Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
11 Le. of the Mahay&na, which according to TAranftha, Geschichte des Buddhismus, p. 274, stands above the division of the Bauddhas into various schools. 3 Lotus, p. 285. INTRODUCTION. XXXili fess that I am not so sure of it. As the Satra, like other compositions of the kind, begins with the solemn ‘Thus have I heard, &c.,’ it is at least possible that the distich belongs to the compiler. I am not aware that the scribes were in the habit of using such expressions as va& or synonymous terms instead of likh, to write; and as we find in the Mahavastu similar futures as vakshye, viz. udirayishyam and upavarmayishy4mi', where they can hardly be imputed to the scribe, it is safer to leave the question, whether the opening distich of the Lotus is the work of a compiler or of a copyist, undecided, the more so because the parallel phrase athadto—vyakhy4syadmaf, frequently found immediately after the invocation, in non-Buddhistic writings, must be held to refer to the author or authors, compilers. The Lotus being one of the standard works of the Mahayana, the study of it cannot but be useful for the right | appreciation of that remarkable system. A perusal of the book will convince the reader that a statement of Professor Wassiljew’s? can only be accepted with some restrictions, when this scholar, so profoundly versed in the history and development of Northern Buddhism, says that the Buddha ‘Of the Mahayana is ‘neither the creator nor the ruler of the world; he remains the same cold, indifferent egoist, absorbed in Nothingness. The Tathagata of the Lotus is passionless, indeed, but that does not involve his being an egoist. In general it may be said that the spirit of the Mahdyana is more universal, its ideal less monastical than the Hinaydna’s. According to Professor Rhys Davids we must not seek the superior vital power which enabled the Great Vehicle to outlive the earlier teaching in certain metaphysical subtleties, but in the idea of a desire to save all living creatures; ‘the idea,’ to quote his own words’, ‘as summarised in the theory of Bodisatship, is the key-note of the later school, just as Arahatship is the key-note of } Mahavastu (ed. Senart), p. 1, with the remarks of the editor, and p.g. 2 In his Buddhismus, p. 126. * In Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion, p. 254. (21) c XXxiV SADDHARMA-PUNDARIKA.
2Senart), p. 1, with the remarks of the editor, and p.g. 2 In his Buddhismus, p. 126. * In Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion, p. 254. (21) c XXxiV SADDHARMA-PUNDARIKA. early Buddhism.’ The Mah4y4na doctors said in effect: ‘We grant you all you say about the bliss of attaining Nirvaza in this life’. But it produces advantage only to yourselves; and according to your own theory there will be a necessity for Buddhas in the future as much as there has been for Buddhas in the past. Greater, better, nobler then, than the attainment of Arahatship must be the attainment of Bodisatship from a desire to save all living creatures in the ages that will come.’ The teaching of the Lotus, however, is different, and comes to this, that every one should try to become a Buddha. It admits that from a practical point of view one may distinguish three means, so-called Vehicles, yAnas, to attain the summum bonum, Nirvaza, although in a higher sense there is only one Vehicle. These means are, in plain language, piety, philosophy or rather Yogism, and striving for the enlightenment and weal of our fellow-creatures ; these means are designated by the terms of Vehicle of (obedient) hearers or disciples, of Pratyekabuddhas, and of Bodhisattvas. Higher than piety is true and self-acquired knowledge of the eternal laws; higher than knowledge is devoting oneself to the spiritual weal of others?. The higher unity embracing the three separate Vehicles is the Buddha-vehicle. The title of Bodhisattva is not always used in the same acceptation. Apart from a broad distinction we can draw 1 It may be observed that there is nothing peculiarly Buddhistic in the searching for Nirvana in this life, except in the sound of the word. It is exactly the same as what other Indian enthusiasts or mystics called Givanmukti, the aim of Yogins in the fourth degree (answering to the Arhats of the Buddhists) and of the Brahmans or Dvigas in the fourth Asrama. 2 See chap. iii, p. 80. Something similar in Bhagavad-gita XII, 12: sreyo hi gianam abhyésig gianad dhyanam visishyate, dhyanat karmaphalatyagas tyagaé kAantir anantaram; and IV,5: labhante brahmanirvaaam rishayak kshfnakalmashak, khinnadvaidha yatatmanak sarvabhitahite ratahk. Neither in these passages of the Bhagavad-gita nor in the three Vehicles is there anything new; abhyAsa, study, denotes the period of one’s studying under a master, the Brahmasdriship, which the Lotus calls the Vehicle of Disciples ; the period of dhyana, alias the Vehicle of Pratyekabuddhas, coincides with the third Asrama, that of Vanaprastha; the ty4ga, alias Bodhisattvaship, is virtually the same with the life of a Sannyasin, Yati, or Mukta. Ga#ana characterises the second Asrama; in the Lotus it is merged in or combined with dhyana. INTRODUCTION. XXXV
