Dialogues of the Buddha (Digha Nikaya)

Lastly, the Lokayata system is, in various works of the fourteenth century and later, appropriately fathered on /varvaka, a mythical character in the Mahabharata, an ogre, who appears in the garb of a Brahman 5. It is not certain whether this is due to the ingenuity of a friend or a foe. In either case, like the fathering of the later Sarikhya on the ancient sage Kapila ; or the fathering of the collection of fables, made by Planudes in the fourteenth century A.D.,upon Aesop the story-teller of the fifth century B.C., it has been eminently successful, has deceived many, and is still widely accepted. Pending the discovery of other texts, and especially of given above from the Abhidhana Padipika, in which Lokayataw is simply explained as vitawa'a-sattha^. This last expression cannot possibly mean anything of that sort. 1 Weber, Ueber ein fragment der Bhagavati, II, 248. 2 My Milinda, I, 7. 3 Ibid. I, 17. 4 Cowell's Translation, p. 236. B Madhusudana Sarasvati, Prabodha&mdrodaya, Sarva-darjanasawgraha. such as are not only the testimony of opponents, the best working hypothesis to explain the above facts seems to be that about 500 B.C. the word Lokayata was used in a complimentary way as the name of a branch of Brahman learning-, and probably meant Nature-lore — wise sayings, riddles, rhymes, and theories handed down by tradition as to cosmogony, the elements, the stars, the weather, scraps of astronomy, of elementary physics, even of anatomy, and knowledge of the nature of precious stones, and of birds and beasts and plants. To be a master of such lore was then considered by no means unbecoming to a learned Brahman, though it ranked, of course, below his other studies. At that time there was no school so called, and no special handbook of such knowledge. But portions of it trenched so closely upon, were so often useful as metaphor in discussing the higher and more especially priestly wisdom, that we find sayings that may well have belonged to it preserved in the pre-Buddhistic literature. Such passages, for instance, as Br*. Ar. Up. Ill, 8, 3, Ktend. Up. IV, 17, 1, and VI, 2-7, on the worlds and on cosmogony; AVzand. III. on the colour of the rays of the sun ; Bri. Ar. Up. II, 1,5-7, and III, 7, 3-J, on the elements; Ait. Ar. Ill, 2, 1, 4, and others, on the parts of the body ; and many others of a similar kind on these and other subjects might be cited as examples.

The amount then existing of such lore was too small to make a fair proficiency in it incompatible with other knowledge. As the amount of it grew larger, and several branches of natural science were regularly studied, a too exclusive acquaintance with Lokayata became looked upon with disfavour. Even before the Christian era masters of the dark sayings, the mysteries, of such mundane lore were marked with sophists and casuists. This feeling is increasingly vouched for in the early centuries of our era. In the fifth century we hear of a book, presumably on the riddles and mysteries of the craft, as it is called ' a book of quibbles.' Various branches of mundane science had been by that time fairly well worked out. Lokayata was still the name for the old Nature-lore, on the same level as folk-lore, and in contradistinction, not only to theosophy on the one hand, but to such science as there was on the other. In the first half of the eighth century Kumarila uses the word as a mere term of abuse, and in the sense of infidel, of his equally orthodox opponents, the Mimawsists. And shortly afterwards 5ahkara, in setting forth his theory of the soul, controverts a curious opinion which he ascribes to Lokayatikas, — possibly wrongly, as the very same opinion

172 V. KtirADANTA SUTTA. was controverted ages before in the Pi/akas, and not there called Lokayata, though the word was in use in Pi/aka times. Finally in the fourteenth century the great theologian Sayawa-Madhava has a longish chapter in which he ascribes to the Lokayatikas the most extreme forms of the let-useat-and-drink-for-to-morrow-we-die view of life ; of Pyrrhonism in philosophy, and of atheism in theology. The Lokayata had no doubt, at that time, long ceased to exist. His very able description has alJ the appearance of being drawn from his own imagination ; and is chiefly based on certain infidel doggrel verses which cannot possibly have formed a part of the Lokayata studied by the Brahmans of old l. It is the ideal of what will happen to the man of some intellect, but morally so depraved that he will not accept the theosophist position. Throughout the whole story we have no evidence of any one who called himself a Lokayatika, or his own knowledge Lokayata. After the early use of the word in some such sense as Nature-lore, folk-lore, there is a tone of unreality over all the statements we have. And of the real existence of a school of thought, or of a system of philosophy that called itself by the name there is no trace. In the middle period the riddles and quibbles of the Nature-lorists are despised. In the last period the words Lokayata, Lokayatika, become mere hobby horses, pegs on which certain writers can hang the views that they impute to their adversaries, and give them, in doing so, an odious name.

1 Sarva-darjana-sa?«graha, Chapter I, translated by Prof. Cowell in the version published in 1882. [The wrong Sacrifice and the right.] [127] 1. Thus have I heard. The Blessed One once, when going on a tour through Magadha, with a great multitude of the brethren, with about five hundred brethren, came to a Brahman village in Magadha called Khanumata. And there at Khanumata he lodged in the Ambala/Mika pleasaunce l. Now at that time the Brahman Ku/adanta was dwelling at Khanumata, a place teeming with life, with much grassland and woodland and water and corn, on a royal domain presented him by Seniya Bimbisara the king of Magadha, as a royal gift, with power over it as if he were the king. And just then a great sacrifice was being got ready on behalf of Ku/adanta the Brahman. And a hundred bulls, and a hundred steers, and a hundred heifers, and a hundred goats, and a hundred rams had been brought to the post for the sacrifice. 2. Now the Brahmans and householders of Khanumata heard the news of the arrival of the Samara Gotama 2. [128] And they began to leave Khanumata in companies and in bands to go to the Ambala/Mika pleasaunce.

3. And just then Ku/adanta the Brahman had gone apart to the upper terrace of his house for his siesta ; and seeing the people thus go by, he asked his doorkeeper the reason. And the doorkeeper told him 3. 1 Not the same as the one with the same name half way between Ra^-agaha and Nalanda (above, p. 1 of the text). Buddhaghosa (p. 294) says it was like it. 2 The whole of § 2 of the So«ada«</a is here repeated. 3 All given in the text in full, as in the So«ada«o'a Sutta. 174 v- K^rADANTA SUTTA. 4. Then Ku^adanta thought : ' I have heard that the Samara Gotama understands about the successful performance of a sacrifice with its threefold method and its sixteen accessory instruments. Now I don't know all this, and yet I want to carry out a sacrifice. [129] It would be well for me to go to the Samawa Gotama, and ask him about it.' So he sent his doorkeeper to the Brahmans and householders of Khanumata, to ask them to wait till he could go with them to call upon the Blessed One. 5. But there were at that time a number of Brahmans staying at Khanumata to take part in the great sacrifice. And when they heard this they went to Ku/adanta, and persuaded him, on the same grounds as the Brahmans had laid before So^adaw^a, not to go. But he answered them in the same terms as Sowadaw^a had used to those Brahmans. [134] Then they were satisfied, and went with him to call upon the Blessed One l

9. And when he was seated there Ku/adanta the Brahman told the Blessed One what he had heard 2, and requested him to tell him about success in performing a sacrifice in its three modes 3 and with its accessory articles of furniture of sixteen kinds 4 1 §§ 3~7 inclusive of the So«ada«aa are here repeated in full in the text. 2 As in § 4. 3 Vidha. Childers gives 'pride' as the only meaning of this word. But he has made a strange muddle between it and vidho. All that he has under both words should be struck out. All that he has under vidho should be entered under vidha, which has always the one meaning ' mode, manner, way.' Used ethically of the Arahats it refers, no doubt, to divers ' modes ' of pride or delusion (as for instance in vidhasu na vikampanti at S. I, 84, and in the passage quoted in Childers). He makes vidha a very rare word, and vidho a common one. It is just the contrary. Vidha is frequent, especially at the end of adjectival compounds. Vidho is most rare. It is given doubtfully by Buddhaghosa, in discussing a doubtful reading at Sum. I, 269, in the sense of 'yoke'; and is a possible reading at Vin. II, 136, 319; IV, 168, 363 in the sense of 'brooch' or ' buckle.'

Here vidha in Ku/adanta's mouth means, of course, mode of rite or ritual. Gotama lays hold of the ambiguity of the word, and twists it round to his ethical teaching in the sense of mode of generosity. 1 Parikkhara, 'accessories, fillings, equipments, appurtenances,' 1 Well then, O Brahman, give ear and listen attentively and I will speak.' ' Very well, Sir,' said Ku/adanta in reply ; and the Blessed One spake as follows : — 10. ' Long ago, O Brahman, there was a king by name Wide-realm (Mahci. Vi^ita) 1, mighty, with great wealth and large property ; with stores of silver and gold, of aids to enjoyment 2, of goods and corn ; with his treasure-houses and his garners full. Now when King Wide-realm was once sitting alone in meditation he became anxious at the thought : "I have in abundance all the good things a mortal can enjoy. The whole wide circle of the earth is mine by conquest to possess. 'Twere well if I were to offer a great sacrifice that should ensure me weal and welfare for many days." 1 And he had the Brahman, his chaplain, called ; and telling him all that he had thought, [135] he said : " So I would fain, O Brahman, offer a great sacrifice — let the venerable one instruct me how — for my weal and my welfare for many days."

11. 'Thereupon the Brahman who was chaplain said to the king : " The king's country, Sire, is harassed and harried. There are dacoits abroad who pillage the villages and townships, and who make the roads unsafe. Were the king, so long as that is so, to levy a fresh tax, verily his majesty would be acting wrongly. But perchance his majesty might think : 'I'll soon put a stop to these scoundrels' game by degradation and banishment, and fines and bonds and death ! ' But their licence cannot be satisfactorily put a stop to so. The remnant left unpunished would still go on harassing the realm. Now there is one method to adopt to — the furniture of a room, the smallest things one wears, the few objects a wandering mendicant carries about with him, and so on. Here again the word is turned into a riddle, the solution of which is the basis of the dialogue. 1 Literally 'he who has a great realm' — =just as we might say Lord Broadacres. 2 ' Such as jewels and plate/ says Buddhaghosa (p. 295). 176 V. KC7ADANTA sutta. put a thorough end to this disorder. Whosoever there be in the kind's realm who devote themselves to keeping cattle and the farm, to them let his majesty the kine £ive food and seed-corn. Whosoever there be in the king's realm who devote themselves to trade, to them let his majesty the king give capital. Whosoever there be in the king's realm who devote themselves to government service 1t to them let his majesty the king give wages and food. Then those men, following each his own business, will no longer harass the realm ; the king's revenue will go up ; the country will be quiet and at peace ; and the populace, pleased one with another and happy, dancing their children in their arms, will dwell with open doors."

' Then King Wide-realm, O Brahman, accepted the word of his chaplain, [136] and did as he had said. And those men, following each his business, harassed the realm no more. And the king's revenue went up. And the country became quiet and at peace. And the populace, pleased one with another and happy, dancing their children in their arms, dwelt with open doors. 12. 'So King Wide-realm had his chaplain called, and said : " The disorder is at an end. The country is at peace. I want to offer that great sacrifice — let the venerable one instruct me how — for my weal and my welfare for many days." ' Then let his majesty the king send invitations to whomsoever there may be in his realm who are Kshatriyas, vassals of his, either in the country or the towns ; or who are ministers and officials of his, either in the country or the towns ; or who are Brahmans of position, either in the country or the towns ; or who are householders of substance, either in the country or the towns, saying : " I intend to offer a great sacrifice. Let the venerable ones give their sanction to what will be to me for weal and welfare for many days."

' Then King Wide-realm, O Brahman, accepted the 1 Ra^a-porise. On this word, the locative singular of a neuter abstract form, compare M. I, 85. word of his chaplain, [137] and did as he had said. And they each — Kshatriyas and ministers and Brahmans and householders — made alike reply : " Let his majesty the king celebrate the sacrifice. The time is suitable, O king » ! " 4 Thus did these four, as colleagues by consent, become wherewithal to furnish forth that sacrifice 2. 13. 'King Wide-realm was gifted in the following eight ways : — ' He was well born on both sides, on the mother's side and on the father's, of pure descent back through seven generations, and no slur was cast upon him, and no reproach, in respect of birth — 4 He was handsome, pleasant in appearance, inspiring trust, gifted with great beauty of complexion, fair in colour, fine in presence, stately to behold — 1 He was mighty, with great wealth, and large property, with stores of silver and gold, of aids to enjoyment, of goods and corn, with his treasure-houses and his garners full — 4 He was powerful, in command of an army, loyal and disciplined, in four divisions (of elephants, cavalry, chariots, and bowmen), burning up, methinks, his enemies by his very glory —

4 He was a believer, and generous, a noble giver, keeping open house, a welling spring 3 whence Samawas and Brahmans, the poor and the wayfarers, beggars, and petitioners might draw, a doer of good deeds — 1 He was learned in all kinds of knowledge — 4 He knew the meaning of what had been said, and could explain : " This saying has such and such a meaning, and that such and such " — 1 'Because it was right and fit to do such deeds when one was young and rich. To spend one's days in selfishness, and then, in old age to give gifts would be no good,' says Buddhaghosa (p. 297). 2 Ya««assa parikkhara. The latter word is here twisted round to a new sense. 8 Opana = udapana. Compare M. I, 379; Vin. I, 236 ; Mil. 411; Sum. I, 298 ; and the note at • Vinaya Texts/ II, 115. ' He was intelligent, expert and wise, and able to think out things present or past or future * — ' And these eight gifts of his, too, became wherewithal to furnish forth that sacrifice. [138] 14. ' The Brahman his chaplain was gifted in the following four ways : —

' He was well born on both sides, on the mother's and on the father's, of pure descent back through seven generations, with no slur cast upon him, and no reproach in respect of birth — 1 He was a student repeater who knew the mystic verses by heart, master of the Three Vedas, with the indices, the ritual, the phonology, and the exegesis (as a fourth), and the legends as a fifth, learned in the idioms and the grammar, versed in Lokayata (Nature-lore) and in the thirty marks on the body of a great man — ' He was virtuous, established in virtue, gifted with virtue that had grown great — 1 He was intelligent, expert, and wise ; foremost, or at most the second, among those who hold out the ladle.' ' Thus these four gifts of his, too, became wherewithal to furnish forth that sacrifice. 15. 'And further, O Brahman, the chaplain, before the sacrifice had begun, explained to King Wide-realm the three modes : ' Should his majesty the king, before starting on the great sacrifice, feel any such regret as : " Great, alas, will be the portion of my wealth used up herein," let not the king harbour such regret. Should his majesty the king, whilst he is offering the great sacrifice, feel any such regret as : " Great, alas, will be the portion of my wealth used up herein," let not the king harbour such regret. Should his majesty the king, when the great sacrifice has been offered, feel any such regret as : " Great, alas, has been the portion of my wealth used up herein," let not the king harbour such regret'

1 Buddhaghosa explains this as meaning that he knew the result of Karma, he knew that his present prosperity was a gift tq him by the good deeds done to others in the past, and that there would be a similar result in future for his good deeds done now. ' Thus did the chaplain, O Brahman, before the sacrifice had begun, explain to King Wide-realm the three modes. 16. 'And further, O Brahman, the chaplain, before the sacrifice had begun, in order to prevent any compunction that might afterwards, in ten ways, arise as regards those who had taken part therein, said : " Now there will come to your sacrifice, Sire, men who destroy the life of living things, and men who refrain therefrom — men who take what has not been given, and men who refrain therefrom — men who act evilly in respect of lusts, and men who refrain therefrom — men who speak lies, and men who do not — men who slander, and men who do not — men who speak rudely, and men who do not — men who chatter vain things, and men who refrain therefrom — [139, 140] men who covet, and men who covet not — men who harbour illwill, and men who harbour it not — men whose views are wrong, and men whose views are right. Of each of these let them, who do evil, alone with their evil. For them who do well let your majesty offer, for them, Sire, arrange the rites, them let the king gratify, in them shall your heart within find peace."

