On Yuan Chwang's Travels in India, 629–645 A.D. v2.c20.139

v2.c20.139

The very interesting passage, here condensed in translation, about the Brethren in the monastery with the Hamsa tope, to which reference has been made in a previous chapter, deserves the attention of students of Buddhism. Here we have in Magadha a community of Buddhist monks, which had been following the Vinaya as it has come to us in the Pali language, giving up suddenly one of its rules as unworthy of their creed and unorthodox. The Brethren in the Monastery had adhered to the rule prescribed by Buddha that flesh-food might be taken if three specified conditions were fulfilled. One day they could not get any animal food lawful for them to eat; a thoughtless Brother seeing wild geese flying overhead said jesting — The Brethren today have no breakfast, the Mahāsattva must know the right time”. Julien missing the drift of the whole passage makes the joking bhikshu address the others saying — “Aujourd'hui, la pitance des religieux est insuffisante. Mo-ho-sa-to (Mahāsattvas—nobles êtres), il faut que vous sachiez que voilà le moment”. There is no point or sense in this latter sentence, and bhikshus are not styled Mahāsattvas. The Mahāsattva of the speaker was evidently the candidate for future Buddhahood, and as such he was to be ready to give up his life in charity at the right opportunity. While the bhikshu was speaking a goose, being it is to be supposed a Bodhisattva Mahāsattva in that incarnation, fell from the flock, and gave up his body for food to the hungry monks. These, however, were so moved with sad feelings that they could not cook the goose; they buried it and became Mahāyānists. As such they gave up the “gradual” system which allowed of exceptions and relaxations in rule and doctrine. They were henceforth to observe the strict rule that flesh was not to to be eaten by then in any circumstances. This is the Mahāyānists’ version of Buddha’s teaching, but in the Vinaya, as has been seen, he expressly allows fish and flesh to his disciples on the three conditions of not having seen, not having heard, and not having suspicion.