I. 1. Thus have I heard. The Blessed One was once going along the high road between Rājagaha and Nālandā[2] with a great company of the brethren, with about five hundred brethren. And Suppiya the mendicant[3] too was going along the high road between Rājagaha and Nālandā with his disciple the youth Brahmadatta. Now just then Suppiya the mendicant was speaking in many ways in dispraise of the Buddha, in dispraise of the Doctrine, in dispraise of the Order. But young Brahmadatta, his pupil, gave utterance, in many ways, to praise of the Buddha, to praise of the Doctrine, to praise of the Order. Thus they two, teacher and pupil, holding opinions in direct contradiction one to the other, were following, step by 2 step, after the Blessed One and the company of the brethren.
2. Now the Blessed One put up at the royal rest-house in the Ambalaṭṭhikā pleasance[^fn_2_l] to pass the night, and with him the company of the brethren. And so also did Suppiya the mendicant, and with him his young disciple Brahmadatta. And there, at the rest-house, these two carried on the same discussion as before.
3. And in the early dawn a number of the brethren assembled, as they rose up, in the pavilion; and this was the trend of the talk that sprang up among them, as they were seated there. ‘How wonderful a thing is it, brethren, and how strange that the Blessed One, he who knows and sees, the Arahat, the Buddha Supreme, should so clearly have perceived how various are the inclinations of men! For see how while Suppiya the mendicant speaks in many ways in dispraise of the Buddha, the Doctrine, and the Order, his own disciple young Brahmadatta, speaks, in as many ways, in praise of them. So do these two, teacher and pupil, follow step by step after the Blessed One and the company of the brethren, giving utterance to views in direct contradiction one to the other.’
4. Now the Blessed One, on realising what was the drift of their talk, went to the pavilion, and took his seat on the mat spread out for him. And when he had sat down he said: ‘What is the talk on which you are engaged sitting here, and what is the subject of the conversation between you?’ And they told him all. And he said:
5. ‘Brethren, if outsiders should speak against me, or against the Doctrine, or against the Order, you should not on that account either bear malice, or suffer heart-burning, or feel illwill. If you, on that account, should be angry and hurt, that would stand in the way of your own self-conquest. If, when others speak against us, you feel angry at that, and displeased, would you then be able to judge how far that speech of theirs is well said or ill?’
'But when outsiders speak in dispraise of me, or of the Doctrine, or of the Order, you should unravel what is false and point it out as wrong, saying: “For this or that reason this is not the fact, that is not so, such a thing is not found among us, is not in us.”
6. 'But also, brethren, if outsiders should speak in praise of me, in praise of the Doctrine, in praise of the Order, you should not, on that account, be filled with pleasure or gladness, or be lifted up in heart. Were you to be so that also would stand in the way of your self-conquest. When outsiders speak in praise of me, or of the Doctrine, or of the Order, you should acknowledge what is right to be the fact, saying: “For this or that reason this is the fact, that is so, such a thing is found among us, is in us.”
7. ‘It is in respect only of trifling things, of matters of little value, of mere morality, that an unconverted man, when praising the Tathāgata, would speak. And what are such trifling, minor details of mere morality that he would praise?’
8. '“Putting away the killing of living things, Gotama the recluse holds aloof from the destruction 4 of life. He has laid the cudgel and the sword aside, and ashamed of roughness, and full of mercy, he dwells compassionate and kind to all creatures that have life.” It is thus that the unconverted man, when speaking in praise of the Tathāgata, might speak[5].
'Or he might say: “Putting away the taking of what has not been given, Gotama the recluse lived aloof from grasping what is not his own. He takes only what is given, and expecting that gifts will come[6], he passes his life in honesty and purity of heart.”
'Or he might say: “Putting away unchastity, Gotama the recluse is chaste. He holds himself aloof, far off, from the vulgar practice, from the sexual act[7].”
9. 'Or he might say: “Putting away lying words, Gotama the recluse holds himself aloof from falsehood. He speaks truth, from the truth he never swerves; faithful and trustworthy, he breaks not his word to the world.”
'Or he might say: “Putting away slander, Gotama the recluse holds himself aloof from calumny. What he hears here he repeats not elsewhere to raise a quarrel 5 against the people here; what he hears elsewhere he repeats not here to raise a quarrel against the people there. Thus does he live as a binder together of those who are divided, an encourager of those who are friends, a peacemaker, a lover of peace, impassioned for peace, a speaker of words that make for peace.”
'Or he might say: “Putting away rudeness of speech, Gotama the recluse holds himself aloof from harsh language. Whatsoever word is blameless, pleasant to the ear, lovely, reaching to the heart, urbane[8], pleasing to the people, beloved of the people—such are words he speaks.”
'Or he might say: “Putting away frivolous talk[9], Gotama the recluse holds himself aloof from vain conversation. In season he speaks, in accordance with the facts, words full of meaning, on religion, on the discipline of the Order. He speaks, and at the right time, words worthy to be laid up in one’s heart, fitly illustrated, clearly divided, to the point.”
10. 'Or he might say: "Gotama the recluse holds himself aloof from causing injury to seeds or plants[10].
He abstains from cheating with scales or bronzes[11] or measures.
‘Such are the things, brethren, which an unconverted man, when speaking in praise of the Tathāgata, might say.’
11. 'Or he might say: “Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, continue addicted to the injury of seedlings and growing plants whether propagated from roots or cuttings or joints or buddings or seeds[12]—Gotama the 7 recluse holds aloof from such injury to seedlings and growing plants.”
12. 'Or he might say: “Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, continue addicted to the use of things stored up; stores, to wit, of foods, drinks, clothing, equipages, bedding, perfumes, and curry-stuffs[13]—Gotama the recluse holds aloof from such use of things stored up.”
13. 'Or he might say: "Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, continue addicted to visiting shows[14]; that is to say,
(1) Nautch dances (naccaṃ)[15]. (2) Singing of songs (gītaṃ). (3) Instrumental music (vāditaṃ). (4) Shows at fairs (pekkhaṃ)[16].
(5) Ballad recitations (akkhānaṃ)[17]. (6) Hand music (pāṇissaraṃ)[18]. (7) The chanting of bards (vetālaṃ)[19]. (8) Tam-tam playing (kumbhathūnaṃ)[20].
(9) Fairy scenes (Sobhanagarakaṃ)[21]. (10) Acrobatic feats by Caṇḍālas(Caṇḍāla-vaṃsa-dhopanaṃ)[22]. (11) Combats of elephants, horses, buffaloes, bulls, goats, rams, cocks, and quails. (12) Bouts at quarter-staff[23], boxing, wrestling[24]. (13-16) Sham-fights, roll-calls, manreuvres, reviews[25].—
14. 'Or he might say: "Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, continue addicted to games and recreations[26]; that is to say,
(1) Games on boards with eight, or with ten, rows of squares[27]. (2) The same games 10 played by imagining such boards in the air[28]. (3) Keeping going over diagrams drawn on the ground so that one steps only where one ought to go[29]. (4) Either removing the pieces or men from a heap with one’s nail, or putting them into a heap, in each case without shaking it, He who shakes the heap, loses. (5) Throwing dice[30]. (6) Hitting a short stick with a long one[31]. (7) Dipping the hand with the fingers stretched out in lac, or red dye, or flour-water, and striking the wet hand on the ground or on a wall, calling out ‘What shall it be?’ and showing the form required—elephants, horses, &c.[32] (8) Games with balls[33]. (9) Blowing through toy pipes made of leaves[34]. (10) Ploughing with toy ploughs[35]. (11) Turning summersaults[36]. (12) Playing with toy windmills made of palm-leaves[37].
(13) Playing with toy measures made of palm-leaves. (14, 15) Playing with toy carts or toy bows[38]. (16) Guessing at letters traced in the air, or on a playfellow’s back[39]. (17) Guessing the playfellow’s thoughts. (18) Mimicry of deformities.
15. 'Or he might say: "Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, continue addicted to the use of high and large couches; that is to say[40],
(1) Moveable settees, high, and six feet long (Āsandi)[41]. (2) Divans with animal figures carved on the supports (Pallanko)[42].
(3) Goats’ hair coverlets with very long fleece (Gonako)[43]. (4) Patchwork counterpanes of many colours (Cittakā). (5) White blankets (Paṭikā). (6) Woollen coverlets embroidered with flowers (Paṭalikā). (7) Quilts stuffed with cotton wool (Tūlikā). (8) Coverlets embroidered with figures of lions, tigers, &c. (Vikatikā). (9) Rugs with fur on both sides (Uddalomī). (10) Rugs with fur on one side (Ekantalomi). (11) Coverlets embroidered with gems (Kaṭṭhissaṃ). (12) Silk coverlets (Koseyyaṃ). (13) Carpets large enough for sixteen dancers (Kuttakaṃ). (14-16) Elephant, horse, and chariot rugs. (17) Rugs of antelope skins sewn together (Ajina-paveṇi). (18) Rugs of skins of the plantain antelope. (19) Carpets with awnings 13 above them (Sauttara-cchadaṃ). (20) Sofas with red pillows for the head and feet."
16. 'Or he might say: "Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, continue addicted to the use of means for adorning and beautifying themselves; that is to say,—Rubbing in scented powders on one’s body, shampooing it, and bathing it. Patting the limbs with clubs after the manner of wrestlers[44]. The use of mirrors, eye-ointments, garlands, rouge, cosmetics, bracelets, necklaces, walking-sticks, reed cases for drugs, rapiers, sunshades, embroidered slippers, turbans, diadems, whisks of the yak’s tail, and long-fringed white robes—
Gotama the recluse holds aloof from such means of adorning and beautifying the person[45]."
17. 'Or he might say: "Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, continue addicted to such low conversation as these:
Tales of kings, of robbers, of ministers of state; tales of war, of terrors, of battles; talk about foods and drinks, clothes, beds, garlands, perfumes; talks about relationships, equipages, villages, town, cities, and countries; tales about women , and about heroes; gossip at street corners[46], or places whence 14 water is fetched; ghost stories[47]; desultory talk[48]; speculations about the creation of the land or sea[49], or about existence and non-existence[50]--
18. 'Or he might say: "Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, continue addicted to the use of wrangling phrases[51]: such as—
“I am speaking to the point, you are not[52].”
“You are putting last what ought to come first, and first what ought to come last[53].”
“Your challenge has been taken up[54].”
“You are proved to be wrong[55].”
“Set to work to clear your views[56].”
“Disentangle yourself if you can.[57]”—
19. 'Or he might say: "Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, continue addicted to taking messages, going on errands, and acting as go-betweens; to wit, on kings, ministers of state, Kshatriyas, Brahmans, or young men, saying: ‘Go there, come hither, take this with you, bring that from thence’—
20. ‘Or he might say: “Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, are tricksters[58], droners out (of holy words for pay)[59], 16 diviners[60], and exorcists[61], ever hungering to add gain to gain[62]—Gotama the recluse holds aloof from such deception and patter.”’
21. 'Or he might say: "Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, earn their living by wrong means of livelihood, by low arts, such as these:—
(1) palmistry-prophesying long life, prosperity, &c. (or the reverse), from marks on a child’s hands, feet, &c.[63] (2) Divining by means of omens and signs[64]. (3) Auguries drawn from thunderbolts and other celestial portents[65].
(4) Prognostication by interpreting dreams[66]. (5) Fortune-telling from marks on the body[67]. (6) Auguries from the marks on cloth gnawed by mice[68]. (7) Sacrificing to Agni[69]. (8) Offering oblations from a spoon[70]. (9-13) Making offerings to gods of husks, of the red powder between the grain and the husk, of husked grain ready for boiling, of ghee, and of oil[71]. (14) Sacrificing by spewing mustard seeds, &c., into the fire out of one’s mouth[72]. (15) Drawing blood from one’s right knee as a sacrifice to the gods[73].
(16) Looking at the knuckles, &c., and, after muttering a charm, divining whether a man is well born or lucky or not[74]. (17) Determining whether the site, for a proposed house or pleasance, is lucky or not[75]. (18) Advising on customary law[76]. (19) Laying demons in a cemetery[77]. (20) Laying ghosts[78]. (21) Knowledge of the charms to be used when lodging in an earth house[79]. (22) Snake charming[80].
(23) The poison craft[81]. (24) The scorpion craft[82]. (25) The mouse craft[82:1]. (26) The bird craft[83]. (27) The crow craft[84]. (28) Foretelling the number of years that a man has yet to live. (29) Giving charms to ward off arrows[85]. (30) The animal wheel[86].
22. 'Or he might say: "Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, earn their living by wrong means of livelihood, by low arts, such as these—
Knowledge of the signs of good and bad qualities in the following things and of the marks in them denoting the health or luck of their owners:—to wit, gems[87], staves, garments, swords, arrows, bows, other weapons, women[88], men[88:1], boys[88:2], girls[88:3], slaves, slave-girls, elephants, horses, buffaloes, balls, oxen, goats[89], sheep[89:1], fowls[89:2], quails[89:3], iguanas[90], earrings[90:1], tortoises, and other animals—
23. 'Or he might say: "Whereas some recluses 20 and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, earn their living by wrong means of livelihood, by low arts, such as soothsaying, to the effect that—
The foreign chiefs will gain the victory, and ours will suffer defeat[91]--
24. 'Or he might say: "Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, earn their living by wrong means of livelihood, by such low arts as foretelling—
(1) There will be an eclipse of the moon. (2) There will be an eclipse of the sun. (3) There will be an eclipse of a star (Nakshatra)[92]. (4) There will be aberration of the sun or the moon. (5) The sun or the moon will return to its usual path. (6) There will be aberrations of the stars. (7) The stars will return to their usual course[93].
(8) There will be a fall of meteors[94]. (9) There will be a jungle fire[95]. (10) There will be an earthquake. (11) The god will thunder. (12-15) There will be rising and setting, clearness and dimness, of the sun or the moon or the stars[96], or foretelling of each of these fifteen phenomena that they will betoken such and such a result"
25. 'Or he might say: 'Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, earn their living by wrong means of livelihood, by low arts, such as these:—
Counting on the fingers[97].
Counting without using the fingers[98].
Summing up large totals[99].
Composing ballads, poetizing[100].
Casuistry, sophistry[101]--
26. Or he might say: "Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, earn their living by wrong means of livelihood, by low arts, such as—
(1) Arranging a lucky day for marriages in which the bride or bridegroom is brought home[102]. (2) Arranging a lucky day for marriages in which the bride or bridegroom is sent forth[103]. (3) Fixing a lucky time for the conclusion of treaties of peace [or using charms to procure harmony][104]. (4) Fixing a lucky time for the outbreak of hostilities [or using charms to make discord][104:1]. (5) Fixing a lucky time for the calling in of debts [Or charms for success in throwing dice][104:2]. (6) Fixing a lucky time for the expenditure of money [or charms to bring ill luck to an opponent throwing dice][104:3]. (7) Using charms to make people lucky[105]. (8) Using charms to make people unlucky. (9) Using charms to procure abortion. (10) Incantations to bring on dumbness. (11) Incantations to keep a man’s jaws fixed. (12) Incantations to make a man throw up his hands. (13) Incantations to bring on deafness[106].
(14) Obtaining oracular answers by means of the magic mirror[107]. (15) Obtaining oracular answers through a girl possessed[108]. (16) Obtaining oracular answers from a god[109]. (17} The worship of the Sun[110]. (18} The worship of the Great One[111]. (19) Bringing forth flames from one’s mouth. (20) Invoking Sirī, the goddess of Luck[112]--
27. 'Or he might say: "Whereas some recluses and Brahmans, while living on food provided by the faithful, earn their living by wrong means of livelihood, by low arts, such as these:—
(1) Vowing gifts to a god if a certain benefit be granted. (2) Paying such vows. (3) Repeating charms while lodging in an earth house[113]. (4) Causing virility[114]. (5) Making a man impotent[114:1]. (6) Fixing on lucky sites for dwellings[115]. (7) Consecrating sites[115:1]. (8) Ceremonial rinsings of the mouth. (9) Ceremonial bathings[116]. (10) Offering sacrifices. (11-14) Administering emetics and purgatives. (15) Purging people to relieve the head (that is by giving drugs to make people sneeze). (16) Oiling people’s ears (either to make them grow or to heal sores on them). (17) Satisfying people’s eyes (soothing them by dropping medicinal oils into them). (18) Administering drugs through the nose[117]. (19) Applying collyrium to the eyes. (20) Giving medical ointment for the eyes. (21) Practising as an oculist. (22) Practising as a surgeon. (23) Practising as a doctor for children.
(24) Administering roots and drugs. (25) Administering medicines in rotation[118]--
‘These, brethren, are the trifling matters, the minor details, of mere morality, of which the unconverted man, when praising the Tathāgata, might speak.’
28. 'There are, brethren. other things, profound, difficult to realise, hard to understand, tranquillising, sweet, not to be grasped by mere logic, subtle, comprehensible only by the wise[119]. These things the Tathāgata, having himself realised them and seen them face to face, hath set forth; and it is of them that they, who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with the truth, should speak.
29. 'There are recluses and Brahmans, brethren, who reconstruct the ultimate beginnings of things, whose speculations are concerned with the ultimate past[120], and who on eighteen grounds put forward various 27 assertions regarding it. And about what, with reference to what, do those venerable ones do so?
30. 'There are, brethren, some recluses and Brahmans who are Eternalists[121], and who, on four grounds, proclaim that both the soul and the world are eternal. And about what, with reference to what, do those venerable ones do so?
31. 'In the first place, brethren, some recluse or Brahman by means of ardour, of exertion, of application, of earnestness, of careful thought, reaches up to such rapture of heart that, rapt in heart, he calls to mind his various dwelling-places in times gone by—in one birth, or in two, or three, or four, or five, or ten, or twenty, or thirty, or forty, or fifty, or a hundred, or a thousand, or in several hundreds or thousands or laks of births—to the effect that “There I had such and such a name, was of such and such a lineage[122] and caste[123], lived on such and such food, experienced such and such pains and pleasures, had such and such a span of years. And when I fell from thence I was reborn in such and such a place under such and such a name, in such and such a lineage and caste, living on such and such food, experiencing such and such pains and pleasures, with such and such a span of years. And when I fell from thence I was reborn here.” Thus does he recollect, in full detail both of condition and of custom, his various dwelling-places 28 in times gone by. And he says to himself: “Eternal is the soul; and the world, giving birth to nothing new, is stedfast as a mountain peak, as a pillar firmly fixed; and though these living creatures transmigrate and pass away, fall from one state of existence and spring up in another, yet they are for ever and ever. And why must that be so? Because I, by means of ardour of exertion of application of earnestness of careful thought, can reach up to such rapture of heart that, rapt in heart, I can call to mind, and in full detail both of condition and of custom, my various dwelling-places in times gone by—by that is it that I know this—that the soul is eternal; and that the world, giving birth to nothing new, is stedfast as a mountain peak, as a pillar firmly fixed; and that though these living creatures transmigrate and pass away, fall from one state of existence and spring up in another, yet they are for ever and ever.”
'This, brethren, is the first state of things on account of which, starting from which, some recluses and Brahmans are Eternalists, and maintain that both the soul and the world are eternal.
32. [The second case put is in all respects the same save that the previous births thus called to mind extend over a still longer period up to ten world aeons[124].]
33. [The third case put is in all respects the same save that the previous birth: "thus called to mind extend over a still longer period up to forty world aeons.]
34. 'And in the fourth place, brethren, on what ground is it, starting from what, that those venerable ones are Eternalists, and maintain that the soul and the world are eternal.
'In this case, brethren, some recluse or Brahman 29 is addicted to logic and reasoning. He gives utterance to the following conclusion of his own, beaten out by his argumentations and based on his sophistry[125]; “Eternal is the soul; and the world, giving birth to nothing new, is stedfast as a mountain peak, as a pillar firmly fixed; and these living creatures, though they transmigrate and pass away, fall from one state of existence and spring up in another, yet they are for ever and ever.”
'This, brethren, is the fourth state of things on the ground of which, starting from which, some recluses and Brahmans are Eternalists, and maintain that the soul and the world are eternal.
35. 'These, brethren, are those recluses and Brahmans who are Eternalists, and in four ways maintain that both the soul and the world are eternal. For whosoever of the recluses and Brahmans are such and maintain this, they do so in these four ways, or in one or other of the same, and outside these there is no way in which this opinion is arrived at.
36. 'Now of these, brethren, the Tathāgata knows that these speculations thus arrived at, thus insisted on, will have such and such a result, such and such an effect on the future condition of those who trust in them. That does he know, and he knows also other things far beyond (far better than those speculations)[126]; and having that knowledge he is not puffed up, and thus untarnished he has, in his own heart[127], realised the way of escape from them[128], has understood, as they really are, the rising up and passing away of sensations, their sweet taste, their danger, how they cannot be relied on; and not grasping after any (of 30 those things men are eager for) he, the Tathāgata, is quite set free[129].
37. ‘These[130], brethren, are those other things, profound, difficult to realise, hard to understand, tranquillising, sweet, not to be grasped by mere logic, subtle, comprehensible only by the wise, which the Tathāgata, having himself realised and seen face to face, hath set forth; and it is concerning these that they who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with the truth, should speak.’
1. 'There are, brethren, some recluses and Brahmans who are Eternalists with regard to some things, and in regard to others Non-Eternalists; who on four grounds maintain that the soul and the world are partly eternal and partly not.
'And what is it that these venerable ones depend upon, what is it that they start from, in arriving at this conclusion?
2. 'Now there comes a time, brethren, when, sooner or later, after the lapse of a long long period, this world-system passes away. And when this happens beings have mostly been reborn in the World of Radiance, and there they dwell made of mind, feeding on joy, radiating light from themselves, traversing the air, continuing in glory; and thus they remain for a long long period of time.
3. 'Now there comes also a time, brethren, when, 31 sooner or later, this world-system begins to re-evolve. When this happens the Palace of Brahmā appears, but it is empty. And some being or other, either because his span of years has passed or his merit is exhausted, falls from that World of Radiance, and comes to life in the Palace of Brahmā. And there also he lives made of mind, feeding on joy, radiating light from himself, traversing the air, continuing in glory; and thus does he remain for a long long period of time.
4. 'Now there arises in him, from his dwelling there so long alone, a dissatisfaction and a longing: “O! would that other beings might come to join me in this place!” And just then, either because their span of years had passed or their merit was exhausted, other beings fall from the World of Radiance, and appear in the Palace of Brahmā as companions to him, and in all respects like him.
5. 'On this, brethren, the one who was first reborn thinks thus to himself: “I am Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Supreme One, the Mighty, the All-seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of all, the Maker, the Creator, the Chief of all, appointing to each his place, the Ancient of days, the Father of all that are and are to be[131]. These other beings are of my creation. And why is that so? A while ago I thought, ‘Would that they might come!’ And on my mental aspiration, behold the beings came.”
'And those beings themselves, too, think thus: “This must be Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Supreme, the Mighty, the All-seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of all, the Maker, the Creator, the Chief of all, appointing to each his place, the Ancient of days, the Father of all that are 32 and are to be, And we must have been created by him. And why? Because, as we see, it was he who was here first, and we came after that.”
6. 'On this, brethren, the one who first came into existence there is of longer life, and more glorious, and more powerful than those who appeared after him. And it might well be, brethren, that some being on his falling from that state, should come hither. And having come hither he might go forth from the household life into the homeless state, And having thus become a recluse he, by reason of ardour of exertion of application of earnestness of careful thought, reaches up to such rapture of heart that, rapt in heart, he calls to mind his last dwelling-place, but not the previous ones. He says to himself: "That illustrious Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Supreme One, the Mighty, the All-seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of all, the Maker, the Creator, the Chief of all, appointing to each his place, the Ancient of days, the Father of all that are and are to be, he by whom we were created, he is stedfast immutable eternal, of a nature that knows no change, and he will remain so for ever and ever. But we who were created by him have come hither as being impermanent mutable limited in duration of life.
'This, brethren, is the first state of things on account of which, starting out from which, some recluses and Brahmans, being Eternalists as to some things, and Non-eternalists as to others, maintain that the soul and the world are partly eternal and partly not.
'There are, brethren, certain gods called the “Debauched by Pleasure[132],” For ages they pass their time in the pursuit of the laughter and sport of sensual lusts. In consequence thereof their self-possession is corrupted, and through the loss of their self-control they fall from that state:[133].
8. 'Now it might well be, brethren, that some being, on his falling from that state, should come hither. And having come hither he should, as in the last case, become a recluse, and acquire the power of recollecting his last birth, but only his last one.
9. 'And he would say to himself: “Those gods who are not debauched by pleasure are stedfast, immutable, eternal, of a nature that knows no change, and they will remain so for ever and ever. But we—who fell from that state, having lost our self-control through being debauched by pleasure—we have come hither as being impermanent, mutable, limited in duration of life.”
'There are, brethren, certain gods called “the Debauched in Mind[134].” They burn continually with envy[135] one against another, and being thus irritated, their hearts become ill-disposed towards each other, and being thus debauched, their bodies become feeble, and their minds imbecile. And those gods fall from that state.
11. 'Now it might well be, brethren, that some 34 being, on his falling from that state, should come hither; and having become a recluse should, as in the other cases, acquire the power of recollecting his last birth, but only his last one.
12. I And he would say to himself: “Those gods who are not debauched in mind do not continually burn with envy against each other, so their hearts do not become evil disposed one towards another, nor their bodies feeble and their minds imbecile. Therefore they fall not from that state; they are stedfast, immutable, eternal, of a nature that knows no change, and they will remain so for ever and ever. But we were corrupted in mind, being constantly excited by envy against one another. And being thus envious and corrupt our bodies became feeble, and our minds imbecile, and we fell from that state, and have come hither as being impermanent, mutable, limited in duration of life.”
'In this case, brethren, some recluse or Brahman is addicted to logic and reasoning. He gives utterance to the following conclusion of his own, beaten out by his argumentations and based on his sophistry: “This which is called eye and ear and nose and tongue and body is a self which is impermanent, unstable, not eternal, subject to change. But this which is called heart, or mind, or consciousness is a self which is permanent, stedfast, eternal, and knows no change, and it will remain for ever and ever[136].”
'This, brethren, is the fourth state of things, on the ground of which, starting from which, some recluses 35 and Brahmans are Semi-eternalists, and in four ways maintain that the soul and the world are in some respects eternal, and in some not.
14. 'These, brethren, are those recluses and Brahmans who are Semi-eternalists, and in four ways maintain that the soul and the world are eternal in some cases and not in others. For whosoever of the recluses and Brahmans are such and maintain this, they do so in these four ways or in one or other of the same; and outside these there is no way in which this opinion is arrived at.
15. 'Now of these, brethren, the Tathāgata knows that these speculations thus arrived at, thus insisted on, will have such and such a result, such and such an effect on the future condition of those who trust in them. That does he know, and he knows also other things far beyond (far better than those speculations); and having that knowledge, he is not puffed up, and thus untarnished he has, in his own heart, realised the way of escape from them, has understood, as they really are, the rising up and passing away of sensations, their sweet taste, their danger, how they cannot be relied on, and not grasping after any (of those things men are eager for) he, the Tathāgata, is quite set free.
‘These, brethren, are those other things, profound, difficult to realise, hard to understand, tranquillising, sweet, not to be grasped by mere logic, subtle, comprehensible only by the wise, which the Tathāgata, having himself realised and seen face to face, hath set forth; and it is concerning these that they who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with the truth, should speak.’
16. 'There are, brethren, certain recluses and Brahmans who are Extensionists[137], and who in four ways set forth the infinity or finiteness of the world. And 36 on what ground, starting out from what, do these venerable ones maintain this?
17. 'In the first case, brethren, some recluse or Brahman, by means of ardour of exertion of application of earnestness of careful thought, reaches up to such rapture of heart that he, rapt in heart, dwells in the world imagining it finite. And he says thus to himself: “Finite is the world, so that a path could be traced round it[138]. And why is this so? Since I, by means of ardour of exertion of application of earnestness of careful thought, can reach up to such rapture of heart that, rapt in heart, I dwell in the world perceiving it to be finite—by that I know this.”
18. 'The second case is similar, only that the conclusion is: “Infinite is the world without a limit. Those recluses and Brahmans who say it is finite, so that a path could be traced round it, are wrong[139].”
19. 'The third case is similar, only that the conclusion is that he imagines the world limited in the upward and downward directions, but infinite across; he declares both the former conclusions to be wrong.
20. 'In the fourth case, brethren, some recluse or Brahman is addicted to logic and reasoning. He gives utterance to the following conclusion of his own, beaten out by his argumentations and based on his sophistry: “This world is neither finite nor yet infinite, Those recluses and Brahmans who maintain either the first, or the second, or the third conclusion, are wrong. Neither is the world finite, nor is it infinite.”
21. 'These, brethren, are those recluses and Brahmans who are Extensionists, and in four ways maintain that the world is finite or infinite. For whosoever of the recluses and Brahmans are such, and maintain this, they do so in these four ways or in one or other of the same; and outside these there is no way in which this opinion is arrived at.
22. 'Now of these, brethren, the Tathāgata knows that these speculations thus arrived at, thus insisted on, will have such and such a result, such and such an effect on the future condition: of those who trust in them. That does he know, and he knows also other things far beyond (far better than those speculations); and having that knowledge he is not puffed up, and thus untarnished he has, in his own heart, realised the way of escape from them, has understood, as they really are, the rising up and passing away of sensations, their sweet taste, their danger, how they cannot be relied on, and not grasping after any (of those things men are eager for) he, the Tathāgata, is quite set free.
'These, brethren, are those other things, profound, difficult to realise, hard to understand, tranquillising, sweet, not to be grasped by mere logic, subtle, comprehensible only by the wise, which the Tathāgata, having himself realised and seen face to face, hath set forth; and it is concerning these that they who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with the truth, should speak:
23. 'There are, brethren, some recluses and Brahmans who wriggle like eels; and when a question is put to them on this or that they resort to equivocation, to eel-wriggling, and this in four ways.
24. 'In the first place, brethren, some recluse or Brahman does not understand the good in its real nature, nor the evil. And he thinks: “I neither know 38 the good, as it really is, nor the evil. That being so, were I to pronounce this to be good or that to be evil, I might be influenced therein by my feelings or desires, by illwill or resentment. And under these circumstances I might be wrong; and my having been wrong might cause me the pain of remorse; and the sense of remorse might become a hindrance to me[140].” Thus fearing and abhorring the being wrong in an expressed opinion, he will neither declare anything to be good, nor to be bad; but on a question being put to him on this or that, he resorts to eel-wriggling, to equivocation, and says: “I don’t take it thus. I don’t take it the other way. But I advance no different opinion. And I don’t deny your position. And I don’t say it is neither the one, nor the other[141].”
25. [The same, reading] '. . . “Under these circumstances I might fall into that grasping condition of heart which causes rebirth; and my so falling might cause me the pain of remorse; and the sense of remorse might become a hindrance to me.” Thus fearing and abhorring the falling into that state[142], he will neither declare (&c., as in § 24).
26. [The same, reading] 'And he thinks: “I neither know the good, as it really is, nor the evil. Now there are recluses and Brahmans who are clever, subtle, experienced in controversy, hair-splitters, who go about, methinks, breaking to pieces by their wisdom 39 the speculations of others. Were I to pronounce this to be good, or that to be evil, these men might join issue with me, call upon me for my reasons, point out my errors. And on their doing so, I might be unable to explain[143]. And that might cause me the pain of remorse; and the sense of remorse might become a hindrance to me.” Thus fearing and abhorring the joinder of issue, he will neither declare (&c., as in § 24).
27. 'In this case, brethren, some recluse or Brahman is dull, stupid. And it is by reason of his dullness, his stupidity, that when a question on this or that is put to him, he resorts to equivocation, to wriggling like an eel—“If you ask me whether there is another world,—well, if I thought there were, I would say so. But I don’t say so. And I don’t think it is thus or thus. And I don’t think it is otherwise. And I don’t deny it. And I don’t say there neither is, nor is not, another world.” Thus does he equivocate, and in like manner about each of such propositions as the following[144]:—
(1) There are Chance Beings (so called because they spring into existence, either here or in another world, without the intervention of parents, and seem therefore to come without a cause).
(1) A man who has penetrated to the truth[145] continues to exist after death.
This, brethren, is the fourth case[146].
28. 'These, brethren, are those recluses and Brahmans who wriggle like eels; and who, when a question is put to them on this or that, resort to equivocation, to eel-wriggling; and that in four ways. For whosoever do so, they do so in these four ways, or in one or other of the same; there is no other way in which they do so.
29. 'Now of these, brethren, the Tathāgata knows that these speculations thus arrived at, thus insisted on, will have such and such a result, such and such an effect on the future condition of those who trust in them. That does he know, and he knows also other things far beyond (far better than those speculations); and having that knowledge he is not puffed up, and thus untarnished he has, in his own heart, realised the way of escape from them, has understood, as they really are, the rising up and passing away of sensations, their sweet taste, their danger, how they cannot be relied on, and not grasping after any (of those things men are eager for) he, the Tathāgata, is quite set free.
‘These, brethren, are those other things, profound, difficult to realise, hard to understand, tranquillising, 41 sweet, not to be grasped by mere logic, subtle, comprehensible only by the wise, which the Tathāgata; having himself realised and seen face to face, hath set forths and it is concerning these that they who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with the truth, should speak.’
30. 'There are, brethren, some recluses and Brahmans who are Fortuitous-Originists[147], and who in two ways maintain that the soul and the world arise without a cause. And on what ground, starting out from what, do they do so?
31. 'There are, brethren, certain gods called Unconscious Beings[148]. As soon as an idea occurs to them they fall from that state. Now it may well be, brethren, that a being, on falling from that state, should come hither; and having come hither he might go forth from the household life into the homeless state. And having thus become a recluse he, by reason of ardour and so on (as in the other cases) reaches up to such rapture of heart that, rapt in heart, he calls to mind how that idea occurred to him, but not more than that. He says to himself: “Fortuitous 42 in origin are the soul and the world. And why so? Because formerly I was not, but now am. Having not been, I have come to be.”
'This, brethren, is the first state of things on account of which, starting out from which, some recluses and Brahmans become Fortuitous-Originists, and maintain that the soul and the world arise without a cause.
'In this case, brethren, some recluse or Brahman is addicted to logic and reasoning. He gives utterance to the following conclusion of his own, beaten out by his argumentations, and based on his sophistry: “The soul and the world arose without a cause.”
34. 'Now of these, brethren, the Tathāgata knows that these speculations thus arrived at, thus insisted on, will have such and such a result, such and such an effect on the future condition of those who trust in them. That does he know, and he knows also other things far beyond (far better than those speculations); and having that knowledge he is not puffed up, and thus untarnished he has, in his own heart, realised the way of escape from them, has understood, as they really are, the rising up and passing away of sensations, their sweet taste, their danger, how they cannot be relied on, and not grasping after any (of those things men are eager for) he, the Tathāgata, is quite set free.
‘These, brethren, are those other things, profound, difficult to realise, hard to understand, tranquillising, sweet, not to be grasped by mere logic, subtle, comprehensible only by the wise, which the Tathāgata, having himself realised and seen face to face, hath set forth; and it is concerning these that they who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with the truth, should speak.’
35. 'These, brethren, are the recluses and Brahmans who reconstruct the ultimate beginnings of things, whose speculations are concerned with the 43 ultimate past, and who on eighteen grounds put forward various assertions regarding the past[149]. And those who do so, all of them, do so in one or other of these eighteen ways. There is none beside.
36. 'Now of these, brethren, the Tathāgata knows that these speculations thus arrived at, thus insisted on, will have such and such a result, such and such an effect on the future condition of those who trust in them. That does he know, and he knows also other things far beyond (far better than those speculations); and having that knowledge he is not puffed up, and thus untarnished he has, in his own heart, realised the way of escape from them, has understood, as they really are, the rising up and passing away of sensations, their sweet taste, their danger, how they cannot be relied on, and not grasping after any (of those things men are eager for) he, the Tathāgata, is quite set free.
‘These, brethren, are those other things, profound, difficult to realise, hard to understand, tranquillising, sweet, not to be grasped by mere logic, subtle, comprehensible only by the wise, which the Tathāgata, having himself realised and seen face to face, hath set forth; and it is concerning these that they who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with the truth, should speak.’
37. 'There are, brethren, recluses and Brahmans who arrange the future, whose speculations are concerned with the future, and who on forty-four grounds put forward various assertions regarding the future. And on account of what, starting out from what, do they do so?
38. 'There are, brethren, recluses and Brahmans who hold the doctrine of a conscious existence after death[150], and who maintain in sixteen ways that 44 the soul after death is conscious. And how do they do so?
(1) has form[151], (2) is formless[152], (3) has, and has not, form, (4) neither has, nor has not, form, (5) is finite, (6) is infinite, (7) is both, (8) is neither, (9) has one mode of consciousness, (10) has various modes of consciousness, (11) has limited consciousness, (12) has infinite consciousness, (13) is altogether happy, (14) is altogether miserable, (15) is both, (16) is neither."
39. 'These, brethren, are those recluses and Brahmans who hold the doctrine of a conscious existence after death, and who maintain in sixteen ways that the soul after death is conscious. And those who do so, all of them, do so in one or other of these sixteen ways. There is none beside.
40. 'Now of these, brethren, the Tathāgata knows that these speculations thus arrived at, thus insisted on, will have such and such a result, such and such an effect on the future condition of those who trust in them. That does he know, and he knows also other things far beyond (far better than those speculations); and having that knowledge he is not puffed up, and thus untarnished he has, in his own heart, realised the way of escape from them, has understood, as they really are, the rising up and passing away of sensations, their sweet taste, their danger, how they cannot be relied on, and not grasping after any (of those things men are eager for) he, the Tathāgata, is quite set free.
‘These, brethren, are those other things, profound, difficult to realise, hard to understand. tranquillising, sweet, not to be grasped by mere logic, subtle, comprehensible only by the wise, which the Tathāgata, having himself realised and seen face to face, hath set forth; and it is concerning these that they who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with the truth, should speak.’
1. 'There are, brethren, recluses and Brahmans who hold the doctrine of an unconscious existence after death, and who maintain in eight ways that the soul after death is unconscious. And how do they do so?
(1) has form, (2) is formless, (3) has, and has not, form, (4) neither has, nor has not, form (5) is finite, (6) is infinite, (7) is both, (8) is neither."
3. 'These, brethren, are those recluses and Brahmans who hold the doctrine of an unconscious existence after death, and who maintain in eight ways that the soul after death is unconscious. And those who do so, all of them, do so in one or other of those eight ways. There is none beside.
4. 'Now of these, brethren, the Tathāgata knows that these speculations thus arrived at, thus insisted on, will have such and such a result, such and such an effect on the future condition of those who trust in them. That does he know, and he knows also other things far beyond (far better than those speculations); and having that knowledge he is not puffed up, and thus untarnished he has, in his own heart, realised the 46 way of escape from them, has understood, as they really are, the rising up and passing away of sensations. their sweet taste, their danger, how they cannot be relied on, and not grasping after any (of those things men are eager for) he, the Tathāgata, is quite set free.
'These, brethren, are those other things, profound, difficult to realise, hard to understand, tranquillising, sweet, not to be grasped by mere logic, subtle, comprehensible only by the wise, which the Tathāgata, having himself realised and seen face to face hath set forth; and it is concerning these that they who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with the truth should speak.
5-8. [Similar sections for those who maintain in eight ways that the soul after death is neither conscious nor unconscious.]
[153]9. 'There are, brethren, recluses and Brahmans who are Annihilationists, who in seven ways maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being[154]. And on account of what, starting out from what, do they do so?
10. 'In the first place, brethren, some recluse or Brahman puts forth the following opinion, the following view: “Since, Sir, this soul has form, is built up of the four elements, and is the offspring of father and mother, it is cut off, destroyed, on the dissolution of the body; and does not continue after death; and then, Sir, the soul is completely annihilated.” Thus is it that some maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being.
11. 'To him another says: “There is, Sir, such a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the whole soul, Sir, is not then completely annihilated. For there is a further soul—divine, having form, belonging to the sensuous plane, feeding on solid food. That you neither know of nor perceive. But I know 47 and have experienced it. And since this soul, on the dissolution of the body, is cut off and destroyed, does not continue after death, then is it, Sir, that the soul is completely annihilated.” Thus is it that some maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being.
12. 'To him another says: “There is, Sir, such a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the whole soul, Sir, is not then completely annihilated. For there is a further soul-divine, having form, made of mind, with all its major and minor parts complete, not deficient in any organ. This you neither know of nor perceive. But I know and have experienced it. And since this soul, on the dissolution of the body, is cut off and destroyed, does not continue after death, then is it, Sir, that the soul is completely annihilated.” Thus is it that some maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being.
13. 'To him another says: “There is, Sir, such a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the whole soul, Sir, is not then completely annihilated. For there is a further soul, which by passing beyond ideas of form, by the dying out of ideas of resistance, by paying no heed to ideas of difference, conscious that space is infinite, reaches up to the plane of the infinity of space[155]. This you neither know of nor perceive. But I know and have experienced it. And since this soul, on the dissolution of the body, is cut off and destroyed, does not continue after death, then is it, Sir, that the soul is completely annihilated.” Thus is it that some maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being.
14. 'To him another says: "There is, Sir, such a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the whole soul, Sir, is not then completely annihilated.
For there is a further soul, which having passed beyond the plane of the infinity of space, knowing that consciousness is infinite, reaches up to the plane of the infinity of consciousness[156]. This you neither know of nor perceive. But I know and have experienced it. And since this soul, on the dissolution of the body, is cut off and destroyed, does not continue after death, then is it, Sir, that the soul is completely annihilated." Thus is it that some maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being.
15. 'To him another says: “There is, Sir, such a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the whole soul, Sir, is not then completely annihilated. For there is a further soul, which by passing quite beyond the plane of the infinity of consciousness, knowing that there is nothing, reaches up to the plane of no obstruction[157]. This you neither know of nor perceive. But I know and have experienced it. And since this soul, on the dissolution of the body, is cut off and destroyed, does not continue after death, then is it, Sir, that the soul is completely annihilated.” Thus is it that some maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being.
16. 'To him another says: “There is, Sir, such a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the whole soul, Sir, is not then completely annihilated. For there is a further soul, which by passing quite beyond the plane of no obstruction, realises ‘This is good, this is excellent,’ and reaches up to the plane of neither ideas nor the absence of ideas[158]. This you 49 neither know of, nor perceive. But I know and have experienced it. And since this soul, on the dissolution of the body, is cut off, destroyed, does not continue after death, then is it, Sir, that the soul is completely annihilated.” Thus is it that some maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being.
17. 'These, brethren, are the recluses and Brahmans who are Annihilationists and in seven ways maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being. And whosoever do so they, all of them, do so in one or other of these seven ways. There is none beside.
18. [Repetition of § 40, above p. 44, setting forth that other, higher, knowledge of a Tathāgata, for which alone he can be rightly praised.]
19. 'There are, brethren, recluses and Brahmans who hold the doctrine of happiness in this life, who in five ways maintain the complete salvation, in this visible world, of a living being. And relying on what, starting out from what, do they do so?
20. 'Hereon, brethren, some recluse or Brahman may have the following opinion, the following view: “Whensoever the soul, in full enjoyment and possession 50 of the five pleasures of sense, indulges all its functions, then, Sir, the soul has attained, in this visible world, to the highest Nirvāṇa[159].” Thus do some maintain the complete happiness, in the visible world, of a living being.
21. 'To him another says: “There is, Sir, such a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the soul does not by that alone attain to the highest Nirvāṇa. And why not? Sensuous delights, Sir, are transitory, they involve pain, their very nature is to fluctuate. And grief, lamentation, pain, sorrow, and loathing arise out of their inconstancy and change. But whensoever the soul, putting away sensuous delights and evil dispositions, enters into and abides in the First Jhāna, the state of joy and ease, born of seclusion, accompanied by reflection, accompanied by investigation, then, Sir, has the soul attained, in this visible world, to the highest Nirvāṇa.” Thus do some maintain the complete happiness, in the visible world, of a living being.
22. 'To him another says: “There is, Sir, such a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the soul does not by that alone attain to the highest Nirvāṇa. And why not? Because inasmuch as that state involves reasoning and investigation it is stamped as being gross. But whensoever, Sir, the soul, suppressing both reasoning and investigation, enters into and abides in the Second Jhāna, the state of joy and ease, born of serenity, without reflection or investigation, a state of elevation of mind, internal calm of heart, then, Sir, has the soul attained, in this visible world, to the highest Nirvāṇa.” Thus do some maintain the complete happiness, in the visible world, of a living being.
23. 'To him another says: “There is, Sir, such a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the soul does not by that alone attain to the highest Nirvāṇa. And why not? Because inasmuch as that state involves the sense of joy, of exhilaration of heart, it is stamped as being gross. But whensoever, Sir, the soul, by absence of the longing after joy remains in equanimity, mindful and self-possessed, and experiences in the body that ease of which the Arahats speak (when they say) ‘the man serene and thoughtful dwells at ease,’ and so enters into and abides in the Third Jhāna—then, Sir, has the soul attained, in this visible world, to the highest Nirvāṇa.” Thus do some maintain the complete happiness, in the visible world, of a living being.
24. 'To him another says: “There is, Sir, such a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the soul does not by that alone attain to the highest Nirvāṇa. And why not? Because inasmuch as that state involves a constant dwelling of the mind on the ease it has enjoyed it is stamped as gross. But whensoever, Sir, the soul, by putting away ease, by putting away pain. by the previous dying away both of joys and griefs has entered into and abides in the Fourth Jhāna[160]—a state made pure by self-possession and equanimity, without pain arid without ease—then, Sir, has the soul attained, in this visible world, to the highest Nirvāṇa.” Thus do some maintain the complete happiness, in the visible world, of a living being.
25. 'These, brethren, are the recluses and Brahmans who hold the doctrine of happiness in this life, who in five ways maintain the complete salvation, in this visible world, of a living being. And those who do 52 so, all of them, do so in one or other of these five ways. There is none beside.
26. [Repetition of § 40, above p. 44, setting forth that other, higher, knowledge of a Tathāgata, for which alone he ean be rightly praised.]
27. 'These, brethren, are the recluses and Brahmans who arrange the future, whose speculations are concerned with the future, and who on forty-four grounds put forward various assertions regarding the future. And those who do so, all of them, do so in one or other of these forty-four ways. There is none beside.
28. [Repetition of § 40, above p. 44, setting forth that other, higher, knowledge of a Tathāgata, for which alone he can be rightly praised.]
29. 'These, brethren, are the recluses and Brahmans who reconstruct the past, and arrange the future, or who do both, whose speculations are concerned with both, and who in sixty-two ways put forward propositions with regard to the past and to the future, and those who do so, all of them, do so in one or other of these sixty-two ways. There is none beside.
30. [Repetition of § 40, above p. 44, setting forth that other, higher, knowledge of a Tathāgata, for which alone he can be rightly praised.]
