In MN 63, Māluṅkyaputta demands answers to speculative questions about the cosmos, the soul, and the fate of a realized person after death. The Buddha responds with the analogy of a man struck by a poisoned arrow who refuses treatment until irrelevant details are answered.
Source and historical status
The poisoned-arrow analogy is in an early discourse. The article is rewritten around MN 63 rather than an invented man who simply ‘asked too many questions.’
The narrative in context
In MN 63, Māluṅkyaputta demands answers to speculative questions about the cosmos, the soul, and the fate of a realized person after death. The Buddha responds with the analogy of a man struck by a poisoned arrow who refuses treatment until irrelevant details are answered.
What the story teaches
The point is practical: teachings are evaluated by whether they address suffering and the path to its cessation.
How to read the poisoned-arrow parable
The poisoned-arrow comparison appears in the Cūḷamāluṅkya Sutta, where the Buddha declines to make certain speculative questions central to liberation. The point is not that Buddhism rejects every philosophical question, but that some questions do not serve the urgent task described in the discourse. Reading the full setting prevents the parable from becoming a vague slogan against inquiry.
