The Buddhist Cosmos

by Punnadhammo Mahathero

  In the Saṃyutta account, each of Māra’s daughters in turn then addresses the Buddha with a stanza to which the Buddha replies. Taṇhā’s verse repeats that of Māra given above at the beginning of this section starting with “Are you sunk in sorrow, that you meditate here in the forest?” The Buddha replies that he “has conquered the army of the dear and the pleasant and meditates alone, having found bliss.” Arati asks more pertinently: how does he meditate that sensual perceptions do not seize him? The gist of the Buddha’s answer is that he dwells “without constructing, mindful, without attachment (asaṅkharāno satimā anoko).” Ragā’s verse is not a question, but a statement. She declares that he will lead many out of the reach of the King of Death (maccurāja), presumably meaning her father.

  They then returned to their father who berated them for their folly:

  You fools! You sought to break a rock with a lotus stalk.

  You tried to cleave a mountain with your nails,

  To chew iron with your teeth.

  With a great rock on your head, you stepped into the abyss.

  It was like knocking your breasts into a post.

  You depart from Gotama disappointed. (SN 4:25)

  The Jātaka account adds a curious variation, which it qualifies by saying that “although some teachers say this, it should not be believed.” In this version, when the daughters appear in the forms of old women “with broken teeth and grey hair” the Buddha says, “and so you shall remain.” Although the reason for rejecting this version is not stated, it is presumably because such a command would not be compassionate on the part of the Buddha. We can also assume this never happened because desire, discontent and passion are still very much with us and don’t seem to have lost any of their power since the Buddha’s day (Jāt-nid 3).

  Regarding the beauty of Māra’s daughters, it should be remembered that they are Paranimmitavasavatti devīs, representing the very summit of sensuality. Later, when the Buddha rejected the suggestion of marriage to the beauty Māgaṇḍiyā, he recounted how he had not been tempted even by the daughters of Māra, devīs who had “golden bodies free from phlegm and other such impurities.” So why would he desire a merely human female, whose body was “like a decorated vessel filled with dung” (Dhp-a 14:1).

  A note on the problem of chronology. Fitting these incidents into the chronology of the Buddha’s career is problematic. On the one hand, they are clearly meant to occur in close sequence at the end of the seven year period of Māra’s close pursuit, but on the other hand, they are located at the Goat Herder’s Banyan Tree where the Buddha stayed for the five weeks after his awakening. The three principal sources, the Dhammapada, the Māra Saṃyutta and the Jātaka Nidana versions all contain this contradiction to some degree. Various solutions, none of them wholly satisfactory, present themselves. Perhaps the Buddha made a return visit to that locale one year afterwards, although this is nowhere recorded as happening. Perhaps Māra was watching the Bodhisatta for some months before the renunciation. This would contradict the text of the Suttanipāta and Saṃyutta commentaries which explicitly define the period of Māra’s close pursuit as comprising the six years of austerities plus the first year after awakening (Sn-a 3:2 & SN-a 4:24). The Dhammapada account also marks the beginning of this period at the Bodhisatta’s home-leaving (Dhp-a 14:1). It would, however, receive some oblique support from a passage in the Milindapañha which says that a “certain deva of Māra’s group” tried to tempt the Bodhisatta with world dominion before the home-leaving (Mil 5:3,2 eng. v2 p111). Most likely, the discrepancy may simply be a confusion in the texts between two separate traditions. In the end, the question must be settled arbitrarily, and I have chosen here to place these incidents one year after the awakening.694

  3:5:37 MĀRA AND THE BUDDHA IV—OTHER ENCOUNTERS

  Although Māra abandoned his close pursuit of the Buddha, he did not cease altogether from harassing him and attempting to thwart the spread of the Dhamma. Māra returned to his abode in the Paranimmitavasavatti deva realm and from there he checked from time to time on what the Buddha was doing back in the human world (MN-a 49). Several subsequent encounters of Māra and the Buddha are recorded.

