Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Age of the Nandas and Mauryas c12.s10: Buddhism

Age of the Nandas and Mauryas c12.s10

Language
English

Buddhism

c12.s10.1

Although originally a Śramaṇa movement, Buddhism had emerged out of it in the 4th century B.C. as a distinct and powerful religion endowed with great potentiality for expansion. But the extent of this expansion before the time of the Emperor Aśoka is still a matter of conjecture. Its activity in pre-Aśokan times seems to have been confined to Kosala and Magadha but small communities of brethren had probably come into existence in the west in Mathurā and Ujjayinī. The traditional account of the second Buddhist council which is said to have taken place 100 years after the Nirvāṇa of Buddha at Vaiśālī, refers to invitations sent to the pātheyya monks and to the communities in such distant places as Avanti, Kauśāmbi, Sāṅkāśya and Kanauj. Pātheyya meant the western monks including probably the community of Mathurā. The Aśokan legends attach great importance to the monastery of Naṭabhaṭa on the Urumuṇḍa hill at Mathurā, as Upagupta, the spiritual guide of the Emperor, and Śāṇavāsa, the teacher of Upagupta, both belonged to that institution. The legends at least show that Mathurā had attained some importance in the Buddhist church already before the time of Aśoka.

c12.s10.2

The most outstanding events in the history of the church in this period were the two councils, the second and the third. The second council was held, according to all traditions, one hundred years after the Nirvāṇa, at Vaiśāli. It is said to have originated on account of some difference in points of monastic discipline. The monks of Vaiśāli had declared as admissible ten new points viz. : 1. storing of salt in a horn, 2. the taking of the midday meal when the sun's shadow shows two finger-breadths after noon, 3. the going to some village and there eating fresh food, 4. residing in the same parish and yet holding the uposatha separately, 5. sanction of a solemn act in an incomplete chapter, 6. (unconditional) following of a precedent, 7. the partaking of unchurned milk, 8. the use of unfermented toddy, 9. the use of a mat without fringes (not conforming with the model prescribed), 10. to accept gold and silver.

c12.s10.3

This action was not however approved by other monks and hence a council was called at Vaiśāli. This council after a long deliberation appointed a committee of eight elders, four of them hailed from the east and the other four from the west. Among the former was Sabbakāmi, thera of Vaiśāli who, it is said, had received his ordination 120 years earlier and among the latter was Sambhūta Śāṇavāsa of Mathurā who was probably the same as the teacher of Upagupta. The ten points of the monks of Vaiśāli were declared to be against the rules. In a plenary session of the council, the Vinaya was rehearsed. The Bhikṣus who were excommunicated are also said to have convened another meeting which was a great council (Mahāsaṅgīti). Henceforth the followers of the wrong views who were then most probably more numerous came to be known as the Mahāsāṅghika.

c12.s10.4

So far, the story seems to be generally reliable but the difficulty arises when the question of chronology comes in. The tradition says that the council was held in the time of Aśoka, or Kālāśoka, the son of Śiśunāga. But history does not know of any such king. Attempts have been made to identify Kālāśoka with Kākavarṇa who is mentioned in the Puranic lists as the son of Śiśunāga but the identification is based on unconvincing grounds. The Pāli as well as Sanskrit Buddhist sources say that Aśoka flourished one hundred years after the Nirvāṇa and that until he embraced the Buddhist faith he was living a life of black and sinful deeds. He was then a Caṇḍāśoka or a Kāmāśoka but after his conversion he became a Dharmāśoka. It is this Aśoka then who is contemplated in the traditional account of the second council. Some of the monks who took a leading part in the conference seem to have been contemporaneous with the Maurya emperor whereas others belonged to one generation earlier.

c12.s10.5

Although the story of the second council in its present form is a garbled version and does not give a faithful picture of the event, it, however, seems that it had a historical basis. A Vinaya council had certainly been held at Vaiśālī and its session might have been necessitated by the arbitrary conduct of the local monks, but the time when it was held cannot be fixed with any amount of certainty. It is not impossible that it was held during the earlier part of the reign of Aśoka. This council led to the first schism in the church and the foundation of the Mahāsānghika school.

c12.s10.6

The account of the third council which was held at Pāṭaliputra is still more confused. It was not a general council but a party meeting of the Elders—the Theravādins. The Ceylonese tradition says that it was held 18 years after the coronation of Aśoka but there is no confirmation of this fact in the edicts of the emperor. As it was a meeting of the Theravādins, the Mahāsānghikas were excluded from it. The Ceylonese account of the council runs as follows :

c12.s10.7

"When 236 years had elapsed after Nirvāṇa, sixty thousand monks dwelt in the Aśokārāma. Sectarians of different descriptions, all of them wearing the kaṣāya, ruined the Doctrine of the Jina. It was then that Tissa Moggaliputta convoked a council, attended by 1000 monks. Having destroyed the false doctrines and subdued many shameless people, he restored the true faith, and propounded the Abhidhamma treatise *Kathāvatthu*. It was from him that Mahendra, the future apostle of Buddha, learnt the 5 nikāyas, the 7 books of the Abhidhamma and the whole Vinaya.'

