Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of Indian Literature v2.c19.s6: Buddhist Literature in Pure and Mixed Sanskrit

A History of Indian Literature v2.c19.s6

Language
English

Contents

Buddhist Literature in Pure and Mixed Sanskrit

v2.c19.s6.1

Now, though the Pāli literature of India, Ceylon and Burma, is an unusually rich and extensive literature, it must nevertheless be admitted that it does but represent the literature of one Buddhist sect, namely that of the Theravādins. Other schools and sects used other Middle Indian dialects,² and some of the most prominent schools produced works of literature written partly in Sanskrit and partly in a Middle Indian dialect assimilated to Sanskrit which, to use *Senart's* term, we may call "Mixed Sanskrit."³ Many large works of this literature have come down to us, but in some cases only fragments remain. In the North and North-West of India there were great centres of learning, such as the universities of Nālanda and Takkasilā (Taxila) where for hundreds of years not only all branches of secular knowledge, especially medicine, but also the philosophical and theological literature of the Buddhists were cultivated with great zeal. Indian Pandits went thence to Tibet and China, learned Tibetan and Chinese, and translated Sanskrit works into these languages. Chinese pilgrims like Hsüan Tsang learned Sanskrit at Nālanda, and translated Buddhist texts into Chinese.¹ Some of the Sanskrit works which were produced there, and the originals of which are lost, would not be known to us but for the Tibetan and Chinese texts. The finds of manuscripts in Central Asia, include fragments not only of Sanskrit texts, but also of translations of Indian works in Central Asiatic languages.²

v2.c19.s6.2

² According to Vinītadeva (8th century A.D.) the Sarvāstivādins used Sanskrit, the Mahāsaṅghikas Prākrit, the Sammitīyas Apabhraṁśa and the Sthaviravādins (i.e., Theravādins) Paiśāci. *Cf.* *Ryukan Kimura*, A Historical Study of the Terms Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna and the origin of Mahāyāna Buddhism, Calcutta, 1927, p. 7; R. *Pischel* in SBA 1904, p. 808.

v2.c19.s6.3

³ It was formerly generally called "Gāthā dialect" (see above, Vol. I. p 47 f. ), which is the more inapt, as it is widely used in inscriptions too. *Cf.* *S. Lefmann* in ZDMG 29, 1875, 212 ff.; *E. Senart*, JA 1882, s. 7, t. XIX, 238 ff., 1886, s. 8, t. VIII, p. 318 ff.; Kern, SBE 21, p. XIV ff.; *Bühler*, Ep. Ind. I, 1892, 239, 377; II, 34; Hoernle and *Bhandarkar*, Ind. Ant. 12, 1883, pp. 89 f., 205f., 139 ff.; 17, 1888, p. 36 ff.; *J. Wackernagel*, Altindische Grammatik. I, Göttingen, 1896, p. XXXIX ff.

v2.c19.s6.4

¹ *cf.* Phanindranath *Bose*, Indian Teachers of Buddhist Universities, Madras, 1923; The Indian Teachers in China, Madras, 1923; and Prabhatkumar *Mukherjee*, Indian Literature Abroad, in Ind. Hist. Qu, Vols. I-III, 1925-1927.

v2.c19.s6.5

² Thus fragments of Buddhist texts have been found in two languages hitherto unknown, which are now termed “Kuchean” and “Khotanese” after Kuchar and Khotan, the places in Eastern Turkestan where they were discovered, as the names “Tokharian,” “North Aryan,” “East Indian” and “Śakian,” suggested by various scholars have not been generally accepted (Cf. Sten *Konow* in Festschrift Windisch, p. 96 f.; *Hoernle*, Manuscript Remains, I, p. IX ff.). Fragments in “Kuchean” have been published by S. *Lévi* in JA 1911, s. 10, t. XVII, 138 ff., 431 ff.; t. XIX, 1912, 101ff; JRAS 1913, 109 ff.; and in Hoernle, Manuscript Remains, I, pp. 357ff., 365 ff.; Fragments in “Khotanese” by *Konow* and *Hoernle* in Hoernle, Manuscript Remains, I, pp. 214 ff., 289 ff., 395 ff.; also by E. *Leumann*, Zur nordarischen Sprache und Literatur, Strassburg, 1912; Maitreyasamiti, Strassburg, 1919, and Buddhistische Literatur, Nordarisch und Deutsch, I, Leipzig, 1920 (AKM XV, 2). A Soghdian version of the Vessantara-Jātaka has been edited and translated by R. *Gauthiot* in JA 1912, s. 10, t. XIX, pp. 163 ff., 430 ff; see also Le Sūtra des causes et des effets du bien et du mal, éd. et trad. d’après les textes sogdiens, chinois et tibétains par R. *Gauthiot* et P. *Pelliot*, Paris (Mission Pelliot) I, 1920; II, 1926. Buddhist texts in the Uigurian language have been published by H. *Stönner* in SBA 1904, p. 1282 ff. and F. W. K. *Müller*, Uigurica I and II, in ABA 1908 and 1910. E. *Sieg* and W. *Siegling*, to which scholars is due the credit of having proved “Tokharian” (“Kuchean”) to be an Indo-European language, (SBA 1908, p. 915 ff.) have published fragments of Buddhist Sanskrit texts from the finds at Turfan: Tocharische Sprachreste, I, Die Texte, Berlin and Leipzig, 1921.

v2.c19.s6.6

By far the greater part of this literature written in pure and “mixed” Sanskrit, and which, for the sake of brevity we term “Buddhist Sanskrit literature,” either belongs to the Mahāyāna or has at least come under its influence to a greater or lesser degree.³ For this reason, it is essential to premise a few remarks as to the schism of Buddhism into its two great sections, Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, if we desire to attain to a true understanding of this literature.

