On V: The Prophecy
As has been said, Sumedha reflected: “What is the use of selfishly escaping the cycle of births alone,” and this is mentioned in the Chronicles of the Buddhas (Buddha-vaṁsa, Bv 2.56): Kiṁ me ekena tiṇṇena, “why should I cross over by myself?”
Quoting this Pāḷi sentence, people are fond of saying with a tinge of contempt: “One
But, if one continues to read the same sentence one would come across: Purisena thāma-dassinā, “in spite of the fact that I am a superior person, fully aware of my prowess of wisdom, faith and energy,” which explicitly qualifies the foregoing sentence. All this indicates that only those who, despite their ability, are selfish, and not willing to work for others, should be blamed. And those who have no such ability, who say: “I will work for others,” and are not true to their words, should be despised, for they do not know the limits of their own capability. As a matter of fact, those who have no ability to work for others, should look after their own interest. That is why it is taught in the Dhamma Verses (Dhammapada, Dhp 166):
Atta-d-atthaṁ paratthena bahunā pi na hāpaye.
Atta-d-attham-abhiññāya sadattha-pasuto siyā.
Let him not sacrifice his own interest by being willing to work too much for others. Knowing full well his own limited ability he should work for his own welfare.
This teaching of the Dhamma Verses means: “He who is incompetent to work for others but speaks as though he were competent cannot do good for others, nor can he do good for himself; thus he suffers a double loss. Therefore, he who is incompetent to work for others should seek his own good and work only for himself. He who knows the true extent of his own capability and works only for himself should not be blamed as a selfish person, but should be spoken of as a good person who works within the limits of his capability. On the contrary, he who is qualified like Sumedha to render service to others but runs only after his own interest, ignoring others’ interests should truly be censured as a selfish person. In short, let him work for others, if he is competent. If not, let him look after himself so that he may not miss his interest. He who seeks his own interest but pretends to be working for others’ welfare is surely a dishonest, cunning, evil person.”
Nerañjarā
Nerañjarā, as the name of a river, is derived from nela-jala, nela meaning “faultless” and jala, meaning water; hence “the river with pure, clean water.”
Another derivation is from nīla-jala, nīla meaning “blue” and jala meaning water; “blue water” signifies “clear water,” hence: “the river with clear blue water.”
Yet another derivation is from nari-jarā meaning a hydraulophone, a kind of musical instrument which produces a sound similar to that of the flowing waters in a stream.
Honouring Others
“Stepping out with his right foot,” is the translation of the Pāḷi phrase dakkhiṇaṁ pādam-uddhari (Bv 2.75). Buddha Dīpaṅkara departed, not only stepping out with his right foot first, but also keeping Sumedha on his right. This mode of departure from the presence of an honourable person is a very ancient Indian way of showing high esteem.
“Honouring him with eight handfuls of flowers,” in Pāḷi is aṭṭhahi puppha-muṭṭhīhi pūjetvā, which occurs in the Birth Stories commentary (Jātaka, PTS 1.16) and the Chronicles of the Buddhas commentary (Buddha-vaṁsa, PTS 94). Over this phrase, there has been a controversy whether a living Buddha should pay respect to a Bodhisatta who would become a Buddha only many aeons later. Even if one argues that Buddha Dīpaṅkara was paying homage not to the person of the recluse Sumedha but only to the omniscient wisdom (sabbaññutā-ñāṇa) he would attain, this argument also is unacceptable as it is inappropriate that the present possessor of omniscience should pay respect to the omniscience yet to be attained by a Bodhisatta.
The whole controversy rests on the translation of the word pūjetvā, which is connected with pūjā. The Supplementary Readings (Khuddaka-pāṭha) commentary explains that pūjā means sakkāra, “treating well,” mānana, “holding in esteem,” and vandanā, “salutation, homage, or obeisance.” The author gives his view that in honouring the recluse Sumedha with eight handfuls of flowers, the Buddha was not saluting or paying homage or obeisance (vandanā), but he was merely giving good treatment (sakkāra) to Sumedha and showing the high esteem (mānana) in which he held him.
Prophetic Phenomena
“Prophetic phenomena,” is the rendering into English of the Pāḷi word nimitta, which means a phenomenon foretelling a good or evil event that is likely to take place.
The text mentions the prophetic phenomenon which took place on the day the planet Visākhā conjoined with the full moon. That day is reckoned as the full moon day of May (Vesākha). The day is regarded usually to be auspicious, as it is the full moon day of the first month of the year.
All the previous Buddhas received their prophecies of becoming a Buddha on the full moon day of May. So when Sumedha received the prediction on the same auspicious day, Devas and Brahmas were quite positive about the proclamation that Sumedha would definitely become a Buddha.
The author further mentions that the full moon day of May is not only the day on which the prophecy was received, but also the day on which Bodhisattas took their last birth in the human world; it is also the day on which they attained Perfect Self-Awakening and the day on which they passed away into Nibbāna.
The full moon of May (Vesākha) is so auspicious that in the traditional customs of Myanmar kings of the past have had themselves anointed and crowned on this particular day.
Thirty-two prophetic phenomena occurred on the day Sumedha received the prediction. These phenomena were different from those that took place on the days of Buddha’s conception, birth, Awakening and the teaching of the first discourse.