Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1r line of kings, in the Ceylon chronicles, the date of the Great Decease would be 543 B.C., which is arrived at by adding to the date 161 B.C. (from which the reliable portion of the history begins) two periods of 146 and 236 years. The first purports to give the time which elapsed between 161 B. C. and the great Buddhist church Council held under Asoka, and in the eighteenth year of his reign, at Patna ; and the second to give the interval between that Council and the Buddha's death. It would result from the first calculation that the date of Asoka's coronation would be 325 B.C. (146+161 + 18). But we know that this must contain a blunder or blunders, as the date of Asoka's coronation can be fixed, as above stated, with absolute certainty within a year or two either way of 267 B.C. Would it then be sound criticism to accept the other, earlier, period of 236 years found in those chronicles— a period which we cannot test by Greek chronology— and by simply adding the Ceylon calculation of 236 years to the European date for the eighteenth year of Asoka (that in circa 249 B.c.) to conclude that the Buddha died in or about 485 B.C. ? I cannot think so. The further we go back the greater does the probability of error become, not less. The most superficial examination of the details of this earlier period shows too, that they are unreliable ; and what reliance would it be wise to place upon the total, apart from the details, when we find it mentioned for the first time in INTRODUCTION. xlvii a work, the Dipavawsa, written eight centuries after the date it is proposed to fix ? If further proof were needed, we have it in the fact that the Dipavawsa actually contains the details of another calculation — based not on the lists of kings (Rd^a-param- par&), but on a list of Theras (Thera-paramparA) stretching back from Asoka's time to the time of the great Teacher — which contradicts this calculation of 236 years. The Thera-parampard gives the name of the member of the Buddhist Order of Mendicants, that is, the Thera, who ordained Mahinda (the son of Asoka), then the name of the Thera who ordained that Thera, and so on. There are only five of them from UpSli, who was ordained six- teen years after Buddha's death, down to Mahinda in- clusive. This would account not for 2136, but only for about 150 years. For let the reader take the case of any clergyman in the present day. The Bishop who ordains him would have been ordained thirty or forty years before ; and four such intervals would fill out, not 236 years, but about a century and a half ; and a similar argument applies with reasonable certainty to the case in point. An examination of the details of the List of Theras confirms this conclusion strongly on every essential point. An examination also of the List of Kings shows that the period of 236 years is wrong by being too long.
2lf ; and a similar argument applies with reasonable certainty to the case in point. An examination of the details of the List of Theras confirms this conclusion strongly on every essential point. An examination also of the List of Kings shows that the period of 236 years is wrong by being too long. The shorter period of 1 50 years between Asoka and the Great Decease agrees much better with what we know of the literary history of Buddhism during that interval. And it also agrees with the tradition of the northern Bud- dhists as preserved by Hiouen Thsang, and in Kashmir and Tibet 1 . In the 'Questions of Milinda' also — a work of unknown date, preserved only in its P&li form, but 1 Julien's translation of Hiouen Thsang, ' M^moires stir les contrees occi- dentales,' vol. i. p. 172 ; Kahlaaa's Ra^a-taranginl, Book I ; and Csoma Korosi in * Asiatic Researches,' vol. xx. pp. 92, 297. They place the Great Decease 400 years before Kanishka, whose Council was held shortly after the commence- ment of our era. xlviii THE BOOK OF THE GREAT DECEASE. possibly derived from a northern Buddhist Sanskrit work — the date of the Buddha's death is fixed at five hundred years before the time of Milinda \ who certainly reigned about a century after Christ. I am, therefore, of opinion that the hitherto accepted date of the Buddha's death should be modified accordingly. This would make the date of the Great Decease about 420-400 B.C. (very possibly a year or two later), and the date of Gotama's birth therefore eighty years earlier, or in round numbers about 500 B. C. I have discussed the whole question at full length in my 'Ancient Coins and Measures of Ceylon/ written in ampli- fication of a paper read in 1874 before the Royal Asiatic Society ; and to that work I must refer any reader, who may take interest in these chronological discussions, for ampler details. I have been able here to present only a summary of an argument which is in so far of little im- portance, inasmuch as the rectification which I have ven- tured to propose only differs by a little more than half a century from the earliest date which can in any case be suggested as approximately correct (that is about 485 B.C.). The date 543 B. c, still unfortunately accepted outside the circle of students of Buddhism 2 , is now acknowledged to be too early by all scholars who have seriously considered the subject. 1 Trenckner, p. 3. Mr. Trenckner says in his preface that Buddhaghosa quotes this work, but unfortunately he does not give any reference. See the note below on our Sutta, Chap. VI, § 3. 2 See, for instance, Max Duncker, ' History of Antiquity,* vol. iv. p. 364. On the dated Edict, ascribed by some to Asoka, see my note loc. tit, and Oldenberg, ' Introd. to the Maha-vagga/ p. xxxviii. THE BOOK OF THE GREAT DECEASE. mahA-pabinibbAna-sutta. Chapter I. i \ Thus have I heard. The Blessed One was once dwelling in Ra^agaha, on the hill called the Vultures Peak.
