Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of Indian Literature v2.c19.s5: Non-Canonical Pāli Literature

A History of Indian Literature v2.c19.s5

Language
English

Contents

Non-Canonical Pāli Literature

v2.c19.s5.1

¹ ¹⁾ *Cf.* Geiger, Pāli Literatur und Sprache, p. 17 ff.

v2.c19.s5.2

Apart from later additions, the greater part of the Pāli texts of the canon arose in India, and it was not until later that they were transmitted to Ceylon. The great bulk of the non-canonical Pāli literature, is, however, the work of the monks of Ceylon. The most notable exception is the Milindapañha,²⁾ "the Questions of Milinda." This work must have originated in north-west India, the only region where the memory of the great and wise ruler Milinda could have been sufficiently vivid as to warrant his being made the hero of a poem. This Milinda is none other than the Greek king Menandros, the most prominent of the rulers of the Græco-Indian empire, which, in the second century B.C., had separated itself from the Græco-Bactrian empire. The period of his reign was probably the first century B.C.,³⁾ and he ruled over a great empire, which comprised not only the whole of the region of the Indus as well as Gujrat, but the Ganges province too. It may have been an historical event, the meeting and conversation of the Greek king with a celebrated Buddhist teacher, which led to the origin of the Milindapañha, or it may have been that the author of the dialogue merely took a pattern from so many dialogues in the Upaniṣads and Itihāsas, in introducing the great king in conversation with a sage: at all events, even if he was not himself a Buddhist,¹ Milinda-Menandros must have been closely connected with the Buddhist community. We can also assume as a certainty that the author of the Milindapañha, whose name, it is true, we do not know, lived at a time when the memory of the Greek king was still green. But as the Greek rule in India came to an end soon after the death of Menandros, it is scarcely feasible that his memory should have endured longer than a century at the most. Hence the work is more likely to have been written in the first century A.D., rather than in the second. The fact that the problems discussed in the Milindapañha are, in the main, identical with those forming the favourite themes in the canon, would also seem to indicate a comparatively early date.² Buddhaghosa, too, the famous commentator of the fifth century, refers to the Milindapañha as an unimpeachable authority, on a level with the canonical texts.¹ In style, however, the Milindapañha shows an advance on the speeches of the Suttapiṭaka; and it is but few of the dialogues of the canon, as for instance that of the Pāyāsi-Sutta in the Dīghanikāya, which are as vivid and sprightly as those of the Milindapañha. These last-named are well able to bear comparison with the Dialogues of Plato.²

v2.c19.s5.3

² ²⁾ Ed. by V. *Trenckner*, London 1880; Vol. I of an edition in Siamese characters has been issued by Their Majesties Queen Aunt and Queen Suddhasinninath of Siam in 1925; translated into English by T. W. *Rhys Davids* in SBE, Vols. 35 and 36; into German (only the genuine parts) by F. O. *Schrader*, Berlin s.a. (1905), and (complete) by Bhikkhu *Nyāṇatiloka*, München 1919; Books I-III into French by *L. Finot*, Paris 1923 (Les Classiques de l'Orient VIII.). Extracts (similes and short parables) are translated by E. W. *Burlingame*, Buddhist Parables, p. 201 ff. *Cf.* *Barth* in RHR 28, 1893, 257ff. = Œuvres II, 170 ff.; *R. Garbe*, Beiträge zur indischen Kulturgeschichte, Berlin 1903, p. 95 ff.; T. W. *Rhys Davids* in ERE VIII, 1915, 631 ff. The title of the work is given in the MSS. as **Milindapañham** (neut.) or **Milindapañhā** (plur.), but the Buddhists of Ceylon generally say **Milindapañho** (masc.) : *Trenckner* Ed., p. vi.

v2.c19.s5.4

³ ³⁾ *A. V. Gutschmid*, Geschichte Irans und seiner Nachbarländer, Tübingen 1888, p. 104, gives the approximate dates of Menander's reign as 125-95 B.C. According to *Smith*, Early History, pp. 227 ff., 239, 258, Menander invaded India in about 155 B.C., "but Gardner places him about 110 B.C." *H. Raychaudhuri* (Political History of Ancient India, Calcutta 1923, pp 204 ff., 209), whose view is shared by *L. D. Barnett* (Calcutta Review, Feb. 1924, p. 250), places Menander in the first century B.C., and, (according to Benoytosh Bhattacharya, The Indian Buddhist Iconography, Oxford, 1924, p. xxi) *R. C. Mazumdar* is said to have proved "that a date prior to 90 B C. cannot be assigned to Menander." (Bhattacharya gives no reference, so I do not know Mazumdar's arguments.) See also *Rapson*, Cambridge History, I, 547 ff.

v2.c19.s5.5

¹ An argument in favour of his having been a Buddhist, would be furnished by Plutarch's remarkable statement that, after the death of Menander, several Indian cities quarrelled about the possession of his ashes, which were eventually divided, whereupon each city erected a memorial over its own share. According to the legend, exactly the same thing happened at the death of Buddha (*Garbe*, l.c., pp. 102, 112 f., *Schrader*, l.c., p. xvi). Of course, it is possible that Menander was merely a sympathiser with the Buddhists, and presented the Order with great donations It is significant, though, that coins of Menander show the Buddhist wheel (S *Lévi* in RHR 23; 1891, p. 43 f.).

v2.c19.s5.6

² The themes discussed show remarkable similarity with those which play a prominent part in the Kathā-Vatthu. *Cf.* *Rhys Davids* in SBE, Vol. 36, pp. xx-xxvi. The allusion to the Thera Tissa (p. 71, SBE, Vol. 35, p. 110), "a master in the art of writing," who is said to have died many years before and "of whom people know only by his writings," would seem to point to a considerable, though not unduly protracted, interval of time between the author of the Milindapañha and Tissa Moggaliputta (if it is he who is meant) who lived in the 3rd century B, C.

v2.c19.s5.7

¹ *E.g.*, Atthasālinī, pp. 112, 114, 119, 120, 122, 142; Visuddhi-Magga, p. 87; all these references are to passages in Books I-III of the Mil. f. *Rhys Davids* in SBE vol. 35, p. xiv ff.

