Transcriber's Notes:
Italic text is denoted by _underscores_ and bold text by
=equal signs=.
Small uppercase have been replaced with regular uppercase.
Characters after a carat are superscripts.
Blank pages have been eliminated.
Variations in spelling and hyphenation have been left as in the
original.
THE
SACRED BOOKS OF THE BUDDHISTS
Oxford
HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY
SACRED BOOKS OF THE BUDDHISTS
TRANSLATED
BY VARIOUS ORIENTAL SCHOLARS
AND EDITED BY
F. MAX MÜLLER
_PUBLISHED UNDER THE PATRONAGE OF_
HIS MAJESTY CHULÂLANKARANA, KING OF SIAM
VOL. I
London
HENRY FROWDE
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE
AMEN CORNER, E.C.
1895
THE _G_ÂTAKAMÂLÂ
OR
GARLAND OF BIRTH-STORIES
BY
ÂRYA _S_ÛRA
_TRANSLATED FROM THE SANSKRIT_
BY
J. S. SPEYER
London
HENRY FROWDE
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE
AMEN CORNER, E.C.
1895
EDITOR'S PREFACE.
After all the necessary preparations for the first and second series of
the _Sacred Books of the East_, consisting in all of forty-nine volumes,
with two volumes of _General Index_, had been completed, I still
received several offers of translations of important texts which I felt
reluctant to leave unpublished. As they were chiefly translations of
Buddhist texts, I mentioned the fact to several of my Buddhist friends,
and I was highly gratified when I was informed that H. M. the King of
Siam, being desirous that the true teaching of the Buddha should become
more widely known in Europe, had been graciously pleased to promise that
material support without which the publication of these translations
would have been impossible.
I therefore resolved to do what I could for helping to spread a more
correct knowledge of the religion of Buddha: but after the first three
volumes of this new Series of the Sacred Books of the Buddhists is
published, it will mainly depend on the interest which the public may
take in this work, whether it can be continued or not.
As long as my health allows me to do so I shall be quite willing to
continue what has been a labour of love to me during many years of my
life. It was not always an easy task. The constant correspondence with
my fellow-workers has taxed my time and my strength far more than I
expected. The difficulty was not only to select from the very large mass
of Sacred Books those that seemed most important and most likely to be
useful for enabling us to gain a correct view of the great religions of
the East, but to find scholars competent and willing to undertake the
labour of translation. I can perfectly understand the unwillingness of
most scholars to devote their time to mere translations. With every year
the translation of such works as the Veda or the Avesta, instead of
becoming easier, becomes really more perplexing and more difficult.
Difficulties of which we formerly had no suspicion have been brought to
light by the ever-increasing number of fresh students, and precautions
have now to be taken against dangers the very existence of which was
never dreamt of in former years. I do not exaggerate when I say that the
translation of some of the hymns of the Veda, often clearly corrupt in
the original, has become as difficult as the deciphering of hieroglyphic
or cuneiform inscriptions, where at all events the text may be depended
on. What critical scholars like is to translate a verse here and a verse
there, possibly a hymn or a whole chapter with various readings,
critical notes and brilliant conjectures; but to translate a whole book
without shirking a single line is a task from which most of them recoil.
Nor have the labours of those who have hitherto ventured on a more
complete translation of the Rig-veda, such as Wilson, Grassmann, Ludwig
and Griffith, been received as they ought to have been, with gratitude
for what they have achieved, and with allowances for what they failed to
achieve. I therefore remarked in the Preface to the first volume of this
collection, p. xlii:
'Oriental scholars have been blamed for not having as yet supplied
a want so generally felt, and so frequently expressed, as a
complete, trustworthy, and readable translation of the principal
Sacred Books of the Eastern Religions. The reasons, however, why
hitherto they have shrunk from such an undertaking are clear
enough. The difficulties in many cases of giving complete
translations, and not selections only, are very great. There is
still much work to be done for a critical restoration of the
original texts, for an examination of their grammar and metres, and
for determining the exact meaning of many words and passages. That
kind of work is naturally far more attractive to scholars than a
mere translation, particularly when they cannot but feel that, with
the progress of our knowledge, many a passage which now seems clear
and easy, may, on being re-examined, assume a new import. Thus
while scholars who would be most competent to undertake a
translation prefer to devote their time to more special researches,
the work of a complete translation is deferred to the future, and
historians are left under the impression that Oriental scholarship
is still in so unsatisfactory a state as to make any reliance on
translations of the Veda, the Avesta, or the Tâo-te king extremely
hazardous.
'It is clear, therefore, that a translation of the principal Sacred
Books of the East can be carried out only at a certain sacrifice.
Scholars must leave for a time their own special researches in
order to render the general results already obtained accessible to
the public at large. And even then, useful results can be achieved
_viribus unitis_ only.'
