Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Similarly, under certain circumstances, the affirmation of existence is not possible XXviil GAINA SOTRAS. (syad asti avaktavya); of non-existence (sy4n nAsti avaktavyah); and also of both (sy4d asti nAsti avaktavyah)}.’ This is the famous Saptabhanginaya of the Gainas. Would any philosopher have enunciated such truisms, unless they served to silence some dangerous opponents ? The subtle discussions of the Agnostics had probably bewildered and misled many of their contemporaries. Consequently the Syadvada must have appeared to them as a happy way leading out of the maze of the Ag#anavada. It was the weapon with which the Agnostics assailed the enemy, turned against themselves. Who knows how many of their followers went over to Mahdvira’s creed convinced by the truth of the Saptabhanginaya ! We can trace, I imagine, the influence of Agnosticism also in the doctrine of the Buddha about the NirvAma, as it is stated in P4li books. Professor Oldenberg was the first to draw attention to the decisive passages which prove beyond the possibility of doubt that the Buddha declined answering the question whether the Tathagata (i.e. the liberated soul, or rather principle of individuality) is after death or not. If the public of his time had not been accustomed to be told that some things, and those of the greatest interest, were beyond the ken of the human mind, and had not acquiesced in such answers, it certainly would not have lent a willing ear to a religious reformer who declined to speak out on what in Brahmanical philosophy is considered the end and goal of all speculations. As it is, Agnosticism seems to have prepared the way for the Buddhist doctrine of the Nirvaza*, It is worthy of note 1 Bhandarkar, Report for 1883-4, p. 95 f. 2 The reticence of Buddha on the nature of the Nirvasza may have been wise at his time; but it was fraught with very important results for the development of the church. For his followers, having to hold their own against such split-hair dialecticians as the Brahmanical philosophers, were almost driven to enunciate more explicit ideas about the great problem which the founder of the church had left unsolved. The tendency to supply the crowning stone to an edifice which appeared to have been left unfinished by the hand of the master, led to the division of the community into numerous INTRODUCTION. XXIX that in a dialogue between king Pasénadi and the nun Khémé, told in the Samyutta Nikaya, and translated by Oldenberg, the king puts his questions about the existence or non-existence of the Tathagata after death in the same formulas which Sa#gaya is made to use in the passage translated above from the Sama##aphala Sutta.
2In support of my assumption that the Buddha was influenced by contemporary Agnosticism, I may adduce a tradition incorporated in the Mahavagga I, 23 and 24. There we are told that the most distinguished pair of his disciples, Sariputta and Moggalana, had, previously to their conversion, been adherents of Saw#igaya, and had brought over to Buddha 250 disciples of their former teacher. This happened not long after Buddha’s reaching Bédhi, i.e. at the very beginning of the new sect, when its founder must have been willing, in order to win pupils, to treat prevalent opinions with all due consideration. The greatest influence on the development of Mahavira’s doctrines must, I believe, be ascribed to Gés4la, the son of Makkhali. <A history of his life, contained in the Bhagavati XV, 1, has been briefly translated by Hoernle in the Appendix to his translation of the Uvasaga Dasdo. It is there recorded that Gésala lived six years together with Mahiviraas his disciple, practising asceticism, but afterwards separated from him, started a Law of his own, and set up as a Gina, the leader of the Agivikas. The Buddhist records, however, speak of him as the successor of Nanda Vakkha and Kisa Samkikfa, and of his sect, the a#élaka paribb4gakas, as a long-established order of monks. We have no reason to doubt the statement of the Gainas, that Mahavira and Géséla for some time practised austerities together; but the relation between them probably was different from what the Gainas would have us believe. I suppose, and shall now bring forward some arguments in favour of my opinion, that Mahavira and Gésdla asso- sects soon after the Nirvaza of Buddha. We need not wonder therefore that in Ceylon, which is at such a distance from the centre of Brahmanical learning, Buddhists could retain the doctrine of the Nirvaza in its original form. XXX GAINA SOTRAS.