v2.c19.s6.7

³ For our earliest knowledge of this literature, which is preserved chiefly in Nepal, we are indebted to Brian Houghton *Hodgson*, who lived in Nepal from 1821 to 1843, and rendered equally signal services as a statesman, geographer, zoologist, ethnographer and investigator of Indian languages and antiquities. He was instrumental in procuring numerous Buddhist manuscripts for Indian and European libraries, and especially for Paris, where they were turned to excellent use by Eugène *Burnouf* (Introduction à l'histoire du Buddhisme Indien, 2. èd., Paris, 1876). At about the same time (1824) as Hodgson made his discoveries which so essentially promoted the knowledge of Buddhist literature, the celebrated Hungarian Alexander *Csoma de Kőrös*, after wandering on foot from Hungary to Tibet, had just begun to open up the Buddhist literature of Tibet. Shortly afterwards, the Pāli literature of Ceylon, too, was opened by George *Turnour*. Information regarding the contents of numerous manuscripts of Buddhist Sanskrit literature is given by *Rājendralāla Mitra*, The Sanskrit Buddhist Literature of Nepal, Calcutta, 1882; *C. Bendall*, Catalogue of Buddhist Sanskrit Manuscripts in Cambridge, Cambridge, 1883; and *Haraprasāda Sāstrī*, A Descriptive Catalogue of Sanskrit Manuscripts in the Government Collection under the care of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, I, Buddhist Manuscripts, Calcutta, 1917. The Tibetan translations in the Kanjure are described by *A. Csoma de Kőrös*, Asiatic Researches, Vol. 20, Calcutta, 1836, and *L. Feer*, in AMG, t. 5, Paris, 1883. *Cf.* also *H. Beckh*, Verzeichnis der tibetischen Handschriften I, Handschriftenverzeichnis der Königl. Bibl. zu Berlin, Bd. 24, Berlin, 1914. A considerable amount of information about the later literature of Buddhism from Tibetan sources, is afforded us by Tāranātha in his work "History of Buddhism in India" completed in 1608, translated from the Tibetan into German by *A. Schiefner*, St. Petersburg, 1869; translated from the German in *Ind. Hist. Qu.* 3, 1927. On the Chinese translations see *Bunyiu Nanjio's* *Catalogue of the Chinese Translations of the Buddhist Tripiṭaka*, Oxford, 1883; *E. Denison Ross*, Alphabetical List of the Titles of Works in the Chinese Buddhist Tripiṭaka, being an Index to Bunyiu Nanjio's Catalogue and to the 1905 Kioto Reprint of the Buddhist Canon, Calcutta, 1910; and *Probodhchandra Bagchi*, Le canon bouddhique en Chine, les traductions, I, Paris, 1927. Sino-Indica Publications de l'Université de Calcutta, 1. Among the most famous translators are Dharmarakṣa, 265-313 A.D., Kumārajīva, 344-481 A.D., Hsüan-Tsang, 630-645 in India, his translations 645-661, and I-tsing, 671-695 in India, his translations 700-712. On Kumārajīva s. *S. Lévi* in *JA* 1913, s. 11, t. II, p. 334 ff. translated by *Phanindranath Bose*, Calcutta, 1922, and *J. Nobel* in *SBA* 1917, 206 ff.

v2.c19.s6.8.1

To the earlier Buddhist schools, whose main doctrines coincide with those of the Theravāda as it has come down in the Pāli Canon, individual liberation, Nirvāṇa, was the most complete salvation; and the state of the Arhat, who even during his mortal life is accorded a foretaste of Nirvāṇa, was the goal of all striving, a goal attainable only to the few, by the aid of certain spiritual experiences which can only be acquired in the monastic life. This doctrine is not rejected by the adherents of the Mahāyāna; but, though it is acknowledged to have originated with Buddha,¹ it is described as the Hīnayāna, *i.e.*, the lesser (hīna), the inadequate "vessel" (yāna), which does not suffice to steer all beings to the end of suffering. What they teach, is the Mahāyāna, the "great vessel," which is fit to conduct a larger number of beings, indeed the whole of the teeming mass of humanity, safely over the suffering of the world. This new doctrine which, according to the claims of its adherents, is based upon a profounder interpretation of the old texts, or upon the profounder teachings of Gotama Buddha, which he imparted only to the elect among his disciples, sets up the ideal of the Bodhisattva in the stead of that of the Arhat. Not only the monk, but every human being, can make it his aim to be reborn as a Bodhisattva, a "being destined for enlightenment," *i.e.*, a candidate for enlightenment, in order to bring salvation to all men.

v2.c19.s6.8.2

Now, if this aim is to be within the reach of the many, then there must be more convenient means of attaining it than are provided in the Hīnayāna. Thus, according to the teachings of the Mahāyāna, even in the householder in the midst of family life, the merchant, the artisan, the king, nay, even the labourer, the pariah, can attain salvation, on the one hand by practising pity and friendliness to all beings, by exceptional generosity and self-denial, and on the other hand by faithful and devoted worship of the Buddha, the Buddhas and the Bodhisattvas.¹ Though, as we have seen, Buddha is frequently described as a superhuman being, even in the Pāli Canon, it is nevertheless the enlightenment which first makes him a superman, with power to perform many a miracle, and finally he enters into Nirvāṇa, leaving behind him only his doctrine, and at all events his relics, as objects of worship. The Lokottaravādins, who were still adherents of the Hīnayāna, went further than this. They regarded the Buddhas not as ordinary men, but as supernatural (lokottara) beings, who descend to earth for a certain period, in order to partake of all human experiences. In the Mahāyāna, on the other hand, the Buddhas are from the outset nothing but divine beings, and their sojourn on earth and their entry into Nirvāṇa are purely and simply sportive and a delusion.

v2.c19.s6.8.3

Furthermore, whilst the Hīnayāna already makes mention of a number of Buddhas, predecessors of Śākyamuni in earlier æons of the world’s history, the Mahāyāna speaks of thousands, nay, milliards of Buddhas. In addition, the Mahāyāna Buddhists worship as divine beings countless myriads of Bodhisattvas, beings destined for enlightenment, endowed with the “perfections” (pāramitās), who in their pity towards human beings, refused to enter into Nirvāṇa. Add to these also Hindu deities, especially from the cycle of Śiva, which became associated with the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, and with them filled the Buddhist pantheon. This newly originated mythology, the new Bodhisattva ideal, and the Buddha worship (Buddha-Bhakti) which now came more and more into prominence, all these combined form the popular side of the Mahāyāna. Even as this side was already prepared in the Hīnayāna, but found its further development under the influence of Hinduism, in the same way the philosophical side of the Mahāyāna is merely an elaboration of Hīnayāna doctrines under the influence of Brahmanical philosophy. Early Buddhism had explained the origin of suffering or the discords of existence by the Paṭiccasamuppāda,[^1)

v2.c19.s6.9

¹ *Hsüan-Tsang* gives a classification of the sacred writings of the Mahāyāna, in which the Śrāvaka-Piṭaka, *i.e.*, the Canon of the Hīnayāna, is also included. *Cf.* *S. Lévi* and *Ed. Chavannes* in *JA*, sér. 11, t. VIII, 1916, p. 5 ff.

v2.c19.s6.10

¹ We see here the influence of the doctrine of Bhakti, known to us from the Bhagavad-Gītā, and it is most probable that it was the Bhagavad-Gītā itself which influenced the development of the Mahāyāna. *Cf.* above, Vol. I, p. 431 ff; *Kern*, Manual of Buddhism, p. 122. Some scholars assume that outside influences, too, contributed towards the moulding of the Mahāyāna; but a hypothesis of this nature is not necessary, and cannot be proved. *Cf. S. Lévi*, Mahāyāna-Sūtrālaṃkāra, II, p. 16 ff.; *Kennedy*, JRAS 1902, p. 377 ff.; *Eliot*, Hinduism and Buddhism, III, p. 445 ff.; A.B. *Keith*, Buddhist Philosophy, p. 217. On the Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna in general, see *La Vallée Poussin* in ERE VIII, 1915, 330 ff. and *R. Kimura*, A Historical Study of the Terms Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna etc., Calcutta, 1927.

v2.c19.s6.11

¹ Sanskrit Pratītya-sam-utpāda, “the dependently-co-ordinated-origination” (Stcherbatsky). The usual translation “formula of cusality” is not quite correct, for the doctrine is not of a succession of cause and effect, but is that of a mutually interdependent conditionality. The established formula runs thus: "If there is this, then there appears that." *Cf.* Th. *Stcherbatsky*, The Conception of Buddhist Nirvāṇa, Leningrad, 1927, p. 39 ff.

