Arahant Bhikkhuni Isidasi
(Isidasi - A Journey Through Samsara)
In Pāialiputta, which was to become the capital of King Asoka, there lived two Buddhist nuns, Isidāsī and Bodhi, both skilled in contempla- tion, well versed in the Teaching, free from all defilements. One day after they had gone on their alms round and had finished their meal, the two friends sat in the shade, and their conversation drifted towards their personal histories. The older nun, whose name was Bodhi, had appar- ently undergone much suffering before she joined the Order, and she wondered why her younger companion Isidāsī had decided to renounce the world. The latter was still in the flush of youth. She had a cheerful countenance, and it hardly seemed conceivable that life could have left bitter traces on her. So how, the older nun wondered, had the suffering of existence revealed itself to her and impelled her to a life of renunciation?
“You are lovely, noble Isidāsī,
And your youth has not yet faded,
What was the flaw that you had seen
That led you to pursue renunciation?”
(Thī 403)
Isidāsī told her story. She had been born in the south, in Ujjeni, the capital of the kingdom of Avantī. Her father was a wealthy citizen, and she was his only, much-loved daughter. A business friend of his, a wealthy merchant, asked him to give his daughter in marriage to his son, and Isidāsī’s father was glad for his daughter to marry into the friend’s family. Isidāsī was an upright, well-disciplined young woman.
The deep respect for her parents that she had learned at home she extended equally to her parents-in-law, and she entertained a warm, friendly relationship with all her husband’s relatives, maintaining always a deliberate attitude of proper modesty. She was also a very industrious and conscientious housewife. She served her husband with great love, even cooking his meals with her own hands rather than leaving this task to the servants:
By myself I cooked the rice,
By myself I washed the dishes.
As a mother looks after her only son,
So did I serve my husband.
I showed him devotion unsurpassed,
I served him with a humble mind;
I rose early, I was diligent, virtuous
And yet my husband hated me.
(Thī 412–13)
Isidāsī was indeed one of those ideal wives on the Indian model who selflessly serve their husbands, and her husband had every reason to rejoice that he had found such a life companion; for even amongst Indian women, generally known for their gentle disposition, she excelled and was truly a treasure. Yet, strangely, her husband could not tolerate her, and he went to his parents and voiced his complaint. His parents, however, praised her virtues and asked the young man, with great bewilderment, why he did not like her. He explained that she certainly had done nothing to hurt him, nor had she ever displayed any aggression against him, but he simply did not like her, he was tired of her, he had had enough of her, and he was ready to leave the house so that he would not have to set eyes on her any more (Thī 414–16).
The parents were very upset and could not understand their son. So they asked Isidāsī to come to them, sadly told her how matters stood, and begged her to tell them what she had done, assuring her that she could speak in full confidence. They must have imagined that their son had for some reason been reticent about speaking up, and they hoped that their beloved daughter-in-law would tell them what was amiss so that they could take steps to reconcile her husband to her. The whole affair was conducted on all sides in a calm and dignified manner. Neither the parents nor the son were at all violent or aggressive, and the son was even ready to leave the house and go his own way rather than do anything against Isidāsī. The parents too were ready to forgive their daughter-in-law for any wrong that she might have done. But she answered quite truthfully:
I have done nothing wrong,
I have done him no harm,
have not spoken rudely to him.
What have I done that my husband hates me?
(Thī 418)
In fact, nothing whatsoever had happened. Even her husband himself did not know why he hated her and could give no rational explanation for his antipathy. As Isidāsī’s in-laws could not remedy the situation, and as they did not want to lose their son, they had no choice but to send her back to her parents. Such an exemplary woman, they thought, would surely find another husband with whom she could be happy. For Isidāsī, of course, this was an absolutely humiliating experience. Returning to her parents as a rejected wife, she was almost devastated:
Rejected, overcome by suffering,
They led me back to my father’s house.
“While appeasing our son,” they exclaimed,
“We have lost the beautiful goddess of fortune!”
(Thī 419)
Her father took his only daughter back under his protection. Though what had happened was beyond his comprehension, he started looking for another husband for her. Among his acquaintances he found a virtuous and wealthy man who was so happy at the prospect of marrying Isidāsī that he offered to provide half the usual marriage fee. But although Isidāsī served her new husband with the utmost love and affection, after barely a month the same strange pattern once again repeated itself. The second husband lost his affection for her, became irritated with her mere presence, and sent her back to her parents, the marriage annulled.