c12.s10.8

The account, as may be seen, has a pronounced sectarian tendency and tries to prove the originality and superiority of the Theravāda or the Vibhajyavāda school. This clearly shows that it was a party meeting of which the historicity may not be disputed, but the story of the compilation of the *Kathāvatthu*, which again presupposes the existence of the entire Pāli canon consisting of the Vinaya, the 5 nikāyas and six other Abhidhamma works must be made an exception.

c12.s10.9

The history of the Buddhist church in this period was not in all appearance an undistrubed one. The church was gradually losing its unity on account of its expansion and for want of regular communication between the various distant communities. Local influences were slowly affecting their conduct and shaping them in different ways. These tendencies ultimately gave rise to different Buddhist schools. The community of Vaiśālī, as we have already seen, formed itself into a school either before the time of Aśoka or in a period when Aśoka had not yet taken up the cause of Buddhism. Under Aśoka's patronage, the Buddhist community of Pāṭaliputra, which pretended to be more loyal to the teachings of Buddha, reorganised itself and tried to check the schismatic tendency in the church. It is probably under their influence that Aśoka advised his officials to see that nobody might destroy the unity of the Saṅgha. The Sārnāth Pillar edict contains the following order of the emperor to his officers at Pāṭaliputra :

c12.s10.10

'....the Saṅgha cannot be divided by any one. But indeed the monk or nun who shall break up the Saṅgha should be caused to put on white robes and to reside in non-residence.'

c12.s10.11

The same instruction was also issued by the emperor to the Mahāmātras of Kauśāmbi. In the Sāñchi version of the edict, the instruction is given in a slightly different form : 'The Saṅgha of both monks and nuns is made united as long as (my) sons and great-grandsons (shall reign) and as long as the moon and the sun (shall shine).’

c12.s10.12

The compelling of a monk or a nun to put on white robes and to reside in non-residence meant expulsion from the community, a punishment prescribed in the Vinayas for the offence of Saṅghabheda. Aśoka certainly did not issue the edict to give publicity to the already existing Vinaya rule concerning Saṅghabheda. The church must have shown serious symptoms of disintegration and this was a special measure to safeguard its unity. The tradition confirms that Aśoka’s fears were justified. It is said that during the third century of the Nirvāṇa, a number of schools such as Sarvāstivāda, Mahīśāsaka, Dharmaguptaka etc. made their appearance within the orthodox section of the church (Theravāda). The Mahāsānghika school which had long separated from it was also split up into a number of schools.

c12.s10.13

The greatest event in the history of Buddhism in this period was the conversion of Aśoka. The legendary accounts, although marred by many exaggerated claims of the community, enable us to give a connected picture of Aśoka as a Buddhist. The traditions are confirmed by the inscriptions and both have been reviewed in the account of the reign of Aśoka given above.

c12.s10.14

Aśoka’s patronage must have contributed to the spread of Buddhism not only within the empire but also to distant lands even in his lifetime. We learn from the edicts that he himself had given a lead in this direction. Throughout his empire he had circulated instructions on the Dhamma, and caused them to be inscribed on rocks and pillars overlooking the highroads so that they could attract the notice of his subjects. We have seen that he had specially advised his officials to afford facilities to his subjects and to encourage them so that they might follow the Dhamma. When he says that he had achieved the conquest by law (dhamma-vijaya) both within his empire and outside, he probably means that he had entrusted his officers with this mission within his own empire and deputed missionaries to the foreign countries.

c12.s10.15

The credit of the initiative in this direction is attributed by the Ceylonese chronicles to Tissa Moggaliputta. In the inscriptions Aśoka speaks of the missions as his own. To whomsoever the initiative might have been due, either to Tissa Moggaliputta, as the tradition claims, or to Aśoka himself under the inspiration of the Saṅgha, it is quite conceivable that after the reorganisation of the Magadhan church in the third council and with the co-operation of the emperor himself, efforts were made to carry Buddhism to distant countries. The success of the first missionary activity might not have been very large so far as the foreign countries were concerned but within the Maurya empire they must have been crowned with immense success. The epigraphic records and Buddhist monuments of the post-Aśokan times bear clear testimony to it.

Linked texts (2)