v2.c19.s6.12

*i.e.*, the formula in which it is shown that all the elements of being originate only in mutual interdependence. The Hīnayāna derives from this formula the doctrine of Anattatā, of the "Non-Self," *i.e.*, the doctrine that there is no independent and permanent ego, but merely a succession of corporeal and psychical phenomena which change every moment. The Mahāyāna derives from the same formula the doctrine of Śūnyatā, *i.e.*, the doctrine that "all (is) void" (sarvaṃ śūnyam) meaning "devoid" of independent reality.¹

v2.c19.s6.13

¹ ) *Stcherbatsky* (1. c., pp. 40 f., 42 f.) renders "Śūnyatā" by "relativity," because, according to this doctrine, nothing real can be stated of objects, but only relations. Max *Walleser* (Die buddhistische Philosophie, Vol. II. Heidelberg, 1911, p. III) calls this doctrine "negativity," because it simultaneously denies existence and non-existence.

v2.c19.s6.14

Buddhist Sanskrit literature is, however, by no means exclusively Mahāyānist. There is also a number of important Hīnayāna texts, which are written in pure and mixed Sanskrit.

Remnants of the Sanskrit Canon

v2.c19.s6.t1.1

In the first place the Sarvāstivāda school² of the Hīnayāna, which had its adherents more especially in Kashmir and Gandhāra, and spread thence to Central Asia, Tibet and China, had a Sanskrit Canon of its own. Though no complete copy of this canon has come down to us, we know it firstly, from many fragments, large and small, which have been discovered among the manuscripts and block-prints brought from Eastern Turkestan by M.A. (Sir Aurel) Stein, A. Grünwedel, A. von Le Coq, P. Pelliot, and others; ¹ secondly, from quotations in other Buddhist Sanskrit works, such as Mahāvastu, Divyāvadāna and Lalita-Vistara, and lastly, from Chinese and Tibetan translations.² The principal texts of the Mūla-Sarvāstivāda Canon were translated from Sanskrit into Chinese by the Chinese pilgrim *I-tsing* in the years 700-712.³ There are, however, Chinese translation of single texts dating from the middle of the 2nd century onwards, and there were adherents of the Sarvāstivāda in India as early as the 2nd century B.C.⁴ In wording and in the arrangement of the texts, the Sanskrit Canon evinces great similarity to the Pāli Canon, but on the other hand, there are many points of difference too. A feasible explanation of this is that both canons had a common source, probably the lost Māgadhī Canon, from which first the Pāli Canon branched off in one part of India, and then, later on, the Sanskrit Canon in another district.

v2.c19.s6.t1.2

² ) The literal meaning of Sarvāstivāda is "the all-is doctrine," the doctrine that everything exists permanently. *I-tsing* (A Record of the Buddhist Religion, transl. by J. *Takakusu*, Oxford, 1896, pp. XXIV, 8 ff., 20) calls it Āryamūlasarvāstivāda, and he mentions the schools of the Mūla-Sarvastivādas, the Dharmaguptas, the Mahīśāsakas and the Kāśyapīyas, as its sub-divisions. The relationship between the Sarvāstivāda and the Mūla-Sarvāstivāda is, however, by no means clear. *Cf.* *Takakusu*, ERE XI, p. 198 ff.; *Lévi* in T'oung Pao, sér. 2, t. VIII, 1907, p. 114 f., N. *Dutt*, Early History of the Spread of Buddhism and the Buddhist Schools, p. 271 n. and table to p. 224. In the Buddhist dictionary Mahāvyutpatti, para. 275, a list of the schools begins with: Āryasarvāstivādāḥ,

v2.c19.s6.t1.3

¹ Cf. *W. Geiger*, Die archaeologischen und literarischen Funde in Chinesisch Turkestan und ihre Bedeutung für die orientalistische Wissenschaft, Erlangen (Rede beim Antritt des Prorektorats) 1912; *H. Oldenburg* in NGGW 1912, 171 ff.; *H. Lüders*, Über die literarischen Funde von Ostturkestan, in SBA 1914, p. 85 ff.; *A. F. Rud. Hoernle*, Manuscript Remains of Buddhist Literature found in Eastern Turkestan, I, Oxford, 1916.

v2.c19.s6.t1.4

² Cf. *Oldenburg* in ZDMG 52, 1898, 654 ff., 662 ff.; *M. Anesaki* in OO XIII, Hamburg, 1902, p. 61; Le Muséon, N. S. VI, 1905, p. 23 ff.; VII, 1906, p. 33 ff.; JRAS 1901, p. 895 ff.

v2.c19.s6.t1.5

³ *J. Takakusu*, A Record of the Buddhist Religion by I-tsing translated, p. XXXVII. Cf. *Ed. Huber* in BEFEO VI, 1906, pp. 1 ff., 36; *S. Lévi* in T'oung Pao, sér. 2, t. V, 1904, p. 297 ff.; t. VIII, 1907, p. 110 ff. The Chinese "Tripiṭaka," though also divided into a Vinaya, Sūtra and Abhidharma, does not, however, mean the same as the Pāli Tipitaka, for it contains many non-canonical texts besides the canonical ones, in fact even Brahmanical philosophical treatises (*s. Takakusu* in JRAS 1896, p. 415). In the Tibetan Kanjur, too, which is also designated as a "Tripiṭaka" and consists of a Vinaya, Sūtra and Abhidharma, much is included which does not admit of comparison with the Tipitaka, and was certainly not a part of the Canon.

v2.c19.s6.t1.6

⁴ A Sarvāstivādin ācārya Buddhila is mentioned in inscriptions on the lion capitol in Mathurā dating from the 2nd century A.D., *s. F.W. Thomas*, Ep. Ind. 9, 1907-8, p. 135 ff.

v2.c19.s6.t1.7

Fragments of the Prātimokṣa-Sūtra of the Sarvāstivādins, as well as other texts of the Vinayapiṭaka of the Sanskrit Canon, have been found in Central Asia (Eastern Turkestan), and a few in Nepal too. It is also possible to reconstruct the Prātimokṣa-Sūtra from Chinese and Tibetan translations. Both the Sanskrit Canon of the Sarvāstivādins and the Vinayas of the Mahīśāsakas, Dharmaguptas and Mahā-Saṅghikas, show manifold divergences in separate details from the Pāli Canon and from one another, not only as regards the rules of the Prātimokṣa, but also as regards the rules of the Vinaya in general. Nevertheless, the original stock of rules is one and the same.¹ It is in the stories prefaced to the rules in order to relate on what occasion the Buddha proclaimed the rules in question, that the texts show greater divergences. The Mūla-Sarvāstivāda Vinaya contained many legends having reference to the conversion of Kashmir and North-western India to Buddhism.² Some of these legends are also to be found in the Divyāvadāna, which borrowed a large portion of its tales from the Vinayapiṭaka of the Mūla-Sarvāstivāda.¹ The Vinayapiṭaka also includes the Śikṣās and Saṅghakarmans corresponding to the Pāli Sikkhās and Kammavācās, and fragments of these have been brought to light in Central Asia.²

