CHAPTER VIII

LIFE OF THE BUDDHA

1

We have hitherto been occupied with obscure and shadowy personalities.

The authors of the Upanishads are nameless and even MahâvÎra is unknown

outside India. But we now come to the career of one who must be ranked

among the greatest leaders of thought that the world has seen, the

Indian prince generally known as Gotama or the Buddha. His historical

character has been called in question, but at the present day probably

few, if any, competent judges doubt that he was a real person whose date

can be fixed and whose life can be sketched at least in outline.

We have seen that apart from the personality of Gotama, ancient India

was familiar with the idea of a Buddha and had even classified the

attributes he should possess. Two styles of biography are therefore

possible: an account of what Gotama actually was and did and an account

of what a Buddha is expected to be and do. This second style prevails in

later Buddhist works: they contain descriptions of the deeds and

teaching of a Buddha, adapted to such facts in Gotama's life as seemed

suitable for such treatment or could not be ignored. Rhys Davids has

well compared them to _Paradise Regained_, but the supernatural element

is, after the Indian fashion, more ornate.

The reader will perhaps ask what are the documents describing Gotama's

sayings and doings and what warrant we have for trusting them. I will

treat of this question in more detail in a later chapter and here will

merely say that the Pali works called Vinaya or monastic rules and

Suttas[294] or sermons recount the circumstances in which each rule was

laid down and each sermon preached. Some narrative passages, such as the

Sutta which relates the close of the Buddha's life and the portion of

the Vinaya which tells how he obtained enlightenment and made his first

converts, are of considerable length. Though these narratives are

compilations which accepted new matter during several centuries, I see

no reason to doubt that the oldest stratum contains the recollections of

those who had seen and heard the master.

In basing the following account on the Pali Canon, I do not mean to

discredit Sanskrit texts merely because they are written in that

language or to deny that many Pali texts contain miraculous and

unhistorical narratives[295]. But the principal Sanskrit Sûtras such as

the Lotus and the Diamond Cutter are purely doctrinal and those texts

which profess to contain historical matter, such as the Vinayas

translated from Sanskrit into Chinese, are as yet hardly accessible to

European scholars. So far as they are known, they add incidents to the

career of the Buddha without altering its main lines, and when the

accounts of such incidents are not in themselves improbable they merit

consideration. On the whole these Sanskrit texts are later and more

embellished than their Pali counterparts, but it is necessary not to

forget the existence of this vast store-house of traditions, which may

contain many surprises[296].

Though the Pali texts do not give the story of the Buddha's life in a

connected form, they do give us details about many important events in

it and they offer a picture of the world in which he moved. The idea of

biography was unknown to the older Indian literature. The Brâhmaṇas and

Upanishads tell us of the beliefs and practices of their sages, the

doctrines they taught and the sacrifices they offered, but they rarely

give even an outline of their lives. And whenever the Hindus write about

a man of religion or a philosopher, their weak historical sense and

their strong feeling for the importance of the teaching lead them to

neglect the figure of the teacher and present a portrait which seems to

us dim and impersonal. Indian saints are distinguished by what they

said, not by what they did and it is a strong testimony to Gotama's

individuality and force of character, that in spite of the centuries

which separate us from him and the misty unreal atmosphere which in

later times hangs round his name, his personality is more distinct and

lifelike than that of many later teachers.

Most of the stories of his youth and childhood have a mythical air and

make their first appearance in works composed long after his death, but

there is no reason to distrust the traditional accounts of his lineage.

He was the son of Suddhodana of the Kshatriya clan known as Sâkya or

Sâkiya[297]. In later literature his father is usually described as a

king but this statement needs qualification. The Sâkyas were a small

aristocratic republic. At the time of the Buddha's birth they recognized

the suzerainty of the neighbouring kingdom of Kosala or Oudh and they

were subsequently annexed by it, but, so long as they were independent,

all that we know of their government leads us to suppose that they were

not a monarchy like Kosala and Magadha. The political and administrative

business of the clan was transacted by an assembly which met in a

council hall[298] at Kapilavatthu. Its president was styled Râjâ but we

do not know how he was selected nor for how long he held office. The

Buddha's father is sometimes spoken of as Râjâ, sometimes as if he were

a simple citizen. Some scholars think the position was temporary and

elective[299]. But in any case it seems clear that he was not a Mahârâjâ

like Ajâtasattu and other monarchs of the period. He was a prominent

member of a wealthy and aristocratic family rather than a despot. In

some passages[300] Brahmans are represented as discussing the Buddha's

claims to respect. It is said that he is of a noble and wealthy family

but not that he is the son of a king or heir to the throne, though the

statement, if true, would be so obvious and appropriate that its

omission is sufficient to disprove it. The point is of psychological

importance, for the later literature in its desire to emphasize the

sacrifice made by the Buddha exaggerates the splendour and luxury by

which he was surrounded in youth and produces the impression that his

temperament was something like that reflected in the book of

Ecclesiastes, the weary calm, bred of satiety and disenchantment, of one

who has possessed everything and found everything to be but vanity. But

this is not the dominant note of the Buddha's discourses as we have

them. He condemns the pleasures and ambitions of the world as

unsatisfying, but he stands before us as one who has resisted and

vanquished temptation rather than as a disillusioned pleasure-seeker.

The tone of these sermons accords perfectly with the supposition,

supported by whatever historical data we possess, that he belonged to a

fighting aristocracy, active in war and debate, wealthy according to the

standard of the times and yielding imperfect obedience to the authority

of kings and priests. The Pitakas allude several times to the pride of

the Sâkyas, and in spite of the gentleness and courtesy of the Buddha

this family trait is often apparent in his attitude, in the independence

of his views, his calm disregard of Brahmanic pretensions and the

authority that marks his utterances.

The territory of the Sâkyas lay about the frontier which now divides

Nepal from the United Provinces, between the upper Rapti and the Gandak

rivers, a hundred miles or so to the north of Benares. The capital was

called Kapilavatthu[301], and the mention of several other towns in the

oldest texts indicates that the country was populous. Its wealth was

derived chiefly from rice-fields and cattle. The uncultivated parts were

covered with forest and often infested by robbers. The spot where the

Buddha was born was known as the Lumbini Park and the site, or at least

what was supposed to be the site in Asoka's time, is marked by a pillar

erected by that monarch at a place now called Rummindei[302]. His mother

was named Mâyâ and was also of the Sâkya clan. Tradition states that she

died seven days after his birth and that he was brought up by her

sister, Mahâprajâpatî, who was also a wife of Suddhodana. The names of

other relatives are preserved, but otherwise the older documents tell us

nothing of his childhood and the copious legends of the later church

seem to be poetical embellishments. The Sutta-Nipâta contains the story

of an aged seer named Asita who came to see the child and, much like

Simeon, prophesied his future greatness but wept that he himself must

die before hearing the new gospel.

The personal name of the Buddha was Siddhârtha in Sanskrit or Siddhattha

in Pali, meaning he who has achieved his object, but it is rarely used.

Persons who are introduced in the Pitakas as addressing him directly

either employ a title or call him Gotama (Sanskrit Gautama). This was

the name of his _gotra_ or gens and roughly corresponds to a surname,

being less comprehensive than the clan name Sâkya. The name Gotama is

applied in the Pitakas to other Sâkyas such as the Buddha's father and

his cousin Ânanda. It is said to be still in use in India and has been

borne by many distinguished Hindus. But since it seemed somewhat

irreverent to speak of the Buddha merely by his surname, it became the

custom to describe him by titles. The most celebrated of these is the

word Buddha[303] itself, the awakened or wise one. But in Pali works he

is described just as frequently by the name of Bhagavâ or the Lord. The

titles of Śâkya-Muni and Śâkya-Siṃha have also passed into common use

and the former is his usual designation in the Sanskrit sûtras. The word

Tathâgata, of somewhat obscure signification[304], is frequently found

as an equivalent of Buddha and is put into the mouth of Gotama himself

as a substitute for the first personal pronoun.

We can only guess what was the religious and moral atmosphere in which

the child grew up. There were certainly Brahmans in the Sâkya territory:

everyone had heard of their Vedic lore, their ceremonies and their

claims to superiority. But it is probable that their influence was less

complete here than further west[305] and that even before this time they

encountered a good deal of scepticism and independent religious

sentiment. This may have been in part military impatience of priestly

pedantry, but if the Sâkyas were not submissive sheep, their waywardness

was not due to want of interest in religion. A frequent phrase in the

Buddha's discourses speaks of the "highest goal of the holy life for the

sake of which clansmen leave their homes and go forth into

homelessness." The religious mendicant seemed the proper incarnation of

this ideal to which Kshatriyas as well as Brahmans aspired, and we are

justified in supposing that the future Buddha's thoughts would naturally

turn towards the wandering life. The legend represents him as carefully

secluded from all disquieting sights and as learning the existence of

old age, sickness and death only by chance encounters which left a

profound impression. The older texts do not emphasize this view of his

mental development, though they do not preclude it. It is stated

incidentally that his parents regretted his abandonment of worldly life

and it is natural to suppose that they may have tried to turn his mind

to secular interests and pleasures[306]. His son, Râhula, is mentioned

several times in the Pitakas but his wife only once and then not by name

but as "the princess who was the mother of Râhula[307]." His separation

from her becomes in the later legend the theme of an affecting tale but

the scanty allusions to his family found in the Pitakas are devoid of

sentimental touches. A remarkable passage is preserved in the Anguttara

Nikâya[308] describing his feelings as a young man and may be the origin

of the story[309] about the four visions of old age, sickness, death and

of peace in the religious life. After describing the wealth and comfort

in which he lived[310], he says that he reflected how people feel

repulsion and disgust at the sight of old age, sickness and death. But

is this right? "I also" he thought "am subject to decay and am not free

from the power of old age, sickness and death. Is it right that I should

feel horror, repulsion and disgust when I see another in such plight?

And when I reflected thus, my disciples, all the joy of life which there

is in life died within me."

No connected account of his renunciation of the world has been found in

the Pitakas but[311] people are represented as saying that in spite of

his parents' grief he "went out from the household life into the

homeless state" while still a young man. Accepted tradition, confirmed

by the Mahâparinibbâna Sutta, says that he retired from worldly life

when he was twenty-nine years old. The event is also commemorated in a

poem of the Sutta-Nipâta[312] which reads like a very ancient ballad.

