Wednesday, September 9, 2015

Thoughts on "The Short Dialogue with Malunkya"

In "The Short Dialogue with Malunkya," Malunkya asked the Buddha if he could explain some questions about if the world is finite or eternal, if the soul is connected to or separate from the body, and what happens after death. The Buddha tells Malunkya that the answers to the questions don't matter because they won't bring him closer to achieving enlightenment or nirvana. However, if the Buddha knew the answers, what would be the harm in divulging them? If the Buddha did not know the answers, why didn't he just say so? As Malunkya says, "But if the Blessed One does not know . . . then the only honest thing . . . is to say, 'I don't know, I don't see.'" Could admitting he doesn't know make him lose face (Probably not, but it was the only possible explanation I could think of)? The last possibility is that these questions are "by their very nature unanswerable." Maybe the ones about the soul being connected to the body and what happens after death, but if you remember the story of how the Buddha became enlightened, you might remember that the earth stood up as witness to the Buddha's pledge to teach others because it is eternal; the earth is the thing that remains. 
I have a feeling that the Buddha knew the answers, but told Malunkya a lie to protect him. Maybe Malunkya would grasp the truth incorrectly, like grasping the tail of a snake, or fixate on the answers as one must not do. Convincing him that knowing the answers would not help him achieve enlightenment or nirvana was probably the right thing to do, because in the end, "Malunkyaputta felt joy at the Blessed One's words. 

No comments:

Post a Comment