v2.c19.s6.t1.8

¹ The Sanskrit text of the Prātimokṣa-Sūtra has been edited by *L. Finot* on the basis of the fragments of manuscripts found by *Pelliot* in Central Asia, and has been translated into French, with the Chinese version of Kumārajīva, by *Ed. Huber*, in JA ser. 11, t. II, 1913, pp. 465-558 ; a fragment from M. A. Stein's collection, by *La Vallée Poussin* in JRAS 1913, p. 843 ; a fragment in the Kuchean language, by *S. Lévi* in JA s. 10, t. XIX, 1912, 101 ff.; JRAS 1913, p. 109 ff.; Hoernle, Manuscript Remains, p. 357 ff. *E. Waldschmidt*, Bruchstücke des Bhikṣuṇī-Prātimokṣa der Sarvāstivādins, Leipzig 1926, has edited the, fragments of manuscripts of the Prātimokṣa of the nuns, which were found at Turfan, and compared them with the corresponding texts of all the other schools. For the Tibetan version of the Prātimokṣa, see *G. Huth*, Die tibetische Version der Naiḥsargika-prāyaścittika-dharmāḥ, Strassburg 1891. See also *Oldenberg* in ZDMG 52, 1898, p. 644 ff.

v2.c19.s6.t1.9

² Cf. *J. Przyluski* and *S. Lévi* in JA s. 11, t. IV, 1914, p. 493 ff. In addition, the reign of Kaniṣka is prophesied, the seven-day week is mentioned, among other things, from which *Lévi* (T'oung Pao, s. 2, Vol. VIII, 1907, p. 115 f.) concludes that the Mūla-Sarvāstivāda-Vinaya was not completed before the 3rd century A.D. However, as there were already Sarvāstivādins at a much earlier period (see above, p. 232), it is most likely that there was an earlier Sarvāstivāda-Vinaya too, and possibly the Mūla-Sarvāsti-vāda-Vinaya was merely a later version of that work.

v2.c19.s6.t1.10

¹ Fragments corresponding to the Mahā-Vagga of the Vinayapiṭaka, found in the Stein collection, have been edited by *La Vallée Poussin* in JRAS 1913, p. 550 ff. A fragment of a Buddhist ritual of ordination, corresponding to the Culla-Vagga X, 17, in Sanskrit, was discovered by *C. Bendall* in Nepal and edited in Album Kern, p. 373 ff. Various fragments of the Vinaya, ed. by *Hoernle*, Manuscript Remains, pp. 4-16. A fragment of the Bhikṣuṇikā-dharma-vacana, ed. by Miss *C. M. Ridding* and *La Vallée Poussin* in BSOS I, 1920, p. 123 ff. See also *S. Lévi* in T'oung Pao, s. 2, Vol. VIII, 1907, p. 110 ff. ; *N. Dutt*, Early History of the Spread of Buddhism and the Buddhist Schools, p. 280 ff.

v2.c19.s6.t1.11

² Cf. *La Vallée Poussin* in JRAS 1913, 843 ff.; *Lüders* in SBA 1922, p. 243.

v2.c19.s6.t1.12

The Nikāyas of the Pāli Canon find their parallel in the Āgamas of the Sanskrit Canon; the Dīrghāgama corresponding to the Dīghanikāya, the Madhyamāgama to the Majjhimanikāya, the Saṃyuktāgama to the Saṃyuttanikāya, and the Ekottarāgama to the Aṅguttaranikāya. Fragments of various Sūtras of the Dīrghāgama (Saṃgīti-Sūtra, Āṭanātiya-Sūtra), of the Madhyamāgama (Upāli-Sūtra, Śuka-Sūtra), of the Saṃyuktāgama and the Ekottarāgama, have been found in Central Asia.³ These fragments are not always in agreement with the corresponding Pāli texts. The comparison of the Chinese Āgamas with the corresponding Pāli Nikāyas, has also shown both agreement to a considerable extent, and notable divergences.¹ In the first place there is no agreement as regards the order of the Sūtras in the separate Āgamas. In the Saṃyuktāgama the division into Vargas and Saṃyuktasa is totally different, and there are Saṃyuktas in the Pāli which are missing in the Chinese version; on the other hand, there are some in the Chinese which do not occur in the Pāli.² The greatest differences are those which we find between the Ekottarāgama and the Aṅguttaranikāya. On the whole it may be said that the points of agreement and the divergences prove that the Sanskrit Āgamas and the Pāli Nikāyas were compiled from the same materials, but were arranged in different ways in the different schools. Now in the Chinese Tripiṭaka there are also texts which, though bearing the same titles as the corresponding Pāli texts, are nevertheless essentially different. Thus there is a Brahmajāla-Sūtra, which was translated into Chinese by Kumārajīva, and is held in high esteem in China and Japan but which teaches Buddhist ethics in the spirit of the Mahāyāna. On the other hand, there are in the Abhidharma-Kośa-Vyākhyā, several quotations from a Brahmajāla-Sūtra, which must have corresponded to the Pāli text.³ The Chinese Tripiṭaka contains ten different translations of the Mahā-Parinirvāṇa-Sūtra. Three of these translations belong to the Hīnayāna and seven to the Mahāyāna; and the only thing they have in common is the external form, inasmuch as they contain speeches which the Buddha is supposed to have uttered prior to his death (parinirvāṇa).¹

v2.c19.s6.t1.13

³ Fragments of the Āgamas of the Sanskrit Canon were discovered amongst the remains of MSS. found in Eastern Turkestan, and edited by *R. Pischel* in SBA 1904, pp. 808 f., 1138 ff.; *S. Lévi* in T'oung Pao, s. 2, Vol. V, 1904, p. 297 ff.; JA s. 10, t. XVI, 1910, pp. 433 ff., 450 ff.; JRAS 1911, p. 764 ff. ; *L. de La Vallée Poussin* in JRAS 1911, p. 772 ; 1912, p. 1063 ff.; 1913, p. 569 ff.; *Hoernle*, Manuscript Remains, pp. 16-52. A fragment of the Śroṇa-Sūtras of the Saṃyukta-Āgama (cf. Saṃyuttanikāya 22, 49 f. = Vol. III, p. 48 ff.) has been edited by *La Vallée Poussin* from MSS. of Cecil Bendall's collection, in JRAS 1907, 375 ff. Quotations from the Saṃyukta and Ekottara Āgamas have been traced by *S. Lévi* in the commentary on Asaṅga's Mahāyāna-Sūtrālaṃkāra (ed. *Lévi*, on XVI, 21 f., 75). *V. A. Smith* and *W. Hoey* found Buddhist Sūtras in Sanskrit, written on bricks, in the ruins of Gopālpur, together with inscriptions which are dated between 250 and 400 A.D. (JASB, proceedings 1896, p. 99 ff.).

v2.c19.s6.t1.14

¹ See especially M. *Anesaki*, The Four Buddhist Āgamas in Chinese, in Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan, Vol. 35, Part 3, 1908, and above, p. 232, note 3.