17. 'And further, O Brahman, the chaplain, whilst the king was carrying out the sacrifice, instructed and aroused and incited and gladdened his heart in sixteen ways : " Should there be people who should say of the king, as he is offering the sacrifice : ' King Wide-realm is celebrating sacrifice without having invited the four classes of his subjects, without himself having the eight personal gifts, without the assistance of a Brahman who has the four personal gifts ;' then would they speak not according to the fact. For the consent of the four classes has been obtained, the king has the eight, and his Brahman has the four, personal gifts. With regard to each and every one of these sixteen conditions the king may rest assured that it has been fulfilled. He can sacrifice, and be glad, and possess his heart in peace ,." 1 This whole closing sentence is repeated, in the text, of each of the sixteen. l8o V. KUTADANTA SUTTA. [141] 1 8. 'And further, O Brahman, at that sacrifice neither were any oxen slain, neither goats, nor fowls, nor fatted pigs, nor were any kinds of living creatures put to death. No trees were cut down to be used as posts, no Dabbha grasses mown to strew around the sacrificial spot. And the slaves and messengers and workmen there employed were driven neither by rods nor fear, nor carried on their work weeping with tears upon their faces. Whoso chose to help, he worked ; whoso chose not to help, worked not. What each chose to do, he did ; what they chose not to do, that was left undone. With ghee, and oil, and butter, and milk, and honey, and sugar only was that sacrifice accomplished.

[142] 19. 'And further, O Brahman, the Kshatriya vassals, and the ministers and officials, and the Brahmans of position, and the householders of substance, whether of the country or of the towns, went to King Wide-realm, taking with them much wealth, and said : " This abundant wealth, Sire, have we brought hither for the king's use. Let his majesty accept it at our hands ! " '" Sufficient wealth have I, my friends, laid up, the produce of taxation that is just. Do you keep yours, and take away more with you ! " 'When they had thus been refused by the king, they went aside, and considered thus one with the other : " It would not beseem us now, were we to take this wealth away again to our own homes. King Wide-realm is offering a great sacrifice. Let us too make an after-sacrifice ! " 20. 'So the Kshatriyas established a continual largesse to the east of the king's sacrificial pit, and the officials to the south thereof, and the Brahmans to the west thereof, and the householders to the north thereof. And the things given, and the manner of their gift, was in all respects like unto the great sacrifice of King Wide-realm himself.

[143] ' Thus, O Brahman, there was a fourfold co-operation, and King Wide-realm was gifted with THE WRONG SACRIFICE AND THE RIGHT. l8l eight personal gifts, and his officiating Brahman with four. And there were three modes of the giving of that sacrifice. This, O Brahman, is what is called the due celebration of a sacrifice in its threefold mode and with its furniture of sixteen kinds ! ' 21. And when he had thus spoken, those Brahmans lifted up their voices in tumult, and said: 'How glorious the sacrifice, how pure its accomplishment ! ' But Ku/adanta the Brahman sat there in silence. Then those Brahmans said to Ku/adanta : ' Why do you not approve the good words of the Samara Gotama as well-said ? ' ' I do not fail to approve : for he who approves not as well-said that which has been well spoken by the Samara Gotama, verily his head would split in twain. But 1 was considering that the Samara Gotama does not say : " Thus have I heard," nor " Thus behoves it to be," but says only " Thus it was then," or " It was like that then." So I thought : " For a certainty the Samara Gotama himself must at that time have been King Wide-realm, or the Brahman who officiated for him at that sacrifice. Does the venerable Gotama admit that he who celebrates such a sacrifice, or causes it to be celebrated, is reborn at the dissolution of the body, after death, into some state of happiness in heaven ? '

' Yes, O Brahman, that I admit. And at that time I was the Brahman who, as chaplain, had that sacrifice performed.' 22. ' Is there, O Gotama, any other sacrifice less difficult and less troublesome, with more fruit and more advantage still than this ? ' [144] ' Yes, O Brahman, there is.' ' And what, O Gotama, may that be ? ' ' The perpetual gifts kept up in a family where they are given specifically to virtuous recluses. 23. ' But what is the reason, O Gotama, and what the cause, why such perpetual givings specifically to virtuous recluses, and kept up in a family, are less difficult and troublesome, of greater fruit and greater advantage than that other sacrifice with its three modes and its accessories of sixteen kinds ? ' ' To the latter sort of sacrifice, O Brahman, neither will the Arahats go, nor such as have entered on the Arahat way. And why not ? Because at it beating with sticks takes place, and seizing by the throat l. But they will go to the former, where such things are not. And therefore are such perpetual gifts above the other sort of sacrifice.'

24. ' And is there, O Gotama, any other sacrifice less difficult and less troublesome, of greater fruit and of greater advantage than either of these ? ' [145] ' Yes, O Brahman, there is. 1 And what, O Gotama, may that be ? ' ' The putting up of a dwelling place (Vihara) on behalf of the Order in all the four directions.' 25. ' And is there, O Gotama, any other sacrifice less difficult and less troublesome, of greater fruit and of greater advantage than each and all of these three? ' ' Yes, O Brahman, there is.' ' And what, O Gotama, may that be ? ' ' He who with trusting heart takes a Buddha as his guide, and the Truth, and the Order — that is a sacrifice better than open largesse, better than perpetual alms, better than the gift of a dwelling place.' [146] 26. ' And is there, O Gotama, any other sacrifice less difficult and less troublesome, of greater fruit and of greater advantage than all these four ? ' ' When a man with trusting heart takes upon himself the precepts — abstinence from destroying life ; abstinence from taking what has not been given ; abstinence from evil conduct in respect of lusts ; abstinence from lying words ; abstinence from strong, intoxicating, maddening drinks, the root of carelessness — that is a sacrifice better than open largesse, better than perpetual alms, better than the gift of dwelling places,

better than accepting guidance.' 1 The attendants, at such a general largesse, says Buddhaghosa (p. 303), push the recipients about, make them stand in a queue, and use violence in doing so. 27. 'And is there, O Gotama, any other sacrifice less difficult and less troublesome, of greater fruit and of greater advantage than all these five ? ' ' Yes, O Brahman, there is.' [147] ' And what, O Gotama, may that be ? ' [The answer is the long passage from the Sama^a-phala, jj 40, p. 62 (of the text), down to § 75 (p- 74) > on tne First 6V£ana, as follows : — 1. The Introductory paragraphs on the appearance of a Buddha, his preaching, the conversion of a hearer, and his renunciation of the world. 2. The Silas (minor morality). 3. The paragraph on Confidence. 4. The paragraph on 'Guarded is the door of his senses.' 5. The paragraph on 'Mindful and selfpossessed.' 6. The paragraph on Content. 7. The paragraph on Solitude. 8. The paragraphs on the Five Hindrances. 9. The description of the First GAana..] ' This, O Brahman, is a sacrifice less difficult and less troublesome, of greater fruit and greater advantage than the previous sacrifices.'

[The same is then said of the Second, Third, and Fourth 6^anas, in succession (as in the Sama7Ha-phala, §§ 77-82), and of the Insight arising from knowledge (ibid. §§ 83, 84), and further (omitting direct mention either way of §§ 85-96 inclusive) of the knowledge of the destruction of the Asavas, the deadly intoxications or floods (ibid. §j 97-98).] ' And there is no sacrifice man can celebrate, O Brahman, higher and sweeter than this.' 28. And when he had thus spoken, Ku/adanta the Brahman said to the Blessed One : ' Most excellent, O Gotama, are the words of thy mouth, most excellent ! Just as if a man were to set up 184 V. KtirADANTA SUTTA. what has been thrown down, or were to reveal that which has been hidden away, or were to point out the right road to him who has gone astray, or were to bring a light into the darkness so that those who had eyes could see external forms — just even so has the truth been made known to me in many a figure by the venerable Gotama. I, even I, betake myself to the venerable Gotama as my guide, to the Doctrine and the Order. May the venerable One accept me as a disciple, as one who, from this day forth, as long as life endures, has taken him as his guide. And I [148] myself, O Gotama, will have the seven hundred bulls, and the seven hundred steers, and the seven hundred heifers, and the seven hundred goats, and the seven hundred rams set free. To them I grant their life. Let them eat green grass and drink fresh water, and may cool breezes waft around them.'

29. Then the Blessed One discoursed to Ku/adanta the Brahman in due order ; that is to say, he spake to him of generosity, of right conduct, of heaven, of the danger, the vanity, and the defilement of lusts, of the advantages of renunciation. And when the Blessed One became aware that Ku/adanta the Brahman had become prepared, softened, unprejudiced, upraised, and believing in heart, then did he proclaim the doctrine the Buddhas alone have won ; that is to say, the doctrine of sorrow, of its origin, of its cessation, and of the Path. And just as a clean cloth, with all stains in it washed away, will readily take the dye, just even so did Ku/adanta the Brahman, even while seated there, obtain the pure and spotless Eye for the Truth, and he knew : ' Whatsoever has a beginning, in that is inherent also the necessity of dissolution.' 30. And then the Brahman Ku/adanta, as one who had seen the Truth, had mastered it, understood it, dived deep down into it, who had passed beyond doubt, and put away perplexity and gained full confidence, who had become dependent on no other for his knowledge of the teaching of the Master, addressed the Blessed One and said :

' May the venerable Gotama grant me the favour of taking his to-morrow's meal with me, and also the members of the Order with him.' And the Blessed One signified, by silence, his consent. Then the Brahman Ku/adanta, seeing that the Blessed One had accepted, rose from his seat, and keeping his right towards him as he passed, he departed thence. And at daybreak he had sweet food, both hard and soft, made ready at the pit prepared for his sacrifice, and had the time announced to the Blessed One : ' It is time, O Gotama ; and the meal is ready.' And the Blessed One, who had dressed early in the morning, put on his outer robe, and taking his bowl with him, went with the brethren to Ku/adanta's sacrificial pit, and sat down there on the seat prepared for him. And Ku/adanta the Brahman [149] satisfied the brethren with the Buddha at their head, with his own hand, with sweet food, both hard and soft, till they refused any more. And when the Blessed One had finished his meal, and cleansed the bowl and his hands, Ku/adanta the Brahman took a low seat and seated himself beside him. And when he was thus seated the Blessed One instructed and aroused and incited and gladdened Kii/adanta the Brahman with religious discourse ; and then arose from his seat and departed thence.

Ku/adanta Sutta is ended. The form of this Sutta is remarkable. We have two distinct subjects discussed. First the question of the ability to see heavenly sights and hear heavenly sounds being raised, the Buddha says that it is not for the sake of acquiring such powers that people join the Order under him. And being asked what their object then is, he gradually leads the questioner on to Arahatship, as the aim, along the Eightfold Path. There the Sutta might appropriately have ended. But the Buddha himself then raises a totally different question — whether the soul and the body are the same. And though, for the reason stated below, he gives no answer, he leads the discourse again up to Arahatship along the series of mental states set out in the Sama«#a-phala. This second part of our Dialogue might form a separate Sutta, and it is in fact added, as a Sutta by itself, to the present division of the Dialogues. Why then is it also included here? Buddhaghosa's answer is that the young noble Mahali, who raises the first point, was known to harbour the heresy that there is a soul, and that it has form. (The words the commentator uses are very short, and the context must, I think, be supplied from the passage translated above, § 10 on p. 46.) It was to clear his mind of this notion that the Buddha specially raised the second point.

However this may be, the Sutta must have been already a double one, must have had its present form, before it received a place in that division of the Buddhist scriptures where it now stands. Each Sutta in that division incorporates the whole of the very ancient tract called the Silas. The division is therefore called the Sila Vagga. And no Sutta not containing the Silas can belong to it. Our Sutta only contains the Silas in the second part. That part, therefore, must have belonged to it when the dialogues were arranged as they now stand. The question raised in that second part is one of a group of questions on which primitive Buddhism expresses no opinion. They are called the Ten A vyakatani, the Indeterminates, points not determined. Besides being often mentioned in the Dialogues translated in the present work and elsewhere, they form the subject of the Avyakata Sawzyutta (No. 44 in vol. iv of the Sawyutta Nikaya), and they are as follows1 : — 1, 2. Whether the world is eternal or not. 3, 4. Whether the world is infinite or not. 5, 6. Whether the soul is the same as the body, or distinct from it 2.