It relates how Bimbisâra, King of Magadha, looking out from his palace,

saw an unknown ascetic, and feeling he was no ordinary person went

himself to visit him. It would appear from this that Gotama on leaving

his family went down to the plains and visited Râjagaha, the capital of

Magadha, now Rajgîr to the south of Patna. The teachers of the Ganges

valley had probably a greater reputation for learning and sanctity than

the rough wits of the Sâkya land and this may have attracted Gotama. At

any rate he applied himself diligently to acquire what knowledge could

be learned from contemporary teachers of religion. We have an account

put into his own mouth[313] of his experiences as the pupil of Alâra

Kâlâma and Uddaka Râmaputta but it gives few details of his studies. It

would appear however that they both had a fixed system (dhamma) to

impart and that their students lived in religious discipline (vinaya) as

members of an Order. They were therefore doing exactly what the Buddha

himself did later on a larger scale and with more conspicuous success.

The instruction, we gather, was oral. Gotama assimilated it thoroughly

and rapidly but was dissatisfied because he found that it did not

conduce to perfect knowledge and salvation[314]. He evidently accepted

his teachers' general ideas about belief and conduct—a dhamma, a vinaya,

and the practice of meditation—but rejected the content of their

teaching as inadequate. So he went away.

The European mystic knows the dangers of Quietism[315]. When Molinos and

other quietists praise the Interior Silence in which the soul neither

speaks nor desires nor thinks, they suggest that the suspension of all

mental activity is good in itself. But more robust seekers hold that

this "orison of quiet" is merely a state of preparation, not the end of

the quest, and valuable merely because the soul recuperates therein and

is ready for further action. Some doctrine akin to that of the quietists

seems to underlie the mysterious old phrases in which the Buddha's two

teachers tried to explain their trances, and he left them for much the

same reasons as led the Church to condemn Quietism. He did not say that

the trances are bad; indeed he represented them as productive of

happiness[316] in a sense which Europeans can hardly follow. But he

clearly refused to admit that they were the proper end of the religious

life. He felt there was something better and he set out to find it.

The interval between his abandonment of the world and his enlightenment

is traditionally estimated at seven years and this accords with our

other data. But we are not told how long he remained with his two

teachers nor where they lived. He says however that after leaving them

he wandered up and down the land of Magadha, so that their residence was

probably in or near that district[317]. He settled at a place called

Uruvelâ. "There" he says "I thought to myself, truly this is a pleasant

spot and a beautiful forest. Clear flows the river and pleasant are the

bathing places: all around are meadows and villages." Here he determined

to devote himself to the severest forms of asceticism. The place is in

the neighbourhood of Bodh-Gaya, near the river now called Phalgu or

Lilañja but formerly Nerañjara. The fertile fields and gardens, the

flights of steps and temples are modern additions but the trees and the

river still give the sense of repose and inspiration which Gotama felt,

an influence alike calming to the senses and stimulating to the mind.

Buddhism, though in theory setting no value on the pleasures of the eye,

is not in practice disdainful of beauty, as witness the many allusions

to the Buddha's personal appearance, the persistent love of art, and the

equally persistent love of nature which is found in such early poems as

the Theragâthâ and still inspires those who select the sites of

monasteries throughout the Buddhist world from Burma to Japan. The

example of the Buddha, if we may believe the story, shows that he felt

the importance of scenery and climate in the struggle before him and his

followers still hold that a holy life is led most easily in beautiful

and peaceful landscapes.

2

Hitherto we have found allusions to the events of the Buddha's life

rather than consecutive statements and narratives but for the next

period, comprising his struggle for enlightenment, its attainment and

the commencement of his career as a teacher, we have several accounts,

both discourses put into his own mouth and narratives in the third

person like the beginning of the Mahâvagga. It evidently was felt that

this was the most interesting and critical period of his life and for

it, as for the period immediately preceding his death, the Pitakas

provide the elements of a biography. The accounts vary as to the amount

of detail and supernatural events which they contain, but though the

simplest is perhaps the oldest, it does not follow that events

consistent with it but only found in other versions are untrue. One

cannot argue that anyone recounting his spiritual experiences is bound

to give a biographically complete picture. He may recount only what is

relevant to the purpose of his discourse.

Gotama's ascetic life at Uruvelâ is known as the wrestling or struggle

for truth. The story, as he tells it in the Pitakas, gives no dates, but

is impressive in its intensity and insistent iteration[318]. Fire, he

thought to himself, cannot be produced from damp wood by friction, but

it can from dry wood. Even so must the body be purged of its humours to

make it a fit receptacle for illumination and knowledge. So he began a

series of terrible fasts and sat "with set teeth and tongue pressed

against the palate" until in this spiritual wrestling the sweat poured

down from his arm pits. Then he applied himself to meditation

accompanied by complete cessation of breathing, and, as he persevered

and went from stage to stage of this painful exercise, he heard the

blood rushing in his head and felt as if his skull was being split, as

if his belly were being cut open with a butcher's knife, and finally as

if he were thrown into a pit of burning coals. Elsewhere[319] he gives

further details of the horrible penances which he inflicted on himself.

He gradually reduced his food to a grain of rice each day. He lived on

seeds and grass, and for one period literally on dung. He wore haircloth

or other irritating clothes: he plucked out his hair and beard: he stood

continuously: he lay upon thorns. He let the dust and dirt accumulate

till his body looked like an old tree. He frequented a cemetery—that is

a place where corpses were thrown to decay or be eaten by birds and

beasts—and lay among the rotting bodies.

But no enlightenment, no glimpse into the riddle of the world came of

all this, so, although he was nearly at death's door, he determined to

abstain from food altogether. But spirits appeared and dissuaded him,

saying that if he attempted thus to kill himself they would nourish him

by infusing a celestial elixir through his skin and he reflected that he

might as well take a little food[320]. So he took a palmful or two of

bean soup. He was worn almost to a shadow, he says. "When I touched my

belly, I felt my backbone through it and when I touched my back, I felt

my belly—so near had my back and my belly come together through this

fasting. And when I rubbed my limbs to refresh them the hair fell

off[321]." Then he reflected that he had reached the limit of

self-mortification and yet attained no enlightenment. There must be

another way to knowledge. And he remembered how once in his youth he had

sat in the shade of a rose apple tree and entered into the stage of

contemplation known as the first rapture. That, he now thought, must be

the way to enlightenment: why be afraid of such bliss? But to attain it,

he must have more strength and to get strength he must eat. So he ate

some rice porridge. There were five monks living near him, hoping that

when he found the Truth he would tell it to them. But when they saw that

he had begun to take food, their faith failed and they went away.

The Buddha then relates how, having taken food, he began to meditate and

passed through four stages of contemplation, culminating in pure

self-possession and equanimity, free alike from all feeling of pain or

ease. Such meditation was nothing miraculous but supposed to be within

the power of any trained ascetic. Then there arose before him a vision

of his previous births, the hundreds of thousands of existences with all

their details of name, family and caste through which he had passed.

This was succeeded by a second and wider vision in which he saw the

whole universe as a system of karma and reincarnation, composed of

beings noble or mean, happy or unhappy, continually "passing away

according to their deeds," leaving one form of existence and taking

shape in another. Finally, he understood the nature of error[322] and of

suffering, the cessation of suffering and the path that leads to the

cessation of suffering. "In me thus set free the knowledge of freedom

arose and I knew 'Rebirth has been destroyed, the higher life has been

led; what had to be done has been done, I have no more to do with this

world[323].' This third knowledge came to me in the last watch of the

night: ignorance was destroyed, knowledge had arisen, darkness was

destroyed, light had arisen, as I sat there earnest, strenuous,

resolute[324]."

On attaining enlightenment he at first despaired of preaching the truth

to others. He reflected that his doctrine was abstruse and that mankind

are given over to their desires. How can such men understand the chain

of cause and effect or teaching about Nirvana and the annihilation of

desire? So he determined to remain quiet and not to preach. Then the

deity Brahmâ Sahampati appeared before him and besought him to preach

the Truth, pleading that some men could understand. The Buddha surveyed

the world with his mind's eye and saw the different natures of mankind.

"As in a pool of lotuses, blue, red or white, some lotuses born in the

water, grown up in the water, do not rise above the water but thrive

hidden under the water and other lotuses, blue, red or white, born in

the water, grown up in the water, reach to the surface: and other

lotuses, blue, red or white, born in the water, grown up in the water,

stand up out of the water and the water does not touch them." Thus did

he perceive the world to be and he said to Brahmâ "The doors of

immortality are open. Let them that have ears to hear, show faith."

Then he began to wonder to whom he should first preach his doctrine, and

he thought of his former teachers. But a spirit warned him that they had

recently died. Then he thought of the five monks who had tended him

during his austerities but left him when he ceased to fast. By his

superhuman power of vision he perceived that they were living at Benares

in the deer park, Isipatana. So, after remaining awhile at Uruvelâ he

started to find them and on the way met a naked ascetic, in answer to

whose enquiries he proclaimed himself as the Buddha; "I am the Holy One

in this world, I am the highest teacher, I alone am the perfect supreme

Buddha, I have gained calm and nirvana, I go to Benares to set moving

the wheels of righteousness[325]. I will beat the drum of immortality in

the darkness of this world." But the ascetic replied. "It may be so,

friend," shook his head, took another road and went away, with the

honour of being the first sceptic.

When the Buddha reached the deer park[326], a wood where ascetics were

allowed to dwell and animals might not be killed, the five monks saw him

coming and determined not to salute him since he had given up his

exertions, and turned to a luxurious life. But as he drew near they were

overawed and in spite of their resolution advanced to meet him, and

brought water to wash his feet. While showing him this honour they

called him Friend Gotama but he replied that it was not proper to

address the Tathâgata[327] thus. He had become a Buddha and was ready to

teach them the Truth but the monks demurred saying that if he had been

unable to win enlightenment while practising austerities, he was not

likely to have found it now that he was living a life of ease. But he

overcame their doubts and proceeded to instruct them, apparently during

some days, for we are told that they went out to beg alms.