My expectations, however, have not been deceived. My appeal was most
generously responded to by the best Oriental scholars in England,
France, Germany, Holland and America. Nor have these scholars, who were
not afraid to come forward with translations which they knew to be far
from final, had to regret their courage and their public spirit. The
most competent judges have accepted what we had to offer in a grateful
and indulgent spirit. There has only been one painful exception in the
case of a scholar who has himself never ventured on the translation of a
sacred text, and who seems to have imagined that he could render more
useful service by finding fault with the translation of certain words
and passages, or by suggesting an entirely different and, in his eyes, a
far more excellent method of translation. All scholars know how easy it
is to glean a few straws, and how laborious to mow a whole field. There
are passages in every one of the Sacred Books, even in such carefully
edited texts as the Old and New Testaments, on which interpreters will
always differ; and we know how, after centuries of constant labour
bestowed on those texts, the most learned and careful scholars have not
been able to agree, or to avoid oversights in their Revised Version of
the Bible. Could we expect anything different in the first attempts at
translating the Sacred Books of other religions? Valuable emendations,
offered in a scholarlike spirit, would have been most gratefully
accepted by myself and by my fellow-workers. But seldom, nay hardly
ever, have emendations been proposed that would essentially alter the
_textus receptus_ or throw new light on really obscure passages, while
the offensive tone adopted by our critic made it impossible to answer
him. As he is no longer among the living, I shall say no more. I feel
bound, however, for the sake of those who do not know me, to correct one
remark, as invidious as it was groundless, made by the same departed
scholar, namely that I had received an excessive _honorarium_ as Editor
of the Sacred Books of the East, nay, as he expressed it, that I had
levied tribute of my fellow-workers. The fact is that during all the
years which I devoted to the superintending of the publication of the
fifty volumes of the Sacred Books of the East, I have not had the
smallest addition to my income. I was relieved by the University of
Oxford from the duty of delivering my public lectures, so that I might
devote my time to this large literary undertaking brought out by our
University Press. My labour, even the mere official correspondence with
my many contributors, was certainly not less than that of delivering
lectures which I had been in the habit of delivering for twenty-five
years. My private lectures were continued all the same, and the
publications of my pupils are there to show how ungrudgingly I gave them
my time and my assistance in their literary labours. It is difficult to
see of what interest such matters can be to other people, or with what
object they are dragged before the public. I should have felt ashamed to
notice such an accusation, if the accuser had not been a man whose
scholarship deserved respect. I have never claimed any credit for the
sacrifices which I have made both in time and in money, for objects
which were near and dear to my heart. It has been, as I said, a labour
of love, and I shall always feel most grateful to the University of
Oxford, and to my fellow-translators, for having enabled me to realise
this long cherished plan of making the world better acquainted with the
Sacred Books of the principal religions of mankind, a work which has
borne fruit already, and will, I hope, bear still richer fruit in the
future.
If the members of the principal religions of the world wish to
understand one another, to bear with one another, and possibly to
recognise certain great truths which, without being aware of it, they
share in common with one another, the only solid and sound foundation
for such a religious peace-movement will be supplied by a study of the
Sacred Books of each religion.
One such religious Peace-Congress has been held already in America.
Preparations for another are now being made; and it is certainly a sign
of the times when we see Cardinal Gibbons, after conferring with Pope
Leo XIII at Rome, assuring those who are organising this new Congress:
'The Pope will be with you, I know it. Write, agitate, and do not be
timid[1].'
[1] _Le Pape sera avec vous, je le sais. Écrivez, agissez, ne soyez
pas timides._ Revue de Paris, Sept. 1, 1895, p. 136.
The _G_âtakamâlâ, of which Prof. Speyer has given us an English
translation in this volume, is a work well known to students of
Buddhism. The edition of the Sanskrit text by Prof. Kern is not only an
_editio princeps_, but the text as restored by him will probably remain
the final text, and Prof. Speyer in translating has had but seldom to
depart from it.
_G_âtaka has generally been translated by Birth-story or Tale of
Anterior Births, and it would be difficult to find a better rendering.
This class of stories is peculiar to Buddhism; for although the idea
that every man had passed through many existences before his birth on
earth and will pass through many more after his death was, like most
Buddhist theories, borrowed from the Brâhmans, yet its employment for
teaching the great lessons of morality seems to have been the work of
Buddha and his pupils. In addition to this there was another theory,
likewise Brahmanic in its origin, but again more fully developed for
practical purposes by the Buddhists, that of <g>Karma, a firm belief that
an unbroken chain of cause and effect binds all existences together.
The great problems of the justice of the government of the world, of the
earthly sufferings of the innocent, and the apparent happiness of the
wicked, were to the Indian mind solved once for all by the firm
conviction that what we experience here is the result of something that
has happened before, that there is an unbroken heredity in the world,
and that we not only benefit by, but also suffer from our ancestors. In
order fully to understand the drift of the _G_âtakas we must, however,
bear in mind one more article of the Buddhist faith, namely that, though
ordinary mortals remember nothing of their former existences beyond the
fact that they did exist, which is involved in the very fact of their
self-consciousness, highly enlightened beings have the gift of recalling
their former vicissitudes. It is well known that Pythagoras claimed the
same gift of remembering his former lives, or at all events is reported
to have claimed it. A Buddha is supposed to know whatever has happened
to him in every existence through which he has passed: and it seems to
have been the constant habit of the historical Buddha, Buddha
_S_âkya-muni, to explain to his disciples things that were happening by
things that had happened countless ages before. Those lessons seem
certainly to have impressed his hearers, after they once believed that
what they had to suffer here on earth was not the result of mere chance,
but the result of their own former deeds or of the deeds of their
fellow-creatures, that they were in fact paying off a debt which they
had contracted long ago. It was an equally impressive lesson that
whatever good they might do on earth would be placed to their account in
a future life, because the whole world was one large system in which
nothing could ever be lost, though many of the links of the chain of
cause and effect might escape human observation or recollection.