7-10. Whether a man who has attained to the truth (a Tath&gata) exists, or not, and in any way, after death. There are others mentioned occasionally by themselves ; but these form the usual group. Of them, those numbered 1-4 and 7-10 are speculations already condemned in the Brahma-^ala (above, pp. 27 foil., pp. 35 foil., and p. 40 respectively). The remaining two, those numbered 5 and 6, form the subject of the Galiya., incorporated in our present Sutta. The position taken by the primitive Buddhists as to these Indeterminates is so often referred to that it undoubtedly was an important item in the Buddha's actual belief. It is rendered very clear by the old legend put into the Buddha's mouth in the Udana just quoted. There the various nonBuddhist teachers of the time are represented as expressing strong opinions one way or the other on these questions ; and as getting so excited about them that they came to blows. Gotama thereupon tells a story how, in ancient days, a similar riot having taken place, the king had all the blind men in the city brought together, and had an elephant brought in. Each of the blind men touches a different part of the elephant. The king then asks them to explain what an elephant is like. He who had felt the head said it was like a water-pot. He who had felt the ear said it was like a winnowing basket. He who had felt the tusk said it was like a plough-share. He who had felt the trunk said it was like a plough-handle. He who had felt the body said it was like a granary. He who had felt its legs said it was like a pillar. He who had felt its back said it

1 Po///fopada Sutta (translated below). Sawyutta IV, 393 ; Udana VI, 4 ; M. I, 484. &c. 2 Tarn givam tarn sartraw. Childers {sub voce \>anho) renders this : ' Is this the life ? is this the body ? ' but that must be wrong See Sum. I, 319. 1 88 vi. mahAli sutta. was like a mortar. He who had felt its tail said it was like a pestle. He who had felt its bristles said it was like a broom. And each one was so sure he was right that they clamoured one against the other, and came to blows, to the amusement of the king. Then comes the moral : — ' In such points Brahmans and recluses stick .Wrangling on them, they violently discuss — Poor folk ! they see but one side of the shield I ' The inference is obvious. To discuss such questions is mere speculation, useless, because it is based on insufficient evidence. This is the philosophic position ; and it resembles very closely the position taken up, in the West, many centuries afterwards, by Hume and his followers. And, as usual in primitive Buddhism, the ethical corollary is very emphatically insisted upon. It is several times pointed out in the Dialogues1 of these ten speculations that they —

' The jungle, the desert, the puppet show, the writhing, the entanglement, of speculation — are accompanied by sorrow, by wrangling, by resentment, by the fever of excitement ; they conduce neither to detachment of heart, nor to freedom from lusts, nor to tranquillity, nor to peace, nor to wisdom, nor to the insight of the higher stages of the Path, nor to Arahatship.' In other words the speculations, being based on insufficient evidence, are not only useless — they are also, therefore, wrong ; that is, from the Buddhist point of view, a disadvantage in the struggle towards the only aim worth striving for — the perfection and emancipation of Arahatship. As for the special point of our Sutta — the lesson that no wise min will condescend to discuss the question whether the soul is, or is not, the same as the body — it must be remembered that the negative is the view now known to be so widely, indeed universally prevalent among unthinking people throughout the world that it was almost certainly held also in India. The general opinion about the soul in the pre-Buddhistic Upanishads is somewhat different. There (to judge by the passages set out in my article in the J. R. A. S. for January 1H99) it is looked upon as being, at least during life, smaller than the body, though after death, when it flies away from the body through an aperture in the top of the head, it was apparently regarded as a subtle and very impalpable, but still material, double of the body of the deceased.

It was the refusal to allow any place for this universal 1 For instance, M. I, 455. belief in a semi-material soul in his own system that is the most striking, and perhaps the most original, feature in Gotama's teaching. No other religion of which we have sufficient records to enable us to form an opinion on the point has been constructed without the ' soul.' Where the others said ' soul,' Gotama said usually ' Action,' which comes to much the same as character. In this respect he came very near to our modern use of the word in such expressions as ' a high-souled man ' or ' a soul for music' And it is worth calling attention to the fact that even in Shakspere more than half the times the word is used it is in this secondary, ethical, emotional sense. Even in the old authorised translation of our Bible, in which the Word occurs altogether 449 times, it is used 55 times merely in the sense of person *, only 85 times in the animistic sense, and 306 times in the sense of emotional or intellectual qualities or disposition 2. This will make Gotama's position, which is really very simple, more clear. He rejected entirely the use of the word in the old animistic sense. He retained it in a personal sense, in the meaning of ' oneself, himself,' &c. 3 And though, of course, he acknowledged the reality of the emotional and intellectual dispositions, he refused absolutely to look upon them as a unity.

The position is so absolute, so often insisted on, so fundamental to the right understanding of primitive Buddhism, that it is essential there should be no mistake about it. Yet the position is also so original, so fundamentally opposed to what is usually understood as religious belief, both in India and elsewhere, that there is great temptation to attempt to find a loophole through which at least a covert or esoteric belief in the soul, and in future life (that is of course of a soul), can be recognised, in some sort of way, as part of so widely accepted a religious system. There is no loophole, and the efforts to find one have always met with unswerving opposition, both in the Pi/akas themselves and in extra-canonical works4. 1 'We were in the ship two hundred and seventy-six souls,' Actsxxvii. 37. 2 There are about a score of ambiguous passages ; but a different decision as to them would not change the proportion to any substantial extent. 3 Attano, attana, &c, in all the oblique cases. But for the nominative atta, the use of which might have been misunderstood, say aw is almost always, if not indeed always, substituted. 4 See the quotations in my 'American Lectures' (London, 1896), pp. 39-42, and the notes above, pp. 81, 87.

Our available records are not at present sufficient to enable us to judge either of the numbers, or of the importance, of those Buddhists who made such attempts. But it is clear from the tone of the first chapter of the Katha Vatthu, and from the express statements of the commentary on it, that there were such Buddhists as early as the time of Asoka. They belonged to two out of the eighteen schools of thought which had then arisen. The names of these schools are the Sammitiya and the Va^i-puttaka1. We may yet hope to recover a work which will contain their arguments in their own words. But if the opinion condemned at pp. 14-19 of the Katha Vatthu be really theirs, as the commentator declares it is, then it would seem that they held a view practically the same as that opinion of Mahali, which the Buddha, in our Sutta, goes out of his way to raise in the form of a question, and to put aside as unworthy of discussion. The expression sambodhi-parayano used in this Sutta, § 13, has been hitherto misunderstood. The Buddhist ideal is a subjective state to be reached, in this world, by going along an eightfold path, so called because of the eight good qualities or characteristics which make up its eight parts. Progress along this path is divided into tour stages in which certain evil dispositions, the ten so-called Bonds, are got rid of. The Sambodhi is the insight, wisdom, intelligence, awakening, which is essential to the three higher stages of this state of Arahatship. And what is connoted by the term can best, perhaps, be understood by bearing in mind its seven constituent parts, the Sambogg/ianga — self-possession, investigation into the truth, energy, calm, joy, concentration, and magnanimity.

In describing the first and lowest of the four stages of the Path, it is always stated (Digha I, 156 ; M. P. S. II, 27 ; A. II, 238, &c.) of the disciple — not that he has then attained the sambodhi, he has only attained abhisamaya — but that he is sambodhi-parayano. Childers (sub voce parayano) explains this as 'having the Four Truths as his support.' But Buddhaghosa (Sum. I, 313) says: 'He has the sambodhi — by which is meant that of the three higher stages — as his furthermost aim ; in other words, he will attain to that." Buddhaghosa's explanation is the only one possible in 1 Katha-vatthu-ppakararca-a/MakatM, p. 8 (in the Journal of the Pali Text Society for 1889). the context, and is confirmed by every other passage in the Pali Pi/akas where the word sambodhi has been traced. It never means the wisdom of a Buddha, but always the insight of the higher stages of the path to Arahatship. But it is necessary to point this out because the distinction is of the first importance for the history of Buddhism ; and also because the erroneous rendering of Burnouf has been followed by Childers in the Dictionary, sub voce sambodhi ('attainment of Buddhaship, Buddhahood'), and has not been corrected by any of the distinguished scholars who have discussed the meaning of Asoka's eighth edict in which the word occurs \ The king there says that he ' set out for the sambodhi.' If this means that he had started, in his own opinion, along the line of the Paramitas, towards the attainment, in some future birth, of Buddhahood, then it is most interesting and important as giving us the earliest mention of a doctrine not found in the Pali Pi/akas, and entirely opposed to their view of Buddhism. But the word does not necessarily imply this, nor does the context require it. The doctrine spoken of with contempt, by the Mahayanist doctors, as the ' Lesser Vehicle ' is quite possible here, and more in accordance with all the rest of the Asoka expressions. There would seem to be no sufficient reason why we should not understand Asoka to mean that he had started, in his own opinion, along the Eightfold Path, towards the attainment, doubtless in some future birth, of Arahatship. Whether this be so or not, this is the only meaning of the word so far found in the Pi/akas.

And further, this entering on the Path — the Eightfold Path to the wisdom of the Arahat — is a quite different thing from becoming a Buddhist. There are numerous passages where the very nature of the discourse held not only to laymen (upasakas), but even to members of the Order (bhikkhus), shows that they were not supposed to have attained as yet to the state of mind described as 'entering upon the Path.' Both the rules of the Order, and the precepts laid down for laymen, are, from the Pi/aka point of view, on a different plane altogether, lower than, apart from, that of the Path. Acting up to those rules, carrying out those precepts, can never even result in ' conversion ' without the awakening of the new life. It is therefore very doubtful whether the word ' conversion ' should be used, in English translations of Buddhist texts, to express a man's 1 See Senart, ' Inscriptions de Piyadasi,' I, 186, and the other authorities referred to at I, 182 and II, 223. becoming an upasaka or a bhikkhu. For though the word ' conversion ' is used in English in two senses — either that of joining the outward organisation of a new faith, or that of having one's eyes opened to the higher life — the second is the more accurate use of the word, and ought always to be implied in the first.

The word sambodhi-parayano occurs in the passage first above quoted (Digha I, 156) in the answer to the question, ' What is the aim of the life of the recluse (that is, of the member of the Buddhist Order) ? ' Opponents and controversialists are fond of asking this question, and it is interesting to notice how it is answered. It is never the attainment of Buddhahood, but always (though the phraseology differs) the attainment of Arahatship. Thus, in the standing phrase used to state that so and so has become an Arahat (M. P. S., p. 60, at the end of Chapter V, and often elsewhere), it is said he has realised the aim of the higher life (brahma/£ariya-pariyosana?#). The Ratha-vinita and the Kulla. Sakuludayi Dialogues (Nos. 24 and 79 of the Ma^/zima Collection) lead up to the same conclusion. In the Sawyutta IV, 51, the aim is said to be the complete understanding of sorrow (dukkhassa pari««a), and the same reply is expanded further on in the same book (IV, 233) by the explanation that the way of gaining this understanding is to follow out the whole of the Eightfold Path to Arahatship. And this is repeated further on (S. V, 6 : compare Mil. 49, ioi). In the Anguttara (IV, 7) the object is said to be the destruction of the seven bonds, the destruction of which is precisely Arahatship.

So sambodhi-patto is used in the Sutta Nipata, 478, 503, to describe the Arahat, of whom it is said (Itivuttaka, No 47, p. 42 : compare ibid. p. 117 = A. II, 14, and also A. II, 200, 202 ; S. N. 765) that even here, in this world, he will reach up to the sambodhi, the way to which is said to be the Eightfold Path (M. I, 431 and the Dhamma-£akka-ppavattana Sutta, &c). And sambodhi-parayano, with which we started, is only another way of stating what is expressed by amata-parayano ('having the ambrosia of Arahatship as his aim ') in a Sutta, not yet traced, but quoted by Moggalliputta Tissa at Katha Vatthu XXII, 7 l. Of course the above is not intended to imply that the Buddha had not attained the sambodhi. He was an Arahat, and, as such, had all the graces an Arahat should have 2. 1 Compare brahma-parayano at Mil. 234, brahma^ariyaparayano at A. Ill, 75, and daw</a-parayano at M. I, 88. 2 Childers thinks sambodho is merely another form of sambodhi. On the same page of this Sutta we have two instances of a curious manner of address not infrequent in the Pi/akas, but as yet very imperfectly understood. After being told that Nagita was the name of the Buddha's personal attendant, we find him suddenly, and without any explanation, addressed as Kassapa. And the young Li££//avi. introduced to us at the beginning of the Sutta by the name 'Hare-lip ' (0#//addha), is addressed both by Nagita and by the Buddha, neither by his name 0///^addha, nor as Likfchavi, but (and again without any explanation) as Mahali.

There are several points in this question of address which cannot yet be solved, but several others are already pretty clear. There are at least eight different modes of speaking of or to a person : — i. A nickname arising out of some personal peculiarity. Such are Lambaka««a (Hanging-eared), Ku/adanta (witha protruding tooth), O/Maddha (Hare-lipped), Anathapiwrf'ika (the beggars' friend), Darupattika (the man with the wooden bowl). All these are used in a quite friendly, but familiar way. And such names occur so often that it would seem as if nearly everybody was known by a nickname. 2. A personal name, called in Pali the mula-nama. This, like our own so-called Christian names, is not connected with any personal peculiarity. Some of these names (like similar ones among ourselves) are of very obscure derivation, but others are clear enough as adjectives with a good or lucky meaning. Such are Tissa (after the lucky star of that name), Devadatta (onr Theodore), Bhaddiya (nearly the same as our Frederick), Nanda or Ananda (Joy), Abhaya (Fearless), and many others. 3. The name of the Gotta or gens, what we should call a surname or family name. These are usually patronymic in form; such as Opama««a, Kawhayana, Moggallana, Kassapa, Kaw^arayana, Kondawwa, Vase/Ma, Vessayana, Bharadva^-a, Va££/*ayana.