v2.c19.s5.8

² A. *Weber*, Die Griechen in Indien (SBA 1890, p. 927) has raised the question whether the Milindapañha has not, perhaps, a closer connection with the Dialogues of Plato representing "so to speak, an intentional Indian counterpart to them." This is, however, unlikely, if only because the Milindapañha dialogue has so many models in the dialogues of the Upaniṣads, in the ascetic poetry of the Mahābhārata and in the Tipiṭaka, that there is no reason for supposing a Greek prototype. Neither does the Milindapañha show any trace whatsoever of a knowledge of the Greek language or of the Greek world of thought (*cf. Garbe*, l.c., p. 114). *Finot*, too, (Introduction to his French translation, p. 14) thinks that the style of the Milindapañha shows traces of Greek influence.

v2.c19.s5.9

It is true that this praise, as well as the date I have assumed, cannot be applied to the entire work as we have it in the Pāli text, but only to the work in its original form; for there can scarcely be any doubt that, of the seven books which go to form the text, only a small part of the first introductory book and Books II and III are ancient and authentic. Even in Book III, later additions already appear to have crept in. By far the major portion of the work was not added until a later time, and probably not all at once. As it is the purpose of the work to dispel doubts of all kinds, which it does in somewhat incoherent fashion, it is, by its very nature, an eminently suitable receptacle for interpolation and additions. The most striking evidence of the spuriousness of Books IV-VII is the fact that they are absent in the Chinese translation, which is supposed to have originated between 317 and 420 A.D.¹ In contents, too, Books IV-VII differ from Book I in character. Moreover, the last chapter of Book III forms a fitting conclusion to the work, and Book IV begins with a new introduction.²

v2.c19.s5.10

¹ *Cf.* Ed. *Specht* et S. *Lévi*, Deux traductions Chinoises du Milindapañho, OC IX London 1892, I, 518 ff. The "two translations" are in reality only two recensions of *one and the same* translation. Under the title of "the Sūtra of Nāgasena" this translation was already mentioned by Seng-yeou in the Catalogue compiled by him in 505 A.D., among the books which he saw with his own eyes; whereas under the title of "the Sūtra of the similes of Nāgasena," it was only familiar to him from the "old catalogue" of the 5th century. *Cf.* P. *Pelliot* in JA 1914, sér. II, t. IV, p. 379 ff. In a Chinese Buddhist Avadāna work of 472 A.D., the introductory book of the Milindapañha, embellished with anecdotes, appears as an independent story, which has the appearance of a late echo of the old dialogue (*cf.* J. *Takakusu* in JRAS 1896, pp. 1-21 and Ed. *Chavannes*, Cinq cents contes du Tripiṭaka Chinois III, 120 ff., No. 418). L. A. *Waddell* (in JRAS 1897, p. 227 ff.) on the strength of very doubtful Tibetan data, has attempted to show that this Chinese Avadāna is nearer to the original work, and that originally not Milinda, but a king Nanda of Magadha, was the hero of the book. "Nanda," however, is undoubtedly only a sanskritised form of the Greek Menandros. *Cf.* *Pelliot*, l.c., p. 380 f. *Rhys Davids* (ERE VIII, 632) thinks it possible that the Indian work, which was translated into Chinese, consisted of seven books, and that the concluding books were omitted by the Chinese translator. I regard this as most unlikely.

v2.c19.s5.11

² *Cf.* *Garbe*, l.c., p. 136 ff. E. *Schrader* (Introduction to his translation, p. xxiii f.) assumes that there were seven different recensions or revisions of this work. In my opinion, gradual interpolations and additions should be assumed, rather than revisions. I do not see sufficient reasons for declaring the whole of Book III to be spurious, as do *Garbe* and *Schrader*. *Senart* (JA 1892, sér. 8, t. xix, p. 343) and *Barth* (Œuvres II, p. 171) already declared the end of Book III (Trenckner's ed., p. 89) to be the final portion of the original work. Similarly *Pelliot*, JA, s. II, t. IV, 1914, p. 418.

v2.c19.s5.12

The old poem probably began with the magnificent description of the city of Sāgala, the residence of King Milinda.³ Then it was related how the well-informed and mighty Greek king one day, after he had reviewed his army, expressed a wish for a contest in speeches. But the king was so dreaded an opponent in speech contests with wise men, that it was not easy to find a Brahman or an ascetic who would venture to dispute with him. However, his courtiers took him to the monk Āyupāla, who lived in a hermitage in the vicinity of Sāgala. Even he is embarrassed by the king's very first question, and Milinda exclaims: "Empty, alas, is all India. All India is but vain gossip! There is no ascetic or Brahman who is capable of disputing with me and solving my doubts!" Just at that time the very learned and wise Buddhist monk Nāgasena was passing through villages and towns begging. He was famed far and wide for his wisdom, and in debate nobody could rival him. He had just come to Sāgala and had settled down in a hermitage. The courtiers take the king to him, and the personality of the sage at once makes a powerful impression on the king.¹

v2.c19.s5.13

³ The Pāli work begins with a few introductory verses, and towards the end of the introduction, too, we find a few verses. *Schrader* (pp. xxvi, xxxii) regards these verses as the remnants of a Pāli poem which originated in Ceylon. I think they are only Gāthās of the kind which occur so frequently in the Suttas of the Tipiṭaka, and which were at all times popular in India for the embellishment of prose narratives.

v2.c19.s5.14

¹ The passages which I regard as decidedly spurious in Book I, are the following: paragraph 3 (a table of contents, which refers to the entire Pāli work), paragraphs 4-8 (a Jātaka, which tells of the former births of Milinda and Nāgasena, and ends with a prophecy of Buddha), 11-14 (already recognised by *Rhys Davids* as a clumsy interpolation) and 16-36 (conception, birth, youth, conversion and attainment of Arhatship of Nāgasena).

v2.c19.s5.15

Neatly arising from this situation, the first dialogue immediately introduces us to one of the main problems of Buddhism. King Milinda asks the sage his name. The sage says he is called Nāgasena, but that is merely a name, there is no ego, no person attached to it. This leads to a most excellent dialogue between the sage and the king, and finally the king has to confess that there is no permanent ego.²

v2.c19.s5.16

² *Cf.* *Oldenberg*, Buddha, p. 292 ff.; *Radhakrishnan*, Indian Philosophy, I, 391 f.