v2.c19.s6.t1.15

² The Sagāthavarga in the three Chinese versions of the Saṃyuktāgama contains 318 Sūtras, out of which 244 coincide with those of the Pāli text. It is impossible to determine whether the quotations traced by *Anesaki* (Le Muséon, N. S. VII, 1906, 38 ff.) in the Chinese Mahā-Prajñā-Pāramitā-Śāstra, are derived from a Pāli or Prākrit text of the Saṃyutta and Suttanipāta. For the Saṃyukta Āgama, see also *Lévi* in T'oung Pao, s. 2, Vol. V, 1904, p. 297 ff.

v2.c19.s6.t1.16

³ Cf. *La Vallée Poussin* in JRAS 1908, 359 ff., *Anesaki* in ERE, Vol. V, p. 452.

v2.c19.s6.t1.17

¹ Cf. F. Max Müller in SBE, Vol. 10 (I), p. xxxi note; J. *Edkins* in JRAS 1881, p. 66 ff.; R. *Kimura*, in JDL 4, 1921, 188 f. note, and Historical Study of the Terms Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna, p. 94 note. The Hīnayāna includes the translation of Po-fâ-tsu (290-306 A.D.) and that of Fa-hien (between 317 and 420 A.D.); translated into Italian, after the last-named, by Carlo *Puini* in GSAI 21, 1908, p. 59 ff.; 22, 1909, p. 1 ff. The earliest Vaipulya-Parinirvāṇa-Sūtra was translated into Chinese by Dharmarakṣa (between 205 and 316 A.D.). Specimens of it are given by S. *Beal* in Ind. Ant. 5, 1876, p. 222 ff. and SBE Vol. 19, p. 365 ff.

v2.c19.s6.t1.18

The Sanskrit Canon also contained a "Kṣudraka" corresponding to the Khuddakanikāya.² We do not know whether this included all those texts which in the Pāli Canon are counted as belonging to the fifth Nikāya; but we do know that the Sanskrit Canon also contained the Sanskrit texts Udāna, Dharmapada, Sthavira-Gāthā, Vimānavastu and Buddha-Vaṃśa, corresponding to the Pāli texts Udāna, Dhammapada, Thera-Gāthā, Vimāna-Vatthu and Buddha-Vaṃsa. In the Chinese Tripiṭaka, it is true, there is no single text to correspond to the Suttanipāta; but more than half of the texts included in the Suttanipāta occur in the Āgamas, for instance the texts corresponding to the Aṭṭhaka-Vagga and the Pārāyana. Fragments of the Sanskrit version of the two last-named have been found in Eastern Turkestan too.³ A collection corresponding to the Itivuttakas was translated into Chinese by Hsüan Tsang in about 650 A.D.⁴ Considerable quotations, forming a parallel to passages from the Khuddakapāṭha, the Vimāna-Vatthu, Buddha-Vaṃsa and Dhammapada, are to be found in the Mahāvastu.¹

v2.c19.s6.t1.19

² A Kṣudraka is mentioned by Hsüan Tsang as the fifth Āgama of the Śrāvakapiṭaka, s. *Lévi* in JA s. 11, t. VIII, 1916, p. 20. Nevertheless, the "four Āgamas" are especially emphasized as the real Āgamas, as for instance, when the Divyāvadāna makes frequent mention (pp. 17, 331, 333) of the *āgamacatuṣṭayam*, cf. *Oldenberg* in ZDMG 52, 654 f.

v2.c19.s6.t1.20

³ Cf. M. *Anesaki* in JPTS 1906-7, p. 50 f.; *Hoernle* in JRAS 1916, p. 709 ff.; 1917, p. 134. In the Sanskrit version of the Aṭṭhaka-Vagga (it is mentioned as the arthavargīyāṇi Sūtrāṇi in the Divyāvadāna, p. 20) prose narratives precede the verses, but there are none such in the Pāli. There are also other divergences from the Pāli text. The Sanskrit text is shorter.

v2.c19.s6.t1.21

⁴ K. *Watanabe* in JPTS 1906-7, p. 44 ff. In the Chinese Tripiṭaka there is a work Ṣaṭpāramitā-saṃnipāta-Sūtra (translated in 222 A.D.) which is a kind of Cariyāpiṭaka; s. R. *Kimura*, A Historical Study of the Terms Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna, p. 129, note 1.

v2.c19.s6.t1.22

¹ Mahāvastu, ed. *Senart*, I, 290 ff.; II, 191 ff.; I, 250 ff.; Quotations from "the Dharmapada" (sing) or "the Dharmapadas" (plur.): II, 212; III, 91, 156, 434 ff.

v2.c19.s6.t1.23

We glean from one of the Mahāvastu quotations,² that there was a Dharmapada in the Sanskrit Canon, divided into Vargas, after the style of the Pāli Dharmapada. This Sanskrit version was not identical with that of the Pāli Canon, but both versions had an original stock of verses in common, and were arranged on one and the same principle. The collection of verses which belonged to the original Canon, also served as a prototype and as a foundation for more comprehensive anthologies, which were compiled in later times, and were widely propagated in Central Asia, Tibet and China. Thus, for instance, there is a Chinese anthology with the same 26 sections (Vargas) as the Pāli Dhammapada though it has 13 additional sections.³ Fragments of a Sanskrit anthology have been found in Central Asia, which were at first regarded as passages from recensions of the Dharmapada, but which in reality belong to the Udāna-Varga, which is known to us from a Tibetan translation. This anthology was compiled by Dharmatrāta, who, according to Tāranātha, is supposed to have lived in King Kaniṣka's day. In the Tibetan version, it contains not only 375 verses, corresponding to verses of the Dhammapada, but also the greater part of the verses of the Udāna, and numerous verses which have parallels in the Suttanipāta and other portions of the Pāli Canon.⁴ Another anthology was written in a Prākrit dialect, which is a later form of the North-west Indian dialect familiar to us from the Shāhbāzgarhī rock edicts of Aśoka, and compiled after the pattern, and with the help of the Dhammapada or some similar verse collection of the Sanskrit Canon, or the original Canon. Fragments of this anthology have come down to us in a few leaves of a manuscript written in the Kharoṣṭhī script, which M. Petroffsky and J. L. Dutreuil de Rhins had found at Khotan, and brought to Europe.[^1)

v2.c19.s6.t1.24

² III, 434 ff. Here a Sahasravarga is quoted from "the Dharmapadas;" it contains 24 verses, whilst the Sahassa-Vagga in the Pāli consists of only 16 verses. On the Dharmapada in Nepal, Tibet and China, s. *Oldenberg* in ZDMG 52, 1898, p. 662 ff.

v2.c19.s6.t1.25

³ Cf. *Max Müller* in SBE, Vol. 10 (1), p. 2 ff.; S. *Beal*, Texts from the Buddhist Canon commonly known as Dhammapada, London 1902; and the important study on the Dharmapada recensions by *S. Lévi* in JA. s. 10, t. XX, 1912, pp. 203-294.

