Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature c9: Chapter V. The Pāramitās

The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature c9

Language
English

Contents

Chapter V. The Pāramitās

c9.2.1

A *bodhisattva* must practise the six or ten *pāramitās* (Perfections). This important word *pāramitā* has also been translated as "transcendental virtue", "perfect virtue", "highest perfection", "complete attainment", "die Vollkommenheit", etc. The form *pārami* is also found (*Divy.*, 637, 5, *mantrāṇām pāramiṃ gatāḥ*). In Pāli, the forms *pāramī* and *pāramitā* occur in the *Sutta-nipāta*, the *Jātaka*, the *Nettipakaraṇa* and other treatises¹; and T. W. Rhys Davids and W. Stede translate: "completeness, perfection, highest state" (*Pāli Dicy.*). The term *pāramitā* has been wrongly explained by Böhtlingk and Roth, Monier Williams, E. Burnouf, B. Hodgson and M. Vassilief as consisting of two words, *pāram* (the opposite bank, the further shore), and *ita* (gone, from the root *i*, Skt. Dicy., M.W. 566c)². Böhtlingk and Roth regard it as a contracted form of the abstract substantive *pāramitā* (the quality of having gone to the further shore). But E. Burnouf thinks that it is an adjectival participle, which really qualifies a suppressed substantive like *buddhi*, but which is employed as a substantive on account of its similarity to other abstract nouns ending in *-tā*. He says: "Ce mot, en effet, est le féminin de l'adjectif *pāramita* signifiant, 'celui qui est allé à l'autre rive, transcendant,' mais ce n'est ni ce ne peut être un substantif. Or c'est comme substantif que l'emploient les Bouddhistes . . .

c9.2.2

Peut-être le mot de *pāramitā* se rapporte-il à quelque terme sous-entendu, comme celui de *buddhi*, l'Intelligence, par exemple, de sorte qu'on devrait traduire les noms des diverses Perfections de cette manière: (l'Intelligence) parvenue à l'autre rive de la sagesse, de l'aumône, de la charité, et ainsi des autres . . . Je dirai seulement que l'expression de *pāramitā*, une fois introduite dans la langue avec l'ellipse que je suppose, a pu y rester et y prendre par extension la valeur d'un substantif, à cause de sa ressemblance extérieure avec un nom abstrait tel que ceux qu'on forme au moyen de la syllabe *-tā*."³ E. Burnouf also refers to T. Goldstücker's view that the word is derived from Sanskrit *parama* (= “most distant, last; highest, first, most excellent or distinguished, best, greatest, chief, primary, principal, superior”. Skt. Dicy., M.W. 535*a*). T. Goldstücker was on the right track, but he unfortunately thought that *pārami* meant “daughter of *parama*, i.e. of Buddha”. *Pāramitā* is really derived from *parama* (and not from *pāra* with the root *i*), as the *Bo. Bhū.* clearly explains. The *pāramitās* are so called, because they are acquired during a long period of time (*paramena kālena samudāgatāḥ*), and are supremely pure in their nature (*paramayā svabhāva-viçuddhyā viçuddhāḥ*).

c9.2.3

They also transcend the virtues or qualities of the *çrāvakas* and the *pratyeka-buddhas*, and lead to the highest result (*paramam ca phalam anuprayacchanti*).⁴ It is not necessary to accept all the details that are given in the *Bodhisattva-bhūmi*. But the derivation of the term from *parama* is thus placed beyond the possibility of doubt. It simply means, “highest condition, highest point, best state, perfection.” F. W. Thomas, T. W. Rhys Davids and W. Stede explain it as a substantive derived from *parama*, while L. de la Vallée Poussin expresses himself enigmatically : “les vertus d’au-dela, parceque leur mérite est appliqué à l’acquisition de la qualité de Bouddha.”⁵ The Tibetan equivalent is *pha-rol-tu-phyin-pa*. S. C. Das explains thus : “to get to the other side; in Buddhism, crossing to the other side of this life, i.e. to *Nirvāṇa*; absolute transcendental virtue” (Tib. Dicy., 817*b*). This seems to confirm E. Burnouf’s view that *pāramitā* is derived from *pāra*. But it only proves that the Tibetan translators did not know the correct etymology of the term. The *Bodhisattva-bhūmi*, cited above, connects it with *parama*. Unfortunately, the Chinese also seem to have made the same mistake as the Tibetans. According to E. J. Eitel, they translate *pāramitā* as “means of passing, arrival at the other shore” (p. 115*a*).⁶

c9.3

The earlier and alternative form *pārami* also points to the derivation from *parama*. The suffix *-tā* was probably added to it on the analogy of the abstract substantives ending in *-tā*. It has been suggested that a compound like *dāna-pāramitā* may be explained as “the quality or condition of a person, who is a *dāna-pārami*, i.e. who possesses the *pārami* or highest point of *dāna* or charity.” In this case, the suffix *-tā* would be added to a *bahu-vrihi* compound (*dānasya pāramir yasya*). But the two words in such a compound as *dāna-pāramitā* seem to stand in direct apposition, and it is better to construe thus : *dānam eva* *pāramitā dāna-pāramitā*. The virtue of charity is itself the Perfection.