32. 'Of these, brethren, those recluses and Brahmans who are Eternalists, who in four ways maintain that the soul and the world are eternal:
(2) those who are Semi-eternalists, who in four ways maintain that the soul and the world are partly eternal and partly not:
(3) those who are Extensionists, who in four ways maintain the infinity or the finiteness of the world:
(4) those who are Eel-wrigglers, who when a question is put to them on this or that resort, in four ways, to equivocation, to wriggling like eels:
(5) those who are Fortuitous-Originists, who in two ways maintain that the soul and the world arose without a cause:
(7) those who hold the doctrine of a conscious existence after death, who maintain in sixteen ways that the soul after death is conscious:
(8) those who hold the doctrine of an unconscious existence after death, who maintain in eight ways that the soul after death is unconscious:
(9) those who maintain in eight ways that the soul after death is neither conscious nor unconscious:
(10) those who are Annihilationists, who maintain in seven ways the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being:
(11) those who hold the doctrine of happiness in this life, who in five ways maintain the complete salvation, in this visible world, of a living being—
That opinion of theirs is based only on the personal sensations, on the worry and writhing consequent thereon[161], of those venerable recluses and Brahmans, who know not, neither perceive, and are subject to all kinds of craving:
58 foll. 'That they should experience those sensations without such contact, such a condition of things could not be.
71. 'They, all of them, receive those sensations through continual contact in the spheres of touch. To them on account of the sensations arises craving, on account of the craving arises the fuel (that is, the necessary condition, the food, the basis, of future lives). from the fuel results becoming, from the tendency to become arises rebirth, and from rebirth comes death, and grief, lamentation, pain, sorrow, and despair. It is, brethren, when a brother understands, 54 as they really are, the origin and the end, the attraction, the danger, and the way of escape from the six realms of contact, that he gets to know what is above, beyond, them all[162].
72. 'For whosoever, brethren, whether recluses or Brahmans, are thus reconstructors of the past or arrangers of the future, or who are both, whose speculations are concerned with both, who put forward various propositions with regard to the past and to the future, they, all of them, are entrapped in the net of these sixty-two modes; this way and that they plunge about, but they are in it; this way and that they may flounder, but they are included in it, caught in it.
'Just, brethren, as when a skilful fisherman or fisherlad should drag a tiny pool of water with a fine-meshed net he might fairly think: “Whatever fish of size may be in this pond, everyone will be in this net; flounder about as they may, they will be included in it, and caught”—just so is it with these speculators about the past and the future, in this net, flounder as they may, they are included and caught.
73. 'The outward form, brethren, of him who has won the truth[163], stands before you, but that which binds it to rebirth is cut in twain. So long as his body shall last, so long do gods and men behold him. On the dissolution of the body, beyond the end of his life, neither gods nor men shall see him.
‘Just, brethren, as when the stalk of a bunch of mangoes has been cut, all the mangoes that were hanging on that stalk go with it; just so, brethren, though the outward form of him who has won the truth stands before you, that which binds it to rebirth has been cut in twain. So long as his body shall last, so long do gods and men behold him. On the dissolution of the body, beyond the end of his life, neither gods nor men shall see him.’
74. When he had thus spoken, the venerable Ananda said to the Blessed One: ‘Strange, Lord, is this, and wonderful! And what name has this exposition of the truth?’
‘Ananda, you may remember this exposition as the Net of Advantage, and as the Net of Truth, and as the Supreme Net, and as the Net of Theories; remember it even as the Glorious Victory in the day of battle!’
Thus spake the Blessed One, and glad at heart the brethren exalted his word. And on the delivery of this discourse the thousandfold world-system shook.
I. Thus have I heard. The Blessed One was once dwelling at Rājagaha in the Mango Grove of Jīvaka the children’s physician[165], with a great company of the brethren, with twelve hundred and fifty of the brethren. Now at that time the king of Magadha, Ajātasattu, the son of the Videha princess[166], on the Uposatha day, held on the fifteenth, on Komudi (white 66 water-lily), the full moon day of the fourth month[167], at night, when the moon was full, was seated on the upper terrace roof of his palace surrounded by his ministers. And the king, on that sacred day, gave utterance to a hymn of joy, saying:
‘Who is the recluse or Brahman whom we may call upon to-night, who, when we call upon him, shall be able to satisfy our hearts[168]?’
2. When he had thus spoken, a certain minister said to the king: ‘There is, Sire, Pūraṇa Kassapa, the head of an order, of a following, the teacher of a school, well known and of repute as a sophist, revered by the people, a man of experience, who has long been a recluse, old and well stricken in years. Let your Majesty pay a visit to him. It may well be[169] that, on calling upon him, your heart, Sire, shall find peace.’ But when he had thus spoken Ajātasattu the king kept silence.
3-7. Then other five ministers spake in the same terms of Makkhali of the cow-pen, of Ajita of the garment of hair, of Pakudha Kaccāyana, of Sañjaya of the Belaṭṭha clan, and of the Nigaṇṭha of the Nāta clan. And still, to each, Ajātasattu the king kept silence.
8. Now at that time Jīvaka the physician was seated, in silence, not far from Ajātasattu the king. And the king said to him: ‘But you, friend Jīvaka, why do you say nothing?’
‘The Blessed One, Sire, the Arahat, the all-awakened-one, is now lodging in our Mango Grove, with a great company of the brethren, with twelve hundred and fifty brethren. And this is the good report that has been noised abroad as to Gotama the Blessed One: “An Arahat, fully awakened, is the exalted One, abounding In wisdom and goodness, happy, with knowledge of the worlds, unsurpassed as a guide to mortals willing to be led, the teacher of gods and men, a blessed Buddha.” Let your Majesty pay a visit to him. It may well be that, on calling upon him, your heart, Sire, shall find peace.’
9. ‘Very good, Sire!’ said Jīvaka the physician in assent to the words of the king. And he had five hundred she-elephants made ready, and the state elephant the king was wont to ride, and had word brought to the king: ‘The elephants, Sire, are caparisoned. Do now what seemeth to you meet.’ Then the king had five hundred of his women mounted on the she-elephants, one on each; and himself mounted the state elephant; and he went forth, the attendants bearing torches, in royal pomp, from Rājagaha to Jīvaka the physician’s Mango Grove.
10. And the king, when close upon the Mango Grove, was seized with a sudden fear and consternation, and the hairs on his body stood erect. And anxious and excited, he said to Jīvaka: ‘You are playing me no tricks, Jīvaka? You are not deceiving me? You are not betraying me to my foes? How can it be that there should be no sound at all, not a sneeze nor a cough, in so large an assembly of the brethren, among twelve hundred and fifty of the brethren?’
‘Fear not, O king. I play no trick, neither deceive you; nor would I betray you to the foe. Go on, O king, 68 go straight on! There, in the pavilion hall, the lamps are burning.’
11. Then the king went on, on his elephant as far as the path was passable for elephants, and then on foot, to the door of the pavilion; and then said to Jīvaka:
‘That is he, O king, sitting against the middle pillar, and facing the East, with the brethren around him.’
12. Then the king went up, and stood respectfully on one side. And as he stood there and looked on the assembly, seated in perfect silence, calm as a clear lake, he broke out: ‘Would that my son, Udāyi Bhadda, might have such calm as this assembly of the brethren now has!’
13. Then the king bowed to the Blessed One, and stretching forth his joined palms in salutation to the Order took his seat aside, and said to the Blessed One: ‘I would fain question the Blessed One on a certain matter, if he give me opportunity to set forth the question.’
14. ‘There are, Sir, a number of ordinary crafts:—mahouts, horsemen, charioteers, archers, standard bearers, camp marshalls, camp followers, high military officers of royal birth, military scouts[170], men brave as elephants, champions, heroes, warriors in buckskin, home-born slaves, cooks, barbers, bath attendants, confectioners, garland-makers, washermen, weavers, basket-makers, potters, arithmeticians, accountants, and whatsoever others of like kind there may be. All 69 these enjoy, in this very world, the visible fruits of their craft. They maintain themselves, and their parents and children and friends, in happiness and comfort. They keep up gifts, the object of which is gain on high, to recluses and Brahmans,—gifts that lead to rebirth in heaven, that redound to happiness, and have bliss as their result. Can you, Sir, declare to me any such immediate fruit, visible in this very world, of the life of a recluse[171]?’
15. ‘Do you admit to us, O king, that you have put the same question to other recluses or to Brahmans?’
16. "Once I went to Pūraṇa Kassapa[172]. And after exchanging with him the greetings and compliments of friendship and courtesy, I seated myself beside him, and put to him the same question as I have now put, Lord, to you.
17. 'Then Pūraṇa Kassapa said to me: “To him who acts, O king, or causes another to act, to him who mutilates or causes another to mutilate, to him who punishes or causes another to punish, to him who causes grief or torment, to him who trembles or causes others to tremble, to him who kills a living creature, who takes what is not given, who breaks into houses, who commits dacoity, or robbery, or highway robbery, or adultery, or who speaks lies, to him thus acting there is no guilt. If with a discus with an edge sharp as 70 a razor he should make all the living creatures on the earth one heap, one mass, of flesh, there would be no guilt thence resulting, no increase of guilt would ensue. Were he to go along the south bank of the Ganges striking and slaying, mutilating and having men mutilated, oppressing and having men oppressed, there would be no guilt thence resulting, no increase of guilt would ensue. Were he to go along the north bank of the Ganges giving alms, and ordering gifts to be given, offering sacrifices or causing them to be offered, there would be no merit thence resulting, no increase of merit. In generosity, in self-mastery, in control of the senses, in speaking truth there is neither merit, nor increase of merit.” Thus, Lord, did Pūraṇa Kassapa, when asked what was the immediate advantage in the life of a recluse, expound his theory of non-action[173]. Just, Lord, as if a man, when asked what a mango was, should explain what a bread fruit is, just so did Pūraṇa Kassapa, when asked what was the fruit, in this present state of being, of the life of a recluse, expound his theory of non-action. Then, Lord, it occurred to me: “How should such a one as I think of giving dissatisfaction to any recluse or Brahman in my realm?” So I neither applauded nor blamed what he said, and though dissatisfied I gave utterance to no expression of dissatisfaction, and neither accepting nor rejecting that answer of his, I arose from my seat, and departed thence.
19. ['In the same manner I went to five other teachers, and receiving to this same question put an answer not to the point, I behaved in each case as just set forth. And the answers of the five were thus:][174]
20. 'When one day I had thus asked Makkhali of the cow-pen[175], he said: "There is, O king, no cause, either ultimate or remote, for the depravity of beings; they become depraved without reason and without cause. There is no cause, either proximate or remote, for the rectitude of beings; they become pure without reason and without cause. The attainment of any given condition, of any character, does not depend either on one’s own acts, or on the acts of another, or on human effort. There is no such thing as power or energy, or human strength or human vigour. All animals, all creatures (with one, two, or more senses), all beings (produced from eggs or in a womb), all souls (in plants)[176] are without force and power and energy of their own. They are bent this way and that by their fate, by the necessary conditions of the class to which they belong, by their individual nature: and it is according to their position in one or other of the six classes that they experience ease or pain.
'"There are fourteen hundred thousands of the principal sorts of birth, and again six thousand others, and again six hundred. There are five hundred sorts of Karma, and again five (according to the five senses), and again three (according to act, word, and thought); and there is a whole Karma and a half Karma (the whole being a Karma of act or word, the half a Karma of thought).
'"There are sixty-two paths (or modes of conduct), sixty-two periods, six classes (or distinctions among men)[177], eight stages of a prophet’s existence[178], forty-nine hundred sorts of occupation[179], forty-nine hundred sorts of wandering mendicants, forty-nine hundred regions dwelt in by Nāgas, two thousand faculties, three thousand purgatories, thirty-six places where dust accumulates, seven sorts of animate and seven of inanimate production, and seven of production by grafting, seven sorts of gods, and of men, and of devils, and of great lakes, and seven principal and again seven hundred minor sorts of Pacuṭas[180] of precipices, and of dreams.
'“There are eighty-four hundred thousand periods during which both fools and wise alike, wandering in transmigration, shall at last make an end of pain. Though the wise should hope: ‘By this virtue or this performance of duty, or this penance, or this righteousness will I make the Karma (I have inherited), that is not yet mature, mature’—though the fool should hope, by the same means, to get gradually rid of Karma that has matured—neither of them can do it. The ease and pain, measured out, as it were, with a measure, cannot be altered in the course of transmigration; there 73 can be neither increase nor decrease thereof, neither excess nor deficiency. Just as when a ball of string is cast forth it will spread out just as far, and no farther, than it can unwind, just so both fools and wise alike, wandering in transmigration exactly for the allotted term, shall then, and only then, make an end of pain.”
'Thus, Lord, did Makkhali of the cow-pen, when asked what was the immediate advantage in the life of a recluse, expound his theory of purification through transmigration.
23. 'When, one day, I had thus asked Ajita of the garment of hair, he said[181]: "There is no such thing, O king, as alms or sacrifice or offering. There is neither fruit nor result of good or evil deeds. There is no such thing as this world or the next. There is neither father nor mother, nor beings springing into life without them. There are in the world no recluses or Brahmans who have reached the highest point[182], who walk perfectly, and who having understood and realised, by themselves alone, both this world and the next, make their wisdom known to others.
'“A human being is built up of the four elements. When he dies the earthy in him returns and relapses to the earth, the fluid to the water, the heat to the fire, the windy to the air, and his faculties[183] pass into space. The four bearers, on the bier as a fifth, take his dead body away; till they reach the burning-ground men utter forth eulogies, but there his bones are bleached, 74 and his offerings[184] end in ashes. It is a doctrine of fools, this talk of gifts. It is an empty lie, mere idle talk, when men say there is profit therein. Fools and wise alike, on the dissolution of the body, are cut off, annihilated, and after death they are not.”
'Thus, Lord, did Ajita of the garment of hair, when asked what was the immediate advantage in the life of a recluse, expound his theory of annihilation.
26. 'When, one day, I had thus asked Pakudha Kaccāyana, he said: “The following seven things, O king, are neither made nor commanded to be made, neither created nor caused to be created, they are barren (so that nothing is produced out of them), stedfast as a mountain peak, as a pillar firmly fixed. They move not, neither do they vary, they trench not one upon another, nor avail aught as to ease or pain or both. And what are the seven? The four elements—earth, water, fire, and air-and ease, and pain, and the soul as a seventh. So there is neither slayer nor causer of slaying, hearer or speaker, knower or explainer. When one with a sharp sword cleaves a head in twain, no one thereby deprives any one of life, a sword has only penetrated into the interval between seven elementary substances.”
'Thus, Lord, did Pakudha Kaccāyana, when asked what was the immediate advantage in the life of a recluse, expound the matter by expounding something else.
28. 'When, one day, I had thus asked the Nigaṇṭha of the Nāta clan, he said: “A Nigaṇṭha, O king (a man free from bonds}, is restrained with a fourfold self-restraint. He lives restrained as regards all water; restrained as regards all evil; all evil has he washed away; and he lives suffused with the sense of evil held at bay. Such is his fourfold self-restraint. And since he is thus tied with this fourfold 75 bond, therefore is he, the Nigaṇṭho (free from bonds), called Gatatto (whose heart has gone; that is, to the summit, to the attainment, of his aim) Yatatto (whose heart is kept down; that is, is under command), and Ṭhitatto (whose heart is fixed)[185].”
'Thus, Lord, did the Nigaṇṭha of the Nāta clan, when asked what was the immediate advantage in the life of a recluse, expound his theory of the fourfold bond.
31. 'When, one day, I had thus asked Sañjaya of the Belaṭṭha clan, he said: “If you ask me whether there is another world—well, if I thought there were, I would say so. But I don’t say so. And I don’t think it is thus or thus. And I don’t think it is otherwise. And I don’t deny it. And I don’t say there neither is, nor is not, another world. And if you ask me about the beings produced by chance; or whether there is any fruit, any result, of good or bad actions; or whether a man who has won the truth continues, or not, after death—to each or any of these questions do I give the same reply[186].”
33. 'Thus, Lord, did Sañjaya of the Belaṭṭha clan, when asked what was the immediate advantage in the life of a recluse, show his manner of prevarication. And to hint, as to all the others, I expressed neither approval nor dissatisfaction, but neither accepting nor 76 rejecting what was said, I arose from my seat, and departed thence[187].
34, ‘And now, Lord, I put the same question to the Blessed One. Can you show me any immediate fruit, in this world, of the life of a recluse, such as those who follow each of the occupations I have mentioned are, each of them, able tO show?’
'I can, O king. And to that end I would fain put a question to you. Answer it as you may think most fit.
35. ‘Now what do you think, O king. Suppose among the people of your household there were a slave who does work for you, rises up in the morning before you do and retires later to rest, who is keen to carry out your pleasure, anxious to make himself agreeable in what. he does and says, a man who watches your every look. Suppose he should think, “Strange is it and wonderful, this issue of meritorious deeds, this result of merit! Here is this king of Magadha, Ajātasattu, the son of the Videha princess—he is a man, and so am I. But the king lives in the full enjoyment and possession of the five pleasures of sense—a very god, methinks—and here am I a slave, working for him, rising before him and retiring later to rest, keen to carry out his pleasure, anxious to make myself agreeable in deed and word, watching his very looks. Would that I were like him, that I too might earn merit. Why should not I have my hair and beard shaved off, 77 and don the yellow robes, and going forth from the household state, renounce the world?” And suppose, after a time, he should do so. And having been admitted into an Order, should dwell restrained in act and word and thought, content with mere food and shelter, delighting in solitude. And suppose your people should tell you of this, saying: “If it please your majesty, do you know that such a one, formerly your slave, who worked for you, and so on (all as before) has now donned the yellow robes, and has been admitted into an Order, and dwells restrained, content with mere food and shelter, delighting in solitude?” Would you then say: “Let the man come back; let him become a slave again, and work for me”?’
36. ‘Nay, Lord, rather should we greet him with reverence , and rise up from our seat out of deference towards him, and press him to be seated. And we should have robes and a bowl, and a lodging place, and medicine for the sick—all the requisites of a recluse—made ready, and beg him to accept of them. And we should order watch and ward and guard to be kept for him according to the law.’
‘But what do you think, O king. That being so, is there, or is there not, some fruit, visible in this world, of the life of a recluse?’
‘This then, O king, is the first kind of the fruit, visible in this world, which I maintained to arise from the life of a recluse.’
‘I can, O king. And to that end I would fain put a question, &c. [as before, to the end of § 36, the case now put being that of a free man who cultivates his land, a householder, who pays taxes and thus increases the king’s wealth, but gives up his little property and his position in his clan, and enters an Order.]’
39. ‘Can you, Lord, show me any other fruit, visible in this world, of the life of a reclase, a fruit higher and sweeter than these?’
40. 'Suppose, O king, there appears in the world one who has won the truth, an Arahat, a fully awakened one, abounding in wisdom and goodness; happy, who knows all worlds, unsurpassed as a guide to mortals willing to be led, a teacher for gods and men, a Blessed One, a Buddha. He, by himself, thoroughly knows and sees, as it were, face to face this universe,—including the worlds above of the gods, the Brahmas, and the Maras, and the world below with its recluses and Brahmans, its princes and peoples,—and having known it, he makes his knowledge known to others. The truth, lovely in its origin, lovely in its progress, lovely in its consummation, doth he proclaim, both in the spirit and in the letter, the higher life doth he make known, in all its fullness and in all its purity[188].
41. 'A householder[189] or one of his children, or a man of inferior birth in any class listens to that truth; and on hearing it he has faith in the Tathāgata (the one who has found the truth); and when he is possessed of that faith, he considers thus within himself:
'“Full of hindrances is household life, a path for the dust of passion. Free as the air is the life of him who has renounced all worldly things. How difficult is it for the man who dwells at home to live the higher life in all its fullness, in all its purity, in all its bright perfection! Let me then cut off my hair and beard, let me clothe myself in the orange-coloured robes, and let me go forth from the household life into the homeless state.”
'Then, before long, forsaking his portion of wealth, be it great or small, forsaking his circle of relatives, be they many or be they few, he cuts off his hair and beard, he clothes himself in the orange-coloured robes, 79 and he goes forth from the household life into the homeless state.
42. 'When he has thus become a recluse he lives self-restrained by that restraint that should be binding on a recluse[190]. Uprightness is his delight, and he sees danger in the least of those things he should avoid. He adopts, and trains himself in, the precepts. He encompasses himself with good deeds in act and word. Pure are his means of livelihood, good is his conduct, guarded the door of his senses. Mindful and self-possessed he is altogether happy.
'In this, O king, that the Bhikshu, putting away the killing of living things, holds aloof from the destruction of life. The cudgel and the sword he has laid aside, and ashamed of roughness, and full of mercy, he dwells compassionate and kind to all creatures that have life.
[Here follow the whole of the Sīlas (the paragraphs on minor morality), in the words already translated above in the Brahma-jāla Sutta, §§ 8 to 27. Only for ‘Gotama the recluse’ one should read ‘the Bhikshu’; and alter in each case the words of the refrain accordingly.]
63. 'And then that Bhikshu, O king, being thus master of the minor moralities, sees no danger from any side; that is, so far as concerns his self-restraint in conduct. Just, O king, as a sovereign, duly crowned, whose enemies have been beaten down, sees no danger from any side; that is, so far as enemies are concerned, so is the Bhikshu confident. And endowed with this body of morals, so worthy of honour, he experiences, within himself, a sense of ease without alloy. Thus is it, O king, that the Bhikshu becomes righteous.
64. ‘And how. O king, is the Bhikshu guarded as to the doors of his senses[191]?’
'When, O king, he sees an object with his eye he is not entranced in the general appearance or the details of it[192]. He sets himself to restrain that which might give occasion for evil states, covetousness and dejection, to flow in over him so long as he dwells unrestrained as to his sense of sight. He keeps watch upon his faculty of sight, and he attains to mastery over it. And so, in like manner, when he hears a sound with his ear, or smells an odour with his nose, or tastes a flavour with his tongue, or feels a touch with his body, or when he cognises a phenomenon with his mind he is not entranced in the general appearance or the details of it. He sets himself to restrain that which might give occasion for evil states, covetousness and dejection, to flow in over him so long as he dwells unrestrained as to his mental (representative) faculty. He keeps watch upon his representative faculty, and he attains to mastery over it. And endowed with this self-restraint, so worthy of honour, as regards the senses, he experiences, within himself, a sense of ease into which no evil state can enter[193]. Thus is it, O king, that the Bhikshu becomes guarded as to the doors of his senses.
'In this matter, O king. the Bhikshu in going forth or in coming back keeps clearly before his mind’s eye (all that is wrapt up therein—the immediate object of 81 the act itself, its ethical significance, whether or not it is conducive to the high aim set before him, and the real facts underlying the mere phenomenon of the outward act). And so also in looking forward, or in looking round; in stretching forth his arm, or in drawing it in again; in eating or drinking, in masticating or swallowing, in obeying the calls of nature, in going or standing or sitting, in sleeping or waking, in speaking or in being still, he keeps himself aware of all it really means[194]. Thus is it, O king, that the Bhikshu becomes mindful and self-possessed.
'In this matter, O king, the Bhikshu is satisfied with sufficient robes to cherish his body, with sufficient food to keep his stomach going. Whithersoever he may go forth, these he takes with him as he goes—just as a bird with his wings, O king, whithersoever he may fly, carries his wings with him as he flies. Thus is it, 'O king, that the Bhikshu becomes content[195].
67. 'Then, master of this so excellent body of moral precepts, gifted with this so excellent self-restraint as to the senses, endowed with this so excellent mindfulness and self-possession, filled with this so excellent content, he chooses some lonely spot to rest at on his way—in the woods, at the foot of a tree, on a hill side, in a mountain glen, in a rocky cave, in a charnel place, or on a heap of straw in the open field. And returning thither after his round for alms he seats himself, when his meal is done, cross-legged, keeping his body erect, and his intelligence alert, intent.
68. 'Putting away the hankering after the world[196], he remains with a heart that hankers not, and purifies his mind of lusts. Putting away the corruption of the wish to injure, he remains with a heart free from ill-temper, and purifies his mind of malevolence. Putting away torpor of heart and mind[197], keeping his ideas alight[198], mindful and self-possessed, he purifies his mind of weakness and of sloth. Putting away flurry and worry, he remains free from fretfulness, and with heart serene within, he purifies himself of irritability and vexation of spirit. Putting away wavering, he remains as one passed beyond perplexity; and no longer in suspense as to what is good, he purifies his mind of doubt.
69. 'Then just, O king, as when a man, after contracting a loan[199], should set a business on foot, and his 83 business should succeed, and he should not only be able to pay off the old debt he had incurred, but there should be a surplus over to maintain a wife. Then would he realise : “I used to have to carry on my business by getting into debt, but it has gone so well with me that I have paid off what I owed, and have a surplus over to maintain a wife.” And he would be of good cheer at that, would be glad of heart at that:—
70. 'Then just, O king, as if a man were a prey to disease, in pain, and very ill, and his food would not digest, and there were no strength left in him; and after a time he were to recover from that disease, and his food should digest, and his strength come back to him; then, when he realised his former and his present state, he would be of good cheer at that, he would be glad of heart at that:—
71. 'Then just, O king, as if a man were bound in a prison house, and after a time he should be set free from his bonds, safe and sound, and without any confiscation of his goods; when he realised his former and his present state, he would be of good cheer at that, he would be glad of heart at that:—
72. 'Then just, O king, as if a man were a slave, not his own master, subject to another, unable to go whither he would; and after a time he should be emancipated from that slavery, become his own master, not subject to others, a free man, free to go whither he would; then, on realising his former and his present state, he would be of good cheer at that, he would be glad of heart at that:—
73. 'Then just, O king, as if a man, rich and prosperous, were to find himself on a long road, in a desert, where no food was, but much danger; and after a time were to find himself out of the desert, arrived safe; on the borders of his village, in security and peace; then, on realising his former and his present state, he would be of good cheer at that, he would be glad of heart at that:—
74. 'Just so, O king, the Bhikshu, so long as these 84 five Hindrances are not put away within him looks upon himself as in debt, diseased, in prison, in slavery, lost on a desert road. But when these five Hindrances have been put away within him, he looks upon himself as freed from debt, rid of disease, out of jail, a free man, and secure;
75. 'And gladness springs up within him on his realising that, and joy arises to him thus gladdened, and so rejoicing all his frame becomes at ease, and being thus at ease he is filled with a sense of peace, and in that peace his heart is stayed[200].
75 A. 'Then estranged from lusts, aloof from evil dispositions, he enters into and remains in the First Rapture—a state of joy and ease born of detachment[201], reasoning and investigation going on the while.
'His very body does he so pervade, drench, permeate, and suffuse with the joy and ease born of detachment, that there is no spot in his whole frame not suffused therewith.
76. 'Just, O king, as a skilful bathman or his apprentice will scatter perfumed soap powder in a metal basin, and then besprinkling it with water, drop by drop, will so knead it together that the ball of lather, taking up the unctuous moisture, is drenched with it, pervaded by it, permeated by it within and without, and there is no leakage possible.
'This, O king, is an immediate fruit of the life of a recluse, visible in this world, higher and sweeter than the last.
77. 'Then further, O king, the Bhikshu suppressing all reasoning and investigation enters into and abides in the Second Jhāna, a state of joy and ease, born of the serenity of concentration, when no reasoning or investigation goes on,—a state of elevation[202] of mind, a tranquillisation of the heart within.
'And his very body does he so pervade, drench, permeate, and suffuse with the joy and ease born of concentration, that there is no spot in his whole frame not suffused therewith.
78. 'Just, O king, as if there were a deep pool, with water welling up into it from a spring beneath, and with no inlet from the east or west, from the north or south, and the god should not from time to time send down showers of rain upon it. Still the current of cool waters rising up from that spring would pervade, fill, permeate, and suffuse the pool with cool waters; and there would be no part or portion of the pool unsuffused therewith.
'This, O king, is an immediate fruit of the life of a recluse, visible in this world, and higher and sweeter than the last.
79. 'Then further, O king, the Bhikshu, holding aloof from joy, becomes equable[203]; and mindful and self-possessed he experiences in his body that ease which the Arahats talk of when they say: “The man serene and self-possessed is well at ease,” and so he enters into and abides in the Third Jhāna.
'And his very body does he so pervade, drench, 86 permeate, and suffuse with that ease that has no joy with it, that there is no spot in his whole frame not suffused therewith.
80. "Just, O king, as when in a lotus tank the several lotus flowers, red or white or blue, born in the water, grown up in the water, not rising up above the surface of the water, drawing up nourishment from the depths of the water, are so pervaded, drenched, permeated, and suffused from their very tips down to their roots with the cool moisture thereof, that there is no spot in the whole plant, whether of the red lotus, or of the white, or of the blue, not suffused therewith.
'This, O king, is an immediate fruit of the life of a recluse, visible in this world, and higher and sweeter than the last.
81. 'Then further, O king, the Bhikshu, by the putting away alike of ease and of pain, by the passing away alike of any elation, any dejection, he had previously felt, enters into and abides in the Fourth Jhāna, a state of pure self-possession and equanimity. without pain and without ease.
'And he sits there so suffusing even his body with that sense of purification, of translucence, of heart, that there is no spot in his whole frame not suffused therewith.
82. 'Just, O king, as if a man were sitting so wrapt from head to foot in a clean white robe, that there were no spot in his whole frame not in contact with the clean white robe—just so, O king, does the Bhikshu sit there, so suffusing even his body with that sense of purification, of translucence, of heart, that there is no spot in his whole frame not suffused therewith.
'This, O king, is an immediate fruit of the life of a recluse, and higher and sweeter than the last.
83. 'With his heart thus serene, made pure, translucent, cultured, devoid of evil, supple, ready to act, firm, and imperturbable, he applies and bends down his mind to that insight that comes from knowledge. He grasps the fact: “This body of mine has form, it is built up of the four elements, it springs from father 87 and mother, it is continually renewed by so much boiled rice and juicy foods, its very nature is impermanence, it is subject to erasion, abrasion, dissolution, and disintegration[204]; and therein is this consciousness[205] of mine, too, bound up, on that does it depend.”
84. 'Just, O king, as if there were a Veluriya gem, bright, of the purest water, with eight facets, excellently cut, clear, translucent, without a flaw, excellent in every way. And through it a string, blue, or orange-coloured, or red, or white, or yellow should be threaded. If a man, who had eyes to see, were to take it into his hand, he would clearly perceive how the one is bound up with the other[206].
'This, O king, is an immediate fruit of the life of a recluse, visible in this world, and higher and sweeter than the last.
85. 'With his heart thus serene, made pure, translucent, cultured, devoid of evil, supple, ready to act, firm, and imperturbable, he applies and bends down his mind to the calling up of a mental image. He calls up from this body another body, having form; 88 made of mind, having all (his own body’s) limbs and parts, not deprived of any organ[207].
86. 'Just, O king, as if a man were to pull out a reed from its sheath. He would know: “This is the reed, this the sheath. The reed is one thing, the sheath another. It is from the sheath that the reed has been drawn forth[208].” And similarly were he to take a snake out of its slough, or draw a sword from its scabbard[209].
'This, O king, is an immediate fruit of the life of a recluse, visible in this life, and higher and sweeter than the last.
87. 'With his heart thus serene, made pure, translucent, cultured, devoid of evil, supple, ready to act, firm and imperturbable, he applies and bends down his mind to the modes of the Wondrous Gift[210]. He enjoys the Wondrous Gift in its various modes—being one he becomes many, or having become many becomes one again; he becomes visible or invisible; he goes, feeling no obstruction, to the further side of a wall or rampart or hill, as if through air; he penetrates up and down through solid ground, as if through water; he walks on water without breaking 89 through as if on solid ground; he travels cross-legged in the sky, like the birds on wing; even the Moon and the Sun, so potent, so mighty though they be, does he touch and feel with his hand; he reaches in the body even up to the heaven of Brahmā.
88. 'Just, O king, as a clever potter or his apprentice could make, could succeed in getting out of properly prepared clay any shape of vessel he wanted to have—or an ivory carver out of ivory, or a goldsmith out of gold.
'This, O king, is an immediate fruit of the life of a recluse, and higher and sweeter than the last.
89. 'With his heart thus serene, made pure, translucent, cultured, devoid of evil, supple, ready to act, firm and imperturbable, he applies and bends down his mind to the Heavenly Ear. With that clear Heavenly Ear surpassing the ear of men he hears sounds both human and celestial, whether far or near.
90. 'Just, O king, as if a man were on the high road and were to hear the sound of a kettledrum or a tabor or the sound of chank horns and small drums he would know: “This is the sound of a kettledrum, this is the sound of a tabor, this of chank horns and of drums[211].”
'This, O king, is an immediate fruit of the life of a recluse, visible in this life, and higher and sweeter than the last.
91. 'With his heart thus serene (&c. as before), he directs and bends down his mind to the knowledge which penetrates the heart. Penetrating with his own heart the hearts of other beings, of other men, he knows them. He discerns—
The mean mind to be mean, and the lofty mind lofty[212];
92. 'Just, O king, as a woman or a man or a lad, young and smart, on considering attentively the image of his own face in a bright and brilliant mirror or in a vessel of clear water would, if it had a mole on it, know that it had, and if not, would know it had not.
'This, O king, is an immediate fruit of the life of a recluse, visible in this world, and higher and sweeter than the last.
93. 'With his heart thus serene (&c. as before), he directs and bends down his mind to the knowledge of the memory of his previous temporary states. He recalls to mind his various temporary states in days gone by—one birth, or two or three or four or five births, or ten or twenty or thirty or forty or fifty or a hundred or a thousand or a hundred thousand births, through many an aeon of dissolution, many an aeon of evolution, many an aeon of both dissolution and evolution[213]. “In such a place such was my name, such my family, such my caste[214], such my food, such my experience of discomfort or of ease, and such the limits of my life. When I passed away from that state, I took form again in such a place. There I had 91 such and such a name and family and caste and food and experience of discomfort or of ease, such was the limit of my life. When I passed away from that state I took form again here”—thus does he call to mind his temporary state in days gone by in all their details, and in all their modes.
94. 'Just, O king, as if a man were to go from his own to another village, and from that one to another, and from that one should return home. Then he would know: “From my own village I came to that other one. There I stood in such and such a way, sat thus, spake thus, and held my peace thus. Thence I came to that other village; and there I stood in such and such a way, sat thus, spake thus, and held my peace thus. And now, from that other village, I have returned back again home[215].”
'This, O king, is an immediate fruit of the life of a recluse. Visible in this world, and higher and sweeter than the last.
95. 'With his heart thus serene (&c. as before), he directs and bends down his mind to the knowledge of the fall and rise of beings. With the pure Heavenly Eye[216], surpassing that of men, he sees beings as they pass away from one form of existence and take shape in another; he recognises the mean and the noble, the well favoured and the ill favoured, the happy and the wretched, passing away according to their deeds: “Such and such beings, brethren, evil in act and word and thought, revilers of the noble ones, holding to wrong views, acquiring for themselves that Karma which results from wrong views, they, on the dissolution of the body, after death, are reborn in some unhappy state of suffering or woe. But such and such beings, my brethren, well doers in act and word and thought, not revilers of the noble ones, holding to right views, 92 acquiring for themselves that Karma that results from right views, they, on the dissolution of the body, after death, are reborn in some happy state in heaven.” Thus with the pure Heavenly Eye, surpassing that of men, he sees beings as they pass away from one state of existence, and take form in another; he recognises the mean and the noble, the well favoured and the ill favoured, the happy and the wretched, passing away according to their deeds[217].
96. 'Just, O king, as if there were a house with an upper terrace on it in the midst of a place where four roads meet, and a man standing thereon, and with eyes to see, should watch men entering a house, and coming forth out of it, and walking hither and thither along the street[218], and seated in the square in the midst. Then he would know: “Those men are entering a house, and those are leaving it, and those are walking to and fro in the street, and those are seated in the square in the midst.”
'This, O king, is an immediate fruit of the life of a recluse, visible in this world, and higher and sweeter than the last.
97. 'With his heart thus serene (&c. as before), he directs and bends down his mind to the knowledge of the destruction of the Deadly Floods[219]. He knows 93 as it really is: “This is pain.” He knows as it really is: “This is the origin of pain.” He knows as it really is: “This is the cessation of pain.” He knows as it really is: “This is the Path that leads to the cessation of pain.” He knows as they really are: “These are the Deadly Floods.” He knows as it really is: “This is the origin of the Deadly Floods.” He knows as it really is: “This is the cessation of the Deadly Floods.” He knows as it really is: “This is the Path that leads to the cessation of the Deadly Floods.” To him, thus knowing, thus seeing, the heart is set free from the Deadly Taint of Lusts[220], is set free from the Deadly Taint of Becomings[221], is set free from the Deadly Taint of Ignorance[222]. In him, thus set free, there arises the knowledge of his emancipation, and he knows: “Rebirth has been destroyed. The higher life has been fulfilled. What had to be done has been accomplished. After this present life there will be no beyond!”
98. 'Just, O king, as if in a mountain fastness there were a pool of water, clear, translucent, and serene; and a man, standing on the bank, and with eyes to see, should perceive the oysters and the shells, the gravel and the pebbles and the shoals of fish, as they move about or lie within it: he would know: “This 94 pool is clear, transparent, and serene, and there within it are the oysters and the shells, and the sand and gravel, and the shoals of fish are moving about or lying still[223].”
‘This, O king, is an immediate fruit of the life of a recluse, visible in this world, and higher and sweeter than the last. And there is no fruit of the life of a recluse, visible in this world, that is higher and sweeter than this[224].’
99. And when he had thus spoken, Ajātasattu the king said to the Blessed One: ‘Most excellent, Lord, most excellent! Just as if a man were to set up that which has been thrown down, or were to reveal that which is hidden away, or were to point out the right road to him who has gone astray, or were to bring a lamp into the darkness so that those who have eyes could see external forms—just even so, Lord, has the truth been made known to me, in many a figure, by the Blessed One. And now I betake myself, Lord, to the Blessed One as my refuge, to the Truth, and to the Order. May the Blessed One accept me as a disciple, as one who, from this day forth, as long as life endures, has taken his refuge in them. Sin has overcome me, Lord, weak and foolish and wrong that I am, in that, for the sake of sovranty, I put to death my father, that righteous man, that righteous king! May the Blessed One accept it of me, Lord, that do so acknowledge it as a sin, to the end that in future I may restrain myself.’
100. ‘Verily, O king, it was sin that overcame you in acting thus. But inasmuch as you look upon it as sin, and confess it according to what is right, we accept your confession as to that. For that, O king, is custom in the discipline of the noble ones[225], that whosoever 95 looks upon his fault as a fault, and rightfully confesses it, shall attain to self-restraint in future.’
101. When he had thus spoken, Ajātasattu the king said to the Blessed One: ‘Now, Lord, we would fain go. We are busy, and there is much to do.’
Then Ajātasattu the king, pleased and delighted with the words of the Blessed One, arose from his seat, and bowed to the Blessed One, and keeping him on the right hand as he passed him, departed thence.
102. Now the Blessed One, not long after Ajātasattu the king had gone, addressed the brethren, and said: ‘This king. brethren, was deeply affected, he was touched in heart. If, brethren, the king had not put his father to death, that righteous man, and righteous king, then would the clear and spotless eye for the truth have arisen in him, even as he sat there[226].’
I. 1. Thus have I heard. The Blessed One, when once on a tour through the Kosala country with a great company of the brethren, with about five hundred brethren, arrived at a Brahman village in Kosala named Icchānankala; and while there he stayed in the Icchānankala Wood.
Now at that time the Brahman Pokkharasādi was dwelling at Ukkaṭṭha, a spot teeming with life, with much grassland and woodland and corn, on a royal domain, granted him by King Pasenadi of Kosala as a royal gift, with power over it as if he were the king[227].
2. Now the Brahman Pokkharasādi[228] heard the news:
'They say that the Samaṇa Gotama, of the Sākya clan, who went out from a Sākya family to adopt the religious life, has now arrived, with a great company of the brethren of his Order, at Icchānankala, and is staying there in the Icchānankala Wood. Now regarding that venerable Gotama, such is the high reputation that has been noised abroad:—That Blessed One is an Arahat, a fully awakened one, abounding in wisdom and goodness, happy, with knowledge of the worlds, unsurpassed as a guide to mortals willing to be led, a teacher for gods and men, a Blessed One, a Buddha. He, by himself, thoroughly knows and sees, as it were, face to face this universe,—including the worlds above of the gods, the Brahmas, and the Māras, and the world below with its recluses and Brahmans, its princes and peoples,—and having known it, he makes his knowledge known to others. The truth, lovely in its origin, lovely in its progress, lovely in its consummation, doth he proclaim, both in the spirit and in the letter, the higher life doth he make known, in all its fullness and in all its purity.
3. Now at that time a young Brahman, an Ambaṭṭha[229], was a pupil under Pokkharasādi the Brahman. And he was a repeater (of the sacred words) knowing the mystic verses by heart, one who had mastered the Three Vedas, with the indices, the ritual, the phonology, and the exegesis (as a fourth)[230], and the legends 110 as a fifth. learned in the idioms and the grammar, versed in Lokāyata sophistry, and in the theory of the signs on the body of a great man[231],—so recognised an authority in the system of the threefold Vedic knowledge as expounded by his master, that he could say of him: ‘What I know that you know, and what you know that I know.’
4. And Pokkarasādi told Ambaṭṭha the news, and said: ‘Come now, dear Ambaṭṭha, go to the Samaṇa Gotama, and find out whether the reputation so noised abroad regarding him is in accord with the facts or not, whether the Samaṇa Gotama is such as they say or not.’
‘There have been handed down, Ambaṭṭha, in our mystic verses thirty-two bodily signs of a great man,—signs which, if a man has, he will become one of two things, and no other[232]. If he dwells at home he will become a sovran of the world, a righteous king, bearing rule even to the shores of the four great oceans, a conqueror, the protector of his people, possessor of the seven royal treasures. And these are the seven treasures that he has—the Wheel, the Elephant, the Horse, the Gem, the Woman, the Treasurer, and the 111 Adviser as a seventh[233]. And he has more than a thousand sons, heroes, mighty in frame, beating down the armies of the foe. And he dwells in complete ascendancy over the wide earth from sea to sea, ruling it in righteousness without the need of baton or of sword. But if he go forth from the household life into the houseless state, then he will become a Buddha who removes the veil from the eyes of the world. Now I, Ambaṭṭha, am a giver of the mystic verses; you have received them from me.’
6. ‘Very good, Sir,’ said Ambaṭṭha in reply; and rising from his seat and paying reverence to Pokkharasādi, he mounted a chariot drawn by mares, and proceeded, with a retinue of young Brahmans, to the Icchānankala Wood. And when he had gone on in the chariot as far as the road was practicable for vehicles, he got down, and went on, into the park, on foot.
7. Now at that time a number of the brethren were walking up and down in the open air. And Ambaṭṭha went up to them, and said: ‘Where may the venerable Gotama be lodging now? We have come hither to call upon him.’
8. Then the brethren thought: ‘This young Brahman Ambaṭṭha is of distinguished family. and a pupil of the distinguished Brahman Pokkharasādi. The Blessed One will not find it difficult to hold conversation with such.’ And they said to Ambaṭṭha: ‘There, Ambaṭṭha, is his lodging[234], where the door is shut, go quietly up and enter the porch gently, and give a cough, and knock on the cross-bar. The Blessed One will open the door for you.’
9. Then Ambaṭṭha did so. And the Blessed One opened the door, and Ambaṭṭha entered in. And the other young Brahmans also went in; and they exchanged with the Blessed One the greetings and 112 compliments of politeness and courtesy, and took their seats. But Ambaṭṭha, walking about, said something or other of a civil kind in an off-hand way, fidgeting about the while, or standing up, to the Blessed One sitting there.
10. And the Blessed One said to him: ‘Is that the way, Ambaṭṭha, that you would hold converse with aged teachers, and teachers of your teachers well stricken in years, as you now do, moving about the while or standing, with me thus seated?’
11. ‘Certainly not, Gotama. It is proper to speak with a Brahman as one goes along only when the Brahman himself is walking, and standing to a Brahman who stands, and seated to a Brahman who has taken his seat, or reclining to a Brahman who reclines. But with shavelings, sham friars, menial black fellows, the offscouring of our kinsman’s heels[235]—with them I would talk as I now do to you!’
‘But you must have been wanting something, Ambaṭṭha, when you came here. Turn your thoughts rather to the object you had in view when you came. This young Brahman Ambaṭṭha is ill bred, though he prides himself on his culture; what can this come from except from want of training[236]?’
12. Then Ambaṭṭha was displeased and angry with the Blessed One at being called rude; and at the thought that the Blessed One was vexed with him, he said, scoffing, jeering, and sneering at the Blessed One: ‘Rough is this Sākya breed of yours, Gotama, and rude; touchy is this Sākya breed of yours and 113 violent. Menials, mere menials[237], they neither venerate, nor value, nor esteem, nor give gifts to, nor pay honour to Brahmans. That, Gotama, is neither fitting, nor is it seemly!’
‘Once, Gotama, I had to go to Kapilavatthu on some business or other of Pokkharasādi’s, and went into the Sākyas’ Congress Hall[238]. Now at that time there were a number of Sākyas, old and young, seated in the hall on grand seats, making merry and joking together, nudging one another with their fingers[239]; and for a truth, methinks, it was I myself that was the subject of their jokes; and not one of them even offered me a seat. That, Gotama, is neither fitting, nor is it seemly, that the Sākyas, menials as they are, mere menials, should neither venerate, nor value, nor esteem, nor give gifts to, nor pay honour to Brahmans.’
14. ‘Why a quail, Ambaṭṭha, little hen bird though she be, can say what she likes in her own nest. And there the Sākyas are at their own home, in Kapilavatthu. It is not fitting for you to take offence at so trifling a thing.’
15. ‘There are these four grades[240], Gotama,—the nobles, the Brahmans, the tradesfolk, and the work-people. And of these four, three—the nobles, the tradesfolk, and the work-people—are, verily, but attendants on the Brahmans. So, Gotama, that is neither fitting, nor is it seemly, that the Sākyas, menials as they are, mere menials, should neither venerate, nor value, nor esteem, nor give gifts to, nor pay honour to the Brahmans.’
16. Then the Blessed One thought thus: ‘This Ambaṭṭha is very set on humbling the Sākyas with his charge of servile origin. What if I were to ask him as to his own lineage.’ And he said to him:
'Yes, but if one were to follow up your ancient name and lineage, Ambaṭṭha, on the father’s and the mother’s side, it would appear that the Sākyas were once your masters, and that you are the offspring of one of their slave girls. But the Sākyas trace their line back to Okkāka the king[241].
'Long ago, Ambaṭṭha, King Okkāka, wanting to divert the succession in favour or the son of his favourite queen, banished his elder children—Okkāmukha, Karaṇḍa, Hatthinika, and Sinipura—from the land. And being thus banished they took up their dwelling on the slopes of the Himālaya, on the borders of a lake where a mighty oak tree grew.
‘Now Okkāka the king asked the ministers at his court: “Where, Sirs, are the children now[242]?”’
‘There is a spot, Sire, on the slopes of the Himālaya, on the borders of a lake, where there grows a mighty oak (sako). There do they dwell. And lest they should injure the purity of their line they have married their own (sakāhi) sisters.’
'Then did Okkāka the king burst forth in admiration : “Hearts of oak (sakyā) are those young fellows! Right well they hold their own (paramasakyā)[243]!”
'That is the reason, Ambaṭṭha, why they are known as Sākyas. Now Okkāka had a slave girl called Disā. She gave birth to a black baby. And no sooner was it born than the little black thing said, “Wash me, mother. Bathe me, mother. Set me free, mother, of this dirt. So shall I be of use to you.”