v2.c19.s6.t1.26

⁴ Fragments of the Udānavarga, from finds in Central Asia, have been published by *R. Pischel*, Die Turfan-Rezensionen des Dhammapada, SBA 1908, p. 968 ff.; *S. Lévi* and *La Vallée Poussin* in JA s. 10, t. XVI, 1910, p. 444 ff.; t. XVII, 1911, 431 ff.; t. XIX, 1912, p. 311 ff.; *JRAS* 1911, p. 758 ff ; 1912. p. 355 ff. The Tibetan version of the Udānavarga has been translated into English by W. W. *Rockhill*, London 1883, and the Tibetan text was published by H. *Beckh*, Berlin 1911. Cf. A. *Schiefnen* Über Vasubandhus Gāthāsaṃgraha, in Mélanges Asiatiques VIII (Bulletin XXV, 1878), pp. 559 f., 590 ff.; *La Vallée Poussin* in GGA 1912, 191 f.; *Lüders* in SBA 1914, p. 102; and *Seidenstücker*, Das Udāna, I, 1913, pp. 37, 71 ff. A voluminous anthology, about five times as large as the Pāli Dhammapada, is the *Dharmasamuccaya* by Avalokitasimha, who has also drawn from Mahāyāna sources; on a MS. of this work, found in Nepal, see Dharma Aditya *Dharmācārya* in Ind. Hist. Qu. 1, 1925, 422 ff., 677 ff. [^1): ¹) The old Kharoṣṭhī manuscript, important from the points of view both of language and palaeography, has been edited by *Senart* in JA s. 9, t. XII, 1898, pp. 193 ff., 515 ff. This edition was the foundation for the new edition by Benimadhab *Barua* and Sailendranath *Mitra*, Calcutta 1921. The fragments found by *Petroffsky* were identified by S. *d'Oldenburg*, St. Petersburg 1907. On the "MS. Dutreuil de Rhins," cf. Comptes rendus de l'académie des inscriptions, 14. mai 1895 et 15. avril 1898; *Senart*, OC XI Paris 1897, I, 1 ff.; G. *Bühler*, On the Origin of the Indian Brahma Alphabet, 2nd Ed., Strassburg 1898, p. 122 ff.; *Lüders* in NGGW 1899, p. 474 ff.; T. W. *Rhys Davids* in JRAS 1899, p. 426 ff.; R. O. *Franke* in ZDMG 60, 1906, p. 477 ff.; M. A. *Stein*, Ancient Khotan, Oxford 1907, I, 188; Jules *Bloch*, JA ser. 10, t. XIX, 1912, p. 331 ff.; *Konow* (Festschrift Windisch, p. 85 ff.) is of opinion that, though this anthology is composed in a dialect originating in the North-west of India, it was written in the neighbourhood of Khotan. Like *Bühler* (l.c.) he ascribes it to the 1st century A.D., whilst *Lüders* (SBA 1914, p. 101) thinks it was written in the 3rd century A.D. It is probably the earliest Indian manuscript which has been discovered so far.

v2.c19.s6.t1.27

It is a certainty that there were Jātakas too, in the Sanskrit Canon; but it must remain an open question whether this Canon ever included a Jātaka Book or a large collection of Jātakas of its own. It is doubtful, too, whether the collection of "seven Abhidharmas," which is translated in the Chinese Tripiṭaka, is also derived from the old Canon, for these Abhidharmas have nothing in common with the Abhidhammapiṭaka of the Pāli Canon save the number seven and a few titles.¹

v2.c19.s6.t1.28

¹ J. *Takakusu*, JRAS 1905, p. 3 ff. and JPTS 1905, p. 67 ff. See above, p. 173.

v2.c19.s6.t1.29

The Canon of the Mūla-Sarvāstivādins has thus only come down to us in an incomplete way, but as regards the other Buddhist sects, we do not know whether they had any set Canon at all. As far as we can see, each sect merely has one or several texts which pass as especially sacred, being regarded as a kind of "Bible," and which partly assimilated and partly displaced the old texts of a Tripiṭaka which they, too, acknowledged in principle.

The Mahāvastu

v2.c19.s6.t2.1

One of the most important works which still belongs to the old school of the Hīnayāna is the Mahāvastu² or Mahāvastu-Avadāna.³ The work calls itself a book "of the Vinayapiṭaka according to the text of the Lokottaravādins of the Mahāsāṅghikas." The Mahāsāṅghikas, *i.e.*, the adherents of the Mahāsāṅgha, "the great community," are according to unanimous tradition, the earliest schismatics. Among the sections into which they are subdivided, we find the Lokottaravādins, *i.e.*, those according to whose doctrine the Buddhas are "exalted above the world" (lokottara) and adapt themselves to worldly life only externally.¹ The biography of the Buddha, which is the chief content of the Mahāvastu, quite agrees with this doctrine, for it is profusely adorned with miracles. In this respect, to be sure, it differs little from those texts of the Pāli Canon which deal with the life of the Buddha. In both cases we hear of miracles accompanying the conception, birth and enlightenment, and the first conversions of the Buddha. The Mahāvastu agrees with the Nidāna-Kathā in that it treats the life of the Buddha in three sections.² The first of these begins with the life of the Bodhisattva at the time of Buddha Dīpaṅkara (I, 193 ff.) and tells of his existences at the times of the other former Buddhas. The second section (II, 1 ff.) introduces us to the heaven of the Tuṣita gods, where the Bodhisattva, there reborn, determines to attain rebirth in the womb of Queen Māyā, and tells of the miracles of the conception and birth of the prince, his departure from his home, his conflicts with Māra and the enlightenment which he finally attains under the Bodhi tree. Lastly, the third section (in Vol. III), agreeing in its main features with the Mahāvagga of the Vinayapiṭaka,¹ relates the history of the first conversions and the rise of the monastic community. This, too, is the reason why the Mahāvastu claims to belong to the Vinayapiṭaka, though apart from a few remarks on admission into the order, it contains next to nothing about the Vinaya, the rules of the Order. It corresponds to that part of the Vinayapiṭaka which tells the history of the rise of the Order.²

v2.c19.s6.t2.2

² The text has been edited by E'. *Senart* in 3 vols., Paris 1882-1897, with detailed surveys of the contents in the Introductions and a valuable commentary. A survey of the contents has also been given by *Rājendralāla Mitra*, Sanskrit Buddhist Lit. of Nepal, pp. 115-161. See also A. *Barth* in RHR 11, 1885, 160 ff.; 42 1900, 51 f. (=Oeuvres I, 376 ff,; II, 384) and Journal des savants 1899, 459 ff., 517 ff., 623 ff., E. *Windisch*, Die Komposition des Mahāvastu, in ASGW XXVII, 1909, 467-511; *Oldenberg* in NGGW 1912, 123 ff.; L. de *La Vallée Poussin* in ERE VIII, 328 ff.; Haraprasad *Sāstrī* in Ind. Hist. Qu. 1, 1925, 202 ff.