Can this account be regarded as in any sense historical, as being not

perhaps the Buddha's own words but the reminiscences of some one who had

heard him describe the crisis of his life? Like so much of the Pitakas

the narrative has an air of patchwork. Many striking passages, such as

the descriptions of the raptures through which he passed, occur in other

connections but the formulæ are ancient and their use here may be as

early and legitimate as elsewhere. In its main outlines the account is

simple, unpretentious and human. Gotama seeks to obtain enlightenment by

self-mortification: finds that this is the wrong way: tries a more

natural method and succeeds: debates whether he shall become a teacher

and at first hesitates. These are not features which the average Indian

hagiographer, anxious to prove his hero omnipotent and omniscient, would

invent or emphasize. Towards the end of the narrative the language is

more majestic and the compiler introduces several stanzas, but though it

is hardly likely that Gotama would have used these stanzas in telling

his own story, they may be ancient and in substance authentic. The

supernatural intervention recorded is not really great. It amounts to

this, that in mental crises the Buddha received warnings somewhat

similar to those delivered by the dæmon of Socrates[328]. The appearance

of Brahmâ Sahampati is related with more detail and largely in verse,

which suggests that the compiler may have inserted some legend which he

found ready to hand, but on the whole I am inclined to believe that in

this narrative we have a tradition not separated from the Buddha by many

generations and going back to those who had themselves heard him

describe his wrestling to obtain the Truth and his victory.

Other versions of the enlightenment give other incidents which are not

rendered less credible by their omission from the narrative quoted, for

it is clearly an epitome put together for a special didactic purpose.

But still the story as related at the beginning of the Mahâvagga of the

Vinaya has a stronger smack of mythology than the passages quoted from

the Sutta-Pitaka. In these last the Bodhi-tree[329] is mentioned only

incidentally, which is natural, for it is a detail which would impress

later piety rather than the Buddha himself. But there is no reason to be

sceptical as to the part it has played in Buddhist history. Even if we

had not been told that he sat under a tree, we might surmise that he did

so, for to sit under a tree or in a cave was the only alternative for a

homeless ascetic. The Mahâvagga states that after attaining Buddhahood

he sat crosslegged at the foot of the tree for seven days

uninterruptedly, enjoying the bliss of emancipation, and while there

thought out the chain of causation which is only alluded to in the

suttas quoted above. He also sat under three other trees, seven days

under each. Heavy rain came on but Mucalinda, the king of the serpents,

"came out of his abode and seven times encircled the body of the Lord

with his windings and spread his great hood over the Lord's head." Here

we are in the domain of mythology: this is not a vignette from the old

religious life on the banks of the Nerañjara but a work of sacred art:

the Holy Supreme Buddha sitting immovable and imperturbable in the midst

of a storm sheltered by the folds of some pious monster that the

artist's fancy has created.

The narrative quoted from the Majjhima-Nikâya does not mention that the

Buddha during his struggle for enlightenment was assailed or tempted by

Mâra, the personification of evil and of transitory pleasures but also

of death. But that such an encounter—in some respects analogous to the

temptation of Christ by the Devil—formed part of the old tradition is

indicated by several passages in the Pitakas[330] and not merely by the

later literature where it assumes a prominent and picturesque form. This

struggle is psychologically probable enough but the origin of the story,

which is exhaustively discussed in Windisch's _Buddha und Mâra_, seems

to lie not so much in any account which the Buddha may have given of his

mental struggles as in amplifications of old legends and in

dramatizations of metaphors which he may have used about conquering

death.

The Bodhi-tree is still shown at Bodh-Gaya. It stands on a low terrace

behind the temple, the whole lying in a hollow, below the level of the

surrounding modern buildings, and still attracts many pilgrims from all

Buddhist lands though perhaps not so many as the tree at Anuradhapura in

Ceylon, which is said to be sprung from one of its branches transplanted

thither. Whatever title it may have to the reverence of the faithful

rests on lineage rather than identity, for the growth which we see at

Bodh-Gaya now cannot claim to be the branches under which the Buddha sat

or even the trunk which Asoka tended. At best it is a modern stem sprung

from the seeds of the old tree, and this descent is rendered disputable

by legends of its destruction and miraculous restoration. Even during

the time that Sir A. Cunningham knew the locality from 1862 to 1880 it

would seem that the old trunk decayed and was replaced by scions grown

from seed.

The texts quoted above leave the Buddha occupied in teaching the five

monks in the Deer Park and the Mahâvagga gives us the text of the

sermon[331] with which he opened his instruction. It is entitled Turning

the Wheel of Righteousness, and is also known as The Sermon at Benares.

It is a very early statement of the main doctrines of primitive Buddhism

and I see no reason to doubt that it contains the ideas and phrases of

the Buddha. The gist of the sermon is extremely simple. He first says

that those who wish to lead a religious life should avoid the two

extremes of self-indulgence and self-torture and follow a middle way.

Then he enunciates what he calls the four truths[332] about evil or

suffering and the way to make an end of it. He opens very practically,

and it may be noticed that abstruse as are many of his discourses they

generally go straight to the heart of some contemporary interest. Here

he says that self-indulgence is low and self-mortification crazy: that

both are profitless and neither is the religious life. That consists in

walking in the middle path, or noble eightfold path defined in a

celebrated formula as right views, right aspirations, right speech,

right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right

rapture. He then enunciates the four truths. The first declares that all

clinging to existence involves suffering. I shall have occasion to

examine later the pessimism which is often said to characterize Buddhism

and Indian thought generally. Here let it suffice to say that the first

truth must be taken in conjunction with the others. The teaching of the

Buddha is a teaching not so much of pessimism as of emancipation: but

emancipation implies the existence of evil from which men must be freed:

a happy world would not need it. Buddhism recognizes the evil of the

world but it is not on that account a religion of despair: the essence

of it is that it provides a remedy and an escape.

The second and third truths must be taken together and in connection

with the formula known as the chain of causation (paṭiccasamuppâda).

Everything has a cause and produces an effect. If this is, that is: if

this is not, then that is not. This simple principle of uniform

causation is applied to the whole universe, gods and men, heaven, earth

and hell. Indian thought has always loved wide applications of

fundamental principles and here a law of the universe is propounded in a

form both simple and abstract. Everything exists in virtue of a cause

and does not exist if that cause is absent. Suffering has a cause and if

that cause can be detected and eliminated, suffering itself will be

eliminated. This cause of evil is Tanhâ, the thirst or craving for

existence, pleasure and success. And the cure is to remove it. It may

seem to the European that this is a proposal to cure the evils of life

by removing life itself but when in the fourth truth we come to the

course to be followed by the seeker after salvation—the eightfold

path—we find it neither extravagant nor morbid. We may imagine that an

Indian of that time asking different schools of thinkers for the way to

salvation would have been told by Brahmans (if indeed they had been

willing to impart knowledge to any but an accredited pupil) that he who

performs a certain ceremony goes to the abode of the gods: other

teachers would have insisted on a course of fasting and self-torture:

others again like Sâñjaya and Makkhali would have given argumentative

and unpractical answers. The Buddha's answer is simple and practical:

seven-eighths of it would be accepted in every civilized country as a

description of the good life. It is not merely external, for it insists

on right thought and right aspiration: the motive and temper are as

important as the act. It does not neglect will-power and activity, for

right action, right livelihood and right effort are necessary—a point to

be remembered when Buddhism is called a dreamy unpractical religion. But

no doubt the last stage of the path, right rapture or right meditation,

is meant to be its crown and fulfilment. It takes the place of prayer

and communion with the deity and the Buddha promises the beatific vision

in this life to those who persevere. The negative features of the Path

are also important. It contains no mention of ceremonial, austerities,

gods, many or one, nor of the Buddha himself. He is the discoverer and

teacher of the truth; beyond that his personality plays no part.

But we are here treating of his life rather than of his doctrine and

must now return to the events which are said to have followed the first

sermon.

The first converts had, even before embracing the Buddha's teaching,

been followers of a religious life but the next batch of recruits came

from the wealthy mercantile families of Benares. The first was a youth

named Yasa who joined the order, while his father, mother and former

wife became lay believers. Then came first four and subsequently fifty

friends of Yasa and joined the order. "At that time" says the

Mahâvagga. "there were sixty-one Arhats[333] in the world," so that at

first arhatship seems to have followed immediately on ordination. Arhat,

it may be mentioned, is the commonest word in early Buddhist literature

(more common than any phrase about nirvana) for describing sanctity and

spiritual perfection. The arhat is one who has broken the fetters of the

senses and passions, for whom there will be no new birth or death, and

who lives in this world like the Buddha, detached but happy and

beneficent.

The Buddha then addressed his followers and said--"Monks, I am delivered

from all fetters, human and divine, and so are you. Go now and wander

for the gain of many, for the welfare of many, out of compassion for the

world, for the good, for the gain and for the welfare of gods and men.

Let not two of you go the same way. Preach the doctrine which is

glorious in the beginning, glorious in the middle and glorious in the

end, in the spirit and in the letter; proclaim a consummate, perfect and

pure life of holiness." The monks then went forth and returned bringing

candidates to be formally ordained by the Buddha. But seeing that these

journeys caused fatigue and trouble, he authorized the ordained monks to

confer ordination without reference to himself. He then returned to

Uruvelâ, where he had dwelt before attaining Buddhahood, and converted a

thousand Jaṭilas, that is to say Brahmans living the life of hermits,

which involved the abandonment of household life but not of sacrifices.

The admission of these hermits to the order is probably historical and

explains the presence among the Buddha's disciples of a tendency towards

self-mortification of which he himself did not wholly approve. The

Mahâvagga[334] contains a series of short legends about these

occurrences, one of them in two versions. The narratives are miraculous

but have an ancient tone and probably represent the type of popular

story current about the Buddha shortly after or even during his life.

One of them is a not uncommon subject in Buddhist art. It relates how

the chamber in which a Brahman called Kassapa kept his sacred fire was

haunted by a fire-breathing magical serpent. The Buddha however spent

the night in this chamber and after a contest in which both emitted

flames succeeded in conquering the beast. After converting the Jaṭilas

he preached to them the celebrated Fire Sermon, said to have been

delivered on the eminence now called Brahma Yoen[335] near Gaya and

possibly inspired by the spectacle of grass fires which at some seasons

may be seen creeping over every hill-side in an Indian night,

"Everything, Monks, is burning and how is it burning? The eye is

burning: what the eye sees is burning: thoughts based on the eye are

burning: the contact of the eye (with visible things) is burning and the

sensation produced by that contact, whether pleasant, painful or

indifferent is also burning. With what fire is it burning? It is burning

with the fire of lust, the fire of anger, with the fire of ignorance; it

is burning with the sorrows of birth, decay, death, grief, lamentation,

suffering, dejection and despair."