The Buddha, in telling these stories of his former births or existences,
speaks of himself, not exactly as the same individual, but rather as the
enlightened one, the Buddha as he existed at any and at every time; and
from a moral point of view, the enlightened meant the good, the perfect
man. We must not suppose that his hearers were expected to believe, in
our sense of the word, all the circumstances of his former existences as
told by Buddha _S_âkya-muni. Even for an Indian imagination it would
have been hard to accept them as matters of fact. A _G_âtaka was not
much more than what a parable is with us, and as little as Christians
are expected to accept the story of Lazarus resting in Abraham's bosom
as a matter of fact (though, I believe, the house of _Dives_ is shown at
Jerusalem) were the Buddhists bound to believe that Buddha as an
individual or as an historical person, had formerly been a crow or a
hare. The views of the Buddhists on the world and its temporary tenants,
whether men, animals, or trees, are totally different from our own,
though we know how even among ourselves the theories of heredity have
led some philosophers to hold that we, or our ancestors, existed at one
time in an animal, and why not in a vegetable or mineral state. It is
difficult for us to enter fully into the Buddhist views of the world; I
would only warn my readers that they must not imagine that highly
educated men among the Buddhists were so silly as to accept the
_G_âtakas as ancient history.
It would be more correct, I believe, to look upon these Birth-stories as
homilies used for educational purposes and for inculcating the moral
lessons of Buddhism. This is clearly implied in the remarks at the end
of certain _G_âtakas, such as 'This story is also to be used when
discoursing on the Buddha' (p. 148), or 'This story may be used with the
object of showing the difficulty of finding companions for a religious
life' (p. 172). We know that Christian divines also made use of popular
stories for similar purposes. In India many of these stories must have
existed long before the rise of Buddhism, as they exist even now, in the
memory of the people. It is known how some of them reached Greece and
Rome and the Western world through various well-ascertained
channels[2], and how they still supply our nurseries with the earliest
lessons of morality, good sense, and good manners.
[2] Migration of Fables, in Chips from a German Workshop, vol. iv,
=p. 412=.
It may be said that the lessons of morality inculcated in these homilies
are too exaggerated to be of any practical usefulness. Still this _modus
docendi_ is very common in Sacred Books, where we often find an extreme
standard held up in the hope of producing an impression that may be
useful in less extreme cases. To offer the other cheek to whosoever
shall strike our right cheek, to give up our cloak to him who takes away
our coat, to declare that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye
of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God, are
all lessons which we also take _cum grano salis_. They ask for much in
the hope that something may be given. That there is danger too in this
mode of teaching cannot be denied. We are told that Ârya _S_ûra, in
order to follow the example of Buddha in a former birth, threw himself
in this life before a starving tigress to be devoured. Let us hope that
this too was only a _G_âtaka.
When once a taste for these moralising stories had arisen, probably
owing to Buddha's daily intercourse with the common people, their number
grew most rapidly. The supply was unlimited, all that was required was
the moral application, the _Haec fabula docet_. The Buddhists give their
number as 550. The earliest are probably those which are found in
different parts of the Buddhist Canon. In the _K_ariyâ-pi_t_aka there is
a collection of thirty-five stories of the former lives of Buddha, in
each of which he acquired one of the ten Pâramitâs or Great Perfections
which fit a human being for Buddhahood[3]. A similar collection is found
in the Buddhava_m_sa[4], which contains an account of the life of the
coming Buddha, the Bodhisat, in the various characters which he filled
during the periods of the twenty-four previous Buddhas.
[3] See Buddhist Birth-stories, translated by Rhys Davids, p. lv.
[4] Some doubt attaches to the canonicity of the _K_ariyâ-pi_t_aka
and the Buddhava_m_sa (see Childers, s. v. Nikâya).
The _G_âtaka stories are therefore at least as old as the compilation of
the Buddhist Canon at the Council of Vesâli, about 377 B.C.[5] It was at
that Council that the great schism took place, and that the ancient
Canon was rearranged or disarranged. Among the books thus tampered with
is mentioned the _G_âtaka, which therefore must be considered as having
existed, and formed part of the old Canon before the Council of Vesâli.
This is what the Dîpava_m_sa (V, 32) says on the subject:
'The Bhikkhus of the Great Council settled a doctrine contrary (to
the true Faith). Altering the original text they made another text.
They transposed Suttas which belonged to one place (of the
collection) to another place; they destroyed the true meaning of
the Faith, in the Vinaya and in the five collections (of the
Suttas).... Rejecting single passages of the Suttas and of the
proposed Vinaya, they composed other Suttas and another Vinaya
which had (only) the appearance (of the genuine ones). Rejecting
the following texts, viz. the Parivâra, which is the abstract of
the contents (of the Vinaya), the six sections of the Abhidhamma,
the Pa_t_isambhidâ, the Niddesa, and _some portions of the_
G_âtaka_, they composed new ones.'
[5] Dhammapada, p. xxx, S. B. E., vol. x.
Whatever else this may prove with regard to the way in which the ancient
Canon was preserved, it shows at all events that _G_âtakas existed
before the Vesâli Council as an integral portion of the sacred Canon,
and we learn at the same time that it was possible even then to compose
new chapters of that canon, and probably also to add new _G_âtaka
stories.
Whether we possess the text of the _G_âtaka in exactly that form in
which it existed previous to the Council of Vesâli in 377 B.C. is
another question. Strictly speaking we must be satisfied with the time
of Vattagâmani in whose reign, 88-76 B.C., writing for literary purposes
seems to have become more general in India, and the Buddhist Canon was
for the first time reduced to writing.
What we possess is the Pâli text of the _G_âtaka as it has been
preserved in Ceylon. The tradition is that these 550 _G_âtaka stories,
composed in Pâli, were taken to Ceylon by Mahinda, about 250 B.C., that
the commentary was there translated into Singhalese, and that the
commentary was retranslated into Pâli by Buddhaghosha, in the fifth
century A.D. It is in this commentary alone that the text of the
_G_âtakas has come down to us. This text has been edited by Dr.