v2.c19.s6.t2.3

³ This is the title of the work in most of the colophons. In the text itself and also in some of the colophons, it is called Mahāvastu. Mahāvastu means "The great subjects," *i.e.*, the main subjects of the Vinaya, that is to say the admission to the order, etc., and corresponds to the Mahā-Vagga of the Pāli Vinayapiṭaka and the Vinayavastu (beside Kṣudrakavastu, corresponding to the Culla-Vagga) of the Vinayapiṭaka of the Sarvāstivādins. *Cf. La Vallée Poussin, l.c.*, Mahāvastu-Avadāna means "The legends pertaining to the main subjects of the Vinaya." H. *Zimmer* (in ZII 3, 1925, 201 ff.) seeks to prove that avadāna means the same as nidāna, "origin," "original cause," and he explains mahāvastu as "the great fact of salvation." I consider this erroneous. The fact that the Chinese translators occasionally confused *nidāna* and *avadāna* (cf. S. Lévi in JA 1912, s. 10, t. XX, p. 219) is no proof that these two expressions are identical. Moreover, in the Vinaya literature, vastu has the definite meaning of "subject of the Vinaya" and the "event" related in connection with this subject.

v2.c19.s6.t2.4

¹ "The perfectly enlightened ones have nothing in common with the world, but with the great Ṛṣis everything is exalted above the world," Mahāvastu I, 159, 2. "They wash their feet, though no dust clings to them, they sit in the shade, though the heat of the sun never oppresses them, they take nourishment, though hunger never troubles them, they use medicine, though they have no illness, etc.;" *Windisch*, l.c., p. 470. According to Mahāv. I, 2, the Lokottaravādins belong to the "middle land" (madhyadeśa), *i.e.*, to the "sixteen countries" of Northern India. Cf. Mahāvastu I, 198.

v2.c19.s6.t2.5

² See above, p. 186. However, the expressions *dūrenidāna*, *avidūrenidāna* and *santikenidāna* are not to be found in the Mahāvastu.

v2.c19.s6.t2.6

¹ *Cf.* Windisch, l.c., 476 ff.

v2.c19.s6.t2.7

² See above, p. 26 ff., and Windisch, l.c., pp. 473, 476 ff. Probably it is only this portion of the Vinayapiṭaka which has come down to us in the Mahāvastu. *Cf.* Oldenberg in NGGW 1912, 152. T. W. *Rhys Davids* (SBB III, 256 f.) advances the less likely theory that the Lokottaravādins revised only the introduction, because they took over the rules of the Vinaya themselves in their Pāli form, or in some form resembling the Pāli, just as they were, without any change. H. *Zimmer*, l.c., 209 ff., thinks that the presentation of Buddha's life with the preliminary conditions in previous existences, constitutes a "Vinaya" for those who wish to attain Buddha-hood (in the sense of the Mahāyāna, which, he says, is already foreshadowed in the Mahāvastu). There is no evidence anywhere for this use of the word *vinaya*.

v2.c19.s6.t2.8

When we say that the main purpose of the Mahāvastu is to relate the life-story of the Buddha for the Lokottaravādins, this by no means exhausts the contents of the work, nor has any idea of its composition been given. Far from its being a specimen of artistic literature, the Mahāvastu should rather be described as a labyrinth, in which the thread of a connected narrative of the Buddha's life can only be discovered with some difficulty. This narrative is continually interrupted by other matters, especially numerous Jātakas and Avadānas, but also by dogmatic Sūtras. There is no apparent principle of systematic arrangement. Frequently there is not even an attempt made to establish any connection, however loose, between the various parts. Moreover, one and the same story, be it an episode of Buddha's life or a Jātaka, is very often told twice consecutively, first in prose and then again in verse, this latter form diverging sometimes more and sometimes less. Not only this, but in various places the same episodes recur several times with slight variations. Thus the legend of Buddha's birth is told no less than four times.¹ The language, too, is not unified. Though the entire work, the prose as well as the verse, is written in "mixed Sanskrit," this dialect is sometimes more and sometimes less akin to Sanskrit. In the verse it is more archaic.² As regards style, too, earlier and later portions of the work can be clearly distinguished.³

v2.c19.s6.t2.9

¹ Windisch, Buddha's Geburt, pp. 106, 124 f.

v2.c19.s6.t2.10

² Oldenberg, ZDMG 52, 663. Haraprasad *Śāstrī* (Ind. Hist. Qu. I, 1925, 204 f.) rejects the term "vernacularized Sanskrit" or "Sanskritized vernacular" as applied to the language of the Mahāvastu. He regards it as a dialect which was actually spoken in Northern India in the 2nd century B.C.

v2.c19.s6.t2.11

³ Cf. Oldenberg in NGGW 1912, 123 ff.

v2.c19.s6.t2.12

In spite of all this, and in spite of the fact that this work tells us scarcely anything new about the doctrine of the Buddha, nor even about special doctrines of the Lokottaravādins, this work is nevertheless of the utmost importance, because it has preserved many old traditions and old versions of texts which appear in the Pāli Canon too. Thus the departure of Prince Siddhārtha from his home (abhiniṣkramaṇa) is related in very archaic fashion, resembling the Majjhimanikāya (26 and 36).⁴ Similarly we find there old versions of the "sermon of Benares," the Mahā-Govinda-Sutta (Dīghanikāya 19), the Dīgha-Nakha-Sutta (Majjhimanikāya 74), the Māra-Saṃyutta from the Saṃyuttanikāya, the Sahassa-Vagga from the Dhammapada, the Khuddaka-Pāṭha, the Pabbajjā, Padhāna and Khaggavisāṇa-Suttas from the Suttanipāta, and isolated portions of the Vimāna-Vatthu and of the Buddha-Vaṃsa.⁵ The poems on the birth of the Buddha also maintain the old ballad style. They are remnants of that old Buddhist ballad poetry which we have already met with so often.

v2.c19.s6.t2.13

⁴ II, 117. Immediately after it there is a second, later setting of the same Abhiniṣkramaṇa-Sūtra.

v2.c19.s6.t2.14

⁵ Cf. Oldenberg, ZDMG 52, 659 ff., 665 ff. Windisch, Māra und Buddha, 316 ff., 322 ff.; J. Dutoit, Die duṣkaracaryā des Bodhisattva, Strassburg 1905; J. Charpentier in WZKM 23, 1909, 33 ff. (Māra-Saṃyutta und Mahāvastu); *Rhys Davids*, SBB III, p. 256 ff. (on the Mahā-Govinda-Sutta).