‘Now just as now, Ambaṭṭha, people call devils “devils,” so then they called devils “black fellows” (kaṇhe). And they said: “This fellow spoke as soon as he was born. 'Tis a black thing (kaṇha) that is born, a devil has been born!” And that is the origin, Ambaṭṭha, of the Kanhayanas s. He was the ancestor of the Kaṇhāyanas[244]. And thus is it, Ambaṭṭha, that if one were to follow up your ancient name and lineage, on the father’s and on the mother’s side, it would appear that the Sākyas were once your masters, and that you are the offspring of one of their slave girls.’
17. When he had thus spoken the young Brahmans said to the Blessed One: ‘Let not the venerable 116 Gotama humble Ambaṭṭha too sternly with this reproach of being descended from a slave girl. He is well born, Gotama, and of good family; he is versed in the sacred hymns, an able reciter, a learned man. And he is able to give answer to the venerable Gotama in these matters.’
18. Then the Blessed One said to them: ‘Quite so. If you thought otherwise, then it would be for you to carry on our discussion further. But as you think so, let Ambaṭṭha himself speak[245].’
19. ‘We do think so; and we will hold our peace. Ambaṭṭha is able to give answer to the venerable Gotama in these matters.’
20. Then the Blessed One said to Ambaṭṭha the Brahman: ‘Then this further question arises, Ambaṭṭha, a very reasonable one which, even though unwillingly, you should answer. If you do not give a clear reply, or go off upon another issue[246], or remain silent, or go away, then your head will split in pieces on the spot[247]. What have you heard, when Brahmans old and well stricken in years, teachers of yours or their teachers, were talking together, as to whence the Kaṇhāyanas draw their origin, and who the ancestor was to whom they trace themselves back?’
And when he had thus spoken Ambaṭṭha remained silent. And the Blessed One asked the same question again. And still Ambaṭṭha remained silent. Then the Blessed One said to him: ‘You 117 had better answer, now, Ambaṭṭha. This is no time for you to hold your peace. For whosoever, Ambaṭṭha, does not, even up to the third time of asking, answer a reasonable question put by a Tathāgata (by one who has won the truth), his head splits into pieces on the spot.’
21. Now at that time the spirit who bears the thunderbolt[248] stood over above Ambaṭṭha in the sky with a mighty mass of iron, all fiery, dazzling, and aglow, with the intention, if he did not answer, there and then to split his head in pieces. And the Blessed One perceived the spirit bearing the thunderbolt, and so did Ambaṭṭha the Brahman. And Ambaṭṭha on becoming aware of it, terrified, startled, and agitated, seeking safety and protection and help from the Blessed One, crouched down beside him in awe[249], and said: ‘What was it the Blessed One said? Say it once again!’
‘What do you think, Ambaṭṭha? What have you heard, when Brahmans old and well stricken in years, teachers of yours or their teachers, were talking together, as to whence the Kaṇhāyanas draw their origin, and who the ancestor was to whom they trace themselves back?’
‘Just so, Gotama, did I hear, even as the venerable Gotama hath said. That is the origin of the Kaṇhāyanas, and that the ancestor to whom they trace themselves back.’
22. And when he had thus spoken the young Brahmans fell into tumult, and uproar, and turmoil; and said: ‘Low born, they say, is Ambaṭṭha the Brahman; his family, they say, is not of good standing; they say he is descended from a slave girl; and the Sākyas were his masters. We did not suppose that the Samaṇa Gotama, whose words are righteousness itself, was not a man to be trusted!’
23. And the Blessed One thought: ‘They 118 go too far, these Brahmans, in their depreciation of Ambaṭṭha as the offspring of a slave girl. Let me set him free from their reproach.’ And he said to them: 'Be not too severe in disparaging Ambaṭṭha the Brahman on the ground of his descent. That Kaṇha became a mighty seer[250]. He went into the Dekkan, there he learnt mystic verses, and returning to Okkāka the king, he demanded his daughter Madda-rūpī in marriage. To him the king in answer said: “Who forsooth is this fellow, who—son of my slave girl as he is—asks for my daughter in marriage;” and, angry and displeased, he fitted an arrow to his bow. But neither could he let the arrow fly, nor could he take it off the string again[251].
'Then the ministers and courtiers went to Kaṇha the seer, and said: “Let the king go safe, Sir; let the king go safe[252].”
“The king shall suffer no harm. But should he shoot the arrow downwards, then would the earth dry up as far as his realm extends.”
“The king shall suffer no harm, nor his land. But should he shoot the arrow upwards, the god would not rain for seven years as far as his realm extends[253].”
“The king shall suffer no harm, nor the land either, and the god shall rain. But let the king aim the arrow at his eldest son. The prince shall suffer no harm, not a hair of him shall be touched.”
'Then, O Brahmans, the ministers told this to Okkāka, 119 and said: “Let the king aim[254] at his eldest son. He will suffer neither harm nor terror.” And the king did so, and no harm was done. But the king, terrified at the lesson given him, gave the man his daughter Madda-rūpī to wife. You should not, O Brahmans, be too severe to disparage Ambaṭṭha in the matter of his slave-girl ancestress. That Kaṇha was a mighty seer:
24. Then the Blessed One said to Ambaṭṭha: ‘What think you, Ambaṭṭha? Suppose a young Kshatriya should have connection with a Brahman maiden, and from their intercourse a son should be born. Now would the son thus come to the Brahman maiden through the Kshatriya youth receive a seat and water (as tokens of respect) from the Brahmans?’
‘But would the Brahmans allow him to partake of the feast offered to the dead, or of the food boiled in milk[255], or of the offerings to the gods, or of food sent as a present?’
25. ‘Then what think you, Ambaṭṭha? Suppose a Brahman youth should have connection with a Kshatriya maiden, and from their intercourse a son should be born. Now would the son thus come to the Kshatriya maiden through the Brahman youth receive 120 a seat and water (as tokens of respect) from the Brahmans?’
‘But would the Brahmans allow him to partake of the feast offered to the dead, or of food boiled in milk, or of an offering to the gods, or of food sent as a present?’
26. 'Then, Ambaṭṭha, whether one compares women with women, or men with men, the Kshatriyas are higher and the Brahmans inferior.
‘And what think you, Ambaṭṭha? Suppose the Brahmans, for some offence[256] or other, were to outlaw a Brahman by shaving him and pouring ashes over his head[257], were to banish him from the land or from the township. Would he be offered a seat or water among the Brahmans?’
‘Or would the Brahmans allow him to partake of the food offered to the dead, or of the food boiled in milk, or of the offerings to the gods, or of food sent as a present?’
27. ‘But what think you, Ambaṭṭha? If the Kshatriyas had in the same way outlawed a Kshatriya, and banished him from the land or the township, would he, among the Brahmans, be offered water and a seat?’
‘And would he be allowed to partake of the food offered to the dead, or of the food boiled in milk, or of the offerings to the gods, or of food sent as a present?’
'But thereby, Ambaṭṭha, the Kshatriya would have fallen into the deepest degradation, shaven as to his head, cut dead with the ash-basket, banished from land and township. So that, even when a Kshatriya has fallen into the deepest degradation. still it holds good that the Kshatriyas are higher, and the Brahmans inferior.
“The Kshatriya is the best of those among this folk who put their trust in lineage. But he who is perfect in wisdom and righteousness, he is the best among gods and men.”
'Now this stanza, Ambaṭṭha, was well sung and not ill sung by the Brahmā Sanaṃ-kumāra, well said and not ill said, full of meaning and not void thereof. And I too approve it; I also, Ambaṭṭha, say:
“The Kshatriya is the best of those among this folk who put their trust in lineage. But he who is perfect in wisdom and righteousness, he is the best among gods and men.”’
Here ends the First Portion for Recitation[260].
‘In the supreme perfection in wisdom and righteousness, Ambaṭṭha, there is no reference to the question either of birth, or of lineage, or of the pride which says: “You are held as worthy as I,” or “You are not held as worthy as I,” It is where the talk is of marrying, or of giving in marriage, that reference is made to such things as that, For whosoever, Ambaṭṭha, are in bondage to the notions of birth or of lineage, or to the pride of social position, or of connection by marriage, they are far from the best wisdom and righteousness. It is only by having got rid of all such bondage that one can realise for himself that supreme perfection in wisdom and in conduct,’
[Here follow, under Morality (Sīla)[261],
The introductory paragraphs (§§ 40-42 of the Sāmañña-phala, pp. 62, 63 of the text) on the appearance of a Buddha, his preaching, the conversion of a hearer, and his renunciation of the world: then come
1. The Sīlas, above, pp. 4-12 (§§ 8-27) of the text, Only the refrain differs, It runs here, at the end of each clause, through the whole of this repeated passage: ‘This is reckoned in him as morality.’
2. The paragraph on Confidence, above, p. 69 of the text, § 63. The refrain from here onwards is: ‘This is reckoned to him as conduct.’
8. The paragraphs on the Four Rapt Contemplations[262], above, pp. 73-76, §§ 75-82. The refrain at the end of each of them (‘higher and better than the last’) is here, of course, to be read not as higher fruit of the life of a recluse, but as higher conduct.
9. The paragraphs on Insight arising from Knowledge (Ṇāṇa-dassanaṃ), above, p. 76 of the text, §§ 83, 84. The refrain from here onwards is: ‘This is reckoned in him as wisdom, and it is higher and sweeter than the last.’
12. The paragraphs on the Heavenly Ear (Dibbasota). above, p. 79 of the text, §§ 89, 90.
13. The paragraphs on Knowledge of the hearts of others (Ceto-pariya-ñāṇaṃ), above, p. 79 of the text, §§ 91, 92.
births (Pubbe-nivāsa-anussati-ñāṇa), above, p. 81 of the text, §§ 93, 94.
15. The paragraph on the Divine Eye (Dibbacakkhu), above, p. 82 of the text, § 95, 96.
16. The paragraphs on the Destruction of the Deadly Floods (Āsavānaṃ khaya-ñāṇaṃ), above, p. 83 of the text, §§ 97, 98[263].]
‘Such a man, Ambaṭṭha, is said to be perfect in wisdom, perfect in conduct, perfect in wisdom and conduct. And there is no other perfection in wisdom and conduct higher and sweeter than this.’
3. ‘Now, Ambaṭṭha, to this supreme perfection in wisdom and goodness there are Four Leakages[264]. And what are the four?’
'In case, Ambaṭṭha, any recluse or Brahman, without having thoroughly attained unto this supreme perfection in wisdom and conduct, with his yoke on his shoulder (to carry fire-sticks, a water-pot, needles, and the rest of a mendicant friar’s outfit), should plunge into the depths of the forest, vowing to himself: “I will henceforth be one of those who live only on fruits that have fallen of themselves”—then, verily, he turns out worthy only to be a servant unto him that hath attained to wisdom and righteousness.
'And again, Ambaṭṭha, in case any recluse or Brahman, without having thoroughly attained unto this supreme perfection in wisdom and conduct, and without having attained to living only on fruits fallen of themselves, taking a hoe and a basket with him, should plunge into the depths of the forest, vowing to himself: “I will henceforth be one of those who live only on bulbs and roots and fruits”—then, verily, he turns out worthy only to be a servant unto him who hath attained to wisdom and righteousness.
'And again, Ambaṭṭha, in case any recluse or Brahman, without having thoroughly attained unto this supreme perfection in wisdom and conduct, and without having attained to living only on fruits fallen of themselves, and without having attained to living only on bulbs and roots and fruits, should build himself a fire-shrine near the boundaries of some village or some town, and there dwell serving the fire-god[265]—then, verily, he turns out worthy only to be a servant unto him that hath attained to wisdom and righteousness.
'And again, Ambaṭṭha, in case any recluse or Brahman, without having thoroughly attained unto this supreme perfection in wisdom and conduct, and without having attained to living only on fruits fallen of themselves, and without having attained to living only on bulbs and roots and fruits, and without having attained to serving the fire-god[266] should build himself a four-doored almshouse at a crossing where four high roads meet, and dwell there, saying to himself: “Whosoever, whether recluse or Brahman, shall pass here, from either of these four directions, him will I entertain according to my ability and according to my power”—then, verily, he turns out worthy only to be a servant unto him who hath attained to wisdom and righteousness.
'These are the Four Leakages, Ambaṭṭha, to supreme perfection in righteousness and conduct[266:1].
4. ‘Now what think you, Ambaṭṭha? Have you, as one of a class of pupils under the same teacher, been instructed in this supreme perfection of wisdom and conducts?’
‘Not that, Gotama. How little is it that I can profess 127 to have learnt! How supreme this perfection of wisdom and conduct! Far is it from me to have been trained therein?’
‘Then what think you, Ambaṭṭha? Although you have not thoroughly attained unto this supreme perfection of wisdom and goodness, have you been trained to take the yoke upon your shoulders, and plunge into the depths of the forest as one who would fain observe the vow of living only on fruits fallen of themselves?’
‘Then what think you, Ambaṭṭha? Although you have not attained unto this supreme perfection of wisdom and goodness, nor have attained to living on fruits fallen of themselves, have you been trained to take hoe and basket, and plunge into the depths of the forest as one who would fain observe the vow of living only on bulbs and roots and frutts?’
‘Then what think you, Ambaṭṭha? Although you have not attained unto this supreme perfection of wisdom and goodness, and have not attained to living on fruits fallen of themselves, and have not attained to living on bulbs and roots and fruits, have you been taught to build yourself a fire-shrine on the borders of some village or some town, and dwell there as one who would fain serve the fire-god?’
‘Then what think you, Ambaṭṭha? Although you have not attained unto this supreme perfection of wisdom and goodness, and have not attained to living on fruits fallen of themselves, and have not attained to living on bulbs and roots and fruits, and have not attained to serving the fire-god, have you been taught to build yourself a four-doored almshouse at a spot where four high roads cross, and dwell there as one who would fain observe the vow to entertain whosoever might pass that way, from any of the four directions, according to your ability and according to your power?’
5. ‘So then you, Ambaṭṭha, as a pupil, have fallen short[267] of due training, not only in the supreme wisdom and conduct, but even in any one of the Four Leakages by which the complete attainment thereof is debarred. And your teacher too, the Brahman Pokkharasādi, has told you this saying: “Who are these shavelings, sham friars, menial black fellows, the offscouring of our kinsman’s heels, that they should claim converse with Brahmans versed in the threefold Vedic lore!”—he himself not having even fulfilled any one even of these lesser duties (which lead men to neglect the higher ones). See, Ambaṭṭha, how deep]y your teacher, the Brahman Pokkharasādi, has herein done you wrong.’
6. ‘And the Brahman Pokkharasādi, Ambaṭṭha, is in the enjoyment of a grant from Pasenadi, the king of Kosala. But the king does not allow him to come into his presence. When he consults with him he speaks to him only from behind a curtain. How is it, Ambaṭṭha, that the very king, from whom he accepts this pure and lawful maintenance, King Pasenadi of Kosala, does not admit him to his presence? See, Ambaṭṭha, how deeply your teacher, the Brahman Pokkharasādi, has herein done you wrong[268].’
7. ‘Now what think you, Ambaṭṭha? Suppose a king, either seated on the neck of his elephant or on the back of his horse, or standing on the footrug of his chariot , should discuss some resolution of state with his chiefs or princes. And suppose as he left the spot and stepped on one side, a workman (Śūdra) or the slave of a workman should come up and, standing there, should discuss 129 the matter, saying: “Thus and thus said Pasenadi the king.” Although he should speak as the king might have spoken, or discuss as the king might have done, would he thereby be the king, or even as one of his officers?’
8. ‘But just so, Ambaṭṭha, those ancient poets (Rishis) of the Brahmans, the authors of the verses, the utterers of the verses, whose ancient form of words so chanted, uttered, or composed, the Brahmans of to-day chant over again and rehearse, intoning or reciting exactly as has been intoned or recited—to wit, Aṭṭhaka, Vāmaka, Vāmadeva, Vessāmitta, Yamataggi, Angirasa, Bhāradvaga, Vāseṭṭha, Kassapa, and Bhagu[269]—though you can say: “I, as a pupil, know by heart their verses,” that you should on that account be a Rishi, or have attained to the state of a Rishi—such a condition of things has no existence!’
9. ‘Now what think you, Ambaṭṭha? What have you heard when Brahmans, old and well stricken in years, teachers of yours or their teachers, were talking together—did those ancient Rishis, whose verses you so chant over and repeat, parade about well groomed, perfumed, trimmed as to their hair and beard, adorned with garlands and gems, clad in white garments, in the full possession and enjoyment of the five pleasures of sense, as you, and your teacher too, do now?’
‘Or did they live, as their food, on boiled rice of the best sorts, from which all the black specks had been sought out and removed, and flavoured with sauces and curries of various kinds, as you, and your teacher too, do now?’
‘Or were they waited upon by women with fringes 130 and furbelows[270] round their loins, as you, and your teacher too, do now?’
‘Or did they go about driving chariots, drawn by mares with plaited manes and tails[271], using long wands and goads the while, as you, and your teacher too, do now?’
‘Or did they have themselves guarded in fortified towns, with moats dug out round them[272] and crossbars let down before the gates[273], by men girt with long swords, as you, and your teacher too, do now?’
10. ‘So then, Ambaṭṭha, neither are you a Rishi, nor your teacher, nor do you live under the conditions under which the Rishis lived. But whatever it may be, Ambaṭṭha, concerning which you are in doubt or perplexity about me, ask me as to that. I will make it clear by explanation.’
11. Then the Blessed One went forth from his chamber, and began to walk up and down. And Ambaṭṭha did the same. And as he thus walked 131 up and down, following the Blessed One, he took stock of the thirty-two signs of a great man, whether they appeared on the body of the Blessed One or not. And he perceived them all save only two. With respect to those two—the concealed member and the extent of tongue[274]—he was in doubt and perplexity, not satisfied, not sure.
12. And the Blessed One knew that he was so in doubt. And he so arranged matters by his Wondrous Gift that Ambaṭṭha the Brahman saw how that part of the Blessed One that ought to be hidden by clothes was enclosed in a sheath. And the Blessed One so bent round his tongue that he touched and stroked both his ears, touched and stroked both his nostrils, and the whole circumference of his forehead he covered with his tongue[275].
And Ambaṭṭha, the young Brahman, thought: ‘The Samaṇa Gotama is endowed with the thirty-two signs of a great man, with them all, not only with some of them.’ And he said to the Blessed One: ‘And now, Gotama, we would fain depart. We are busy, and have much to do.’
13. Now at that time the Brahman Pokkharasādi had gone forth from Ukkaṭṭha with a great retinue of Brahmans, and was seated in his own pleasaunce waiting there for Ambaṭṭha. And Ambaṭṭha came on to the pleasaunce. And when he had come in his chariot as far as the path was practicable for chariots, he descended from it, and came on foot to where Pokkharasādi was, and saluted him, and took his seat respectfully on one side. And when he was so seated, Pokkharasādi said to him:
‘Well! is the venerable Gotama so as the reputation about him I told you of declares; and not otherwise. Is he such a one, or is he not?’
‘He is so, Sir, as his reputation declares, and not otherwise. Such is he, not different. And he is endowed with the thirty-two signs of a great man, with all of them, not only with some.’
15. When he had thus spoken, Pokkharasādi said to him: ‘Oh! you wiseacre! Oh I you dullard! Oh! you 133 expert, forsooth, in our threefold Vedic lore! A man, they say, who should carry out his business thus, must, on the dissolution of the body, after death, be reborn into some dismal state of misery and woe. What could the very points you pressed in your insolent words lead up to, if not to the very disclosures the venerable Gotama made[^fn_133_1]? What a wiseacre; what a dullard; what an expert, forsooth, in our threefold Vedic lore.’ And angry and displeased, he struck out with his foot, and rolled Ambaṭṭha over. And he wanted, there and then, himself, to go and call on the Blessed One.
16. But the Brahmans there spake thus to Pokkharasādi: ‘It is much too late, Sir, to-day to go to call on the Samaṇa Gotama. The venerable Pokkharasādi can do so to-morrow.’
So Pokkharasādi had sweet food, both hard and soft, made ready at his own house, and taken on wagons, by the light of blazing torches, out to Ukkaṭṭha. And he himself went on to the Icchānankala Wood, driving in his chariot as far as the road was practicable for vehicles, and then going on, on foot, to where the Blessed One was. And when he had exchanged with the Blessed One the greetings and compliments of politeness and courtesy, he took his seat on one side, and said to the Blessed One:
{1. Āsajja āsajja . . . upanīyya upanīyya. Buddhaghosa is somewhat ambiguous in his interpretation of this idiomatic phrase, on which compare M. I, 250, 251; A. I, 172.} 134 he had thus spoken Pokkharasādi said to the Blessed One:
19. And the Brahman Pokkharasādi took stock, on the body of the Blessed One, of the thirty-two marks of a Great Being. And he saw them all plainly, save only two. As to two of them—the sheath-concealed member and the extensive tongue—he was still in doubt and undecided. But the Blessed One showed them to Pokkharasādi, even as he had shown them to Ambaṭṭha[276]. And Pokkharasādi perceived that the Blessed One was endowed with the thirty-two marks of a Great Being, with all of them, not only with some. And he said to the Blessed One: ‘May the venerable Gotama grant me the favour of taking his to-morrow’s meal with me, and also the members of the Order with him.’ And the Blessed One accepted, by silence, his request.
20. Then the Brahman Pokkharasādi, seeing that the Blessed One had accepted, had (on the morrow) the time announced to him: ‘It is time, oh Gotama, the meal is ready.’ And the Blessed One, who had dressed in the early morning, put on his outer robe, and taking his bowl with him, went, with the brethren, to Pokkharasādi’s house, and sat down on the seat prepared for him. And Pokkharasādi, the Brahman, satisfied the Blessed One, with his own hand, with sweet food, both hard and soft, until he refused any more, and the young Brahmans the members of the Order. And when the Blessed One had finished his meal, and cleansed the bowl and his[277] hands, Pokkharasādi took a low seat, and sat down beside him.
21. Then to him thus seated the Blessed One 135 discoursed in due order; that is to say, he spake to him of generosity, of right conduct, of heaven, of the danger, the vanity, and the defilement of lusts, of the advantages of renunciation. And when the Blessed One saw that Pokkharasādi, the Brahman, had become prepared, softened, unprejudiced, upraised, and believing in heart, then he proclaimed the doctrine the Buddhas alone have won; that is to say, the doctrine of sorrow, of its origin, of its cessation, and of the Path. And just as a clean cloth from which all stain has been washed away will readily take the dye, just even so did Pokkharasādi, the Brahman, obtain, even while sitting there, the pure and spotless. Eye for the Truth, and he knew: 'Whatsoever has a beginning in that is inherent also the necessity of dissolution.
22. And then the Brahman Pokkharasādi, as one who had seen the Truth, had mastered it, understood it, dived deep down into it, who had passed beyond doubt and put away perplexity and gained full confidence, who had become dependent on no other man for his knowledge of the teaching of the Master, addressed the Blessed One, and said:
‘Most excellent, oh Gotama (are the words of thy mouth), most excellent! Just as if a man were to set up that which has been thrown down, or were to reveal that which has been hidden away, or were to point out the right road to him who has gone astray, or were to bring a light into the darkness so that those who had eyes could see external forms,—just even so, Lord, has the truth been made known to me, in many a figure, by the venerable Gotama. And I, oh Gotama, with my sons, and my wife, and my people, and my companions, betake myself to the venerable Gotama as my guide, to the truth, and to the Order. May the venerable Gotama accept me as a disciple, as one who from this day forth, as long as life endures, has taken him as his guide. And just as the venerable Gotama visits the families of others, his disciples, at Ukkaṭṭha, so let him visit 136 mine. Whosoever there may be there, of Brahmans or their wives, who shall pay reverence to the venerable Gotama, or stand up in his presence, or offer him a seat or water, or take delight in him, to him that will be, for long, a cause of weal and bliss.’
I. Thus have I heard. The Blessed One once, when going on a tour through the Anga country with a great multitude of the brethren, with about five hundred brethren, arrived at Campā[278]. And there at Campā he lodged on the bank of the Gaggarā Lake[279].
Now at that time the Brahman Soṇadaṇḍa was dwelling at Campā, a place teeming with life[280], with much grassland and woodland and water and corn, on a royal domain granted him by Seniya Bimbisāra, the king of Magadhā[281], as a royal fief, with power over it as if he were the king.
2. Now the Brahmans and householders of Campā heard the news: 'They say that the Samaṇa Gotama of the Sākya clan, who went out from a Sākya family to adopt the religious life, has now arrived, with a great 145 company of the brethren at Campā, and is staying there on the shore of the Gaggarā Lake. Now regarding that venerable Gotama, such is the high reputation that has been noised abroad:—That Blessed One is an Arahat, a fully awakened one, abounding in wisdom and goodness, happy, with knowledge of the worlds, unsurpassed as a guide to mortals willing to be led, a teacher for gods and men, a Blessed One, a Buddha. He, by himself, thoroughly knows and sees, as it were, face to face this universe,—including the worlds above of the gods, the Brahmas, and the Māras, and the world below with its recluses and Brahmans, its princes and peoples,—and having known it, he makes his knowledge known to others. The truth, lovely in its origin, lovely in its progress, lovely in its consummation, doth he proclaim, both in the spirit and in the letter, the higher life cloth he make known, in all its fullness and in all its purity.
And the Brahmans and householders of Campā began to leave Campā in companies and in bands from each district[282], so that they could be counted, to go to the Gaggarā Lake.
3. Now at that time Soṇadaṇḍa the Brahman had gone apart to the upper terrace of his house for his siesta, and seeing the people thus go by, he said to his doorkeeper: ‘Why are the people of Campā going forth like this towards the Gaggarā Lake?’
Then the doorkeeper told him the news. And he said: ‘Then, good doorkeeper, go to the Brahmans and householders of Campā, and say to them: “Soṇadaṇḍa the Brahman desires them to wait. He will himself come to see the Samaṇa Gotama.”’
4. Now at that time there were about five hundred Brahmans from different kingdoms lodging at Campā for some business or other. And when they heard that Soṇadaṇḍa was intending to visit the 146 Samaṇa Gotama, they went to Soṇadaṇḍa, and asked whether that was so.
‘Let not the venerable Soṇadaṇḍa do that. It is not fitting for him to do so. If it were the venerable Soṇadaṇḍa who went to call upon him, then the venerable Soṇadaṇḍa’s reputation would decrease and the Samaṇa Gotama’s would increase. This is the first reason why you, Sir, should not call upon him, but he upon you.’
That he was well born on both sides, of pure descent through the mother and through the father back through seven generations, with no slur put upon him, and no reproach, in respect of birth.—
That he was a repeater (of the sacred words), knowing the mystic verses by heart, one who had mastered the Three Vedas, with the indices, the ritual, the phonology, and the exegesis (as a fourth), and the legends as a fifth, learned in the words and in the grammar, versed in Lokāyata (Nature-lore), and in the theory of the signs on the body of a great man—
That he was handsome, pleasant to look upon, inspiring trust, gifted with great beauty of complexion, fair in colour, fine in presence[283], stately[284] to behold—
That he had a pleasant voice and pleasing delivery, and was gifted with polite address, distinct, not husky[285], suitable for making clear the matter in hand—
That he was the teacher of the teachers of many, 147 instructing three hundred Brahmans in the repetition of the mystic verses, and that many young Brahmans, from various directions and various counties, all craving for the verses, came to learn them by heart under him—
That he was honoured, held of weight, esteemed worthy, venerated and revered by Seniya Bimbisāra, the king of Magadhā—
That he was honoured, held of weight, esteemed worthy, venerated and revered by Pokkharasādi, the Brahman—
That he dwelt at Campā, a place teeming with life, with much grassland and woodland and corn, on a royal fief granted him by Seniya Bimbisāra, the king of Magadhā, as a royal gift, with power over it as if he were the king—
For each of these reasons it was not fitting that he, Soṇadaṇḍa the Brahman, should call upon the Samaṇa Gotama, but rather that the Samaṇa Gotama should call upon him.
'Then, Sirs, listen, and hear why it is fitting that I should call upon the venerable Gotama, and not he should call upon me—
'Truly, Sirs, the venerable Gotama is well born on both sides, of pure descent through the mother and the father back through seven generations, with no slur put upon him, and no reproach in respect of birth—
'Truly, Sirs, the Samaṇa Gotama has gone forth (into the religious life), giving up the great clan of his relations[286]--
'Truly, Sirs, the Samaṇa Gotama has gone forth (into the religious life), giving up much money and gold, treasure both buried and above the ground—
'Truly, Sirs, the Samaṇa Gotama, while he was still a young man, without a grey hair on his head, in the beauty of his early manhood, has gone forth from the household life into the homeless state—
'Truly, Sirs, the Samaṇa Gotama, though his father and mother were unwilling, and wept, their cheeks being wet with tears, nevertheless cut off his hair and beard, and donned the yellow robes, and went out from the household life into the homeless state—
'Truly, Sirs, the Samaṇa Gotama is handsome, pleasant to look upon, inspiring trust, gifted with great beauty of complexion, fair in colour, fine in presence, stately to behold—
'Truly, Sirs, the Samaṇa Gotama is virtuous with the virtue of the Arahats, good and virtuous, gifted with goodness and virtue—
'Truly, Sirs, the Samaṇa Gotama hath a pleasant voice, and a pleasing delivery, he is gifted with polite address, distinct, not husky, suitable for making clear the matter in hand—
'Truly, Sirs, the Samaṇa Gotama has no passion of lust left in him, and has put away all fickleness of mind—
'Truly, Sirs, the Samaṇa Gotama believes in Karma, and in action[287], he is one who puts righteousness in the forefront (of his exhortations) to the Brahman race—
'Truly, Sirs, the Samaṇa Gotama went forth from a distinguished family primeval[288] among the Kshatriya clans—
'Truly, Sirs, people come right across the country from distant lands to ask questions of the Samaṇa Gotama—
'Truly, Sirs, such is the high reputation noised abroad concerning the Samaṇa Gotama, that he is said to be an Arahat, exalted, fully awakened, abounding in wisdom and righteousness, happy, with knowledge of the worlds, a Blessed One, a Buddha—
'Truly, Sirs, the Samaṇa Gotama bids all men welcome, is congenial, conciliatory, not supercilious, accessible to all, not backward in conversation—
'Truly, Sirs, the Samaṇa Gotama is honoured, held of weight, esteemed and venerated and revered by the four classes (of his followers—the brethren and sisters of the Order, laymen and lay women)—
"Truly, Sirs, in whatsoever village or town the Samaṇa Gotama stays, there the non-humans do the humans no harm—
'Truly, Sirs, the Samaṇa Gotama as the head of an Order, of a school, as the teacher of a school, is the acknowledged chief of all the founders of sects. Whereas some Samaṇas and Brahmans have gained a reputation by all sorts of insignificant matters[289], not 150 so the Samaṇa Gotama. His reputation comes from perfection in conduct and righteousness—
'Truly, Sirs, the king of Magadhā, Seniya Bimbisāra, with his children and his wives, with his people and his courtiers, has put his trust in the Samaṇa Gotama—
'Truly, Sirs, King Pasenadi of Kosala, with his children and his wives, with his people and his courtiers, has put his trust in the Samaṇa Gotama—
'Truly, Sirs, Pokkharasādi the Brahman, with his children and his wives, with his people and his intimates, has put his trust in the Samaṇa Gotama—
'Truly, Sirs, the Samaṇa Gotama is honoured, held of weight, esteemed, and venerated and revered alike by Seniya Bimbisāra, the king of Magadhā, by Pasenadi the king of Kosala, and by Pokkharasādi the Brahman—
'Truy, Sirs, the Samaṇa Gotama has now arrived at Campā and is staying on the shores of the Gaggarā Lake. But all Samaṇas and Brahmans who come into our village borders are our guests. And guests we ought to esteem and honour, to venerate and revere. And as he is now so come, he ought to be so treated, as a guest—
‘For each and all of these considerations it is not fitting that the Samaṇa Gotama should call upon us, but rather does it behove us to call upon him. And so far only do I know the excellencies of the Samaṇa Gotama, but these are not all of them, for his excellence is beyond measure.’
7. And when he had thus spoken, those Brahmans said to him: ‘The venerable Soṇadaṇḍa declares the praises of the Samaṇa Gotama on such wise, that were he to be dwelling even a hundred leagues from here, it would be enough to make a believing man go thither to call upon him, even had he to carry a bag (for the provisions for the journey) on his back[290]. Let us then all go to call on the Samaṇa Gotama together!’
8. Now the following hesitation arose in Soṇadaṇḍa’s mind as he passed through the wood: 'Were I to ask the Samaṇa Gotama a question, if he were to say: “The question ought not to be asked so, thus ought the question to be framed;” the company might thereupon speak of me with disrespect, saying: “Foolish is this Soṇadaṇḍa the Brahman, and inexpert. He is not even able to ask a question rightly.” But if they did so my reputation would decrease; and with my reputation my incomings would grow less, for what we have to enjoy, that depends on our reputation. But if the Samaṇa Gotama were to put a question to me, I might not be able to gain his approval[291] by my explanation of the problem. And if they were then to say to me: “The question ought not to be answered so; thus ought the problem to be explained;” the company might thereupon speak of me with disrespect, saying: “Foolish is this Soṇadaṇḍa the Brahman, and inexpert. He is not even able to satisfy the Samaṇa Gotama by his explanation of the problem put.” But if they did so, my reputation would decrease; and with my reputation my incomings would grow less, for what we have to enjoy, that depends upon our reputation. But on the other hand if, having come so far, I should turn back without calling upon the Samaṇa Gotama, then might the company speak disrespectfully of me, saying: “Foolish is this Soṇadaṇḍa the Brahman, and inexpert, though obstinate with pride, he is so afraid that he dare not call on the Samaṇa Gotama. How can he turn back after having come so far?” But if they did so, my reputation would decrease; and with my reputation my incomings would grow less. For what we have to enjoy, that depends upon our reputation.
9. So Soṇadaṇḍa the Brahman went up to where the 152 Blessed One was. And when he had come there he exchanged with the Blessed One the greetings and compliments of politeness and courtesy, and took his seat on one side. And as to the Brahmans and householders of Campā, some of them bowed to the Blessed One and took their seats on one side; some of them exchanged with him the greetings and compliments of politeness and courtesy, and then took their seats on one side; some of them called out their name and family, and then took their seats on one side; and some of them took their seats on one side in silence.
10. Now as Soṇadaṇḍa was seated there he was still filled with hesitation, thinking as before set out; and he added to himself: ‘Oh! would that the Samaṇa Gotama would but ask me some question on my own subject, on the threefold Vedic lore. Verily, I should then be able to gain his approval by my exposition of the problem put!’
11. Now the Blessed One became aware in his own mind of the hesitation in the mind of Soṇadaṇḍa, and he thought: ‘This Soṇadaṇḍa is afflicted in his heart. I had better question him on his own doctrine.’ And he said to him: ‘What are the things, Brahman, which the Brahmans say a man ought to have in order to be a Brahman, so that if he says: “I am a Brahman,” he speaks accurately and does not become guilty of falsehood?’
12. Then Soṇadaṇḍa thought: ‘What I wished and desired and had in my mind and hoped for—that the Samaṇa Gotama should put to me some question on my own subject, on the threefold Vedic lore—that he now does. Oh! that I may be able to satisfy his heart with my exposition thereof!’
13. And drawing his body up erect, and looking round on the assembly, he said to the Blessed One: 'The Brahmans, Gotama, declare him to be a Brahman who can accurately say “I am a Brahman” without being guilty of falsehood, who has five things. And what are the five? In the first place, Sir, a Brahman is well born on both sides, on the mother’s side and on 153 the father’s side, of pure descent back through seven generations, with no slur put upon him, and no reproach, in respect of birth—
'Then he is a repeater (of the sacred words), knowing the mystic verses by heart, one who has mastered the Three Vedas, with the indices, the ritual, the phonology, and the exegesis (as a fourth), and the legends as a fifth, learned in the phrases and in the grammar, versed in Lokāyata sophistry, and in the theory of the signs on the body of a great man—
'Then he is handsome, pleasant to look upon, inspiring trust, gifted with great beauty of complexion, fair in colour, fine in presence, stately to behold,—
‘Then he is learned and wise, the first, or it may be the second, among those who hold out the ladle[292].’
14. ‘But of these five things, oh Brahman, is it possible to leave one out, and to declare the man who has the other four to be a Brahman, to be one who can accurately, and without falling into falsehood, claim to be a Brahman?’
‘Yes, Gotama, that can be done. We could leave out colour[293]. For what does colour matter? If he have the other four—good birth, technical training, virtue, and wisdom, as just set forth[294]-Brahmans would still declare him to be a Brahman; and he could rightly, without danger of falsehood, claim to be one.’
15. ‘But of these four things, oh Brahman, is it possible to leave one out, and to declare the man who has the other three to be a Brahman, to be one who can rightly, and without falling into falsehood, claim to be a Brahman?’
‘Yes, Gotama, that could be done. We could leave out the verses. For what do the verses matter? If 154 he have the other three—good birth, virtue, and wisdom—Brahmans would still declare him to be a Brahman; and he could rightly, without danger of falsehood, claim to be one.’
16. ‘But of these three things, Brahman, is it possible to leave one out, and to declare the man who has the other two to be a Brahman, to be one who can accurately, and without falling into falsehood, claim to be a Brahman?’
‘Yes, Gotama, that could be done. We could leave out birth. For what does birth matter? If he have the other two—virtue and wisdom—Brahmans would still declare him to be a Brahman; and he could rightly, without danger of falsehood, claim to be one.’
17. And when he had thus spoken the other Brahmans said to Soṇadaṇḍa: ‘Say not so, venerable Soṇadaṇḍa, say not so! He depreciates not only our colour, but he depreciates our verses and our birth. Verily the venerable Soṇadaṇḍa is going over to the doctrine of the Samaṇa Gotama.’
18. Then the Blessed One said to those Brahmans: ‘If you, oh Brahmans, think that Soṇadaṇḍa is unlearned, that he speaks unfittingly, that he is unwise, that he is unable to hold his own with me in this matter, let him keep silence, and do you discuss with me. But if you think him learned, able in speech, wise, able to hold his own, then do you keep silence, and let him discuss with me.’
19. And when he had thus spoken, Soṇadaṇḍa the Brahman said to those Brahmans: ‘Let not the venerable ones say so. Say not so, Sirs. I do not depreciate either our colour, nor our verses, nor our birth.’
20. Now at that time a young Brahman named Angaka[295], sister’s son to Soṇadaṇḍa the Brahman, was seated in that company. And Soṇadaṇḍa said to those 155 Brahmans: ‘Do the venerable ones see this Angaka, our nephew?’
'Well! Angaka, Sirs, is handsome, pleasant to look upon, inspiring trust, gifted with great beauty of complexion, fair in colour, fine in presence, stately to behold—none in this assembly is like unto him in colour, save only the Samaṇa Gotama.
'And Angaka, Sirs, is a repeater (of the sacred words), knowing the mystic verses by heart, one who has mastered the Three Vedas, with the indices, the ritual, the phonology, and the exegesis (as a fourth), and the legends as a fifth, learned in the phrases and the grammar, versed in Lokāyata (Nature-lore), and in the theory of the signs on the body of a great man—I myself have taught him the verses.
'And Angaka, Sirs, is well born on both sides, on the mother’s side and on the father’s side, of pure descent back through seven generations, with no slur put upon him, and no reproach in respect of birth—I myself know his forebears, on the mother’s side and on the father’s.
'If Angaka, Sirs, should kill living things, and take what has not been given, and go the way of the adulterer, and speak lies, and drink strong drink, what then, Sirs, would his colour avail him? what the verses? what his birth?
‘It is in so far, Sirs, as a Brahman is virtuous, increased in virtue, gifted with virtue that has grown great; in so far as he is learned and wise, the first, or it may be the second, among those who hold out the ladle, that Brahmans would declare him, as endowed with these two qualities, to be a Brahman, to be one who could rightly say “I am a Brahman” without falling into falsehood.’
21. ‘But of these two things, oh Brahman, is it possible to leave one out, and to declare the man who has the other to be a Brahman, to be one who can rightly, and without falling into falsehood, claim to be a Brahman?’
‘Not that, Gotama! For wisdom, oh Gotama, is purified by uprightness, and uprightness is purified by wisdom. Where there is uprightness, wisdom is there, and where there is wisdom, uprightness is there. To the upright there is wisdom, to the wise there is uprightness, and wisdom and goodness are declared to be the best thing in the world[296]. Just, oh Gotama, as one might wash hand with hand, or foot with foot, just even so, oh Gotama, is wisdom purified by uprightness, and uprightness is purified by wisdom. Where there is uprightness, wisdom is there, and where there is wisdom, uprightness is there. To the upright, there is wisdom, to the wise there is uprightness, and wisdom and goodness are declared to be the best thing in the world.’
22. 'That is just so, oh Brahman. And I, too, say the same. But what, then, is that uprightness and what that wisdom?,
‘We only know, oh Gotama, the general statement in this matter. May the venerable Gotama be pleased to explain the meaning of the phrase.’
[Here follow the paragraphs 40-63 in the Sāmañña-Phala Sutta above, pp. 62-70 of the text; that is, the paragraph on the appearance of a Buddha, his preaching, the conversion of the hearer, his renunciation of the world, all the Sīlas, and the paragraph on Confidence, § 63.]
at So vivicc’ eva kāmehi iṇ § 75 of the Sāmañña-phala down to the end of § 82*, then the paragraphs on Insight arising from Knowledge, on the Mental Image, on the Wondrous Gifts, on the Heavenly Ear, on Knowledge of the hearts of others, on Memory of one’s own previous births, on the Divine Eye, and on the Destruction of the Deadly Floods, all as in the Sāmañña-phala,* §§ 83-98 inclusive.]
‘This, oh Brahman, is that wisdom[297].’
‘Most excellent, oh Gotama (are the words of thy mouth), most excellent! Just as if a man were to set up that which has been thrown down, or were to reveal that which has been hidden away, or were to point out the right road to him who has gone astray, or were to bring a light into the darkness so that those who had eyes could see external forms—just even so has the truth been made known to me, in many a figure, by the venerable Gotama. I, even I, betake myself to the venerable Gotama as my guide, to the truth, and to the Order. And may the venerable Gotama accept me as a disciple, as one who, from this day forth, as long as life endures, has taken him as his guide. And may the venerable Gotama grant me the favour of taking his to-morrow’s meal with me, and also the members of the Order with him.’
Then the Blessed One signified, by silence, his consent. And Soṇadaṇḍa, on seeing that he had done so, arose from his seat and bowed down before the Blessed 158 One, and walking round him with his right hand towards him, departed thence. And at early dawn he made ready at his house sweet food, both hard and soft, and had the time announced to the Blessed One: ‘It is time, oh Gotama, and the meal is ready.’
25. Then the Blessed One, who had dressed in the early morning, put on his outer robe, and taking his bowl with him, went with the brethren to Soṇadaṇḍa’s house, and sat down on the seat prepared for him. And Soṇadaṇḍa the Brahman satisfied the Blessed One, and the brethren, with his own hand, with sweet food, both hard and soft, until they refused any more.
And when the Blessed One had finished his meal, and cleansed the bowl and his hands, Soṇadaṇḍa took a low seat, and sat down beside him, and said:
26. ‘If, oh Gotama, after I have entered the assembly, I should rise from my seat to bow down before the venerable Gotama, then the assembly would find fault with me[298]. Now he with whom the assembly should find fault, his reputation would grow less; and he who should lose his reputation, his income would grow less. For that which we have to enjoy, that depends upon our reputation. If then, when I am seated in the assembly, I stretch forth my joined palms in salutation, let the venerable Gotama accept that from me as arising up from my seat. And if when I am seated in the assembly I take off my turban, let the venerable Gotama accept that from me as a salutation with my head. So if, when I am in my chariot, I were to get down from the chariot to salute the venerable Gotama, the surrounders would find fault with me. If, then, when mounted on my chariot, I bend down low the staff of my goad, let the venerable Gotama accept that from me as if I had got down. And if, when mounted on my chariot, I should wave 159 my hand, let the venerable Gotama accept that from me as if I had bowed low in salutation[299]!’
27. Then the Blessed One instructed and roused and incited and gladdened Soṇadaṇḍa the Brahman with religious discourse, and then rose from his seat and departed thence.
1. Thus have I heard. The Blessed One once, when going on a tour through Magadhā, with a great multitude of the brethren, with about five hundred brethren, came to a Brahman village in Magadhā called Khānumata. And there at Khānumata he lodged in the Ambalaṭṭhikā pleasaunce[300].
Now at that time the Brahman Kūṭadanta was dwelling at Khānumata, a place teeming with life, with much grassland and woodland and water and corn, on a royal domain presented him by Seniya Bimbisāra the king of Magadhā, as a royal gift, with power over it as if he were the king.
And just then a great sacrifice was being got ready on behalf of Kūṭadanta the Brahman. And a hundred bulls, and a hundred steers, and a hundred heifers, and a hundred goats, and a hundred rams had been brought to the post for the sacrifice.
2. Now the Brahmans and householders of Khānumata heard the news of the arrival of the Samaṇa Gotama[301]. And they began to leave Khānumata in companies and in bands to go to the Ambalaṭṭhikā pleasaunce.
3. And just then Kūṭadanta the Brahman had gone apart to the upper terrace of his house for his siesta; and seeing the people thus go by. he asked his doorkeeper the reason. And the doorkeeper told him[302].
4. Then Kūṭadanta thought: ‘I have heard that the Samaṇa Gotama understands about the successful performance of a sacrifice with its threefold method and its sixteen accessory instruments. Now I don’t know all this, and yet I want to carry out a sacrifice. It would be well for me to go to the Samaṇa Gotama, and ask him about it.’
So he sent his doorkeeper to the Brahmans and householders of Khānumata, to ask them to wait till he could go with them to call upon the Blessed One.
5. But there were at that time a number of Brahmans staying at Khānumata to take part in the great sacrifice. And when they heard this they went to Kūṭadanta, and persuaded him, on the same grounds as the Brahmans had laid before Soṇadaṇḍa, not to go. But he answered them in the same terms as Soṇadaṇḍa had used to those Brahmans. Then they were satisfied, and went with him to call upon the Blessed One[303].
9. And when he was seated there Kūṭadanta the Brahman told the Blessed One what he had heard[304], and requested him to tell him about success in performing a sacrifice in its three modes[305] and with its accessory articles of furniture of sixteen kinds[306].
10. 'Long ago, O Brahman, there was a king by name Wide-realm (Mahā Vijita)[307], mighty, with great wealth and large property; with stores of silver and gold, of aids to enjoyment[308], of goods and corn; with his treasure-houses and his garners full. Now when King Wide-realm was once sitting alone in meditation he became anxious at the thought: “I have in abundance all the good things a mortal can enjoy. The whole wide circle of the earth is mine by conquest to possess. 'Twere well if I were to offer a great sacrifice that should ensure me weal and welfare for many days.”
'And he had the Brahman, his chaplain, called; and telling him all that he had thought, he said: “So I would fain, O Brahman, offer a great sacrifice—let the venerable one instruct me how—for my weal and my welfare for many days.”