Now both she and her father were totally at a loss. Shortly thereafter a mendicant came to the house in quest of alms. The man did not seem too happy with his ascetic condition, and it suddenly occurred to Isidāsī’s father to offer him his daughter. The father suggested to the ascetic that he discard his robe and begging bowl and settle into a more comfortable lifestyle, with a splendid mansion for his home and the beautiful Isidāsī for his wife. The ascetic readily agreed to this tempting offer, which was beyond his wildest expectations. But after only two weeks he came to his father-in-law and begged him to return his robe and bowl: he would rather starve as the poorest of beggars than spend one more day in Isidāsī’s company. The whole family pleaded with him to tell them what he wanted; they would fulfil his every wish if he only agreed to remain, for he was a virtuous man. But he refused every inducement. He was, he said, sure of one thing only: he could no longer stay with Isidāsī under one roof. And with these words he left. (Thī 422–25).
Isidāsī was utterly miserable and considered committing suicide rather than having to go on bearing such suffering. Now it so happened that on that same day a Buddhist nun named Jinadattā came to her father’s house on her alms round. Seeing the nun’s peaceful countenance, Isidāsī thought that she should become a nun herself. She made her wish known, but her father, reluctant to lose his only daughter, pleaded with her to stay at home. Here, he said, she could perform meritorious deeds that would lead to her future welfare. But Isidāsī wept and begged her father to let her go forth. By this time she had realized that her incomprehensible fate must be due to some deeper cause, some evil kamma created in a former life. Finally her father relented:
Then my father said to me,
“Attain enlightenment and the supreme state,
Gain Nibbāna which the best of men
Has himself already realized.”
(Thī 432)
Thus Isidāsī took leave of her parents and her circle of relatives. She followed the elder nun to the monastery and went forth into the homeless life.
After her ordination she spent seven days in utmost exertion, and by the end of the week she had realized the three higher knowledges— the recollection of past lives, the knowledge of the passing away and rebirth of beings, and the knowledge of the destruction of defilements. Through her ability to remember previous lives Isidāsī found the underlying causes behind her marital failures in this life, and much else that lay hidden in the dim recesses of saṃsāra.
Looking past into the past Isidāsī saw that eight lives ago she had been a man—a goldsmith, handsome and rich, full of the intoxication of youth. Dazzled by physical beauty, this dashing goldsmith had seduced the wives of others, with no regard for decency and morality. He loved to conquer other men’s wives, one after another, like a butterfly flitting from flower to flower. He played with love and felt no compunction over the damage he could cause. All he wanted was the thrill of conquest, the titillation of lust, but never any responsibilities, any commitment, any obligation to love. He wanted to take his pleasure, again and again, and he wanted change. He broke his victims’ hearts, and did not care in the slightest what happened to them. Whether he broke hearts or marriages was for him a matter of indifference. And so he danced for a while, as it were, on the top of a volcano—until his time was up.
Then he fell into the dark abyss that he had dug out for himself by his own reckless conduct. He was reborn in hell, where there is wailing and gnashing of teeth, and there he experienced a thousand times over the suffering that he had inflicted upon others. He had been infinitely ruthless in deed and in intention, so in hell he was subjected to infinitely ruthless punishment, without pity and without mercy, just as he himself had been pitiless and cruel on earth. The special punishment for adulterers and lechers in hell, they say, is an excursion without respite through a forest where every leaf is a sword. They see a beautiful woman in the distance, run after her, and are cut on all sides by the razor-sharp sword edges. And the woman, like Fortune on her sphere, runs ahead and beckons but can never be reached. Yet the lecher, impelled by obsessive desire, cannot help himself. Time and again he throws himself into the forest and is cut to shreds by the sharp leaves. “And I suffered torment for a long time,” says Isidāsī the nun (Thī 436). She clearly remembered her human existence as the goldsmith and knew full well why he had to undergo such bitter atonement.
After completion of this hellish punishment, he moved on in saṃsāra. In his next life he had forgotten everything and was reborn in the womb of a monkey. As he had worked through the worst consequences of his misdeeds, he was beginning to rise slowly from the depths. After having done penance for the hate that was in him when he coarsely rejected the women he had seduced and despised their deceived husbands, he still retained the drives of a purely animal craving, and through the influence of these tendencies he assumed the form of an animal. This is a literal manifestation of the saying of Dionysius the Areopagite: “The nature of desire is such, that it turns a man into the thing he desires.” That man—who had indulged his lustfulness without scruples or inhibitions—now became a being not subject to the rule of reason, an animal, and precisely the animal that is nearest to man: a monkey. Only seven days after his birth, however, the leader of the monkey tribe bit off the newborn’s sexual organs, to prevent future rivalry:
A great monkey, leader of the troop,
Castrated me when I was seven days old.