The Buddha now went on with his converts to Râjagaha. He stopped in a

bamboo grove outside the town and here the king, Bimbisâra, waited on

him and with every sign of respect asked him to take food in his palace.

It was on this occasion that we first hear of him accepting an

invitation to dinner[336], which he did frequently during the rest of

his career. After the repast the king presented a pleasure garden just

outside the town "to the fraternity of monks with the Buddha at their

head." At that time another celebrated teacher named Sâñjaya was

stopping at Râjagaha with a train of two hundred and fifty disciples.

Two of them, Sâriputta and Moggallâna, joined the Buddha's order and

took with them the whole body of their companions.

The Mahâvagga proceeds to relate that many of the young nobility joined

the order and that the people began to murmur saying "The Monk Gotama

causes fathers to beget no sons and families to become extinct." And

again "The Great Monk has come to Giribbaja of the Magadha people,

leading with him all the followers of Sâñjaya. Whom will he lead off

next?" When this was told to the Buddha he replied that the excitement

would only last seven days and bade his followers answer with the

following verse "It is by the true doctrine that the great heroes, the

Buddhas, lead men. Who will murmur at the wise who lead men by the power

of truth?" It is possible, as Oldenburg suggests, that we have here two

popular couplets which were really bandied between the friends and

enemies of the Buddha.

3

It now becomes difficult to give dates but the Mahâvagga[337] relates

that the Buddha stopped some time at Râjagaha and then revisited his

native town, Kapilavatthu. That he should have done so is natural enough

but there is little trace of sentiment in the narrative of the Vinaya.

Its object is to state the occasion on which the Buddha laid down the

rules of the order. Irrelevant incidents are ignored and those which are

noticed are regarded simply as the circumstances which led to the

formulation of certain regulations. "The Lord dwelt in the Sakka country

near Kapilavatthu in the Banyan Grove. And in the forenoon having put on

his robes and taken his alms bowl he went to the home of the Sakka

Suddhodana[338] and sat down on a seat prepared for him. Then the

princess who was the mother of Râhula[339] said to him 'This is your

father, Râhula, go and ask him for your inheritance.' Then young Râhula

went to the place where the Lord was, and standing before him said 'Your

shadow, Monk, is a place of bliss.' Then the Lord rose from his seat and

went away but Râhula followed him saying 'Give me my inheritance, Monk.'

Then the Lord said to Sâriputta (who had already become his chief

disciple) 'Well, Sâriputta, confer the preliminary ordination on young

Râhula.' Sâriputta asked how he should do so and the Buddha explained

the forms.

"Then the Sakka Suddhodana went to the place where the Lord was and

after respectfully saluting him asked for a boon. 'Lord, when the

Blessed One gave up the world, it was great pain to me and so it was

when Nanda[340] did the same. Great too was my pain when Râhula did it.

The love for a son, Lord, cuts into the skin, the flesh, the bones, and

reaches the marrow. Let not the preliminary ordination be conferred on a

son without his parents' permission.' The Buddha assented. Three or four

years later Suddhodana died."

From Kapilavatthu the Buddha is said to have gone to Sâvatthî, the

capital of Kosala where Pasenadi was king, but now we lose the

chronological thread and do not find it again until the last years of

his life. Few of the numerous incidents recorded in the Pitakas can be

dated. The narrators resemble those Indian artists who when carving a

story in relief place all the principal figures in one panel without

attempting to mark the sequence of the incidents which are represented

simultaneously. For the connection of events with the Buddha's teaching

the compilers of the Pitakas had an eye; for their connection with his

life none at all. And though this attitude is disquieting to the

historic sense it is not unjustifiable. The object and the achievement

of the Buddha was to preach a certain doctrine and to found an order.

All the rest—years and countries, pains and pleasures—was of no

importance. And it would appear that we have not lost much: we should

have a greater sense of security if we had an orderly account of his

wanderings and his relations with the kings of his time, but after he

had once entered on his ministry the events which broke the peaceful

tenour of his long life were few and we probably know most of them

though we cannot date them. For about forty-five years he moved about

Kosala, Magadha and Anga visiting the two capitals Sâvatthî and Râjagaha

and going as far west as the country of the Kurus. He took little part

in politics or worldly life, though a hazy but not improbable story[341]

represents him as pacifying the Sâkyas and Koliyas, who were on the

point of fighting about the water of the Rohini which irrigated the

lands of both clans. He uniformly enjoyed the respect and attention of

kings and the wealthy classes. Doubtless he was not popular with the

Brahmans or with those good people who disliked seeing fine young men

made into monks. But it does not appear that his teaching provoked any

serious tumults or that he was troubled by anything but schism within

the order. We have, if not a history, at least a picture of a life which

though peaceful was active and benevolent but aloof, majestic and

authoritative.

We are told[342] that at first his disciples wandered about at all

seasons but it was not long before he bade them observe the already

established routine for itinerant monks of travelling on foot during the

greater part of the year but of resting for three months during the

rainy season known as Vassa and beginning some time in June. When moving

about he appears to have walked from five to ten miles a day, regulating

his movements so as to reach inhabited places in time to collect food

for the midday meal. The afternoon he devoted to meditation and in the

evening gave instruction. He usually halted in woods or gardens on the

outskirts of villages and cities, and often on the bank of a river or

tank, for shade and water would be the first requisites for a wandering

monk. On these journeys he was accompanied by a considerable following

of disciples: five hundred or twelve hundred and fifty are often

mentioned and though the numbers may be exaggerated there is no reason

to doubt that the band was large. The suttas generally commence with a

picture of the surroundings in which the discourse recorded was

delivered. The Buddha is walking along the high road from Râjagaha to

Nâlanda with a great company of disciples. Or he is journeying through

Kosala and halting in a mango-grove on the banks of the Aciravatî river.

Or he is stopping in a wood outside a Brahman village and the people go

out to him. The principal Brahmans, taking their siesta on the upper

terraces of their houses, see the crowd and ask their doorkeepers what

it means. On hearing the cause they debate whether they or the Buddha

should pay the first call and ultimately visit him. Or he is halting on

the shore of the Gaggarâ Lake at Campâ in Western Bengal, sitting under

the fragrant white flowers of a campaka tree. Or he visits the hills

overlooking Râjagaha haunted by peacocks and by wandering monks. Often

he stops in buildings described as halls, which were sometimes merely

rest houses for travellers. But it became more and more the custom for

the devout to erect such buildings for his special use and even in his

lifetime they assumed the proportions of monasteries[343]. The people of

Vesâlî built one in a wood to the north of their city known as the

Gabled Hall. It was a storied house having on the ground floor a large

room surrounded by pillars and above it the private apartments of the

Buddha. Such private rooms (especially those which he occupied at

Sâvatthî), were called Gandhakûṭî or the perfumed chamber. At

Kapilavatthu[344] the Sâkyas erected a new building known as Santhagâra.

The Buddha was asked to inaugurate it and did so by a discourse lasting

late into the night which he delivered sitting with his back against a

pillar. At last he said his back was tired and lay down, leaving Ânanda

to continue the edification of the congregation who were apparently less

exhausted than the preacher.

But perhaps the residence most frequently mentioned is that in the

garden called Jetavana at Sâvatthî. Anâthapiṇḍika, a rich merchant of

that town, was converted by the Buddha when staying at Râjagaha and

invited him to spend the next rainy season at Sâvatthî[345]. On

returning to his native town to look for a suitable place, he decided

that the garden of the Prince Jeta best satisfied his requirements. He

obtained it only after much negotiation for a sum sufficient to cover

the whole ground with coins. When all except a small space close to the

gateway had been thus covered Jeta asked to be allowed to share in the

gift and on receiving permission erected on the vacant spot a gateway

with a room over it. "And Anâthapiṇḍika the householder built dwelling

rooms and retiring rooms and storerooms and halls with fireplaces, and

outside storehouses and closets and cloisters and halls attached to the

bath rooms and ponds and roofed open sheds[346]."

Buddhaghosa has given an account[347] of the way in which the Buddha was

wont to spend his days when stopping in some such resting-place, and his

description is confirmed by the numerous details given in the Pitakas.

He rose before dawn and would often retire and meditate until it was

time to set out on the round for alms but not unfrequently he is

represented as thinking that it was too early to start and that he might

first visit some monk of the neighbourhood. Then he went round the town

or village with his disciples, carrying his almsbowl and accepting

everything put into it. Sometimes he talked to his disciples while

walking[348]. Frequently, instead of begging for alms, he accepted an

invitation to dine with some pious person who asked the whole band of

disciples and made strenuous culinary efforts. Such invitations were

given at the conclusion of a visit paid to the Buddha on the previous

day and were accepted by him with silence which signified consent. On

the morning of the next day the host announced in person or through a

messenger that the meal was ready and the Buddha taking his mantle and

bowl went to the house. The host waited on the guests with his own

hands, putting the food which he had prepared into their bowls. After

the repast the Buddha delivered a discourse or catechized the company.

He did the same with his own disciples when he collected food himself

and returned home to eat it. He took but one meal a day[349], between

eleven and twelve, and did not refuse meat when given to him, provided

that he did not know the animals had been slaughtered expressly for his

food. When he had given instruction after the meal he usually retired to

his chamber or to a quiet spot under trees for repose and meditation. On

one occasion[350] he took his son Râhula with him into a wood at this

hour to impart some of the deepest truths to him, but as a rule he gave

no further instruction until the late afternoon.

The Pitakas represent all believers as treating the Buddha with the

greatest respect but the salutations and titles which they employ hardly

exceed those ordinarily used in speaking to eminent persons[351]. Kings

were at this time addressed as Deva, whereas the Buddha's usual title is

Bhagavâ or Bhante, Lord. A religious solemnity and deliberation prevails

in the interviews which he grants but no extravagance of adoration is

recorded. Visitors salute him by bowing with joined hands, sit

respectfully on one side while he instructs them and in departing are

careful to leave him on their right hand. He accepts such gifts as food,

clothes, gardens and houses but rejects all ceremonial honours. Thus

Prince Bodhi[352] when receiving him carpeted his mansion with white

cloths but the Buddha would not walk on them and remained standing at

the entrance till they were taken up.