11. ‘Thereupon the Brahman who was chaplain said to the king: "The king’s country, Sire, is harassed and harried. There are dacoits abroad who pillage the villages and townships, and who make the roads unsafe. Were the king, so long as that is so, to levy a fresh tax, verily his majesty would be acting wrongly. But perchance his majesty might think: ‘I’ll soon put a stop to these scoundrels’ game by degradation and banishment, and fines and bonds and death!’ But their licence cannot be satisfactorily put a stop to so. The remnant left unpunished would still go on harassing the realm. Now there is one method to adopt to 176 put a thorough end to this disorder. Whosoever there be in the king’s realm who devote themselves to keeping cattle and the farm, to them let his majesty the king give food and seed-corn. Whosoever there be in the king’s realm who devote themselves to trade, to them let his majesty the king give capital. Whosoever there be in the king’s realm who devote themselves to government service[309], to them let his majesty the king give wages and food. Then those men, following each his own business, will no longer harass the realm; the king’s revenue will go up; the country will be quiet and at peace; and the populace, pleased one with another and happy, dancing their children in their arms. will dwell with open doors."
'Then King Wide-realm, O Brahman, accepted the word of his chaplain, and did as he had said. And those men, following each his business, harassed the realm no more. And the king’s revenue went up. And the country became quiet and at peace. And the populace, pleased one with another and happy, dancing their children in their arms, dwelt with open doors.
12. 'So King Wide-realm had his chaplain called, and said: “The disorder is at an end. The country is at peace. I want to offer that great sacrifice—let the venerable one instruct me how—for my weal and my welfare for many days.”
'Then let his majesty the king send invitations to whomsoever there may be in his realm who are Kshatriyas, vassals of his, either in the country or the towns; or who are ministers and officials of his, either in the country or the towns; or who are Brahmans of position, either in the country or the towns; or who are householders of substance, either in the country or the towns, saying: “I intend to offer a great sacrifice. Let the venerable ones give their sanction to what will be to me for weal and welfare for many days.”
'Then King Wide-realm, O Brahman, accepted the 177 word of his chaplain, and did as he had said, And they each—Kshatriyas and ministers and Brahmans and householders—made alike reply: “Let his majesty the king celebrate the sacrifice. The time is suitable, O king[310]!”
'Thus did these four, as colleagues by consent, become wherewithal to furnish forth that sacrifice[311],
'He was well born on both sides, on the mother’s side and on the father’s, of pure descent back through seven generations, and no slur was cast upon him, and no reproach, in respect of birth—
'He was handsome, pleasant in appearance, inspiring trust, gifted with great beauty of complexion, fair in colour, fine in presence, stately to behold—
'He was mighty, with great wealth, and large property, with stores of silver and gold, of aids to enjoyment, of goods and corn, with his treasure-houses and his garners full—
'He was powerful, in command of an army, loyal and disciplined, in four divisions (of elephants, cavalry, chariots, and bowmen), burning up, methinks, his enemies by his very glory—
'He was a believer, and generous, a noble giver, keeping open house, a welling spring s whence Samaṇas and Brahmans, the poor and the wayfarers, beggars, and petitioners might draw, a doer of good deeds—
'He knew the meaning of what had been said, and could explain: “This saying has such and such a meaning, and that such and such”—
'He was intelligent, expert and wise, and able to think out things present or past or future[312]--
'He was well born on both sides, on the mother’s and on the father’s, of pure descent back through seven generations, with no slur cast upon him, and no reproach in respect of birth—
'He was a student repeater who knew the mystic verses by heart, master of the Three Vedas, with the indices, the ritual, the phonology, and the exegesis (as a fourth ), and the legends as a fifth, learned in the idioms and the grammar, versed in Lokāyata (Nature-lore) and in the thirty marks on the body of a great man—
‘He was intelligent, expert, and wise; foremost, or at most the second, among those who hold out the ladle.’
15. 'And further, O Brahman, the chaplain, before the sacrifice had begun, explained to King Wide-realm the three modes:
'Should his majesty the king, before starting on the great sacrifice, feel any such regret as: “Great, alas, will be the portion of my wealth used up herein,” let not the king harbour such regret. Should his majesty the king, whilst he is offering the great sacrifice, feel any such regret as: “Great, alas, will be the portion of my wealth used up herein,” let not the king harbour such regret. Should his majesty the king, when the great sacrifice has been offered, feel any such regret as: “Great, alas, has been the portion of my wealth used up herein,” let not the king harbour such regret:
'Thus did the chaplain, O Brahman, before the sacrifice had begun, explain to King Wide-realm the three modes.
16. 'And further, O Brahman, the chaplain, before the sacrifice had begun, in order to prevent any compunction that might afterwards, in ten ways, arise as regards those who had taken part therein, said: “Now there will come to your sacrifice, Sire, men who destroy the life of living things, and men who refrain therefrom—men who take what has not been given, and men who refrain therefrom—men who act evilly in respect of lusts, and men who refrain therefrom—men who speak lies, and men who do not—men who slander, and men who do not-men who speak rudely, and men who do not—men who chatter vain things, and men who refrain therefrom— men who covet, and men who covet not—men who harbour illwill, and men who harbour it not—men whose views are wrong, and men whose views are right. Of each of these let them, who do evil, alone with their evil. For them who do well let your majesty offer, for them, Sire, arrange the rites, them let the king gratify, in them shall your heart within find peace.”
17. 'And further, O Brahman, the chaplain, whilst the king was carrying out the sacrifice, instructed and aroused and incited and gladdened his heart in sixteen ways: “Should there be people who should say of the king, as he is offering the sacrifice: ‘King Wide-realm is celebrating sacrifice without having invited the four classes of his subjects, without himself having the eight personal gifts, without the assistance of a Brahman who has the four personal gifts;’ then would they speak not according to the fact. For the consent of the four classes has been obtained, the king has the eight, and his Brahman has the four, personal gifts. With regard to each and everyone of these sixteen conditions the king may rest assured that it has been fulfilled. He can sacrifice, and be glad, and possess his heart in peace[313].”
18. 'And further, O Brahman, at that sacrifice neither were any oxen slain, neither goats, nor fowls, nor fatted pigs, nor were any kinds of living creatures put to death. No trees were cut down to be used as posts, no Dabbha grasses mown to strew around the sacrificial spot. And the slaves and messengers and workmen there employed were driven neither by rods nor fear, nor carried on their work weeping with tears upon their faces. Whoso chose to help, he worked; whoso chose not to help, worked not. What each chose to do, he did; what they chose not to do, that was left undone. With ghee, and oil, and butter, and milk, and honey, and sugar only was that sacrifice accomplished.
19. 'And further, O Brahman, the Kshatriya vassals, and the ministers and officials, and the Brahmans of position, and the householders of substance, whether of the country or of the towns, went to King Wide-realm, taking with them much wealth, and said: “This abundant wealth, Sire, have we brought hither for the king’s use. Let his majesty accept it at our hands!”
'“Sufficient wealth have I, my friends, laid up, the produce of taxation that is just. Do you keep yours, and take away more with you!”
'When they had thus been refused by the king, they went aside, and considered thus one with the other: “It would not beseem us now, were we to take this wealth away again to our own homes. King Wide-realm is offering a great sacrifice. Let us too make an after-sacrifice!”
20. 'So the Kshatriyas established a continual largesse to the east of the king’s sacrificial pit, and the officials to the south thereof, and the Brahmans to the west thereof, and the householders to the north thereof. And the things given, and the manner of their gift, was in all respects like unto the great sacrifice of King Wide-realm himself.
‘Thus, O Brahman, there was a fourfold co-operation, and King Wide-realm was gifted with 181 eight personal gifts, and his officiating Brahman with four. And there were three modes of the giving of that sacrifice. This, O Brahman, is what is called the due celebration of a sacrifice in its threefold mode and with its furniture of sixteen kinds!’—
21. And when he had thus spoken, those Brahmans lifted up their voices in tumult, and said: ‘How glorious the sacrifice, how pure its accomplishment!’ But Kūṭadanta the Brahman sat there in silence.
Then those Brahmans said to Kūṭadanta: ‘Why do you not approve the good words of the Samaṇa Gotama as well-said?’
‘I do not fail to approve: for he who approves not as well-said that which has been well spoken by the Samaṇa Gotama, verily his head would split in twain. But I was considering that the Samaṇa Gotama does not say: “Thus have I heard,” nor “Thus behoves it to be,” but says only “Thus it was then,” or “It was like that then.” So I thought: "For a certainty the Samaṇa Gotama himself must at that time have been King Wide-realm, or the Brahman who officiated for him at that sacrifice. Does the venerable Gotama admit that he who celebrates such a sacrifice, or causes it, to be celebrated, is reborn at the dissolution of the body, after death, into some state of happiness in heaven?’
‘Yes, O Brahman, that I admit. And at that time I was the Brahman who, as chaplain, had that sacrifice performed.’
22. ‘Is there, O Gotama, any other sacrifice less difficult and less troublesome, with more fruit and more advantage still than this?’
23. ‘But what is the reason, O Gotama, and what the cause, why such perpetual givings specifically to virtuous recluses, and kept up in a family, are less difficult and troublesome, of greater fruit and greater 182 advantage than that other sacrifice with its three modes and its accessories of sixteen kinds?’
‘To the latter sort of sacrifice, O Brahman, neither will the Arahats go, nor such as have entered on the Arahat way. And why not? Because at it beating with sticks takes place, and seizing by the throat[314]. But they will go to the former, where such things are not. And therefore are such perpetual gifts above the other sort of sacrifice.’
24. ‘And is there, O Gotama, any other sacrifice less difficult and less troublesome, of greater fruit and of greater advantage than either of these?’
25. ‘And is there, O Gotama, any other sacrifice less difficult and less troublesome, of greater fruit and of greater advantage than each and all of these three?’
‘He who with trusting heart takes a Buddha as his guide, and the Truth, and the Order—that is a sacrifice better than open largesse, better than perpetual alms, better than the gift of a dwelling place.’
26. ‘And is there, O Gotama, any other sacrifice less difficult and less troublesome of greater fruit and of greater advantage than all these four?’
‘When a man with trusting heart takes upon himself the precepts—abstinence from destroying life; abstinence from taking what has not been given; abstinence from evil conduct in respect of lusts; abstinence from lying words; abstinence from strong, intoxicating, maddening drinks, the root of carelessness—that is a sacrifice better than open largesse, better than perpetual alms, better than the gift of dwelling places, better than accepting guidance.’
27. ‘And is there, O Gotama, any other sacrifice less difficult and less troublesome, of greater fruit and of greater advantage than all these five?’
[The answer is the long passage from the Sāmañña-phala, § 40, p. 62 (of the text), down to § 75 (p. 74), on the First Jhāna, as follows;—
1. The Introductory paragraphs on the appearance of a Buddha, his preaching, the conversion of a hearer, and his renunciation of the world.
‘This, O Brahman, is a sacrifice less difficult and less troublesome, of greater fruit and greater advantage than the previous sacrifices.’
[The same is then said of the Second, Third, and Fourth Jhānas, in succession (as in the Sāmaṇṇa-phala, §§ 77-82), and of the Insight arising from knowledge (ibid. §§ 83, 84), and further (omitting direct mention either way of §§ 85-96 inclusive) of the knowledge of the destruction of the Āsavas, the deadly intoxications or floods (ibid. §§ 97-98).]
‘Most excellent, O Gotama, are the words of thy mouth, most excellent! Just as if a man were to set up 184 what has been thrown down, or were to reveal that which has been hidden away, or were to point out the right road to him who has gone astray, or were to bring a light into the darkness so that those who had eyes could see external forms—just even so has the truth been made known to me in many a figure by the venerable Gotama. I, even I, betake myself to the venerable Gotama as my guide, to the Doctrine and the Order. May the venerable One accept me as a disciple, as one who, from this day forth, as long as life endures, has taken him as his guide. And I myself, O Gotama, will have the seven hundred bulls, and the seven hundred steers, and the seven hundred heifers, and the seven hundred goats, and the seven hundred rams set free. To them I grant their life. Let them eat green grass and drink fresh water, and may cool breezes waft around them.’
29. Then the Blessed One discoursed to Kūṭadanta the Brahman in due order; that is to say, he spake to him of generosity, of right conduct, of heaven, of the danger, the vanity, and the defilement of lusts, of the advantages of renunciation. And when the Blessed One became aware that Kūṭadanta the Brahman had become prepared, softened, unprejudiced, upraised, and believing in heart, then did he proclaim the doctrine the Buddhas alone have won; that is to say, the doctrine of sorrow, of its origin, of its cessation, and of the Path. And just as a clean cloth, with all stains in it washed away, will readily take the dye, just even so did Kūṭadanta the Brahman, even while seated there, obtain the pure and spotless Eye for the Truth, and he knew: ‘Whatsoever has a beginning, in that is inherent also the necessity of dissolution.’
30. And then the Brahman Kūṭadanta, as one who had seen the Truth, had mastered it, understood it, dived deep down into it, who had passed beyond doubt, and put away perplexity and gained full confidence, who had become dependent on no other for his knowledge of the teaching of the Master, addressed the Blessed One and said:
‘May the venerable Gotama grant me the favour of taking his to-morrow’s meal with me, and also the members of the Order with him.’
And the Blessed One signified, by silence, his consent. Then the Brahman Kūṭadanta, seeing that the Blessed One had accepted, rose from his seat, and keeping his right towards him as he passed, he departed thence. And at daybreak he had sweet food, both hard and soft, made ready at the pit prepared for his sacrifice, and had the time announced to the Blessed One: ‘It is time, O Gotama; and the meal is ready.’ And the Blessed One, who had dressed early in the morning, put on his outer robe, and taking his bowl" with him, went with the brethren to Kūṭadanta’s sacrificial pit, and sat down there on the seat prepared for him. And Kūṭadanta the Brahman satisfied the brethren with the Buddha at their head, with his own hand, with sweet food, both hard and soft, till they refused any more. And when the Blessed One had finished his meal, and cleansed the bowl and his hands, Kūṭadanta the Brahman took a low seat and seated himself beside him. And when he was thus seated the Blessed One instructed and aroused and incited and gladdened Kūṭadanta the Brahman with religious discourse; and then arose from his seat and departed thence.
1. Thus have I heard. The Blessed One was once staying at Vesālī at the Gabled Hall in the Great Wood[315]. Now at that time a number of Brahmans, who had been sent on pressing business of one kind or another from Kosali and Magadhā, were lodging at Vesālī.
And they heard the news: ‘They say that the Samaṇa Gotama of the Sākya clan, who went out from a Sākya family to adopt the religious life, is now staying at Vesālī at the Gabled Hall in the Great Wood. Now regarding that venerable Gotama, such is the high reputation that has been noised abroad: “That Blessed One is an Arahat, a fully awakened one, abounding in wisdom and goodness, happy, who knows all worlds, unsurpassed as a guide to mortals willing to be led, a teacher for gods and men, a Blessed One, a Buddha. He, by himself, thoroughly knows and sees, as it were, face to face this universe,—including the worlds above of the gods, the Brahmās, and the Māras, and the world below with its recluses and Brahmans, its princes and peoples,—and having known it, he makes his knowledge known to others. The truth, lovely in its origin, lovely in its progress, lovely in its 198 consummation, doth he proclaim, both in the spirit and in the letter, the higher life doth he make known, in all its fullness and in all its purity. And good is it to pay visits to Arahats like that.”’
2. So those Brahmans from Kosala and Magadhā went out to the Great Wood, and to the Gabled Hall. Now at that time the venerable Nāgita was acting as the personal attendant on the Blessed One. And they went to him, and said: 'Where is it, Nāgita, that that venerable Gotama is lodging now, for we wish to see him.
3. And Hare-lip the Licchavi, too, came to the Great Wood, and to the Gabled Hall, with a retinue of his clan; and going up to the venerable Nāgita, he saluted him, and reverently standing apart, he said to him: ‘Where, venerable Nāgita, is the Blessed One now lodging, the Arahat, the Buddha; for we wish to see him?’ And on receiving a similar reply he, too, sat down apart, saying: ‘I will not go till I have seen the August One, the Arahat, the Buddha.’
4. But Sīha, a novice[316], came up to the venerable Nāgita, and saluted him, and standing reverently apart, he said to him: 'These envoys of the Brahmans from Kosalā and Magadhā, many of them, have come, O Kassapa[317], to call upon the Blessed One; and Hare-lip the Licchavi, too, with a retinue of his clan, has come to do the same. ‘Twere best, O Kassapa, that all this folk should be allowed to see the Blessed One.’
‘Very good, Sir,’ said Sīha the novice in assent to the venerable Nāgita. And he went where the Blessed One was, and saluted him, and standing reverently apart, he said to him even as he had said to Nāgita.
5. And Sīha did so. And the Blessed One came out from the house, and sat down. And the Brahmans from Kosalā and Magadhā exchanged with him the greetings and compliments of politeness and courtesy, and took their seats on one side. And Hare-lip the Licchavi also, with the retinue of his clan, bowed down to the Blessed One, and seated himself on one side. And when he was thus seated he addressed the Blessed One, and said:
‘Some few days ago, Sir, Sunakkhatta of the Licchavis[318] came to me, and said: “It is only three years, Mahāli[319], since I first came under the Blessed One, and I can see heavenly forms, pleasant to behold, fitted to satisfy all one’s desires, exciting longing in one’s heart. But I cannot hear heavenly sounds like that.” Now, Sir, are there such heavenly sounds, which he could not hear, or have they no existence?’
‘They are real, those heavenly sounds, pleasant, fitted to satisfy one’s desires, exciting longing in one’s heart, which he could not hear. They are not things of nought.’
6. ‘But what then is the proximate, and what the ultimate cause, why he could not hear them, they being thus real and not things of nought?’
7. 'Suppose a recluse, Mahāli, to have practised one-sided concentration of mind with the object of seeing such heavenly forms in any one direction,—in the East, or the South, or the West, or the North, or above; or below, or across,—and not with the object of hearing such heavenly sounds. Then since he has practised one-sided concentration, with the one object only in view, he only sees the sights, he hears not the sounds. And why not? Because of the nature of his self-concentration [samādhi].
8, 9. 'And so also, Mahāli, if he have practised one-sided concentration with the object of hearing, in any one direction, the heavenly sounds. Then, and for the same reason, he hears the sounds, but he sees not the sights.
10, 11. ‘But suppose, Mahāli, he has practised self-concentration with the double object in view of seeing and hearing, in any one direction, those heavenly sights and those heavenly sounds. Then since he has practised self-concentration with the double object in view, he both sees the sights and hears the sounds. And why so? Because of the nature of his self-concentration.’
12. ‘Then, Sir, is it for the sake of attaining to the practice of such self-concentration that the brethren lead the religious life under the Blessed One?’
'In the first place, Mahāli, a brother by the complete destruction of the Three Bonds (the Delusions of self, Doubt, and Trust in the efficacy of good works and ceremonies)[320] becomes a converted man, one who cannot be reborn in any state of woe, and is assured of 201 attaining to the Insight (of the stages higher still)[321]. That, Mahāli, is a condition, higher and sweeter, for the sake of which the brethren lead the religious life under me.
'And then further, Mahāli, a brother by the complete destruction of those Three Bonds, and by reducing to a minimum lust, illwill, and dullness, becomes a Once-returner, one who on his first return to this world shall make an end of pain. That, Mahāli, is a condition higher still and sweeter, for the sake of which the brethren lead the religious life under me.
'And then further, Mahāli, a brother by the complete destruction of the Five Bonds that bind people to this world[322] becomes an inheritor of the highest heavens[323], there to pass away, thence never to return[324]. That, Mahāli, is a condition higher still and sweeter, for the sake of which the brethren lead the religious life under me.
'And then further. Mahāli, when a brother by the destruction of the Deadly Floods (or Intoxications—Lusts, Becomings, Delusion, and Ignorance) has, by himself, known and realised and continues to abide here, in this visible world, in that emancipation of mind, that emancipation of heart, which is Arahatship—that, Mahāli, is a condition higher still and sweeter still, for the sake of which the brethren lead the religious life under me.
‘Such, Mahāli, are the conditions higher and sweeter 202 (than seeing heavenly sights and hearing heavenly sounds), for the sake of which the brethren lead the religious life under me.’
'Verily it is this Noble Eightfold Path, that is to say: Right views, right aspirations, right speech, right action, a right means of livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right ecstasy in self-concentration[325]. This, Mahāli, is the path, and this the method, for the realisation of these conditions.
15. 'One day, Mahāli, I was staying at Kosambī, in the Ghosita pleasaunce. There two recluses, Maṇḍissa the wandering mendicant, and Jāliya the pupil of Dārupattika (the man with the wooden bowl), came to me, and exchanged with me the greetings and compliments of politeness and courtesy, and stood reverently apart. And so standing they said to me:
‘How is it then, O venerable Gotama, is the soul the same thing as the body? Or is the soul one thing and the body another?’
[Here follows the whole of the exposition given in the Sāmañña-Phala Sutta, §§ 40-75, that is to say:
9, The emancipation of heart from the five hindrances—covelousness, illwill, sloth of body and mind, excitement and worry, and perplexity.
16. ‘Then estranged from lusts, aloof from evil states, he enters into and remains in the First Rapture—a state of joy and ease, born of detachment, reasoning and investigation going on the while. Now, Sirs, when a Bhikshu knows thus and sees thus, would that make him ready to take up the subject: “Is the soul the same thing as the body, or is the soul one thing and the body another?”’
‘Yes, it would, Sir[326].’
17, 18. [The cases are then put of a Bhikshu who has acquired the second, third, and fourth Raptures (D. II, 77-81) and the knowledge arising from insight (Ñāṇa-dassana; D. II, 83, 84); and the same question, reply, and rejoinder are given in each case.]
19, 'With his heart thus serene (&c. above, p, 85), he directs and bends down his mind to the knowledge of the destruction of the Deadly Floods, He knows as it really is: “This is pain.” He knows as it really is: “This is the origin of pain.” He knows as it really is: “This is the cessation of pain.” He knows as it really is: “This is the Path that leads to the cessation of pain.” He knows as they really are: “These are the Deadly Floods.” He knows as it really is: “This is the origin of the Deadly Floods.” He knows as it really is: “This is the cessation of the Deadly Floods.” He knows as it really is: “This is the 204 Path that leads to the cessation of the Deadly Floods.” To him, thus knowing, thus seeing, the heart is set free from the Deadly Taint of Lusts, is set free from the Deadly Taint of Becomings, is set free from the Deadly Taint of Ignorance. In him, thus set free, there arises the knowledge of his emancipation, and he knows: “Rebirth has been destroyed. The higher life has been fulfilled. What had to be done has been accomplished. After this present life there will be no beyond!”
‘When a Bhikshu, Sirs, knows thus and sees thus, would that make him ready to take up the question: “Is the soul the same as the body, or is the soul one thing and the body another?”’
‘No, Sir, it would not[327].’
Thus spake the Blessed One; and Hare-lip the Licchavi, pleased at heart, exalted the word of the Blessed One.
1. Thus have I heard. The Blessed One was once dwelling at Uguññā, in the Kaṇṇakatthala deer-park[328]. Now Kassapa, a naked ascetic, came to where the Exalted One was, and exchanged with him the greetings and compliments of civility and courtesy, and stood respectfully aside. And, so standing, he said to the Exalted One:
2. ‘I have heard it said, O Gotama, thus: “The Samaṇa Gotama disparages all penance; verily he reviles and finds fault with every ascetic, with every one who lives a hard life.” Now those, O Gotama, who said this, were they therein repeating Gotama’s words, and not reporting him falsely? Are they announcing, as a minor tenet of his, a matter really following from his Dhamma (his system)? Is there nothing in this opinion of his, so put forward as wrapt up with his system, or as a corollary from it, that could meet with objection[329]? For we would fain bring no false accusation against the venerable Gotama.’
3. 'No, Kassapa. Those who said so were not 224 following my words, On the contrary, they were reporting me falsely. and at variance with the fact,
'Herein, O Kassapa, I am wont to be aware, with vision bright and purified, seeing beyond what men can see, how some men given to asceticism, living a hard life, are reborn, on the dissolution of the body, after death, into some unhappy, fallen state of misery and woe; while others, living just so, are reborn into some happy state, or into a heavenly world—how some men given to asceticism, but living a life less hard, are equally reborn, on the dissolution of the body, after death into some unhappy, fallen state of misery and woe; while others, living just so, are reborn in some happy state, or into a heavenly world. How then could I, O Kassapa, who am thus aware, as they really are, of the states whence men have come, and whither they will go, as they pass away from one form of existence, and take shape in another,—how could I disparage all penance; or bluntly revile and find fault with every ascetic, with every one who lives a life that is hard?
4. Now there are, O Kassapa, certain recluses and Brahmans who are clever, subtle, experiences in controversy, hair splitters, who go about, one would think, breaking itno pieces by teir wisdom the speculations of their adversaries. And as between them and me there is, as to some points, agreement, and as to some points, not. As to some of those things they approve, we also approve thereof. As to some of those things they disapprove, we also disapprove thereof. As to some of the things they approve, we disapprove thereof. As to some of the things they disapprove, we approve thereof. And some things we approve of, so do they. And some things we disapprove of, so do they And some things we approve, they do not. And some things we disapprove of, they approve of.
5. 'And I went to them, and said: “As for those things, my friends, on which we do not agree, let us leave them alone. As to those things on which we 225 agree, let the wise put questions about them, ask for reasons as to them, talk them over, with or to their teacher, with or to their fellow disciples; saying: ‘Those conditions of heart, Sirs, which are evil or accounted as evil among you, which are blameworthy or accounted as such among you, which are insufficient for the attainment of Arahatship, or accounted as such among you, depraved or accounted as such among you—who is it who conducts himself as one who has more absolutely put them away from him, the Samaṇa Gotama, or the other venerable ones, the teachers of schools?’”
6. 'Then it may well be, O Kassapa, that the wise, so putting questions one to the other, asking for reasons, talking the matter over, should say: “The Samaṇa Gotama conducts himself as one who has absolutely put those conditions away from him; whereas the venerable ones, the other teachers of schools, have done so only partially.” Thus is it, O Kassapa, that the wise, so putting questions one to the other, asking for reasons, talking the matter over, would, for the most part, speak in praise of us therein.
7. 'And again, O Kassapa, let the wise put questions one to another, ask for reasons, talk the matter over, with or to their teacher, with or to their fellow disciples, saying: “Those conditions of heart, Sirs, which are good or accounted as such among you, which are blameless or accounted as such among you, which suffice to lead a man to ArahatShip or are accounted as sufficient among you, which are pure or accounted as such among you—who is it who conducts himself as one who has more completely taken them upon him, the Samaṇa Gotama, or the other venerable ones, the teachers of schools?”
8. 'Then it may wen be, O Kassapa, that the wise, so putting questions one to the other, asking for reasons, talking the matter over, should say: “The Samaṇa Gotama conducts himself as one who has completely taken these conditions upon him, whereas the venerable 226 ones, the other teachers of schools, have done so only partially.” Thus it is, O Kassapa, that the wise, so putting questions one to the other, asking for reasons, talking the matter over, would, for the most part, speak in praise of us therein.
9-12. '[And further, also, O Kassapa, the wise would, for the most part, acknowledge that the body of my disciples were more addicted to that which is generally acknowledged to be good, refrain themselves more completely from that which is generally acknowledged to be evil, than the venerable ones, the disciples of other teachers[330].]
13. 'Now there is, O Kassapa, a way, there is a method which if a man follow he will of himself, both see and know that: “The Samaṇa Gotama is one who speaks in due season, speaks that which is, that which redounds to advantage, that which is the Norm (the Dhamma), that which is the law of self-restraint (the Vinaya).”
'And what, Kassapa, is that way, what that method, which if a man follow, he will, of himself, know that, and see that. Verily it is this Noble Eightfold Path, that is to say: Right Views, Right Aspirations, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Mode of Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Rapture.
‘This, Kassapa, is that way, this that method, which if a man follow, he will of himself, both know and see that: “The Samaṇa Gotama is one who speaks in due season, speaks that which is, that which redounds to profit, that which is the Norm, that which is the law of self-restraint.”’
'And so also, Gotama, are the following ascetic practices accounted, in the opinion of some Samaṇas 227 and Brāhmaṇas, as Samaṇa-ship and Brāhmaṇa-ship[331].—.
'He is of loose habits (performing his bodily functions, and eating food, in a standing posture, not crouching down, or sitting down, as well-bred people do):—
'He licks his hands clean (after eating, instead of washing them, as others do)[332]:—
'(When on his rounds for alms, if politely requested to step nearer, or to wait a moment, in order that food may be put into his bowl), he passes stolidly on (lest he should incur the guilt of following another person’s word):—
'He refuses to accept any invitation (to call on his rounds at any particular house, or to pass along any particular street) or to go to any particular place):—
'He will not accept (food taken direct) from the mouth of the pot or pans (in which it is cooked; lest 228 those vessels should be struck or scraped, on his account, with the spoon):—
'(He will) not (accept food placed) within the threshold (lest it should have been placed there specially for him):—
'(He will) not (accept food placed) among the sticks[333] (lest it should have been placed there specially for him):—
'(He will) not (accept food place) among the pestles (lest it should have been placed there specially for him):—
'When two persons are eating together he wil not accept (food, taken from what they are eating, if offered to him by only one of the two):—
'He will not accept food from a woman in intercourse with a man[334] (lest their intercourse be hindered):—
'He will not accept food collected (by the faithful in time of drought)[335]:—
'He will not accept fish, nor meat, nor strong drink, nor intoxicants, nor gruel[336]:—
'He is a “One-houser” (turning back from his round as soon as he has received an alms at any one house), a “One-mouthful-man”:—
'He keeps himself going on only one alms[337], or only two, or so on up to only seven:—
'He takes food only once a day, or once every two days, or so on up to once every seven days. Thus does he dwell addicted to the practice of taking food according to rule, at regular intervals, up to even half a month.
'And so also, Gotama, are the following ascetic practices accounted, in the opinion of some Samaṇas and Brāhmaṇas, as Samaṇaship and Brāhmaṇaship:—
'He feeds on potherbs, on wild rice[338], on Nivāra seeds, on leather parings[339], on the water-plant called Haṭa, on the fine powder which adheres to the grains of rice beneath the husk, on the discarded scum of boiling rice, on the flour of oil-seeds[340], on grasses, on cow-dung, on fruits and roots from the woods, on fruits that have fallen of themselves.
'And so also, Gotama, are the following ascetic practices accounted, in the opinion of some Samaṇas and Brāhmaṇas, as Samaṇaship and Brāhmaṇaship:—
'He wears cloths taken from corpses and thrown away[341]:—
'He wears clothing made of the bark of the Tiritaka tree[342]:—
'He wears a dress made of a network of strips of a black antelope’s hide[342:1]:—
'He wears a garment made of small slips or slabs of wood (shingle) pieced together[343]:—
'He wears, as a garment, a blanket of human hair[344]:—
‘He wears, as a garment, a blanket made of horses’ tails[345]:—
'He is a “plucker-out-of-hair-and-beard,” addicted to the practice of plucking out both hair and beard:—
'He is a “croucher-down-on-the-heels,” addicted to exerting himself when crouching down on his heels[346]:—
'He is a “bed-of-thorns-man,” putting iron spikes or natural thorns under the skin on which he sleeps[347]:—
'He sleeps on the bare ground[348]:—
'He is a “dust-and-dirt-wearer,” (smearing his body with oil he stands where dust clouds blow, and lets the dust adhere to his body):—
'He lives and sleeps in the open air[349]:—
'Whatsoever seat is offered to him, that he accepts 232 (without being offended at its being not dignified enough):—
'He is a “filth-eater,” addicted to the practice of feeding on the four kinds of filth (cow-dung, cow’s urine, ashes, and clay)[350]:—
'He is a “non-drinker,” addicted to the practice of never drinking cold water (lest he should injure the souls in it)[351]:—
'He is an “evening-third-man,” addicted to the practice of going down into water thrice a day (to wash away his sins).
15. ‘If a man, O Kassapa, should go naked, and be of loose habits, and lick his hands clean with his tongue, and do and be all those other things you gave in detail, down to his being addicted to the practice of taking food, according to rule, at regular intervals up to even half a month—if he does all this, and the state of blissful attainment in conduct, in heart, in intellect, have not been practised by him, realised by him, then is he far from Samaṇaship, far from Brāhmaṇaship. But from the time, O Kassapa, when a Bhikkhu has cultivated the heart of love that knows no anger, that knows no illwill—from the time when, by the destruction of the deadly intoxications (the lusts of the flesh, the lust after future life, and the defilements of delusion and ignorance), he dwells in that emancipation of heart, that emancipation of mind, that is free from those intoxications, and that he, while yet in this visible world, has come to realise and know-from that time, O Kassapa, is it that the Bhikkhu is called a Samaṇa, is called a Brāhmaṇa!’
'And if a man, O Kassapa, feed on potherbs, on wild rice, on Nivāra seeds, or on any of those other things you gave in detail down to fruits that have fallen of themselves, and the state of blissful attainment in conduct, in heart, in intellect, have not been practised by him, realised by him, then is he far from Samaṇaship, far from Brāhmaṇaship. But from the time, O Kassapa, when a Bhikkhu has cultivated the heart of love that knows no anger, that knows no illwill—from the time when, by the destruction of the deadly intoxications (the lusts of the flesh, the lust after future life, and the defilements of delusion and ignorance), he dwells in that emancipation of heart, that emancipation of mind, that is free from those intoxications, and that he, while yet in this visible world, has come to realise and know—from that time, O Kassapa, is it that the Bhikkhu is called a Samaṇa, is called a Brāhmaṇa!
‘And if a man, O Kassapa, wear coarse hempen cloth, or carry out all or any of those other practices you gave in detail down to bathing in water three times a day, and the state of blissful attainment in conduct, in heart, in intellect, have not been practised by him, realised by him, then is he far from Samaṇaship, far from Brāhmaṇaship. But from the time, O Kassapa, when a Bhikkhu has cultivated the heart of love that knows no anger, that knows no illwill—from the time when, by the destruction of the deadly intoxications (the lusts of the flesh, the lust after future life, and the defilements of delusion and ignorance), he dwells in that emancipation of heart, that emancipation of mind, that is free from those intoxications, and that he, while yet in this visible world, has come to realise and know—from that time, O Kassapa, is it that the Bhikkhu is called a Samaṇa, is called a Brāhmaṇa!’
16. And when he had thus spoken, Kassapa, the naked ascetic, said to the Blessed One: ‘How hard then, Gotama, must Samaṇaship be to gain, how hard must Brāhmaṇaship be!’
‘That, Kassapa, is a common saying in the world that the life of a Samaṇa and of a Brāhmaṇa is hard to lead. But if the hardness, the very great hardness, of that life depended merely on this ascetism, on the carrying out of any or all of those practices you have detailed, then it would not be fitting to say that the life of the Samaṇa, of the Brāhmaṇa, was hard to lead. It would be quite possible for a householder, or for the son of a householder, or for any one, down to the slave girl who carries the water-jar, to say: “Let me now go naked, let me become of low habits,” and so on through all the items of those three lists of yours. But since, Kassapa, quite apart from these matters, quite apart from all kinds of penance, the life is hard, very hard to lead; therefore is it that it is fitting to say: “How hard must Samaṇaship be to gain, how hard must Brāhmaṇaship be!” For from the time, O Kassapa, when a Bhikkhu has cultivated the heart of love that knows no anger, that knows no illwill—from the time when, by the destruction of the deadly intoxications (the lusts of the flesh, the lust after future life, and the defilements of delusion and ignorance), he dwells in that emancipation of heart, in that emancipation of mind, that is free from those intoxications, and that he, while yet in this visible world, has come to realise and know—from that time, O Kassapa, is it that the Bhikkhu is called a Samaṇa, is called a Brāhmaṇa[352]!’
17. And when he had thus spoken, Kassapa, the naked ascetic, said to the Blessed One: ‘Hard is it, Gotama, to know when a man is a Samaṇa, hard to know when a man is a Brāhmaṇa!’
‘That, Kassapa, is a common saying in the world 235 that it is hard to know a Samaṇa, hard to know a Brāhmaṇa. But if being a Samaṇa, if being a Brāhmaṇa, depended merely on this asceticism, on the carrying out of any or each of those practices you have detailed, then it would not be fitting to say that a Samaṇa is hard to recognise, a Brāhmaṇa is hard to recognise. It would be quite possible for a householder, or for the son of a householder, or for any one down to the slave girl who carries the water-jar, to know: “This man goes naked, or is of loose habits, or licks his fingers with his tongue,” and so on through all the items of those three lists of yours. But since, Kassapa, quite apart from these matters, quite apart from all kinds of penance, it is hard to recognise a Samaṇa, hard to recognise a Brāhmaṇa, therefore is it fitting to say: “Hard is it to know when a man is a Samaṇa, to know when a man is a Brāhmaṇa!” For from the time, O Kassapa, when a Bhikkhu has cultivated the heart of love that knows no anger, that knows no illwill—from the time when, by the destruction of the deadly intoxications (the lusts of the flesh, the lust after future life, and the defilements of delusion and ignorance), he dwells in that emancipation of heart, in that emancipation of mind, that is free from those intoxications, and that he, while yet in this visible world, has come to realise and know—from that time, O Kassapa, is it that the Bhikkhu is called a Samaṇa, is called a Brāhmaṇa!’
18. And when he had thus spoken, Kassapa, the naked ascetic, said to the Blessed One: ‘What then, Gotama, is that blissful attainment in conduct, in heart, and in mind?’
[The answer is all the paragraphs in the Sāmaṇṇa-phala translated above, and here divided as follows:—
1. The paragraphs on the appearance of a Buddha, the conversion of a layman, his entry into the Order (§§ 40-42 above, pp. 78-79).
2. The Sīlas, as in the Brahma-jāla, §§ 8-27. See above, pp. 57, 58.
3. The paragraph on Confidence (§ 63 above, p. 79).
4. The paragraph on ‘Guarded is the door of his senses’ (§ 64 above, pp. 79, 80).
5. The paragraph on ‘Mindful and Self-possessed’ (§ 65 above, pp. 80, 81).
6. The paragraph on Simplicity of Life, being content with little (§ 66 above, p. 81).
7. The paragraphs on Emancipation from the Five Hindrances—covetousness, ill-temper, laziness, worry, and perplexity (§§ 67-74 above, pp. 82-84).
8. The paragraph on the Joy and Peace, that, as a result of this emancipation, fills his whole being (§ 75 above, p. 84).
9. The paragraphs on the Four Ecstasies (Jhānas,—§§ 75-82 above, pp. 84-86).
10. The paragraphs on the Insight arising from Knowledge (Ñāṇa-dassana,—§§ 83, 84 above, pp. 86, 87.)
11. The paragraphs on the power of projecting mental images (§§ 85, 86 above, p. 87).
13. The realisation of the Four Noble Truths, the destruction of the Intoxications, and the attainment of Arahatship.]
'And there is no other state of blissful attainment 237 in conduct and heart and mind which is, Kassapa, higher and sweeter than this[353].
21. 'Now there are some recluses and Brahmans, Kassapa, who lay emphasis on conduct. They speak, in various ways, in praise of morality. But so far as regards the really noble, the highest conduct, I am aware of no one who is equal to myself, much less superior. And it is I who have gone the furthest therein; that is, in the highest conduct (of the Path).
'There are some recluses and Brahmans, Kassapa, who lay emphasis on self-mortification, and scrupulous care of others. They speak in various ways in praise of self-torture and of austere scrupulousness. But so far as regards the really noblest, the highest sort of self-mortification and scrupulous regard for others, I am aware of no one else who is equal to myself, much less superior. And it is I who have gone the furthest therein; that is, in the highest sort of scrupulous regard for others[354].
'There are some recluses and Brahmans, Kassapa, who lay emphasis on intelligence. They speak, in various ways, in praise of intelligence. But so far as regards the really noblest, the highest intelligence, I am aware of no one else who is equal to myself, much less superior. And it is I who have gone the furthest therein; that is, in the highest Wisdom[355] (of the Path).
'There are some recluses and Brahmans, Kassapa, who lay emphasis on emancipation. They speak, in various ways, in praise of emancipation. But so far as regards the really noblest, the highest emancipation, I am aware of no one else who is equal to myself, much less superior. And it is I who have gone the furthest therein; that is, in the most complete emancipation (of the Path).
22. 'Now it may well be, Kassapa, that the recluses of adverse schools may say: “The Samaṇa Gotama utters forth a lion’s roar; but it is in solitude that he roars, not where men are assembled.” Then should they be answered: “Say not so. The Samaṇa Gotama utters his lion’s roar, and that too in the assemblies where men congregate.”
'And it may well be, Kassapa, that the recluses of adverse schools should thus, in succession, raise each of the following objections:—
'Then in each such case, Kassapa, they should be answered as before, until the answer runs:—"Say not so. For the Samaṇa Gotama both utters forth his 239 lion’s roar, and that too in assemblies where men congregate, and in full confidence in the justice of his claim, and men put their questions to him on that, and on being questioned he expounds the problem put, and by his exposition thereof satisfaction arises in their hearts, and they hold it worthy to listen to his word, and in listening to it they experience conviction, and being convinced they give outward signs thereof, and they penetrate even to the truth, and having grasped it they are able also to carry the truth out!
23. 'I was staying once, Kassapa, at Rājagaha, on the hill called the Vulture’s Peak. And there a follower of the same mode of life as yours, by name Nigrodha, asked me a question about the higher forms of austere scrupulousness of life. And having been thus questioned I expounded the problem put. And when I had thus answered what he asked, he was well pleased, as if with a great joy[356]:
‘And who, Sir, on hearing the doctrine of the Exalted One, would not be well pleased, as if with a great joy. I also, who have now heard the doctrine of the Exalted One, am thus well pleased, even as if with a great joy. Most excellent, Lord, are the words of thy mouth, most excellent, just as if a man were to set up what has been thrown down, or were to reveal that which has been hidden away, or were to point out the right road to him who has gone astray, or were to bring a lamp into the darkness, so that those who have eyes could see external forms—just even so, Lord, has the truth been made known to me, in many a figure, by the Exalted One. And I, even I, betake myself as my guide to the Exalted One, and to the Doctrine, and to the Brotherhood. I would fain, Lord, renounce the world under the Exalted One; I would fain be admitted to his Order.’
24. ‘Whosoever, Kassapa, having formerly been a member of another school, wishes to renounce the world and receive initiation in this doctrine and 240 discipline, he temains in probation for four months[357]. And at the end of the four months the brethren, exalted in spirit, give him initiation, and receive him into the Order, raising him up into the state of a Bhikkhu. But nevertheless I recognise, in such cases, the distinction there may be between individuals.’
‘Since, Lord, the four months’ probation is the regular custom, I too, then, will remain on probation for that time. Then let the brethren, exalted in spirit, give me initiation and raise me up into the state of a Bhikkhu.’
So Kassapa, the naked ascetic, received initiation, and was admitted to membership of the Order under the Exalted One. And from immediately after his initiation the venerable Kassapa remained alone and separate, earnest, zealous, and master of himself. And e’er long he attained to that supreme goal[358] for the sake of which clansmen go forth from the household life into the homeless state: yea, that supreme goal did he, by himself, and while yet in this visible world, bring himself to the knowledge of, and continue to realise, and to see face to face. And he became sure that rebirth was at an end for him, that the higher life had been fulfilled, that everything that should be done had been accomplished, and that after this present life there would be no beyond!
Here ends the Kassapa-Sihanada Suttanta[359].
1. Thus have I heard. The Exalted One was once staying at Sāvatthi in Anātha Piṇḍika’s pleasaunce in the Jeta Wood. Now at that time Poṭṭhapāda[360], the wandering mendicant, was dwelling at the hall put up in Queen Mallikā’s park for the discussion of systems of opinion—the hall set round with a row of Tinduka trees, and known by the name of ‘The Hall[361].’ And there was with him a great following of mendicants; to wit, three hundred mendicants.
2[362]. Now the Exalted One, who had put on his under garment in the early morning, proceeded in his robes, and with his bowl in his hand, into Sāvatthi for alms.
And he thought: ‘It is too early now to enter Sāvatthi for alms. Let me go to the Hall, the debating hall in the Mallikā Park, where Poṭṭhapāda is.’ And he did so.
3. Now at that time Poṭṭhapāda was seated with the company of the mendicants all talking with loud voices, with shouts and tumult, all sorts of worldly talk: to wit, tales of kings, of robbers, of ministers of state; tales of war, of terrors, of battles; talks about foods and drinks, about clothes and beds and garlands and perfumes; talks about relationships; talks about equipages, villages, towns, cities, and countries; tales about women and heroes; gossip such as that at street corners, and places whence water is fetched; ghost stories; desultory chatter; legends about the creation of the land or sea; and speculations about existence and non-existence[363].
4. And Poṭṭhapāda, the mendicant, caught sight of the Exalted One approaching in the distance. And at the sight of him he called the assembly to order, saying: ‘Be still, venerable Sirs, and make no noise. Here is the Samaṇa Gotama coming. Now that venerable one delights in quiet, and speaks in praise of quietude. How well it were if, seeing how quiet the assembly is, he should see fit to join us!’ And when he spake thus, the mendicants kept silence.
‘May the Exalted One come near. We bid him welcome. It is long since the Exalted One took the departure[364] of coming our way. Let him take a seat. Here is a place spread ready.’
And the Exalted One sat down. And Poṭṭhapāda, the mendicant, brought a low stool, and sat down beside him. And to him thus seated the Exalted One said:
‘What was the subject, Poṭṭhapāda, that you were seated here together to discuss; and what was the talk among you that has been interrupted?’
'Never mind, Sir, the subject we were seated together to discuss. There will be no difficulty in the Exalted One hearing afterwards about that. But long ago, Sir, on several occasions, when various teachers, Samaṇas and Brahmans, had met together, and were seated in the debating hall, the talk fell on trance[365], and the question was: “How then, Sirs, is the cessation of consciousness brought about?”
'Now on that some said thus: “Ideas come to a man without a reason and without a cause, and so also do they pass away. At the time when they spring up within him, then he becomes conscious; when they pass away, then he becomes unconscious.” Thus did they explain the cessation of consciousness.
'On that another said: “That, Sirs, will never be so as you say. Consciousness, Sirs, is a man’s soul. It is the soul that comes and goes. When the soul comes into a man then he becomes conscious, when the soul goes away out of a man then he becomes unconscious.” Thus do others explain the cessation of consciousness[366].
'On that another said: “That, Sirs, will never be as you say. But there are certain Samaṇas and Brahmans of great power and influence. It is they who infuse consciousness into a man, and draw it away out of him. When they infuse it into him he becomes conscious, when they draw it away he becomes unconscious.” Thus do others explain the cessation of consciousness[367].
‘Then, Sir, the memory of the Exalted One arose in me, and I thought: “Would that the Exalted One, would that the Happy One were here, he who is so skilled in these psychical states.” For the Exalted One would know how trance is brought about[368].’ How, then, Sir, is there cessation of consciousness?’
7. 'Well, as to that, Poṭṭhapāda, those Samaṇas and Brahmans who said that ideas come to a man and pass away without a reason, and without a cause, are wrong from the very commencement. For it is precisely through a reason, by means of a cause, that ideas come and go. By training some ideas arise. By training others pass away.
[He then sets out the first part of the system of self-training for the Bhikkhu, as translated above, pp. 78-84, from the Sāmañña-phala, as follows:—
1. The introductory paragraphs on the appearance of a Buddha, his preaching, the conviction of a hearer and his renunciation of the world.