Fausböll. He has distinguished in his edition between three component
elements, the tale, the frame, and the verbal interpretation. This text,
of which the beginning was translated in 1880 by Prof. Rhys Davids, is
now being translated by Mr. R. Chalmers, Mr. W. R. D. Rouse, Mr. H. T.
Francis and Mr. R. A. Neil, and the first volume of their translation
has appeared in 1895 under the able editorship of Professor Cowell.
As Professor Speyer has explained, the _G_âtakamâlâ, the Garland of
Birth-stories, which he has translated, is a totally different work. It
is a Sanskrit rendering of only thirty-four _G_âtakas ascribed to Ârya
_S_ûra. While the Pâli _G_âtaka is written in the plainest prose style,
the work of Ârya _S_ûra has higher pretensions, and is in fact a kind of
kâvya, a work of art. It was used by the Northern Buddhists, while the
Pâli _G_âtaka belongs to the Canon of the Southern Buddhists. The date
of Ârya _S_ûra is difficult to fix. Târanâtha (p. 90) states that _S_ûra
was known by many names, such as A_s_vaghosha, Mât_rik_e_t_a,
Pit_rik_e_t_a, Durdarsha (_sic_), Dharmika-subhûti, Mati_k_itra. He also
states that towards the end of his life _S_ûra, was in correspondence
with king Kanika (Kanishka?), and that he began to write the hundred
_G_âtakas illustrating Buddha's acquirement of the ten Pâramitâs (see p.
xiv), but died when he had finished only thirty-four. It is certainly
curious that our _G_âtakamâlâ contains thirty-four _G_âtakas[6]. If
therefore we could rely on Târanâtha, Ârya _S_ûra, being identical with
A_s_vaghosha, the author of the Buddha_k_arita, would have lived in the
first century of our era. He is mentioned as a great authority on metres
(Târanâtha, p. 181), and he certainly handles his metres with great
skill. But dates are always the weak point in the history of Indian
Literature. Possibly the study of Tibetan Literature, and a knowledge of
the authorities on which Târanâtha relied, may throw more light
hereafter on the date of _S_ûra and A_s_vaghosha.
[6] The same is also the number of Avadânas in the
Bodhisattva-Avadâna, and the stories seem to be the same as those
of our _G_âtakamâlâ.--Rajendralal Mitra, Sanskrit Buddhist
Literature, p. 49.
F. MAX MÜLLER.
OXFORD, _October, 1895_.
CONTENTS.
PAGE
INTRODUCTION xxi
Introductory Stanzas 1
I. The Story of the Tigress 2
II. The Story of the King of the _S_ibis 8
III. The Story of the Small Portion of Gruel 20
IV. The Story of the Head of a Guild 25
V. The Story of Avishahya, the Head of a Guild 30
VI. The Story of the Hare 37
VII. The Story of Agastya 46
VIII. The Story of Maitrîbala 55
IX. The Story of Vi_s_vantara 71
X. The Story of the Sacrifice 93
XI. The Story of _S_akra 104
XII. The Story of the Brâhman 109
XIII. The Story of Unmâdayantî 114
XIV. The Story of Supâraga 124
XV. The Story of the Fish 134
XVI. The Story of the Quail's Young 138
XVII. The Story of the Jar 141
XVIII. The Story of the Childless One 148
XIX. The Story of the Lotus-Stalks 154
XX. The Story of the Treasurer 164
XXI. The Story of _K_u_dd_abodhi 172
XXII. The Story of the Holy Swans 181
XXIII. The Story of Mahâbodhi 200
XXIV. The Story of the Great Ape 218
XXV. The Story of the _S_arabha 227
XXVI. The Story of the Ruru-Deer 234
XXVII. The Story of the Great Monkey 244
XXVIII. The Story of Kshântivâdin 253
XXIX. The Story of the Inhabitant of the Brahmaloka 268
XXX. The Story of the Elephant 281
XXXI. The Story of Sutasoma 291
XXXII. The Story of Ayog_ri_ha 314
XXXIII. The Story of the Buffalo 324
XXXIV. The Story of the Woodpecker 329
Synoptical Table of the Correspondence between the
Stanzas of the _G_âtakamâlâ and the Scripture
Verses of the Pâli _G_âtaka 337
Index 341
Transliteration of Oriental Alphabets adopted for
the Translations of the Sacred Books of the
Buddhists 347
INTRODUCTION
The 'Garland of Birth-stories' belongs to the Canon of the Northern
Buddhists. For the discovery of this work we are indebted to Mr. Brian
H. Hodgson, who as early as 1828 mentioned it among the interesting
specimens of Bauddha scriptures communicated to him by his old Patan
monk, and also procured copies of it. One of these was deposited in the
library of the college of Fort William, now belonging to the Bengal
Asiatic Society, and was described, in 1882, by Râ_g_endralâla Mitra.
Another was forwarded to the Paris library. Burnouf, who thoroughly
studied other works belonging to the Sûtra and Avadâna classes, which
form part of the Hodgson MSS. in Paris, seems to have had a merely
superficial acquaintance with the _G_âtakamâlâ, if we may judge from the
terms with which he deals with it in his 'Introduction à l'histoire du
Bouddhisme indien.' p. 54 of the second edition: 'Je dis les livres,
quoiqu'il n'en existe qu'un seul dans la liste népalaise et dans la
collection de M. Hodgson, qui porte et qui mérite le titre de _Djâtaka_
(naissance); c'est le volume intitulé _Djâtakamâlâ_ ou la Guirlande des
naissances, qui passe pour[7] un récit des diverses actions méritoires
de Çâkya antérieurement à l'époque où il devint Buddha.' In fact, he has
never given a summary, still less a detailed account of its contents. It
was not until 1875 that M. Féer gave such an account in the Journal
Asiatique, VII^e Sér., t. 5, p. 413.