4. The name of the clan, called in Pali Kula-nama, such as Sakka, Kalama, Buli, Koliya, LiM^avi, Vaggi, Malla, &c. 5. The name of the mother, with putta (son) added to it; such as Sari-putta (the more usual name by which the famous disciple Upatissa is called), Vedehi -putta (a name of A^atasattu king of Magadlja), Maw^ika-putta (=Upaka), As the former is only found as yet in one ambiguous phrase (M. I, 17; II, 211; S. IV, 6, 8, 97, 233, &c), the discussion of its meaning would be premature. Mantawi-putta ( = Pu«/za), Godhi-putta ( = Devadatta), Moggali-putta ( = Tissa, author of the Katha Vatthu). Less frequently the reverse is the case, and a mother or father, whose child has become famous, is simply referred to as the mother, or father, of so and so. It is noteworthy that the name of the father is never used in this way, and that the mother's name is never a personal name ; but always taken either from the clan, or from the family, to which she belonged. Occasionally the root-form of the name of the clan, or of the trade, has -putto added to it in a similar way (Vanganta-putto, Todeyya-putto1, rathakaraputto). But these cases, which are rare, should rather be classified under the next division.

6. The name of the position in society, or the occupation, of the person addressed. Such are brahmawa, gahapati, mahara^a, thapati, &c. 7. A mere general term of courtesy or respect, not containing any special application to the person addressed — such as bhante, ivuso, ayye, &c. 8. Lastly there is the local name, never used in addressing a person, but prefixed or added to the mula or gotta name, in narrative sentences, to distinguish between two or more people of the same name. Thus of the eighteen different Kassapas mentioned in the books, three are distinguished, in narrative, as Uruvela-Nadi- and Gaya-Kassapa respectively ; of the eight different Pittas one is distinguished as Ma^Mikasandika ; of the seventeen different Bharadva^as one is distinguished as Kapa//zika. Other instances are probably Hatthako A/avako, Bahiyo Daru£iriyo, Pokkharasadi Subhagavaniko, &c. On the rules regulating the choice as to which one of these various sorts of names should, under the circumstances, be used in any particular case, the following observations may be made. It is not considered courteous among equals, except in the case of close familiarity, to use either of the two sorts of personal names, that is, either the nickname or the m Manama.

The Buddha addresses Brahmansas Brahma;; a (for instance So«ada«^a and Ku/adanta above in the Suttas so called; £a«usso?n at M. I, 16, 178 ; A. I, 56, 159, 166 ; II, 173 ; IV, 54; Saw^aya at M. II, 127, 132, though his gotta name is 1 Todeyya-putto may be rendered «;'her ' son of the man of Tudi ' or ' of the sons of the dwellers in Tudi ' (a well-known village), or lastly ' of the Todeyya clan,' ' the Todeyyan.' given, Akasa-gotta; Sikha at A. II, 232, though his gotta name is given, Moggallana). But we have had one instance above where he addresses a young Brahman as Amba//^a, apparently a clan name (his gotta was Kawhayawa). This solitary exception may be because of his youth. On the other hand the Buddha usually addresses ascetics, not as paribb&^aka, but by their gotta name. Thus at M. I, 228-250 he calls Sa££ako, the Nigant/ia., by his gotta name Aggi-vessayana. At M. I, 497-500 he calls Dighanakho (so called, no doubt, because he kept his nails long) by his gotta name, which is again Aggi-vessayana. And at M. II, 40 he calls Vekha«aso by his gotta name of Ka££ana. This is only in accord with the usage followed by others besides the Buddha. Thus Gawusso/zi, a Brahman, at M. I, 175, addresses the ascetic Pilotika by his gotta name of Va^Mayana, and Assa^i, a member of the Buddhist order, also calls Sakkako by his gotta name {loc. cit.). and everybody, not a Buddhist, addresses the Buddha by his gotta name, as Gotama. When therefore we find other ascetics addressed by the Buddha by the same name as has been used in the introductory narrative (as, for instance, in the case of Sarabha, A. I, 186; Potaliya, A. II, 100; Po///;apada, D. I, 178 foil.), one may conclude that these also are probably gotta names. This custom of addressing people by their gotta name, no doubt a common one in certain cases, was expressly forbidden to Wxgantkas (Jacobi, ' Caina-Sdtras,' II, 305). They called their own Order a gotra (ibid. 321, 327), and apparently thought it worldly to recognise the existence of any other.

The Buddha addresses members of his own clan, whether members of his Order or not, by their personal names (so of Vappa, A. II, 197 ; of Mahanama, M. I, 91, 354; A. I, 220 ; III, 284). The same holds good of the junior members of the Order, but some at least of the more distinguished among them are always addressed by him either by their gotta, or by their mother's, name (compare Moggallana, Ka££ana, Kassapa, Gotami, Sariputta). Nagita, for instance, though he is addressed as Kassapa by his nephew, the novice Siha, is addressed by the Buddha simply as Nagita. Probably every Brahman, and every member of each of the free clans, had a gotta name. We have no certain instance of such a name in any other case. The gotta names used in the clans are the same as those given in Brahman books to Brahmans. It has been concluded that they are Brahman names, and that the clans must have adopted them from the Brahmans, each family or gens taking the gotta name of their private chaplain, their purohita priest. But in that case we should surely expect to find some evidence that such priests were usually maintained in such clans. There is no evidence of the kind. All that we can fairly conclude is that the clans claimed, by the very use of these names, to be descended from the same ancestors as the Brahmans, who also bore the names ; and that the claim was admitted to be well founded. As shown above, even Brahmans use these gotta names of non-Brahmans. It would seem that the nickname, when once generally known, tended, in speaking of a person, to drive the others out of use. But it is never used in speaking to the person referred to by it.

From the usage referred to, as followed by the Buddha and others, it would seem that the gotta name was considered as more honourable than either of the personal names, and also than the descriptive general name or title of paribba^aka (wandering mendicant, recluse). Even the title Brahma;/a was dropped for the gotta name in the case of a recluse. There are a number of problems, both as to general principles and as to details, that still remain, in this matter of names, unsolved. Is A/ara, for instance, a nickname or a mula-nama; is Kalamo a gotta name or a clan name1? To what classes of the people was the use of gotta names limited, and what is the historical explanation of this limitation ? Were there as many as a dozen clan names in Magadha and Kosala combined? What was exactly implied by the clan-name, the Kula-nama? The word gotta probably had the same meaning, when the Pi/akas were composed, as gotra has in the later law books written by the priests. How comes it then that the number of gottas referred to is so very small ? Are there much more than a score altogether ? What light does the meaning of the mula and gotta names throw on the religious conceptions and social customs of the people ?

I hope to return to these and similar questions when I can find time to publish my Pali Onomasticon, of the names in the Pi/akas and in the older inscriptions. What has here been said is probably sufficient to make the use of the names in this Sutta clear 2. 1 See my note at ' Buddhist Suttas,' p. 75, and compare contra A. I, 188, 278. 2 Evaw-namo evawz-gotto at M. II, 33 ; S. Ill, 25 ; D. I, 242 is followed at D. I, 13 by eva/«-va«»o; but evidence of any effect of social distinctions on names is at present very slight.

[150] i. Thus have I heard. The Blessed One was once staying at Vesali at the Gabled Hall in the Great Wood \ Now at that time a number of Brahmans, who had been sent on pressing business of one kind or another from Kosala and Magadha, were lodging at Vesali. And they heard the news : ' They say that the Sarnawa Gotama of the Sakya clan, who went out from a Sakya family to adopt the religious life, is now staying at Vesali at the Gabled Hall in the Great Wood. Now regarding that venerable Gotama, such is the high reputation that has been noised abroad : " That Blessed One is an Arahat, a fully awakened one, abounding in wisdom and goodness, happy, who knows all worlds, unsurpassed as a guide to mortals willing to be led, a teacher for gods and men, a Blessed One, a Buddha. He, by himself, thoroughly knows and sees, as it were, face to face this universe, — including the worlds above of the gods, the Brahmas, and the Maras, and the world below with its recluses and Brahmans, its princes and peoples, — and having known it, he makes his knowledge known to others. The truth, lovely in its origin, lovely in its progress, lovely in its

1 The Great Wood stretched from Vesali northwards to ,the Himalaya range. In it they had laid out a pleasaunce for the Order, and made there a storied house, with a hall below surrounded by pillars only, and facing the west, and above it the gabled apartments in which the Buddha so often stayed. consummation, doth he proclaim, both in the spirit and in the letter, the higher life doth he make known, in all its fullness and in all its purity. And good is it to pay visits to Arahats like that." ' 2. So those Brahmans from Kosala and Magadha went out to the Great Wood, and to the Gabled Hall. Now at that time the venerable Nagita was acting as the personal attendant on the Blessed One. And they went to him, and said : ' Where is it, Nagita, that that venerable Gotama is lodging now, for we wish to see him.' [l5l] ' It is not a fitting time, Sirs, to call upon the Blessed One. He has retired into solitude.' Then they sat down round about, saying, ' We will not go away without seeing the venerable Gotama.' 3. And Hare-lip the Li^^avi, too, came to the Great Wood, and to the Gabled Hall, with a retinue of his clan ; and going up to the venerable Nagita, he saluted him, and reverently standing apart, he said to him : ' Where, venerable Nagita, is the Blessed One now lodging, the Arahat, the Buddha ; for we wish to see him ? ' And on receiving a similar reply he, too, sat down apart, saying : ' I will not go till I have seen the August One, the Arahat, the Buddha.'

4. But Siha, a novice1, came up to the venerable Nagita, and saluted him, and standing reverently apart, he said to him : ' These envoys of the Brahmans from Kosala and Magadha, many of them, have come, O Kassapa 2, to call upon the Blessed One ; and Harelip the Li/£/&£avi, too, with a retinue of his clan, has come to do the same. 'Twere best, O Kassapa, that all this folk should be allowed to see the Blessed One.' 1 He was the son of Nagita' s sister. He had joined the Order as a novice when only seven years old, and shown so much intelligence as a learner that he was a favourite with all, even with the Buddha himself. He must therefore be different from the other Siha, also a Li&Wavi, who is the hero of the story told at Vin. I, 233-238 = A. IV, 179-188, as the latter is not a member of the Order at all. Professor Edward MUller (J. P. T. S., 1888, p. 97) confounds the two. 2 This is the gotta, the gens, to which Nagita belonged. 'Very well, then, Siha. Tell the Blessed One yourself.' ' Very good, Sir,' said Siha the novice in assent to the venerable Nagita. And he went where the Blessed One was, and saluted him, and standing reverently apart, he said to him even as he had said to Nagita.

[152] ' Very well, Siha. Spread out a mat for me in the shade in front of the house.' 5. And Siha did so. And the Blessed One came out from the house, and sat down. And the Brahmans from Kosala and Magadha exchanged with him the greetings and compliments of politeness and courtesy and took their seats on one side. And Hare-lip the Li/£>£/zavi also, with the retinue of his clan, bowed down to the Blessed One, and seated himself on one side. And when he was thus seated he addressed the Blessed One, and said : 1 Some few days ago, Sir, Sunakkhatta of the LL£/£>£avis l came to me, and said: "It is only three years, Mahali 2, since I first came under the Blessed One, and I can see heavenly forms, pleasant to behold, fitted to satisfy all one's desires, exciting longing in one's heart. But I cannot hear heavenly sounds like that." Now, Sir, are there such heavenly sounds, which he could not hear, or have they no existence ? ' ' They are real, those heavenly sounds, pleasant, fitted to satisfy one's desires, exciting longing in one's heart, which he could not hear. They are not things of nought.'

1 This young man became the Buddha's personal attendant; but afterwards, when the Buddha was in extreme old age (M. I, 82), he went over to the creed of Kora the Kshatriya, and left the Buddhist Order. Kora's doctrine was the efficacy of asceticism, of rigid selfmortification. And it was to show how wrong this doctrine, as put forth by Sunakkhatta, was, that the Buddha told the story (Gat. I, 398) of the uselessness of the efforts he himself had made when 1 Now scorched, now frozen, lone in fearsome woods, Naked, without a fire, afire within, He, as a hermit, sought the crown of faith.' But we do not hear that Sunakkhatta ever came back to the fold. 2 This is again the name of the gotta, the gens. Buddhaghosa (p. 316) calls him a ra^a. 6. ' But what then is the proximate, and what the ultimate cause, why he could not hear them, they being thus real and not things of nought ? ' [153] 7. ' Suppose a recluse, Mahali, to have practised one-sided concentration of mind with the object of seeing such heavenly forms in any one direction, — in the East, or the South, or the West, or the North, or above, or below, or across, — and not with the object of hearing such heavenly sounds. Then since he has practised one-sided concentration, with the one object only in view, he only sees the sights, he hears not the sounds. And why not ? Because of the nature of his selfconcentration [s a mid hi].

[154] 8, 9. 'And so also, Mahali, if he have practised one-sided concentration with the object of hearing, in any one direction, the heavenly sounds. Then, and for the same reason, he hears the sounds, but he sees not the sights. [165] 10, 11. ' But suppose, Mahali, he has practised self-concentration with the double object in view of seeing and hearing, in any one direction, those heavenly sights and those heavenly sounds. Then since he has practised self-concentration with the double object in view, he both sees the sights and hears the sounds. And why so ? Because of the nature of his self-concentration.' 1 2. ' Then, Sir, is it for the sake of attaining to the practice of such self-concentration that the brethren lead the religious life under the Blessed One ? ' ' No, Mahali. There are things, higher and sweeter than that, for the sake of which they do so.' [156] 13. 'And what, Sir, may those other things be ? ' 1 In the first place, Mahali, a brother by the complete destruction of the Three Bonds (the Delusions of self, Doubt, and Trust in the efficacy of good works and ceremonies) * becomes a converted man, one who cannot be reborn in any state of woe, and is assured of

1 See my 'American Lectures' (London, 1896, pp. 142-149) for the full meaning of these three, and of the following Bonds. attaining to the Insight (of the stages higher still)1. That, Mahali, is a condition, higher and sweeter, for the sake of which the brethren lead the religious life under me. 'And then further, Mahali, a brother by the complete destruction of those Three Bonds, and by reducing to a minimum lust, illwill, and dullness, becomes a Oncereturner, one who on his first return to this world shall make an end of pain. That, Mahali, is a condition higher still and sweeter, for the sake of which the brethren lead the religious life under me. ' And then further, Mahali, a brother by the complete destruction of the Five Bonds that bind people to this world 2 becomes an inheritor of the highest heavens 3, there to pass away, thence never to return 4. That, Mahali, is a condition higher still and sweeter, for the sake of which the brethren lead the religious life under me. ' And then further, Mahali, when a brother by the destruction of the Deadly Floods (or Intoxications — Lusts, Becomings, Delusion, and Ignorance) has, by himself, known and realised and continues to abide here, in this visible world, in that emancipation of mind, that emancipation of heart, which is Arahatship — that, Mahali, is a condition higher still and sweeter still, for the sake of which the brethren lead the religious life under me.