3Edict, ascribed by some to Asoka, see my note loc. tit, and Oldenberg, ' Introd. to the Maha-vagga/ p. xxxviii. THE BOOK OF THE GREAT DECEASE. mahA-pabinibbAna-sutta. Chapter I. i \ Thus have I heard. The Blessed One was once dwelling in Ra^agaha, on the hill called the Vultures Peak. Now at that time A^atasattu, the son of the queen-consort of Videha origin 2 , the king of Magadha, was desirous of attacking the Va^ians ; and he said to himself, * I will root out these Va^*- 1 Sections i-io, inclusive, recur in the Va^gi Vagga of the Sutta Nipata in the Anguttara Nikaya ; and there is a curiously incorrect version of § 3 in the Fa Kheu Pi Hu, translated from the Chinese by Mr. Beal, under the title of ' The Dhammapada from the Buddhist Canon,' pp. 165, 166. 2 A^atasattu Vedehiputto. The first word is not a per- sonal name, but an official epithet, ' he against whom there has arisen no (worthy or equal) foe ; ' the second gives us the maiden family, or tribal (not personal) name of his mother. Persons of distinction are scarcely ever mentioned by name in Indian Buddhist books, a rule applying more especially to kings, but extended n °t unfrequently to private persons. Thus Upatissa, the earnest ai *d thoughtful disciple whom the Buddha himself declared to be ' l he second founder of the kingdom of righteousness/ is referred t0 either as Dhamma-senapati or as Sariputta ; epithets of cor- responding origin to those in the text. By the Gains A^-atasattu ls called Ku«ika or Kowika, which again is probably not the name S lv en to him at the rice-eating (the ceremony corresponding to ln fant baptism), but a nickname acquired in after life. [II] B 2 THE BOOK OF THE GREAT DECEASE. C g ians, mighty and powerful 1 though they be, I w destroy these Va < £fians, I will bring these Va^iai to utter ruin ! 9 2. So he spake to the Brdhman Vassak&ra, tl prime-minister of Magadha, and said : ' Come now, O Brahman, do you go to the Bless* One, and bow down in adoration at his feet on n behalf, and enquire in my name whether he is fr< from illness and suffering, and in the enjoyment ease and comfort, and vigorous health. Then t< him that A^cltasattu, son of the Vedehi, the king Magadha, in his eagerness to attack the Vaggian has resolved, " I will root out these Va^ians, migh and powerful though they be, I will destroy the Vagfians, I will bring these Va^ians to utter ruin And bear carefully in mind whatever the Bless* One may predict, and repeat it to me. For tl Buddhas speak nothing untrue!' 3. Then the Brahman Vassakdra hearkened to th words of the king, saying, * Be it as you say/ An ordering a number of magnificent carriages to b made ready, he mounted one of them, left R^agah with his train, and went to the Vulture's Peal riding as far as the ground was passable for ca 1 Evammahiddhike evammah&nubhave. There is nothii supernatural about the iddhi here referred to.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1r line of kings, in the Ceylon chronicles, the date of the Great Decease would be 543 B.C., which is arrived at by adding to the date 161 B.C. (from which the reliable portion of the history begins) two periods of 146 and 236 years. The first purports to give the time which elapsed between 161 B. C. and the great Buddhist church Council held under Asoka, and in the eighteenth year of his reign, at Patna ; and the second to give the interval between that Council and the Buddha's death. It would result from the first calculation that the date of Asoka's coronation would be 325 B.C. (146+161 + 18). But we know that this must contain a blunder or blunders, as the date of Asoka's coronation can be fixed, as above stated, with absolute certainty within a year or two either way of 267 B.C. Would it then be sound criticism to accept the other, earlier, period of 236 years found in those chronicles— a period which we cannot test by Greek chronology— and by simply adding the Ceylon calculation of 236 years to the European date for the eighteenth year of Asoka (that in circa 249 B.c.) to conclude that the Buddha died in or about 485 B.C. ? I cannot think so. The further we go back the greater does the probability of error become, not less. The most superficial examination of the details of this earlier period shows too, that they are unreliable ; and what reliance would it be wise to place upon the total, apart from the