3Ga#ana characterises the second Asrama; in the Lotus it is merged in or combined with dhyana. INTRODUCTION. XXXV between human and superhuman Bodhisattvas'—the latter are here left out of account—we find sometimes the word ‘applied to those persons who in the passage of our Sitra alluded to are styled Srdvakas, hearers, learners. This appears to be the case at least in Nep4l, as we know from the following passage*: ‘The Buddha is the adept in the wisdom of Buddhism (Bodhijndna), whose first duty, so long as he remains on earth, is to communicate his wisdom to those who are willing to receive it. These willing learners are the “Bodhisattvas,” so called from their hearts being inclined to the wisdom of Buddhism, and “ Sanghas,” from their companionship with one another, and with their Buddha or teacher, in the vihdras or ccenobitical establishments. The Bodhisattva or Sangha continues to be such until he has surmounted the very last grade of that vast and laborious ascent by which he is instructed that he can “scale the heavens,” and pluck immortal wisdom from its resplendent source: which achievement performed, he becomes a Buddha, that is, an Omniscient Being.’ Here the Bodhisattvas are plainly distinguished from the ceenobitical monks ; they are so likewise in the Lotus, in which we find them also in the function of learned or wise men (Pazditas), of preachers or ministers of religion. Wassiljew Lc. remarks about the Bodhisattva—the terrestrial one of course—that ‘from one side, he seems to be the substitute of the ancient Bhikshu ;’ from which we ought not to infer that the mendicant monks, as such, ceased to exist, for that is notoriously not the case, but that the Bodhisattvas were charged with the office of preaching. They are persons who deserve to be honoured both by mendicant monks and lay devotees‘, and formed, it would seem, a kind of learned clergy, not to be confounded, however, with the modern Vagra-A-#aryas or married clergymen in Nepal. There is reason to suppose that one of the + 1 Cf. Wassiljew, Buddhismus, p. 124. 3 B. H. Hodgson, Essays, p. 62. Cf. Stanislas Julien, Voyages des Pélerins bouddhistes, II, p. 436 note. 3 See especially the whole of chapter x. * Lotus, chap. x, st. 27 seq. c2 XXXVI SADDHARMA-PUNDARIKA.
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.
11 Le. of the Mahay&na, which according to TAranftha, Geschichte des Buddhismus, p. 274, stands above the division of the Bauddhas into various schools. 3 Lotus, p. 285. INTRODUCTION. XXXili fess that I am not so sure of it. As the Satra, like other compositions of the kind, begins with the solemn ‘Thus have I heard, &c.,’ it is at least possible that the distich belongs to the compiler. I am not aware that the scribes were in the habit of using such expressions as va& or synonymous terms instead of likh, to write; and as we find in the Mahavastu similar futures as vakshye, viz. udirayishyam and upavarmayishy4mi', where they can hardly be imputed to the scribe, it is safer to leave the question, whether the opening distich of the Lotus is the work of a compiler or of a copyist, undecided, the more so because the parallel phrase athadto—vyakhy4syadmaf, frequently found immediately after the invocation, in non-Buddhistic writings, must be held to refer to the author or authors, compilers. The Lotus being one of the standard works of the Mahayana, the study of it cannot but be useful for the right | appreciation of that remarkable system. A perusal of the book will convince the reader that a statement of Professor Wassiljew’s? can only be accepted with some restrictions, when this scholar, so profoundly versed in the history and development of Northern Buddhism, says that the Buddha ‘Of the Mahayana is ‘neither the creator nor the ruler of the world; he remains the same cold, indifferent egoist, absorbed in Nothingness. The Tathagata of the Lotus is passionless, indeed, but that does not involve his being an egoist. In general it may be said that the spirit of the Mahdyana is more universal, its ideal less monastical than the Hinaydna’s. According to Professor Rhys Davids we must not seek the superior vital power which enabled the Great Vehicle to outlive the earlier teaching in certain metaphysical subtleties, but in the idea of a desire to save all living creatures; ‘the idea,’ to quote his own words’, ‘as summarised in the theory of Bodisatship, is the key-note of the later school, just as Arahatship is the key-note of } Mahavastu (ed. Senart), p. 1, with the remarks of the editor, and p.g. 2 In his Buddhismus, p. 126. * In Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion, p. 254. (21) c XXxiV SADDHARMA-PUNDARIKA.