[7] I have spaced the words that prove my statement.
Moreover, Burnouf's statement is not quite correct with respect to the
Nepal list. Not one, but three _G_âtaka works are named there[8], the
_G_âtakâvadâna (No. 32), the _G_âtakamâlâ (No. 33), and the
Mahâ_g_âtakamâlâ (No. 34). Of these only one, indeed, is extant, viz.
No. 33, our 'Garland of Birth-stories.' No. 34 may be the work,
containing 550 or 565 _G_âtakas, spoken of by the Bauddha monk who
imparted so much valuable information to Hodgson[9], or, perhaps, the
original of the Tibetan collection of 101 tales, including also our
_G_âtakamâlâ, to which two Russian scholars, Serge d'Oldenburg and
Ivanovski, have of late drawn the attention of the public[10]. As to No.
32, its title, _G_âtakâvadâna, allows the supposition that it is either
a collection of _G_âtakas and avadânas, or that it contains 'great
religious exploits' (avadâna) performed by the Bodhisattva, who
afterwards became Buddha, the Lord. Nothing is more common than the use
of both terms in a nearly synonymous manner. Our _G_âtakamâlâ bears also
the appellation of Bodhisattvâvadânamâlâ[11]. In translating _G_âtaka by
'birth-story,' I comply with the general use and official interpretation
of that term by the Buddhist Church. The original meaning must have been
simply 'tale, story,' as Prof. Kern has demonstrated in his 'History of
Buddhism in India[12].' Additional evidence of this statement may be
drawn from the fact, that in several of the old and traditional headings
of these stories the former part of the compound denotes not the
Bodhisattva, but some other person of the tale, as Vyâghrî_g_âtaka, 'the
Story of the Tigress,' or a thing, as Kumbha_g_âtaka, 'the Story of the
Jar;' Bisa_g_âtaka, 'the Story of the Lotus-stalks,' which are
respectively Nos. I, XVII, and XIX of this collection; or an action, as
Sîlavîma_m_sa(ka)_g_âtaka, the common heading of Nos. 86, 290, 305, and
330 in Fausböll's Pâli _G_âtaka, Na_kk_a_g_âtaka, ibid., No. 32, or a
quality, as Sîlânisa_m_sa_g_âtaka, ibid., No. 190.
[8] See Hodgson, Essays on the Languages &c. of Nepal and Tibet,
1874, p. 37.
[9] See Hodgson, Essays, pp. 17 and 37.
[10] See the paper of d'Oldenburg, translated by Dr. Wenzel in the
Journ. Roy. As. Soc. of 1893, p. 304.
[11] Also cp. the passage of the Avadânakalpalatâ, quoted infra, p.
xxiii.
[12] See I, p. 257 of the original (Dutch) edition.
Some time after M. Féer's compte-rendu of the Paris MS. was published
two new MSS. of the _G_âtakamâlâ came to Europe. They belong to the
valuable set of Sanskrit Buddhist works which Dr. Wright acquired for
the Cambridge University Library, and are described by Prof. Cecil
Bendall in his excellent Catalogue (1883). Prof. Kern was the first to
appreciate the great literary merits of the _G_âtakamâlâ, and soon
planned an edition, availing himself of the two Cambridge MSS. (Add.
1328 and 1415) and the Paris one[13]. This editio princeps was published
at the end of 1891 as the first volume of the Harvard Oriental Series of
Prof. Lanman. It has every right to bear the name of 'princeps,' not
only because Ârya _S_ûra's work has never been edited before, but on
account of the critical acumen and the untiring care of the editor,
whose exertions have almost purged the text from the clerical errors and
blunders which greatly encumber the Nepal manuscripts[14]. Thus, thanks
to Prof. Kern, this masterpiece of Sanskrit Buddhist literature is now
accessible to Sanskritists in an excellent edition. I have undertaken to
translate it, as I consider it a most valuable document for the
knowledge of Buddhism.
[13] Dr. d'Oldenburg mentions two more copies; they are at St.
Petersburg. See his paper in the Journ. Roy. As. Soc., p. 306.
[14] Compare the complaint of Prof. Cowell, p. xii of the
Introduction to his translation of the Buddha_k_arita (Sacred
Books, vol. xlix).
Properly speaking, _G_âtakamâlâ is a class-name. It has been pointed out
above that in the Northern Buddhist Canon several writings of that name
have been made known, and though, so far as I know, this appellation
does not occur in the book-titles of the Pâli Tripi_t_aka, such texts as
the Pâli _G_âtaka and the _K_ariyâpi_t_aka may have some right to be
thus designated. That it is a generic appellation is made plain from
Somendra's Introduction to the Avadânakalpalatâ of his father
Kshemendra. It is said there, verses 7 and 8:--
'â_k_âryaGopadattâdyair avadânakramo_ggh_itâ_h_
u_kk_ityo_kk_itya vihitâ gadyapadyavi_sri_ṅkhalâ_h_,
ekamârgânusâri_n_ya_h_ para_m_ gâmbhîryakarka_s_â_h_
vistîr_n_avar_n_anâ_h_ santi _G_ina_g_âtakamâlikâ_h_.'
'There exist many "Garlands of Birth-stories of the _G_ina" by Gopadatta
and other teachers, who, discarding the usual order of the Avadânas,
gathered tales _carptim_, and told them at length in elaborate prose
(gadya) interspersed with verse, holding themselves free as to the
proportions of the two styles, which they made interchange. They all
treat of the praise of the Right Path, but, owing to their profoundness,
are hard to understand.'