10. 'But when he has realised that these Five Hindrances have been put away from within him, a gladness springs up within him, and joy arises to him thus gladdened, and so rejoicing all his frame 248 becomes at ease, and being thus at ease he is filled with a sense of peace, and in that peace his heart is stayed. Then estranged from lusts, aloof from evil dispositions, he enters into and remains in the First Rapture (the First Jhāna)—a state of joy and ease born of detachment, reasoning and investigation going on the while. Then that idea, (that consciousness)[369], of lusts, that he had before, passes away. And thereupon there arises within him a subtle, but actual, consciousness of the joy and peace arising from detachment, and he becomes a person to whom that idea is consciously present.
‘Thus is it that through training one idea, one sort of consciousness, arises; and through training another passes away. This is the training I spoke of,’ said the Exalted One.
11. 'And again, Poṭṭhapāda, the Bhikkhu, suppressing all reasoning and investigation, enters into and abides in the Second Rapture (the Second Jhāna)—a state of joy and ease, born of the serenity of concentration, when no reasoning or investigation goes on, a state of elevation of mind, a tranquillisation of the heart within. Then that subtle, but actual, consciousness of the joy and peace arising from detachment, that he just had, passes away. And thereupon there arises a subtle, but actual, consciousness of the joy and peace born of concentration. And he becomes a person conscious of that.
‘Thus also is it that through training one idea, one sort of consciousness, arises; and through training another passes away. This is the training I spoke of,’ said the Exalted One.
12. 'And again, Poṭṭhapāda, the Bhikkhu, holding aloof from joy, becomes equable; and, mindful and self-possessed, he experiences in his body that ease which the Arahats talk of when they say: “The man serene and self-possessed is well at ease.” And so he enters 249 into and abides in the Third Rapture (the Third Jhāna). Then that subtle, but yet actual, consciousness, that he just had, of the joy and peace born of concentration, passes away. And thereupon there arises a subtle, but yet actual, consciousness of the bliss of equanimity. And he becomes a person conscious of that.
‘Thus also is it that through training one idea, one sort of consciousness, arises; and through training another passes away. This is the training I spoke of,’ said the Exalted One.
13. 'And again, Poṭṭhapāda, the Bhikkhu, by the putting away alike of ease and of pain, by the passing away of any joy, any elation, he had previously felt, enters into and abides in the Fourth Rapture (the Fourth Jhāna)—a state of pure self-possession and equanimity, without pain and without ease. Then that subtle, but yet actual, consciousness, that he just had, of the bliss of equanimity, passes away. And thereupon there arises to him a subtle, but yet actual, consciousness of the absence of pain, and of the absence of ease[370]. And he becomes a person conscious of that.
‘Thus also is it that through training one idea, one sort of consciousness, arises; and through training another passes away. This is the training I spoke of,’ said the Exalted One.
14. 'And again, Poṭṭhapāda, the Bhikkhu, by passing beyond the consciousness of form, by putting an end to the sense of resistance, by paying no heed to the idea of distinction, thinking: “The space is infinite,” reaches up to and remains in the mental state in which 250 the mind is concerned only with the consciousness of the infinity of space. Then the consciousness, that he previously had, of form passes away, and there arises in him the blissful consciousness, subtle but yet actual, of his being concerned only with the infinity of space. And he becomes a person conscious of that.
‘Thus also is it that through training one idea, one sort of consciousness, arises; and through training another passes away. This is the training I spoke of,’ said the Exalted One.
15. 'And again, Poṭṭhapāda, the Bhikkhu, by passing quite beyond the consciousness of space as infinite, thinking: “Cognition[371] is infinite,” reaches up to and remains in the mental state in which the mind is concerned only with the infinity of cognition. Then the subtle, but yet actual, consciousness, that he just had, of the infinity of space, passes away. And there arises in him a consciousness, subtle but yet actual, of everything being within the sphere of the infinity of cognition. And he becomes a person conscious of that.
‘Thus also is it that through training one idea, one sort of consciousness, arises; and through training another passes away. This is the training I spoke of,’ said the Exalted One.
16. 'And again, Poṭṭhapāda, the Bhikkhu, by passing quite beyond the consciousness of the infinity of cognition, thinking: “There is nothing that really is,” reaches up to and remains in the mental state in which the mind is concerned only with the unreality of things. Then that sense of everything being within the sphere of infinite cognition, that he just had, passes away. And there arises in him a consciousness, subtle but yet actual, of unreality as the object of his thought[372]. And he becomes a person conscious of that.
‘Thus also is it that through training one idea, one sort of consciousness, arises; and through training another passes away. This is the training I spoke of,’ said the Exalted One.
17. 'So from the time, Poṭṭhapāda, that the Bhikkhu is thus conscious in a way brought about by himself (from the time of the First Rapture), he goes on from one stage to the next, and from that to the next until he reaches the summit of consciousness. And then he is on the summit it may occur to him: “To be thinking at all is the inferior state. 'Twere better not to be thinking. Were I to go on thinking and fancying[373], these ideas, these states of consciousness, I have reached to, would pass away, but others, coarser ones, might arise. So I will neither think nor fancy any more.” And he does not. And to him neither thinking any more, nor fancying, the ideas, the states of consciousness, he had, pass away; and no others, coarser than they, arise. So he touches cessation. Thus is it, Poṭṭhapāda, that the attainment of the cessation of conscious ideas takes place step by step.
18. ‘Now what do you think, Poṭṭhapāda? Have you ever heard, before this, of this gradual attainment of the cessation of conscious ideas?’
‘No, Sir, I have not. But I now understand what you say as follows: [and he repeated the words of section 17.]’
‘That is right, Poṭṭhapāda[374].’
19. ‘And does the Exalted One teach that there is one summit of consciousness, or that there are several?’
‘As he attains to the cessation (of one idea, one state of consciousness) after another, so does he reach, one after another, to different summits up to the last. So is it, Poṭṭhapāda, that I put forward both one summit and several.’
20. ‘Now is it, Sir, the idea, the state of consciousness, that arises first, and then knowledge; or does knowledge arise first, and then the idea, the state of consciousness; or do both arise simultaneously, neither of them before or after the other?’
‘It is the idea, Poṭṭhapāda, the state of consciousness, that arises first, and after that knowledge. And the springing up of knowledge is dependent on the springing up of the idea, of the state of consciousness[375]. And this may be understood from the fact that a man recognises: “It is from this cause or that that knowledge has arisen to me.”’
21. ‘Is then, Sir, the consciousness identical with a man’s soul, or is consciousness one thing, and the soul another[376]?’
‘I take for granted[377], Sir, a material soul, having 253 form, built up of the four elements, nourished by solid food[378].’
‘And if there were such a soul, Poṭṭhapāda, then, even so, your consciousness would be one thing, and your soul another. That, Poṭṭhapāda, you may know by the following considerations. Granting, Poṭṭhapāda, a material soul, having form, built up of the four elements, nourished by solid food; still some ideas, some states of consciousness, would arise to the man, and others would pass away. On this account also, Poṭṭhapāda, you can see how consciousness must be one thing. and soul another.’
22. ‘Then, Sir, I fall back on a soul made of mind, with all its major and minor parts complete, not deficient in any organ[379].’
‘And granting, Poṭṭhapāda, you had such a soul, the same argument would apply[380].’
‘And granting, Poṭṭhapāda, you had such a soul, still the same argument would apply[380:1].’
24. ‘But is it possible, Sir, for me to understand whether consciousness is the man’s soul, or the one is different from the other?’
‘Hard is it for you, Poṭṭhapāda, holding, as you do, different views, other things approving themselves to you, setting different aims before yourself, striving after a different perfection, trained in a different system of doctrine, to grasp this matter!’
25-27. ‘Then, Sir, if that be so, tell me at least: “Is the world eternal? Is this alone the truth, and any other view mere folly?”’
And to each question the Exalted One made the same reply:—][381]
‘This question is not calculated to profit, it is not 255 concerned with the Norm (the Dhamma), it does not redound even to the elements of right conduct, nor to detachment, nor to purification from lusts, nor to quietude, nor to tranquillisation of heart, nor to real knowledge, nor to the insight (of the higher stages of the Path), nor to Nirvāṇa. Therefore is it that I express no opinion upon it.’
‘I have expounded, Poṭṭhapāda, what pain[382] is; I have expounded what is the origin of pain; I have expounded what is the cessation of pain; I have expounded what is the method by which one may reach the cessation of pain[383].’
‘Because that question, Poṭṭhapāda, is calculated to profit, is concerned with the Norm, redounds to the beginnings of right conduct, to detachment, to purification from lusts, to quietude, to tranquillisation of heart, to real knowledge, to the insight of the higher stages of the Path, and to Nirvāṇa. Therefore is it, Poṭṭhapāda, that I have put forward a statement as to that.’
‘That is so, O Exalted One. That is so, O Happy One. And now let the Exalted One do what seemeth to him fit.’
31. Now no sooner had the Exalted One gone away than those mendicants bore down upon Poṭṭhapāda, the mendicant, from all sides with a torrent of jeering and biting words[384], saying: I Just so, forsooth, this Poṭṭhapāda gives vent to approval of whatsoever the Samaṇa 256 Gotama says, with his: “That is so, O Exalted One. That is so, O Happy One.” Now we, on the other hand, fail to see that the Samaṇa Gotama has put forward any doctrine that is distinct with regard to any one of the ten points raised.’ And they went through them all in detail.
But when they spake thus Poṭṭhapāda, the mendicant, replied: ‘Neither do I see that he puts forward, as certain, any proposition with respect to those points. But the Samaṇa Gotama propounds a method in accordance with the nature of things, true and fit, based on the Norm, and certain by reason of the Norm. And how could I refuse to approve, as well said, what has been so well said by the Samaṇa Gotama as he propounded that?’
32. Now after the lapse of two or three days Citta, the son of the elephant trainer[385], and Poṭṭhapāda, the mendicant, came to the place where the Exalted One was staying. And on their arrival Citta, the son of the elephant trainer, bowed low to the Exalted One, and took his seat on one side. And Poṭṭhapāda, the mendicant, exchanged with the Exalted One the greetings and compliments of courtesy and friendship, and took his seat on one side, and when he was so seated he told the Exalted One how the mendicants had jeered at him, and how he had replied.
33. 'All those mendicants, Poṭṭhapāda, are blind, and see not. You are the only one, with eyes to see, among them. Some things, Poṭṭhapāda, I have laid down as certain, other things I have declared uncertain.
The latter are those ten questions that you raised, and for the reasons given I hold them matters of uncertainty. The former are the Four Truths I expounded, and for the reasons given I hold them to be matters of certainty.
34. 'There are some Samaṇas and Brahmans, Poṭṭhapāda, who hold the following opinion, indulge in the following speculation: “The soul is perfectly happy and healthy after death.” And I went to them, and asked them whether that was their view or not. And they acknowledged that it was[386]. And I asked them whether, so far as they were in the habit of knowing or perceiving it[387], the world (that is, the people in the world) was perfectly happy, and they answered: “No.”
'Then I asked them: “Or further, Sirs, can you maintain that you yourselves for a whole night, or for a whole day, or even for half a night or day, have ever been perfectly happy?” And they answered: “No.”
'Then I said to them: “Or further, Sirs, do you know a way, or a method, by which you can realise a state that is altogether happy?” And still to that question they answered: “No.”
'And then I said: “Or have you, Sirs, ever heard the voices of gods who had realised rebirth in a perfectly happy world, saying: ‘Be earnest, O men, and direct in effort, towards the realisation of (rebirth in) a world of perfect happiness. For we, in consequence of similar effort, have been reborn in such a world.’” And still they answered: “No.”
‘Now what think you as to that, Poṭṭhapāda? That being so, does not the talk of those Samaṇas and Brahmans turn out to be without good ground[388]?’
351. 'Just as if a man should say: “How I long for, how I love the most beautiful woman in the land!”
'And people should ask him: “Well! good friend! this most beautiful woman in the land, whom you so love and long for, do you know whether that beautiful woman is a noble lady, or of priestly rank, or of the trader class, or of menial birth?”
'And people should ask him: “Well! good friend! This most beautiful woman in the land, whom you so love and long for, do you know what her name is, or her family name, or whether she be tall, or short, or of medium height; whether she be dark or brunette or golden in colour[389]; or in what village, or town, or city she dwells?”—
'And people should say to him: “So then, good friend, whom you know not, neither have seen, her do you love and long for?”
‘Now what think you of that, Poṭṭhapāda? Would it not turn out, that being so, that the talk of that man was witless talk?’
36, 37. 'Then just so also, Poṭṭhapāda, with the Samaṇas and Brahmans who talk about the soul being perfectly happy and healthy after death[390]. It is just, Poṭṭhapāda, as if a man were to put up a staircase in a place where four cross roads meet, to mount up thereby on to the upper storey of a mansion. And people should say to him: “Well! good friend! this mansion, to mount up into which you are making this staircase, do you know whether it is in the East, or in the West, or in the South, or in the North? whether it is high, or low, or of medium size?”
'And people should say to him: “But then, good friend, you are making a staircase to mount up into a mansion you know not of, neither have seen!”
‘Now what think you of that, Poṭṭhapāda? Would it not turn out, that being so, that the talk of that man was witless talk?’
38. ‘[Then surely just so, Poṭṭhapāda, with those Samaṇas and Brahmans who postulate a soul happy and healthy after death. For they acknowledge that they know no such state in this world now. They acknowledge that they cannot say their own souls have been happy here even for half a day. And they acknowledge that they know no way, no method, of ensuring such a result[391].] Now what think you of that, Poṭṭhapāda. That being so, does not their talk, too, turn out to be without good ground?’
39. 'The following three modes of personality, Poṭṭhapāda, (are commonly acknowledged in the world):—material, immaterial, and formless[392]. The 260 first has form, is made up of the four elements, and is nourished by solid food. The second has no form, is made up of mind, has all its greater and lesser limbs complete, and all the organs perfect. The third is without form, and is made up of consciousness only.
40-42. 'Now I teach a doctrine, Poṭṭhapāda, with respect to each of these[393], that leads to the putting off of that personality; so that if you walk according to that doctrine, the evil dispositions one has acquired may be put away[394]; the dispositions which tend to purification[395] may increase; and one may continue to see face to face, and by himself come to realise, the full perfection and grandeur of wisdom.
'Now it may well be, Poṭṭhapāda, that you think: “Evil dispositions may be put away, the dispositions 261 that tend to purification may increase, one may continue to see face to face, and by himself come to realise, the full perfection and grandeur of wisdom, but one may continue sad.” Now that, Poṭṭhapāda, would not be accurate judgment. When such conditions are fulfilled, then there will be joy, and happiness, and peace, and in continual mindfulness and self-mastery, one will dwell at ease.
43-45. 'And outsiders, Poṭṭhapāda, might question us thus: “What then, Sir, is that material (or that mental, or that formless) mode of personality for the putting away of which you preach such a doctrine as will lead him who walks according to it to get free from the evil dispositions he has acquired, to increase in the dispositions that tend to purification, so that he may continue to see face to face, and by himself come to realise, the full perfection and grandeur of wisdom?” And to that I should reply (describing it in the words I have now used to you[396]): “Why this very personality that you see before you is what I mean.”
‘Now what think you of that, Poṭṭhapāda. That being so, would not the talk turn out to be well grounded?’
46. 'Just, Poṭṭhapāda, as if a man should construct a staircase, to mount up into the upper storey of a palace, at the foot of the very palace itself. And men should say to him[397]:
'“Well! good friend! that palace, to mount up into which you are constructing this staircase, do you know whether it is in the East, or in the West, or in the 262 South, or in the North? whether it is high or low or of medium size?”
'And when so asked, he should answer: “Why! here is the very palace itself! It is at the very foot of it I am constructing my staircase with the object of mounting up into it.”
‘What would you think, Poṭṭhapāda, of that? Would not his talk, that being so, turn out to be well grounded?’
47. ‘Then just so. Poṭṭhapāda, when I answer thus[398] to the questions put to me.’
48. Now when he had thus spoken, Citta, the son of the elephant trainer, said to the Exalted One: ‘At that time, Sir, when a man is in possession of any one of the three modes of personality, are the other two unreal to him then? Is it only the one he has that is real[399]?’
49. 'At the time, Citta, when any one of the three modes of personality is going on, then it does not come under the category of either of the other two. It is known only by the name of the mode going on.
‘If people should ask you, Citta, thus: “Were you in the past, or not? Will you be in the future. or not? Are you now, or not?”—How would you answer?’
‘I should say that I was in the past, and not not; that I shall be in the future, and not not; that I am now, and not not.’
50. ‘Then if they rejoined: “Well! that past personality that you had, is that real to you; and the future personality, and the present, unreal? The future personality that you will have, is that real to you; and the past personality, and the present, unreal? The personality that you have now, in the present, is that real to you; and the past personality, and the future, unreal?”—How would you answer?’
‘I should say that the past personality that I had was real to me at the time when I had it; and the others unreal. And so also in the other two cases.’
51. 'Well! Just so, Citta, when any one of the three modes of personality is going on, then it does not come under the category of either of the other two.
52. 'Just, Citta, as from a cow comes milk, and from the milk curds, and from the curds butter, and from the butter ghee, and from the ghee junket; but when it is milk it is not called curds, or butter, or ghee, or junket; and when it is curds it is not called by any of the other names; and so on—
53. ‘Just so, Citta, when any one of the three modes of personality is going on, it is not called by the name of the other. For these, Citta, are merely names, expressions, turns of speech, designations in common use in the world. And of these a Tathāgata (one who has won the truth) makes use indeed, but is not led astray by them[400].’
‘Most excellent, Sir, are the words of thy mouth; most excellent! Just as if a man were to set up that which has been thrown down, or were to reveal that which has been hidden away, or were to point out the right road to him who has gone astray, or were to bring a light into the darkness so that those who had eyes could see external forms,—just even so has the truth 264 been made known, in many a figure, by the Exalted One. And I, Sir, betake myself to the Exalted One as my guide, to his Doctrine, and to his Order. May the Exalted One accept me as an adherent; as one who, from this day forth as long as life endures, has taken him as his guide.’
55. But Citta, the son of the elephant trainer, though he made use of the same words, concluded with the request: ‘And may I be permitted to go forth from the world under the Exalted One; may I receive admission into his Order.’
56. And his request was granted, and he was received into the Order. And from immediately after his initiation Citta, the son of the elephant trainer, remained alone and separate, earnest, zealous, and resolved. And e’er long he attained to that supreme goal of the higher life for the sake of which the clansmen go forth utterly from the household life to become houseless wanderers—yea! that supreme goal did he, by himself, and while yet in this visible world, bring himself to the knowledge of, and continue to realise, and to see face to face! And he became conscious that rebirth was at an end; that the higher life had been fulfilled; that all that should be done had been accomplished; and that, after this present life, there would be no beyond!
I. 1. Thus have I heard. The venerable Ānanda was once staying at Sāvatthi in the Jeta Wood, in Anātha Piṇḍika’s pleasaunce, shortly after the Exalted One had died away[401]. Now at that time the young Brahman Subha, the son of the man of Tudi[402], was dwelling at Sāvatthi on some business or other.
‘Come now, young man. Go to the Samaṇa Ānanda, and ask in my name as to whether his sickness and indisposition has abated, as to his health and vigour and condition of ease; and say: “'Twere well if the venerable Ānanda would be so kind as to pay a visit to Subha, the young Brahman, the son of the man of Tudi.”’
3. ‘Very well, Sir,’ said that young man in reply. And he went to the place where the venerable Ānanda was staying, and exchanged with him the greetings and compliments of politeness and courtesy, and took his seat apart. And, so seated, he delivered to the venerable Ānanda the message with which he had been charged.
‘It is not just now, young man, convenient, for I have just taken medicine. But perhaps I may be able to go on the morrow, if so be that conditions and opportunity seem fit.’
‘So, Sir, the matter has been so far accomplished that perhaps the venerable Ānanda may be able to come on the morrow, if so be that conditions and opportunity seem fit.’
5. And the venerable Ānanda, when the night had passed away, dressed himself early in the morning, and went, in his robes and carrying his bowl, with a Bhikkhu from the Cetiya countrya, as his attendant, to Subha’s house, and took his seat on the mat spread out for him. And Subha, the young Brahman, the son of the man of Tudi, came there where he sat, and exchanged with the venerable Ānanda the greetings and compliments of politeness and courtesy, and took his seat on one side. And, so seated, he said to the venerable Ānanda:
‘You, Sir, have waited long on the venerable Gotama, constantly near him, continually in his company. You, Sir, will know what were the things the venerable Gotama was wont to praise; to which he used to incite the folk, in which he established them, and made them firm. What were they, Ānanda?’
6. ‘Three are the bodies of doctrine, O Brahman, which the Exalted One was wont to praise; to which he used to incite the folk, in which he established them, and made them firm. And what are the three? The so noble body of doctrine regarding right conduct, the so noble body of doctrine regarding self-concentration, the so noble body of doctrine regarding intelligence[403].’
‘And what, Ānanda, is this so noble body of doctrine regarding right conduct (Sīla) in praise of which the venerable Gotama was wont to speak; to which he used to incite the folk, in which he established them, and made them firm?’
7. [The reply §§ 7-29 is §§ 40-63 of the Sāmañña-phala Sutta, including:
‘Wonderful is this, Ānanda, and mysterious—both that this so noble group of conduct is well-rounded, not incomplete; and that I perceive no other, like unto it, among the other Samaṇas and Brāhmaṇas outside of this communion. And were they also to perceive such in themselves, then would they be satisfied with thus much, and would say: “So far is enough. We have done thus much. The aim of our Samaṇaship has been reached.” But you, Ānanda, on the other hand, say: “There is yet something further, according to your system, still to be done.”’
II. 1. ‘And what, Ānanda, is this so noble body of doctrine regarding self-concentration (Samādhi) in praise of which the venerable Gotama was wont to speak; to which he used to incite the folk, in which he established them, and made them firm?’
[The answer §§ 2-18 is §§ 64-82 of the Sāmañña-phala Sutta, that is to say:
4. The emancipation of heart from the Five Hindrances—covetousness, ill-temper, sloth of body and mind, excitement and worry, and perplexity.
6-9. The Four Raptures (Jhānas). And the answer is followed by the same injunction as to something further to be done, and the same rejoinder as above in Chapter I, § 30.]
20. ‘And what, Ānanda, is this so noble body of doctrine regarding intellect (Paññā) in praise of which the venerable Gotama was wont to speak; to which he used to incite the folk, in which he established them, and made them firm?’
1. The Ṇāṇa-dassana—the insight which sees that the body is impermanent, and that mind (Viññāna) is bound up with it, has no existence independent of it.
3. The perception of the Four Truths as to sorrow and the Eightfold Path; the rooting out of one’s mind of the Intoxicants (the Asāvas); and the final. assurance, consequent thereon, of Emancipation gained.]
27. ‘This, young Brahman, is that so noble body of doctrine regarding intellect, of which that Exalted One was wont to speak in praise; to which he used to incite the folk, in which he established them, and made them firm.’
‘Wonderful is this, Ānanda, and mysterious—both that this so noble group of doctrine regarding intellect is well-rounded, not incomplete; and that I perceive no other, like unto it among the other Samaṇas and Brāhmaṇas outside of this communion. And 271 there is not, in this matter, anything further to be accomplished. Most excellent, Ānanda, are the words of thy mouth, most excellent! Just as if a man were to set up that which has been thrown down, or were to reveal that which has been hidden away, or were to point out the right road to him who has gone astray, or were to bring a light into the darkness so that those who have eyes could see external forms—just even so has the truth been made known to me, in many a figure, by the venerable Ānanda. And I, even I, betake myself to that venerable Gotama as my guide, to the truth, and to the Order. May the venerable Ānanda receive me as an adherent, as one who, from this day forth, as long as life endures. has taken them as his guide.’
1. Thus have I heard. The Exalted One was once staying at Nālandā in the Pāvārika’s mango grove[404]. Now Kevaddha[405], a young householder, came where the Exalted One was, and bowed down in salutation to him, and took a seat on one side. And, so seated, he said to the Exalted One:
‘This Nālandā of ours, Sir, is influential and prosperous, full of folk, crowded with people devoted to the Exalted One. It were well if the Exalted One were to give command to some brother to perform, by power surpassing that of ordinary men, a mystic wonder. Thus would this Nālandā of ours become even so much the more devoted to the Exalted One.’
'But, Kevaddha, it is not thus that I am wont to give instruction to the brethren: “Come now, my brethren; perform ye a mystic wonder, by power surpassing that of ordinary men, for the lay folk clad in their garments of white!”
2. And a second time Kevaddha made the same request to the Exalted One, and received a second time the same reply.
‘I would fain do no injury to the Exalted One. I only say that this Nālandā of ours is influential and prosperous, full of folk, crowded with people devoted to the Exalted One. It were well if the Exalted One were to give command to some brother to perform, by power surpassing that of ordinary men, a mystic wonder. Thus would this Nālandā of ours become even so much the more devoted to the Exalted One.’
'There are three sorts of wonders, Kevaddha, which I, having myself understood and realised them, have made known to others. And what are the three? The mystic wonder, the wonder of manifestation, and the wonder of education[406].
'In this case, Kevaddha, suppose that a brother enjoys the possession, in various ways, of mystic power—from being one he becomes multiform, from being multiform he becomes one: from being visible he becomes invisible: he passes without hindrance to the further side of a wall or a battlement or a mountain, as if through air: he penetrates up and down through solid ground, as if through water: he walks on water without dividing it, as if on solid ground: he travels cross-legged through the sky, like the birds on wing: he touches and feels with the hand even the Moon and the Sun, beings of mystic power and potency though they be: he reaches, even in the body, up to the heaven of Brahmā. And some believer, of trusting heart, should behold him doing so.
5. ‘Then that believer should announce the fact to an unbeliever, saying: “Wonderful, Sir, and marvellous is the mystic power and potency of that recluse. For verily I saw him indulging himself, in various ways, in mystic power:—from being one becoming multiform (&c., as before, down to) reaching, even in the body, up to the heaven of Brahmā.”’
‘Then that unbeliever should say to him: “Well, Sir! there is a certain charm called the Gandhara Charm. It is by the efficacy thereof that he performs all this[407].”’
'Well, Kevaddha! It is because I perceive danger in the practice of mystic wonders, that I loathe, and abhor, and am ashamed thereof.
'Suppose, in this case, Kevaddha, that a brother can make manifest the heart and the feelings, the reasonings and the thoughts, of other beings, of other individuals, saying: “So and so is in your mind. You are thinking of such and such a matter. Thus and thus are your emotions.” And some believer, of trusting heart, should see him doing so[408].
7. 'Then that believer should announce the fact to an unbeliever, saying: "Wonderful, Sir, and marvellous is the mystic power and potency of that recluse. For verily I saw him making manifest the heart and the feelings, the reasonings and the thoughts, of other beings, of other individuals, saying: “So and so is in your mind. You are thinking of such and such a matter. Thus and thus are your emotions.”
'Then that unbeliever should say to him: “Well, Sir! there is a charm called the Jewel Charm[409]. It is by the efficacy thereof that he performs all this.” 279 ‘Now what think you, Kevaddha? Might not the unbeliever so say?’
'Well, Kevaddha! It is because I perceive danger in the practice of the wonder of manifestation, that I loathe, and abhor, and am ashamed thereof.
'Suppose, Kevaddha, that a brother teaches thus: “Reason in this way, do not reason in that way. Consider thus, and not thus. Get rid of this disposition, train yourself, and remain, in that.” This, Kevaddha, is what is called “The wonder of education.”
[The text repeats the Sāmañña-phala Suttanta, §§ 40 to 84, and § 97, that is to say:
4. The minor details of mere morality (summarised above at p. 58) which he observes.
9. The emancipation of the heart from the Five Hindrances—covetousness, ill-temper, sloth of body and mind, excitement and worry, and perplexity.
12. The insight arising from the knowledge of the nature of the body, and its impermanence, and of the fact that consciousness is bound up with it.
13. The realisation of the Four Truths, the destruction of the Intoxicants, and the final assurance of the emancipation of Arahatship.
67. 'So these, Kevaddha, are the three wonders I have understood and realised myself, and made known to others.
'[410]Once upon a time, Kevaddha, there occurred to a certain brother in this very company of the brethren, a doubt on the following point: “Where now do these four great elements—earth, water, fire, and wind—pass away, leaving no trace behind?” So that brother, Kevaddha, worked himself up into such a state of ecstasy that the way leading. to the world of the Gods became clear to his ecstatic vision.
68. 'Then that brother, Kevaddha, went up to the realm of the Four Great Kings; and said to the gods thereof: “Where, my friends, do the four great elements—earth, water, fire, and wind—cease, leaving no trace behind?”
'And when he had thus spoken the gods in the heaven of the Four Great Kings said to him: “We, brother, do not know that. But there are the Four Great Kings. more potent and more glorious than we. They will know it.”
69-79. ‘Then that brother, Kevaddha, went to the Four Great Kings, [and put the same question, and was sent on, by a similar reply, to the Thirty-three, who sent him on to their king, Sakka; who sent him on to the Yāma gods. who sent him on to their king, Suyāma; who sent him on to the Tusita gods, who sent him on to their king, Santusita; who sent him on 281 to the Nimmāna-rati gods, who sent him on to their king, Sunimmita; who sent him on to the Para-nimmita Vasavatti gods, who sent him on to their king, Vasavatti; who sent him on to the gods of the Brahmā-world[411].’]
80. 'Then that brother, Kevaddha, became so absorbed by self-concentration that the way to the Brahmā-world became clear to his mind thus pacified. And he drew near to the gods of the retinue of Brahmā, and said: “Where, my friends, do the four great elements-earth, water, fire, and wind-cease, leaving no trace behind?”
'And when he had thus spoken the gods of the retinue of Brahmā replied: “We, brother, do not know that. But there is Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Supreme One, the Mighty One, the All-seeing One, the Ruler, the Lord of all, the Controller, the Creator, the Chief of all, appointing to each his place, the Ancient of days, the Father of all that are and are to be[412]! He is more potent and more glorious than we. He will know it.”
'“We, brother. know not where Brahmā is, nor why Brahmā is, nor whence. But, brother, when the signs of his coming appear, when the light ariseth, and the glory shineth, then will He be manifest. For that is the portent of the manifestation of Brahmā when the light ariseth, and the glory shineth.”
81. ‘And it was not long, Kevaddha, before that Great Brahmā became manifest. And that brother drew near to him, and said: “Where, my friend, do the four great elements—earth, water, fire, and wind—cease, leaving no trace behind?”’
And when he had thus spoken that Great Brahmā said to him: “I, brother, am the Great Brahmā, the Supreme, the Mighty, the All-seeing, the Ruler, the 282 Lord of all, the Controller, the Creator, the Chief of all, appointing to each his place, the Ancient of days, the Father of all that are and are to be!”
82. 'Then that brother answered Brahmā, and said: “I did not ask you, friend, as to whether you were indeed all that you now say. But I ask you where the four great elements—earth, water, fire, and wind—cease, leaving no trace behind?”
83. 'Then again, Kevaddha, Brahmā gave the same reply. And that brother, yet a third time, put to Brahmā his question as before. 'Then, Kevaddha, the Great Brahmā took that brother by the arm and led him aside, and said:
'“These gods, the retinue of Brahmā, hold me, brother, to be such that there is nothing I cannot see, nothing I have not understood, nothing I have not realised. Therefore I gave no answer in their presence. I do not know, brother, where those four great elements—earth, water, fire, and wind—cease, leaving no trace behind. Therefore you, brother, have done wrong, have acted ill, in that, ignoring[413] the Exalted One. you have undertaken this long search, among others, for an answer to this question. Go you now, return to the Exalted One, ask him the question, and accept the answer according as he shall make reply.”
84. 'Then, Kevaddha, that Bhikkhu, as quickly as one could stretch forth his bended arm, or draw it in when stretched forth, vanished from the Brahmā-world, and appeared before me. And he bowed in salutation to me, and took his seat on one side; and, so seated, he said to me: “Where is it, Sir, that these four great elements—earth, water, fire, and wind—cease, leaving no trace behind?”
85. 'And when he had thus spoken, Kevaddha, I answered him thus: "Long, long ago, brother, 283 sea-faring traders were wont, when they were setting sail on an ocean voyage, to take with them a land-sighting bird. And when the ship got out of sight of the shore they would let the land-sighting bird free. Such a bird would fly to the East, and to the South, and to the West, and to the North, to the zenith, and to the intermediate points of the compass. And if anywhere on the horizon it caught sight of land, thither would it fly. But if no land, all round about, were visible, it would come back even to the ship. Just so, brother, do you, having sought an answer to this question, and sought it in vain, even up to the Brahmā-world, come back therefore to me. Now the question, brother, should not be put as you have put it. Instead of asking where the four great elements cease, leaving no trace behind, you should have asked:
“Where do earth, water, fire, and wind, And long and short, and fine and coarse. Pure and impure, no footing find? Where is it that both name and form[414] Die out, leaving no trace behind?”
'The intellect of Arahatship, the invisible, the endless, accessible from every side[415]— 284 ‘There is it that earth, water, fire, and wind, And long and short, and fine and coarse, Pure and impure, no footing find. There is it that both name and form Die out, leaving no trace behind. When intellection ceases they all also cease.’
Thus spake the Exalted One. And Kevaddha, the young householder, pleased at heart, rejoiced at the spoken word.
1. Thus have I heard. The Exalted One, when once passing on a tour through the Kosala districts with a great multitude of the members of the Order, with about five hundred Bhikshus, arrived at Sālavatikā (a village surrounded by a row of Sāla trees). Now at that time Lohicca[416] the Brahman was established at Sālavatikā, a spot teeming with life, with much grassland and woodland and corn, on a royal domain granted him by King Pasenadi of Kosala, as a royal gift, with power over it as if he were the king[417].
2. Now at that time Lohicca the Brahman was thinking of harbouring the following wicked view: ‘Suppose that a Samaṇa or a Brāhmaṇa have reached up to some good state (of mind), then he should tell no one else about it. For what can one man do for another? To tell others would be like the man who, having broken through an old bond, should entangle himself in a new one. Like that, I say, is this (desire to declare to others); it is a form of lust. For what can one man do for another[418]?’
3. Now Lohicca the Brahman heard the news: ‘They say that the Samaṇa Gotama, of the sons of the Sākyas, who went out from the Sākya clan to adopt the religious life, has now arrived, with a great company of the brethren of his Order, on his tour through the Kosala districts, at Sālavatikā. Now regarding that venerable Gotama, such is the high reputation that has been noised abroad:—that Exalted One is an Arahat, fully awakened, abounding in wisdom and goodness, happy, with knowledge of the worlds, unsurpassed as a guide to mortals willing to be led, a teacher for gods and men, an exalted one, a Buddha. He, by himself, thoroughly knows, and sees as it were face to face, this universe—including the worlds above of the gods, the Brahmās, and the Māras; and the world below with its Samaṇas and Brāhmaṇas, its princes and peoples—and having known it, he makes his knowledge known to others. The truth, lovely in its origin, lovely in its progress, lovely in its consummation, doth he proclaim both in the spirit and in the letter. The higher life doth he make known in all its fullness, and in all its purity. And good is it to pay visits to Arahats like that.’
4. Then Lohicca the Brahman said to Bhesikā the barber: ‘Come now, good Bhesikā, go where the Samaṇa Gotama is staying, and, on your arrival, ask in my name as to whether his sickness and indisposition has abated, as to his health and vigour and condition of ease; and speak thus: “May the venerable Gotama, and with him the brethren of the Order, accept the to-morrow’s meal from Lohicca the Brahman.”’
5. ‘Very well, Sir,’ said Bhesikā the barber, acquiescing in the word of Lohicca the Brahman, and did so even as he had been enjoined. And the Exalted One consented, by silence, to his request.
6. And when Bhesikā the barber perceived that the Exalted One had consented, he rose from his seat, and passing the Exalted One with his right hand towards him, went to Lohicca the Brahman, and on his arrival spake to him thus:
‘We addressed that Exalted One[419], Sir, in your name, even as you commanded. And the Exalted One hath consented to eome.’
7. Then Lohicca the Brahman, when the night had passed, made’ ready at his own dwelling-place sweet food, both hard and soft, and said to Bhesikā the barber: ‘Come now, good Bhesikā, go where the Samaṇa Gotama is. staying, and on your arrival, announce the time to him, saying: “It is time, O Gotama, and the meal is ready.”’
‘Very well, Sir,’ said Bhesikā the barber in assent to the words of Lohicca the Brahman; and did so even as he had been enjoined.
And the Exalted One, who had robed himself early in the early morning, went robed, and carrying his bowl with him, with the brethren of the Order, towards Sālavatikā.
8. Now, as he went, Bhesikā the Barber walked, step by step, behind the Exalted One. And he said to him:
'The following wicked opinion has occurred to Lohicca the Brahman: “Suppose that a Samaṇa or a Brāhmaṇa have reached up to some good state (of mind), then he should tell no one else about it. For what can one man do for another? To tell others would be like the man who, having broken through an old bond, should entangle himself in a new one. Like that, I say, is this (desire to declare to others); it is a form of lust.” ‘Twere well, Sir, if the Exalted One would disabuse his mind thereof. For what can one man do for another?’
9. And the Exalted One went on to the dwelling-place of Lohicca the Brahman, and sat down on the seat prepared for him. And Lohicca the Brahman satisfied the Order, with the Buddha at its head, with his own hand, with sweet food both hard 291 and soft, until they refused any more. And when the Exalted One had finished his meal, and had cleansed the bowl and his hands, Lohicca the Brahman brought a low seat and sat down beside him. And to him, thus seated, the Exalted One spake as follows:
‘Is it true, what they say, Lohicca, that the following wicked opinion has arisen in your mind: [and he set forth the opinion as above set forth]?’
‘Then suppose, Lohicca, one were to speak thus: “Lohicca the Brahman has a domain at Sālavatikā. Let him alone enjoy all the revenue and all the produce of Sālavatikā, allowing nothing to anybody else!” Would the utterer of that speech be a danger-maker as touching the men who live in dependence upon you, or not?’
‘Now if a man hold unsound doctrine, Lohicca, I declare that one of two future births will be his lot, either purgatory or rebirth as an animal.’
‘Then suppose, Lohicca, one were to speak thus: “King Pasenadi of Kosala is in possession of Kāsi and Kosala. Let him enjoy all the revenue and all the produce of Kāsi and Kosala. allowing nothing to 292 anybody else.” Would the utterer ot that speech be a danger-maker as touching the men who live in dependence on King Pasenadi of Kosala—both you yourself and others—or not?’
'Now if a man hold unsound doctrine, Lohicca, I declare that one of two future births will be his lot, either purgatory or rebirth as an animal.
12 and 14. 'So then, Lohicca, you admit that he who should say that you, being in occupation of Sālavatikā, should therefore yourself enjoy all the revenue and produce thereof, bestowing nothing on any one else; and he who should say that King Pasenadi of Kosala, being in power over Kāsi and Kosala, should therefore himself enjoy all the revenue and produce thereof, bestowing nothing on any one else—would be making danger for those living in dependence on you; or for those, you and others, living in dependence upon the King. And that those who thus make danger for others, must be wanting in sympathy for them. And that the man wanting in sympathy has his heart set fast in enmity. And that to have one’s heart set fast in enmity is unsound doctrine:—
13 and 15. 'Then just so, Lohicca, he who should say: “Suppose a Samaṇa or a Brāhmaṇa to have reached up to some good state (of mind), then should he tell no one else about it. For what can one man do for another? To tell others would be like the man who, having broken through an old bond, should entangle himself in a new one. Like that, I say, is this desire to declare to others, it is a form of lust;”— just 293 so he, who should say thus, would be putting obstacles in the way of those clansman who, having taken upon themselves the Doctrine and Discipline set forth by Him-who-has-won-the-Truth, have attained to great distinction therein—to the fruit of conversion, for instance, or to the fruit of once returning, or to the fruit of never returning, or even to Arahatship—he would be putting obstacles in the way of those who are bringing to fruition the course of conduct that will lead to rebirth in states of bliss in heaven[420]. But putting obstacles in their way he would be out of sympathy for their welfare; being out of sympathy for their welfare his heart would become established in enmity; and when one’s heart is established in enmity, that is unsound doctrine. Now if a man hold unsound doctrine, Lohicca, I declare that one of two future births will be his lot, either purgatory or rebirth as an animal[421].
16. 'There are these three sorts of teachers in the world, Lohicca, who are worthy of blame. And whosoever should blame such a one, his rebuke would be justified, in accord with the facts and the truth, not improper. What are the three?
'In the first place, Lohicca, there is a sort of teacher who has not himself attained to that aim of Samaṇaship for the sake of which he left his home and adopted the homeless life. Without having himself attained to it he teaches a doctrine (Dhamma) to his hearers, saying: “This is good for you, this will make you happy.” Then those hearers of his neither listen to him, nor give ear to his words, nor become stedfast in heart through their knowledge thereof; they go their own way, apart from the teaching of the master. Such a teacher may be rebuked, setting out these facts, and 294 adding: “You are like one who should make advances to her who keeps repulsing him, or should embrace her who turns her face away from him. Like that, do I say, is this lust of yours (to go on posing as a teacher of men, no one heeding, since they trust you not). For what, then, can one man do for another?”
'This, Lohicca, is the first sort of teacher in the world worthy of blame. And whosoever should blame such a one, his rebuke would be justified, in accord with the facts and the truth, not improper.
17. 'In the second place, Lohicca, there is a sort of teacher who has not himself attained to that aim of Samaṇaship for the sake of which he left his home and adopted the homeless life. Without having himself attained to it he teaches a doctrine to his hearers, saying: “This is good for you; that will make you happy.” And to him his disciples listen; they give ear to his words; they become stedfast in heart by their understanding what is said; and they go not their own way, apart from the teaching of the master. Such a teacher may be rebuked, setting out these facts and adding: “You are like a man who, neglecting his own field, should take thought to weed out his neighbour’s field. Like that, do I say, is this lust of yours (to go on teaching others when you have not taught yourself). For what, then, can one man do for another?”
'This, Lohicca, is the second sort of teacher in the world worthy of blame. And whosoever should blame such a one, his rebuke would be justified, in accord with the facts and the truth, not improper.
18. 'And again, Lohicca, in the third place, there is a sort of teacher who has himself attained to that aim of Samaṇaship for the sake of which he left his home and adopted the homeless life. Having himself attained it, he teaches the doctrine to his hearers, saying: “This is good for you, that will make you happy.” But those hearers of his neither listen to him, nor give ear to his words, nor become stedfast in heart through understanding thereof; they go their own way, apart 295 from the teaching of the master. Such a teacher may be rebuked, setting out these facts, and adding: "You are like a man who, having broken through an old bond, should entangle himself in a new one. Like that, do I say, is this lust of yours (to go on teaching when you have not trained yourself to teach). For what, then, can one man do for another?
‘This, Lohicca, is the third sort of teacher in the world worthy of blame. And whosoever should blame such a one, his rebuke would be justified, in accord with the facts and the truth, not improper. And these, Lohicca, are the three sorts of teachers of which I spoke.’
1. The appearance of a Tathāgata (one who won the truth), his preaching, the conversion of a hearer, his adoption of the homeless state. (Above, pp. 78, 79.)
2. The minor details of mere morality that he practises. (Above, pp. 57, 58.)
3. The Confidence of heart he gains from this practice. (Above, p. 79.)
4. The paragraph on ‘Guarded is the door of his Senses.’ (Above, pp. 79, 80.)
5. The paragraph on ‘Mindful and Self-possessed.’ (Above, pp. 80, 81.)
6. The paragraph on Simplicity of life, being content with little. (Above, p. 81.)
7. The paragraphs on Emancipation from the Five Hindrances—covetousness, ill-temper, laziness, worry, and perplexity. (Above, pp. 82-84.)
8. The paragraph on the Joy and Peace that, as a result of this emancipation, fills his whole being. (Above, p. 84.)
9. The paragraphs on the Four Raptures (Jhānas). (Above, pp. 84-86.)
10. The paragraphs on the Insight arising from Knowledge (the knowledge of the First Path). (Above, pp. 86, 87.)
11. The paragraphs on the Realisation of the Four Noble Truths, the destruction of the Intoxications—lust, delusions, becomings, and ignorance—and the attainment of Arahatship. (Above, pp. 92, 93.)
‘And whosoever the teacher be, Lohicca, under whom the disciple attains to distinction so excellent as that[^fn_296_1], that, Lohicca, is a teacher not open to blame in the world. And whosoever should blame such a one, his rebuke would be unjustifiable, not in accord either with the facts or with the truth, without good ground.’
'Just, Gotama, as if a man had caught hold of a man, falling over the precipitous edge of purgatory, by the hair of his head, and lifted him up safe back on the firm land—just so have I, on the point of falling into purgatory, been lifted back on to the land by the venerable Gotama. Most excellent, O Gotama, are the words of thy mouth, most excellent! Just as if a man were to set up what has been thrown down, or were to reveal what has been hidden away, or were to point out the right road to him who has gone astray or were to bring a light into the darkness so that those who had eyes could see external forms—just even so has the truth been made known to me, in many a
{1. Uḷāraṃ visesaṃ adhigacchati. See for instance Saṃyutta V, 154, 5.} 297 figure, by the venerable Gotama. And I, even I, betake myself to the venerable Gotama as my guide, to the Doctrine, and to the Order. May the venerable Gotama accept me as a disciple; as one who, from this day forth as long as life endures, has taken him as his guide!’
1. Thus have I heard. When the Exalted One was once journeying through Kosala with a great company of the brethren, with about five hundred brethren, he came to the Brahman village in Kosala which is called Manasākaṭa. And there at Manasākaṭa the Exalted One stayed in the mango grove, on the bank of the river Aciravatī, to the north of Manasākaṭa.
2. Now at that time many very distinguished and wealthy Brahmans were staying at Manasākaṭa; to wit, Kankī the Brahman, Tārukkha the Brahman, Pokkharasādi the Brahman, Jāṇussoṇi the Brahman, Todeyya the Brahman, and other very distinguished and wealthy Brahmans[423].
3. Now a conversation sprung up between Vāseṭṭha and Bhāradvāja, when they were taking exercise (after their bath) and walking up and down in thoughtful mood, as to which was the true path, and which the false[424].’
‘This is the straight path, this the direct way which makes for salvation, and leads him, who acts according to it, into a state of union with Brahmā. I mean that which has been announced by the Brahman Pokkharasādi.’
‘This is the straight path, this the direct way which makes for salvation, and leads him, who acts according to it, into a state of union with Brahmā. I mean that which has been announced by the Brahman Tārukkha.’
6. But neither was the young Brahman Vāseṭṭha able to convince the young Brahman Bhāradvāja, nor was the young Brahman Bhāradvāja able to convince the young Brahman Vāseṭṭha.
‘That Samaṇa Gotama, Bhāradvāja, of the sons of the Sākyas, who went out from the Sākya clan to adopt the religious life, is now staying at Manasākaṭa, in the mango grove, on the bank of the river Aciravatī, to the north of Manasākaṭa. Now regarding that venerable Gotama, such is the high reputation that has been noised abroad: “That Exalted One is an Arahat, a fully enlightened one, abounding in wisdom and goodness, happy, with knowledge of the worlds, unsurpassed as a guide to mortals willing to be led, a teacher of gods and men, an Exalted One, a Buddha.” 302 Come, then, Bhāradvāja, let us go to the place where the Samaṇa Gotama is; and when we have come there, let us ask the Samaṇa Gotama touching this. matter. What the Samaṇa Gotama shall declare unto us, that let us bear in mind[425].’
