An Elder who possessed the knack of saying "the wrong thing." He would go to a place where people were enjoying a holiday and recite stanzas suitable to a funeral and vice versa (DhA.iii.123ff). When the Buddha heard of this he related the Somadatta Játaka, showing that in past births, too, Láludayí had possessed the same propensity. He is identified with the foolish father (Agnidatta) of the story (J.ii.167; DhA.iii.125). We also read of his jealousy of the praises bestowed on Sáriputta and Moggallána for their knowledge and exposition of the Law, and he claimed that he possessed knowledge equal to theirs. But one day when asked to preach, he sat on a seat holding a painted fan, but found nothing to say. He thereupon agreed to preach in the evening; but the same thing happened, and he barely escaped with his life, so furious was his audience. The Buddha, on hearing of this, related the Súkara Játaka (in which Láludáyí was the pig), showing that in the past, too, he had covered himself with disgrace because of his boastfulness. J.ii.344ff.; but according to the introductory story of the Játaka itself (in J.ii.9ff.), Láludáyí's name is not mentioned, and the incident described differs somewhat.
On another occasion, he had a dispute with Dabba Mallaputta regarding the allotment of the rice tickets, and the monks, in order to teach him a lesson, handed him the tickets to distribute. But he created such confusion that there was a great uproar, and Ananda was sent by the Buddha to find out what was happening. When Amanda returned with this story, the Buddha related the Tandulanáli Játaka to show that in the past Láludáyí had been a foolish appraiser (J.i.123ff). The Nangalísa Játaka gives another example of his folly and ineptitude (J.i.446ff); so does also the Padańjali Játaka (J.ii.263f), where he is identified with Padańjali, an idle, lazy loafer. In the Maháummagga Játaka (J.vi.478) he is identified with the somewhat foolish king, Vedeha.
Láludáyí once had a discussion with Pasúra, who, at first, thought him to be clever and wise, and accepted him as teacher, being ordained by him. But, later, Pásura easily defeated him in discussion (SNA.ii.540). Others, too, visiting Jetavana, and seeing him in the Preacher's seat, mistook him for an eminent Elder, but soon discovered their mistake (E.g., DhA.ii.31).
On one occasion (A.iii.192f.; AA.ii.628) Láludáyí even dared to contradict Sáriputta regarding birth among the manomayadevá ??. Three times Sáriputta repeated his statement and three times Láludáyí contradicted him, and, there being no monk in the assembly who supported Sáriputta, he took Láludáyí to the Buddha, where he three times repeated the same statement, being three times contradicted. Then the Buddha called Láludáyí "a witless fool" and silenced him. Ananda was witness to the dispute, but took no part in it, thereby winning the Buddha's censure.
Elsewhere (A.iv.414f.; AA.ii.810), however, we find Láludáyí listening in all humility to a discourse by Sáriputta on Nibbána, as the happiness which is not sensed (avedayitasukha). Though Udáyí's knowledge of the Dhamma was not profound, he did not hesitate to take part in a discussion, even with the Buddha himself, when occasion arose. We find him twice censured by the Buddha for this exhibition of his ignorance, once in the Mahákamma vibhanga Sutta (M.iii.208) and once again in a discussion on anussati (A.iii.322f). In both instances Ananda is present, and, in the discussion on anussati, he earns the Buddha's praise for his knowledge compared with Udáyí's ignorance. This annoyed Udáyí, for we find him confronting Ananda with the fact that though he had been in the constant society of the Buddha he had not profited by it, a remark which earned the censure of the Buddha and his assurance that Ananda would certainly reach perfection in that very life (A.i.228; AA.i.441).
Buddhaghosa (ThagA.ii.7; some of the MSS. read nátakácariyaputta ) calls Láludáyí Kovariyaputta. It is not clear whether this means that his father was called Kovariya.
The Vinaya (Vin.iii.110) mentions a monk called Udáyí who was a colleague of Seyyasaka. He persuaded Seyyasaka to commit the first Sanghádisesa offence, saying that he himself acted likewise. For this the Mánatta penalty was imposed on him.
According to the Commentaries, (Sp.iii.517; DhA.iii.5) this Udáyí is to be identified with Láludáyí, and if this be correct, it was perhaps the same monk who was guilty of several Vinaya offences attributed to Udáyi - see Udáyi (2) - though the Vinaya Commentary does not elsewhere (E.g., Sp.iii.541, 549, 552, where he is simply called Udáyi) definitely so identify him, except once (Sp.iv.804), where he is mentioned as having made an embroidered robe for a nun, which he persuaded her to wear in the assembly of the nuns! Was this because the Commentator regarded the two Udáyis as distinct persons? (E.g., MA.i.348).
Láludáyí is given as an example of a person who did no good either to himself or to others (neva attahitáya patipanno no parahitáya). Buddhaghosa elsewhere (Sp.iii.517) describes him as “bhantamigasappatibhágo niddárámatádim anuyuttánam ańńataro lolabhikkhu."
1. Láludáyíthera Vatthu. The story of Láludáyí's past life as Aggidatta (DhA.iii.123ff). Cp. the Somadatta Játaka.
2. Láludáyíthera Vatthu. The story of Láludáyí's futile attempt to excel Sáriputta and Moggallána in the power of preaching. DhA.iii.344ff.