This definition of that class exactly suits the work, the translation of
which is here published. This composition consists, indeed, of verse
intermingled with flowery prose built up according to the rules and
methods of Sanskrit rhetoric; it claims to be a florilegium, a selection
of _G_âtakas, with the avowed object of rousing or invigorating the true
faith in the minds of the reader; and the stories are told at length. It
has perhaps been the most perfect writing of its kind. It is
distinguished no less by the superiority of its style than by the
loftiness of its thoughts. Its verses and artful prose are written in
the purest Sanskrit[15], and charm the reader by the elegance of their
form and the skill displayed in the handling of a great variety of
metres, some of which are rarely to be met with elsewhere[16], and are
sometimes adorned with the additional qualities of difficult and refined
rhymes, and the like. Apparently _S_ûra, to whom the _G_âtakamâlâ is
ascribed, was a poet richly gifted by Nature, whose talent must have
been developed by thorough and extensive literary studies. Above all, I
admire his moderation. Unlike so many other Indian masters in the art of
literary composition, he does not allow himself the use of embellishing
apparel and the whole luxuriant _mise en scène_ of Sanskrit ala_m_kâra
beyond what is necessary for his subject. His flowery descriptions, his
long and elaborate sermons, his elegant manner of narration, are always
in harmony with the scheme of the whole or the nature of the contents.
Similarly, in the choice of his metres he was guided by stylistic
motives in accordance with the tone and sentiment required at a given
point of the narrative. It is a pity that most of these excellencies are
lost in the translation.
[15] The peculiarities of our author are not many, and bear chiefly
on lexicology, not on grammar or style, which show the most
intimate acquaintance with the classic language. His subject-matter
and his faith, of course, necessitate the use of a number of terms,
found in Buddhist writings only; yet he avoids several of them,
which are not good Sanskrit, as vi_g_ita and most of those
signalized by Cowell and Neil in p. ix of their edition of the
Divyâvadâna. He often employs uddhava=Pâli utthava [which itself
is=Skt. utsava], sumukha='propense,' sâtmîbhavati, ºkaroti, ºbhâva,
a term to express the imbibing of qualities into one's nature,
adhyâ_s_aya=â_s_aya, vitâna and vaitânya='dejected' and
'dejection,' vimana_h_=durmana_h_ 'sad,' pratipat and
pratipatti='(good) conduct' and so on. Likewise he uses such words
as vanîpaka, pratisa_m_-modana, (ahorâtram) atinâmayâm âsa, XXVI,
27 ârabhya [=Pâli ârabbha] in the meaning of
'concerning'=adhik_ri_tya, â_s_ritya and VIII, 20
pratyâham=pratyaham. On the other hand, instances of old words and
expressions, and of such as were hitherto only known from the
Dictionaries, are found in his work. So e.g. addhâ IX, 60 and
elsewhere, âkumbha XVII, 5, XXVIII, 31, dâ_nd_â_g_inika in XXVIII,
37.
[16] Among the less common metres I notice the Mattamayûra V,
22-24, XXIX, 4 and 32; the Pramitâkshara XVII, 17, XVIII, 20,
XXIII, 25; the Bhu_g_aṅgaprayâta XXIX, 26; the Prahara_n_akalitâ
or Kalikâ XVII, 20; some metre akin to the Sumânikâ--cp.
Colebrooke, Misc. Ess. II, 141--XXIII, 34-39, for it does not suit
the scheme taught by Colebrooke, in verses 35-39 each pâda
consisting of two trochees and a bacchius, whereas verse 34 is made
up of two trochees and a molossus.
Thus much for the philologist and the lover of Oriental literature. To
the student of Buddhism it is the peculiar character of the _G_âtakamâlâ
which constitutes its great importance. Although it is styled 'a garland
of stories,' it is really a collection of homilies. Each _G_âtaka is
introduced by a simple prose sentence of ethical and religious purport,
which is to be illustrated by the story. The whole treatment of the tale
bears the character of a religious discourse. Prof. Cowell, in his
preface to the translation of the Pâli _G_âtaka, observes that the
_G_âtaka-legends are 'continually introduced into the religious
discourses ... whether to magnify the glory of the Buddha or to
illustrate Buddhist doctrines and precepts by appropriate
examples[17].' Our _G_âtakamâlâ has a right to be called a choice
collection of such sermons, distinguished by their lofty conception and
their artistic elaboration. It is a document of the first rank for the
study of ancient Buddhist homiletics, and is for this reason entitled to
a place among the Sacred Books of the East.
[17] See The Jātaka, translated from the Pâli by various hands
under the editorship of Prof. E. B. Cowell, Cambridge, 1895, I, p.
vi.
_S_ûra took his thirty-four holy legends from the old and traditional
store of _G_âtaka-tales. Almost all of them have been identified with
corresponding ones in other collections, both of Northern and Southern
Buddhism. So far as I could control those parallels or add to them, I
have taken care to notice them at the beginning or at the end of each
story. The author himself in his introductory stanzas declares his
strict conformity with scripture and tradition; and, however much he has
done for the adornment and embellishment of the outer form of his tales,
we may trust him, when he implies that he has nowhere changed their
outlines or their essential features, but has narrated them as they were
handed down to him by writing or by oral tradition. Wherever his account
differs from that preserved in other sources, we may infer that he
followed some different version. Sometimes he passes over details of
minor importance. For instance, in the second story he avoids the
hideous particulars of the eye-operation, dwelt upon in the Pâli
_G_âtaka. The same good taste will be appreciated in Story XXVIII, when
the cruel act of the wicked king against the monk Kshântivâdin has to be
told, and in Story VIII. Stories XVII, XXII, XXXI are much simpler than
their parallels in the holy Pâli book, which are unwieldy, encumbered as
they are by exuberance of details. I cannot help thinking that _S_ûra
omitted such particulars purposely. For the rest, he does not pretend to
tell stories new or unknown to his readers. He acknowledges their
popularity; he puts the story of the tigress at the beginning, in order
to honour his teacher, who had celebrated that _G_âtaka. He often
neglects to give proper names to the actors in his tales. For instance,
of Agastya, Ayog_ri_ha, _K_u_dd_abodhi, the heroes of the _G_âtakas thus
named, it is nowhere said that they were so called. _G_û_g_aka, the
Brâhman who begged the children from Vi_s_vantara, consequently a
well-known figure in the legend, is only named 'a Brâhman.' In the same
story (IX) Madrî, the wife of the hero, is introduced as a well-known
person, although her name had not been mentioned before.