The introduction to the Ariyapariyesana-Sutta gives a fairly complete

picture of a day in his life at Sâvatthî. It relates how in the morning

he took his bowl and mantle and went to the town to collect food. While

he was away, some monks told his personal attendant Ânanda that they

wished to hear a discourse from him, as it was long since they had had

the privilege. Ânanda suggested that they had better go to the hermitage

of the Brahman Rammaka near the town. The Buddha returned, ate his meal

and then said "Come, Ânanda, let us go to the terrace of Migâra's

mother[353] and stay there till evening." They went there and spent the

day in meditation. Towards evening the Buddha rose and said "Let us go

to the old bath to refresh our limbs." After they had bathed, Ânanda

suggested that they should go to Rammaka's hermitage: the Buddha

assented by his silence and they went together. Within the hermitage

were many monks engaged in instructive conversation, so the Buddha

waited at the door till there was a pause in the talk. Then he coughed

and knocked. The monks opened the door, and offered him a seat. After a

short conversation, he recounted to them how he had striven for and

obtained Buddhahood.

These congregations were often prolonged late into the night. We hear

for instance how he sat on the terrace belonging to Migâra's mother[354]

in the midst of an assembly of monks waiting for his words, still and

silent in the light of the full moon; how a monk would rise, adjusting

his robe so as to leave one shoulder bare, bow with his hands joined and

raised to his forehead and ask permission to put a question and the Lord

would reply, Be seated, monk, ask what you will. But sometimes in these

nightly congregations the silence was unbroken. When King Ajâtasattu

went to visit him[355] in the mango grove of Jîvaka he was seized with

sudden fear at the unearthly stillness of the place and suspected an

ambush. "Fear not, O King," said Jîvaka, "I am playing you no tricks. Go

straight on. There in the pavilion hall the lamps are burning ... and

there is the Blessed One sitting against the middle pillar, facing the

east with the brethren round him." And when the king beheld the assembly

seated in perfect silence, calm as a clear lake, he exclaimed "Would

that my son might have such calm as this assembly now has."

The major part of the Buddha's activity was concerned with the

instruction of his disciples and the organization of the Sangha or

order. Though he was ready to hear and teach all, the portrait presented

to us is not that of a popular preacher who collects and frequents

crowds but rather that of a master, occupied with the instruction of his

pupils, a large band indeed but well prepared and able to appreciate and

learn by heart teaching which, though freely offered to the whole world,

was somewhat hard to untrained ears. In one passage[356] an enquirer

asks him why he shows more zeal in teaching some than others. The answer

is, if a landowner had three fields, one excellent, one middling and one

of poor soil, would he not first sow the good field, then the middling

field, and last of all the bad field, thinking to himself; it will just

produce fodder for the cattle? So the Buddha preaches first to his own

monks, then to lay-believers, and then, like the landowner who sows the

bad field last, to Brahmans, ascetics and wandering monks of other

sects, thinking if they only understand one word, it will do them good

for a long while. It was to such congregations of disciples or to

enquirers belonging to other religious orders that he addressed his most

important discourses, iterating in grave numbered periods the truths

concerning the reality of sorrow and the equal reality of salvation, as

he sat under a clump of bamboos or in the shade of a banyan, in sight

perhaps of a tank where the lotuses red, white and blue, submerged or

rising from the water, typified the various classes of mankind.

He did not start by laying down any constitution for his order. Its

rules were formed entirely by case law. Each incident and difficulty was

referred to him as it arose and his decision was accepted as the law on

that point. During his last illness he showed a noble anxiety not to

hamper his followers by the prestige of his name but to leave behind him

a body of free men, able to be a light and a help to themselves. But a

curious passage[357] represents an old monk as saying immediately after

his death "Weep not, brethren; we are well rid of the Great Monk. We

used to be annoyed by being told, 'This beseems you and this does not

beseem you. But now we shall be able to do what we like and not have to

do what we don't like.'" Clearly the laxer disciples felt the Master's

hand to be somewhat heavy and we might have guessed as much. For though

Gotama had a breadth of view rare in that or in any age, though he

refused to multiply observances or to dogmatize, every sutta indicates

that he was a man of exceptional authority and decision; what he has

laid down he has laid down; there is no compulsion or punishment, no vow

of obedience or _sacrificium intellectus_; but it is equally clear that

there is no place in the order for those who in great or small think

differently from the master.

In shepherding his flock he had the assistance of his senior disciples.

Of these the most important were Sâriputta and Moggallâna, both of them

Brahmans who left their original teacher Sâñjaya to join him at the

outset of his ministry. Sâriputta[358] enjoyed his confidence so fully

that he acted as his representative and gave authoritative expositions

of doctrine. The Buddha even compared him to the eldest son of an

Emperor who assists his father in the government. But both he and

Moggallâna died before their master and thus did not labour

independently. Another important disciple Upâli survived him and

probably contributed materially to the codification of the Vinaya.

Anuruddha and Ânanda, both of them Sâkyas, are also frequently

mentioned, especially the latter who became his personal attendant[359]

and figures in the account of his illness and death as the beloved

disciple to whom his last instructions were committed. These two

together with four other young Sâkya nobles and Upâli joined the order

twenty-five years before Gotama's death and perhaps formed an inner

circle of trusted relatives, though we have no reason to think there was

any friction between them and Brahmans like Sâriputta. Upâli is said to

have been barber of the Sâkyas. It is not easy to say what his social

status may have been, but it probably did not preclude intimacy.

The Buddha was frequently occupied with maintaining peace and order

among his disciples. Though the profession of a monk excluded worldly

advancement, it was held in great esteem and was hence adopted by

ambitious and quarrelsome men who had no true vocation. The troubles

which arose in the Sangha are often ascribed in the Vinaya to the

Chabbaggiyas, six brethren who became celebrated in tradition as spirits

of mischief and who are evidently made the peg on which these old

monkish anecdotes are hung. As a rule the intervention of the Buddha was

sufficient to restore peace, but one passage[360] indicates resistance

to his authority. The brethren quarrelled so often that the people said

it was a public scandal. The Buddha endeavoured to calm the disputants,

but one of them replied, "Lord, let the Blessed One quietly enjoy the

bliss which he has obtained in this life. The responsibility for these

quarrels will rest with us alone." This seems a clear hint that the

Blessed One had better mind his own business. Renewed injunctions and

parables met with no better result. "And the Blessed One thought" says

the narrative "'truly these fools are infatuated,' and he rose from his

seat and went away."

Other troubles are mentioned but by far the most serious was the schism

of Devadatta, represented as occurring in the old age of Gotama when he

was about seventy-two. The story as told in the Cullavagga[361] is

embellished with supernatural incidents and seems not to observe the

natural sequence of events but perhaps three features are historical:

namely that Devadatta wished to supersede the Buddha as head of the

order, that he was the friend of Ajâtasattu, Crown Prince and afterwards

King of Magadha[362], and that he advocated a stricter rule of life than

the Buddha chose to enforce. This combination of piety and ambition is

perhaps not unnatural. He was a cousin of the Buddha and entered the

order at the same time as Ânanda and other young Sâkya nobles. Sprung

from that quarrelsome breed he possessed in a distorted form some of

Gotama's own ability. He is represented as publicly urging the Master to

retire and dwell at ease but met with an absolute refusal. Sâriputta was

directed to "proclaim" him in Râjagaha, the proclamation being to the

effect that his nature had changed and that all his words and deeds were

disowned by the order. Then Devadatta incited the Crown Prince to murder

his father, Bimbisâra. The plot was prevented by the ministers but the

king told Ajâtasattu that if he wanted the kingdom he could have it and

abdicated. But his unnatural son put him to death all the same[363] by

starving him slowly in confinement. With the assistance of Ajâtasattu,

Devadatta then tried to compass the death of the Buddha. First he hired

assassins, but they were converted as soon as they approached the sacred

presence. Then he rolled down a rock from the Vulture's peak with the

intention of crushing the Buddha, but the mountain itself interfered to

stop the sacrilege and only a splinter scratched the Lord's foot. Then

he arranged for a mad elephant to be let loose in the road at the time

of collecting alms, but the Buddha calmed the furious beast. It is

perhaps by some error of arrangement that after committing such

unpardonable crimes Devadatta is represented as still a member of the

order and endeavouring to provoke a schism by asking for stricter rules.

The attempt failed and according to later legends he died on the spot,

but the Vinaya merely says that hot blood gushed from his mouth.

That there are historical elements in this story is shown by the

narrative of Fa Hsien, the Chinese pilgrim who travelled in India about

400 A.D. He tells us that the followers of Devadatta still existed in

Kosala and revered the three previous Buddhas but refused to recognize

Gotama. This is interesting, for it seems to show that it was possible

to accept Gotama's doctrine, or the greater part of it, as something

independent of his personality and an inheritance from earlier teachers.

The Udâna and Jâtaka relate another plot without specifying the year.

Some heretics induced a nun called Sundarî to pretend she was the

Buddha's concubine and hired assassins to murder her. They then accused

the Bhikkhus of killing her to conceal their master's sin, but the real

assassins got drunk with the money they had received and revealed the

conspiracy in their cups.

But these are isolated cases. As a whole the Buddha's long career was

marked by a peace and friendliness which are surprising if we consider

what innovations his teaching contained. Though in contending that

priestly ceremonies were useless he refrained from neither direct

condemnation nor satire, yet he is not represented as actively

attacking[364] them and we may doubt if he forbade his lay disciples to

take part in rites and sacrifices as a modern missionary might do. We

find him sitting by the sacred fire of a Brahman[365] and discoursing,

but not denouncing the worship carried on in the place. When he

converted Siha[366], the general of the Licchavis, who had been a Jain,

he bade him continue to give food and gifts as before to the Jain monks

who frequented his house—an instance of toleration in a proselytizing

teacher which is perhaps without parallel. Similarly in the

Sîgâlovâda-sutta it is laid down that a good man ministers to monks and

to Brahmans. If it is true that Ajâtasattu countenanced Devadatta's

attempts to murder him, he ignored such disagreeable details with a

sublime indifference, for he continued to frequent Râjagaha, received

the king, and preached to him one of his finest sermons without alluding

to the past. He stands before us in the suttas as a man of amazing power

of will, inaccessible to fear, promises and, one may add, to argument

but yet in comparison with other religious leaders singularly gentle in

taking the offensive against error. Often he simply ignored it as

irrelevant: "Never mind" he said on his deathbed to his last convert

"Never mind, whether other teachers are right or wrong. Listen to me, I

will teach you the truth." And when he is controversial his method is

often to retain old words in honourable use with new meanings. The

Brahmans are not denounced like the Pharisees in the New Testament but

the real Brahman is a man of uprightness and wisdom: the real sacrifice

is to abstain from sin and follow the Truth.