  Although he clearly should have known by then the futility of the task, Māra occasionally tried to arouse defiled states of mind in the Buddha. Once, when the Buddha was walking on the Gijjhakūṭa Mountain (“Vulture’s Peak”) Māra shattered some nearby boulders, attempting without success to arouse fear in the Buddha (SN 4:11). On another occasion, Māra tried once more to corrupt the Buddha with the temptation of worldly power:

  In those days, people were oppressed by kings. When the Buddha contemplated the unrighteous actions of kings who would punish and oppress the people, he was moved to compassion and he thought, “Is it possible to exercise rulership without killing or being killed, without conquering or being conquered, without sorrow or causing sorrow? Is it possible to rule righteously?”

  Māra knew the thoughts of the Buddha. “The samaṇa Gotama is considering now whether it is possible to exercise sovereignty. It must be that he desires rulership. Now, rulership is a cause of heedlessness. Now I have an opportunity to go to him and make an effort.”

  Māra went to the Buddha and said, “Blessed One, you have well developed the four iddhipāda.695 If the Blessed One were to wish, ‘may the Himavā, king of mountains, become gold’, it would become gold. Then with that wealth you could do that which wealth allows, and could rule righteously.”

  The Buddha replied with a stanza declaring his transcendence of all sense desire and ended by saying to Māra, “I admonish you, Pāpima. Know this, my nature is not the same as your nature. Thus I admonish you.” (Dhp-a 23: 8 & SN 4:20)

  On two recorded occasions Māra insulted the Buddha as he lay down to sleep. In the first episode, the Buddha lied down mindfully on his right side after doing walking meditation most of the night:

  Māra: “Why do you sleep? Why do you sleep?

  What is this? You sleep like a wretch (dubbhago).

  (Like a corpse, like one unconscious)

  There is an empty hut, so you sleep.

  What is this? The sun has risen, and you sleep.”696

  The Buddha replied that if one who is free from attachment desires sleeps, “what is it to you, Māra?” The word dubbhago translated here, and by Bhikkhu Bodhi, as “wretch” literally means a person with bad luck. It is the etymological opposite of bhagavā, “the blessed one”, and may be a deliberate play on words. The commentary adds an additional riposte by the Buddha, “you are like a fly buzzing around hot porridge and, unable to land, only gets more irritated” (SN-a 4:7).

  The second episode occurred after Devadatta had tried to kill the Buddha by rolling a boulder down the slope of Gijjhakūṭa Mountain, leaving him wounded by a stone splinter in the foot. The Buddha was experiencing severe painful feelings but “he mindfully endured them without mental suffering.” When he folded his outer robe to make a mat and lie down on his right side, Māra approached him:

  Māra: “Do you sleep out of laziness? (mandiyā) Or are you intoxicated by poetry?

  (Like a poet who thinks up poems, until he is drunk with them)

  You must not have much to do!

  Alone on your solitary bed,

  Sleepy-faced, why do you doze?”697

  The Buddha replied in three stanzas, the gist of his reply being, “My mind is at peace, so why shouldn’t I sleep?” Māra then disappeared.

  Unable to find a flaw in the Buddha, Māra focussed his efforts on attempting to obstruct his teaching. At one time the Buddha was discoursing on the Dhamma before a large assembly. Māra thought, “I shall make them blind (vicakkhukammāya).” The commentary explains that this means to destroy the “wisdom eye” (paññācakkhu) of the assembly, in other words to confuse them with a terrifying sound or vision. Māra then addressed the Buddha:

  Māra: “Why do you roar like a lion, so confident before the assembly?

  There is ind
eed a rival wrestler (paṭimallo), so why do you think you are the victor?”

  Buddha: “The great heroes (mahāvīrā) are confident before the assemblies,

  The Tathāgatas of great power, having overcome desire for the three worlds.” (SN 4:12)

  The Buddha’s confidence before the assemblies recalls the Parisā Sutta of the Aṅguttara Nikāya. There, the Buddha is said to appear incognito in various assemblies both human and non-human, to speak on the dhamma. One of these assemblies is that of Māra’s company (AN 8: 69). We are not told how Māra reacted to the dhamma being preached in his own inner sanctum, but we can well imagine that he was not pleased. This counter-tactic of the Buddha’s, together with the allusion to “rival wrestlers” illustrates that the relationship between these two had something of the nature of a struggle about it. It was a conflict for the minds of beings, with Māra always attempting to keep them “bound in his snares” of desire and fear, and the Buddha attempting to set them free.

