Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of Indian Literature v2.c23: Appendix III. Bhabrū-Bairat-Edict of Asoka

A History of Indian Literature v2.c23

Language
English

Appendix III. Bhabrū-Bairat-Edict of Asoka

v2.c23.2

The small boulder which contains the inscription of Bairat, is now preserved in Calcutta in the Asiatic Society of Bengal, and for this reason the inscription is described by *E. Hultzsch* (Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, Vol. I, Inscriptions of Asoka, New Edition, p. xxv) as "Calcutta-Bairat Rock-Inscription," as there is also another rock inscription of Bairat. The boulder was discovered in 1840 on an eminence in the neighbourhood of Bairat. As the discoverer stated that Bairat was not far from "Bhabra," the inscription was also called the "Bhabra edict." Bhabra is, however, only an erroneous name for Bhābrū, which is, as a matter of fact, 12 miles from Bairat. Many scholars have devoted themselves to identifying the texts mentioned in the inscription, in the Canon, and appreciating their historical significance. *Cf. E. Hultzsch*, l. c., pp. xliii f., 172ff.; *Senart* in JA 1884, s. 8, t. III, p. 478ff.; 1885, t. V, p. 391ff.; and 1887, t. IX, p. 498ff. with an excellent facsimile of the inscription; *H. Oldenberg*, Vinaya Piṭakam Ed., Vol. I, p. xl note; *K. E. Neumann*, Reden Gotamo Buddhos I, pp. 135, 324, 567 and WZKM 11, 1897, p. 159f.; *T. W. Rhys Davids* in JPTS 1896, p. 93ff.; JRAS 1898, p. 639f.; Buddhist India, p. 169f.; Dialogues of the Buddha, SBB II, 1899, Preface, p. xiii f.; *S. Lévi* in JA 1896, s. 9, t. VII, p. 475ff.; *E. Hardy* in JRAS 1901, p. 311ff. and Asoka, p. 58ff. and *V. A. Smith* in JRAS 1901, p. 574; Asoka, 3rd Ed., p. 157; *Kern*, Manual, pp. 2 and 113; *Pischel* in SBA 1904, p. 807f., *A. J. Edmunds* in JRAS 1913, 385ff.; *Kosambi* in Ind. Ant. 41, 40; *Barua* in JRAS 1915, p. 805; Ind. Ant. 48, 8ff.; *Eliot* I, 290f.; *F. Weller* in Asia Major 5, 1930, p. 166.

v2.c23.3

The texts recommended by Aśoka are :—

v2.c23.4

(1) *Vinaya-samukase*, probably "the principal sermon of the Vinaya-Piṭaka," *i.e.*, the sermon of Benares, which in numerous passages (Vinaya-P., Mahā-Vagga I, 7, 6; 8, 2 etc., Udāna V, 3) is called sāmukkaṃsikā dhammadesanā, "the most excellent sermon." Thus according to A. J. *Edmunds* in JRAS 1913, p. 385. *Oldenberg* and *Rhys Davids* (SBE 13, p. xxvi f.) explained it as "Abstract of the Vinaya" and assumed that this referred to the Pātimokkha. B. M. *Barua* translates: "Excellent treatise on Vinaya moral discipline."

v2.c23.5

(2) *Aliya-vasāṇi*, the dasa ariya-vāsā, "the ten rules of life of the noble one" which are taught in the Saṃgīti-Suttanta and in the Dasuttara-Suttanta of the Dīgha-Nikāya (III, pp. 269 and 291) and in the Aṅguttara-Nikāya X, 19 (Vol. V, p. 29).

v2.c23.6

(3) *Anāgata-bhayāni*, "the five future dangers," which are taught in the Aṅguttara-Nikāya V, 77-80 (Vol. III, p. 100 ff.).

v2.c23.7

(4) *Munigāthā*, probably the Muni-Sutta in the Sutta-Nipāta 206 to 220.