Women played a considerable part in the entourage of Gotama. They were

not secluded in India at that time and he admitted that they were

capable of attaining saintship. The work of ministering to the order, of

supplying it with food and raiment, naturally fell largely to pious

matrons, and their attentive forethought delighted to provide for the

monks those comforts which might be accepted but not asked for.

Prominent among such donors was Visâkhâ, who married the son of a

wealthy merchant at Sâvatthî and converted her husband's family from

Jainism to the true doctrine. The Vinaya recounts how after entertaining

the Buddha and his disciples she asked eight boons which proved to be

the privileges of supplying various classes of monks with food, clothing

and medicine and of providing the nuns with bathing dresses, for, said

she, it shocked her sense of propriety to see them bathing naked. But

the anecdotes respecting the Buddha and women, whether his wife or

others, are not touched with sentiment, not even so much as is found in

the conversation between Yâjñavalkya and Maitreyî in the Upanishad. To

women as a class he gave their due and perhaps in his own opinion more

than their due, but if he felt any interest in them as individuals, the

sacred texts have obliterated the record. In the last year of his life

he dined with the courtezan Ambapâlî and the incident has attracted

attention on account of its supposed analogy to the narrative about

Christ and "the woman which was a sinner." But the resemblance is small.

There is no sign that the Buddha, then eighty years of age, felt any

personal interest in Ambapâlî. Whatever her morals may have been, she

was a benefactress of the order and he simply gave her the same

opportunity as others of receiving instruction. When the Licchavi

princes tried to induce him to dine with them instead of with her, he

refused to break his promise. The invitations of princes had no

attraction for him, and he was a prince himself. A fragment of

conversation introduced irrelevantly into his deathbed discourses[367]

is significant--"How, Lord, are we to conduct ourselves with regard to

womankind? Don't see them, Ânanda. But if we see them, what are we to

do? Abstain from speech. But if they should speak to us what are we to

do? Keep wide awake."

This spirit is even more evident in the account of the admission of Nuns

to the order. When the Buddha was visiting his native town his aunt and

foster mother, Mahâprajâpatî, thrice begged him to grant this privilege

to women but was thrice refused and went away in tears. Then she

followed him to Vesâlî and stood in the entrance of the Kûṭagâra Hall

"with swollen feet and covered with dust, and sorrowful." Ânanda, who

had a tender heart, interviewed her and, going in to the Buddha,

submitted her request but received a triple refusal. But he was not to

be denied and urged that the Buddha admitted women to be capable of

attaining saintship and that it was unjust to refuse the blessings of

religion to one who had suckled him. At last Gotama yielded—perhaps the

only instance in which he is represented as convinced by argument—but he

added "If, Ânanda, women had not received permission to enter the Order,

the pure religion would have lasted long, the good law would have stood

fast a thousand years. But since they had received that permission, it

will now stand fast for only five hundred years[368]."

He maintained and approved the same hard detached attitude in other

domestic relations. His son Râhula received special instruction but is

not represented as enjoying his confidence like Ânanda. A remarkable

narrative relates how, when the monk Sangâmaji was sitting beneath a

tree absorbed in meditation, his former wife (whom he had left on

abandoning the world) laid his child before him and said "Here, monk, is

your little son, nourish me and nourish him." But Sangâmaji took no

notice and the woman went away. The Buddha who observed what happened

said "He feels no pleasure when she comes, no sorrow when she goes: him

I call a true Brahman released from passion[369]." This narrative is

repulsive to European sentiment, particularly as the chronicler cannot

spare the easy charity of a miracle to provide for the wife and child,

but in taking it as an index of the character of Gotama, we must bear in

mind such sayings of Christ as "If any man come to me and hate not his

father and mother and wife and children and brethren and sisters, yea

and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple[370]."

4

Political changes, in which however he took no part, occurred in the

last years of the Buddha's life. In Magadha Ajâtasattu had come to the

throne. If, as the Vinaya represents, he at first supported the schism

of Devadatta, he subsequently became a patron of the Buddha. He was an

ambitious prince and fortified Pâṭaligâma (afterwards Pâṭaliputra)

against the Vajjian confederation, which he destroyed a few years after

the Buddha's death. This confederation was an alliance of small

oligarchies like the Licchavis and Videhans. It would appear that this

form of constitution was on the wane in northern India and that the

monarchical states were annexing the decaying commonwealths. In Kosala,

Viḍûḍabha conquered Kapilavatthu a year or two before the Buddha's

death, and is said to have perpetrated a great massacre of the Sâkya

clan[371]. Possibly in consequence of these events the Buddha avoided

Kosala and the former Sâkya territory. At any rate the record of his

last days opens at Râjagaha, the capital of Magadha.

This record is contained in the Mahâparinibbâna Sutta, the longest of

the suttas and evidently a compilation. The style is provokingly uneven.

It often promises to give a simple and natural narrative but such

passages are interrupted by more recent and less relevant matter. No

general estimate of its historical value can be given but each incident

must be apprized separately. Nearly all the events and discourses

recorded in it are found elsewhere in the canon in the same words[372]

and it contains explanatory matter of a suspiciously apologetic nature.

Also the supernatural element is freely introduced. But together with

all this it contains plain pathetic pictures of an old man's fatigue and

sufferings which would not have been inserted by a later hand, had they

not been found ready in tradition. And though events and sermonettes are

strung together in a way which is not artistic, there is nothing

improbable in the idea that the Buddha when he felt his end approaching

should have admonished his disciples about all that he thought most

important.

The story opens at Râjagaha about six months before the Buddha's death.

The King sends his minister to ask whether he will be successful in

attacking the Vajjians. The Buddha replies that as long as they act in

concord, behave honourably, and respect the Faith, so long may they be

expected not to decline but prosper. The compiler may perhaps have felt

this narrative to be an appropriate parallel to the Buddha's advice to

his disciples to live in peace and order. He summoned and addressed the

brethren living in Râjagaha and visited various spots in the

neighbourhood. In these last utterances one phrase occurs with special

frequency, "Great is the fruit, great the advantage of meditation

accompanied by upright conduct: great is the advantage of intelligence

accompanied by meditation. The mind which has such intelligence is freed

from intoxications, from the desires of the senses, from love of life,

from delusion and from ignorance."

He then set forth accompanied by Ânanda and several disciples. Judging

from the route adopted his intention was to go ultimately to Sâvatthî.

This was one of the towns where he resided from time to time, but we

cannot tell what may have been his special motives for visiting it on

the present occasion, for if the King of Kosala had recently massacred

the Sâkyas his presence there would have been strange. The road was not

direct but ran up northwards and then followed the base of the

mountains, thus enabling travellers to cross rivers near their sources

where they were still easy to ford. The stopping-places from Râjagaha

onwards were Nâlanda, Pâṭaliputra, Vesâlî, Bhandagâma, Pâvâ, Kusinârâ,

Kapilavatthu, Setavya, Sâvatthî. On his last journey the Buddha is

represented as following this route but he died at the seventh

stopping-place, Kusinârâ. When at Pâṭaligâma, he prophesied that it

would become a great emporium[373]. He was honourably entertained by the

officers of the King who decided that the gate and ferry by which he

left should be called Gotama's gate and Gotama's ferry. The gate

received the name, but when he came to the Ganges he vanished

miraculously and appeared standing on the further bank. He then went on

to Vesâlî, passing with indifference and immunity from the dominions of

the King of Magadha into those of his enemies, and halted in the grove

of the courtezan Ambapâlî[374]. She came to salute him and he accepted

her invitation to dine with her on the morrow, in spite of the protests

of the Licchavi princes.

The rainy season was now commencing and the Buddha remained near Vesâlî

in the village of Beluva, where he fell seriously ill. One day after his

recovery he was sitting in the shade with Ânanda, who said that during

the illness his comfort had been the thought that the Buddha would not

pass away without leaving final instructions to the Order. The reply was

a remarkable address which is surely, at least, in parts the Buddha's

own words.

"What does the order expect of me, Ânanda? I have preached the truth

without any distinction of esoteric or exoteric, for in respect of the

truth, there is no clenched hand in the teaching of the Tathâgata. If

there is anyone who thinks 'it is I who will lead the brotherhood' or

'the order is dependent on me,' it is he who should give instructions.

But the Tathâgata does not think that he should lead the order or that

the order is dependent on him. Why then should he leave instructions? I

am an old man now, and full of years, my pilgrimage is finished, I have

reached my sum of days, I am turning eighty years; and just as a

worn-out cart can only be made to move along with much additional care,

so can the body of the Tathagâta be kept going only with much additional

care. It is only when the Tathagâta, ceasing to attend to any outward

thing becomes plunged in meditation, it is only then that the body of

the Tathagâta is at ease. Therefore, Ânanda, be a lamp and a refuge to

yourselves. Seek no other refuge. Let the Truth be your lamp and refuge;

seek no refuge elsewhere.

"And they, Ânanda, who now or when I am dead shall be a lamp and a

refuge to themselves, seeking no other refuge but taking the Truth as

their lamp and refuge, these shall be my foremost disciples—these who

are anxious to learn."

This discourse is succeeded by a less convincing episode, in which the

Buddha tells Ânanda that he can prolong his life to the end of a

world-period if he desires it. But though the hint was thrice repeated,

the heedless disciple did not ask the Master to remain in the world.

When he had gone, Mâra, the Evil one, appeared and urged on the Buddha

that it was time for him to pass away. He replied that he would die in

three months but not before he had completely established the true

religion. Thus he deliberately rejected his allotted span of life and an

earthquake occurred. He explained the cause of it to Ânanda, who saw his

mistake too late. "Enough, Ânanda, the time for making such a request is

past[375]."

The narrative becomes more human when it relates how one afternoon he

looked at the town and said, "This will be the last time that the

Tathâgata will behold Vesâlî. Come, Ânanda, let us go to Bhandagâma."