  On another occasion, Māra again attempted to “blind” the wisdom-eye of the assembly and accused the Buddha of getting caught up in the attachment and aversion of teaching, in other words the vanity of praise and blame. The Buddha replied that he taught only out of compassion for others, and Māra being disappointed once more, disappeared (SN 4:14). Māra would also attempt to create distractions when the Buddha was instructing his disciples. At one time while the Buddha was teaching the bhikkhus, Māra took the form of an ox and threatened to blunder into the row of alms bowls which the bhikkhus had left outside to dry in the sun (SN 4:16). On another similar occasion, a sudden earth-splitting noise at first frightened the bhikkhus until the Buddha told them that the earth was not splitting open, it was only Māra (SN 4:17).

  One such episode turned out a little differently. Māra attempted to disrupt one of the Buddha’s discourses by appearing as a roughly dressed farmer asking about his missing oxen. The Buddha as usual recognized him: “What do you have to do with oxen, Pāpima?” But this time, instead of disappearing as soon as he was recognized, Māra attempted to challenge the Buddha in front of the assembled bhikkhus.

  “The eye is mine, samāṇa, visible forms are mine, eye-consciousness is mine, eye-contact is mine. The ear is mine, sounds are mine, ear-consciousness is mine, ear-contact is mine. The nose is mine, odours are mine, nose-consciousness is mine, nose-contact is mine. The tongue is mine, flavours are mine, tongue-consciousness is mine, tongue-contact is mine. The body is mine, tactile sensations are mine, body-consciousness is mine, body contact is mine. The mind is mine, mind-objects are mine, mind-consciousness is mine, mind-contact is mine. Where can you go, samāṇa, to escape me?”

  The Buddha acknowledges that all six senses are within Māra’s domain and belong to him. But he goes on to say:

  “Pāpima, where there is no eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind, no visible forms, no sound, no odours, no flavours, no tactile sensations, no mind-objects, no eye-consciousness etc., no eye-contact etc., there you cannot go.”

  Māra: “That which is called ‘mine’ and those who say ‘it is mine’. If your mind is like this, you won’t escape me, samāṇa.”

  Buddha: “I am not one who speaks of ‘me’ and ‘mine’,

  Know this Pāpima, you cannot see my path.”

  Then Māra Pāpima disappeared from that place. (SN 4:19)

  Māra was capable of taking possession of other beings and using them for his purposes. The verb rendered “to possess” is anvāvisati in Pali, and might also be translated as “to enter into.”

  At one time the Buddha went into the brahmin village of Pañcasālā for alms, but Māra possessed the villagers and planted the thought in their minds, “don’t let the samāṇa Gotama get any alms.” So after walking for alms, the Buddha left the village with his bowl as clean as when he had entered it.

  Then Māra approached the Blessed One, “Did you get any alms, samāṇa?” “Was it you, Pāpima, that made it so that I didn’t receive any alms?” “Well then, sir, go into the village a second time and I will make sure you do get some alms.”

  (But Māra lied when he said this; he intended for the Buddha to be mocked by the village boys).

  The Buddha replied to Māra:

  “You make demerit Māra, when you insult the Tathāgata.

  Do you think, Pāpima, that your evil deed (pāpa) has no result?

  We live in bliss (sukha), who have nothing at all.

  We shall feed on rapture (pīti) like the Abhāssara Devas”698

  The Buddha’s reply is to remind Māra that despite his high station within saṃsāra, he is himself still trapped within it, and so subject to the results of his own deeds. (We shall see this idea developed further when we consider Māra’s encounter with Moggallāna). The Abhāssara Devas are beings in the brahmā world who are beyond sensuality and physical food. Their level of consciousness is equivalent to second jhāna, of which pīti and sukha are both factors (see § 3:6,8).