v2.c19.s5.17

The Buddhist doctrine that there is no permanent ego, no substance of soul,³ but only a constant change of physical and psychical phenomena, can scarcely be reconciled to the belief in a cycle of rebirths, such as Buddha like the rest of his countrymen assumed, and still less does it harmonise with the doctrine of Karman, according to which all that an individual suffers or enjoys is the result of his own previous actions, a doctrine which plays so important a part in the ethics of Buddhism. The first of these two questions forms the theme of the following conversation,¹ which I quote here because it shows the ability of the author of this work in elucidating even the most difficult problems in an ingenious manner, and by means of excellent parables:

v2.c19.s5.18

³ This is certainly the standpoint of the author of the Milindapañha. In the Canon we find sometimes a decided denial of the ego, at other times the doctrine that an ego does exist in a certain sense, and frequently the agnostic point of view that it is impossible to say either that there is a soul, or the contrary. *Cf.* M. *Walleser*, Die philosophische Grundlage des älteren Buddhismus I, 111 ff; Mrs. *C. A. F. Rhys Davids*, Buddhist Psychology (1924), pp. 156 ff., 278 ff.; *Radhakrishnan*, l.c., 382 ff., 390 ff.; *Keith*, Buddhist Philosophy, pp. 75 ff., 191 ff.

v2.c19.s5.19

¹ Ed. *Trenckner*, p. 40; SBE, Vol. 35, p. 63 ff. *Cf.* *Oldenberg*, Buddha, p. 301 *Keith*, *Buddhist Philosophy*, p. 169 f.

v2.c19.s5.20

The king said: "Lord Nāgasena, when a man is reborn, is he the same or is he another?" The Thera said: "He is neither the same nor is he another." "Give me a parable." "What do you think, great king, are you now as an adult the same as you were as a tender little boy, a little child lying flat on your back?" "No, lord, that tender little boy, that little child lying flat on its back was another, and I as an adult am now another." "If that is so, great king, then you have no mother, no father, no teacher, you have never been instructed, never learned the commandments, never gained wisdom. How then, great king, is the mother of the embryo in its four stages each time another, is the mother of the little child another, and the mother of the adult yet another? Is it another who takes instruction, and another who has learned something? Is it another who commits a crime, and another who is punished by having his hands and feet cut off?" "No, lord, but what would you reply?" The Thera said: "I myself, great king, was the tender little boy, the little child lying flat on its back, and I myself am now the adult. Through one and the same body all these are combined into one unity." "Give me a parable." "Great king, if a man lighted a lamp, would it burn all the night?" "Yes, lord, it would." "How now, great king, is the flame in the first watch of the night the same as the flame in the second watch of the night?" "No, lord." "And is the flame in the second watch of the night the same as the flame in the last watch of the night?" "No, lord." "How, great king, then was there one lamp in the first watch of the night, another lamp in the second watch of the night, and yet another lamp in the last watch of the night?" "No, lord, the lamp burned the whole night by means of one and the same (combustible)." "Exactly so, great king, the continuity of the phenomena² comes about, it is another who arises, and another who passes away, but at the same time there is something which unites them, and therefore a man enters into his last union with consciousness¹ neither as the same nor as another."

v2.c19.s5.21

² *i.e.*, of the beings, which, however, are in reality only ever changing phenomena.

v2.c19.s5.22

¹ i.e., into his last rebirth, for it is the "consciousness" (viññāṇa), by means of which a new individual is formed in the womb. See *Oldenberg*, Buddha, pp. 255 ff., 301 *Keith*, Buddhist Philosophy, p. 78 f.

v2.c19.s5.23

There is a whole series of parables to explain why, though there is no permanent ego, a man is yet responsible for his actions. The following parable is one of them:²

v2.c19.s5.24

² Ed. *Trenckner*, p. 46; SBE, Vol. 35, p. 72.

v2.c19.s5.25

"Suppose a man has stolen another man's mangoes, the owner of the mango tree seizes him, takes him before the king, and says: 'Your Majesty, this man has stolen my mangoes;' now, if the thief says: 'Your Majesty, I did not steal this man's mangoes, the fruits which he planted, and those which I took away, were not the same fruits, I deserve no punishment, would this man be punished, great king?' 'Yes, lord, he would be punished.' 'And why so?' 'Because, whatever the man may say, he would be punished on account of the last mango which undeniably would not be there, had it not been for the former one."

v2.c19.s5.26

In Book II there is a superabundance of excellent parables of this kind. In the authentic part of Book III, too, there is many an apt simile. When, for instance, Nāgasena, in reply to one of the king's questions, says that the end of suffering is brought about not only through renunciation in this life, but that, in addition, efforts in former existences are also needful, he illustrates it by asking the king whether he would delay the digging of wells until he was thirsty, or instruct his men to plough, sow and reap, when he was hungry, or have ramparts dug, walls erected and fortresses built, when the enemy was already before the gates.

v2.c19.s5.27

These specimens will suffice to show the great value of the first and genuine part of the Milindapañha even as a literary production. It is indeed a masterpiece of ancient Indian prose. In Book II and the greater part of Book III, only such questions are raised, as relate to the most important points of Buddhistic ethics and psychology, fundamental questions which are of interest to any layman. Book IV, on the other hand, contains a system of apologetics which could not possibly be of interest to any but thorough-going scholars of the canonical texts. The dilemmas which are discussed in this work, frequently turn to very petty subjects of dogmatics, but especially to the person of Buddha, *e. g.*, what is the use of the veneration of relics, if the Buddha has passed away utterly? How can the Buddha be omniscient, when we are told that he pondered? Why did Buddha receive Devadatta into the Order, even though he knew that this monk would cause a schism? Etc. The reason for these dilemmas is the juxtaposition of contradictory texts. At the same time, every word of the canon, even the most casual remark in the profanest stories in the Jātaka-Book, is regarded as a sacred word of Buddha, which must of necessity be true and good. If, in any of his former births, related in the Jātakas, the Bodhisatta had any faults or vices, the author of Book IV of the Milindapañha does his best to exonerate him. For, in his eyes, the Bodhisatta is entirely identical with the perfect Buddha. The authentic books do not bear the slightest trace of such a conception (neither does the Tipiṭaka). The question as to whether the Buddha ever existed at all,¹ which had already been broached in Book III, is again raised in Book V, and Nāgasena answers it by saying that his existence may be inferred from his teachings. This idea is worked out in a lengthy, very ornate and detailed parable making up the greater part of the book, in which Buddha, who has created his religion, is compared with a master-builder, who builds up a large city. Book VI presents a dilemma, which had already been brought up for discussion in Book IV, but had not found any very satisfactory solution;¹ it is this: If, as the scriptures say, even laymen can attain to the state of an Arhat, why should a man take upon himself the strict monastic vows? The answer given here, is that laymen can attain to the state of an Arhat and Nirvāṇa only because they have already fulfilled the strict vows in former births. These strict vows, the thirteen Dhutaṅgas,² are then described in detail, and their exceptional value explained. This is apparently the real purpose of Book VI. In all the books of the Milindapañha the questions raised are generally answered in parables. Book VII is entirely a book of parables; there are no less than 67 parables³ illustrative of the qualities essential for the monk who desires to attain to the state of an Arhat. Many of these parables already appear in the Tipiṭaka.