' Such, Mahali, are the conditions higher and sweeter 1 Sambodhi-parayano. So Buddhaghosa on this (p. 313) and my Introduction to this Sutta. 2 The above three, and Sensuality and Illwill. 3 Opapatiko, literally 'accidental'; but the use of such a word would only mislead the reader, the real connotation of the word being that of the words I have chosen. Those who gain the highest heavens are so called because there is no birth there in the ordinary way. Each being, who is there, has appeared there suddenly, accidentally as it were, without generation, conception, gestation or any of the other means attending the birth of beings in the world. 4 It is impossible to ignore a reference here to the view expressed in the Br/had Arawyaka Upanishad (VI, 2, 15). ' There do they dwell far away, beyond, in the Brahma-worlds. And for them there is no return.' (than seeing heavenly sights and hearing heavenly sounds), for the sake of which the brethren lead the religious life under me.' 14. ' But is there, Sir, a path, is there a method, for the realisation of these conditions ? ' 'Yes, Mahali, there is.' [157] 'And what, Sir, may be that path, what that method ? '

' Verily it is this Noble Eightfold Path, that is to say : Right views, right aspirations, right speech, right action, a right means of livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right ecstasy in self-concentration l. This, Mahali, is the path, and this the method, for the realisation of these conditions. 1 5. ' One day, Mahali, I was staying at Kosambl, in the Ghosita pleasaunce. There two recluses, Maw^issa the wandering mendicant, and Saliva the pupil of Darupattika (the man with the wooden bowl), came to me, and exchanged with me the greetings and compliments of politeness and courtesy, and stood reverently apart. And so standing they said to me : 'How is it then, O venerable Gotama, is the soul the same thing as the body ? Or is the soul one thing and the body another ? ' ' Listen then, Sirs, and give heed attentively, and I will speak.' 'Very good, Sir,' said those two mendicants in assent, and I spake as follows : — {Here follows the whole of the exposition given in the Sdmahna-phala Sutta, §§ 40-75. that is *? saJ' : 1 . The appearance of a Buddha and his preaching. 2. The awakening of a hearer, and his entry into the Order.

3. His self training in act, word, and speech. 4. The minor details of morality which he observes. 5. The absence of fear, confidence of heart thence resulting. 1 See my 'American Lectures/ pp. 1 36-141; and Sum. I, 3M-3l6- 6. The way in which he learns to guard the door of his senses. 7. The constant self-possession he thus gains. 8. The power of being content with little, with simplicity of life. 9. The emancipation of heart from the five hindrances — covetousness, illwill, sloth of body and mind, excitement and worry, and perplexity. 10. The resulting joy and peace that he gainst] 16. 'Then estranged from lusts, aloof from evil states, he enters into and remains in the First Rapture — a state of joy and ease, born of detachment, reasoning and investigation going on the while. Now, Sirs, when a Bhikshu knows thus and sees thus, would that make him ready to take up the subject : "Is the soul the same thing as the body, or is the soul one thing and the body another ? " ' ' Yes, it would, Sir 1.' 'But I, Sirs, know thus and see thus. And nevertheless I do not say either the one or the other.'

[158] 17, 18. [The cases are then put of a Bhikshu who has acquired the second, third, and fourth Raptures (D. II, 77-81) and the knowledge arising from insight (A^awa-dassana ; D. II, 83, 84) ; and the same question, reply, and rejoinder are given in each case.] 19. 'With his heart thus serene (&c. above, p. 85), he directs and bends down his mind to the knowledge of the destruction of the Deadly Floods. He knows as it really is : " This is pain." He knows as it really is : " This is the origin of pain." He knows as it really is : " This is the cessation of pain." He knows as it really is : " This is the Path that leads to the cessation of pain." He knows as they really are : "These are the Deadly Floods." He knows as it really is: "This is the origin of the Deadly Floods." He knows as it really is: "This is the cessation of the Deadly Floods." He knows as it really is: "This is the 1 The Siamese edition reads : ' No, it would not, Sir.' On the idiom kalla/» etazrc va^anaya compare A. I, 144; M. II, 211.

Path that leads to the cessation of the Deadly Floods." To him, thus knowing, thus seeing, the heart is set free from the Deadly Taint of Lusts, is set free from the Deadly Taint of Becomings, is set free from the Deadly Taint of Ignorance. In him, thus set free, there arises the knowledge of his emancipation, and he knows : " Rebirth has been destroyed. The higher life has been fulfilled. What had to be done has been accomplished. After this present life there will be no beyond ! " ' When a Bhikshu, Sirs, knows thus and sees thus, would that make him ready to take up the question : " Is the soul the same as the body, or is the soul one thing and the body another ? " ' 1 No, Sir, it would not 1.' 'And I, Sirs, know thus and see thus. And nevertheless I do not say either the one or the other.' Thus spake the Blessed One ; and Hare-lip the Li^^avi, pleased at heart, exalted the word of the Blessed One. Here ends the Mahali Sutta. 1 So three Sinhalese and two Burmese MSS. and the Siamese edition. Two Sinhalese MSS. read: 'Yes, Sir, it would.' But Buddhaghosa had clearly, both here and above, § 16, the reading we have followed. And he gives a characteristic explanation — that whereas the Arahat (in § 19) would have too much wisdom to be led astray, following the false trail of the soul theory, the Bhikshu who had only reached up to the Guanas might, being still a puthu^ana, an unconverted man, have leanings that way.

To hold that the soul is the same as the body is the heresy referred to in the Brahma-^ala (above, p. 46). See also the Introduction to the Ku/adanta (above, p. 167). [Is the Soul distinct from the Body ?] [ This Sutta having been incorporated, word for word, as §§ 15-19, inclusive, in the last Sutta, the reader is referred to the translation given there. The Mahali Sutta must have already included, when the Dlgha was put together, this (^aliya episode. For there would otherwise be no reason for the Mahali Sutta being put into the Silakkhanda Vagga, the Silas being contained only in that episode. Why then should the episode appear also again, in full, as a separate Sutta? Is it merely because of the importance of the question ? We have another instance of a similar kind, where the episode of Nigrodha's question, only referred to at § 23 of the Kassapa-Sihanada Sutta, is set out afterwards, in full, in the Udumbarlka Sihanada Sutta (No. 25 in the Dlgha). But there the whole episode is not given twice in full. Such crossreferences are fairly frequent in the Pi/akas, and are of importance for the history of the literature. One of the most striking cases is where the Sawyutta quotes a Sutta, now contained in the Dlgha, by name. (Sakkap3.ilha. Sutta, S. II 1, 13; compare Sum. 1,51; Mil. 350.)]

In this Sutta the Buddha, in conversation with a naked ascetic, explains his position as regards asceticism — so far, that is, as is compatible with his invariable method (as represented in the Dialogues) when discussing a point on which he differs from his interlocutor. When speaking on sacrifice to a sacrificial priest, on union with God to an adherent of the current theology, on Brahman claims to superior social rank to a proud Brahman, on mystic insight to a man who trusts in it, on the soul to one who believes in the soul theory, the method followed is always the same. Gotama puts himself as far as possible in the mental position of the questioner. He attacks none of his cherished convictions. He accepts as the starting-point of his own exposition the desirability of the act or condition prized by his opponent — of the union with God (as in the Tevi^a), or of sacrifice (as in the Kutadanta), or of social rank (as in the Amba///za), or of seeing heavenly sights, &c. (as in the Mahali), or of the soul theory (as in the Po/^apada). He even adopts the very phraseology of his questioner. And then, partly by putting a new and (from the Buddhist point of view) a higher meaning into the words ; partly by an appeal to such ethical conceptions as are common ground between them ; he gradually leads his opponent up to his conclusion. This is, of course, always Arahatship — that is the sweetest fruit of the life of a recluse, that is the best sacrifice, that the highest social rank, that the best means of seeing heavenly sights, and a more worthy object ; and so on. In our Sutta it is the path to Arahatship which is the best asceticism.

There is both courtesy and dignity in the method employed. But no little dialectic skill, and an easy mastery of the ethical points involved, are required to bring about the result. On the hypothesis that the Buddha is a sun myth, and his principal disciples personifications of the stars, the facts seem difficult to explain. One would expect, then, something quite different. How is it that the other disciples who must, in that case, have concocted these Dialogues, refrain so entirely from astrological and mythological details? How is it they attribute to their hero qualities of courtesy and sympathy, and a grasp of ethical problems, all quite- foreign, even antagonistic, to those usually ascribed to sun-heroes — mostly somewhat truculent and very un-ethical personages ? On the hypothesis that he was an historical person, of that training and character he is represented in the Pi/akas to have had, the method is precisely that which it is most probable he would have actually followed. Whoever put the Dialogues together may have had a sufficiently clear memory of the way he conversed, may well have even remembered particular occasions and persons. To the mental vision of the compiler, the doctrine taught loomed so much larger than anything else, that he was necessarily more concerned with that, than with any historical accuracy in the details of the story. He was, in this respect, in much the same position as Plato when recording the dialogues of Socrates. But he was not, like Plato, giving his own opinions. We ought, no doubt, to think of compilers, rather than of a compiler. The memory of co-disciples had to be respected, and kept in mind. And so far as the actual doctrine is concerned our Dialogues are probably a more exact reproduction of the thoughts of the teacher than the dialogues of Plato.

However this may be, the method followed in all these Dialogues has one disadvantage. In accepting the position of the adversary, and adopting his .language, the authors compel us, in order to follow what they give us as Gotama's view, to read a good deal between the lines. The argumentutn ad hominem can never be the same as a statement of opinion given without reference to any particular person. That is strikingly the case with our present Sutta. When addressing his five hearers — the Pa«£avaggiya, the first five converts, and the first Arahats — in the Deer-park at Benares,on the occasion of his first discourse, the Buddha is represented to have spoken of asceticism in a very different way. He there calls it one of 'two extremes which are to be avoided ' ; and describes it as ' painful, unworthy, and unprofitable1.' So in the Puggala Pa/Hatti (IV, 24) the very practices set out in our Sutta, by Kassapa the 'ascetic, 'Buddhist Suttas' (S. B.E.), p. 147. 208 VIIT. KASSAPA-siHANADA SUTTA. as desirable and praiseworthy, are set out as the actions by which a man injures himself. There is nothing of this sort in our Sutta. To judge from it alone one might fairly conclude that the Buddha approved of asceticism, only insisting that the self-mastery and self-control of the Path were the highest and best forms of it. There is really no inconsistency in these three Suttas. But while the first discourse and the Puggala passage were both addressed to disciples, our Sutta is addressed to an ascetic, and the language used is modified accordingly. The conclusion in all is exactly the same.

It is clear that at the time when our Sutta was put together the practice of self-mortification had already been carried out to a considerable extent in India. And further details, in some of which the self-imposed penances are even more extreme, are given in other Dialogues of the same date, notably in the twelfth Sutta of the Ma^-^ima. This is oddly enough also called a Sihanada Sutta, and the reason is not far to seek. The carrying out of such practices, in all countries, wins for the ascetic a very high reputation. Those who despise ear.thly comforts, and even submit themselves to voluntary torture, are looked upon, with a kind of fearsome wonder, as more holy than other men. And no doubt, in most cases, the ascetics laid claim to special virtue. In the Suttas dealing with the practices of the ascetics, Gotama, in laying stress on the more moderate view, takes occasion also to dispute this claim. He maintains, as in our Sutta, that the insight and self-control and self-mastery of the Path, or of the system of intellectual and moral self-training laid down for the Bhikkhu, are really harder than the merely physical practices so much more evident to the eye of the vulgar. It was a point that had to be made. And the Suttas in which it is made are designated as Sihanadas, literally 'the lion's roars' — the proud claim by the Arahat to a dignity and veneration greater than that allowed by the people to the self-torturer, or even to the man who

1 Bescorched, befrozen, lone in fearsome woods, Naked, without a fire, afire within, Struggled, in awful silence, towards the goal ] ! ' And the boast goes really even further. Not only were the ascetics no better than the Arahats, they were even not so practical. The self-mortification was an actual hindrance. It turned men's minds from more essential matters. Diogenes was not only not superior to other men, no nearer to the 1 M. I, 79 => Gat. I, 390. truth than they, by reason of his tub arid of his physical renunciation ; he was their ethical inferior, and was intellectually wrong. So hard, so very hard, was the struggle1 that the Arahat, or the man striving towards Arahatship, should be always sufficiently clothed, and take regular baths, regular exercise, regular food. The line was to be drawn at another point. He was to avoid, not what was necessary to maintain himself in full bodily vigour and power, but all undue luxury, and all worry about personal comfort. It was his duty to keep himself in health. It is open to question whether the earnest and unworldly would now draw the line at the precise point at which Gotama drew it ; either as regards what they would think proper for themselves now, or what they would have thought most proper for those living in India then. Probably they would think rather that he erred on the side of austerity. His contemporaries the Niga«/>6as thought the other way. And the most serious schism in the Buddhist Order, that raised by Devadatta, was especially defended on the ground that Gotama would not, as regards various points, adopt ascetic practices which Devadatta held to be then necessary.