v2.c23.8

(5) *Moneyasute*, doubtless the moneyyāni in the Itivuttaka 67, also in Aṅgutt. III, 120 (Vol. I, p. 273).

v2.c23.9

(6) *Upatisapasine*, "Questions of Upatissa." As Upatissa is a name of Sāriputta, and as the Sāriputta-Sutta in Sutta-Nipāta 955-975 contains questions of Sāriputta, which are answered by Buddha, I have no doubt that this is what is meant. Thus already *Neumann* and now also *Walleser*.

v2.c23.10

(7) *Lāghulovāde musāvādam adhigichya bhagavatā Budhena bhāsite*, "the exhortations to Rāhula, which were uttered by the Lord Buddha in regard to lying," in Majjhima-Nikāya 61. As there is also a second Rāhulovāda-Sutta (Majjhima 62), Aśoka also states the subject-matter of the text recommended by him. Thus Aśoka must have known both texts.

v2.c23.11

The significance of the Bairat Edict should neither be overrated nor yet under-estimated. It is overrating it to conceive of it, as *Barua*, l. c. has done, “as a rare historical document, which conclusively proves the existence of the Buddhist Canon in the third century B.C., in the same form, and with almost the same titles to its different passages, as we have now.” On the other hand, it is under-estimating it, when *Barth* (RHR 5, 1882, 239 f. = Oeuvres, I, p. 342) declares that the titles do not prove that there was a Canon in existence in those days, but that on the contrary they show that though Buddhism had a literature, it had not yet a Canon. Similarly *La Vallée Poussin*, Bouddhisme, Études et Matériaux (Mémoires Acad. Belgique, 55, 1898), p. 32 f., says that the titles prove nothing for the antiquity of the Pāli Canon ; according to him they prove merely the antiquity of Sūtras and Vinayas which are related to the Pāli texts, and that Aśoka does not allude to a definite Canon. The very words of the edict : “ Whatever has been uttered by the Lord Buddha, all that is well said,”¹ make it appear probable that there was something in the nature of a Canon in existence, wherein that which was regarded as having been uttered by Buddha, was collected, and which, therefore, to the minds of believers, bore the stamp of genuineness. When Aśoka says that, though everything which the Lord uttered is good, he especially recommends a few selected texts not only to the monks and nuns, but also to the lay adherents of both sexes, it seems as though he must have been acquainted with a considerable number of such texts. We shall therefore not be unduly bold in arguing from the Edict that, at the time when it was written, there was a canonical collection of Sutta and Vinaya texts in the Māgadhī language. As the texts enumerated by Aśoka appear in various books of the Pāli Canon, it is, to say the least of it, very probable indeed, that the Pāli Canon, as far as the Sutta and Vinaya-Piṭaka are concerned, was very closely related to the Māgadhī Canon. The exaggerated scepticism of *Minayeff*, Recherches, p. 84 ff., has already been confuted by *Oldenberg*, ZDMG 52, 1898, 634 ff.

v2.c23.12

¹ The dictum of Aṅguttara IV, 164 : “All that is well said, that is the word of Buddha” (similarly Śikṣāsamuccaya, p. 15) represents a later stage of development.

v2.c23.13

According to T. *Bloch*, ZDMG 63, 1909, 325 ff., the purpose of the inscription of Bairat was to institute public recitals of the texts named and to make a foundation for this. Unfortunately, however, there is nothing to this effect in the inscription.

v2.c23.14

As to the correctness of the readings and interpretations of the Edict given by Max *Walleser* (Das Edikt von Bhabra, Materialien zur Kunde des Buddhismus, Heft 1, Leipzig, 1923; Nochmals das Edikt von Bhabra, ibidem Heft 9, Heidelberg 1925 and ZII 3, 1924, 113 ff.), I am just as little convinced as Joh. *Nobel* in OLZ 1924, 361 ff., and E. *Leumann* in ZII, 2, 1923, 316 f.

Linked texts (12)