details, when we find it mentioned for the first time in INTRODUCTION. xlvii a work, the Dipavawsa, written eight centuries after the date it is proposed to fix ? If further proof were needed, we have it in the fact that the Dipavawsa actually contains the details of another calculation — based not on the lists of kings (Rd^a-param- par&), but on a list of Theras (Thera-paramparA) stretching back from Asoka's time to the time of the great Teacher — which contradicts this calculation of 236 years. The Thera-parampard gives the name of the member of the Buddhist Order of Mendicants, that is, the Thera, who ordained Mahinda (the son of Asoka), then the name of the Thera who ordained that Thera, and so on. There are only five of them from UpSli, who was ordained six- teen years after Buddha's death, down to Mahinda in- clusive. This would account not for 2136, but only for about 150 years. For let the reader take the case of any clergyman in the present day. The Bishop who ordains him would have been ordained thirty or forty years before ; and four such intervals would fill out, not 236 years, but about a century and a half ; and a similar argument applies with reasonable certainty to the case in point. An examination of the details of the List of Theras confirms this conclusion strongly on every essential point. An examination also of the List of Kings shows that the period of 236 years is wrong by being too long.
2lf ; and a similar argument applies with reasonable certainty to the case in point. An examination of the details of the List of Theras confirms this conclusion strongly on every essential point. An examination also of the List of Kings shows that the period of 236 years is wrong by being too long. The shorter period of 1 50 years between Asoka and the Great Decease agrees much better with what we know of the literary history of Buddhism during that interval. And it also agrees with the tradition of the northern Bud- dhists as preserved by Hiouen Thsang, and in Kashmir and Tibet 1 . In the 'Questions of Milinda' also — a work of unknown date, preserved only in its P&li form, but 1 Julien's translation of Hiouen Thsang, ' M^moires stir les contrees occi- dentales,' vol. i. p. 172 ; Kahlaaa's Ra^a-taranginl, Book I ; and Csoma Korosi in * Asiatic Researches,' vol. xx. pp. 92, 297. They place the Great Decease 400 years before Kanishka, whose Council was held shortly after the commence- ment of our era. xlviii THE BOOK OF THE GREAT DECEASE. possibly derived from a northern Buddhist Sanskrit work — the date of the Buddha's death is fixed at five hundred years before the time of Milinda \ who certainly reigned about a century after Christ. I am, therefore, of opinion that the hitherto accepted date of the Buddha's death should be modified accordingly. This would make the date of the Great Decease about 420-400 B.C. (very possibly a year or two later), and the date of Gotama's birth therefore eighty years earlier, or in round numbers about 500 B. C. I have discussed the whole question at full length in my 'Ancient Coins and Measures of Ceylon/ written in ampli- fication of a paper read in 1874 before the Royal Asiatic Society ; and to that work I must refer any reader, who may take interest in these chronological discussions, for ampler details. I have been able here to present only a summary of an argument which is in so far of little im- portance, inasmuch as the rectification which I have ven- tured to propose only differs by a little more than half a century from the earliest date which can in any case be suggested as approximately correct (that is about 485 B.C.). The date 543 B. c, still unfortunately accepted outside the circle of students of Buddhism 2 , is now acknowledged to be too early by all scholars who have seriously considered the subject. 1 Trenckner, p. 3. Mr. Trenckner says in his preface that Buddhaghosa quotes this work, but unfortunately he does not give any reference. See the note below on our Sutta, Chap. VI, § 3. 2 See, for instance, Max Duncker, ' History of Antiquity,* vol. iv. p. 364. On the dated Edict, ascribed by some to Asoka, see my note loc. tit, and Oldenberg, ' Introd. to the Maha-vagga/ p. xxxviii. THE BOOK OF THE GREAT DECEASE. mahA-pabinibbAna-sutta. Chapter I. i \ Thus have I heard. The Blessed One was once dwelling in Ra^agaha, on the hill called the Vultures Peak.