3We need not wonder therefore that in Ceylon, which is at such a distance from the centre of Brahmanical learning, Buddhists could retain the doctrine of the Nirvaza in its original form. XXX GAINA SOTRAS. ciated with the intention of combining their sects and fusing them into one. The fact that these two teachers lived together for a long period, presupposes, it would appear, some similarity between their opinions. I have already pointed out above, in the note on p. xxvi, that the expression sabbé satt4 sabbé p44 sabbé bhiat4 sabbé giva is common to both Gésala and the Gainas, and from the commentary we learn that the division of animals into ékéndriyas,dvindriyas, &c., which is so common in Gaina texts, was also used by Gésdla. The curious and almost paradoxical Gaina doctrine of the six Lésy4s closely resembles, as Professor Leumann was the first to perceive, Gés4la’s division of mankind into six classes ; but in this particular I am inclined to believe that the Gainas borrowed the idea from the Agivikas and altered it so as to bring it into harmony with the rest of their own doctrines. With regard to the rules of conduct the collective evidence obtainable is such as to amount nearly to proof that Mahavira borrowed the more rigid rules from Gésala. For as stated in the Uttaradhyayana XXIII, 13, p. 121, the Law of Parsva allowed monks to wear an under and upper garment, but the Law of Vardham4na forbade clothes. A term? for naked friar, frequently met with in the Gaina Sitras, is akélaka, literally ‘unclothed.’ Now the Buddhists distinguish between Adélakas and Nigazéhas ; e.g. in Buddhaghésa’s commentary on the Dhammapadam’? it is said of some Bhikkhus that they gave the preference to the Nigaz¢has before the A#élakas, because the latter are stark naked (sabbas6é apatikkfann§4), while the Nigan¢has use some sort of cover’ ‘for the sake of decency,’ as was wrongly assumed by those Bhikkhus. The Buddhists de- 1 Another term is Ginakalpika, which may be rendered: adopting the standard of the Ginas. The Svét&mbaras say that the Ginakalpa was early replaced by the Sthavirakalpa, which allows the use of clothes. 2 Fausboll’s edition, p. 398. 3 The words sésakam purimasamappit4 va pafisshadenti are not quite clear, but the contrast leaves no doubt about what is meant. Sésaka is, I believe, the Pali for sisnaka. If this is right, the ahove words may be translated : ‘they cover the pudenda wearing (a cloth) about the forepart (of their body).’ INTRODUCTION. XXxXI
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.
1Similarly, under certain circumstances, the affirmation of existence is not possible XXviil GAINA SOTRAS. (syad asti avaktavya); of non-existence (sy4n nAsti avaktavyah); and also of both (sy4d asti nAsti avaktavyah)}.’ This is the famous Saptabhanginaya of the Gainas. Would any philosopher have enunciated such truisms, unless they served to silence some dangerous opponents ? The subtle discussions of the Agnostics had probably bewildered and misled many of their contemporaries. Consequently the Syadvada must have appeared to them as a happy way leading out of the maze of the Ag#anavada. It was the weapon with which the Agnostics assailed the enemy, turned against themselves. Who knows how many of their followers went over to Mahdvira’s creed convinced by the truth of the Saptabhanginaya ! We can trace, I imagine, the influence of Agnosticism also in the doctrine of the Buddha about the NirvAma, as it is stated in P4li books. Professor Oldenberg was the first to draw attention to the decisive passages which prove beyond the possibility of doubt that the Buddha declined answering the question whether the Tathagata (i.e. the liberated soul, or rather principle of individuality) is after death or not. If the public of his time had not been accustomed to be told that some things, and those of the greatest interest, were beyond the ken of the human mind, and had not acquiesced in such answers, it certainly would not have lent a willing ear to a religious reformer who declined to speak out on what in Brahmanical philosophy is considered the end and goal of all speculations. As it is, Agnosticism seems to have prepared the way for the Buddhist doctrine of the Nirvaza*, It is worthy of note 1 Bhandarkar, Report for 1883-4, p. 95 f. 2 The reticence of Buddha on the nature of the Nirvasza may have been wise at his time; but it was fraught with very important results for the development of the church. For his followers, having to hold their own against such split-hair dialecticians as the Brahmanical philosophers, were almost driven to enunciate more explicit ideas about the great problem which the founder of the church had left unsolved. The tendency to supply the crowning stone to an edifice which appeared to have been left unfinished by the hand of the master, led to the division of the community into numerous INTRODUCTION. XXIX that in a dialogue between king Pasénadi and the nun Khémé, told in the Samyutta Nikaya, and translated by Oldenberg, the king puts his questions about the existence or non-existence of the Tathagata after death in the same formulas which Sa#gaya is made to use in the passage translated above from the Sama##aphala Sutta.