That he closely adheres to the traditional stock of legends is also
shown by a good number of his verses. Generally speaking, the metrical
part of the _G_âtakamâlâ admits of a fourfold division. There are
laudatory verses, praising and pointing out the virtues of the hero;
these are commonly found in the first part or preamble of the tale.
There are descriptive verses, containing pictures of fine scenery or of
phenomena. Further, there are religious discourses, sometimes of
considerable length, put in the mouth of the Bodhisattva; they have
their place mostly at the end[18]. The rest consists in verses treating
of facts in the story, and it is chiefly there that we find again the
gâthâs of the corresponding Pâli _G_âtakas. It is incontestable that in
a great many cases _S_ûra worked on the same or a very similar stock of
gâthâs as are contained in the Sacred Canon of the Southern Buddhists.
For the sake of reference I have registered those parallel verses in a
Synoptical Table, which is placed at the end of this book (pp. 337-340).
Sometimes the affinity is so striking that one text will assist the
interpretation and critical restitution of the other. _S_ûra's stanza,
V, 11, for example, has not been invented by the author himself; it is a
refined paraphrase in Sanskrit of some Prâkrit gâthâ of exactly the same
purport as that which in Fausböll's _G_âtaka III, p. 131, bears the
number 158. By comparing pâda c in both, it is plain that in the Pâli
text no ought to be read instead of vo[19]. It must have been sacred
texts in some popular dialect, not in Sanskrit, that underly the
elaborate and high-flown verses of _S_ûra. This is proved, among other
things, by the mistake in XIX, 17, pointed out by Prof. Kern in the
Various Readings he has appended to his edition.
[18] It is but seldom that the verses contain a mere repetition or
development of what has just been told in the prose immediately
preceding. Of this kind are XIII, 16; XIX, 5; XXV, 1; XXX, 5.
[19] Here are some other instances. In the Bhisa_g_âtaka, Fausb.
IV, 309, 11, read puttî ... sabbakâmî, cp. _G_âtakamâlâ XIX, 13,
ibid. 1. 22 sabbasamattaveda_m_ and 1. 24 pû_g_entu, cp.
_G_âtakamâlâ XIX, 16; ibid. p. 310, 3 lattha, not alattha, cp. XIX,
18.--In the _K_ullaha_m_sa_g_âtaka, F. V, 340, 12 kha_nd_a_m_ the
reading of _B^{ds}_ and _S^{dr}_ is confirmed by _S_ûra, XXII, 37
ûna_m_. Ibid. 343, 16 I read tâvad eva _k_a te lâbho kat' assa
yâ_k_anâ _k_a me, comparing _S_ûra XXII, 50, and from XXII, 80 I
infer that F. V, 350, 16 mama is to be read for dhamma_m_, vasu for
vaso, sabbatth' instead of sabb' atth'.--In F. I, 213, 13 a prose
passage may be corrected from the parallel prose of _G_âtakamâlâ.
(p. 98, 8 of the edition); divide the words thus, ku_kkh_ito _g_âto
a_nd_akosam padâletvâ.
On the other hand the Pâli text is of use to correct a passage of
_S_ûra. XXII, 33 c we should read dharmo hy apa_k_ita_h_ samyag
&c., cp. Fausb. V, 339, 22.
As I have already remarked, each story is introduced by a leading
sentence, expressing some religious maxim, which, according to Indian
usage, is repeated again at the end as a conclusion to the story, being
preceded by evam or tathâ, 'in this manner.' But, as a rule[20], the
epilogues are not limited to that simple repetition. They often contain
more, the practical usefulness of the story thus told being enhanced by
the addition of other moral lessons, which may be illustrated by it, or
by pointing out different subjects of religious discourses, in
connection with which our tale may be of use. Most of these epilogues,
in my opinion, are posterior to _S_ûra. Apart from the argument offered
by some remarkable discrepancies in style and language and the monkish
spirit pervading them, I think it highly improbable that, after the
author had put at the head and at the end of each _G_âtaka the moral
maxim he desires to inculcate upon the minds of his readers by means of
the account of a certain marvellous deed of the Bodhisattva, he should
himself add different indications for other employments to serve
homiletical purposes. It is more likely that these accessories are of
later origin, and were added when the discourses of _S_ûra had gained so
great a reputation as to be admitted to the Canon of Sacred Writings,
and had come to be employed by the monks as a store of holy and edifying
sermons for the purposes of religious instruction.
[20] With the exception of V and XV. In the conclusion of III and
XIII the leading text is repeated, and then more fully developed;
in that of the ninth _G_âtaka it is repeated in an abridged form.