v2.c19.s5.28

¹ Ed. *Trenckner*, pp. 70, 73; SBE, Vol. 35, pp. 109, 113.

v2.c19.s5.29

¹ Ed. *Trenckner*, p. 242 ff.; SBE, Vol. 36, p. 56 ff.

v2.c19.s5.30

² They are very advantageous for a holy life, but are not compulsory for all monks. They are discussed in Section If of Buddhaghosa's Visuddhi-Magga. The term Dhutaṅga (or Dhūtaṅga) is not yet to be found in the Tipiṭaka, except in the Parivāra of later date (Vinayapiṭaka, ed. Oldenberg, Vol. V, p. 193, cf. p. 131). *Cf. Kern*, Manual of Indian Buddhism, p. 75 f.

v2.c19.s5.31

³ The book begins with a table of contents (mātikā) which gives an additional 38 parables. The entire book was probably appended to the Milindapañha even later than the preceding books, and remained incomplete.

v2.c19.s5.32

In Books IV-VII we find, on the one hand, a liberal sprinkling of quotations from the canon, and on the other, frequent allusions to traditions divergent from those embodied in the canon, and most likely belonging to a later period, and especially allusions to legends which appear only in the commentaries, in the commentary on the Jātaka and in those on the Vimānavatthu and Dhammapada.⁴ These legends are permeated with a low conception of the doctrine of Karman, an exaggerated cult of the Buddha (Buddha-Bhakti) and a somewhat crude belief in miracles, which would seem to indicate a later period.

v2.c19.s5.33

⁴ *Cf. E. W. Burlingame* in HOS, Vol. 28, p. 60 ff. Burlingame is wrong in concluded from these references that Books IV-VII of the Mil. "are as late as the beginning of the sixth century A.D." Not only is it not proved, but, in view of sundry deviations, it is unlikely, that the author of Books IV-VII of the Mil. derived his knowledge of the legends referred to, from these commentaries. *Cf.* also *Rhys Davids*, SBE, Vol. 35, pp. xl ff., 196, 284 ff., 297 f.; Vol. 36, pp 43 ff., 143 note, 304 note. The authentic parts of the Mil. contain only such quotations as could, for other reasons too, be regarded as belonging to the earliest part of the Canon. The enumeration of the seven books of the Abhidhamma (I, 26) appears in the spurious part of the introduction.

v2.c19.s5.34

A work which is probably as early as the earliest portions of the Milindapañha, and which also possibly dates far enough back to have been written in India, is the Netti-Pakaraṇa, also called Netti-Gandha, or simply Netti, "The Book of Guidance" (*viz.*, to the True Religion).¹ This is the earliest work which offers a connected treatment of the whole of the teaching of Buddha; it is possibly earlier than the last two books of the Abhidhammapiṭaka,² and is ascribed to no less a person than Mahākaccāna, the disciple of Buddha, who, as far back as in the Majjhimanikāya, was proclaimed to be the best expounder of the word of Buddha.³ The same Mahākaccāna is also said to have composed the Peṭakopadesa, "Instruction of the students of the Piṭakas,"⁴ a continuation of the Netti, and most likely not much later than this last-named work. A commentary on the Netti was written by Dhammapāla (probably in the fifth century A. D.).

v2.c19.s5.35

¹ With Extracts from Dhammapāla's Commentary ed. by *E. Hardy*, PTS 1902.

v2.c19.s5.36

² *Cf.* Mrs. *Rhys Davids*, JRAS 1925, p. 111 f.

v2.c19.s5.37

³ Majjh. 18 (I, 110 ff.), 133 (III, 194 ff.), 138 (III, 223 ff.).

v2.c19.s5.38

⁴ Not yet published, but see *Rudolf Fuchs's* Specimen des Peṭakopadesa, Berlin, Diss., 1908. *Cf.* *Shwe Zan Aung* in JPTS 1910-1912, p. 120.

v2.c19.s5.39

By far the major portion of non-canonical Pāli literature consists of commentaries. The monks in the monasteries of India and Ceylon, to whom we are indebted for the comparatively faithful transmission of the canonical texts, did not rest content with the study and teaching of these texts, but from the very outset endeavoured to explain them too. In the Suttas we find the earliest beginnings of exegetical activity, and there are a few commentaries in the canon itself.¹ Though we cannot believe the orthodox Buddhists of Ceylon, when they affirm that the Aṭṭhakathās, *i.e.*, the “explanations of the meaning” or “commentaries,” have been handed down since the first Council with the texts of the Tipiṭaka, were translated into Singhalese by Mahinda, written down under Vaṭṭagāmani, and translated into Pāli by Buddhaghosa (5th century A.D.),² yet we can have no doubt that the exegetical and literary activity of the monks began in India immediately after the compilation of the texts, and, that Pāli, the language of the canon, was used also for the early commentaries. These ancient teachers are often cited in the commentaries of the 5th century, as Porāṇā, “the ancient ones.”³ But when the Theravāda school in India itself was more and more superseded by other Buddhist sects and schools, it was the monasteries of Ceylon,⁴ which became permanent centres for the study of the Theravāda texts. Whatever Pāli commentaries were available were translated into Singhalese. Only the verses, partly memorial verses and partly verses of narrative passages, were left unchanged in Pāli. The monks of Ceylon worked on independently in this direction, wrote Singhalese commentaries, tried their hand at Pāli also, especially Pāli verses, and attained to such a degree of perfection in this, that in the 5th century it was already possible for Buddhaghosa to write in an elegant Pāli style, and to set about translating or retranslating the Singhalese commentaries into the sacred Pāli language.