2Senart), p. 1, with the remarks of the editor, and p.g. 2 In his Buddhismus, p. 126. * In Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion, p. 254. (21) c XXxiV SADDHARMA-PUNDARIKA. early Buddhism.’ The Mah4y4na doctors said in effect: ‘We grant you all you say about the bliss of attaining Nirvaza in this life’. But it produces advantage only to yourselves; and according to your own theory there will be a necessity for Buddhas in the future as much as there has been for Buddhas in the past. Greater, better, nobler then, than the attainment of Arahatship must be the attainment of Bodisatship from a desire to save all living creatures in the ages that will come.’ The teaching of the Lotus, however, is different, and comes to this, that every one should try to become a Buddha. It admits that from a practical point of view one may distinguish three means, so-called Vehicles, yAnas, to attain the summum bonum, Nirvaza, although in a higher sense there is only one Vehicle. These means are, in plain language, piety, philosophy or rather Yogism, and striving for the enlightenment and weal of our fellow-creatures ; these means are designated by the terms of Vehicle of (obedient) hearers or disciples, of Pratyekabuddhas, and of Bodhisattvas. Higher than piety is true and self-acquired knowledge of the eternal laws; higher than knowledge is devoting oneself to the spiritual weal of others?. The higher unity embracing the three separate Vehicles is the Buddha-vehicle. The title of Bodhisattva is not always used in the same acceptation. Apart from a broad distinction we can draw 1 It may be observed that there is nothing peculiarly Buddhistic in the searching for Nirvana in this life, except in the sound of the word. It is exactly the same as what other Indian enthusiasts or mystics called Givanmukti, the aim of Yogins in the fourth degree (answering to the Arhats of the Buddhists) and of the Brahmans or Dvigas in the fourth Asrama. 2 See chap. iii, p. 80. Something similar in Bhagavad-gita XII, 12: sreyo hi gianam abhyésig gianad dhyanam visishyate, dhyanat karmaphalatyagas tyagaé kAantir anantaram; and IV,5: labhante brahmanirvaaam rishayak kshfnakalmashak, khinnadvaidha yatatmanak sarvabhitahite ratahk. Neither in these passages of the Bhagavad-gita nor in the three Vehicles is there anything new; abhyAsa, study, denotes the period of one’s studying under a master, the Brahmasdriship, which the Lotus calls the Vehicle of Disciples ; the period of dhyana, alias the Vehicle of Pratyekabuddhas, coincides with the third Asrama, that of Vanaprastha; the ty4ga, alias Bodhisattvaship, is virtually the same with the life of a Sannyasin, Yati, or Mukta. Ga#ana characterises the second Asrama; in the Lotus it is merged in or combined with dhyana. INTRODUCTION. XXXV
3Ga#ana characterises the second Asrama; in the Lotus it is merged in or combined with dhyana. INTRODUCTION. XXXV between human and superhuman Bodhisattvas'—the latter are here left out of account—we find sometimes the word ‘applied to those persons who in the passage of our Sitra alluded to are styled Srdvakas, hearers, learners. This appears to be the case at least in Nep4l, as we know from the following passage*: ‘The Buddha is the adept in the wisdom of Buddhism (Bodhijndna), whose first duty, so long as he remains on earth, is to communicate his wisdom to those who are willing to receive it. These willing learners are the “Bodhisattvas,” so called from their hearts being inclined to the wisdom of Buddhism, and “ Sanghas,” from their companionship with one another, and with their Buddha or teacher, in the vihdras or ccenobitical establishments. The Bodhisattva or Sangha continues to be such until he has surmounted the very last grade of that vast and laborious ascent by which he is instructed that he can “scale the heavens,” and pluck immortal wisdom from its resplendent source: which achievement performed, he becomes a Buddha, that is, an Omniscient Being.’ Here the Bodhisattvas are plainly distinguished from the ceenobitical monks ; they are so likewise in the Lotus, in which we find them also in the function of learned or wise men (Pazditas), of preachers or ministers of religion. Wassiljew Lc. remarks about the Bodhisattva—the terrestrial one of course—that ‘from one side, he seems to be the substitute of the ancient Bhikshu ;’ from which we ought not to infer that the mendicant monks, as such, ceased to exist, for that is notoriously not the case, but that the Bodhisattvas were charged with the office of preaching. They are persons who deserve to be honoured both by mendicant monks and lay devotees‘, and formed, it would seem, a kind of learned clergy, not to be confounded, however, with the modern Vagra-A-#aryas or married clergymen in Nepal. There is reason to suppose that one of the + 1 Cf. Wassiljew, Buddhismus, p. 124. 3 B. H. Hodgson, Essays, p. 62. Cf. Stanislas Julien, Voyages des Pélerins bouddhistes, II, p. 436 note. 3 See especially the whole of chapter x. * Lotus, chap. x, st. 27 seq. c2 XXXVI SADDHARMA-PUNDARIKA.
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.