On account of these considerations, I have bracketed in my translation
such part of the epilogues as seemed to me later interpolations. Yet I
did not think it advisable to omit them. They are not without importance
in themselves. They allow us an insight into the interior of the
monasteries and to witness the monks preparing for preaching. Moreover,
some of them contain precious information about holy texts of the
Northern Buddhists, which are either lost or have not yet been
discovered. In the epilogue of VIII there is even a textual quotation;
likewise in that of XXX, where we find the words spoken by the Lord at
the time of his Complete Extinction. As to XI, see my note on that
epilogue. In XII and XXI similar sayings of holy books are hinted at.
Concerning the person of the author and his time, nothing certain is
known. That he was called Ârya _S_ûra is told in the manuscripts, and is
corroborated by Chinese tradition; the Chinese translation of the
_G_âtakamâlâ, made between 960 and 1127 A.D., bears Ârya _S_ûra on its
title as the author's name (see Bunyiu Nanjio's Catalogue, No. 1312).
Tibetan tradition, too, knows _S_ûra as a famous teacher, and as the
author of our collection of stories. Târanâtha identifies him with
A_s_vaghosha, and adds many more names by which the same great man
should be known. It is, however, impossible that two works so entirely
different in style and spirit as the Buddha_k_arita and the _G_âtakamâlâ
should be ascribed to one and the same author.
As to his time, Dr. d'Oldenburg observes that the terminus ante quem is
the end of the 7th century A.D., since it seems that the Chinese
traveller I-tsing speaks of our 'Garland of Birth-stories.' If No. 1349
of Bunyiu Nanjio's Catalogue of the Chinese Tripi_t_aka, being a Sûtra
on the fruits of Karma briefly explained by Ârya _S_ûra, is written by
our author--and there seems to be no reasonable objection to
this--_S_ûra must have lived before 434 A.D., when the latter work is
said to have been translated into Chinese. This conclusion is supported
by the purity and elegance of the language, which necessarily point to a
period of a high standard of literary taste and a flourishing state of
letters. Prof. Kern was induced by this reason to place _S_ûra
approximately in the century of Kâlidâsa and Varâhamihira, but equally
favourable circumstances may be supposed to have existed a couple of
centuries earlier. I think, however, he is posterior to the author of
the Buddha_k_arita. For other questions concerning the _G_âtakamâlâ,
which it would be too long to dwell upon here, I refer to Prof. Kern's
preface and d'Oldenburg in Journ. Roy. As. Soc. 1893, pp. 306-309.
Târanâtha, the historian of Tibetan Buddhism, has preserved a legend
which shows the high esteem in which the _G_âtakamâlâ stands with the
followers of the Buddha's Law. 'Pondering on the Bodhisattva's gift of
his own body to the tigress, he [viz. _S_ûra] thought he could do the
same, as it was not so very difficult. Once he, as in the tale, saw a
tigress followed by her young, near starvation; at first he could not
resolve on the self-sacrifice, but, calling forth a stronger faith in
the Buddha, and writing with his own blood a prayer of seventy _S_lokas,
he first gave the tigers his blood to drink, and, when their bodies had
taken a little force, offered himself[21].' In this legend I recognise
the sediment, so to speak, of the stream of emotion caused by the
stimulating eloquence of that gifted Mahâyânist preacher on the minds of
his co-religionists. Any one who could compose discourses such as these
must have been capable of himself performing the extraordinary exploits
of a Bodhisattva. In fact, something of the religious enthusiasm of
those ancient apostles of the Mahâyâna who brought the Saddharma to
China and Tibet pervades the work of _S_ûra, and it is not difficult to
understand that in the memory of posterity he should have been
represented as a saint who professed the ethics of his religion, _non
disputandi causa_, as Cicero says of Cato, _ut magna pars, sed ita
vivendi_.
[21] I quote the very words, with which Dr. Wenzel translates
d'Oldenburg's quotation from the Russian. See Journ. Roy. As. Soc.,
1. 1. p. 307.
It was no easy task to translate a work of so refined a composition,
still less because there is no help to be had from any commentary. The
Sanskrit text has none, and the Chinese commentary mentioned by Bunyiu
Nanjio is not translated. Repeated and careful study of the original has
led me to change a few passages of the translation I formerly published
in the Bijdragen voor Taal-Land-en Volkenkunde van Ned. Indië, vols.
viii and x of the fifth 'Volgreeks.' Moreover, I have adapted this,
which may almost be styled a second edition, to the wants and the
arrangements of the 'Sacred Books of the East.'
J. S. SPEYER.
GRONINGEN, _April 16, 1895_.
_G_ÂTAKAMÂLÂ
OR
GARLAND OF BIRTH-STORIES
BY
ÂRYA _S_ÛRA.
_Om! Adoration to all Buddhas and Bodhisattvas!_
INTRODUCTORY STANZAS.
1[22]. Grand and glorious, of inexhaustible praise and charm, comprising
excellent virtues and thereby auspicious, are the wonderful exploits
which the Muni performed in previous births. Them will I devoutly
worship with the handful of flowers of my poem.
[22] The cipher on the left denotes the number of the stanza. The
prose parts of the original are indicated by the absence of the
cipher.
2, 3. 'By those praiseworthy deeds the way is taught that is leading to
Buddhahood; they are the landmarks on that way. Further even the
hard-hearted may be softened by them. The holy stories may also obtain a
greater attractiveness.' So I considered, and for the benefit of men the
attempt will be made to find a favourable audience for my own genius, by
treating of the extraordinary facts of the Highest One in the world in a
manner which is in accordance with the course of facts as recorded by
Scripture and Tradition.
4. Him, whose beautiful practice of virtues, while acting for the sake
of others, no one could imitate, though bent on self-interest; Him, the
blaze of whose glory is involved in his true name of the All-Knowing
One; Him, the Incomparable One together with the Law and the
Congregation I venerate with bowed head.
I. THE STORY OF THE TIGRESS.