  Some of Māra’s encounters with the Buddha took the form of simple dialogues or debates. Māra once appeared before the Buddha and declared that, “He who has sons, delights in them. He who has cattle, delights in them.” The Buddha replies that, “He who has sons, sorrows over sons. He who has cattle, sorrows over cattle” (SN 4:8). In another encounter, Māra declares that “Human life is long, death has not yet come, the wise man lives like a suckling baby.” Māra, as a deva living more than nine billion years, obviously cannot believe this himself. The Buddha replies that “Human life is short, the wise man lives as if his turban is on fire” (SN 4:9). One of these exchanges is a little different: Māra is not seen challenging the Buddha but seems to be genuinely curious. He appeared before the Buddha disguised in the form of “a certain man” (aññataro puriso) and asked, “Sir, what is meant by ‘crossing over to the far shore’? (pāraṃ pāranti).” The Buddha knew immediately that it was Māra and replied, “Pāpima, what have you to do with ‘crossing over’? Only those who are free from desire can cross over” (Dhp-a 26:3).

  3:5:38 MĀRA AND THE BUDDHA V—PARINIBBĀNA

  Māra’s final encounter with the Buddha occurred three months before his passing into parinibbāna.699 The following is a summary account of the essential details:

  The Buddha was dwelling in Vesāli. He asked Ānanda to accompany him for the day’s abiding to the Cāpāla Cetiya.

  Ānanda was the Buddha’s attendant. A cetiya is a kind of shrine or memorial, later often called a stupa. The Cāpāla Cetiya was a pre-Buddhist sacred site which had been turned into a vihāra, i.e a dwelling place for bhikkhus. The commentary tells us that it had previously been the residence of a yakkha named Cāpāla.

  Having reached the Cāpāla Cetiya, the Buddha sat down on a prepared seat. He addressed Ānanda in these words:

  “Delightful, Ānanda, is Vesāli. Delightful is the Udena Cetiya, the Gotamaka Cetiiya, the Sattamba Cetiya, the Bahuputta Cetiya, the Sārandada Cetiya. Delightful is the Cāpāla Cetiya.

  “Whoever, Ānanda, has thoroughly mastered the four iddhipādā (“bases of power”, spiritual qualities that give success to any endeavour, including the psychic powers) may, if he wishes, live for a kappa or the remainder of a kappa (kappāvasesa).”

  This passage has been the source of some controversy, hinging on the meaning here of “a kappa or the remainder of a kappa.” The word kappa usually refers to a very long period of time, the life-cycle of an entire world-system. Thus, the straightforward reading would be that the Buddha is here claiming that he could prolong his life to the end of the world. However, the commentary explains that the kappa referred to here is an āyukappa, or full life-span. A full human life-span varies with the various periods of the cosmic cycle, at the time of the Buddha, it was defined as one hundred years. The commentary goes on to define kappāvasesa as meaning “a century, or a little more.” This seems a strained interpretation of vasesa, which means “remainder or residue,” almost the opposite of “a little more than.” Bu
t the commentary goes on to make a couple of cogent arguments in defence of this interpretation. The Buddha was gravely ill, and had been so for ten months already. He was only suppressing the disease through constant efforts in meditation. The Buddha had reached four fifths of the full span of human life and his body was broken and deteriorating; he was only remaining alive for the sake of his disciples and parinibbāna now seemed dear (piya) to him. More cogently, the commentary calls this present kappa a bhaddakappa, (“a fortunate kappa”), which means that this world-system during its total life will see the arising of five Buddhas. The implications are not spelled out here, but it follows that if Gotama Buddha (who was the fourth) were to remain alive until the end of the kappa, he would be for some time co-existent with Metteya Buddha (who will be the fifth). This would mean that two Buddhas would exist at once in the same world-system, which is stated elsewhere to be an impossibility (MN 115 & DN 19).

  But even though the Buddha had given such a clear sign, Ānanda did not implore the Buddha to remain “for the welfare and happiness of the world,” because his mind was pervaded (pariyuṭṭhitacitto) by Māra. The Buddha made his statement a second and third time, but still Ānanda did not comprehend the clear sign, because his mind was pervaded by Māra.

  The commentary explains that Māra is able to pervade anyone’s mind with the vipallāsā (“distortions” or “hallucinations”) who has not gone beyond them. Ānanda was a sotāpanna, (“stream-enterer,” a person at the first level of awakening) so he had gone beyond the vipallāsa of views, but not of those of the mind or of perceptions. So Māra pervaded his mind with a frightful vision so that even though the Buddha’s clear sign was “right in his face” (mukhena hatthaṃ) he was unable to comprehend its meaning.