v2.c19.s5.40

¹ B. Ch. *Law*, Life and Work of Buddhaghosa, p. 53 ff. The Sutta-Vibhaṅga in itself is a kind of commentary on the Pāṭimokkha. The Udāna and the Suttanipāta contain prose passages in the nature of commentaries. The Niddesa is an early commentary on parts of the Suttanipāta. A commentary ascribed to Sāriputta found its way into the Abhidhammapiṭaka as an appendix to the Dhamma-Saṅgaṇi.

v2.c19.s5.41

² *Cf.* L. Comrilla *Vijasinha* and R. C. *Childers* in JRAS 1871, p. 289 ff., *Kern*, Manual of Indian Buddhism, p. 8 f.; Th. *Foulkes* in Ind. Ant. 17, 1888, 123 f.; Dīpavaṁsa 20, 20f.; Mahāvaṁsa 33, 100 ff.; Geiger, Pāli Literatur und Sprache, p. 17 (para. 18).

v2.c19.s5.42

³ Sometimes as Porāṇa-Kathā or Porāṇa-Aṭṭhakathā. Theras who compiled extracts from the Canon (therā dhammasaṁgāhakā) were also counted among the Porāṇas. One and the same verse is ascribed in the Milindapañha (p. 369) to these Theras, and in the Visuddhi-Magga (p. 270) to the “Porāṇā.” *Cf.* Mrs. *Rhys Davids*, Visuddhi-Magga Ed., Vol. II, p. 764 f.; B. Ch. *Law*, Life and Work of Buddhaghosa, p. 64 ff.

v2.c19.s5.43

⁴ Various monasteries had their own commentaries; besides the Mūla- or Mahā-Aṭṭhakathā of the “great monastery” (Mahāvihāra) of Anurādhapura; there was also one of the “northern monastery” (Uttaravihāra) in the same city of Ceylon, as well as an Andha-Aṭṭhakathā in Kāñcīpura in South India, and others. *Cf.* Mrs. *Rhys Davids*, Buddhist Manual of Psychological Ethics, 2nd Ed., p. xxviii.

v2.c19.s5.44

The exegetical and literary activity of the monks, however, extended to all the "three gems": Buddha, the religion (Dhamma) and the monastic community (Saṅgha). The Buddha legend was elaborated; they were not content with the ballads and occasional narratives of the Tipiṭaka, but wished to have a complete account of the Master's life. The religious texts were illustrated and explained in the same manner as was customary in India as far back as the time of the Brāhmaṇas, not only grammatically and lexically, but also by means of narratives and legends.¹ As the Brahmans in their Vedic schools, so also the monks in their monasteries, were true Indians, in that they felt a keen delight in the telling of stories. The numerous narratives contained in the canon were not sufficient for them. They lengthened and completed, they added what they gathered from oral transmission, they inserted what was familiar to them from other branches of literature, re-modelling it in the spirit of Buddhism, and they certainly also composed much that was new in imitation of old models. They also collected the legends on the origin, and made records concerning the history of the monastic order, with the discipline of which they dealt in the commentaries on the Vinayapiṭaka, so that the Aṭṭhakathās also contained the beginnings of a church history.

v2.c19.s5.45

¹ The Aṭṭhakathās contain Jātakas and other narratives, in the same way as the Arthavāda of the Brāhmaṇas (*cf.* above Vol. I, p. 208) contains Itihāsas and Ākhyānas.

v2.c19.s5.46

As regards the Buddha legend, we have seen that there was no actual Buddha biography contained in the canon, but only the beginnings of one. In the Vinayapiṭaka, in certain speeches of the Suttapiṭaka and in a few of the ancient ballads of the Suttanipāta, we found on the one hand records, more or less reliable, of the actual life of the Master, and on the other, the earliest beginnings of a Buddha legend and a Buddha epic. In the Buddhavaṃsa we found a kind of previous history, and in Chapter 26 of it, the epitome of a biography, of the Buddha. The Cariyāpiṭaka and the Jātaka, too, telling of the former existences of the Buddha, contain, at least in the view of the orthodox Buddhist, contributions to the history of the life of Buddha.¹ As far as Pāli literature is concerned, there is, however, no connected life story of the Buddha until we come to the Nidāna-Kathā,² the "Narrative of the Beginnings,"³ which precedes the Jātakaṭṭhavaṇṇanā, the Jātaka commentary, and forms a part of this great commentary work.

v2.c19.s5.47

¹ *Cf.* Rhys Davids, Cambridge History, I, 196 f.; J. Dutoit, Das Leben des Buddha, Leipzig 1906; E. H. Brewster, The Life of Gotama the Buddha. (Compiled exclusively from the Pali Canon.) With an Introductory Note by C. A. F. *Rhys Davids*, London 1926.

v2.c19.s5.48

² The text is to be found in Fausböll's edition of the Jātaka, Vol. I, pp. 1-94, translated by T. W. *Rhys Davids*, Buddhist Birth Stories, pp. 1-133; a free rendering of the contents of the Nidāna-Kathā in Kern, Der Buddhismus I., pp. 24-140, a translation of the dūrenidāna and avidūrenidāna in *Warren*, Buddhism in Translations, pp. 5-83. Two shorter passages, translated by J. Dutoit, Leben des Buddha, pp. 5 ff., 18 ff.

v2.c19.s5.49

³ *i.e.*, of the beginnings of Buddha's career. Nidāna means "cause," "origin," hence also "beginning."

v2.c19.s5.50

This Nidāna-Kathā consists of three sections: 1. The story of the "beginnings in the remote past" (dūrenidāna), from the existence of the later Buddha as Sumedha at the time of the Buddha Dīpaṅkara down to his re-birth in the heaven of the Tusita gods; 2. The story of the "beginnings in the not very remote past" (avidūrenidāna), beginning with the descent of Buddha from the heaven of the Tusita gods, and ending with the attainment of Bodhi, *i.e.*, enlightenment; and 3. The story of the "beginnings in the present" (santikenidāna), relating the events from the enlightenment of Buddha down to the story of the magnificent donation of the merchant Anāthapiṇḍika.

v2.c19.s5.51

The first section is directly connected with the Buddhavamsa and the Cariyāpiṭaka, and is, in the main, a mere commentary on an extract from these two texts. Only the narrative of Sumedha, out of Chapter II of the Buddhavaṃsa, is completely included. We have seen how, countless æons before, the future Buddha, as Sumedha, pays homage to the Buddha of that time, namely Dīpaṅkara, and resolves to attain to the ten "perfections," in order to become worthy of Buddhahood.¹ After he had formed this resolve, he strove again and again in countless re-births for the fulfilment of these highest "perfections"—they are described in the Cariyāpiṭaka, which the author of the Nidāna-Kathā here quotes,² until finally, in his existence as Vessantara, by his boundless self-denying generosity, he has attained to the summit of perfection and is then re-born in the heaven of the Tusita gods.