It is probable that Gotama was largely guided by the opinions and practice of previous recluses. For we have already seen that in other matters, important it is true but not essential, Gotama adopted and extended, so far as it agreed with the rest of his system, what had already been put forward by others. But we cannot, as yet, speak on this point with as much certainty as we could in the other cases of the ethical view of sacrifice, of the ethical connotation attached to the word Brahman 2, and of the reasonable view as to social distinctions and questions of impurity. Our available texts are only sufficient, at present, to suggest the probability. The technical term tapas is already found in the Rig-veda, though only in the latest hymns included in the collection. It is literally 'glow, burning,' and very early acquired the secondary sense of retirement into solitude, ar.d of the attempted conquest of one's lower nature by the burning heat of bodily austerity. And this must have been a common practice, for the time of the year most favourable to such 1 So also KaMaka Upanishad II, 7-13. 2 See Br/had. Ill, 5, 1 ; 8, 10, IV, 4, 21-23 ; ^Mnd. IV, 1, 7. Compare Apastamba I, 8, 23, 6; Vas. VI, 3, 23, 25; XXVI, n = Manu II, 87 = Vishnu LV, 21 ; the passages quoted from the Mahabharata by Muir, ' Metrical Translations,' pp. 263-4, and Deussen

• Veda n*a-sy stem,' p. 155. tap as came to be known as the month tapas. There was no association with the word of what we call ' penance,' a conception arising out of an entirely different order of religious ideas. There was no idea of atonement for, punishment of, making amends for sin. But just as the sacrificer was supposed, by a sort of charm that he_ worked by his sacrifice, to attain ends desirable for himself, so there was supposed to be a sort of charm in tapas producing mystic and marvellous results. The distinction seems to have been that it was rather power, worldly success, wealth, children, and heaven that were attained by sacrifice ; and mystic, extraordinary, superhuman faculties that were attained by tapas. By a natural anthropomorphism the gods too were supposed, for like ends, to offer sacrifice and to perform tapas. Thus it is sometimes by sacrifice, but more often by tapas, that in the different cosmological legends one god or the other is supposed to bring forth creation1. In the latter case an expression often used on such occasions is tapas atapasyata, literally ' he glowed a glow,' and the exact meaning of this enigmatic phrase is by no means certain. It may have been meant to convey that he glowed with fierce resolve, or that he glowed with deep thought, or that he glowed with strong desire, or that he carried out each or some or all of the practices given in Kassapa's three lists of self-mortifications in our Sutta. All these various ideas may possibly be meant to be inferred together, and before they were ascribed to gods similar actions must have been well known among men.

There were some, as one would expect, who therefore placed austerity above sacrifice, or held that it could take the place of sacrifice 2. The more conservative view of the learned Brahman — that it is repeating by heart to oneself, and teaching others, the Vedic verses, that is the chief thing (with which twelve other qualities or practices should always be associated) — is only given with the interesting note that one teacher thinks ' the true ' only, another thinks austerity only to be necessary, and yet a third thinks that learning and teaching the Veda is enough by itself, 'for that is tapas, that is tapas3.' There are several passages making similar comparisons. Thus one text says : ' There are three branches of duty — sacrifice study of the Veda and charity are the first, austerity (tapas) is the second, to dwell as a learner one's life 1 .Satapatha-Br.VI, i, 1,13, and several times in the early Upanishads. 2 So A"Mnd. Up. Ill, 17, 2 and 4. s Tait. I, 9. Compare, on the ethics, Manu VI, 92 and the Ten Paramitas. The idea that Veda-learning is tapas is a common one. long in the house of one's teacher is the third. All these have as reward heavenly worlds. But he who stands firm in Brahman obtains deathlessnessV

So in the passages which explain (by no means consistently) where the soul goes to after it leaves the body, we have a somewhat corresponding division 2. According to the A"^andogya, those who know a certain mystical doctrine about five fires, and those who in the forest follow faith and austerity (tapas), go along the path of the gods to the Brahma worlds. On the other hand, they who sacrifice, and give alms go to the moon, and thence return to earth, and are reborn in high or low positions according to their deeds. But the bad become insects. According to the Brmadara^yaka, those who know the mystic doctrine of the five fires, and those who in the woods practise faith and truth (not tapas) go to the Brahma worlds. On the other hand, those who practise sacrifice, charity, and austerity (tapas) go to the moon, and are thence reborn on earth. But those who follow neither of these two paths become insects. Here austerity is put into a lower grade than it occupies in the last extract. Other later passages are Muw^aka II, 7; III, 2, 4, 6 ; Prajna I, 9 ; V, 4. Though the details differ there is a general concensus that above both sacrifice and austerity, which are themselves meritorious, there is a something higher, a certain kind of truth or faith or wisdom.

This is the exact analogue, from the Upanishad point of view, to the doctrine of the Buddhists that Arahatship is better than austerity. And though the Upanishad belief is not worked out with the same consistency, nor carried so far to its logical conclusion, as the Buddhist, that is simply to be explained by the facts that it is not only earlier, belonging to a time when thought was less matured, but is also not the work of one mind, but of several. There can be but little doubt that Gotama, during his years of study and austerity before he attained Nirva/za under the Tree of Wisdom, had come into contact with the very beliefs, or at least with beliefs similar to those, now preserved in the Upanishads ; and that his general conclusion was based upon them. That he practically condemns physical tapas (austerity) altogether is no argument against his indebtedness, so far as the superiority of wisdom to austerity is concerned, to the older theory. In the passages in which that older theory is set forth we 1 ^Mnd.Up. II, 23, 1. 2 K/iand. Up. V, 10; Br/'had. VI, 2 ; Prajna I, 9 ; V, 4, 5.

212 viii. kassapa-sJhanada sutta. have the germs — indistinct statements, no doubt, and inconsistent, but still the first source — of the well-known theory of the Ajramas ; the Efforts (or perhaps Trainings), four stages into which the life of each member of the ranks of the twice-born (the Dvi^as) should be divided. In later times these are (i) the student, (2) the householder, (3) the hermit, and (4) the wandering ascetic; that is, the Brahma^arin, the Gr/hastha, the Vanaprastha, and the Yati1. And stress was laid on the order in which the stages of effort were taken up, it being held improper for a man to enter the latter without having passed through the former. The Upanishad passages know nothing of the curious technical term of Effort (A.rrama) applied to these stages. And they have really only two divisions (and these not regarded as consecutive stages), that of the sacrificer and of the hermit (not the Bhikshu). Of course studentship is understood as preliminary to both. But we are here at a standpoint really quite apart from the Ajrama theory, and 6arikara and other commentators are obliged to resort to curious and irreconcilable shifts when they try to read back into these old texts the later and more developed doctrine a.

Even the names of the several A^ramas do not occur, as such, in the older Upanishads. Brahma^arin is frequently used for pupil, Yati in two or three passages means ascetic ; but Grzhastha, Vanaprastha, and Bhikshu do not even occur 3. The earliest mention of the Four Efforts is in the old law books. Gautama (III, 2) gives them as Brahma^arin, Grz'hastha, Bhikshu, and Vaikhanasa^ (student, householder, wandering beggar, and hermit). Apastamba (II, 9, 21, 1) has a different order, and different names for the four stages — Garhasthyaw, A/£aryakula;#, Maunaw, and Vanaprasthyaw4. Hofrath Buhler dated these works (very hypothetically) in the fifth and third, or possibly in the sixth and fourth centuries B.C.5 The theory of the Four Efforts was then 1 So Manu V, 137 ; VI, 87. Compare VIII, 390, and VI, 97. a See Max Muller's interesting note in his translation of the Upanishads (Part I, pp. 82-84). s See Jacob's Concordance under the weirds. * Comp. Baudhayana II, 10, 17, 6, and Apastamba II, 4, 9, 13. a 6 He ventures on a conjecture as to possible date in the case of Apastamba only. Him he places on linguistic grounds not later than the third century b.c. ; and, if the argument resting on the mention of •SVetaketu hold good, then a century or two older. Burnell, whom Buhler (Baudh. p. xxx) calls ' the first authority on the literature of the Schools of the Taittirfya Veda,' to which Apastamba belonged,

already current, but by no means settled as to detail. It must evidently have taken shape between the date of the Upanishads just quoted and that of the law books ; that is to say, either just before or some time after the rise of Buddhism. We can, I think, go safely further, and say that it must have been, in all probability, after Buddha, and even after the time when the Pi/akas were put together. For neither the technical term Ajrama, nor any of the four stages of it, are mentioned in the Pi7akas. The theory has become finally formulated, in the order as to detail which has permanently survived, in the later law books from Vasish//fca onwards. He gives the Four Efforts or stages in the life of an orthodox person,as (1) Student, (2) Householder, (3) Hermit, (4) Wandering Mendicant — Brahma- £arin, Gr/hastha, Va»aprastha, and Parivra^-aka \ It will be noticed that this final arrangement differs in two respects — and both of them of importance — from the earliest. In the first place the wandering beggar is put in the last, that is in the highest, place. He is not subordinated, as he was at first, to the hermit. In the second place the expression Bhikshu, applied in Gautama to the wandering mendicant, is dropped in the later books.

The commentators are at great pains to harmonise the divergent order. And they do so by suggesting that the earlier arrangement (which, of course, is, in their eyes, the strange one) is meant to infer exactly the same as does the contrary later arrangement so familiar to them. To them the wandering mendicant had become the last, in order of time and importance, of the Four Efforts ; and they try to put back their own view into the words of the ancient writer they are dealing with. But if the order they were familiar with implies one thing, the older order, which is exactly the reverse, can scarcely imply the same. Or if it does, then the question arises, why should it ? In either case the explanation may be sought for in the history of the two ideas. Now the distinction between the two is quite clear, though the ambiguity of the English word ' ascetic,' often applied to both, may tend to hide it from view2. Gautama starts his was not convinced by the arguments leading up to the^above conclusion. He only ventured, after reading them, to put Apastamba • at least b. c.'A(Manu, p. xxvii). Baudhayana was some generations older than Apastamba (see Biihler, Ap. pp. xxi-xxii). And Gautama was older still.

1 Vas. VII, 2. 2 Thus Biihler uses the one term 'ascetic' to render a number of Sanskrit words — for sa^nyasin at Baudh. II, 10, 17 ; for bhikshu 214 VIII. KASSAPA-sfHANADA SUTTA. description of the hermit by saying that he is to feed on roots and fruits, and practise tapas. And all the later books lay stress on the same point ; often giving, as instances of the tapas, one or other of the very practices detailed by Kassapa the tapasa, in his three lists, in our Sutta1. On the other hand, the wandering mendicant does not practise these severe physical self-mortifications. He is never called tapasa, and though he has abandoned the world, and wanders without a home, simply clad, and begging his food, his self-restraint is mental rather than physical. Of the fifteen rules laid down for him by Gautama, who calls him the Bhikshu (in X, 1 1-25), four or five are precisely equivalent to rules the Buddhist Bhikshu has to observe. There is one significant rule in Baudhayana, however, which is quite contrary to the corresponding Buddhist rule. According to it the twice-born mendicant of the priestly books is, in begging for food, to observe the rules of ceremonial purity, what we call now the rules of caste 2.

Now while the belief in the special efficacy and holiness of austerity, self-torture, tapas, is a world-wide phenomenon, and the practice of it was, no doubt, very early in India too, the idea of the wandering mendicant is peculiar to India. And though the origin and early history of this institution are at present obscure, we have no reason to believe that it was of ancient date. It was older than the Buddha's time. Both Buddhist and Cain records agree on this point. And they are confirmed by an isolated passage in an Upanishad which, as a whole, is pre-Buddhistic 3. There it is said that he who desires to see at Gaut. Ill, 2, n ; for parivra^aka at Vas. X, 1 ; for yati at Manu VI, 54, 56, 69, 86 ; for apasa at Manu VI, 27 ; for muni at Manu VI, 11. Of these the last two refer to the hermit in the woods (the tapasa), the others to the wandering mendicant (the bhikshu). Even for the old Brahman who remains at home under the protection of his son (the Veda-sawnyasin), he has ' become an ascetic' (sawznyased in the Sanskrit, Manu VI, 94). This rendering can, in each case, be easily justified. Each of the Sanskrit words means one or other form, one or other degree, of what may be called asceticism. But the differences might be made clear by variety of rendering.

1 Gautama has altogether ten rules for the hermit, none of which were applicable to the Buddhist Bhikshu (Gaut. Ill, 26-35). 2 Baudhayana II, 10, 18, 4, 5. Manu VI, 27 (of the hermit). So also Vas. X, 31, according to the commentator. But Biihler thinks otherwise ; and Manu VI, 94 confirms Buhler's view. 3 Brzhadara«yaka Upanishad III, 5, 1. the god Brahman cannot attain his end by speculation ; he must put away learning and become childlike, put away childishness and become a muni (a silent one)1, put away silence and become a Brahma«a (that is, of course, not a Brahmawa by birth, but one in a sense nearly the same as Gotama attaches to the word in the So«ada;^a Sutta). This is to explain why it is that ' Brahmawas ' (in the ethical sense) give up cravings for children and wealth and the world and adopt begging as a regular habit (bhiksha£aryaw £aranti). Another recension of the same passage, also preserved in the same Upanishad2, but in a connection which Deussen thinks is a later interpolation 3, ascribes this habit to ' men of old.' The statement is no doubt ambiguous. It might be taken to apply to the hermit (the tapasa) who also begged. But 1 think on the whole that the wandering mendicant is more probably referred to, and referred to as belonging to a higher sphere than the muni, the ascetic. If that be so, this is the earliest passage in which any one of these three ideas (the wandering mendicant, his superiority to the ascetic, and the special ethical sense of the word Brahmawa 4) have, as yet, been found.

The oldest reference in the priestly literature to unorthodox Bhikshus (not necessarily Buddhists) is probably the Maitri Upanishad VIII, 8, which is much later. There is a custom, often referred to in the law books, of students begging their food. This was doubtless of long standing. But it is a conception altogether different from that of the wandering mendicant. The word Bhikshu does not occur in any of these passages. And indeed of all the Upanishads indexed in Colonel Jacob's ' Concordance ' the word only occurs in one — in the little tract called the Parama-hawsa Upanishad. Whenever it may have arisen, the peculiar institution of the Bhikshu is quite as likely, if not more likely, to have originated in Kshatriya circles than among the learned Branmans. All our authorities — Brahman Upanishads, Buddhist Pi/akas, Gain Angas — agree in ascribing to Kshatriyas a most important, not to say predominant, part in such religious activity as lay apart from sacrifice. To take for granted that 1 Afterwards an epithet often used, in the priestly literature of the hermit (the tapasa), in the Buddhist books of the Arahat. 2 Br/had. IV, 4, 22. 3 ' Sechzig Upanishads,' p. 465. * Perhaps, on this third notion, A'Mnd. IV, 1, 7 is another passage of about the same date. A wise 6"udra is apparently there called a Brahma?*a. But the application is by no means certain.