2In support of my assumption that the Buddha was influenced by contemporary Agnosticism, I may adduce a tradition incorporated in the Mahavagga I, 23 and 24. There we are told that the most distinguished pair of his disciples, Sariputta and Moggalana, had, previously to their conversion, been adherents of Saw#igaya, and had brought over to Buddha 250 disciples of their former teacher. This happened not long after Buddha’s reaching Bédhi, i.e. at the very beginning of the new sect, when its founder must have been willing, in order to win pupils, to treat prevalent opinions with all due consideration. The greatest influence on the development of Mahavira’s doctrines must, I believe, be ascribed to Gés4la, the son of Makkhali. <A history of his life, contained in the Bhagavati XV, 1, has been briefly translated by Hoernle in the Appendix to his translation of the Uvasaga Dasdo. It is there recorded that Gésala lived six years together with Mahiviraas his disciple, practising asceticism, but afterwards separated from him, started a Law of his own, and set up as a Gina, the leader of the Agivikas. The Buddhist records, however, speak of him as the successor of Nanda Vakkha and Kisa Samkikfa, and of his sect, the a#élaka paribb4gakas, as a long-established order of monks. We have no reason to doubt the statement of the Gainas, that Mahavira and Géséla for some time practised austerities together; but the relation between them probably was different from what the Gainas would have us believe. I suppose, and shall now bring forward some arguments in favour of my opinion, that Mahavira and Gésdla asso- sects soon after the Nirvaza of Buddha. We need not wonder therefore that in Ceylon, which is at such a distance from the centre of Brahmanical learning, Buddhists could retain the doctrine of the Nirvaza in its original form. XXX GAINA SOTRAS.
3We need not wonder therefore that in Ceylon, which is at such a distance from the centre of Brahmanical learning, Buddhists could retain the doctrine of the Nirvaza in its original form. XXX GAINA SOTRAS. ciated with the intention of combining their sects and fusing them into one. The fact that these two teachers lived together for a long period, presupposes, it would appear, some similarity between their opinions. I have already pointed out above, in the note on p. xxvi, that the expression sabbé satt4 sabbé p44 sabbé bhiat4 sabbé giva is common to both Gésala and the Gainas, and from the commentary we learn that the division of animals into ékéndriyas,dvindriyas, &c., which is so common in Gaina texts, was also used by Gésdla. The curious and almost paradoxical Gaina doctrine of the six Lésy4s closely resembles, as Professor Leumann was the first to perceive, Gés4la’s division of mankind into six classes ; but in this particular I am inclined to believe that the Gainas borrowed the idea from the Agivikas and altered it so as to bring it into harmony with the rest of their own doctrines. With regard to the rules of conduct the collective evidence obtainable is such as to amount nearly to proof that Mahavira borrowed the more rigid rules from Gésala. For as stated in the Uttaradhyayana XXIII, 13, p. 121, the Law of Parsva allowed monks to wear an under and upper garment, but the Law of Vardham4na forbade clothes. A term? for naked friar, frequently met with in the Gaina Sitras, is akélaka, literally ‘unclothed.’ Now the Buddhists distinguish between Adélakas and Nigazéhas ; e.g. in Buddhaghésa’s commentary on the Dhammapadam’? it is said of some Bhikkhus that they gave the preference to the Nigaz¢has before the A#élakas, because the latter are stark naked (sabbas6é apatikkfann§4), while the Nigan¢has use some sort of cover’ ‘for the sake of decency,’ as was wrongly assumed by those Bhikkhus. The Buddhists de- 1 Another term is Ginakalpika, which may be rendered: adopting the standard of the Ginas. The Svét&mbaras say that the Ginakalpa was early replaced by the Sthavirakalpa, which allows the use of clothes. 2 Fausboll’s edition, p. 398. 3 The words sésakam purimasamappit4 va pafisshadenti are not quite clear, but the contrast leaves no doubt about what is meant. Sésaka is, I believe, the Pali for sisnaka. If this is right, the ahove words may be translated : ‘they cover the pudenda wearing (a cloth) about the forepart (of their body).’ INTRODUCTION. XXxXI
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.