‘Very well, my friend!’ said the young Brahman Bhāradvāja, in assent, to the young Brahman Vāseṭṭha.
8. Then the young Brahman Vāseṭṭha and the young Brahman Bhāradvāja went on to the place where the Exalted One was.
And when they had come there, they exchanged with the Exalted One the greetings and compliments of politeness and courtesy, and sat down beside him. And while they were thus seated the young Brahman Vāseṭṭha said to the Exalted One:
'As we, Gotama, were taking exercise and walking up and down, there sprung up a conversation between us on which was the true path, and which the false. I said thus:
‘“This is the straight path, this the direct way which makes for salvation, and leads him who acts according to it, into a state of union with Brahmā. I mean that which has been announced by the Brahman Pokkharasādi.”’
‘“This is the straight path, this the direct way which makes for salvation, and leads him, who acts according to it, into a state of union with Brahmā. I mean that which has been announced by the Brahman Tārukkha.”’
'"This is the straight path, this the direct way which makes for salvation, and leads him, who acts according to it, into a state of union with Brahmā.
‘“This is the straight path, this the direct way which makes for salvation, and leads him, who acts according to it, into a state of union with Brahmā. I mean that which has been announced by the Brahman Tārukkha.”’
‘Wherein, then, O Vāseṭṭha, is there a strife, a dispute, a difference of opinion between you[426]?’
10. 'Concerning the true path and the false, Gotama. Various Brahmans, Gotama, teach various paths. The Addhariyā Brahmans, the Tittiriyā Brahmans, the Chandokā Brahmans [the Chandavā Brahmans], the Bavharijā Brahmans[427]. Are all those saving paths? Are they all paths which will lead him, who acts according to them, into a state of union with Brahmā?
‘Just, Gotama, as near a village or a town there are many and various paths[428], yet they all meet together in the village—just in that way are all the various paths taught by various Brahmans—the Addhariyā Brahmans, the Tittiriyā Brahmans, the Chandokā Brahmans [the Chandavā Brahmans], the Bavharijā Brahmans. Are all these saving paths? Are they all paths which will lead him, who acts according to them, into a state of union with Brahmā?’
12. ‘But yet, Vāseṭṭha, is there a single one of the Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas who has ever seen Brahmā face to face?’
‘Or is there then, Vāseṭṭha, a single one of the teachers of the Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas who has seen Brahmā face to face?’
‘Or is there then, Vāseṭṭha, a single one of the teachers of the teachers of the Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas who has seen Brahmā face to face?’
‘Or is there then, Vāseṭṭha, a single one of the Brahmans up to the seventh generation who has seen Brahmā face to face?’
13. ‘Well then, Vāseṭṭha, those ancient Rishis of the Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas, the authors of the verses, the utterers of the verses, whose ancient form of words so chanted, uttered, or composed, the Brahmans of to-day chant over again or repeat; intoning or reciting exactly as has been intoned or recited—to wit, Aṭṭhaka, Vāmaka, Vāmadeva, Vessāmitta, Yamataggi, Angirasa, Bhāradvāja, Vāsettha, Kassapa, and Bhagu[429]—did even they speak thus, saying: “We know it, we have seen it, where Brahmā is, whence Brahmā is, whither Brahmā is?”’
14. 'Then you say, Vāseṭṭha, that none of the Brahmans, or of their teachers, or of their pupils, even up to the seventh generation, has ever seen Brahmā face to face. And that even the Rishis of old, the authors and utterers of the verses, of the ancient form of words which the Brahmans of to-day so carefully intone and recite precisely as they have 305 been handed down—even they did not pretend to know or to have seen where or whence or whither Brahmā is[430]. So that the Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas have forsooth said thus: “What we know not, what we have not seen, to a state of union with that we can show the way, and can say: ‘This is the straight path, this is the direct way which makes for salvation, and leads him, who acts according to it, into a state of union with Brahmā!’”
‘Now what think you, Vāseṭṭha? Does it not follow, this being so, that the talk of the Brahmans, versed though they be in the Three Vedas, turns out to be foolish talk?’
‘In sooth, Gotama, that being so, it follows that the talk of the Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas is foolish talk!’
15. 'Verily, Vāseṭṭha. that Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas should be able to show the way to a state of union with that which they do not know, neither have seen—such a condition of things can in no wise be!
‘Just, Vāseṭṭha, as when a string of blind men are clinging one to the other[431], neither can the foremost see, nor can the middle one see, nor can the hindmost see—just even so, methinks, Vāseṭṭha, is the talk of the Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas but blind talk: the first sees not, the middle one sees not, nor can the latest see. The talk then of these 306 Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas turns out to be ridiculous) mere words, a vain and empty thing!’
16. ‘Now what think you, Vāseṭṭha? Can the Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas—like other, ordinary, folk—see the Moon and the Sun as they pray to, and praise, and worship them, turning round with clasped hands towards the place whence they rise and where they set?’
‘Certainly, Gotama, they can[432].’
17. ‘Now what think you, Vāseṭṭha? The Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas, who can very well—like other, ordinary, folk—see the Moon and the Sun as they pray to, and praise, and worship them, turning round with clasped hands to the place whence they rise and where they set—are those Brahmans, versed in the Three Vedas, able to point out the way to a state of union with the Moon or the Sun, saying: “This is the straight path, this the direct way which makes for salvation, and leads him, who acts according to it, to a state of union with the Moon or the Sun?”’
18. ‘So you say, Vāseṭṭha, that the Brahmans are not able to point out the way to union with that which they have seen, and you further say that neither any one of them, nor of their pupils, nor of their predecessors even to the seventh generation has ever seen Brahmā. And you further say that even the Rishis of old, whose words they hold in such deep respect, did not pretend to know, or to have seen where, or whence, or whither Brahmā is. Yet these Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas say, forsooth, that they can point out the way to union with that which they know not, neither have seen[433]. Now what 307 think you, Vāseṭṭha? Does it not follow that, this being so, the talk of the Brahmans, versed though they be in the Three Vedas, turns out to be foolish talk?’
‘In sooth, Gotama, that being so, it follows that the talk of the Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas is foolish talk!’
19. ‘Very good, Vāseṭṭha. Verily then, Vāseṭṭha, that Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas should be able to show the way to a state of union with that which they do not know, neither have seen—such a condition of things can in no wise be!’
'Just, Vāseṭṭha, as if a man should say, “How I long for, how I love the most beautiful woman in this land!”
'And people should ask him, “Well! good friend! this most beautiful woman in the land, whom you thus love and long for, do you know whether that beautiful woman is a noble lady or a Brahman woman, or of the trader class, or a Śūdra?”
'And when people should ask him, “Well! good friend! this most beautiful woman in all the land, whom you so love and long for, do you know what the name of that most beautiful woman is, or what is her family name, whether she be tall or short or of medium height, dark or brunette or golden in colour, or in what village or town or city she dwells?”
'And then people should say to him, “So then, good friend, whom you know not, neither have seen, her do you love and long for?”
‘Now what think you, Vāseṭṭha? Would it not turn out, that being so, that the talk of that man was foolish talk?’
20. ‘And just even so, Vāseṭṭha, though you say that the Brahmans are not able to point out the way to union with that which they have seen, and you further say that neither any one of them, nor of their pupils, nor of their predecessors even to the seventh generation has ever seen Brahmā. And you further say that even the Rishis of old, whose words they hold in such deep respect, did not pretend to know, or to have seen where, or whence, or whither Brahmā is. Yet these Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas say, forsooth, that they can point out the way to union with that which they know not, neither have seen! Now what think you, Vāseṭṭha? Does it not follow that, this being so, the talk of the Brahmans, versed though they be in the Three Vedas, is foolish talk?’
‘In sooth, Gotama, that being so, it follows that the talk of the Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas is foolish talk!’
‘Very good, Vāseṭṭha. Verily then, Vāseṭṭha, that Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas should be able to show the way to a state of union with that which they do not know, neither have seen—such a condition of things can in no wise be.’
21. ‘Just, Vāseṭṭha, as if a man should make a staircase in the place where four roads cross, to mount up into a mansion. And people should say to him, "Well, good friend, this mansion, to mount up into which you are making this staircase, do you know whether it is in the east, or in the south, or in the west, or in the north? whether it is high or low or of medium size?’
'And people should say to him, “But then, good friend, you are making a staircase to mount up into something—taking it for a mansion—which, all the while, you know not, neither have seen!”
‘Now what think you, Vāseṭṭha? Would it not 309 turn out, that being so, that the talk of that man was foolish talk?’
22. ‘And just even so, Vāseṭṭha, though you say that the Brahmans are not able to point out the way to union with that which they have seen, and you further say that neither any one of them, nor of their pupils, nor of their predecessors even to the seventh generation has ever seen Brahmā And you further say that even the Rishis of old, whose words they hold in such deep respect, did not pretend to know, or to have seen where, or whence, or whither Brahmā is. Yet these Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas say, forsooth, that they can point out the way to union with that which they know not, neither have seen! Now what think you, Vāseṭṭha? Does it not follow that, this being so, the talk of the Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas is foolish talk?’
‘In sooth, Gotama, that being so, it follows that the talk of the Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas is foolish talk!’
23. ‘Very good, Vāseṭṭha. Verily then, Vāseṭṭha, that Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas should be able to show the way to a state of union with that which they do not know, neither have seen—such a condition of things can in no wise be.’
24. 'Again, Vāseṭṭha, if this river Aciravatī were full of water even to the brim, and overflowing[434]. And a man with business on the other siJe, bound for tlle other side, making for the otller side, should come up, and want to cross over. And he, standing on this bank, should invoke the further bank, and say, “Come hither, O further bank! come over to this side!”
‘Now what think you, Vāseṭṭha? Would the further bank of the river Aciravatī, by reason of that man’s 310 invoking and praying and hoping and praising, come over to this side?’
25. ‘In just the same way, Vāseṭṭha, do the Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas—omitting the practice of those qualities which really make a man a Brahman, and adopting the practice of those qualities which really make men non-Brahmans—say thus: “Indra we call upon, Soma we call upon, Varuṇa we call upon, Īsāna we call upon, Pajāpati we call upon, Brahmā we call upon, [Mahiddhi we call upon, Yama we call upon[435]!]” Verily, Vāseṭṭha, that those Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas, but omitting the practice of those qualities which really make a man a Brahman, and adopting the practice of those qualities which really make men non-Brahmans—that they, by reason of their invoking and praying and hoping and praising, should, after death and when the body is dissolved, become united with Brahmā—verily such a condition of things can in no wise be[436]!’
26. ‘Just, Vāseṭṭha, as if this river Aciravatī were full, even to the brim, and overflowing. And a man with business on the other side, making for the other side, bound for the other side, should come up, and want to cross over. And he, on this bank, were to be bound tightly, with his arms behind his back, by a strong chain. Now what think you, Vāseṭṭha, would that man be able to get over from this bank of the river Aciravatī to the further bank?’
27. ‘In the same way, Vāseṭṭha, there are five things 311 leading to lust, which are called, in the Discipline of the Arahats, a “chain” and a “bond.”’
‘Forms perceptible to the eye; desirable, agreeable, pleasant, attractive forms, that are accompanied by lust and cause delight. Sounds of the same kind perceptible to the ear. Odours of the same kind perceptible to the nose. Tastes of the same kind perceptible to the tongue. Substances of the same kind perceptible to the body by touch. These five things predisposing to passion are called, in the Discipline of the Arahats, a “chain” and a “bond.” And these five things predisposing to lust, Vāseṭṭha, do the Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas cling to, they are infatuated by them, attached to them, see not the danger of them, know not how unreliable they are, and so enjoy them[437].’
28. ‘And verily, Vāseṭṭha, that Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas, but omitting the practice of those qualities which really make a man a Brahman, and adopting the practice of those qualities which really make men non-Brahmans— clinging to these five things predisposing to passion, infatuated by them, attached to them, seeing not their danger, knowing not their unreliability, and so enjoying them—that these Brahmans should after death, on the dissolution of the body, become united to Brahmā—such a condition of things can in no wise be!’
29. 'Again, Vāseṭṭha, if this river Aciravatī were full of water even to the brim, and overflowing. And a man with business on the other side, making for the other side, bound for the other side, should come up, and want to cross over. And if he covering himself up, even to his head, were to lie down, on this bank, to sleep.
‘Now what think you, Vāseṭṭha? Would that man 312 be able to get over from this bank of the river Aciravatī to the further bank?’
30. ‘And in the same way, Vāseṭṭha, there are these Five Hindrances, in the Discipline of the Arahats[438], which are called “veils,” and are called “hindrances,” and are called “obstacles,” and are called “entanglements.”’
'These are the Five Hindrances, Vāseṭṭha, which. in the Discipline of the Arahats, are called veils, and are called hindrances, and are called obstacles, and are called entanglements[439].
'Now with these Five Hindrances, Vāseṭṭha, the Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas are veiled, hindered, obstructed, and entangled.
‘And verily, Vāseṭṭha, that Brahmans versed in the Three Vedas, but omitting the practice of those qualities which really make a man a Brahman, and adopting the practice of those qualities which really make men non-Brahmans—veiled, hindered, obstructed, and entangled by these Five Hindrances—that these Brahmans should after death, on the dissolution of the body, become united to Brahmā—such a condition of things can in no wise be!’
31. ‘Now what think you, Vāseṭṭha, and what have you heard from the Brahmans aged and well-stricken in years, when the learners and teachers are talking 313 together? Is Brahmā in possession of wives and wealth, or is he not[440]?’
‘Is his mind tarnished, or is it pure[441]?’
‘Has he self-mastery, or has he not[442]?’
32. ‘Now what think you, Vāseṭṭha, are the Brahmans versed in the Vedas in the possession of wives and wealth, or are they not?’
33. ‘Then you say, Vāseṭṭha, that the Brahmans are in possession of wives and wealth, and that Brahmā is not. Can there, then, be agreement and likeness between the Brahmans with their wives and property, and Brahmā, who has none of these things?’
34. ‘Very good, Vāseṭṭha. But, verily, that these Brahmans versed in the Vedas, who live married and wealthy, should after death, when the body is dissolved, become united with Brahmā who has none of these things—such a condition of things can in no wise be!’
35. ‘Then you say, too, Vāseṭṭha, that the Brahmans bear anger and malice in their hearts. and are tarnished in heart and uncontrolled, whilst Brahmā is free from anger and malice, pure in heart, and has self-mastery. Now can there, then, be concord and likeness between the Brahmans and Brahmā?’
36. 'Very good, Vāseṭṭha. That these Brahmans versed in the Vedas and yet bearing anger and malice in their hearts, sinful, and uncontrolled, should after death, when the body is dissolved, become united to Brahmā, who is free from anger and malice, pure in heart, and has self-mastery—such a condition of things can in no wise be!
'So that thus then, Vāseṭṭha, the Brahmans, versed though they be in the Three Vedas, while they sit down (in confidence), are sinking down (in the mire)[443]; and so sinking they are arriving only at despair, thinking the while that they are crossing over into some happier land.
‘Therefore is it that the threefold wisdom of the Brahmans, wise in their Three Vedas, is called a waterless desert, their threefold wisdom is called a pathless jungle, their threefold wisdom is called perdition!’
‘It has been told me, Gotama, that the Samaṇa Gotama knows the way to the state of union with Brahmā.’
‘Now what think you, Vāseṭṭha, suppose there were a man born in Manasākaṭa, and people should ask him, who never till that time had left Manasākaṭa, which was the way to Manasākaṭa. Would that man, born and brought up in Manasākaṭa, be in any doubt or difficulty?’
‘Certainly not, Gotama! And why? If the man had been born and brought up in Manasākaṭa, every road that leads to Manasākaṭa would be perfectly familiar to him.’
38. ‘That man, Vāseṭṭha, born and brought up at Manasākaṭa might, if he were asked the way to Manasākaṭa, fall into doubt and difficulty, but to the Tathāgata, when asked touching the path which leads to the world of Brahmā, there can be neither doubt nor difficulty. For Brahmā, I know, Vāseṭṭha, and the world of Brahmā, and the path which leadeth unto it. Yea, I know it even as one who has entered the Brahmā-world, and has been born within it!’
‘Just so has it been told me, Gotama, even that the Samaṇa Gotama knows the way to a state of union with Brahmā. It is well! Let the venerable Gotama be pleased to show us the way to a state of union with Brahmā, let the venerable Gotama save the Brahman race[444]!’
40. 'Then the Blessed One spake, and said: 'Know, Vāseṭṭha, that (from time to time) a Tathāgata is born into the world, an Arahat, a fully awakened one, abounding in wisdom and goodness, happy, with knowledge of the worlds, unsurpassed as a guide to mortals willing to be led, a teacher of gods and men, a Blessed One, a Buddha. He, by himself, thoroughly understands, and sees, as it were, face to face this universe—including the worlds above with the gods, the Māras, and the Brahmās; and the world below with its Samaṇas and Brahmans, its princes and peoples;—and he then makes his knowledge known to others. The truth doth he proclaim both in the letter and in the spirit, lovely in its origin, lovely in its progress, lovely in its consummation: the higher life doth he make known, in all its purity and in all its perfectness.
41. 'A householder (gahapati), or one of his children, or a man of inferior birth in any class, listens to that truth[445]. On hearing the truth he has faith in the Tathāgata, and when he has acquired that faith he thus considers with himself:
'“Full of hindrances is household life, a path defiled by passion: free as the air is the life of him who has renounced all worldly things. How difficult it is for the man who dwells at home to live the higher life in all its fullness, in all its purity, in all its bright perfection! Let me then cut off my hair and beard, let me clothe myself in the orange-coloured robes, and let me go forth from a household life into the homeless state!”
'Then before long, forsaking his portion of wealth, be it great or be it small; forsaking his circle of relatives, be they many or be they few, he cuts off his hair and beard, he clothes himself in the orange-coloured 317 robes, and he goes forth from the household life into the homeless state.
42. ‘When he has thus become a recluse he passes a life self-restrained by that restraint which should be binding on a recluse. Uprightness is his delight, and he sees danger in the least of those things he should avoid. He adopts and trains himself in the precepts. He encompasses himself with goodness in word and deed. He sustains his life by means that are quite pure; good is his conduct, guarded the door of his senses; mindful and self-possessed, he is altogether happy!’
[The answer is set forth in the words of the tract on the Sīlas, translated above, pp. 3-26, but with the refrain as in the Sāmañña-phala Suttanta above, p. 79. Then follow §§ 63-75, inclusive, of the Sāmañña-phala; setting forth:—
76. [446]'And he lets his mind pervade one quarter of 318 the world with thoughts of Love , and so the second, and so the third, and so the fourth. And thus the whole wide world, above, below, around, and everywhere, does he continue to pervade with heart of Love, far-reaching, grown great, and beyond measure.
77. 'Just, Vāseṭṭha, as a mighty trumpeter makes himself heard—and that without difficulty—in all the four directions; even so of all things that have shape or life, there is not one that he passes by or leaves aside, but regards them all with mind set free, and deep-felt love.
78. 'And he lets his mind pervade one quarter of the world with thoughts of pity[447], . . . sympathy[447:1], . . . equanimity[447:2], and so the second, and so the third, and so the fourth. And thus the whole wide world, above, below, around, and everywhere, does he continue to pervade with heart of pity, . . . sympathy, . . . equanimity, far-reaching, grown great, and beyond measure.
79. 'Just, Vāseṭṭha, as a mighty trumpeter makes himself heard—and that without difficulty—in all the four directions; even so of all things that have shape or life, there is not one that he passes by or leaves aside, but regards them all with mind set free, and deep-felt pity, . . . sympathy, . . . equanimity.
80. ‘Now what think you, Vāseṭṭha, will the Bhikkhu who lives thus be in possession of women and of wealth, or will he not?’
81. ‘Then you say, Vāseṭṭha, that the Bhikkhu is free from household and worldly cares, and that Brahmā is free from household and worldly cares. Is there then agreement and likeness between the Bhikkhu and Brahmā?’
'Very good, Vāseṭṭha. Then in sooth, Vāseṭṭha, that the Bhikkhu who is free from household cares should after death, when the body is dissolved, become united with Brahmā, who is the same-such a condition of things is every way possible!
‘And so you say, Vāseṭṭha, that the Bhikkhu is free from anger, and free from malice, pure in mind, and master of himself; and that Brahmā is free from anger, and free from malice. pure in mind, and master of himself. Then in sooth, Vāseṭṭha, that the Bhikkhu who is free from anger, free from malice, pure in mind, and master of himself should after death, when the body is dissolved, become united with Brahmā, who is the same-such a condition of things is every way possible!’
82. 'When he had thus spoken, the young Brahmans Vāseṭṭha and Bhāradvāja addressed the Blessed One, and said:
‘Most excellent, Lord, are the words of thy mouth, most excellent! Just as if a man were to set up that which is thrown down, or were to reveal that which is hidden away, or were to point out the right road to him who has gone astray, or were to bring a lamp into the darkness, so that those who have eyes can see external forms;—just even so, Lord, has the truth been made known to us, in many a figure, by the Exalted One. And we, even we, betake ourselves, Lord, to the Blessed One as our guide, to the Truth, 320 and to the Brotherhood. May the Blessed One accept us as disciples, as true believers, from this day forth, as long as life endures!’
Here ends the Tevigga Suttanta[448].
The whole of this Sutta was translated into English by the Rev. Daniel Gogerly, Wesleyan missionary in Ceylon, in the Journal of the Ceylon Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society for 1846 (reprinted by P. Grimblot in his ‘Sept Suttas Pālis,’ Paris, 1876). ↩︎
Nālandā, afterwards the seat of the famous Buddhist university, was about seven miles north of Rājagaha, the capital of Magadha, the modern Raj-gir (Sum. p. 35). ↩︎
Suppiya was a follower of the celebrated teacher Sañjaya, whose views are set out and controverted in the next Sutta. ↩︎
These titles occur, in the MSS., at the end of the sections of the tract that now follows. It forms a part of each of the Suttas in the first division, the first third, of this collection of Suttas. The division is called therefore the Sīla Vagga or Section containing the Sīlas. The tract itself must almost certainly have existed as a separate work before the time when the discourses, in each of which it recurs, were first put together.
Certain paragraphs from this tract occur also elsewhere. So in Majjhima I, 179 we have the whole of the short paragraphs; in Majjhima, Nos. 76 and 77, and in Mahāvagga V, 8, 3, we have § 17; in Majjhima II, 3 we have most of § 18; and so on. The whole of this tract has been translated into English by Gogerly (in Grimblot, see page 1, note), into French by Burnouf (also in Grimblot, pp. 212 foll.), and into German by Dr. Neumann (in his Buddhistische Anthologie, pp. 67 foll.). ↩︎
This refrain is repeated at the end of each clause. When the Sīlas recur below, in each Sutta, the only difference is in the refrain. See, for instance, the translation of p. 100 in the text. ↩︎
Neumann has ‘waiting for a gift’ which is a possible rendering: but pātikankhati has not yet been found elsewhere in the sense of ‘waiting for.’ The usual meaning of the word expresses just such a trifling matter as we have been led, from the context, to expect. ↩︎
Gāma-dhammā, ‘from the village habit, the practice of country folk, the “pagan” way.’ One might render the phrase by ‘pagan’ if that word had not acquired, in English, a slightly different connotalion. It is the opposite of porī, urbane (applied to speech, below, § 9). Dr. Neumann misses the point here, but has ‘höflich’ below. ↩︎
Porī. See note above on § 8. ↩︎
Sampha-ppalāpa. Sampha occurs alone in the Hemavata Sutta, and at Jāt. VI, 295; A. II, 23. ↩︎
Samārambhā cannot mean ‘planting’ as Dr. Neumann renders it. ↩︎
Kaṃsa-kūṭa. The context suggests that kaṃsa (bronze) may here refer to coins, just as we say in English ‘a copper,’ and the word is actually so used in the 11th and 12th Bhikkhunī Nissaggiya Rules—the oldest reference in Indian books to coins. The most ancient coins, which were of private (not state) coinage, were either of bronze or gold. Buddhaghosa (p. 79) explains the expression here used as meaning the passing off of bronze vessels as gold. Gogerly translates ‘weights,’ Childers sub voce has ‘counterfeit metal,’ and Neumann has ‘Maass.’ Buddhaghosa is obliged to take kaṃsa in the meaning of ‘gold pot,’ which seems very forced; and there is no authority for kaṃsa meaning either weight or mass. On the whole the coin explanation seems to me to be the simplest. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa gives examples of each of these five classes of the vegetable kingdom without explaining the terms. But it is only the fourth which is doubtful. It may mean ‘graftings,’ if the art of grafting was then known in the Ganges valley. ↩︎
Āmisa. Buddhaghosa (p. 83) gives a long list of curry-stuffs included under this term. If he is right then Gogerly’s ‘raw grain’ is too limited a translation, and Neumann’s ‘all sorts of articles to use’ too extensive. In its secondary meaning the word means ‘something nice, a relish, a dainty.’ ↩︎
Visūka-dassanam. This word has only been found elsewhere in the phrase diṭṭhi-visūkaṃ, ‘the puppet shows of heresy’ (Majjhima I, pp. 8, 486; and Serissaka Vimāna LXXXIV, 26). The Sinhalese renders it wiparīta-darśaṇa. ↩︎
Dancing. cannot mean here a dancing in which the persons referred to took part. It must be ballet or nautch dancing. ↩︎
Literally ‘shows.’ This word; only found here, has always been rendered ‘theatrical representations.’ Clough first translated it so in his Sinhalese Dictionary, p. 665, and he was followed by Gogerly, Burnouf, myself (in ‘Buddhist Suttas,’ p. 192), and Dr. Neumann (p. 69),—and Weber (Indian Literature, pp. 199, 319) seems to approve this. But it is most unlikely that the theatre was already known in the fifth century B.C. And Buddhaghosa (p. 84) explains it, quite simply, as naṭa-samajjā. Now samajjo is a very interesting old word (at least in its Pāli form). The Sanskrit samajyā, according to the Petersburg Dictionary, has only been found in modern dictionaries. The Pāli occurs in other old texts such as Vinaya II, 107; IV, 267 (both times in the very same context as it does here); ibid. II, 150; IV, 85; Sigālovada Sutta, p. 300; and it is undoubtedly the same word as samāja in the first of the fourteen Edicts of Asoka. In the Sigālovada there are said to be six dangers at such a samajjo; to wit, dancing, singing, music, recitations, conjuring tricks, and acrobatic shows. And in the Vinaya passages we learn that at a samajjo not only amusements but also food was provided; that high officials were invited, and had special seats; and that it took place at the top of a hill. This last detail of ‘high places’ (that is sacred places) points to a religious motive as underlying the whole procedure. The root aj ({Greek ágo}, ago, whence our ‘act’) belongs to the stock of common Aryan roots, and means carrying on. What was the meaning of this ‘carrying on together’? Who were the people who took part? Were they confined to one village? or have we here a survival from old exogamic communistic dancings together? Later the word means simply ‘fair,’ as at Jātaka III, 541:
‘Many the bout I have played with quarterstaves at the fair,’ with which Jātaka I, 394 may be compared. And it is no doubt this side of the festival which is here in the mind of the author; but ‘fair’ is nevertheless a very inadequate rendering. The Sinhalese has ‘rapid movement in dance-figures’ (ranga-maṇḍalu). ↩︎
These ballad recitations in prose and verse combined were the source from which epic poetry was afterwards gradually developed. Buddhaghosa has no explanation of the word, but gives as examples the Bhārata and the Rāmāyaṇa. The negative anakkhānaṃ occurs Majjhima I, 503. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa explains this as ‘playing on cymbals’; and adds that it is also called pāṇitālam. The word is only found here and at Jātaka V, 506, and means literally ‘hand-sounds.’ ↩︎
Buddhaghosa says ‘deep music, but some say raising dead bodies to life by spells.’ His own explanation is, I think, meant to be etymological; and to show that he derives the word from vi+tāḷa. This would bring the word into connection with the Sanskrit vaitālika, ‘royal bard.’ The other explanation connects the word with vetāla, ‘a demon,’ supposed to play pranks (as in the stories of the Vetāla-pañca-viṃsati) by reanimating corpses. Dr. Neumann adopts it. But it does not agree so well with the context; and it seems scarcely justifiable to see, in this ancient list, a reference to beliefs which can only be traced in literature more than a thousand years later. Gogerly’s rendering ‘funeral ceremonies,’ which I previously followed, seems to me now quite out of the question. ↩︎
It is clear from Jātaka V, 506 that this word means a sort of music. And at Vinaya IV, 285 kumbhathūnikā are mentioned in connection with dancers, acrobats, and hired mourners. Buddhaghosa is here obscure and probably corrupt, and the derivation is quite uncertain. Gogerly’s guess seems better than Burnouf’s or Neumann’s. The Sinhalese has ‘striking a drum big enough to hold sixteen gallons.’ ↩︎
Buddhaghosa seems to understand by this term (literally 'of Sobha city ) the adornments or scenery used for a ballet-dance. (Paṭibhāṇa-kittaṃ at Vinaya II, 151; IV, 61, 298, 358; Sum. I, 42 is the nude in art.) Weber has pointed out (Indische Studien, II, 38; III, 153) that Sobha is a city of the Gandharvas, fairies much given to music and love-making. It is quite likely that the name of a frequently used scene for a ballet became a proverbial phrase for all such scenery. But the Sinhalese has ‘pouring water over the heads of dancers, or nude paintings.’ ↩︎
Buddhaghosa takes these three words separately, and so do all the MSS. of the text, and the Sinhalese version. But I now think that the passage at Jātaka IV, 390 is really decisive, and that we have here one of the rare cases where we can correct our MSS. against the authority of the old commentator. But I follow him in the general meaning he assigns to the strange expression ‘Caṇḍāla-bamboo-washings.’ ↩︎
See Jātaka III, 541. ↩︎
Nibbuddham. The verbal form nibbujjhati occurs in the list at Vinaya III, 180 (repeated at II, 10); and our word at Milinda 232. ↩︎
All these recur in the introductory story to the 50th Pācittiya (Vinaya IV, 107). On the last compare Buddhaghosa on Mahāvagga V, 1, 29. ↩︎
All these terms recur at Vinaya III, 180 (repeated at II, 10). ↩︎
Chess played originally on a board of eight times ten squares was afterwards played on one of eight times eight squares. Our text cannot be taken as evidence of real chess in the fifth century B. C., but it certainly refers to games from which it and draughts must have been developed. The Sinhalese Sanna says that each of these games was played with dice and pieces such as kings and so on. The worJ for pieces is poru (from purisa)—just our ‘men.’ ↩︎
Ākāsam. How very like blindfold chess! ↩︎
Parihāra-patham. A kind of primitive ‘hop-scotch.’ The Sinhalese says the steps must be made hopping. ↩︎
Khalikā. Unfortunately the method of playing is not stated. Compare Eggeling’s note as in his Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa III, 106, 7. In the gambling-scene on the Bharhut Tope (Cunningham, Pl. XLV, No. 9) there is a board marked out on the stone of six times five squares (not six by six), and six little cubes with marks on the sides visible lie on the stone outside the board. ↩︎
Ghaṭikam. Something like ‘tip-cat.’ Siṃ-kelīmaya in Sinhalese. ↩︎
Salāka-hattham. On flour-water as colouring matter, see Jātaka I, 220. ↩︎
Akkham. The usual meaning is ‘a die.’ But the Sinhalese translator agrees with Buddhaghosa. Neither gives any details. ↩︎
Pangacīram. The Sinhalese for this toy is 'pat-kulal. Morris in J. P. T. S., 1889, p. 205, compares the Marathī pungī. ↩︎
Vankakam. From Sanskrit vṛka. See Journal of the Pāli Text Society, 1889, p. 206. ↩︎
Mokkhacikā. So the Sinhalese. Buddhaghosa has an alternative explanation of turning over on a trapeze, but gives this also. See Vinaya I, 275, and J. P. T. S., 1885, p. 49. ↩︎
Cingulikam. See Morris in the J. P. T. S., 1885, p. 50, who compares cingulāyitvā at Anguttara III, 15, 2. ↩︎
All these six, from No. 10 inclusive, are mentioned in the Majjhima, vol. i, p. 266, as children’s games. ↩︎
Akkharikā. It is important evidence for the date at which writing was known in India that such a game should be known in the fifth century B.C. ↩︎
The following list recurs Vinaya I, 192 = II, 163 = Anguttara I, 181, &c. ↩︎
Āsandī. Buddhaghosa merely says ‘a seat beyond the allowed measure,’ but that must refer to height, as the only rule as to measure in seats is the 87th Pācittiya in which the height of beds or chairs is limited to eight ‘great’ inches (probably about eighteen inches). The Sinhalese Sanna adds ‘a long chair for supporting the whole body.’ At Jāt. I, 208 a man lies down on an āsandī so as to be able to look up and watch the stars. At Dīgha I, 55 = Majjhima I, 515 = Saṃyutta III, 307 (where the reading must be corrected), the āsandī is used as a bier. The āsandī is selected as the right sort of seat for the king in both the Vājapeya and Inauguration ceremonies because of its height (Eggeling, Śat.-Brāh. III, 35, 105). It is there said to be made of common sorts of wood, and perforated; which probably means that the frame was of wood and the seat was of interlaced cane or wickerwork. The diminutive āsandiko, with short legs and made square (for sitting, not lying on), is allowed in the Buddhist Order by Vinaya II, 149. And even the āsandī is allowed, if the tall legs be cut down, by Vinaya II, 169, 170 (where the reading chinditvā seems preferable, and is read in the quotation at Sum. I, 88). The renderings ‘large cushion’ at ‘Vinaya Texts,’ II, 27 and ‘stuffed couch’ at III, 209 must be accordingly corrected. Gogerly translates ‘large couch,’ Burnouf ‘une chaise longue,’ and Neumann ‘bequeme Lehnstuhl.’ ↩︎
Pallanko. It is noteworthy that, in spite of the use of a divan with animals carved on its supports being here objected to, it is precisely the sort of seat on which the Buddha himself, or Buddhist personages of distinction, are often, in later sculptures, represented as sitting (Grünwedel, ‘Buddhistische kunst,’ pp. 111, 124, 137; Mitra, ‘Budh Gayā,’ Plates XI, XX, &c. &c.). At Mahāvaṃsa 25 sīhāsana and pallanko are used of the same seat (Asoka’s throne), and sīhāsana is used of Duṭṭha Garnini’s throne, ibid. 157. But the Lion throne of Nissanka Malla, found at Pollonnaruwa, is not a pallanko, but an actual stone lion, larger than life size (‘Indian Antiquary,’ vol. i, p. 135. Compare the similar seat in Grünwedel, p. 95).
By Vinaya II, 170 the possession of a pallanka was allowed to the Order if the animal figures were broken off (the translation in ‘Vinaya Texts,’ III, 209, must be altered accordingly, reading vāḷe for vale, as at Vinaya IV, 312). By Vinaya II, 163 it is laid down that members of the Order were not to use a complete pallanko even in laymen’s houses, so that Nigrodha’s action in the passage just quoted (Mahāvamsa 25) was really a breach of the regulations. ↩︎
The words from gonako down to kaṭṭhissaṃ inclusive, and also kuttakaṃ, are found only in this list, and Buddhaghosa seems to be uncertain as to the exact meaning of some of them. All except No. 7 might be used in laymen’s houses ('Vinaya Texts: III, 197), and all might be possessed by the Order if used only as floor-coverings (ibid. III, 209); except again No. 7, the cotton wool of which might be utilised for pillows. As there is a doubt about the spelling it may be noticed that the Sanna reads goṇakaṃ and uddalomiṃ: and the MS. in the R. A. S. (which repeats each sentence) has gonakaṃ and uddalomiṃ both times. ↩︎
Sambāhanam. Perhaps rubbing the limbs with flat pieces of wood. See Buddhaghosa here and at ‘Vinaya Texts,’ III, 60. ↩︎
This is not quite accurate. Out of the twenty items here objected to, three (shampooing, bathing, and the use of sunshades) were allowed in the Order, and practised by Gotama himself. Bathrooms, and halls attached to them, are permitted by ‘Vinaya Texts,’ III, 189; shampooing by ibid. III, 68, 297. There are elaborate regulations for the provision of hot steam baths and the etiquette to be observed in them; and instances of the use of the ordinary bath in streams or rivers are frequent. The use of sunshades is permitted by ‘Vinaya Texts,’ III, 132-3, and is referred to ibid. III, 88, 274. ↩︎
Visikhā-kathā. Buddhaghosa (p. 90) takes this word (literally ‘street-talk’) in the sense of talk about streets, whether ill or well situate, and whether the inhabitants are bold or poor, &c. ↩︎
Pubba-peta-kathā. The commentator confines this to boasting talk about deceased relatives or ancestors. ↩︎
Nānatta-kathaṃ, literally ‘difference-talk.’ The expression seems somewhat forced, if taken as meaning ‘desultory’; but I see no better explanation. ↩︎
Lokakkhāyikā. Buddhaghosa refers this specially to such speculations as are put forth according to the Lokakkhāyikā system by the Vitaṇḍas (also called Lokāyatikas). These are materialistic theorisers, of whose system very little is, so far, known. See the note at ‘Vinaya Texts,’ vol. iii, p. 151. I have collected other references to them in my ‘Milinda,’ vol. i, p. 7; and to these Digha I, 11, 114, 120, and Attha Sālinī, p. 3, may now be added. They are probably referred to below in chap. iii of this Sutta, §§ 10, 20. ↩︎
This list of foolish talks recurs in Suttas 76-78 in the Majjhima, and at Vinaya I, 188. ↩︎
These expressions all recur at Majjhima II, 3. ↩︎
Sahitaṃ me, literally ‘the put together is to me,’ &c. The idiom is only found here, and may mean either as rendered above, or ‘the context is on my side,’ or ‘the text (of the Scriptures) is on my side,’ or merely ‘that which is of use is on my side.’ This last, given by the Sanna, amounts to the same as the version adopted above. ↩︎
Putting the cart before the horse. ↩︎
Āropito te vādo. On the use of this idiom compare the Commentary on the Theri Gāthā, p. 101. There is a misprint here in the text, aropito for āropito. ‘Issue has been joined against you’ would be a possible rendering. It is the phrase used, when some one has offered to hold debate (maintain a thesis) against all comers, by an opponent who takes up the challenge. ↩︎
Niggahīto si. On this idiom compare the opening paragraphs of the Kathā Vatthu and the Commentary on them (especially pp. 9, 10). It is literally ‘you are censured.’ ↩︎
Cara vāda-pamokkhāya. So Buddhaghosa. But Gogerly renders, ‘Depart, that you may be freed from this disputation;’ and the only parallel passage seems to support this view. It is Majjhima I, 133, where it is said to be wrong to learn the Scriptures for the sake of the advantage of being freed from discussion or debate where texts are quoted against one. Pamokkha occurs besides at Samyutta I, 2, Jātaka V, 30, 31, and Mahāvaṃsa 158, but not in this connection. ↩︎
So the author of Milinda in making his hero Nāgasena use just such a phrase (Mil. p. 27) is making him commit a breach of propriety. ↩︎
Kuhakā. ‘Astonish the world with the three sorts of trickery,’ says Buddhaghosa. These are also referred to without explanation at Jātaka IV, 297 (where we should, I think, read kuhana). ↩︎
Lapakā. Compare Itivuttaka, No. 99 = Anguttara I, 165, 168; and also Milinda 228, Jātaka III, 349. ↩︎
Nemittakā, ‘interpreters of signs and omens.’ See the note on nimittaṃ in the next paragraph. Compare Milinda 299; Gāt. IV, 124. ↩︎
Nippesikā, ‘scarers away’ (? of ghosts, or bad omens). But the Commentary and Sanna give no help, and the word has only been found in this list. ↩︎
All the five words in this list recur at A. III, 111, but the context there is as undecisive as it is here, and the Commentary (fol. ḍi of the Tumour MS. at the India Office), though slightly different, gives no better help. ↩︎
Angaṃ, literally ‘limbs.’ Buddhaghosa distinguishes this from lakkhaṇaṃ (No. 5 in this list), and from anga-vijjā (No. 16). It is not found, in this sense, anywhere in the texts. ↩︎
Nimittaṃ, literally ‘marks,’ or ‘signs.’ Buddhaghosa tells a story in illustration. King Paṇḍu, they say (Pāṇḍi in the Sanna), took three pearls in his closed hand, and asked a diviner what he had in it. The latter looked this way and that for a sign; and seeing a fly which had been caught by a house-lizard (the Sanna says ‘by a dog,’ perhaps the meaning is simply ‘in sugar’) getting free (muttā), said at once ‘pearls’ (also muttā in Pāli). ‘How many?’ says the king. The diviner, hearing a dog bark thrice, answered ‘three.’ Compare Mil. 178, and the note to the last section on nemittikā and the story at Mahāvaṃsa 82. ↩︎
Uppādo, ‘the portents of the great ones, thunderbolts falling, and so on,’ says Buddhaghosa. The Great Ones here mean, I think, the spirits or gods presiding over the sun, moon, and planets (see the note on § 26). The word corresponds to the Sanskrit Utpāta, though the d is vouched for by overwhelming authority. But this is only another instance of a change not infrequent (as Ed. Müller has shown, Pāli Grammar, p. 37); and the one or two cases where Burmese scribes have (wrongly) corrected to uppāta is another instance to be added to those referred to in the Introduction to Sum. I of their habit of putting an easier reading where the more difficult one is really right. Childers should therefore have kept this word separate from the other uppādo. Comp. Jāt. I, 374. ↩︎
Supinam. On the theory of dreams compare Mil., pp. 297-301. At Jāt. I, 374 the word is masculine. Perhaps charms to avert bad dreams (Ath.-veda VI, 46; XVI, 5 and 6) are included in this ‘low art.’ Jāt. No. 77 mocks at the dream interpreters. ↩︎
Lakkhaṇam. The commentator on this word as used in the very same connection at Jāt. I, 374 adds that it means also the knowledge of good and bad marks on such persons and things as are mentioned here in our next paragraph. Buddhaghosa confines its meaning to that given above. This contradiction is another confirmation of the opinion expressed by me in 1880 in ‘Buddhist Birth Stories,’ pp. lxiii foll., that Childers was wrong in ascribing the Jātaka Commentary to Buddhaghosa. The word occurs in Buddhaghosa’s sense at D. I, 114, 120 = A. I, 163, &c.; Jāt. I, 56. ↩︎
Musikācchinnam. The allied superstition of thinking it unlucky to wear clothes gnawed by mice is laughed out of court in the Mangala Gātaka, No. 87. ↩︎
Aggi-homam. Telling people that a sacrifice, if offered in a fire of such and such a wood, will have such and such a result. ↩︎
Dabbi-homam. Telling people that an oblation of such and such grains, butter, or so on, poured into the fire from such and such a sort of spoon, will have such and such a result. ↩︎
See Hillebrandt, ‘Neu und Vollmondsopfer,’ pp. 31, 171, and ‘Ritual-literatur’ in Bühler’s ‘Grundriss,’ pp. 71, 72, 114, 176. The nine homas here objected to may also be compared with the seven at Ath.-veda VIII, 9, 18. ↩︎
No instance of this can be traced in the books of the Brahmans. ↩︎
Compare the passage in Hillebrandt, in Bühler’s ‘Grundriss,’ p. 176, on the use of blood for sorcery. In one passage, Rig-vidh. III, 18, 3, it is one’s own blood that is to be used. But the specific interpretation given here by Buddhaghosa cannot be paralleled from the Brahmanical books. ↩︎
Anga-vijjā. Buddhaghosa thus separates this from the angaṃ of No. 1. In both the passages Jāt. II, 200, 250 the knowledge is simply that of judging from a man’s appearance that he is rough or bad, and it is the good man in the story (in the second case the Bodisat himself) who is the anga-vijjā-pāṭhako. So at Jāt. V, 458 it is by anga-vijjā that the Bodisat prophesies that a man will be cruel. ↩︎
Vatthu-vijjā. Childers (Dict., p. 559) has ‘pool’ instead of ‘house,’ having misread sara for ghara (s and gh are nearly alike in Sinhalese). The craft is further explained by Buddhaghosa in his comment on the Mahā-parinibbāna Sutta I, 26. Its success depended on the belief that the sites were haunted by spirits. See further below, § 27. ↩︎
Khatta-vijjā. The Burmese MSS. correct the rare khatta into the familiar khetta. Khetta-vijjā indeed occurs at Ud. III, 9, and may just possibly there (in connection with writing, arithmetic, tables, &c.) be correct in the meaning of ‘land-survering, mensuration.’ Buddhaghosa, though his explanation is corrupt, evidently understands the phrase in a sense similar to that of khatta-dhamma at Jāt. V, 489, 490; Mil. 164 (see also 178); and his gloss nīti-sattham is probably nearer the mark than Śankara’s (on Chānd. Up. VII, I, 2), which is dhanur-veda. It is the craft of government, then lying in great part in adhering to custom.
