History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c91.299
History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c91.299
- Language
- English
v7.c91.299.1
Before setting out the main causes of the virtual disappearance of Buddhism from India certain general points have to be emphasized. Buddha was only a great reformer of the Hindu religion as practised in his time. He did not feel or claim that he was forming a new religion, nor did he renounce the Hindu religion and all its practices and beliefs. The Buddha referred to the Vedas and Hindu sages with honour in some of his sermons. He recognised the importance of Yogic practices and meditation. His teaching took over several beliefs current among the Hindus in his day such as the doctrine of Karma and Rebirth and cosmological theories. A substantial portion of the teaching of Buddha formed part of the tenets of the Upanisadic period. At the time when he was born there were two main currents of thoughts and practices prevalent among the people, one being the path of sacrifices to Gods and the other being the path of moral endeavour, self-restraint and spiritual goal. It has been shown above (pp. 917-918) how the Upanisads assigned a lower position to the Vedas and the sacrifices enjoined therein and how spiritual knowledge after cultivating high ethical qualities was deemed greater than sacrifices. The Upanisads first began by symbolical interpretation of Vedic sacrifices, as for example in Br. Up. I. 1. 1, where Uṣas, Sūrya and Saṁvatsara are said to be respectively the head, the eye and the soul of the sacrificial horse or as in Chān. Up II. 2.
v7.c91.299.2
1-2, where the five parts of the Sāman employed in a sacrifice are symbolically identified with earth, fire, sky, sun and heaven. Then they proceed to belittle the Veda as mere name and as much inferior to *brahmavidyā* (e. g. Br. Up. IV. 4. 21, I. 4.10, Chān. Up. VII. 1-4, Mundaka I. 1. 4-5. It is generally held by all Sanskrit scholars that at least the oldest Upanisads like the Bṛhadāraṇyaka and the Chāndogya are earlier than Buddha, that they do not refer to Buddha or to his teachings or to the *piṭakas*. On the other hand, though in dozens of *Suttas* meetings of brāhmaṇas and Buddha or his disciples and missionaries are reported they almost always seem to be marked by courtesy on both sides. No meetings are recorded in the early Pali Texts or brahmanical Texts about Śakyans condemning the tenets of ancient brahmanism or about brāhmaṇas censuring the Bauddha heterodoxy. Besides, in all these meetings and talks, the central Upanisad conception of the immanence of *brahma* is never attacked by Buddha or by the early propagators of Buddhism. What Buddha says may be briefly rendered as follows. "Even so have I, O Bhikkhus, seen an ancient path, an ancient road followed by rightly enlightened persons of former times. And what, O Bhikkhus, is that ancient path, that ancient road, followed by the rightly enlightened ones of former times? Just this very Noble Eightfold Path, viz. right views ..&c.
v7.c91.299.3
This, O Bhikkhus, is that ancient path, that ancient road, followed by the rightly enlightened ones of former times. Along that (path) I have gone and while going along that path, I have fully come to know, old age and death. Having come to know it fully, I have told it to the monks, the nuns, the lay followers, men and women; this brahmacarya is prosperous, flourishing, widespread, widely known, has become popular and made manifest well by gods and men." It will be noticed that the Noble Eightfold Path which the Buddha put forward as the one that would put an end to misery and suffering is here expressly stated to be an ancient path trod by ancient enlightened men. Buddha does not claim that he was unique, but claimed that he was only one of a series of Enlightened men and stressed that the moral qualities which he urged men to cultivate belonged to antiquity. In the Dhammapada and the Suttanipāta (Mahāvagga, Vāseṭṭha sutta) the truly virtuous man is spoken of as brāhmaṇa:, "I speak of him as brāhmaṇa, who causes no harm (or evil) in body, word and thought, who is guarded as regards these three sources"; 'neither by matted hair nor by lineage, nor by caste, does one become a brāhmaṇa';
v7.c91.299.4
'that man in whom there is truth and righteousness is blessed and is a brāhmaṇa', 'him who does not cling to desires (or pleasures) as water does not stick to a lotus leaf or as a mustard grain (does not stick) on the top of an awl, I call a brāhmaṇa.'¹⁶⁴⁰ Moreover, it does not appear that at any time the whole of India or even large portions of it were completely Buddhistic. The people of India as a whole were always Hindus.¹⁶⁴¹ There were many millions of people at all times who professed Hinduism and not Buddhism. Besides, even when Buddhism secured the patronage of emperors like Aśoka, Kaniṣka and Harṣa, Buddhism was mainly restricted to monasteries and schools and great tolerance prevailed. For example, Harṣa's father was a great devotee of the Sun and he himself is described in his Banskhera and Madhuban plates as a great devotee of Śiva, though his elder brother Rājyavardhana is described as *paramasaugata* (a great devotee of Buddha) and he appears to have shown favour to the Buddhist pilgrim (Yuan Chwang).¹⁶⁴²