After three halts he arrived at Pâvâ and stopped in the mango grove of

Cunda, a smith, who invited him to dinner and served sweet rice, cakes,

and a dish which has been variously interpreted as dried boar's flesh or

a kind of truffle. The Buddha asked to be served with this dish and bade

him give the sweet rice and cakes to the brethren. After eating some of

it he ordered the rest to be buried, saying that no one in heaven or

earth except a Buddha could digest it, a strange remark to chronicle

since it was this meal which killed him[376]. But before he died he sent

word to Cunda that he had no need to feel remorse and that the two most

meritorious offerings in the world are the first meal given to a Buddha

after he has obtained enlightenment and the last one given him before

his death. On leaving Cunda's house he was attacked by dysentery and

violent pains but bore them patiently and started for Kusinârâ with his

disciples. In going thither he crossed the river Kakutthâ[377], and some

verses inserted into the text, which sound like a very old ballad,

relate how he bathed in it and then, weary and worn out, lay down on his

cloak. A curious incident occurs here. A young Mallian, named Pukkuisa,

after some conversation with the Buddha, presents him with a robe of

cloth of gold, but when it is put on it seems to lose its splendour, so

exceedingly clear and bright is his skin. Gotama explains that there are

two occasions when the skin of a Buddha glows like this—the night of his

enlightenment and the night before his death. The transfiguration of

Christ suggests itself as a parallel and is also associated with an

allusion to his coming death. Most people have seen a face so light up

under the influence of emotion that this popular metaphor seemed to

express physical truth and it is perhaps not excessive to suppose that

in men of exceptional gifts this illumination may have been so bright as

to leave traces in tradition.

Then they went on[378] to a grove at Kusinârâ, and he lay down on a

couch spread between two Sâla trees. These trees were in full bloom,

though it was not the season for their flowering; heavenly strains and

odours filled the air and spirits unseen crowded round the bed. But

Ânanda, we are told, went into the Vihâra, which was apparently also in

the grove, and stood leaning against the lintel weeping at the thought

that he was to lose so kind a master. The Buddha sent for him and said,

"Do not weep. Have I not told you before that it is the very nature of

things most near and dear to us that we must part from them, leave them,

sever ourselves from them? All that is born, brought into being and put

together carries within itself the necessity of dissolution. How then is

it possible that such a being should not be dissolved? No such condition

is possible. For a long time, Ânanda, you have been very near me by

words of love, kind and good, that never varies and is beyond all

measure. You have done well, Ânanda. Be earnest in effort and you too

shall soon be free from the great evils—from sensuality, from

individuality, from delusion and from ignorance."

The Indians have a strong feeling that persons of distinction should die

in a suitable place[379], and now comes a passage in which Ânanda begs

the Buddha not to die "in this little wattle and daub town in the midst

of the jungle" but rather in some great city. The Buddha told him that

Kusinârâ had once been the capital of King Mahâsudassana and a scene of

great splendour in former ages. This narrative is repeated in an

amplified form in the Sutta and Jâtaka[380] called Mahâsudassana, in

which the Buddha is said to have been that king in a previous birth.

Kusinârâ was at that time one of the capitals of the Mallas, who were an

aristocratic republic like the Sâkyas and Vajjians. At the Buddha's

command Ânanda went to the Council hall and summoned the people. "Give

no occasion to reproach yourself hereafter saying, The Tathâgata died in

our own village and we neglected to visit him in his last hours." So the

Mallas came and Ânanda presented them by families to the dying Buddha as

he lay between the flowering trees, saying "Lord, a Malla of such and

such a name with his children, his wives, his retinue and his friends

humbly bows down at the feet of the Blessed One."

A monk called Subhadda, who was not a believer, also came and Ânanda

tried to turn him away but the Buddha overhearing said "Do not keep out

Subhadda. Whatever he may ask of me he will ask from a desire for

knowledge and not to annoy me and he will quickly understand my

replies." He was the last disciple whom the Buddha converted, and he

straightway became an Arhat.

Now comes the last watch of the night. "It may be, Ânanda," said the

Buddha, "that some of you may think, the word of the Master is ended. We

have no more a teacher. But you should not think thus. The truths and

the rules which I have declared and laid down for you all, let them be

the teacher for you after I am gone.

"When I am gone address not one another as hitherto, saying 'Friend.' An

elder brother may address a younger brother by his name or family-name

or as friend, but a younger brother should say to an elder, Sir, or

Lord.

"When I am gone let the order, if it should so wish, abolish all the

lesser and minor precepts."

Thus in his last address the dying Buddha disclaims, as he had

disclaimed before in talking to Ânanda, all idea of dictating to the

order: his memory is not to become a paralyzing tradition. What he had

to teach, he has taught freely, holding back nothing in "a clenched

fist." The truths are indeed essential and immutable. But they must

become a living part of the believer, until he is no longer a follower

but a light unto himself. The rest does not matter: the order can change

all the minor rules if expedient. But in everyday life discipline and

forms must be observed: hitherto all have been equal compared with the

teacher, but now the young must show more respect for the older. And in

the same spirit of solicitude for the order he continues:

"When I am gone, the highest penalty should be imposed on Channa." "What

is that, Lord?" "Let him say what he likes, but the brethren should not

speak to him or exhort him or admonish him[381]."

The end approaches. "It may be, that there is some doubt or misgiving in

the mind of some as to the Buddha, or the truth, or the path, or the

way. Enquire freely. Do not have to reproach yourselves afterwards with

the thought, 'Our teacher was face to face with us and we could not

bring ourselves to enquire when we were face to face with him.'" All

were silent. A second and third time he put the same question and there

was silence still. "It may be, that you put no questions out of awe for

the teacher. Let one friend communicate to another." There was still

silence, till Ânanda said "How wonderful, Lord, and how marvellous. In

this whole assembly there is no one who has any doubt or misgiving as to

the Buddha, the truth, the path and the way." "Out of the fulness of

faith hast thou spoken Ânanda, but the Tathâgata knows for certain that

it is so. Even the most backward of all these five hundred brethren has

become converted and is no longer liable to be born in a state of

suffering and is assured of final salvation."

"Behold, I exhort you saying, The elements of being are transitory[382].

Strive earnestly. These were the last words of the Tathâgata." Then he

passed through a series of trances (no less than twenty stages are

enumerated) and expired.

An earthquake and thunder, as one might have predicted, occurred at the

moment of his death but comparatively little stress is laid on these

prodigies. Anuruddha seems to have taken the lead among the brethren and

bade Ânanda announce the death to the Mallas. They heard it with cries

of grief: "Too soon has the Blessed One passed away. Too soon has the

light gone out of the world."

No less than six days were passed in preparation for the obsequies[383].

On the seventh they decided to carry the body to the south of the city

and there burn it. But when they endeavoured to lift it, they found it

immoveable. Anuruddha explained that spirits who were watching the

ceremony wished it to be carried not outside the city but through it.

When this was done the corpse moved easily and the heaven rained

flowers. The meaning of this legend is that the Mallas considered a

corpse would have defiled the city and therefore proposed to carry it

outside. By letting it pass through the city they showed that it was not

the ordinary relics of impure humanity.

Again, when they tried to light the funeral pile it would not catch

fire. Anuruddha explained that this delay also was due to the

intervention of spirits who wished that Mahâkassapa, the same whom the

Buddha had converted at Uruvelâ and then on his way to pay his last

respects, should arrive before the cremation. When he came attended by

five hundred monks the pile caught fire of itself and the body was

consumed completely, leaving only the bones. Streams of rain

extinguished the flames and the Mallas took the bones to their council

hall. There they set round them a hedge of spears and a fence of bows

and honoured them with dance and song and offerings of garlands and

perfumes.

Whatever may be thought of this story, the veneration of the Buddha's

relics, which is attested by the Piprava vase, is a proof that we have

to do with a man rather than a legend. The relics may all be false, but

the fact that they were venerated some 250 years after his death shows

that the people of India thought of him not as an ancient semi-divine

figure like Rama or Krishna but as something human and concrete.

Seven persons or communities sent requests for a portion of the relics,

saying that they would erect a stupa over them and hold a feast. They

were King Ajâtasattu of Magadha, the Licchavis of Vesâlî, the Sâkyas of

Kapilavatthu, the Bulis of Allakappa, the Koṭiyas of Râmagâma, the

Mallas of Pâvâ[384] and the Brahman of Veṭhadîpa. All except the last

were Kshatriyas and based their claim on the ground that they like the

Buddha belonged to the warrior caste. The Mallas at first refused, but a

Brahman called Doṇa bade them not quarrel over the remains of him who

taught forbearance. So he divided the relics into eight parts, one for

Kusinârâ and one for each of the other seven claimants. At this juncture

the Moriyas of Pipphalivana sent in a claim for a share but had to be

content with the embers of the pyre since all the bones had been

distributed. Then eight stupas were built for the relics in the towns

mentioned and one over the embers and one by Doṇa the Brahman over the

iron vessel in which the body had been burnt.

5

Thus ended the career of a man who was undoubtedly one of the greatest

intellectual and moral forces that the world has yet seen, but it is

hard to arrive at any certain opinion as to the details of his character

and abilities, for in the later accounts he is deified and in the

Pitakas though veneration has not gone so far as this, he is

ecclesiasticized and the human side is neglected. The narrative moves

like some stately ceremonial in which emotion and incident would be out

of place until it reaches the strange deathbed, spread between the

flowering trees, and Ânanda introduces with the formality of a court

chamberlain the Malla householders who have come to pay their last

respects and bow down at the feet of the dying teacher. The scenes

described are like stained glass windows; the Lord preaching in the

centre, sinners repenting and saints listening, all in harmonious

colours and studied postures. But the central figure remains somewhat

aloof; when once he had begun his ministry he laboured uninterruptedly

and with continual success, but the foundation of the kingdom of

Righteousness seems less like the triumphant issue of a struggle than

the passage through the world of some compassionate angel. This is in

great part due to the fact that the Pitakas are works of edification.

True, they set before us the teacher as well as his teaching but they

speak of his doings and historical surroundings only in order to provide

a proper frame for the law which he preached. A less devout and more

observant historian would have arranged the picture differently and even

in the narratives that have come down to us there are touches of human

interest which seem authentic.