v2.c19.s6.t2.15

The Mahāvastu is more especially valuable as a treasure-trove of Jātakas¹ and other narratives. A good half of the work consists of Jātakas, which are related partly in pure prose, partly in mixed prose and verse, sometimes first in prose and then again in verse. Here again we meet with the Bodhisattva now as a world-ruling king, now as a merchant's son, a Brāhmaṇa, or a Nāga prince, as a lion, an elephant, and so on. Many of the Jātakas are versions of those which we find in the Pāli Jātaka book, sometimes almost literally identical, sometimes with greater or lesser deviations. Thus the Śyāmaka-Jātaka (II, 209 ff.), the touching story of the Brāhman's son whom King Peliyakṣa kills with an arrow, is only a version of the Sāma-Jātaka with which we are familiar. The Kinnarī-Jātaka (II, 94 ff.) corresponds in character, though not in contents, to the Kinnara fairy tales of the Jātaka book. The Kusa-Jātaka appears once (II, 420 ff.) in a recension deviating considerably from the Pāli, a second time (III, 1 ff.) in a metrical version, which shows points of agreement with the Pāli Gāthās.² The story of Nalinī, who seduces Ekaśṛṅga (*i.e.* "Unicorn") has, in the Mahāvastu (III, 143 ff.) been watered down to a very pious legend, though it has still preserved old features which have vanished in the prose of the Pāli Jātaka of Isisiṅga.¹ As in the Pāli Tesakuṇa-Jātaka (No. 521) there is in the Mahāvastu also (I, 271 ff.) the childless King Brahmadatta, who instead of a son, gets three eggs, from which three very wise birds come forth, which instruct him in the duties of a king (rājadharma).²

v2.c19.s6.t2.16

¹ *Cf.* S. d'Oldenburg in JRAS 1893, 335 ff., A. Barth in Journal des savants 1899, 625 ff. ; J. Charpentier; Paccekabuddhageschichten, pp. 2 ff., 12 ff., 25 ff. and in Le monde oriental, III, 1909, p. 34 ff. Charpentier shows how the text of the Mahāvastu can often be corrected with the help of the Pāli text.

v2.c19.s6.t2.17

² See avove, pp. 147 f., 133, 136 f. The story of Amarā, the smith's daughter (II, 83 ff.) corresponds to the Pāli Jātaka No. 387. The Markaṭa Jātaka (II, 246 ff.) is the fable of the monkey and the crocodile (Jāt. No. 208), see above, pp. 126, 163. The Śyāmaka-Jātaka translated from the Chinese Tripiṭaka by Ed. Chavannes, Cinq cents contes, t. I, p. 156 ff. On the Kusa-Jātaka in the Mahāvastu see Charpentier in WZKM 27, 1913, 94 f.

v2.c19.s6.t2.18

¹ *Lüders*, NGGW 1901, p. 20 ff., and above, p. 147.

v2.c19.s6.t2.19

² In Mahābhārata I, 229 ff., we meet with four wise birds, the sons of a ṛṣi, who know the Veda, and sing hymns to the god Agni. In the Mārkaṇḍeya-Purāṇa (see Vol. I, p. 560), four wise birds, sons of a ṛṣi, propound not only Yoga doctrines and all manner of other wisdom, but teachings of rājadharma too (Chapters 27-35).

v2.c19.s6.t2.20

However, there are many Jātakas and Avadānas in the Mahāvastu, which have no parallels in the Pāli. A very favourite theme in these is the glorification of the exceeding self-denial and generosity of the Bodhisattva. As King Arka, for instance, he presents to the Buddha of that time, 80,000 grottos (cave-temples) constructed of the seven kinds of precious stones (I, 54). On another occasion he gives away his wife and child merely in order to learn a wise saying (I, 91 f.). As a potter he is more pious than King Kṛkin, as he kills no living being, and sets up his pots at cross-roads, in order to fill them with rice and beans for hungry people; and when he hears that, during his absence, his parents have given to the Buddha the straw with which he had but lately re-thatched his hut, he rejoices for a whole month (I, 317 ff.). Some of the narratives remind us rather of the Brahmanical Purāṇas. Thus the description of hell at the beginning of the Mahāvastu shows various points of resemblance to that in the Mārkaṇḍeya-Purāṇa.³ The Rāja-Vaṃśa, the "history of the kings" (to whose race Śākyamuni belongs), begins in the true manner of the Purāṇas with an account of the creation (I, 338 ff.). The spirit of the Purāṇas is also breathed in the Jātaka (I, 283 ff.), in which a Ṛṣi Rakṣita, the Bodhisattva, attains to such miraculous powers, as a hermit, that he can touch the sun and the moon with his hands. The spirit of the Mahāyāna is very similar to that of the Purāṇas, and some narratives of the Mahāvastu exhibit that preference for phantasmagorias which is so characteristic of the Mahāyāna texts; we find splendid magical pictures, which show the miraculous power of the saints, and are, at the same time, to serve for the glorification of the Buddhas. The "sunshade stories" (chattravastu I, 253 ff.) are of this kind. After the Buddha has delivered the city of Śrāvastī from a dreadful plague caused by Yakṣas, gods and spirits hold sunshades over the Exalted One in order to honour him. The Buddha, however, with his usual kindness, uses his magic power to cause a Buddha to appear under each sunshade, so that each god thinks that the Buddha is sitting under his sunshade.

v2.c19.s6.t2.21

³ See Vol. I, p. 562, and L. *Scherman*, Materialien zur Geschichte der indischen Visionslitteratur, p. 36. The visit of Maudgalyāyana (Pāli Moggallāna) to the eight hells, as well as his wanderings through the animal world, the world of the Pretas, the Asuras and the various classes of gods, may also be based on Pāli tradition, in which likewise Moggallāna is a saint who wanders through heaven and hell and all the worlds.

v2.c19.s6.t2.22

Now, although the Mahāvastu belongs to the Hīnayāna and contains much which could just as well, or actually does, appear in the Pāli texts of the Theravādins, it also contains much which savours of the Mahāyāna. The reason for many such traits is probably that the conception of Buddha prevalent among the Mahāsāṅghikas and the Lokottaravādins does actually represent a transition to the Mahāyāna. In other cases, however, we are most likely right in assuming that interpolation took place.¹ Thus we find in the first volume (I, 63-193) a large section on the ten Bhūmis or steps, which a Bodhisattva must pass through, and a description of the virtues which he must possess in each of the ten steps.¹ Inserted into this section is a Buddhānusmṛti (I, 163 ff.), *i.e.*, a hymn to Buddha, which differs in no wise from the Stotras to Viṣṇu or Śiva in the Purāṇas. It is also in the spirit of the Mahāyāna when (II, 362 ff.) it is said that the purity of the Buddha is so great that the worship of the Exalted One is sufficient for the attainment of Nirvāṇa, and that one already acquires endless merit by merely walking round a stūpa and worshipping it by means of floral offerings, and so on. It reminds us of countless passages in Mahāyāna texts, when we read (III, 137 ff.) that, from the Buddha's smile, there radiate beams which illuminate the entire Buddha regions (Buddhakṣetra). The mention of a great number of Buddhas, and the saying that the Bodhisattvas are not begotten by father and mother, but originate immediately through their qualities,² also remind us of the Mahāyāna.

v2.c19.s6.t2.23

¹ Thus, for instance, the Avalokita-Sūtra (in two versions, II, 293 ff., 297 ff.), is cited as an independent Sūtra, in Śāntideva's Śikṣā-Samuccaya (ed. *Bendall*, pp. 89 f., 297 ff., with the title Avalokana-Sūtra), and in the Tibetan, too, it appears as an independent work. Hence it is probably interpolated in the Mahāvastu, the more so because, in the colophon at the end of the second version it is called parivāra ("accessory," see above, p. 33, the Parivāra of the Vinayapiṭaka). (See *Senart*, II, p. xxvi, note 3.) Though the text in the Śikṣā-Samuccaya agrees in the main with that of the Mahāvastu, there are nevertheless such striking divergences of particular passages, that it cannot possibly be an extract from the Mahāvastu.

First 68 of 787 passages. Read on

Linked texts (78)