This was the fruit of that kamma
Because I had seduced others’ wives.
(Thī 437)
After dying as a monkey, he was reborn as a sheep, the offspring of a lame one-eyed ewe. Further, he was made a gelding, unable to satisfy the sexual urge. He lived in misery thus for twelve years, suffering from intestinal worms and constantly obliged to transport children. His third animal existence was as an ox, castrated, and forced to pull the plough and cart throughout the year, with hardly any rest (Thī 440–41). Hard work was precisely what the licentious goldsmith had always avoided, and now hard work was precisely what he could not escape. He had many duties to perform and very little pleasure, not only because he was castrated, but also because he had to pull heavy loads all day long and, at one point, also lost his eyesight.
In the next life, he who had been successively goldsmith, hell dweller, monkey, sheep, and ox, again arrived at human status—but as a hermaphrodite, a cross between male and female (Thī 442). Because in his earlier existence he had been so obsessed with sexual organs, both his own and those of women, now he found himself having both at the same time—which, of course, again precluded all satisfaction, making of him an outsider in society, especially since he was the son of a slave girl and had been born in the gutter. He eked out an unhappy existence for thirty years and then died.
In the next existence, the being who had gone from manhood to a life in hell, from hell to animal life, and from animal to hermaphrodite, was reborn as a woman. This completed the sex change. He had now become what was formerly the object of his desires: a woman. Indeed, desire turns a man into the things he desires. The newborn girl was the daughter of a man in the lowest social caste, an impecunious carter who failed in everything he undertook and ended up owing everybody money. As his creditors were constantly harassing him and he had nothing to give them, he offered to one of them, a wealthy merchant, his daughter as a slave. The merchant released him from his debts, gave him some money as a bonus, and took the girl. She wept and grieved, but all to no avail—she was taken from home into slavery.
When she was sixteen years old, and an attractive virgin, the son of the house fell in love with her and took her as his secondary wife. He was already happily married to an honourable, virtuous wife, who loved him above everything. She was naturally very distressed when her husband took another wife and felt rejected. The younger woman, however, did everything in her power to defend her newly won position and succeeded in sowing discord between husband and wife. Having known the misery of utter poverty and the burdens of a slave’s life, she was determined to defend her position as the wife of a rich man, and thus she did everything possible to displace her rival. This brought about much feuding and quarreling, until she finally managed to sever the tie between her husband and his first wife (Thī 443–46).
After that life, in which she had again misused the opportunities for happiness offered by human birth, she was reborn as Isidāsī. The fruit of her earlier bad actions having now been exhausted, she was born as a perfect human being. But because in her preceding life she had driven another woman away from her home and enjoyed taking her place, she now had to suffer the contempt and neglect of three successive husbands. None of the three men she held dear wanted her, she was despised and rejected as wife by all of them, apparently without justification but actually as a consequence of her own earlier actions. Since, however, she did not react with anger and aggression, but endeavored at all times to be a model wife, she was able to build on this virtuous foundation. After becoming a nun she attained the meditative absorptions with unusual rapidity and quickly penetrated the key to her mysterious fate.
Once Isidāsī had understood all these connections, once she had realized the evil consequences of unrestrained craving and seen how this leads time and again to self-assertion at the expense of others, the wish arose in her to turn away altogether from the whole cycle of suffering. She understood the interplay of inclinations in her earlier lives and in her present life, and she saw with the divine eye that the same holds true for other beings as well. And thus, having experienced the Teaching in actual practice, she finally attained the third higher knowledge, the full and complete understanding of the Four Noble Truths, which brings release from saṃsāra forever. Thus she became one of the holy ones, an arahant. Having wandered from lecher to hell dweller, then through three lives as a male animal to rebirth as a hermaphrodite, then as a poor slave child who rose to wealth, and finally as a rejected wife—eight lives full of confusion, full of craving and hate—she had had enough. Now, free at last, she could say:
This was the fruit of that past deed,
That although I served them like a slave,
They rejected me and went their way:
Of that, too, I have made an end.
(Thī 447)
(From the book: GREAT DISCIPLES OF THE BUDDHA – NYANAPONIKA THERA AND HELMUTH HECKER , Edited with an Introduction by BHIKKHU BODHI)