2l6 VIII. KASSAEA-S1HANADA SUTTA. the Brahmans must have originated the idea, or the practice, is to ignore all these authorities. And it is only in the Kshatriya books — those of the Buddhists and Cains — that the details of the practice receive much weight, or are dealt with in full detail. The oldest law book has barely a page on the rules for Bhikshus, whereas the regulations, of about the same age, preserved in the Buddhist texts, fill the three volumes translated, under the title ' Vinaya Texts,' in the ' Sacred Books of the East.' And as time goes on the priestly literature continues to. treat the life of a Bhikshu as entirely subordinate, and in the curtest manner. Even Manu has only three or four pages on the subject. The inconsistency, brevity, and incompleteness of the regulations in the priestly books lead one to suppose that, at the time when they were written, there were not enough Bhikshus, belonging to those circles, to make the regulations intended for them alone a matter of much practical importance. In other words, the development also of the Bhikshu idea was due rather to the Kshatriyas than to the sacrificing priests.

The latter were naturally half-hearted in the matter. Even after they had invented the A^rama theory, they did not seem to be very keen about it. On the contrary, there are several passages the other way. Apastamba closes his exposition of them with a remark that upsets the whole, theory : ' There is no reason to place one Airama before another1.' And just before that he quotes a saying of Pra^apati from which it follows that those who become Bhikshus do not gain salvation at all, ' they become dust and perish.' This was no doubt the real inmost opinion of the more narrow-minded of the priests. But the first maker of the phrase did not quite like to put this forward in his own name — the idea of the Bhikshu as a man worthy of special esteem had already become too strong for that. So he makes the god his stalking-horse ; and tries, by using his name, to gain respectability and acceptance for his view. And it survives accordingly as late as the earlier portion of Maou (II, 230), where mention is made of 'the Three A^ramas,' omitting the Bhikshu. We ought not to be surprised to find that, though the whole passage is reproduced, in other respects, in the Institutes of Vish«u (XXXI, 7), this very curious and interesting phrase is replaced by another which avoids the difficulty.

1 Ap. II, 9, 24, 15. Baudhayana also actually quotes with approval another old- saying : ' There was forsooth an Asura, Kapila by name, the son of Prahlada. Striving against the gods he made these divisions (the A.sramas). A wise man should not take heed of them 1. If the priests, when the custom of 'going forth' as a Bhikshu was becoming prevalent, had wished to counteract it, to put obstacles in the way, and especially to prevent any one doing so without first having become thoroughly saturated with the priestly view of things, they could scarcely have taken a more efficacious step than the establishment of this theory. And so far as it served this purpose, and so far only, do they seem to have cared much for it. We have no evidence that the theory had, at any time, become a practical reality — that is, that any considerable number of the twice-born, or even of the Brahmans, did actually carry out all the four A-sramas. Among the circles led by the opinion of learned and orthodox priests it was, no doubt, really held improper for any man to become a religieux until he was getting old, or without having first gone through a regular course of Vedic study. And whenever he did renounce the world he was expected to follow such of the ancient- customs (now preserved in the priestly books under the three heads of Vanaprastha, Parivra^aka, and Vedasaw nyasin) as he chose to follow. But even then he need not observe a clear distinction between these various heads. The percentage of elderly Brahmans who followed any of the three at all must always have been very small indeed, and of these a good many probably became Veda-sa mnyasins, a group which lies outside of the Ajramas. The rules are admitted to be obsolete now. Sahkara says they were not observed in his time2. And the theory seems to be little more than a priestly protest against the doctrine, acted upon by Buddhists, (7ains, and others, and laid down in the Madhura Sutta, that even youths might 'go forth' without any previous Vedic study 3.

There were, in other words, in the Indian community of that time, a number of people — very small, no doubt, compared with the total population, but still amounting to some thousands — who estimated the mystic power of tapas above that of sacrifice ; who gave up the latter, and devoted themselves, in the woods, to those kinds of bodily austerity and 1 Baudh. II, 6, ii, 28. 2 See the passage quoted by Deussen, ' Vedanta- system,' p. 40- 8 See the full text in Chalmers's paper in the J. R. A. S. for 1 -94. 2l8 VIII. KASSAPA-SIHANADA SUTTA. self-torture of which our Sutta gives the earliest detailed account. There were others who rejected both, and preferred the life of the wandering mendicant. In both classes there were unworthy men who used their religious professions for the ' low aims ' set out in the tract on the Silas incorporated in our Sutta, whose very words, in not a few instances, recur in the old law books. But there was also no little earnestness, no little ' plain living and high thinking ' among these ' irregular friars.' And there was a great deal of sympathy, both with their aims and with their practice (provided always they keep to the priestly view of things), among the official class, the regular sacrificing priests. Instead of condemning them, the priests tried, therefore, rather to regulate them. One Vikhanas compiled a special book on Tapas, called either after the author the Vaikhanasa Sutra, or after the subject the .Sramawaka Sutra, which is several times referred to as an authority in the law books whose precepts are doubtless, in part, taken from it l. Tapas was then, in accordance with the general view in the circles in which the law books were composed, regarded as the higher^ of the two, and put therefore at the end in the list of A^ramas.

But there was also another view which had already made itself felt in the Upanishads, which is the basis of our Sutta, and which no doubt became more widely spread in consequence of its having been the view taken up by the progressive party we now call Buddhists. According to this view the life of the Bhikshu, of the wandering mendicant, was the higher. This view, disliked by the more narrowminded, but regarded with favour by the more spirituallyminded of the Brahmans, gradually attained so unquestionably the upper hand, that the order of the last two of the Artamas had to be changed. Tapas became .then a preliminary stage to, instead of the final crown of, the religious life. But the other view continued to be held by a large and influential minority. The strong leaning of the human heart to impute a singular efficacy to physical self-mortifications 1 See Buhler's ' Manu/ XXVII, and the commentators referred to in Biihler's notes, pp. 202 and 203. Also Vas. IX, 10; Gaut. Ill, 27 ; Baudh. II, 6, 1 1, 14, 15 (which proves the identity of the two) ; III, 3, 15-18. Haradatta on Apastamba II, 9, 21, 21 (where he also says they are the same). Dr. Burnell had in his possession fragments of this work, or what, in his opinion, seemed to be so. He^says it was used by followers, of the Black Ya^ur-veda. Buhler also (Ap. p. 154, note) says the Sutra is in existence, and procurable in Gujarat.

of all kinds could not be eradicated. Many of the laity still looked on those who carried out such practices with peculiar favour. The tendency made itself felt even in Buddhism, in spite of our present Sutta, and of many other passages to a similar effect. There is a special name for the ' extra vows,' the dhutangas, carried out by such of the brethren as were inclined that way. And these receive special glorification in a whole book at the end of the Milinda1. It is true that, even in these ' extra vows,' all the extreme forms of tapas are omitted. But this is only a matter of degree. In the priestly law books, also, though they go somewhat further than the dhutangas, the most extreme forms are omitted, especially in the rules for hermits and mendicants contained in the earlier books. This is another point in which the early Buddhists and the more advanced of the learned Brahmans of their time are found to be acting in sympathy. But the discussion of the details would take us too far from our subject. The Niga«///as, A^ivakas, and others went to the other extreme, and like the Buddhists, they never admitted any theory like that of the distinction in time between the Four Ajramas2. It is even doubtful how far that distinction became a really valid and practical reality among the learned priests. They alone, as we have seen, always laid stress on the importance of not 'going forth,' either as ascetic or as wandering mendicant (tapasa or bhikshu), unless first the years of studentship, and then the life as a sacrificing householder, had been fulfilled. They spoke occasionally of Three Efforts only. And as we have seen the lawyers differed in the order in which they mention the two classes of religieux 3.

1 My 'Milinda,' II, 244-274. 2 The Buddhists admitted a distinction in class as between tapasas and bhikkhus. They often distinguish between the simple pabba^a of the latter and the tapasa-pabba^a of the former. See for instance Gat. Ill, 119 (of non-Buddhists). 3 When the warrior hero of the Ramayana brutally murders a peaceful hermit, it is not necessary to call in the Asrama rules to justify the foul deed. The offence (in the view of the poet on the part of the hermit, in the view of most Westerns on the part of the hero) is simply social insolence. Would public opinion, in Kosala, have sanctioned such an act, or enjoyed such a story, in the time of the Pi/akas ? The original Ramayana probably arose, as Professor Jacobi has shown, in Kosala; but this episode (VII, 76) is not in the oldest part. The doctrine for which the poet claims the approval of the gods (and which, By the time that the- later order was settled the word Bhikshu had come to mean so specially a Buddhist mendicant that the learned Brahmans no longer thought it fitting to apply the term to their own mendicants. This at least may be to the explanation of the fact that it is used in Gautama's law book, and not afterwards.

The history of the word is somewhat doubtful. It is not found as yet, as we have seen above, in any pre-Buddhistic text. Perhaps the Gains or the Buddhists first used it. But it was more probably a term common before their time, though not long before, to all mendicants. The form is sufficiently curious for Pacini to take special notice of it in the rule for the formation from desideratives of nouns in u \ In another rule2 he mentions two Bhikshu Sutras — manuals for mendicants, as the Vaikhanasa Sutra was for the hermits (tapasas). These are used by the Parajariwas and the Karmandinas, two groups or corporations, doubtless, of Brahmanical mendicants. Professor Weber refers to this in his History of Indian Literature, p. 305, and Professor Kielhorn has been kind enough to inform me that nothing more has been since discovered on the matter. These Sutras are not mentioned elsewhere. And they can never have acquired so much importance as the Vaikhanasa Sutra, or they would almost certainly have been referred to in the sections in the later law books on mendicants, just as the Vaikhanasa is in the sections on the tapasas. It is also very curious to find Brahmawa Bhikshus with special class names as if they belonged to an Order like those of the Buddhists and the Gains. No such Brahmanical Orders of recluses (pabba^-ita) are mentioned in the Pi/akas. When Brahma«a Bhikshus are referred to, it is either as isolated recluses, or by a generic name not implying any separate Order. Thus in an important passage of the Ariguttara we have the following list of rcligieux, contemporaries of the Buddha : —

1. A^ivika. 6. Maga«^ikd. 2. Nigantha.. 7. Teda;/<afika, 3. Mu«^a-savaka. 8. Aviruddhaka. 4. G:a/ilaka. 9. Gotamaka. 5. Paribba^aka. 10. Devadhammika. No. 1. The men of the livelihood, among whom Makkhali Gosala was a recognised leader, were especially addicted to therefore, was not unquestioned among men, or he need not have done so) is that a .Sudra may not become a tapasa. 1 11,3,54- 2 IV, 3, 1 10. tapas of all kinds, and went always quite naked. The name probably means : * Those who claimed to be especially strict in their rules as to means of livelihood/ The Buddhists also laid special stress on this. The fifth of the eight divisions of the Eightfold Path is samma a^ivo1. No. 2. The Unfettered are the sect we now call Cains, then under the leadership of the Nataputta. They were also addicted, but to a somewhat less degree, to tapas ; and Buddhaghosa here adds that they wore a loin cloth. No. 3. The disciples of the Shaveling are stated by Buddhaghosa to be the same as No. 2. The reading is doubtful, and his explanation requires explanation. Perhaps some special subdivision of the Cains is intended. No. 4. Those who wear their hair in braids. To do so was the rule for the orthodox hermits (the Vanaprasthas or Tapasas, Gautama III, 34). The Brahmawa Bhikshu, on the other hand, was either to be bald, or to have only a forelock (ibid. 22).

No. 5. The wanderers. This is a generic term for wandering mendicants. They went, according to Buddhaghosa, fully clad. Nos. 6-10 are said by Buddhaghosa to be followers of the Titthiya, that is the leaders of all schools that were nonBuddhist. It is precisely here that the list becomes most interesting, the first five names being otherwise known. And it is much to be regretted that the tradition had not preserved any better explanation of the terms than the vague phrase repeated by Buddhaghosa. No. 6 is quite unintelligible at present. No. 7. The Bearers of the triple staff have not been found elsewhere, as yet, earlier than the latest part of Manu (XII, 10). It is very, possibly the name given in the Buddhist community to the Brahma;za Bhikshus (not T&pasas). They carried three staves bound up as one, as a sign, it is supposed, of their self-restraint in thought, word, and deed. This explanation may possibly hold good for so early a date. But it may also be nothing more than an edifying gloss on an old word whose original meaning had been forgotten. In that case the gloss would be founded on such passages as Gaut. Ill, 17 2, where the idea of this threefold division of conduct recurs in the law books. But the technical term tridaw^in is not mentioned in them.

1 See on this Order the passages quoted above in the note at p. 7 1 ; and Leumann in -the ' Vienna Oriental Journal,' III» 128. 2 Comp. Baudhayana XI, 6, 11, 23; Manu V 165; IX, 29. 2 22 VIII. KASSAPA-SlHANADA SUTTA. No. 8. The not opposing ones, the Friends, are not mentioned elsewhere. No. 9. The followers of Gotama means, almost certainly, the followers of some other member of the Sakya clan, distinct from our Gotama. who also founded an Order. We only know of one who did so, Devadatta. The only alternative is that some Brahmawa, belonging to the Gotama gotra, is here referred to as having had a community of Bhikshus named after him. But we know nothing of any such person. No. 10. Those who follow the religion of the God are not mentioned elsewhere. Who is ' the God ' ? Is it Sakka (Indra) or ^Siva? The Deva of the names Devadatta, Devase///zi, Devadaha, &c, is probably the same. We find in this suggestive list several names, used technically as the designation of particular sects, but in meaning applicable quite as much to most of the others. They all claimed to be pure as regards means of livelihood, to be unfettered, to be friends ; they all wandered from place to place, they were all mendicants. And the names can only gradually have come to have the special meaning of the member of one school, or order, only. We should not, therefore, be surprised if the name Bhikshu, also, has had a similar history1.