v2.c19.s5.52

¹ See above, p. 161.

v2.c19.s5.53

² Though, as already observed above, on p. 164, in a version deviating from ours.

v2.c19.s5.54

While in Section I the prose is continually interrupted by verses from the Buddhavaṃsa and the Cariyāpiṭaka, the two next sections contain only a few occasional verse quotations. Section II commences with the "Buddha uproar" in heaven. The Tusita gods importune the Bodhisatta to be born again on earth for the salvation of the world, and, after due consideration, he decides to do so. Then follow the familiar legends of the conception of the Bodhisatta, who, as a white elephant, appears to penetrate into the womb of the dreaming Queen Māyā, of his miraculous birth in the Lumbinī-grove,³ of the welcoming of the newly-born child and the prophecy of the seer Asita about his future greatness, the miracles of his childhood and boyhood, the four encounters of the prince, through which he becomes acquainted with age, disease, death and renunciation of the world, the night scene in the seraglio which matures his resolve to renounce the world, his flight from the palace, achieved with numerous miracles and the aid of the gods, and his adopting the life of a mendicant monk, of his great feats of asceticism, of the milky rice of Sujātā, prepared with the aid of numerous miracles, from which the Bodhisatta, exhausted by his long fast, derives new strength, the meditation under the Bodhi tree, and the attacks of Māra, and finally the attainment of Bodhi, the highest knowledge, which is accompanied by numerous miraculous phenomena.

v2.c19.s5.55

³ In all this, the Nidāna-Kathā has only slightly embellished the miracles told in Dīghanikāya, 14 and Majjhimanikāya, 123. The "white elephant," it is true, does not as yet appear in the Pāli Canon, though it is to be found on the rocks of Kalsi and Dhauli, which contain edicts of King Aśoka, the one on the Kalsi rock bearing the inscription: gajatame, "the best elephant." A relief on the East gate of the stūpa at Sānchi represents the conception of Buddha, showing how he penetrates into the womb of Māyā in the shape of an elephant. *Cf.* E. Hultzsch, The Inscriptions of Aśoka, pp. xiii, 26 f., 27 note 2, 50, 51; *A. Foucher*, The Beginnings of Buddhist Art, p. 92; *Windisch*, Buddhas Geburt, pp. 5 ff., 155 ff.

v2.c19.s5.56

In Section III, too, which deals mainly with the first conversions and is less suited to the introduction of miracles, these latter are by no means absent. A week is spent by Buddha lost in meditation under the Bodhi tree, and the gods doubt whether he has really attained enlightenment. In order to dispel their doubts, he performs a few miracles, rises in the air, then stands beside his "throne" looking towards the East, and remains standing thus for a week, without blinking his eyes. Here the Nidāna-Kathā inserts the remark that on this spot the Animisacetiya, *i.e.*, the "shrine of the non-blinking," was later erected. Several other passages, too, mention fanes which are to recall events in the life of the Buddha, and which probably actually existed. The conversion of the two merchants Tapussa and Bhallika who became lay-disciples is already related in the Vinayapiṭaka (Mahāvagga I, 4). The Nidāna-Kathā adds, however, that these first lay-disciples received a few hairs from the Buddha, over which relics they erected a shrine. The visit of the Buddha to his native town of Kapilavatthu is recounted in great detail, and there is no lack of miracles. Much space is also occupied by the narrative of the great merchant Anāthapiṇḍika, who presented the Jetavana-grove to the monastic order. With this narrative the Nidāna-Kathā breaks off, without its really being evident why the conclusion has been made at precisely this point.

v2.c19.s5.57

The occasional references to the Nidāna-Kathā, in the "stories of the present" (Paccuppanavatthu) prove that the Nidāna-Kathā does not precede the Jātaka commentary by mere accident, but forms an essential part of it. However, as the author of the former work expressly says in one passage,¹ that he deviates from the Jātakaṭṭhakathā, and refers to the "other Aṭṭha-Kathās," it follows that he did not merely translate the Singhalese commentary, but revised it freely with the aid of other commentaries. Unfortunately we have no clue for a definite determination of the date of the Jātaka commentary, and consequently, not of the Nidāna-Kathā either. One thing, however, is certain. The many points of agreement between the Buddha legend as it is related in the Sanskrit sources, and the Nidāna-Kathā, prove that the last-mentioned work is based on the same *Indian* tradition as the former, and therefore probably also reaches back to commentaries which were brought from India to Ceylon, and that at a time before the Mahāyāna literature was developed in India. At all events the Nidāna-Kathā represents an earlier phase in the development of the Buddha legend than the Lalitavistara and similar Sanskrit works, even if the latter must be ascribed to an earlier time.

v2.c19.s5.58

¹ Jātaka, Ed. Fausböll, p. 62.

v2.c19.s5.59

In the Gandhavaṃsa, a "History of the Books," probably written in Burma in the 17th century, Buddhaghosa is said to be the author of the Jātaka commentary. If this were correct, he would belong to the 5th century A.D.; for, little as we know of this commentator, equally celebrated in Ceylon and Burma,¹ we may believe tradition as far as to assume that he lived in the reign of King Mahānāma of Ceylon. It is true that we find this report only in the continuation of the Mahāvaṁsa, which was not written until about the middle of the 13th century. It is, however, confirmed by the fact that a work by Buddhaghosa was already translated into Chinese in 489 A.D.² Out of all the legends that have been woven about this learned man, we might accept as an historical fact that, during the reign of King Mahānāma, he diligently studied the texts of the Tipiṭaka and the Singhalese Aṭṭha-Kathās or "commentaries" in the "great monastery" (Mahāvihāra) of Anurādhapura in Ceylon, where they were kept, and that later, as the first-fruits of his studies, he wrote a systematic work on the Buddha doctrine, the Visuddhi-Magga,³ and afterwards revised, in the Pāli language, the commentaries on the chief texts of the Tipiṭaka.⁴ It is credible, too, that, as the legend has it, he was descended from a Brahman family in the neighbourhood of Bōdh-Gayā, became deeply learned in Brahmanical lore in early youth, but, in consequence of a disputation, was converted to Buddhism by the monk Revata, and was stimulated by his teacher to go to Ceylon to study the Singhalese commentaries.¹ He certainly wrote many of the works ascribed to him which made his name so great, that he was regarded as the commentator *par excellence*, and that commentaries were later ascribed to him which were the work of other authors, or whose authors were unknown. He himself, in introductory verses, mentions as his works the Visuddhi-Magga, the Samantapāsādikā (commentary on the Vinayapiṭaka), the Sumaṅgalavilāsinī (commentary on the Dīghanikāya), the Papañcasūdanī (commentary on the Majjhimanikāya), the Sāratthapakāsinī (commentary on the Saṃyuttanikāya) and the Manoratha-Pūraṇī (commentary on the Aṅguttaranikāya). In the Gandhavamsa there are also ascribed to him the commentaries Kaṅkhāvitaraṇī (on the Pāṭimokkhas), Paramattha-Kathā (on the seven books of the Abhidhammapiṭaka) and those on the Khuddaka-Pāṭha, Suttanipāta, Jātaka and Apadāna.²