The Sutta only follows the Upanishad in looking at all these crafts as minor matters, but it goes beyond it in looking upon them as a ‘low’ way, for a Brahman, of gaining a livelihood. ↩︎
Siva-vijjā. It is clear that siva is used euphemistically, and we may here have an early reference to what afterwards developed into the cult of the god Śiva. Buddhaghosa gives an alternative explanation as knowledge of the cries of jackals. ↩︎
Bhūta-vijjā. Also in the Chāndogya list (loc. cit.). ↩︎
Bhūri-vijjā. It is the same as bhūri-kammaṃ, explained in the same way by Buddhaghosa on § 27 below. ↩︎
Ahi-vijjā. One method is described at Jāt. IV, 457, 8. Perhaps such charms against snake bite as Ath.-v. V, 13; VI, 12, 56; VII, 88, are included. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa says curing or giving poison, or poison spells (compare Ath.-v. VI, 90, 93, 100). ↩︎
These are explained to mean simply curing the bites of these creatures. ↩︎ ↩︎
Understanding their language. ↩︎
Divining by the appearance and the cawings of crows, ↩︎
Compare the Ambaṭṭha-vijjā at Sum. 255 and below, p. 96 of the text, § 23. ↩︎
Miga-kakkam. Understanding the language of all creatures. ↩︎
The whole of this ‘low art’ as applied to gems has been collected in a series of manuals now edited by L. Finot in his ‘Lapidaires Indiens,’ Paris, 1896. ↩︎
The art in these four cases is to determine whether the marks on them show they will bring good (or bad) luck to the houses in which they dwell. ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
The art in these five cases is to say whether it is unclean or not to eat them. ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
This comes in here very oddly. But the old commentator had the same reading, and takes the word in its ordinary senses, not even as amulet. ↩︎ ↩︎
Throughout these paragraphs the plural is used. This cannot be honorific, as the few great kings of that time are always spoken of in the singular. Yet all the previous translators, except Burnouf, translate by the singular—‘the king will march out,’ &c. It is evident that we have to understand ‘chiefs,’ and not the ‘king’: and that not absolute monarchies, but republican institutions of a more or less aristocratic type, were in the mind of the composer of the paragraph. ↩︎
Nakkhatta, translated by Gogerly and Neumann a ‘planet.’ Buddhaghosa explains it by ‘Mars and so on.’ This may apply to planets, but also to stars in general, and I know no other passage where the meaning of the word is confined to planets. Burnouf has ‘constellation,’ but what can the eclipse of a constellation mean? ↩︎
Patha-gamana and uppatha-gamana. Prof. Kielhorn says (in a note he has been kind enough to send me on this section): ‘What the author means by these words I do not know. But uppatha-gamana would be literally “aberration, the going away from one’s proper path”; and patha-gamana therefore should be “following one’s proper course.” I am sure the two words could not mean conjunction and opposition; nor, I think, ascension and declension. It is curious that Buddhaghosa has not explained them.’ ↩︎
Ukkā-pāto. See Jāt. I, 374; Mil. 178. ↩︎
Disā-dāho. ‘Thunder and lightning,’ according to Neumann; ‘fiery corruscations in the atmosphere,’ according to Gogerly, whom Burnouf follows. But Buddhaghosa’s words are only explicable of a jungle fire. Compare Jāt. I, 212, 213, 374. ↩︎
Burnouf takes these four words to refer to four occurrences. Gogerly and Neumann take them as only two. Buddhaghosa seems to imply four. ↩︎
Muddā. There has been great diversity in the various guesses made at the meaning in this connection of muddā, which usually means ‘seal’ or ‘seal-ring.’ Gogerly has ‘conveyancing,’ and so also Childers; Burnouf takes this word and the next as one compound in the sense of foretelling the future ‘by calculating diagrams’; and Neumann has ‘Verwaltungsdienste,’ administrative services. Buddhaghosa is very curt. He says only hattha-mudda ganana. Hattha-muddā is found elsewhere only at Jāt. III, 528, where hattha-muddaṃ karoti means ‘to beckon,’ and at Vin. V, 163, where it is said of the polite member of the Order that he makes no sign with his hand, nor beckons. (On hattha-vikāra compare Mil. I, 207, 547 = Vin. I, 157 = Vin. II, 2I6.) Both these passages are much later than our text, and the sense of beckoning is here impossible. But muddā is mentioned as a craft at Vin. IV, 7 (where it is called honourable), at M. I, 85, and several times in the Milinda (pp. 3, 59, 78, 178 of the Pāli text), and muddiko as the person who practises that craft at D. I, 51 and Vin. IV, 8. The Sinhalese comment on this (quoted in my translation of the Milinda, I, 91) shows that the art there was simply arithmetic, using the joints or knuckles or the fingers as an aid to memory. And this is no doubt the meaning in our paragraph. ↩︎
Gananā. Buddhaghosa’s comment on this is acchiddakā-gaṇanā, in contradistinction to the last. It is evidently calculation not broken up by using the fingers, mental arithmetic pure and simple. The accountant who uses this method is called gaṇako (D. I, 51; Vin. IV, 8). Buddhaghosa’s comment on the latter passage is given by Minayeff at Pat. 84, but with a wrong reading, akkhiṃṭaka. ↩︎
Saṃkhāṇam, literally ‘counting up.’ He who has the faculty of doing this can, on looking at a tree, say how many leaves it has, says Buddhaghosa. But the first words of his comment are doubtful. He may perhaps mean calculating masses by means of the rosary. Burnouf skips this word, and Neumann has simply ‘counting.’ ↩︎
Kāveyyam. The word recurs, in a bad sense, at A. I, 72 = III, 107, and also at S. I, 110 in the phrase kāveyya-matto, ‘drunk with prophecy, inspired.’ Buddhaghosa enumerates, in the words of A. II, 230, four kinds of poetry, and explains them in nearly the same words as found in the Manoratha Pūranī on that passage. None of the four refer to sacrificial hymns. Impromptu rhyming, ballad singing, and the composition of poems are meant. ↩︎
Lokāyatam. Usually rendered ‘materialism.’ But it is quite clear that this meaning is impossible in this connection. See Milinda. 174. ↩︎
Compare the Sinhalese bīna marriage in which the bridegroom is brought into the house of the bride’s family. ↩︎
Compare the Sinhalese dīga marriage in which the bride is sent out to live in the bridegroom’s family. We have no words now in English to express this difference between marrying and giving in marriage. ↩︎
Saṃvadanam. Childers calls this a magic art, following Burnouf who calls it sorcery. Buddhaghosa explains it as astrology. The fact is all these expressions are technical terms for acts of astrology or sorcery, they none of them occur elsewhere either in Pāli or Sanskrit, and the tradition preserved by Buddhaghosa may be at fault in those cases in which the use of the word had not survived to later times. The general sense may be sufficiently clear, but for absolute certainty of interpretation we must wait till examples are found in Indian books of the actual use of the words, not in mere lists, hut in a connection which shows the meaning. Ath.-v. III, 30 is a charm to secure concord in a family, compare VII, 52; and there are several charms in the Atharva-veda for success in gambling. ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
Subhaga-karanam. Many such charms are preserved in the Atharva-veda (for instance, X, 3; 5; XVI, 4; 9). ↩︎
It would be useless to seek in the Atharva-veda, which (with the one exception mentioned in the notes to the next section) gives only the charms which are supposed to bring benefits, for instances of these malevolent practices. But we have here direct evidence that black magic, as was indeed inevitable, was as fully trusted in the sixth century B.C. in the valley of the Ganges as white. We need not be surprised that the malevolent charms are not recorded. ↩︎
Ādāsa-pañḥo. Buddhaghosa says they made a god appear in the mirror and answer questions put. It is a later conception to discard the god, and make the mirror itself give pictures of the hidden events. The mirror is of metal (Par. Dīp. 235). ↩︎
Kumārī-pañḥo. Through a girl of good family and repute. ↩︎
Deva-pañḥo. Also obtained through a girl, but this time a deva-dāsī or temple prostitute. It is instructive to find, even under the patriarchal regime of the sixth century B. C., that men thought they could best have communications from the gods through the medium of a woman. ↩︎
Ādiccupaṭṭhānam. Such sun-worship is ridiculed in the Jātaka of the same name, No. 173. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa explains the Great One as Mahā Brahmā. This seems to me very doubtful. It is at least odd to find Brahmā introduced in this connection. We may grant that the Buddhists might have put sun-worship into a list of sorceries, but there was no ceremonial cult of Brahma and little or none of Brahmā. And however much the new gospel might hold the spetulations of the dominant theosophy in contempt, that would scarcely explain their being ranked as privates in this regiment. Burnouf avoids this by rendering the phrase generally ‘serving the great,’ and Neumann has ‘practising sorcery.’ Neither of these guesses seems happy. Mahat in composition is elsewhere always mahā in Pāli, and we possibly have here a sandhi for mahatī-upaṭṭhānaṃ, in the sense of worship of the Great Mother, the Earth, with covert allusion to mahī. This would give excellent sense, as the worship of the Mother Earth was closely associated in the popular mind with witchcraft. A god or goddess is certainly meant, and one so associated would be best in place here. It is perhaps worthy of note that in the oldest portion of the Taittirīya Upanishad, Sun, Moon, Earth, and Śrī occur together in a set of mystic groups, and Sun, Moon, Brahma, and food are all identified by a word-play with Mahas (Sīkśā-vallī 4-7). ↩︎
See Milinda 191, and Jāt. II, 410. ↩︎
Bhūri-kammam. Is this a place sacred to Mother Earth? The ceremony referred to is the carrying out of the vijjā or craft mentioned in the list at § 21. ↩︎
Vassa- and vossa-kammam. Morris discusses the etymology of these words, only found in this list, in the J. P. T. S., 1889, p. 208. The idea of the second is not, of course, castration, but making a man’s desire to fail by a spell. Several such are preserved in the Atharva (IV, 4; VI, 101 to give virility; VI, 138; VII, 113 to cause impotence). ↩︎ ↩︎
Vatthu-kammaṃ and -parikiraṇam. These constitute the vatthu-vijjā of § 21. ↩︎ ↩︎
Bathings, that is, of other people. ↩︎
See Mil. I, 511 and the rules laid down in ‘Vinaya Texts,’ II, 53-55. ↩︎
The Buddhist view of Nos. 11-25 must not be mistaken. It is sufficiently clear from the numerous examples in the Vinaya (see especially ‘Vinaya Texts,’ II, pp. 41-144), and from the high praise accorded to Jīvaka and other physicians, that the objection was to recluses and Brahmans practising medicine as a means of livelihood. They might do so gratis for themselves or for their coreligionists, and laymen might do so for gain.
The use of paṭimokkha in No. 25 is curious. It is when, for instance, a purgative is first given and then a tonic to counteract the other, to set free from its effect. Compare Jāt. V, 25. ↩︎
The corresponding Sanskrit terms occur at Divyāvadāna, p. 492. No doubt the reading there ought to be nipuṇo. ↩︎
These phrases recur S. Ill, 45. On anuddiṭṭhi see also Gogerly in the ‘Ceylon Friend,’ 1875. p. 133, and Morris in the J. P. T. S., 1886, p. 113; and compare attānuddiṭṭhi at Mil. 146, 160, 352; S. N. 1119. As in our colloquial expression a ‘viewy man,’ diṭṭhi almost always, and anudiṭṭhi in all the seven passages where it occurs, have a connotation of contempt—a mere view. an offhand ill-considered opinion, a delusion. The Greek {Greek dóksa} has had a similar history, and dogma or speculation is a better rendering than view or belief. ↩︎
Sassata-vādā. ↩︎
Gotra, literally ‘cow-stall.’ The history of this word has yet to be written. It probably meant at the time this Sutta was written a family or lineage traced through the father. On the meaning of gotraja (the gentiles of Roman Law) in the later law-books see West and Bühler, ‘Hindu Law of Inheritance,’ p. 171. ↩︎
Vaṇṇa, literally ‘colour.’ Gogerly renders it ‘appearance,’ and Neumann ‘Beruf.’ I have chosen caste (though it is not caste in its strictest sense) because it no doubt refers to the cattāro vaṇṇā mentioned so often in the Suttas. It is true that these—Khattiyas, Brahmans, Vessas, and Suddas—were not castes, but four divisions of the people, each consisting of many subdivisions (by customs as to connubium and commensality) which afterwards hardened into castes. See J. R. A. S., 1897, pp. 180-190. ↩︎
Saṃvaṭṭa-vivaṭṭam (rolling up and evolution, from vaṭṭ, to turn). It is the period of the gradual disintegration and conformation of a world. Needless to add that the length of this period cannot be expressed in figures.
Neither the idea nor the word occurs in books known to be before the Buddha. But both are Indian rather than Buddhist. Saṃvarta is found in the Mahā Bhārata and the Rāmāyaṇa; and the later Sānkhya notion of pralaya is closely allied. ↩︎
This phrase recurs below, chap. iii, §§ 14, 20. ↩︎
Sīla, for instance, and samādhi, and all the other things known to a Buddha, says Buddhaghosa, p. 108. ↩︎
Paccattam. See the common phrases A. II, 198 = S. I, 9, 10, 117; M. I, 188 = 422; M. I, 251, 252 = S. III, 54, &c.; and S. N. 61 I, 906; Mil. 96, 347; Sum. 182. ‘Without depending on any one else, himself by himself,’ says Buddhaghosa. ↩︎
Nirvāṇa, says Buddhaghosa. ↩︎
Gogerly (pp. 77, 78 in Grimblot) has made a sad mess of this paragraph, misunderstanding the grammatical construction of the first clause, and misinterpreting parāmasati in the second, and nissaraṇaṃ in the third. ↩︎
Not of course the four speculations, but the higher knowledge which has led him to reject them. ↩︎
This string of epithets recurs at M. I, 327 in the course of the story of the Brahmā, named Baka, who is represented as coming to the very conclusion set out in our section. The story was a favourite one, and three recensions of it have been preserved (M. I, 326-331; S. I, 142-144. and Jāt. No. 405). Mr. Crow evidently considered himself the Mahā Brahmā of the period.
The omission in the Dialogue of all reference to the Kesava Birth Story may be a sign of greater age or it may be due simply to the fact that it is not required for the argument there. ↩︎
Khiḍḍā-padosikā. They are not mentioned elsewhere except in the list of gods in the Mahā Samaya (p. 287). ↩︎
Buddhaghosa on this has a curious note. The gods, though of great glory, are delicate in body. A man, having gone without food for seven days even, may restore his strength by the use of clear broth and so on. But the gods can’t play tricks with themselves; and it they lose their heads and forget their meal-times, they die—pass away from that state. The poor gods! Whether this be really implied in the text or not, it is at least in harmony with the irony of the Buddha’s talk. ↩︎
Mano-padosikā. Only found here and in the list in the Samaya Sutta. Even there it is almost certainly merely taken from this passage, so that it looks very much as if both these classes or titles of gods were simply invented, in irony, for the sake of the argument. Buddhaghosa identifies this class with the retinue of the Four Great Kings—that is the regents of the four quarters. ↩︎
Upanijjhāyanti, from jhāyati, to burn. Elsewhere found only at Vin. I, 193; II, 269; III, 118, in all which passages it has the connotation of ‘covet, lust after.’ Buddhaghosa takes it here in the sense of envy, and tells a tale, too long to quote, to show the quarrelsome nature of these gods. In the sense of ‘consider’ (from jhāyati, to think) the word has only been found at S. N., p. 143. There may have been confusion between the two homonyms, so that ours got to mean ‘to consider in such a way as to be excited, to burn.’ ↩︎
Buddhaghosa explains that these speculators perceive how the organs of sense break up (and sense impressions pass away); but they fail to see that the same thing holds even more strongly in the case of thoughts, since no sooner has each mental impression given rise to the succeeding one than it passes away. Not perceiving that, and depending on the analogy of birds, who fly away from one tree only to alight on another, they conclude that the mind, when this individuality is broken up, goes (as a unity) elsewhere. ↩︎
Antānantikā. ↩︎
Parivaṭumo. Only found here, Buddhaghosa says nothing. ↩︎
According to Buddhaghosa (Ats. 160) there are four things that are infinite—space, the number of world-systems, the number of living creatures, and the wisdom of a Buddha. Had this doctrine formed part of the original Buddhism we should expect to find these cattāri anantāni in the chapter on the ‘Fours’ in the Anguttara, but I do not find them there. ↩︎
‘Either in self-training or in the attainment of bliss in heaven,’ says Buddhaghosa (p. 115). ↩︎
Buddhaghosa gives examples of these five equivocations. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa explains that if, in his ignorance, he should, by chance, declare the good to be good, he will be puffed up by the approval of the wise. But if he should blunder, he will be filled with vexation and illwill when his error is pointed out. Either of these states of mind will be the fuel to keep. the fire burning, the state technically called Upādāna, ‘grasping.’ ↩︎
Sampāyati. See the note at ‘Vinaya Texts,’. III, 317, and compare M. I, 85, 96, 472. ↩︎
Such questions are called elsewhere the common basis of discussions among Brahmans. ↩︎
The word here used is Tathāgata, ‘he who has gone, or perhaps come, to the truth.’ See Chalmers in the J. R. A. S., Jan., 1898, and compare S. III, 111, 116-118; M. I, 140, 171, 486; S. N. 467. The use of sammaggato (D. I, 55, &c.) and of gatatto (D. I, 57, &c.) shows that gata was used elliptically in the sense of ‘gone to the furthest point aimed at’ among the followers of the other sects that arose at the same time as Buddhism. The exact derivation and history of the word Tathāgata may be doubtful, but its meaning is, on the whole, clear enough. ↩︎
This is the identical answer put below (p. 57 of the text) into the mouth of Sañjaya Belaṭṭhaputta. ↩︎
Adhicca-samuppannikā. This adhicca (which must be distinguished from the other adhicca, derived from adhīyati, occurring at Jāt. III, 218 = IV, 301) recurs at M. I, 443, where it is opposed in the sense of ‘occasional’ to abhiṇha at M. I, 442 in the sense of ‘habitual.’ Udāna VI, 5 throws light on its use here. It is there associated with words meaning ‘neither self-originated, nor created by others.’ It is explained by Buddhaghosa on our passage (Sum. I, 118) as ‘springing up without a cause.’ The derivation is doubtful. ↩︎
Asañña-sattā. They spring into being in this wise. Some one of the Brahman ascetics having practised continual meditation and arrived at the Fourth Gḥāna, sees the disadvantage attached to thinking, and says to himself: ‘It is by dwelling on it in thought that physical pain and all sorts of mental terrors arise. Have done with this thinking. An existence without it were better.’ And dying in this belief he is reborn among the Unconscious Ones, who have form only, and neither sensations nor ideas nor predispositions nor consciousness. So long as the power of the Gḥāna lasts, so long do they last. Then an idea occurs to them—the idea of rebirth in this world—and they straightway die. ↩︎
See I, 1, 29 ( of the text). ↩︎
Literally ‘who are After-deathers, Conscious-maintainers.’ These summary epithets are meant to be contemptuous, and the word chosen for death adds to the force of the phrase. It is not the usual word, but āghātana (so read in the text), meaning literally ‘shambles, place of execution.’ The ordinary phrase would have been param-maraṇikā. ↩︎
So the Ajīvakas, says Buddhaghosa. ↩︎
So the Nigaṇṭhas, says Buddhaghosa. ↩︎
§§ 9-18 are discussed by James D’Alwis in ‘Buddhist Nirvāṇa,’ p. 47. Comp. Jacobi, ‘Jaina Sūtras,’ II, 236, 339. ↩︎
Sato sattassa. Insert the word sato in the text (as in §§ 17, 19, 41, 42). The Kaṭha Upanishad I, 20 alludes to such belief. ↩︎
Compare the 4th Vimokha. See Rh. D. ‘Buddhist Suttas,’ pp. 52, 213. The idea of resistance, paṭigha, is here not ethical, but refers to the senses. Having no sense of reaction to touch, of opposition to muscular effort. It appears from M. I, 164 that this was pretty much the view put forth by Gotama’s first teacher Āḷāra Kālāma. ↩︎
Compare the 5th Vimokha. This seems from M. I, 165 to have been much the same as the view held by Rāma, whose son and pupil, Uddaka, was Gotama’s second teacher. ↩︎
Compare the 6th Vimokha. ↩︎
Though it is not explicitly so stated, this last of these seven theorisers is no doubt to be considered as believing in all the sorts of soul held by the others, so that he believes in seven. One may compare the five souls each more subtle than the last, made respectively of anna, prāṇa, manas, vijñāṇa, and ānanda (food, breath, mind, consciousness, and joy), described in the Taittirīya Upanishad II, 1-5. The Buddhist modification of these theories omits the souls, and treats instead of various states of mind (produced by stages of meditation), the attainment of which, during this life, leads to rebirth in corresponding worlds, or planes of existence, named after those stages of meditations. But the oldest Piṭaka texts say very little about it, and the history of Buddhist speculation on the matter has yet to be formulated.
Centuries afterwards we find a somewhat analogous conception in the gradually ascending series of seven, each more subtle than the last (Sthūla-śarira, linga-śarīra, indriya, manas, ahankara, buddhi, and ātman), set out in the Sānkhya texts, and the later Vedānta has a similar series. There is sufficient truth in the idea or the series of seven set out in our text to explain the persistence of the general idea in all the Indian systems, but the details and the application are strikingly different.
The text shows that the four Arūpa Vimokhas of the Buddhist theory were regarded by the early Buddhists as derived from closely allied speculations, older than Buddhism, and expressed in almost identical phraseology. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa here (Sum. I, 12’) explains Nirvāṇa as the suppression of pain; pain, dukha, being bodily, as opposed to domanassa, mental. ‘In this visible world’ means in whatever world the particular soul happens to be at the time. On parikāreti compare V. II, 290 rājā uyyāne paricāresi, ‘the king indulged himself, enjoyed himself, in the garden.’ ‘All its functions’ is added from the Commentary. ↩︎
The text shows that the four Jhānas were regarded by the early Buddhists as older than Buddhism. The very words used are identical; the only modification introduced in Buddhism being the omission of the ‘souls.’ These four, together with the four Arūpa Vimokhas (see note on § 19), make up the right Attainments (Samāpattiyo), often mentioned in the Jātaka commentary as practised by pre-Buddhistic recluses. ↩︎
On paritasita compare M. I. 36 na asati paritassati, ‘is not worried at what is not’: paritassanā,‘fidgetiness’ or ‘worry,’ at M. I, 136; S. III, 15-19; and Mil. 253, 400. On vipphandita, M. I, 8, 486; Dh. S. 381 (Asl. 253); Jāt. IV, 495. ↩︎
In the text the first three of these four propositions are repeated, of each of the eleven classes of theorisers. The fourth is put in the form which, to avoid repetition, I have adopted for all the four. ↩︎
Tathāgata, that is the speaker himself, the Buddha. ↩︎
Gogerly’s translation of the first part of this Sutta, and Burnouf’s translation of the whole of it, have been reprinted in Grimblot’s ‘Sept Suttas Palis.’ These versions, of remarkable merit for the time when they were made, are full of mistakes which the since-published editions of the Commentary, and of numerous allied texts, enable us now to avoid. I have not thought it necessary to point out the numerous passages, occurring indeed in nearly every sentence, in which the present translation differs from theirs. It should be mentioned here, however, that Burnouf has missed the whole point of the dialogue by misunderstanding the constantly repeated phrase sandiṭṭhikam sāmañña-phalaṃ from which this title is taken. He renders it throughout as meaning ‘foreseen and general fruit’ which is grammatically impossible as regards sandiṭṭhikam, and rests on a false derivation as regards sāmañña. This last word means, of course, ‘samaṇaship, being a samaṇa, living as a samaṇa, a recluse, a religieux.’ ↩︎
Jīvakassa komārabhaccassa. Buddhaghosa (Sum. I, 133) naturally follows the compilers of the Khandakas (V. I, 269) in interpreting the adjective as ‘brought up by the Prince.’ But see the note at ‘Vinaya Texts,’ II, 174; which shows that the more likely meaning is ‘the bringer-up of children’ (child-doctor). Several cures, however, wrought by him are recorded; and the patients are always adults. There is no other reference at all to his being a child-doctor, and the Khandaka which gives the other interpretation is a very ancient document. ↩︎
See the note in my ‘Buddhist Suttas,’ p. 1. Buddhaghosa (p. 139) says she was the daughter of the king of Kosala. ↩︎
This is interesting, as it shows that the year, for the compilers of our Sutta, began in Sāvana (middle of July to middle of August), that is, with the rainy season. There were three Uposatha days in each month, on the 7th, 14th, and 15th day of the month. The full moon night of Kattika (middle of October to middle of Novemher) is called Komudi (from Kumuda, a white water-lily), because that flower is supposed to bloom then. Burnouf is wrong in translating Komudi as the name of the month. ↩︎
The same lines recur, but in a different order, at Jāt. I, 105. Dosinā, the etymology of which puzzled Childers and also Buddhaghosa (p. 141), is jyotsnā. ↩︎
Appeva nāma. Both Gogerly and Burnouf take this to mean ‘to a certainty,’ but compare D. I, 179, 205; V. II, 85, 262. ↩︎
Pakkhandino, ‘rushers forth.’ The exact meaning of some of these military terms is still uncertain, and was apparently uncertain to Buddhaghosa. They all recur, with some differences of reading. in the Milinda (p. 331, in a later and much longer list), and also in the Anguttara (IV, 107), as the names of the constituent elements of a standing army. ↩︎
Burnouf has made a sad mess of this important and constantly repeated clause. He has ‘Is it then possible, Sir, that one should declare to them (that is, to the craftsmen just mentioned) in this world, such a result (of their actions) as foreseen and as the general fruit of their conduct?’ But the king asks the Buddha to tell him (the king himself) whether the members of the Order derive from their lire any benefit corresponding to that which the craftsmen derive from theirs. ↩︎
According to Buddhaghosa (p. 142) he was one of the teachers who went about naked. ↩︎
Akiriyaṃ vyākāsi. Gogerly interprets this ‘he replied by affirming that there are no future rewards and punishments.’ Burnouf has simply ‘m’a donné une réponse vaine.’ But the corresponding word in the subsequent sections summarises the theory of the teacher questioned. On this theory compare A. I, 62; V. I, 235. ↩︎
In the text the framework of the interview is repeated each time in the same words as above. Only the answers differ. The answers all recur in the Majjhima I, 513 foll. ↩︎
'There is a good deal in both the Buddhist and the Jain texts about this Makkhali Gosāla, whose followers were called Ājīvakas, and who was regarded, from the Buddhist point of view, as the worst of the sophists. Some of the Jaina passages, and also Buddhaghosa here, are referred to by Hoernle, ‘Uvāsaka dasāo,’ pp. 108 foll.: and in the Appendixes. The principal Piṭaka passages are M. I, 31, 198, 238, 250, 483, 516, 524. S. I, 66, 68; III, 69, 211; IV, 398. A. I, 33, 286; III, 276, 384. V. I, 8, 291; II, 111, 130, 165, 284; IV, 74. See also Jāt. I, 493 and G. V, 68. As the sect is thrice mentioned in the Asoka Edicts as receiving royal gifts it is certain that it retained an important position for several centuries at least. See Senart, ‘Inscriptions de Piyadasi,’ II, 82, 209.
From the beginning of the answer down to the end of p. 53 recurs at S. III, 211, and the rest of it at ibid. 212, and the first part of the answer is ascribed at ibid. p. 69 to Pūraṇa Kassapa. ↩︎
Sabbe sattā, sabbe pāṇā, sabbe bhūtā, sabbe jīvā. Buddhaghosa gives details of these four classes of living beings, showing how they are meant to include all that has life, on this earth, from men down to plants. The explanation is very confused, and makes the terms by no means mutually exclusive. They are frequently used in the same order in the Jaina-Sūtras, and Professor Jacobi renders them accordingly ‘Every sentient being, every insect, every living thing, whether animal or vegetable.’ ‘Jaina-Sutras,’ II, xxv. This is much better; but we have, in our version, to give the sense in whjch the Buddhists supposed Gosāla to have taken the words. ↩︎
Compare the corresponding theory of the Jains as given in the Uttarādhyāyana Sūtra in Jacobi’s Jaina-Sūtras, vol. ii, p. 213: and that of Pūraṇa Kassapa quoted in Anguttara III, 383. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa gives the details ‘babyhood, playtime, trial time, erect time, learning time, ascetic time, prophet time, and prostrate time’ with (very necessary) comments on each. One may compare Shakepere’s ‘Seven Ages of Man.’ ↩︎
Ājīva. The Siamese edition reads ājīvaka. ↩︎
I think this is the right reading, but don’t know what it means. ↩︎
This answer recurs S. III, 307, M. I, 515 (compare Dh. S. 1215, 1362, 1364), as the view of a typical sophist. ↩︎
Sammag-gato. Buddhaghosa gives here no explanation of this word, but the Jātaka Commentary on Jāt. III, 305 says it means the man who has attained the highest fruit; that is, Arahatship. Gato is used here in the same sense as it has in Tathāgato, in gatatto (in the Nigaṇṭha paragraph below), and in vijjā-gato (S. N. 730, 733, 743), that is, who has not only attempted to go to, but has actually reached, the aim (common alike to the orthodox Vedāntist Brahmans and to each of the various schools of independent, dissenting, thinkers and recluses) of the conquest over ignorance, of the grasp of truth. ↩︎
Indriyāni, the five senses, and the mind as a sixth. ↩︎
Āhutiyo, See Buddhavaṃsa XXVII, 10; Kathā Vatthu 550. The phrase is omitted in the parallel passage in the Jaina ‘Sūtrakṛānga’ pointed out by Jacobi, ‘Jaina-Sūtras,’ II, xxiv. ↩︎
The series of riddles in this difficult passage is probably intended to be an ironical imitation of the Nigaṇṭha’s way of talking. Gogerly has caught the general sense fairly enough, but his version is very free, and wrong as to two of the words, and it gives no idea of the oracular form in which the original is couched. Burnouf’s rendering is quite wide of the mark.
The first of the ‘Four Restraints’ is the well-known rule of the Jains not to drink cold water, on the ground that there are ‘souls’ in it. See the discussion in the Milinda (II, 85-91 of my translation).
Professor Jacobi (‘Jaina-Sūtras,’ II, xxiii) thinks the ‘Four Restraints’ are intended to represent the four vows kept by the followers of Parśva. But this surely cannot be so, for these vows were quite different. ↩︎
The text repeats the whole paragraph put above (p. 27 of the text) into the mouth of the Eel-wriggler. ↩︎
Of these six teachers Pūraṇa denies the evil Karma in a bad act and vice versa; Ajita, in preaching annihilation at death, shuts out the possibility of any effect to be worked by Karma; and Makkhali rejects both Karma and its effect, The theory of Pakudha seems to exclude responsibility; the Nigaṇṭha simply begs the question, by asserting that a Nigaṇṭha has attained the end; and Sañjaya gives no answer at all.
The only one of these six theories of life on which independent evidence is at present accessible is that of the Nigaṇṭha (the Jain theory), But no attempt has yet been made to summarise it, or set it out in a manner intelligible to Western readers. It is very much to be hoped that this want may soon be supplied by one or other of the excellent scholars familiar with the texts. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa applies these last two adjectives to the truth, not to the life. But it seems more in accord with the next paragraph to refer them to the life. ↩︎
Gahapati, which Buddhaghosa takes here in the sense of peasant, ryot. ↩︎
Pātimokkha-saṃvara-saṃvuto. Buddhaghosa, I think, takes this to mean ‘restrained according to the rules of the Pātimokkha.’ ↩︎
On the following important and constantly repeated paragraph compare M. I, 180, 268; K. V. 424-6, 463-4; Mil., 367; Asl. 400, &c. ↩︎
Na nimittaggāhī hoti nānuvyañjanaggāhī. The phrase nimittaṃ gaṇhāti means either to seize upon anything as the object of one’s thought to the exclusion of everything else (see, for instance, Vin. I, 183, and Buddhaghosa’s note on it given in the ‘Vinaya Texts,’ II, 9), or to seize upon the outward sign of anything so keenly as to recognise what it is the mark of (Vin. III, 17). And when the object is a person of the other sex this phrase is the idiom used for our ‘falling in love with.’ Buddhaghosa gives, as an instance of the nimitta, the general conclusion that the object seen, heard, &c., is a man or woman; of the anuvyañjana, the perception of the detail that he or she is smiling, talking. &c. ↩︎
Avyāseka, literally ‘with no besprinkling’ (of evil, says Buddhaghosa). ↩︎
A small volume might be written on the various expansions of this text in the Piṭakas. Several whole Dialogues are devoted to it, and various Suttas in others of the oldest texts. Buddhaghosa has many pages upon it here, and deals with it also at length in the Visuddhi Magga and elsewhere. What is above added in brackets explains the principal points of what is implied, according to the Piṭakas, in this famous passage,—the Buddhist analogue to St. Paul’s: ‘Whether therefore ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God’ (I Cor. x. 31).
By the real fact underlying any action is meant that, in the Buddhist theory, behind the action (going, seeing, &c.) there is no ego, no actor (goer, seer, &c.), that can be called a ‘soul’ (Abbhantare attā nāma āloketā vā viloketā vā n’ atthi), but that there is a psychological explanation sufficient, of itself, without the soul-theory. ↩︎
‘Consider the fowls of the air,’ &c. (Matt. vi. 26). No man can call me servant, and I wander— So said the Exalted One— At will, o’er all the earth, on what I find I feel no need of wages, or of gain, So let the rain pour down now, if it likes, to-night. (Dhaniya Sutta 8.) And see the context in my ‘American Lectures,’ p. 168. ↩︎
Abhijjhaṃ loke pahāya. Gogerly renders ‘banishes desire from him,’ leaving out loke altogether, and rendering abhijjha in defiance both of the derivation and of the traditional explanation of the word. Even Burnouf (who frequently uses ‘desire’ for words in the Pāli meaning ‘lusts’ or ‘excitement’) has here ‘cupidité.’ ↩︎
So Buddhaghosa here (p. 211). But the Dhamma Sangaṇi 1156, 1157 explains it as torpor of mind and body. ↩︎
Āloka-saññī, literally ‘whose ideas are light.’ Neumann (‘Reden des Gotamo,’ I, 434, &c.) translates ‘loving the light,’ which may be the right connotation. Burnouf has ‘being aware of his visual sensation’ (de son regard), which is certainly wrong. ↩︎
Iṇaṃ ādāya. Neumann has ‘oppressed by debt,’ but Buddhaghosa (p. 212) says ‘taking goods on interest’; and this is confirmed by Jāt. IV, 256, V, 436. ↩︎
From the beginning of § 68 the text, though here split up into paragraphs for the convenience of the reader, is really one long sentence or paragraph of much eloquence and force in the Pāli; and the peroration, leading on to the Jhānas, is a favourite passage recurring M. I, 71; Vin. I, 294; Mil. 84. The five similes are to be taken, in order, as referring to the Five Hindrances (Nīvaraṇā) given in § 68. The Dhamma Sangaṇi 1152 gives six hindrances, and M. I, 360-3 gives eight. ↩︎
Viveka, ‘separation’—physically of the body, ‘seclusion’; intellectually, of the objects of thought, ‘discrimination’; ethically, of the heart, ‘being separate from the world.’ We have no word in English suggesting these three, all of which are implied. The stress is upon separation from the world, taking ‘world’ in the sense of all the hindrances to spiritual progress, and especially of the five chief Hindrances (Nīvaraṇā) just above set out. Buddhaghosa has nothing here, but compare Asl. 166. ↩︎
Ekodibhāva. Compare Asl. 169, Senart in Mahāvastu I, 554, and the notes in J. P. T. S., 1884, p. 32 foll. ↩︎
Upekhako, literally ‘looking on,’ that is, looking on rival mental states with equal mind. Imperturbable, impartial, tolerant, unsusceptible, stoical, composed, are all possible renderings, and all unsatisfactory. The ten kinds of Upekkhā ‘equanimity,’ translated into English from Sinhalese by Spence Hardy (Manual, p. 505), can now be corrected from the Pāli at Asl. 172. ↩︎
This is a favourite description of the body. (See M. I, 500; II, 17; S. IV, 83; Jāt. I, 146, &c.) The words for erasion, abrasion, are cunningly chosen (ucchādana, parimaddana). They are also familiar technical terms of the Indian shampooer, and are so used above (p. 7, § 16 of the text). The double meaning must have been clearly present to the Indian hearer, and the words are, therefore. really untranslatable. ↩︎
Viññāṇa. ‘The five senses, sensations arising from objects, and all emotions and intellectual processes,’ says Buddhaghosa (p. 221). ↩︎
In spite of this and similar passages the adherents of the soul theory (having nothing else to fasten on) were apt to fasten on to the Buddhist Viññāṇa as a possible point of reconciliation with their own theory. Even an admirer of the Buddha (one Sāti, a member of the Order) went so far as to tell the Buddha himself that he must, as he admitted transmigration, have meant that the Viññāṇa did not really depend upon, was not really bound up with, the body, but that it formed the link in transmigration. In perhaps the most earnest and emphatic of all the Dialogues (M. I, 256 foll.), the Buddha meets and refutes at length this erroneous representation of his view. But it still survives. I know two living writers on Buddhism who (in blissful ignorance of the Dialogue in question) still fasten upon Buddha the opinion he so expressly refused to accept. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa explains that, if the Bhikshu have his ears unpierced, so will the image, and so on. ↩︎
This old simile occurs already in the Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa IV, 3, 3, 16. ↩︎
The point is the similarity. Buddhaghosa explains that the Karaṇḍa is not a basket (as Burnouf renders it), but the skin which the snake sloughs off; and that the scabbard is like the sword, whatever the sword’s shape. He adds that of course a man could not take a snake out of its slough with his hand. He is supposed in the simile to do so in imagination. ↩︎
Iddhi, literally ‘well-being, prosperity.’ The four Iddhis of a king are personal beauty, length of life, strong health, and popularity (M. Sud. Sutta in my ‘Buddhist Suttas,’ pp. 259-261). The Iddhis of Gotama when at home, as a boy, were the possession of a beautiful garden, soft clothing, comfortable lodging, pleasant music, and good food (A. I, 145). Worldly Iddhi is distinguished from spiritual at A. I, 93. Buddhaghosa gives nine sorts of Iddhi, mostly intellectual, at Asl. 91, and compare 237. There are no examples in the Piṭakas of concrete instances of any of these except the last; but see S. IV, 289, 290; A. III, 340, 341; M. P. S. 43. ↩︎
The point of the comparison, says Buddhaghosa (223), is that if he is in trouble and has lost his way he might be in doubt. But if calm and secure he can tell the difference. ↩︎
Sa-uttara and anuttara. Unless the interpretation given in the Dhamma Sangaṇi 1292, 1293, 1596, 1597 (‘occupied with rebirth in heaven, and occupied with Arahatship’) reveals a change in the use of terms, the evil disposition, in this case only, is put first. ↩︎
This is based on the Indian theory of the periodic destruction and renovation of the universe, each of which takes countless years to accomplish. ↩︎
Vaṇṇa, ‘colour.’ ↩︎
The three villages correspond to the three stages of being, the three Bhūmis,—the world of lust, the world of form, and the formless worlds (the Kāma, Rūpa, and Arūpa Lokas). ↩︎
Dibba-cakkhu. See the note below on § 102 at the end of this Sutta. ↩︎
This paragraph forms the subject of the discussion in the Kathā Vatthu III, 9 (p. 250). The mere knowledge of the general fact of the action of Karma is there distinguished from the Dibba-cakkhu, the Heavenly Eye; and the instance of Sāriputta is quoted, who had that knowledge, but not the Heavenly Eye. As he was an Arahat it follows that the possession of the Heavenly Eye was not a necessary consequence of Arahatship. Buddhaghosa adds (p. 224) that the sphere of vision of the Heavenly Eye did not extend to the Formless Worlds. On the Dhamma-cakkhu, ‘the Eye for the Truth,’ see below, p. 110, § 21 of the text. ↩︎
Vītisañcarante is Buddhaghosa’s reading. The Siamese has Vithim. Compare M. I, 279. ↩︎
Āsavas, Deadly Floods, another untranslatable term. Neumann has Illusion (Wahn); Burnouf has defilement (souillures). They are sometimes the three here mentioned (M. I, 23, 155; A. I, 167; S. IV, 256, &c.); but speculation, theorising (Diṭṭhi) is added as a fourlh in the M. P. S. and elsewhere. Unfortunately, the word has not been yet found in its concrete, primary, sense; unless indeed Buddhaghosa’s statement (at Asl. 48) that well-seasoned spirituous liquors were called āsavā be taken literally. It is therefore impossible to be sure what is the simile that underlies the use of the word in its secondary, ethical sense. Perhaps after all it is the idea of overwhelming intoxication, and not of flood or taint or ooze, that we ought to consider.
Subhūti in quoting the above passage from Buddhaghosa (in the Abhidhāna Padīpikā Sūci, p. 43) reads pärivas° throughout for pārivās°. ↩︎
Kamāsavā, with special reference to the taint of hankering after a future life in the sensuous plane (Kāma Loka); that is, in the world. ↩︎
Bhavāsavā, with special reference to the taint of hankering after a future life in the plane of form and the formless plane (the Rūpa and Arūpa Lokas); that is, in heaven. ↩︎
Avijjāsavā, with special reference to ignorance of the Four Great Truths, just above summarised. ↩︎
The simile recurs M. I, 279; A. I, 9. Compare for the words sippi-sambuka Jāt. V, 197; A. III, 395; Trenckner, ‘Pāli Miscellany,’ p. 60. ↩︎
Because, as Buddhaghosa points out, this is really Arahatship, Nirvāṇa; and it was to this, to Arahatship, that all the rest led up. ↩︎
Ariyānam. That is, either of previous Buddhas, or perhaps of the Arahats. ↩︎
The Dhamma-cakkhu (Eye for the Truth) is a technical term for conversion, for entering on the Path that ends in Arahatship. It is higher than the Heavenly Eye (dibba-cakkhu, above, of the text, § 95) which sees other people’s previous births, and below the Eye of Wisdom (paññā-cakkhu) which is the wisdom of the Arahat (Itivuttaka, p. 52, § 61). ↩︎
So Buddhaghosa; but he gives no further details as to the terms; of the grant, or of the tenancy. The whole string of adjectives recurs below, pp. 111, 114, 127, 131 {see note 1 for the last ref.} of the text, and rāja-bhoggaṃ at Vin. III, 222. Compare Divyāvadāna, p. 620.
The land revenue, payable of course in kind, would be a tithe. If the king had full proprietary (zemindary) rights as well, which is the probable meaning of rāja-bhoggaṃ, his share would be, either with or without the land tax, one half. The grant would be of his own rights only. The rights of the peasants to the other half, and to the use of the common and waste and woods, would remain to them. If Buddhaghosa’s interpretation of brahmadeyyaṃ is correct, then the grantee would also be the king’s representative for all purposes judicial and executive. Elsewhere the word has only been found as applied to marriage; and the first part of the compound (brahma) has always been interpreted by Brahmans as referring to themselves. But brahma as the first part of a compound never has that meaning in Pāli; and the word in our passage means literally ‘a full gift.’ ↩︎
His full name was Pokkharasādi Opamañño Subhagavaniko (M. II, 200); where the second is the gotta (gens) name and the third a local name. See the Introduction to the Mahāli Sutta. ↩︎
According to Jāt. IV, 363 (compare Jāt. IV, 366) there were also Ambaṭṭhas who were not Brahmans by birth, but farmers. ↩︎
The fourth is not expressly mentioned. Buddhaghosa (p. 247) says we have to supply the fourth Veda, the Atharva. But the older Pāli texts do not acknowledge the Atharva as a Veda. It only occurs, as the Athabbaṇa Veda, in the Aṭṭhakathās and Ṭīkās. And it is quite unnecessary to suppose a silent reference to it here. The fourth place is quite sufficiently filled as suggested in the translation. The Āthabbaṇa, given (in S. N, 927) as the name of a mystic art (together with astrology, the interpretation of dreams and of lucky signs, and so forth), is probably not the Veda, but witchcraft or sorcery. The Piṭakas always take three Vedas, and three only, for granted. And the whole point of the Tevijja Sutta (translated in full in my ‘Buddhist Suttas’) is this three-, not four-, fold division. Four Vedas are referred to in the Milinda, at p. 3, and the Atharva-veda, at p. 117. ↩︎
This is the standing description in the Suttas of a learned Brahman. See below, pp. 114, 120 (of the text); A. I, 163; Mil. 10; Divyāvadāna 620, &c. One or two of the details are not quite certain, as yet. ↩︎
The knowledge of these thirty-two marks of a Great Being, (Mahā-purusha) is one of the details in the often-recurring paragraph giving the points of Brahman wisdom, which we have just had at § 3. No such list has been found, so far as I know, in those portions of the pre-Buddhistic priestly literature that have survived. And the inference from both our passages is that the knowledge is scattered through the Brahman texts. Many of the details of the Buddhist list (see the note below on of the text) are very obscure; and a collection of the older Brahman passages would probably throw light upon them, and upon a curious chapter in mythological superstition. Who will write us a monograph (historical of course) on the Mahā-purusha theory as held in early times among the Aryans in India? ↩︎
For the details of these seven see further my ‘Buddhist Suttas,’ pp. 251-259. ↩︎
Vihāra; often rendered ‘monastery,’ a meaning the word never has in the older texts. ↩︎
Bandhupādāpaccā. Neumann, loc. cit. p. 521, says ‘treading on one another’s heels.’ Buddhaghosa refers the expression to the Brahman theory that the Śūdras were born from Brahmā’s heels. And this may well have been the meaning. For though Gotama and the majority of his order were well born, still others, of low caste, were admitted to it, and Ambaṭṭha is certainly represented as giving vent to caste prejudice when he calls the brethren ‘black fellows.’ Compare M. I, 334; S. IV, 117, and below, D. I, 103. ↩︎
And is therefore, after all, not so much his fault as that of his teacher. That this is the implication is clear from the text, pp. 90, 91 (§§ 10-13) below. ↩︎
Ibbhā. Chalmers J. R. A. S., 1894, p. 343) renders this ‘nought but men of substance,’ and he has been followed by Frazer, ‘Literature of India,’ p. 118. But Buddhaghosa’s interpretation is confirmed both by the context and by the derivation. ↩︎
Santhāgāra. Childers is quite wrong about this word. It is the hall where a clan mote was held, and is used exclusively of places for the assemblies of the householders in the free republics of Northern Kosala. It never means a royal rest house, which is rājāgāraka, as we had above (p. 1, § 2 of the Pāli text). Thus at M. I, 353, 4 and Jāt. IV, 147 we have this identical hall of the Sākyas at Kapilavatthu, and at M. I, 457 a similar one of the Sākyas at Cātumāya; at M. P. V, 56 (VI, 23 of the translation in my ‘Buddhist Suttas’) we have the congress hall of the Mallas of Kusinārā, and at M. I, 228 and Vin. I, 233 that of the Licchavis of Vesālī-all of them called Santhāgāra, and all referred to in connection with a public meeting of the clan. ↩︎
Anguli-patodakena. The Introductory Story to the 52nd Pācittiya (Vin. IV, 110 = III, 84) tells how a Bhikshu was inadvertently done to death by being made to laugh immoderately in this way. It must there mean ‘tickling.’ Here, and at A. IV, 343, it seems to have the meaning given above. ↩︎
Vaṇṇā. ↩︎
On this famous old king see the legends preserved in the M. B. V, 13; Mahāvastu I, 348;Jāt. II, 311; Sum. I, 258. ↩︎
Sammanti, ‘dwell,’ not in Childers in this sense. But see S. I, 226 = Sum. I, 125 and Jāt. V, 396. ↩︎
The oak (which doesn’t grow in the text, and could not grow in the Terai) has been introduced to enable the word play to be adequately rendered. The Pāli Saka means a teak tree. ↩︎
Kaṇhāyana is the regular torm of patronymic from Kaṇha. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa (p. 263) says that Gotama’s object was to confine the discussion to a single opponent, since if all spoke at once, it could not well be brought to a conclusion. In the text Gotama repeats the whole speech of the Brahmans. ↩︎
Aññena aññam paṭicarasi. For this idiom, not in Childers, see M. I, 250; Vin. I. 85; A. I, 187, 198; Mil. 94; Sum. I, 264. It is answering one thing by alleging another. ↩︎
This curious threat—which never comes to anything, among the Buddhists, and is apparently never meant to—is a frequent form of expression in Indian books. and is pre-Buddhistic. Comp. Bṛnad Ār. Up. III, 6. 2 and 9. 26. Buddhist passages are M. I, 231; Dhp. 72; Dhp. A. 87, 140; Jāt. I, 54; V, 21, 33, 87, 92, 493, &c. ↩︎
Vajira-pāṇī: to wit, Indra, says Buddhaghosa. ↩︎
Upanisīdati; whence Upanishad, a mystery, secret, listened to in awe. ↩︎
Rishi, mystic sage, magician being no doubt implied, as in B. V. II, 81 = Jāt. I, 17 (verse 90). Compare Merlin. ↩︎
The effect of course of the charm which, Buddhaghosa tells us (p. 265), was known as the Ambaṭṭha charm. ↩︎
Sotthi hotu. This is the old mystic word swasti. We have lost the use of such expressions, Faustum fac regem. ↩︎
All this, says Buddhaghosa, was brutum fulmen. The Ambaṭṭha charm had only power to stop the arrow going off; not to work such results as these. ↩︎
Literally ‘place the arrow (which had a barb shaped like a horse-shoe) on his son.’ ↩︎
Thālipāka. See Jāt. I, 186; Mil. 249. It is used in sacrifices, and also on special occasions. ↩︎
Pakaraṇe. Perhaps ‘in consequence of some regulation or other.’ Buddhaghosa (p. 267) says ‘offence,’ but compare Mil. 189. ↩︎
Assa-puṭena vadhitvā, literally ‘killing him with (the proceeding called) the Ash-basket.’ Compare the idiom ‘cut him dead.’ It is also mentioned at A. II, 242. ↩︎
Sanaṃ-kumāra means ‘ever virgin.’ According to the legend—common ground to Brahmans and Buddhists—there were five ‘mind born’ sons of Brahmā, who remained always pure and innocent, and this Brahmā was one of the five. See the passages quoted by Chalmers in the J. R. A. S., 1894, p. 344.