1 There is a similar list, also full of interesting puzzles, but applicable of course to a date later by some centuries than the above, in the Milinda, p. 191. Worshippers of Siva are there expressly mentioned. [lei] i. Thus have I heard. The Blessed One was once dwelling at Uguuna, in the Ka/makatthala deerpark1. Now Kassapa, a naked ascetic, came to where the Exalted One was, and exchanged with him the greetings and compliments of civility and courtesy, and stood respectfully aside. And, so standing, he said to the Exalted One : 2. 'I have heard it said, O Gotama, thus: The Samara Gotama disparages all penance ; verily he reviles and finds fault with every ascetic, with every one who lives a hard life." Now those, O. Gotama, who said this, were they therein repeating Gotama's words, and not reporting him falsely ? Are they announcing, as a minor tenet of his, a matter really following from his Dhamma (his system) ? Is there nothing in this opinion of his, so put forward as wrapt up with his system, or as a corollary from it, that could meet with objection 2 ? For we would fain bring no false accusation against the venerable Gotama.'

3. ' No, Kassapa. Those who said so were not 1 Miga-daye. That is, a place set apart for deer to roam in in safety, a public park in which no hunting was allowed. 2 It would, perhaps, be more agreeable to the context if one could render this idiomatic phrase : ' Is there anything in this opinion of theirs as to his system, or as to this corollary they have drawn from it, which amounts to being a matter he would object to ? ' But I do not see how this could be reconciled with the syntax of the Pali sentence. And Buddhaghosa takes it as rendered above, summarising it in the words : ' Is your opinion herein altogether free from blame t ' 224 viii. kassapa-sJhanada sutta. following my words. On the contrary, they were reporting me falsely, and at variance with the fact. [162] ' Herein, O Kassapa, I am wont to be aware, with vision bright and purified, seeing beyond what men can see, how some men given to asceticism, living a hard life, are reborn, on the dissolution of the body, after death, into some unhappy, fallen state of misery and woe ; while others, living just so, are reborn into some happy state, or into a heavenly world — how some men given to asceticism, but living a life less hard, are equally reborn, on the dissolution of the body, after death into some unhappy, fallen state of misery and woe ; while others, living just so, are reborn in some happy state, or into a heavenly world. How then could I, O Kassapa, who am thus aware, as they really are, of the states whence men have come, and whither they will go, as they pass away from one form of existence, and take shape in another, — how could I disparage all penance ; or bluntly revile and find fault with every ascetic, with every one who lives a life that is hard ?

4. ' Now there are, O Kassapa, certain recluses and Brahmans who are clever, subtle, experienced in controversy, hair splitters, who go about, one would think, breaking into pieces by their wisdom the speculations of their adversaries. And as between them and me there is, as to some points, agreement, and as to some points, not. As to some of those things they approve, we also approve thereof. As to some of those things they disapprove, we also disapprove thereof. As to some of the things they approve, we disapprove thereof. As to some of the things they disapprove, we approve thereof. And some things we approve of, so do they. And some things we disapprove of, so do they. [163] And some things we approve, they do not. And some things we disapprove of, they approve thereof. 5. ' And I went to them, and said : " As for those things, my friends, on which we do not agree, let us leave them alone. As to those things on which we agree, let the wise put questions about them, ask for reasons as to them, talk them over, with or to their teacher, with or to their fellow disciples, saying : 'Those conditions of heart, Sirs, which are evil or accounted as evil among you, which are blameworthy or accounted as such among you, which are insufficient for the attainment of Arahatship, or accounted as such among you, depraved or accounted as such among you — who is it who conducts himself as one who has more absolutely put them away from him, the Samara Gotama, or the other venerable ones, the teachers of schools ? ' "

6. ' Then it may well be, O Kassapa, that the wise, so putting questions one to the other, asking for reasons, talking the matter over, should say : " The Samara Gotama conducts himself as one who has absolutely put those conditions away from him ; whereas the venerable ones, the other teachers of schools, have done- so only partially." Thus is it, O Kassapa, that the wise, so putting questions one to the other, asking for reasons, talking the matter over, would, for the most part, speak in praise of us therein. 7. ' And again, O Kassapa, let the wise put questions one to another, ask for reasons, talk the matter over, with or to their teacher, with or to their fellow disciples, saying : " Those conditions of heart, Sirs, which are good or accounted as such among you, which are blameless or accounted as such among you, which suffice to lead a man to Arahatship or are accounted as sufficient among you, which are pure or accounted as such among you — who is it who conducts himself as one who has more completely taken them upon him, the Samara Gotama, or the other venerable ones, the teachers of schools ? "

8. ' Then it may well be, O Kassapa, that the wise, so putting questions one to the other, asking for reasons, talking the matter over, should say : " The Sama«a Gotama conducts himself as one who has completely taken these conditions upon him, whereas the venerable 226 vtii. kassapa-sIhanada sutta. ones, the other teachers of schools, have done so only partially." Thus it is, O Kassapa, that the wise, so putting questions one to the other, asking for reasons, talking the matter over, would, for the most part, speak in praise of us therein. [164] 9-12. '[And further, also, O Kassapa, the wise would, for the most part, acknowledge that the body of my disciples were more addicted to that which is generally acknowledged to be good, refrain themselves more completely from that which is generally acknowledged to be evil, than the venerable ones, the disciples of other teachers \] [165] 13. • Now there is, O Kassapa, a way, there is a method which if a man follow he will of himself, both see and know that : " The Samawa Gotama is one who speaks in due season, speaks that which is, that which redounds to advantage, that which is the Norm (the Dhamma), that which is the law of self-restraint (the Vinaya)."

' And what, Kassapa, is that way, what that method, which if a man follow, he will, of himself, know that, and see that. Verily it is this Noble Eightfold Path, that is to say : Right Views, Right Aspirations, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Mode of Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Rapture. ' This, Kassapa, is that way, this that method, which if a man follow, he will of himself, both know and see that : " The Samara Gotama is one who speaks in due season, speaks that which is, that which redounds to profit, that which is the Norm, that which is the law of self-restraint." ' 14. And when he had spoken thus, Kassapa, the naked ascetic, said to the Exalted One : 1 And so also, Gotama, are the following ascetic practices accounted, in the opinion of some Samaras 1 The four paragraphs 5, 6, 7 and 8 are here repeated in full in the text with the change only of reading ' the body of the- dfsciples of. the Samana Gotama ' instead of ' the Samaria Gotama, and similarly for the other teachers. and Brahma^as, as Sama#a-ship and Brahma«a-shipl. — ' He goes naked : —

1 He is of loose habits (performing his bodily functions, and eating food, in a standing posture, not crouching down, or sitting down, as well-bred people do):— ' He licks his hands clean (after eating, instead of washing them, as others do) 2 : — 1 (When on his rounds for alms, if politely requested to step nearer, or to wait a moment, in order that food may be put into his bowl), he passes stolidly on (lest he should incur the guilt of following another person's word) : — ' He refuses to accept food brought (to him, before he has started on his daily round for alms) : — 1 He refuses to accept (food, if told that it has been prepared) especially for him : — ' He refuses to accept any invitation (to call on his rounds at any particular house, or to pass along any particular street, or to go to any particular place) : — ' He will not accept (food taken direct) from the mouth of the pot or pan3 (in which it is cooked ; lest 1 The following description of the naked ascetic recurs in the Ma^^ima I, 77, 238, 342, II, 161, and in the Puggala Parcwatti IV, 24. It consists of a string of enigmatic phrases which are interpreted in my translation, according to Buddhaghosa here, and the unknown commentator on the Puggala. These two are very nearly word for word the same. The differences are just such as would arise when two authors are drawing upon one uniform tradition.

It^would seem from M. I, 238, if compared with I, 524, that it was the Agivakas (see note above on p. 71) who were more especially known for the practice of these forms of asceticism : and from M. I, 77 that it was these forms that had been followed by Gotama himself before his eyes were opened, before he attained to Nirvana. (M. I, 167.) 2 Hatthapalekhano. The tradition was in doubt about this word. Both commentators give an alternative rendering : ' He scratched himself clean with his hand after stooling.' And the Puggala Pa»«atti commentator adds a very curious piece of old folklore as his ' reason for this explanation. 3 Ka/opi; not in Childers. It no doubt means some cooking vessel of a particular shape, but the exact signification, and the deriva- those vessels should be struck or scraped, on his account, with the spoon) : — 1 (He will) not (accept food placed) within the threshold (lest it should have been placed there specially for him) : — ' (He will) not (accept food placed) among the sticks1 (lest it should have been placed there specially for him): — '(He will) not (accept food placed) among the pestles (lest it should have been placed there specially for him) : —

' When two persons are eating together he will not accept (food, taken from what they are eating, if offered to him by only one of the two) : — ' He will not accept food from a woman with child (lest the child should suffer want) : — ' He will not accept food from a woman giving suck (lest the milk should grow less) : — ' He will not accept food from a woman in intercourse with a man2 (lest their intercourse be hindered): — tion of it are both unknown. It may possibly be a Kolarian or Dravidian word. Many centuries afterwards karo/a and karo/i were included in the Vyutpatti, and the Amara Ko^a, as meaning ' vessel.' It is of course out of the question that a word of the fifth century b. c. can be derived from either of them ; but they are evidently the descendants of allied forms. Childers gives another form khalopi on the authority of the Abhidhana Padipika (twelfth century), verse 456, where it occurs in a list of names of pots. Another — kha/opi — is put in his text by Trenckner at Milinda, p. 107, from one MS., but the other two differ. Both commentators paraphrase -it here by ukkhali ^zkkh\ va\

1 Na Da«</a-m-antara/ra. That is, perhaps, among the firewood ; but the expression is not clear. The Commentaries only give the reason. Dr. Neumann (on Magg/iima. I, 77) has, 'he does""not spy beyond the lattice ' or perhaps ' beyond the bars of the grate ' (spahte nicht iiber das Gitter), but this seems putting a great deal of meaning into the sticks, and not sufficiently reproducing the force of antaraw/. And how can pa/iga»bati mean 'spy'? We have, no doubt, to fill out an elliptical phrase. But it is just such cases as those in this paragraph where we* are more likely to go right if we follow the ancient tradition. 2 Na purisantara-gataya. The commentators only give the reason. On the meaning of the word compare Gat. I, 290. 1 He will not accept food collected (by the faithful in time of drought) * : — ' He will not accept food where a dog is standing by (lest the dog should lose a meal) : — ' He will not accept food where flies are swarming round (lest the flies should suffer) : — 1 He will not accept fish, nor meat, nor strong drink, nor intoxicants, nor gruel 2 : —

' He is a "One-houser" (turning back from his round as soon as he has received an alms at any one house), a " One-mouthful-man " : — 1 Or he is a " Two-houser," a " Two-mouthfulman": — ' Or he is a " Seven-houser," a " Seven-mouthfulman " : — 1 He keeps himself going on only one alms 3, or onlytwo, or so on up to only seven : — ' He takes food only once a day, or once every two days, or so on up to once every seven days. Thus does he dwell addicted to the practice of taking food according to rule, at regular intervals, up to even half a month. ' And so also, Gotama, are the following ascetic practices accounted, in the opinion of some Samaras and Brahmawas, as Samawaship and Brahmawaship : — 1 Na sa/wkhittisu. Both meaning and derivation are uncertain. Dr. Neumann has ' not from the dirty.' 2 Thusodaka. It is not fermented. The traditional interpretation here is: 'a drink called Suvirakaw (after the country Suvira) made of the constituents, especially the husk, of all cereals.' The use of salt Soviraka as a cure for wind in the stomach is mentioned at Maha Vagga VI, 16. 3 ; and it was allowed, as a beverage, if mixed with water, to the Buddhist Bhikkhus» In Vimana Vatthu XIX, 8 it is mentioned in a list of drinks given to them. Childers calls it ' sour gruel' following Subhuti in the first edition (1865) of the Abhidhana Padipika (verse 460), but in the Abh. Pad. Sfi& (published in 1893) Subhuti renders it 'kongey'; something of the same sort as barley water. Buddhaghosa adds : ' Every one agrees that it is wrong to drink intoxicants. These ascetics see sin even in this.' The corresponding Sanskrit word, tusodaka, is found only in Sumita.

3 Datti. 'A small pot,' says Buddhaghosa, 'in which special titbits are put aside, and kept.' 230 VIII. kassapa-sIhanada sutta. ' He feeds on potherbs, on wild rice \ on Nivara seeds, on leather parings 2, on the water-plant called Ha /a, on the fine powder which adheres to the grains of rice beneath the husk, on the discarded scum of boiling rice, on the flour of oil-seeds 3, on grasses, on cow-dung, on fruits and roots from the woods, on fruits that have fallen of themselves. ' And so also, Gotama, are the following ascetic practices accounted, in the opinion of some Samaras and Brahmarcas, as Sama^aship and Brahmawaship : — 1 He wears coarse hempen cloth : — 1 He wears coarse cloth of interwoven hemp and other materials : — 4 He wears cloths taken from corpses and thrown away 4 : — 1 He wears clothing made of rags picked up from a dust heap : — 1 He wears clothing made of the bark of the Tiritaka tree6 : — [167] ' He wears the natural hide of a black antelope : — 1 He wears a dress made of a network of strips of a black antelope's hide e : —

' He wears a dress made of Kusa grass fibre : — 1 He wears a garment of bark : — 1 Samaka, not in Childers. See M. I, 156. Gat. II, 365, III, 144. * Daddula, not in Childers. See M. I, 78, 156, 188. 8 Pi##aka, not in Childers. See Vin. IV, 341. The commentators here merely say : ' This is plain.' * A'Aava-dussSni pi dh&reti. The commentators give an alternative explanation : ' Clothing made of Eraka grass tied together.' Was such clothing then used to wrap dead bodies in ? 8 Tiritani pi dh&reti. This custom is referred to at Mahd Vagga VIII, 29, as having been there followed by ascetics. The use of such garments is there forbidden to the Bhikkhus. 8 A^inakkhipam pi dh&reti. Buddhaghosa gives here an explanation different from that given by him on Vin. Ill, 34 (quoted ' Vinaya Texts,' II, 247), where the word also occurs. The Puggala Pa»«atti gives both explanations as possible. Khipa at A. I, 33 means some sort of net. A^inakkhipa is referred to at S. I, 117 as •the characteristic dress of an old Brahman. ' He wears a garment made of small slips or slabs of wood (shingle) pieced together ! : —