v2.c19.s5.60

¹ *Cf.* Bimala Charan *Law*, The Life and Work of Buddhaghosa, Calcutta and Simla, 1923 (Calcutta Or. Series, No. 9, E. 3); Max *Müller* in SBE 10 (I), pp. xii.xxiv; *Minayeff*, Recherches, 189 ff.; Thos. *Foulkes* in Ind. Ant. 19, 1890, pp. 105-122 and T. W. *Rhys Davids* in ERE II, 885 ff. The "biography" written by the monk Mahāmaṅgala in Burma, perhaps in the 14th century (*cf.* Geiger, Pāli Literatur und Sprache, p. 31, para. 40) and published by James *Gray*, Buddhaghosuppatti or the Historical Romance of the Rise and Career of Buddhaghosa, London, 1892, is purely legendary.

v2.c19.s5.61

² This Chinese translation of the Samantapāsādikā is the first work which has been proved to have been translated into Chinese from Pāli. Before this only Chinese translations from Sanskrit were known (J. *Takakusu* in JRAS 1896, 415 ff.)

v2.c19.s5.62

³ There is a tradition that he wrote a work (which has not come down to us) Ñāṇodaya ("the dawning of knowledge") and the Atthasālinī in India, before departing for Ceylon. If there is any truth in this tradition, this atthasālinī could only have been the rough plan of his commentary on the Dhamma-Saṅgaṇi; for the Atthasālinī, which has come down to us, presupposes the Visuddhi-Magga, which was written in Ceylon. *Cf.* Mrs *Rhys Davids*, Buddhist Manual of Psychological Ethics, 2nd ed., p. xxvii.

v2.c19.s5.63

⁴ He tells us himself (in the introduction to the Samantapāsādikā) that he not only translated the commentaries of the Mahāvihāra from the Singhalese, but compared them with the commentaries of other monasteries, abbreviated and freely revised them. Burlingame (JAOS 38, 1918, 267 f.) pronounces the tradition according to which the Attha-Kathās were translated from Pāli into Singhalese, and translated back again from Singhalese into Pāli by Buddhaghosa and others, to be "unreliable and misleading," because Buddhaghosa and the compiler of the commentary on the Dhammapada availed themselves of common Pāli originals though independently of each other, and because both Dhamma-pāla and the compiler of the Jātaka commentary copied from Buddhaghosa's commentaries. Nevertheless, it is possible, indeed probable, that the 5th century translators, though translating from the Singhalese, used available Pāli texts as well (*e g.*, of legends and tales).

v2.c19.s5.64

¹ On Buddhaghosa's date and life, see Appendix IV.

v2.c19.s5.65

² Gandhavamsa, JPTS 1886, p. 59.

v2.c19.s5.66

There is scarcely any doubt that Buddhaghosa is also the author of the commentaries on the Abhidhammapiṭaka, or at least of the Atthasālinī (commentary on the Dhamma-Saṅgaṇi), the Sammoha-vinodanī (commentary on the Vibhaṅga) and the commentary on the Paṭṭhāna-Pakaraṇa, and most likely of the Kaṅkhāvitaraṇī and the Paramattha-Jotikā (commentaries on the Khuddaka-Pāṭha and the Suttanipāta).¹ On the other hand, the commentaries on the Jātaka and the Dhammapada are so very different in language and style from Buddhaghosa's commentaries, that he cannot possibly have written them.² As far as these two works are concerned, the designation "commentary" is, as a matter of fact, just as unsuitable as the expression "author." For, in both works, the actual commentary, *i.e.*, the grammatical and lexical explanation of the verses, occupies only a very small space, whilst narratives, or, to be more exact, sermons in the form of narratives,³ constitute the major part. It will be more correct to speak of compilers or editors, who collected and edited these sermons or narratives.

v2.c19.s5.67

¹ The Khuddaka-Pāṭha commentary has been proved to be the work of Buddhaghosa, by *Burlingame* in HOS, Vol. 28, p. 51f. An edition in Siamese characters of all the commentaries of Buddhaghosa (23 vols.) and of his Visuddhi-Magga (3 vols.) issued by H. H. the Supreme Patriarch of Siam, *Prince Vajiriyana*, in 1920-1922, has been generously presented to scholars by H. R. H. the Prince of Chandaburi. The following commentaries have up to now (1927) been published by the PTS: Samanta-Pāsādikā ed. by *J. Takakusu* assisted by *M. Nagai*, I, 1924, II, 1927; Sumaṅgala-Vilāsinī ed. by *T. W. Rhys Davids* and *J. E. Carpenter*, I, 1886; Papañcasūdanī ed. by *J. H. Woods* and *D. Kosambi*, I, Suttas 1-10, 1922; Manoratha-Pūraṇī, I, Eka-Nipāta, ed. by *Max Walleser*, 1924; Paramattha-Jotikā I, Khuddakapāṭha Commentary, ed. by *Helmer Smith* from a Collation by *Mabel Hunt*, 1915; Paramattha-Jotikā II, Suttanipāta Commentary, ed. by *Helmer Smith*, 1916-1918; Atthasālinī ed. by *Ed. Müller*, 1897; translated ("The Expositor") by *Maung Tin*, ed. and revised by *Mrs. Rhys Davids*, 1920-21; Sammohavinodanī, ed. by *A. P. Buddhadatta Thera*, 1923; Commentary to Paṭṭhānapakaraṇa in the edition of the Tikapaṭṭhāna by *Mrs. Rhys Davids*, 1921-1923; Puggalapaññatti-Atthakathā ed. by *G. Landsberg* and *Mrs. Rhys Davids* in JPTS 1913-1914, p. 170 ff.; Kathāvatthuppakaraṇa-Aṭṭhakathā ed. by *J. P. Minayeff*, in JPTS 1889; Yamakappakaraṇatthakathā ed. by *Mrs. Rhys Davids* in JPTS 1910-1912, p. 51 ff. Editions of Buddhaghosa's commentaries have also been published in Ceylon and in Burma. See *Geiger*, Pāli Literatur und Sprache, p. 19 f., para. 22. There is no mention in any Pāli source, of Buddhaghosa's having written a Sanskrit epic Padya-cūḍāmaṇi also (see below in the chapter on Buddhist Sanskrit literature).