Hofrath Bühler has pointed out that in the Mahābhārata III, 185 (Bombay edition) there is an interesting passage where Sanat-kumāra (the Sanskrit form of the name Sanaṃ-kumāra) is actually represented by the Brahmans themselves as having uttered, as referee in a dispute on a point similar to the one here discussed, not indeed the actual words here imputed to him, but others of a very similar import. See the whole article in the J. R. A. S., 1897, pp. 585-588. We either have in our text a quotation from an older recension of the same legend, or one of the two—either the Brahman editors of the Mahābhārata, or the composers of our Sutta—have twisted the legend a little in their own favour. ↩︎
The verse is a favourite one. It occurs also at M. I, 358; S. I, 153; II, 284; and below in the Aggañña Sutta. ↩︎
This question of caste, besides being often referred to in isolated passages, is described at length also in the Assalāyana, Kaṇṇakathāla, and Madhura Suttas, all in the Majjhima. The first has been translated into German by Professor Pischel and the last into English by Mr. Chalmers, J. R. A. S., 1894, p. 341 and foll. On the facts of caste as disclosed in the Jātaka book see Fick’s ‘Sociale Gliederung in Indien zu Buddha’s Zeit,’ Kiel, 1897; and on the general history of caste in India see Senart’s ‘Les Castes dans l’Inde,’ Paris, 1896. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa, p. 268, seems to have had a different reading—idam p’assa hoti sīlasmiṃ—from that preserved in our text. It comes to much the same result, but is better, as omitting the word bhikkhu. ↩︎
It is important to notice that these are put, not under wisdom, but under conduct. ↩︎
There are therefore eight divisions of conduct, and eight of the higher wisdom. ↩︎
Apāya-mukhāni, ‘outlets, leakages, so that it cannot fill up.’ The word aya-mukhaṃ, inlet, is used in its concrete sense at D. I, 74. and both words at A. II, 166; and ‘outlet’ occurs figuratively, in a secondary sense, as in this passage, in the Sigālovāda Sutta, p. 299. ↩︎
For instances of this see Jāt. I, 285, 494; II, 43. Such service paid to a god has already been condemned in the tract on the Sīlas, the minor details of mere morality (above, pp. 24, 25). ↩︎
Buddhaghosa here (p. 270) says that all sorts of Brahman ascetics are here intended to be included, and he gives further details of eight different sorts (discussed in the Journal of the P. T. S. for 1891, pp. 34 foll.). ↩︎ ↩︎
Parihīnako sācariyako. ‘Have been done out of, neglected in the matter of, defrauded of, this wisdom,’ &c. ↩︎
By concealing this suggestive fact, and thereby leaving you ignorant that the king, a Kshatriya, looked down on a Brahman, even one whom he considered, as a Brahman, of great merit. So at Jāt. V, 257 a king calls a Brahman ‘low born’ (hīna-gacco) compared with himself. ↩︎
On these names see Tevijja Sutta I, 13 (p. 172 of my ‘Buddhist Suttas’) and ‘Vinaya Texts,’ II, 130. ↩︎
Veṭhaka-nata-passāhi. We have here probably the ancient name of the very elaborate girdles which all the fashionable women and goddesses wear on the old bas reliefs. Cunningham, ‘Stūpa or Bharhut,’ Pl. LI, gives figures and details of them. To judge from the bas reliefs—and I cannot call to mind any Piṭaka passage contradicting them—the women (lay women of course, the Sisterhood wore robes from the shoulders downwards) have only very elaborate headdresses and necklaces, a skirt from the waist to the ankles, and a very broad and handsome girdle worn over the top of the skirt. They were unclothed from the neck to the waist. ↩︎
Kutta-vālehi. The chariot of the time, as represented on the bas reliefs, had standing room for four passengers, the steeds wore plumes on their heads, and had their manes and tails elaborately plaited. ‘Stūpa of Bharhut,’ Pl. XII, shows us the chariot of Pasenadi, king of Kosala (see ibid. pp. 124, 125). Kutta is not in Childers. But it occurs frequently. See Jāt. I, 296, 433; II, 127, 128; IV, 219; Asl.321. ↩︎
Compare Jāt. IV, 106; Mil. 330. ↩︎
Okkhitta-palighāsu. Childers says (following the Sanskrit dictionaries) bars ‘of iron.’ But where does the iron come in? This is surely a modern improvement. Unfortunately the word is found elsewhere (M. I, 139; A. III, 84; Dhp. 398) only in an ethical sense. ↩︎
Neither text nor commentary make it clear what these two marks really quite meant. The first, says Buddhaghosa, is ‘like an elephant’s,’ and the second seems, from what follows, to be the power of extending the tongue, like a snake’s, to a great length. This last is possibly derived from poetical descriptions of the tongues of flame or light playing round the disk of the sun.
As to the means by which the Buddha made the first visible to Ambaṭṭha, Buddhaghosa simply quotes Nāgasena (at Mil. 169) to show that he made a visible image of himself fully dressed in his robes. And the difficulty is to see how that would have helped matters. Only an historical explanation of the meaning of the marks can here guide us to what is inferred. ↩︎
These are two of the thirty-two bodily marks of a Great Being (Mahā-purisa), as handed down among the Brahmans (see note above, of the text, § 5) and adopted by the Buddhists. They are in part adaptations to a man of poetical epithets applied to the sun, or to the personification of the mystic human sacrifice; partly characteristics of personal beauty such as any man might have; and one or two of them—the little wart, for instance, between the eyes with white hair on it, and the protuberance at the top of the head—may possibly be added in reminiscence of personal bodily peculiarities which Gotama actually had.
One of the Dialogues in the Dīgha, the Lakhaṇa Sutta, is devoted to these thirty-two marks. They are also enumerated, with slight differences, in the Mahāpadhāna Sutta; and later books give other lists differing from each other, and from the old lists, in many small points. The story told here in §§ 11, 12 recurs in identical words in the Sela Sutta (S. N. No. 33 = M. No. 92) and forms the subject of one of the dilemmas put by King Milinda to Nāgasena (Mil 167). ↩︎
Above, of the text, § 12 repeated. ↩︎
Onīta-patta-pāṇim. See the note at ‘Vinaya Texts,’ I, 83. ↩︎
Campā, the capital of Angā, was on the East bank of the river of the same name (Jāt. IV, 454), which formed the Eastern boundary of Magadhā. It was close to the modern Bagulpur, about Lat. 24° 10’ by Long. 87°. Like other names of famous places in India, it was used over again by colonists in the Far East, and there means what we now call Cochin China and Annam (I-Tsing, p. 58). ↩︎
So called after Queen Gaggarā, who had had it excavated, says Buddhaghosa (Sum. I, 279). He adds that on its banks was a grove or champaka trees, so well known for the fragrance of their beautiful white flowers. It was under those trees that the wandering mendicants put up. ↩︎
Sattussada. The meaning is really quite settled, though Fausböll wrongly translates ussada ‘desire,’ and Oldenberg and myself ‘uneven,’ at S. N. 783 = Vin. I, 3. See No. 15 in the list of the thirty-two marks. Also Jāt. IV, 188 = Dhp. A. 339; Jāt. IV, 60 = Dhp. A. 95; Jāt. IV, 4; P. G. D. 22-44; Asl.307. ↩︎
In the Buddha’s time Angā was subject to Magadhā. ↩︎
Perhaps in ‘companies and separately’; but I follow Buddhaghosa. Comp. M. I, 231; A. II, 55. ↩︎
Brahma-vaccasī. ‘With a body like that of Mahā Brahmā,’ says Buddhaghosa (p. 282). The Burmese and Siamese MSS. read vacchaśī ↩︎
Akkhuddāvakāso, for which Buddhaghosa (pp. 282, 284) gives three contradictory explanations. ↩︎
Aneḷagalāya. ‘Not slobbering,’ says Buddhaghosa. ↩︎
‘Eighty thousand families on the mother’s, and eighty thousand on the father’s side,’ says Buddhaghosa—making a total for the Sākya clan of 800,000, reckoning five to a family. ↩︎
Kamma-vādī kiriya-vādī. Compare ‘Vinaya Texts,’ II, 109, 112. ↩︎
Ādīna-khattiya-kulā. The reading is doubtful, and the Burmese MSS., after their constant habit, have replaced it by an easy reading, abhinna-khattiya-kulā, ‘unbroken Kshatriya family.’ But all the Sinhalese MSS. agree in reading either ādina or ādīna; and if the reading had once been abhinna, it is difficult to see how the alteration to the more difficult reading should have occurred. Buddhaghosa skips the clause, which (if it was in the text before him) is suggestive. He would scarcely have done so unless the matter were really very simple. ‘Autonomous’ would make a good sense in the context; but I have taken the word, in the sense of ‘primordial, aboriginal,’ as being a derivative from ādi, in the same way as adhīna is from adhi. This is simple enough; the only difficulty being that the word occurs nowhere else. ↩︎
Literally ‘anyhow’; ‘such as by wearing no clothes’ explains Buddhaghosa (p. 288). ↩︎
Puṭaṃsenāpi. Compare A. II, 183, where a precisely similar phrase occurs. ↩︎
Cittam na ārādheyyaṃ, ‘win over his mind.’ Comp. M. I, 85, 341; II, 10; Mil. 25. ↩︎
That is, ‘officiate at a sacrifice by pouring out of a spoon a libation of butter, or of spirituous Soma, to the fire god.’ ↩︎
Vaṇṇa, much the same as ‘caste,’ though that rendering is not strictly accurate. (See the Introduction to the Ambaṭṭha.) ↩︎
The full text is repeated, both here and in the following sections. ↩︎
This name looks suspiciously like a kind of personification of the five Angas (the five characteristics) of the true Brahman as just above, § 13, set out. ↩︎
Oldenberg renders this (‘Buddha,’ p. 283) as follows: ‘The wisdom of the upright and the uprightness of the wise have, of all uprightness and wisdom in the world, the highest value.’ I cannot see how this can be grammatically justified; though the sentiment is admirable enough, and would have somewhat relieved the monotony of the paragraph. On paññāṇa as nominative, not genitive, see, for instance, S. I, 41, 42; Sum. I, 171, 290; A. IV, 342. ↩︎
The repetition here is nearly the same as that in the Ambaṭṭha Sutta, summarised above at the translation of p. 100 of the text. The only difference is that the paragraphs 64-74 of the Sāmañña-phala there included as coming under Caraṇa (Conduct) are here included under Sīla (Uprightness). The Jhānas, there put, not under Vijjā (Wisdom), but under Caraṇa, are here put, not under Sīla, but under Paññā (Intelligence). In other words Paññā includes all that was there included under Vijja, and the Four Jhānas besides. But Sīla includes all that is put in the Ambaṭṭha under Sīla—all indeed of the eight divisions of Sīla as summarised above, pp. 57-59. See Buddhaghosa’s notes at pp. 219, 268, 292. ↩︎
On the ground, says Buddhaghosa (p. 292), that he would be saluting a much younger man, one young enough to be his grandson. If this tradition be correct, it would follow that this Sutta must be describing events very early in the public ministry of the Buddha. ↩︎
It will be seen from this section that Soṇadaṇḍa is represented as being a convert only to a limited extent. He still keeps on his school of Vedic studies, and is keenly anxious to retain the good opinion of his students, and of other Brahmans. And if that part of the Buddha’s doctrine put before him in this Sutta be examined, it will be found to be, with perhaps one or two exceptions, quite compatible with the best Brahman views. No doubt if every detail were carried to its strict logical conclusion there would be no further need for Vedic studies, except from the historical standpoint. But those details are, on the face of them, ethical. They belong to a plane not touched on in the then Vedic studies. They could be accepted by an adherent of the soul theory of life. And the essential doctrines of Buddhism—the Path, the Truths, and Arahatship—are barely even referred to. ↩︎
Not the same as the one with the same name half way between Rājagaha and Nālānda (above, p. 1 of the text). Buddhaghosa (p. 294) says it was like it. ↩︎
All given in the text in full, as in the Soṇadaṇḍa Sutta. ↩︎
§§ 3-7 inclusive of the Soṇadaṇḍa are here repeated in full in the text. ↩︎
As in § 4. ↩︎
Vidhā. Childers gives ‘pride’ as the only meaning of this word. But he has made a strange muddle between it and vidho. All that he has under both words should be struck out. All that he has under vidho should be entered under vidhā, which has always the one meaning ‘mode, manner, way.’ Used ethically of the Arahats it refers, no doubt, to divers ‘modes’ of pride or delusion (as for instance in vidhāsu na vikampanti at S. I, 84, and in the passage quoted in Childers). He makes vidhā a very rare word, and vidho a common one. It is just the contrary. Vidhā is frequent, especially at the end of adjectival compounds. Vidho is most rare. It is given doubtfully by Buddhaghosa, in discussing a doubtful reading at Sum. I, 269, in the sense of ‘yoke’; and is a possible reading at Vin. II, 136, 319; IV, 168, 363 in the sense of ‘brooch’ or ‘buckle.’
Here vidhā in Kūṭadanta’s mouth means, of course, mode of rite or ritual. Gotama lays hold of the ambiguity of the word, and twists it round to his ethical teaching in the sense of mode of generosity. ↩︎
Parikkhārā, ‘accessories, fillings, equipments, appurtenances,’—the furniture of a room, the smallest things one wears, the few objects a wandering mendicant carries about with him, and so on. Here again the word is turned into a riddle, the solution of which is the basis of the dialogue. ↩︎
Literally ‘he who has a great realm’—just as we might say Lord Broadacres. ↩︎
‘Such as jewels and plate,’ says Buddhaghosa (p. 295). ↩︎
Rāja-porise. On this word, the locative singular of a neuter abstract form, compare M. I, 85. ↩︎
‘Because it was right and fit to do such deeds when one was young and rich. To spend one’s days in selfishness, and then, in old age to give gifts would be no good,’ says Buddhaghosa (p. 297). ↩︎
Yaññassa parikkhārā. The latter word is here twisted round to a new sense. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa explains this as meaning that he knew the result of Karma, he knew that his present prosperity was a gift to him by the good deeds done to others in the past, and that there would be a similar result in future for his good deeds done now. ↩︎
This whole closing sentence is repeated, in the text, of each of the sixteen. ↩︎
The attendants, at such a general largesse, says Buddhaghosa (p. 303), push the recipients about, make them stand in a queue, and use violence in doing so. ↩︎
The Great Wood stretched from Vesālī northwards to the Himālaya range. In it they had laid out a pleasaunce for the Order, and made there a storied house, with a hall below surrounded by pillars only, and facing the west, and above it the gabled apartments in which the Buddha so often stayed. ↩︎
He was the son of Nāgita’s sister. He had joined the Order as a novice when only seven years old, and shown so much intelligence as a learner that he was a favourite with all, even with the Buddha himself. He must therefore be different from the other Sīha, also a Licchavi, who is the hero of the story told at Vin. I, 233-238 = A. IV, 179-188, as the latter is not a member of the Order at all. Professor Edward Müller (J. P. T. S., 1888, p. 97) confounds the two. ↩︎
This is the gotta, the gens, to which Nāgita belonged. ↩︎
This young man became the Buddha’s personal attendant; but afterwards, when the Buddha was in extreme old age (M. I, 68), he went over to the creed of Kora the Kshatriya, and left the Buddhist Order. Kora’s doctrine was the efficacy of asceticism, of rigid self-mortification. And it was to show how wrong this doctrine, as put forth by Sunakkhatta, was, that the Buddha told the story (Jāt. I, 398) of the uselessness of the efforts he himself had made when
‘Now scorched, now frozen, lone in fearsome woods, Naked, without a fire, afire within, He, as a hermit, sought the crown of faith.’
But we do not hear that Sunakkhatta ever came back to the fold. ↩︎
This is again the name of the gotta, the gens. Buddhaghosa (p. 316) calls him a rāja. ↩︎
See my ‘American Lectures’ (London, 1896, pp. 142-149) for the full meaning of these three, and of the following Bonds. ↩︎
Sambodhi-parāyano. So Buddhaghosa on this (p. 313) and my Introduction to this Sutta. ↩︎
The above three, and Sensuality and Illwill. ↩︎
Opapātiko, literally ‘accidental’; but the use of such a word would only mislead the reader, the real connotation of the word being that of the words I have chosen. Those who gain the highest heavens are so called because there is no birth there in the ordinary way. Each being, who is there, has appeared there suddenly, accidentally as it were, without generation, conception, gestation or any of the other means attending the birth of beings in the world. ↩︎
It is impossible to ignore a reference here to the view expressed in the Bṛhad Āraṇyaka Upanishad (VI, 2, 15). ‘There do they dwell far away, beyond, in the Brahmā-worlds. And for them there is no return.’ ↩︎
See my’ American Lectures,’ pp. 136-141; and Sum. I, 314-316. ↩︎
The Siamese edition reads: ‘No, it would not, Sir.’ On the idiom kallaṃ etaṃ vacanāya compare A. I, 144; M. II, 211. ↩︎
So three Sinhalese and two Burmese MSS. and the Siamese edition. Two Sinhalese MSS. read: ‘Yes, Sir, it would.’ But Buddhaghosa had clearly, both here and above, § 16, the reading we have followed. And he gives a characteristic explanation—that whereas the Arahat (in § 19) would have too much wisdom to be led astray, following the false trail of the soul theory, the Bhikshu who had only reached up to the Jhānas might, being still a puthujjana, an unconverted man, have leanings that way.
To hold that the soul iś the same as the body is the heresy referred to in the Brahma-jāla (above, p. 46). See also the Introduction to the Kūṭadanta (above, p. 167). ↩︎
Miga-dāye. That is, a place set apart for deer to roam in in safety, a public park in which no hunting was allowed. ↩︎
It would, perhaps, be more agreeable to the context if one could render this idiomatic phrase: ‘Is there anything in this opinion of theirs as to his system, or as to this corollary they have drawn from it, which amounts to being a matter he would object to?’ But I do not see how this could be reconciled with the syntax of the Pāli sentence. And Buddhaghosa takes it as rendered above, summarising it in the words: ‘Is your opinion herein altogether free from blame?’ ↩︎
The four paragraphs 5, 6, 7 and 8 are here repeated in full in the text with the change only of reading ‘the body of the disciples of the Samaṇa Gotama’ instead of ‘the Samaṇa Gotama,’ and similarly for the other teachers. ↩︎
The following description of the naked ascetic recurs in the Majjhima I, 77, 238, 342; II, 161, and in the Puggala Panññatti IV, ↩︎
Hatthāpalekhano. The tradition was in doubt about this word. Both commentators give an alternative rendering: ‘He scratched himself clean with his hand after stooling.’ And the Puggala Paññatti commentator adds a very curious piece of old folklore as his reason for this explanation. ↩︎
Na Daṇḍa-m-antaram. That is, perhaps, among the firewood; but the expression is not clear. The Commentaries only give the reason. Dr. Neumann (on Majjhima I, 77) has, ‘he does not spy beyond the lattice’ or perhaps ‘beyond the bars of the grate’ (spähte nicht über das Gitter), but this seems putting a great deal of meaning into the sticks, and not sufficiently reproducing the force of antaram. And how can paṭigaṇhāti mean ‘spy’? We have, no doubt, to fill out an elliptical phrase. But it is just such cases as those in this paragraph where we are more likely to go right if we follow the ancient tradition. ↩︎
Na purisantara-gatāya. The commentators only give the reason. On the meaning, of the word compare Jāt. I, 290. ↩︎
Na saṃkhittisu. Both meaning and derivation are uncertain. Dr. Neumann has ‘not from the dirty.’ ↩︎
Thusodaka. It is not fermented. The traditional interpretation here is: ‘a drink called Suvīrakaṃ (after the country Suvīra) made of the constituents, especially the husk, of all cereals.’ The use of salt Sovīraka as a cure for wind in the stomach is mentioned at Mahā Vagga VI, 16. 3; and it was allowed, as a beverage, if mixed with water, to the Buddhist Bhikkhus. In Vimāna Vatthu XIX, 8 it is mentioned in a list of drinks given to them. Childers calls it ‘sour gruel’ following Subhūti in the first edition (1865) of the Abhidhāna Padīpikā (verse 460), but in the Abh. Pad. Sūkī (published in 1893) Subhūti renders it ‘kongey’; something of the same sort as barley water. Buddhaghosa adds: ‘Everyone agrees that it is wrong to drink intoxicants. These ascetics see sin even in this.’ The corresponding Sanskrit word, tusodaka, is found only in Suśruta. ↩︎
Datti. ‘A small pot,’ says Buddhaghosa, ‘in which special titbits are put aside, and kept.’ ↩︎
Samaka, not in Childers. See M. I, 156. Jāt. II, 365; III, 144. ↩︎
Daddula, not in Childers. See M. I, 78, 156, 188. ↩︎
Piññaka, not in Childers. See Vin. IV, 341. The commentators here merely say: ‘This is plain.’ ↩︎
Chava-dussāni pi dhāreti. The commentators give an alternative explanation: ‘Clothing made of Eraka grass tied together.’ Was such clothing then used to wrap dead bodies in? ↩︎
Ajinakkhipam pi dhāreti. Buddhaghosa gives here an explanation different from that given by him on Vin. III, 34 (quoted ‘Vinaya Texts,’ II, 247), where the word also occurs. The Puggala Paññatti gives both explanations as possible. Khipa at A. I, 33 means some sort of net. Ajinakkhipa is referred to at S. I, 117 as the characteristic dress of an old Brahman. ↩︎ ↩︎
Phalaka-cīram pi dhāreti. See Mahā Vagga VIII, 28. 2; Culla Vagga V, 29. 3. ↩︎
So of Ajita of the garment of hair, above, p. 73. Both commentators say the hair is human hair. ↩︎
Vala-kāmbalam pi dhāreti. So the commentators here. The alternative rendering given by us at ‘Vinaya Texts,’ II, 247, ‘skin of a wild beast,’ should be corrected accordingly. That would be vāḷa, and all the passages where our word occurs read vāla. Comp. A. I, 240. ↩︎
Ukkuṭikappadhāna. Compare Dhp. 141, 2 = Divy. 339. The commentator says he progressed in this posture by a series of hops. The posture is impossible to Europeans, who, if they crouch down on their heels, cannot keep their balance when the heels touch the ground. But natives of India will sit so for hours without fatigue. ↩︎
Both commentators add: ‘or stands, or walks up and down.’ ↩︎
Thaṇḍila-seyyam pi kappeti. The Burmese MSS. and Buddhaghosa, but not the Siamese edition, read taṇḍila. So does my MS. at Dhp. 141. The Puggala omits the word. S. IV, 118, and Mil. 351 have the ṭh. ↩︎
Abbhokāsiko ca hoti. There is no comment on this. But compare Jāt. IV, 8; Mil. 342. ↩︎
Vekaṭiko. So of an Ājīvaka at Jāt. I, 390, and compare ‘Vinaya Texts,’ II, 59. My rendering of the word at Mil. 259 ought, I think, to be corrected accordingly. But why was not this entered among the foods above, where one of them was already mentioned? It looks like an afterthought, or a gloss. ↩︎
Apānako. Compare my Milinda II, 85 foll. on this curious belief. ↩︎
This paragraph, like the last and like the next, is, in the Pāli, broken up into three sections, one for each of the three lists or penances. ↩︎
‘And by this,’ says Buddhaghosa, ‘he means Arahatship. For the doctrine of the Exalted One has Arahatship as its end.’ ↩︎
At Anguttara II, 200 (compare M. I, 240-242) it is said that those addicted to tapo-gigucchā are incapable of Arahatship. Gotama must either, therefore, be here referring to his years of penance before he attained Nirvāṇa under the Tree of Wisdom; or he must be putting a new meaning into the expression, and taking ‘the higher scrupulousness’ in the sense of the self-control of the Path. Probably both are implied.
Gigucchā. is translated by Childers as ‘disgust, loathing,’ following the Sanskrit dictionaries. The example of it given at M. I, 78 is ‘being so mindful, in going out or coming in, that pity is stirred up in one even towards a drop of water, to the effect that: “may I not bring injury on the minute creatures therein.”’ It comes therefore to very nearly the same thing as ahiṃsā. ↩︎
Adhipaññā. From Anguttara II, 93 it is clear that this is the wisdom of the higher stages only of the Path, not of Arahatship. For the man who has adhipaññā has then to strive on till he attains to Arahatship. Puggala paññatti IV, 26 is not really inconsistent with this. ↩︎
The whole conversation will be translated below. It forms the subject of the Udumbarika Sīhanāda Suttanta, No. 25 in the Dīgha. ↩︎
According to the rule laid down in Vinaya I, 69. ↩︎
That is, Arahatship, Nirvāṇa. ↩︎
The Burmese MSS. call it the Mahā Sihanāda Sutta, which is also the name given in the MSS. to the Twelfth Sutta in the Majjhima-called there in the text (p. 83), and in the Milinda (p. 396), the Lomahaṃsana Pariyāya. We have had an instance above (p. 55) or several different names being given, in the text itself, to the same Sutta. And I had already, in 1880, called attention in my ‘Buddhist Birth Stories’ (pp. lx, lxi) to the numerous instances in the Jātaka Book of the same Jātaka being known, in the collection itself, by different names. It is evident that the titles were considered a very secondary matter. ↩︎
This, for the reasons given above at p. 195, is probably a gotta name; and, as such, a patronymic from the personal name, also Poṭṭhapāda, meaning 'born under Poṭṭhapāda (the old name for the 25th lunar asterism, afterwards called Bhadrapadā). Buddhaghosa says that as a layman he had been a wealthy man of the Brahman Vaṇṇa. If so, it is noteworthy that he addresses the Buddha, not as Gotama, but as bhante. ↩︎
The very fact of the erection of such a place is another proof of the freedom of thought prevalent in the Eastern valley of the Ganges in the sixth century B.C. Buddhaghosa tells us that after ‘The Hall’ had been established, others near it had been built in honour of various famous teachers; but the group of buildings continued to be known as ‘The Hall.’ There Brahmans, Nigaṇṭhas, Acelas, Paribbājakas, and other teachers met and expounded, or discussed, their views.
It is mentioned elsewhere. See M. II, 22; Sum. I, 32.
Mallikā was one of the queens of Pasenadi, king of Kosala. See Gat. III, 405; IV, 437. ↩︎
§§ 2-6 recur, nearly, at M. I, 513; II, 1, 2; S. IV, 398. ↩︎
Idhāgamanāya pariyāyaṃ akāsi. So M. I, 252, 326, 481, 514, &c. Perhaps ‘since you made this change in your regular habits.’ ↩︎
Abhisaññā-nirodho, ‘the cessation of consciousness.’ ↩︎
Buddhaghosa explains that they came to this conclusion on the ground of such instances as that of the Rishi Migasingī, who, through love of the celestial nymph Alambusā, fell into a trance that lasted for three years. This must be a different tale from that of the Rishi Isisinga of Jātaka No. 523, whom Alambusā tries in vain to seduce. Compare Vimāna Vatthu XVIII, 11; L, 26. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa explains that the ground for this view is the way in which sorcerers work charms (Athabbanikā athabbanaṃ payojenti-perhaps ‘Atharva priests work out an Atharva charm’) which make a man appear as dead as if his head had been cut off; and then bring him back to his natural condition. ↩︎
Saññā-nirodhassa pakataññū. So Buddhaghosa. Compare Vin. II, 199. ↩︎
Saññā which is used in a sense covering both ‘idea’ and’ consciousness.’ Ekā saññā is therefore rendered below, in the refrain, ‘one idea, one sort of consciousness.’ ↩︎
Sukha and dukkha. Well-fare and ill-fare, well-being and ill-being, ease and dis-ease, uneasiness, discomfort. ‘Pain’ is both too strong a word, and has too frequently an exclusively physical sense, to be a good rendering of dukkha. It is unfortunate that dis-ease has acquired a special connotation which prevents the word being used here; and that we have no pair of correlative words corresponding to those in the Pāli. For pain we have vedanā often (M. I, 10; M. P. S., chapters 2 and 4; Mil. 134), and sometimes dukkha-vedanā (Mil. 112). ↩︎
Viññāna; the exact translation of this word is still uncertain. Perhaps ‘mind’ is meant. ↩︎
On these last three sections, which set out the fourth, fifth, and sixth stages of Deliverance (the Vimokkhas), see my former translation at p. 52 of my ‘Buddhist Suttas’ (S. B. E.) and the notes on pp. 50, 51. These stages are almost exactly the same as the views controverted above at pp. 47, 48. And the doctrine of the sixth Vimokkha, as we see from M. I, 164, formed part of the teaching of Gotama’s teacher, Āḷāra Kālāma. ↩︎
Abhisaṃkhareyyaṃ, perhaps ‘perfecting’ or ‘planning out.’ ↩︎
The foregoing discussion on trance is the earliest one on that subject in Indian literature. Trance is not mentioned in the pre-Buddhistic Upanishads. ↩︎
Ñāṇa depends on saññā; that is, I take it, that the mass of knowledge a man has, his insight, his power of judgment, depends on the ideas, the states of consciousness (here, in this connection, those that arise in the Jhānas, &c.) that are themselves due to the action on his sense organs of the outside world; but are in so far under his own control that he can shut out some, and give play to others. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa says that as a village pig, even if you bathe it in scented water, and anoint it with perfumes, and deck it with garlands, and lay it to rest on the best bed, will not feel happy there, but will go straight back to the dung-heap to take its ease; so Poṭṭhapāda, having tasted the sweet taste of the doctrine of the Three Signs (of the impermanence, the pain, and the absence of any abiding principle) found in everythiug, harks back to the superstition of the ‘soul.’ ↩︎
Paccemi. This is another of the words the exact sense of which, in Piṭaka times, is still doubtful. It means primarily ‘to goback towards, to revert,’ and is so used in the Piṭakas. So in G. V, 196 and in S N. 662 (quoted as verse 125 in the Dhammapada, and recurring also G. III, 203; S. I, 13, 164). But somewhat in the same way as to go back home is to go to a place of security; so in a secondary sense, of opinions or reasons. it means apparently to revert to them, fall back on them, harp on them, with the connotation of regarding them as certain. At S. N. 803 it can be taken either way. At S. N. 788, 803, 840 = 908; M. I, 309, 445, and in the question and answer here, the latter seems to be the sense. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa says this was not his real opinion. He held to that set out below in § 23. But he advances this, more elementary, proposition, just to see how the Buddha would meet it. It is nearly the same as the first of the seven propositions about the soul controverted in the Brahma-jāla (above, pp. 46-48). ↩︎
This sort of soul is nearly the same as the one referred to above, in the Brahma-jāla (§ 12, p. 47); and in the Samaññā-phala (§ 85, p. 87). It is a soul the exact copy, in every respect, of the body, and material, but so subtle that it can be described as ‘made of mind.’ ↩︎
The text repeats the answer given in § 21. with the necessary alterations. The supposition in § 23 is quoted at Asl. 360. The argument is of course that, even if Poṭṭhapāda had any one of these three sorts of soul, then he would regard each of them, in the given case, as a permanent entity. But the consciousness is not an entity. It is a ‘becoming’ only; subject, as he must (and would) admit, to constant change. On his own showing then, it is not ‘soul.’ ↩︎ ↩︎
On these Ten Indeterminates see above, in the Introduction to the Mahāli Sutta. ↩︎
Dukkha. See the note above on § 13. ↩︎
These are the Four Truths, set out more fully in my ‘Buddhist Suttas’ (S. B. E.), pp. 148-150. ↩︎
Vākaya sannitodakena sañjambhariṃ akaṃsu. So also at S. II, 282 and A. I, 187. Probably from the roots tud and jambh. ↩︎
There are seven or eight Cittas in the books, one of whom, a layman, was placed by the Buddha at the head of the expounders of the Norm. The Citta of our passage was famous for the fact that he joined the Buddha’s Order, and then, on one pretext or another, left it again, no less than seven times. (The same thing is related by I-Tsing of Bhartṛhari.) He prided himself on his keenness in distinguishing subtle differences in the meanings of words. And his last revolt was owing to a discussion of that sort he had had with Mahā Koṭṭhita. He took refuge with his friend Poṭṭhapāda, who, says Buddhaghosa, brought him along with him, on this occasion, with the express purpose of bringing about a reconciliation. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa takes janaṃ passaṃ as plurals. ↩︎
Appāṭihīrakatam. Buddhaghosa explains this as ‘witless’ (patibhāna-virabitaṃ). It is the contrary of sappāṭi hīrakataṃ which he explains (on § 45 below) by sappaṭiviharaṇam. Perhaps the meaning of the two words is ‘apposite’ and ‘not apposite’ (compare B. R. on pratiharaṇa).
There is a closely-allied expression at M. P. S., pp. 26, 32, where the talk is of disciples who, when a discussion on a wrong opinion has arisen, know how to refute it according to the doctrine (Dharma), and to preach, on the other hand, a doctrine that is sappāṭihāriyaṃ; that is, a doctrine which, in contra-distinction to the heresy advanced, is the apposite explanation from the Buddhist point of view. The Pāli word for miracle comes from the same root (prati-har); but to render here ‘unmiraculous’ would make nonsense of the passage, and both my own and Windisch’s rendering of the word in the M. P. S. (‘Buddhist Suttas,’ p. 43; ‘Māra und Buddha,’ p. 71) must be also modified accordingly.
On the form compare anuhīramāne, quoted at Sum. I, 61 from the Mahā-padhāna Suttanta (No. 14 in the Digha). ↩︎
Mangura-cchavī. Perhaps ‘of sallow complexion.’ Compare M. I, 246 where all these three words for complexion are used. Mangulī itthī at V. III, 107 = S. II, 260 is an allied form. In all these cases an unhealthy complexion is inferred. Here it must evidently be taken in a favourable sense. ↩︎
§ 34 is here repeated in the text. ↩︎
§ 34 repeated. ↩︎
Oḷāriko, manomayo, and arūpo atta-paṭilābho. Buddhaghosa here explains atta-paṭilābho by attabhāva-paṭilābho; and on attabhāva he says (Asl. 308) that it is used for the body, or the five Skandhas, because the fool jumps to the conclusion: ‘This is my soul.’
These three forms of personality correspond nearly to the planes, or divisions, into which the worlds are divided in the later Buddhist theory—(’) the eleven kāmāvacara worlds, from purgatory below to the deva heavens above, both inclusive: (2) the rūpāvacara worlds, which are the sixteen worlds of the Brahma gods, and are attained to by the practice of the Four Raptures (the Four Jhānas): (3) the four arūpavacara worlds, attained to by the practice of four of the Vimokkhas (Nos. 4-7).
It will be noticed that the lowest of these three planes includes all the forms of existence known in the West, from hell beneath to heaven above. And that the others are connected with the pre-Buddhistic idea of ecstatic meditation leading to special forms of re-existence.
But it is clear from § 58 below that the opinion here put forward is intended to represent, not any Buddhist theory, but a view commonly entertained in the world, such as Poṭṭhapāda himself would admit, and indeed has admitted (above, §§ 21-23). In either case, of course, these modes of existence would be, from the Buddhist point of view, purely temporary. They are the fleeting union of qualities that make up, for a time only, an unstable individuality. ↩︎
The whole paragraph is repeated for each of the three modes of personality. ↩︎
These saṃkilesikā dhammā are identified by Buddhaghosa, with the twelve kāmāvacara-akusala-cittappādā of Dhamma Saṃgaṇi 365-430. But compare, contra, Dh. S. 1241 (where, of course, the word apariyāpannā must be struck out). ↩︎
Buddhaghosa explains these as ‘tranquillity and insight.’ ↩︎
In the words of §§ 39, 40; that is, that whatever the mode of existence, of temporary individuality, there is happiness obtainable; but only in one way, by getting rid, namely, of certain evil dispositions, and by the increase of certain good dispositions. Buddhaghosa thinks this is said in protest against those who, seeking for happiness beyond the grave, do not admit that happiness can be reached here (as above, in § 34).
The above rendering of the elliptical phrase Ayaṃ vā so is confirmed by the simile in § 46. ↩︎
See above, § 37. ↩︎
§§ 42-45 repeated in full. ↩︎
Each of the three cases is given in full. ↩︎
The point is, of course, that just as there is no substratum in the products of the cow, so in man there is no ego, no constant unity, no ‘soul’ (in the animistic sense of the word, as used by savages). There are a number of qualities that, when united, make up a personality—always changing. When the change has reached a certain point, it is convenient to change the designation, the name, by which the personality is known—just as in the case of the products of the cow. But the abstract term is only a convenient form of expression. There never was any personality, as a separate entity, all the time.
The author of the Milinda (pp. 25, 27) has a precisely similar argument. ↩︎
The full details are given in Sumangala Vilāsinī, p. 7. ↩︎
A village near Sāvatthi, now in Nepal territory. ↩︎
On these three Skandhas of doctrine, see above, p. 82, and A. I, 125, &c. ↩︎
Afterwards the site of the famous Buddhist University. ↩︎
The MSS. differ as to the spelling of this name. It is improbable that a wealthy and distinguished man, of high social position, should have been called Kevaṭṭa, ‘fisherman.’ However, Dr. Neumann, who has translated this Suttanta in his ‘Buddhistische Anthropologie,’ pp. 62-100, has adopted this form; and it may turn out to be the better of the two. ↩︎
These are explained at length in the Saṃgārava Sutta, A. I, 168-173. ↩︎
The Gandhāra Charm is mentioned at Jāt. IV, 498, 499, as a well-known charm for the single purpose only of making oneself invisible. ↩︎
The Saṃgārava Sutta (loc. cit.) tells us how—either by omens, or by interpreting exterior sounds, or by hearing the actual sound of the man’s mental operations, or by knowing, in his own heart, the heart of the other. ↩︎
Identified here, by Buddhaghosa, with the Cintāmaṇī Vijjā, which, according to Jāt. III, 504, is only for following up trails. Compare Sum. 265, 267, 271.
It is most probable that the Jātaka is right in both cases as to the meaning of these charm-names, and that the objector is intentionally represented, like Kaṇha in the Ambaṭṭha Suttanta, to be ‘drawing the long bow.’ ↩︎
From here to the end has been translated by the late Henry C. Warren in his ‘Buddhism in Translations,’ pp. 308 foll. ↩︎
The question and answer in §68 is repeated, in the text, in each case. ↩︎
Atisitvā. The Siamese edition has abhisiṃsitvā. On atisitvā see Morris in the J. P. T. S., 1886, and Fausböll at S. N. II, 366. ↩︎
Nāmaāñ ca rūpañ ca; that is, the mental and the physical. Dr. Neumann puts this into nineteenth-century language by translating ‘subject and object.’ And however un-Buddhistic the phrase may be—for no Buddhist would use an expression apparently implying a unity in the subject—it really, if by subject be understood an ever-changing group of impermanent faculties or qualities, comes very near to the Buddhist meaning. ↩︎
Paham. Buddhaghosa takes this in the sense of tittha; that is, ghat, flight of steps or shelving beach from which to step down into water. James d’Alwis, who usually gives the view of Baṭuwan Tuḍāwa, took it as = pabhaṃ, shining—which Buddhaghosa, who gives it as an alternative explanation, had rejected (‘Buddhist Nirvāṇa,’ p. 39). Dr. Neumann, the only European writer who has discussed the point. thinks it is put by the poet, metri causa, for pajahaṃ, ‘rejecting.’ But an English poet, if he wanted to save a syllable, would scarcely write ‘recting’ for ‘rejecting.’ And the Pāli poet, had he wished to give that meaning, could easily have found other means. He need have gone no further afield than adopting simply jaham. That viññāna, when qualified by such adjectives as those here used, can be meant for the viññāna of a man who has attained to Nirvāṇa, could be supported by other passages from the Piṭakas. ↩︎
This is, I think, a local name; the name of the place from which he had come. If that be so, the better rendering throughout would be ‘the Lohicca Brahman.’ ↩︎
This is open to two interpretations: ‘What can the teacher gain from a disciple?’ or ‘What can a disciple gain from a teacher?’ ‘Why should you trouble about others? they cannot help you!’ or ‘Why should you trouble about others? you cannot help them!’ But in either case the implied ground of the argument is the proposition that a man’s rise or fall, progress or defeat, in intellectual and religious matters, lies in himself. He must work out his own salvation. ↩︎
It is clear from this expression that Bhesikā was already a follower of the new teaching. ↩︎
Literally ‘Who are making heavenly embryos ripe for rebirth in heavenly states.’ ↩︎
Paragraphs 12, 13 are repeated of the case put about Pasenadi, king of Kosala. In the translation both cases are included at the beginning of § 12. ↩︎
This Suttanta was translated from the MSS. in my ‘Buddhist Suttas’ (S. B. E., 1881). Since then the text has been published by the Pāli Text Society; and alterations and amendments in a number of details have been rendered necessary. ↩︎
Buddhaghosa says that— Kankī lived at Opasāda, Tārukkha lived at Icchagala (so MSS., perhaps for Icchānangala), Pokkharasādi (sic MS.) lived at Ukkaṭṭha, Gāṇussoṇi lived at Savatthi, and Todeyya lived at Tudigama.
Jāṇussoṇi was converted by the Bhaya-bherava Sutta. On Pokkharasādi, see above, pp. 108, 135, 147; and on Todeyya, see above, p. 267; and on all the names, see Majjhima Nikaya, No. 98 = Sutta Nipata III, 9.
Buddhaghosa adds that because Manasākaṭa was a pleasant place the Brahmans had built huts there on the bank of the river and fenced them in, and used to go and stay there from time to time to repeat their mantras. ↩︎
Ganghāvihāraṃ anucankamantānaṃ anuvicarantānam. Cankamati is to walk up and down thinking. I have added ‘after their bath,’ from Buddhaghosa, who says that this must be understood to have taken place when, after learning by heart and repeating all day, they, went down in the evening to the riverside to bathe, and then walked up and down on the sand. Comp. Mil. 22; Jāt. II, 240, 272. ↩︎
Comp. Divyāvadāna 196, 246; and Anguttara II, pp. 23, 24. ↩︎
This is either mildly sarcastic—as much as to say, ‘that is six of one, and half a dozen of the other’—or is intended to lead on Vāseṭṭha to confess still more directly the fact that the different theologians held inconsistent opinions. ↩︎
The MSS. differ as to the last name, and some of them omit the last but one. The Adhvaryu, Taittīriya, Chandoga, and Bahvṛca priests—those skilled in liturgy generally, and in the Yajur, Sāma, and Rig Vedas respectively—are probably meant. If we adopt the other reading for the last in the list, then those priests who relied on liturgy, sacrifice, or chant would be contrasted with those who had ‘gone forth’ as religieux, either as Tāpasas or as Bhikshus. ↩︎
Maggāni, which is noteworthy as a curious change of gender. ↩︎
See the note on these names at ‘Vinaya Texts,’ II, 130. ↩︎
In the text §§ 12, 13 are repeated word for word. ↩︎
Andhaveṇī paramparaṃ saṃsattā. The Phayre MS. has replaced veṇī by paveṇī, after the constant custom of the Burmese MSS. to improve away unusual or difficult expressions. Buddhaghosa explains andhaveṇi by andhapaveṇi; and tells a tale of a wicked wight, who meeting a company of blind men, told them of a certain village wherein plenty of good food was to be had. When they besought him for hire to lead them there, he took the money, made one blind man catch hold of his stick, the next of that one, and so on, and then led them on till they came to a wilderness. There he deserted them, and they all—still holding each the other, and vainly, and with tears, seeking both their guide and the path—came to a miserable end! Comp. M. II, 170. ↩︎
The words of the question are repeated in the text in this and the following answers. It must be remembered, for these sections, that the Sun and Moon were gods just as much as Brahmā; and that the Moon always comes first in Nikāya and other ancient texts. ↩︎
The text repeats at length the words of §§ 12, 13, 14. ↩︎
Samatittika kākapeyyā. See on this phrase the note in my ‘Buddhist Suttas’ (S. B. E.), pp. 178, 179. ↩︎
The Sinhalese MSS. omit Mahiddhi and Yama, but repeat the verb, ‘we call upon,’ three times after Brahmā. It is possible that the Burmese copyist has wrongly inserted them to remove the strangeness of this repetition. The comment is silent. ↩︎
The Buddha, as usual, here takes the ‘further bank’ in the meaning attached to it by the theologians he is talking to, as union with Brahmā. In his own system, of course, the ‘further bank’ is Arahatship. So Anguttara V, 232, 233, and elsewhere. ↩︎
Gathitā mucchitā ajjhopannā. See A. I, 74, 274; Udāna VII, 3, 4; Sum. 59, &c. ↩︎
Ariyassa vinaye. This may possibly mean ‘in the disciple recommended by the Arahat’ (that is, by the Buddha). But the latter is expressed rather by Sugata-vinaye. Comp. Anguttara V, 237-239 with 234, 235. ↩︎
These Five Hindrances are more fully dealt with above, p. 82. ↩︎
Sapariggaho vā Brahmā apariggaho vā ti. Buddhaghosa says on Vāseṭṭha’s reply, ‘Kāmacchandassa ābhavato itthipariggahena apariggaho,’ thus restricting the ‘possession’ to women. But the reference is no doubt to the first ‘hindrance’; and the word in the text, though doubtless alluding to possession of women also, includes more. Compare, on the general idea of the passage, the English expression, ‘no encumbrances,’ and Jacobi, ‘Jaina-Sūtras’ (S. B. E.) I, xxiii. ↩︎
Asankiliṭṭha-kitto. That is, says Buddhaghosa, ‘free from mental torpor and idleness, worry and flurry.’ ↩︎
Vasavattī vā avasavattī vā. Buddhaghosa says, in explanation of the answer, ‘By the absence of wavering he has his mind under control (vase vatteti).’ ↩︎
Āsīditva saṃsīdanti. I have no doubt the commentator is right in his explanation of these figurative expressions. Confident in their knowledge of the Vedas, and in their practice of Vedic ceremonies, they neglect higher things; and so, sinking into folly and superstition, ‘they are arriving only at despair, thinking the while that they are crossing over into some happier land.’ ↩︎
Buddhaghosa takes this to mean, ‘Save me of the Brahman race.’ ↩︎
The point is, that the acceptance of this’Doctrine and Discipline’ is open to all; not of course that Brahmans never accept it. ↩︎
These paragraphs occur frequently; see, inter alia, Mahā-Sudassana Sutta II, 8, in my ‘Buddhist Suttas’ (S. B. E.). It will be seen from ‘Buddhism.’ pp. 170, 171, that these meditations play a great part in later Buddhism, and occupy very much the place that prayer takes in Christianity. A fifth, the meditation on Impurity, has been added, at what time I do not know, before the last. These four (or five) are called the Brahma Vihāras, and the practice of them leads, not to Arahatship, but to rebirth in the Brahmā-world. ↩︎
Paragraphs 76, 77 are supposed to be repeated of each. ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
Literally ‘The Suttanta about those who have the knowledge of the Three (Vedas).’ See , where the names of these ‘doctors’ are given. ↩︎