the people, and of Sundarī’s assassination, which formed the cause of those accusations.
And, there is yet another question that may be asked as to the origin of this unwholesome fate of being accused in this most disgraceful manner, when there was a tremendous amount of merit to the credit of the Buddha for incalculable wholesome deeds done throughout 4 immeasurables and 100,000 aeons!
This is the answer: The Buddha was once a habitual drunkard, named Murāli, in a previous existence, at the earlier stage of life as a Bodhisatta. He moved about in the company of immoral, wicked persons and eventually acquired an unwholesome mental attitude. One day, he noticed a Paccekabuddha, known as Surabhi, in the act of rearranging his robes, preparing to enter
He suffered in the realms of woes for several 100,000s of years for that offence; and he had to pay for the remnant of his past misdeed by being maliciously accused by the people of having indulged in sexual intercourse with the heretic Sundarī, even after attainment to the most exalted state of an Awakened Buddha.
There are twelve kinds of similar retributions in which the Buddha had to suffer for his past misdeeds in previous existences. These are laid down in Apadāna 39.10 and its commentary.