v2.c19.s5.68

² *Cf. Rhys Davids*, Buddhist Birth Stories, p. lxiii ff.; *Burlingame* in HOS, Vol 28, pp. 49, 59 f.; *Law*, Life and Work of Buddhaghosa, p. ix f.

v2.c19.s5.69

³ Both in the Jātaka commentary and the Dhammapada commentary, the stories are made to issue from Buddha's own lips, as dhammadesanā, *i.e.*, "religious instructions" or "sermons."

v2.c19.s5.70

In fact the commentary on the Dhammapada¹ forms a valuable supplement to the commentary on the Jātaka, and, like the latter, contains many an ancient, popular narrative theme, some of which are well known in universal literature, far beyond the borders of India. Thus we find here the story of a king of Benares who, like Harun al Rashid, wanders about the city at night, the tale of "Doctor Know-all," and so on. Here we also meet with the famous story of Kisā-Gotamī, the mother who strays about in despair with her dead child in her arms, and comes to the Buddha who tells her that he can restore her child to life if she will bring him a mustard seed; but this mustard seed must come from a house in which nobody has ever died. In vain the mother searches from house to house, until finally it dawns upon her that the Master was only endeavouring to teach her the great truth of the universality of death, and, comforted, she becomes a member of the community of Buddha. The legend proves itself genuinely Indian, owing to the fact that it belongs to the type of "consolatory stories" so familiar to us. For this reason, when we meet with a similar anecdote in the Alexander-legend, in a few versions of Pseudo-Kallisthenes as well as in Arabian, Jewish, Persian and Coptic narratives of Alexander, it is more probable that the Buddhist legend influenced the Greek legend; and Rohde's hypothesis of its having first originated on Greek soil, is less feasible.¹ On the other hand, when we read in the romance of Udena and Vāsuladattā,² how King Pajjota, in order to entice Udena into an ambuscade and to get him into his power, had a wooden elephant made, in which he concealed sixty warriors, we see in this an echo of the legend of the Trojan horse, which penetrated to Indian shores.

v2.c19.s5.71

¹ Edited by *H. C. Norman*, 5 vols. (Vol. V, Indexes by *Lakshmaṇa Shastri Tailang*), PTS 1906-1915. Translated (Buddhist Legends) by *Eugene Watson Burlingame*, with important introduction, in HOS, Vols. 28-30, Cambridge, Mass., 1921. Extracts have been edited by *V. Fausböll* in his edition of the Dhammapada (Hauniae 1855). Selections of tales have been translated by *Warren*, Buddhism in Translations, pp. 221 ff., 264 ff., 380 ff., 430 ff., 451 ff., into French by *L. de La Vallée Poussin* and *G. de Blonay* in RHR 26, 1892, 180 ff.; 29, 1894, 195 ff., 329 ff.; from a Burmese version by *T. Rogers*, Buddhaghoṣa's Parables, London 1870. *Cf. Burlingame*, Buddhaghosa's Dhammapada Commentary, and the Titles of its three hundred and ten Stories, together with an Index thereto and an Analysis of Vaggas I-IV, in Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Vol. 45, 1910, pp. 467-550. On the subject-matter and motifs of the stories, s. *Burlingame* in HOS, Vol. 28, p. 29 ff.

v2.c19.s5.72

¹ The story is told in connection with Dhammapada 114, Ed. Norman II, 272 ff.; translation Burlingame in HOS, Vol. 29, 257 ff. *Cf.* E. Rohde in Verhandlungen der 30. Versammlung deutscher Philologen und Schulmänner zu Rostock 1875, p. 68 f, J. H. *Thiessen*, Die Legende von Kisāgotamī, Breslau 1880, and above, Vol. I, 395 f., 411 ff., Vol. II, p. 142.

v2.c19.s5.73

² Udenavatthu on Dhammapada 21-23, ed. Norman I, 161-231, transl. Burlingame in HOS, Vol. 28, 62 f., 247 ff. *Cf.* A. Weber, Indische Streifen I, 370 note, and III, 16, and *Rhys Davids*, Buddhist India, p. 4 ff.

v2.c19.s5.74

The plan of the work is as follows: To every verse or group of verses of the Dhammapada, it is recorded that the Master delivered "this sermon" (dhammadesanā), by which is meant the verse or the group of verses together with the narrative belonging to it, at such and such a place and with reference to this or that person or persons or event. Hereupon follows the story, which ends with the verse or verses, which are then explained word for word. All this, story, verses and explanation of words, is made to issue from Buddha's own lips. In the conclusion it is usually mentioned that after this sermon or these Gāthās a person appearing in the story or "many" or "a hundred thousand" persons (or monks) set their feet on the path of holiness, or attained to a higher stage of holiness. Not infrequently regular Jātakas, too, are inserted or added, telling of the deeds or experiences in a former existence of the hero of the story. The stories themselves are very varied. Side by side with very long stories or veritable novels, we find short, edifying legends, which are invented in a dull and insipid manner merely for the elucidation of a verse; but on the other hand, there are also most interesting fairy tales and stories culled from popular literature. The chief doctrine which the stories seek to impress is that of Karman. The story of the death of Moggallāna is significant, and its interest is enhanced because, like many other narratives of the Dhammapada commentary, it indicates a very hostile attitude towards the "naked ascetics," viz., the Jain monks.[^1)

First 74 of 203 passages. Read on

Linked texts (72)