When the Buddha was dying Ânanda wept because he was about to lose so

kind a master and the Buddha's own language to him is even more

affectionate. He cared not only for the organization of the order but

for its individual members. He is frequently represented as feeling that

some disciple needed a particular form of instruction and giving it. Nor

did he fail to provide for the comfort of the sick and weary. For

instance a ballad[385] relates how Panthaka driven from his home took

refuge at the door of the monastery garden. "Then came the Lord and

stroked my head and taking me by the arm led me into the garden of the

monastery and out of kindness he gave me a towel for my feet." A

striking anecdote[386] relates how he once found a monk who suffered

from a disagreeable disease lying on the ground in a filthy state. So

with Ânanda's assistance he washed him and lifting him up with his own

hands laid him on his bed. Then he summoned the brethren and told them

that if a sick brother had no special attendant the whole order should

wait on him. "You, monks, have no mothers or fathers to care for you. If

you do not wait one on the other, who is there who will wait on you?

Whosoever would wait on me, he should wait on the sick." This last

recalls Christ's words, "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto the least of

these brethren, ye have done it unto me." And, if his approval of monks

being deaf to the claims of family affection seems unfeeling, it should

also be mentioned that in the book called _Songs of the Nuns_[387] women

relate how they were crazy at the loss of their children but found

complete comfort and peace in his teaching. Sometimes we are told that

when persons whom he wished to convert proved refractory he "suffused

them with the feeling of his love" until they yielded to his

influence[388]. We can hardly doubt that this somewhat cumbrous phrase

preserves a tradition of his personal charm and power.

The beauty of his appearance and the pleasant quality of his voice are

often mentioned but in somewhat conventional terms which inspire no

confidence that they are based on personal reminiscence, nor have the

most ancient images which we possess any claim to represent his

features, for the earliest of them are based on Greek models and it was

not the custom to represent him by a figure until some centuries after

his death. I can imagine that the truest idea of his person is to be

obtained not from the abundant effigies which show him as a somewhat

sanctimonious ascetic, but from statues of him as a young man, such as

that found at Sarnath, which may possibly preserve not indeed the

physiognomy of Gotama but the general physique of a young Nepalese

prince, with powerful limbs and features and a determined mouth. For

there is truth at the bottom of the saying that Gotama was born to be

either a Buddha or a universal monarch: he would have made a good

general, if he had not become a monk.

We are perhaps on firmer ground when we find speakers in the

Pitakas[389] commenting on his calm and bright expression and his

unruffled courtesy in discussion. Of his eloquence it is hard to judge.

The Suttas may preserve his teaching and some of his words but they are

probably rearrangements made for recitation. Still it is impossible to

prove that he did not himself adopt this style, particularly when age

and iteration had made the use of certain formulæ familiar to him. But

though these repetitions and subdivisions of arrangement are often

wearisome, there are not wanting traces of another manner, which suggest

a terse and racy preacher going straight to the point and driving home

his meaning with homely instances.

Humour often peeps through the Buddha's preaching. It pervades the

Jâtaka stories, and more than once he is said to have smiled when

remembering some previous birth. Some suttas, such as the tales of the

Great King of Glory, and of King Mahâ Vijita's sacrifice[390], are

simply Jâtakas in another form—interesting stories full of edification

for those who can understand but not to be taken as a narrative of

facts. At other times he simply states the ultimate facts of a case and

leaves them in their droll incongruity. Thus when King Ajâtasattu was

moved and illuminated by his teaching, he observed to his disciples that

His Majesty had all the makings of a saint in him, if only he had not

killed that excellent man his own father. Somewhat similar is his

judgment[391] on two naked ascetics, who imitated in all things the ways

of a dog and a cow respectively, in the hope of thus obtaining

salvation. When pressed to say what their next birth would be, he opined

that if their penance was successful they would be reborn as dogs and

cows, if unsuccessful, in hell. Irony and modesty are combined in his

rejection of extravagant praise. "Such faith have I, Lord[392]" said

Sâriputta, "that methinks there never has been nor will be nor is now

any other greater or wiser than the Blessed One." "Of course, Sâriputta"

is the reply, "you have known all the Buddhas of the past." "No, Lord."

"Well then, you know those of the future." "No, Lord." "Then at least

you know me and have penetrated my mind thoroughly." "Not even that,

Lord." "Then why, Sâriputta, are your words so grand and bold."

There is much that is human in these passages yet we should be making a

fancy portrait did we allow ourselves to emphasize them too much and

neglect the general tone of the Pitakas. These scriptures are the

product of a school; but that school grew up under the Buddha's personal

influence and more than that is rooted in the very influences and

tendencies which produced the Buddha himself. The passionless,

intellectual aloofness; the elemental simplicity with which the facts of

life are stated and explained without any concession to sentiment, the

rigour of the prescription for salvation, that all sensual desire and

attachment must be cut off, are too marked and consistent for us to

suppose them due merely to monkish inability to understand the more

human side of his character. The Buddha began his career as an Indian

Muni, one supposed to be free from all emotions and intent only on

seeking deliverance from every tie connecting him with the world. This

was expected of him and had he done no more it would have secured him

universal respect. The fact that he did a great deal more, that he

devoted his life to active preaching, that he offered to all happiness

and escape from sorrow, that he personally aided with advice and

encouragement all who came to him, caused both his contemporaries and

future generations to regard him as a saviour. His character and the

substance of his teaching were admirably suited to the needs of the

religious world of India in his day. Judged by the needs of other

temperaments, which are entitled to neither more nor less consideration,

they seem too severe, too philosophic and the later varieties of

Buddhism have endeavoured to make them congenial to less strenuous

natures.

Before leaving the personality of the Buddha, we must say a word about

the more legendary portions of his biography, for though of little

importance for history they have furnished the chief subjects of

Buddhist art and influenced the minds of his followers as much as or

more than the authentic incidents of his career[393]. The later legend

has not distorted the old narrative. It is possible that all its

incidents may be founded on stories known to the compilers of the

Pitakas, though this is not at present demonstrable, but they are

embellished by an unstinted use of the supernatural and of the hyperbole

usual in Indian poetry. The youthful Buddha moves through showers of

flowers and an atmosphere crowded with attendant deities. He cannot even

go to school without an escort of ten thousand children and a hundred

thousand maidens and astonishes the good man who proposes to teach him

the alphabet by suggesting sixty-four systems of writing.

The principal scenes in this legend are as follows. The Bodhisattva,

that is the Buddha to-be, resides in the Tusita Heaven and selects his

birth-place and parentage. He then enters the womb of his mother Mâyâ in

the shape of a white elephant, which event she sees in a dream. Brahmans

are summoned and interpret the vision to mean that her son will be a

Universal Monarch or a Buddha. When near her confinement Mâyâ goes to

visit her parents but on the way brings forth her son in the Lumbini

grove. As she stands upright holding the bough of a tree, he issues from

her side without pain to her and is received by deities, but on touching

the ground, takes seven steps and says, "I am the foremost in the

world." On the same day are born several persons who play a part in his

life—his wife, his horse, Ânanda, Bimbisâra and others. Asita does

homage to him, as does also his father, and it is predicted that he will

become a Buddha and renounce the world. His father in his desire to

prevent this secludes him in the enjoyment of all luxury. At the

ploughing festival he falls into a trance under a tree and the shadow

stands still to protect him and does not change. Again his father does

him homage. He is of herculean strength and surpasses all as an archer.

He marries his cousin Yasodharâ, when sixteen years old. Then come the

four visions, which are among the scenes most frequently depicted in

modern sacred art. As he is driving in the palace grounds the gods show

him an old man, a sick man, a corpse and a monk of happy countenance.

His charioteer explains what they are and he determines to abandon the

world. It was at this time that his son was born and on hearing the news

he said that a new fetter now bound him to worldly life but still

decided to execute his resolve. That night he could take no pleasure in

the music of the singing women who were wont to play to him and they

fell asleep. As he looked at their sleeping forms he felt disgust and

ordered Channa, his charioteer, to saddle Kaṇṭhaka, a gigantic white

horse, eighteen cubits long from head to tail. Meanwhile he went to his

wife's room and took a last but silent look as she lay sleeping with her

child.

Then he started on horseback attended by Channa and a host of heavenly

beings who opened the city gates. Here he was assailed by Mâra the

Tempter who offered him universal empire but in vain. After jumping the

river Anomâ on his steed, he cut off his long hair with his sword and

flinging it up into the air wished it might stay there if he was really

to become a Buddha. It remained suspended; admiring gods placed it in a

heavenly shrine and presented Gotama with the robes of a monk.

Not much is added to the account of his wanderings and austerities as

given in the Pitakas, but the attainment of Buddhahood naturally

stimulates the devout imagination. At daybreak Gotama sits at the foot

of a tree, lighting up the landscape with the golden rays which issue

from his person. Sujârâ a noble maiden and her servant Pûrṇâ offer him

rice and milk in a golden vessel and he takes no more food for seven

weeks. He throws the vessel into the river, wishing that if he is to

become a Buddha it may ascend the stream against the current. It does so

and then sinks to the abode of the Nâgas. Towards evening he walks to

the Bodhi-tree and meets a grass-cutter who offers him grass to make a

seat. This he accepts and taking his seat vows that rather than rise

before attaining Buddhahood, he will let his blood dry up and his body

decay. Then comes the great assault of the Tempter. Mâra attacks him in

vain both with an army of terrible demons and with bands of seductive

nymphs. During the conflict Mâra asked him who is witness to his ever

having performed good deeds or bestowed alms? He called on the earth to

bear witness. Earthquakes and thunders responded to the appeal and the

goddess of the Earth herself rose and bore testimony. The rout of Mâra

is supposed to have taken place in the late evening. The full moon[394]

came out and in the three watches of the night he attained

enlightenment.

The Pali and early Sanskrit texts place the most striking legendary

scenes in the first part of the Buddha's life just as scribes give

freest rein to their artistic imagination in tracing the first letter

and word of a chapter. In the later version, the whole text is coloured

and gilded with a splendour that exceeds the hues of ordinary life but

no incidents of capital importance are added after the

Enlightenment[395]. Historical names still occur and the Buddha is still

a wandering teacher with a band of disciples, but his miracles

continually convulse the universe: he preaches to mankind from the sky

and retires for three months to the Tusita Heaven in order to instruct

his mother, who had died before she could hear the truth from her son's

lips, and often the whole scene passes into a vision where the ordinary

limits of space, time and number cease to have any meaning.

Hinduism and Buddhism, An Historical Sketch, Vol. 1 · 第 2 / 10 章