3Edict, ascribed by some to Asoka, see my note loc. tit, and Oldenberg, ' Introd. to the Maha-vagga/ p. xxxviii. THE BOOK OF THE GREAT DECEASE. mahA-pabinibbAna-sutta. Chapter I. i \ Thus have I heard. The Blessed One was once dwelling in Ra^agaha, on the hill called the Vultures Peak. Now at that time A^atasattu, the son of the queen-consort of Videha origin 2 , the king of Magadha, was desirous of attacking the Va^ians ; and he said to himself, * I will root out these Va^*- 1 Sections i-io, inclusive, recur in the Va^gi Vagga of the Sutta Nipata in the Anguttara Nikaya ; and there is a curiously incorrect version of § 3 in the Fa Kheu Pi Hu, translated from the Chinese by Mr. Beal, under the title of ' The Dhammapada from the Buddhist Canon,' pp. 165, 166. 2 A^atasattu Vedehiputto. The first word is not a per- sonal name, but an official epithet, ' he against whom there has arisen no (worthy or equal) foe ; ' the second gives us the maiden family, or tribal (not personal) name of his mother. Persons of distinction are scarcely ever mentioned by name in Indian Buddhist books, a rule applying more especially to kings, but extended n °t unfrequently to private persons. Thus Upatissa, the earnest ai *d thoughtful disciple whom the Buddha himself declared to be ' l he second founder of the kingdom of righteousness/ is referred t0 either as Dhamma-senapati or as Sariputta ; epithets of cor- responding origin to those in the text. By the Gains A^-atasattu ls called Ku«ika or Kowika, which again is probably not the name S lv en to him at the rice-eating (the ceremony corresponding to ln fant baptism), but a nickname acquired in after life. [II] B 2 THE BOOK OF THE GREAT DECEASE. C g ians, mighty and powerful 1 though they be, I w destroy these Va < £fians, I will bring these Va^iai to utter ruin ! 9 2. So he spake to the Brdhman Vassak&ra, tl prime-minister of Magadha, and said : ' Come now, O Brahman, do you go to the Bless* One, and bow down in adoration at his feet on n behalf, and enquire in my name whether he is fr< from illness and suffering, and in the enjoyment ease and comfort, and vigorous health. Then t< him that A^cltasattu, son of the Vedehi, the king Magadha, in his eagerness to attack the Vaggian has resolved, " I will root out these Va^ians, migh and powerful though they be, I will destroy the Vagfians, I will bring these Va^ians to utter ruin And bear carefully in mind whatever the Bless* One may predict, and repeat it to me. For tl Buddhas speak nothing untrue!' 3. Then the Brahman Vassakdra hearkened to th words of the king, saying, * Be it as you say/ An ordering a number of magnificent carriages to b made ready, he mounted one of them, left R^agah with his train, and went to the Vulture's Peal riding as far as the ground was passable for ca 1 Evammahiddhike evammah&nubhave. There is nothii supernatural about the iddhi here referred to.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.