c9.4

The six *pāramitās* are really the chief factors in a *bodhisattva’s* discipline, and the four additional *pāramitās* are merely supplementary in character. The six *pāramitās* are mentioned and discussed in many passages of Buddhist Sanskrit literature,⁷ while the seventh, eighth, ninth and tenth *pāramitās* are mentioned only in a few passages and are not explained at great length.⁸ Thus the *Bo. Bhū.* classifies each of the six chief *pāramitās* under nine separate headings, but it dismisses the other four *pāramitās* in a few sentences in another chapter. The *M. S. Al.* adopts the same method of treatment. The *Dh. S.* gives six *pāramitās* in one section and ten in another; but the *M. Vy.* speaks only of ten *pāramitās*. The *Da. Bhū.* definitely increases the number of the *pāramitās* to ten, as it teaches that a *bodhisattva* practises one of the *pāramitās* in each of the ten *bhūmis* (stages) of his career. This alteration may have been due to the rivalry with the Hīnayānists, who had devised the Pāli formula of the ten *pāramīs* (*dāna*, liberality; *sīla*, virtuous conduct; *nekkhamma*, renunciation; *paññā*, wisdom; *viriya*, energy; *khanti*, forbearance; *sacca*, truthfulness; *adhitthāna*, resolution; *mettā*, love or friendliness; *upekkhā*, equanimity).⁹ But it is more probable that the number of the *pāramitās* (and the *bhūmis*) was raised to ten as a consequence of the invention of the decimal system of computation in the science of arithmetic in the third or fourth century A.D. A. F. R. Hoernle assigns the subject-matter of the Bakhshālī manuscript to that period.¹⁰ The oldest epigraphical evidence for this remarkable discovery dates from the sixth century, and the literary evidence belongs to the same period, as the system is employed by Varāhamihira.¹¹ Many old formulae of Indian philosophy and religion were recast according to the decimal system on account of the enthusiasm evoked by this epoch-making invention. Even the time-hallowed *yamas* and *niyamas* of the *Yoga* system are increased to ten in the later treatises.¹² The *Samādhi-rāja-sūtra* mentions ten advantages of each *pāramitā* (chapter xxviii). The *Bo. Bhū.* assigns ten causes for the phenomena.¹³ In the *Da. Bhū.*, a *bodhisattva* acquires ten qualities in each stage, must beware of ten faults, and so on. The *M. S. Al.* speaks of ten marks, and the *M. Vy.* raises the number of *caryās* from four to ten.¹⁴ There is a sudden transition to the decimal system in many categories and formulae of Indian religion and philosophy. Previous teachers had preferred the numbers Seven and Eight (e.g. seven bhūmis, fourteen guṇa-sthānas of the Jainas, the eightfold Way, the eight aṅgas of Yoga, etc.). But the number Ten is associated with many lists and items after this period. The six pāramitās were also increased to ten, when the bhūmis were reckoned as ten instead of seven.

c9.5

The six chief pāramitās are given as follows ¹⁵ :—

c9.6

(1) Dāna (giving, generosity, liberality).
(2) Ṣīla (virtuous conduct, morality, righteousness).
(3) Kṣānti (forbearance, patience).
(4) Vīrya (energy).
(5) Dhyāna (rapt musing).
(6) Prajñā (wisdom).

c9.7

The four supplementary pāramitās are the following ¹⁶ :—

c9.8

(7) Upāya or Upāya-kauṣalya (skilfulness in the choice or adaptation of means for conversion or succour).
(8) Praṇidhāna (aspiration or resolution).
(9) Bala (strength, power).
(10) Jñāna (knowledge).

c9.9

The formula of the six chief pāramitās was evolved after a process of selection and experimentation. Thus only two of these virtues are mentioned together (ṣīla and kṣānti) in several passages of the Mtu. (ii, 327, 9; ii, 353, 20; ii, 408, 18; iii, 441, 1). In another passage, vīrya is not mentioned (ii, 296, 6); and dhyāna and kṣānti are left out at Mtu., iii, 249, 13 ff. In the Su. Vy., another item (ṣamatha, “calm”) is added after dāna (p. 8, lines 6-7), and prajñā is omitted. Another puzzling problem is presented by the fact that the Sad. Pu. mentions only five pāramitās in an important passage (p. 334, line 2), and the Tibetan literature has a treatise on “the five pāramitās” (Tib. Dicy., Das, p. 817b). It seems likely that the formula included only five “Perfections” at a certain period.

c9.10

The origin of the sixfold formula of the pāramitās must be sought in the early Buddhist triad, ṣīla (virtuous conduct), samādhi (concentration) and prajñā (wisdom), which are known as the three skandhas ¹⁷ (groups constituting the factors of spiritual progress) and also as the three ṣikṣās (branches of instruction, the threefold training and discipline).¹⁸ It is probable that prajñā was added to the original group of two, viz. ṣīla and samādhi, which are mentioned together in several passages (Mtu., ii, 361.8; Ṣikṣā., 121.1). Ṣīla is often said to lead to *samādhi*, and *prajñā* is not spoken of in that context. The eightfold Way also ends with *samādhi*. The threefold *ṣikṣā* is defined as *adhi-ṣila*, *adhi-citta* and *adhi-prajñā* in the *M. Vy.* (Section 36); the prefix *adhi* denotes pre-eminence and importance. *Citta* is here synonymous with *samādhi*. The last two items are identical with the fifth and sixth *pāramitās* (*dhyāna* and *prajñā*). *Ṣila* is the second *pāramitā*, to which *kṣānti* was gradually attached as an important virtue. These two were mentioned together even before the final formulation of the six Perfections. The fourth *pāramitā* (*vīrya*) was placed between the *ṣila* section (which appertained especially to the laymen) and the *dhyāna-prajñā* section (which was really cultivated by the monks). The first *pāramitā* occupied an independent position from a very early period, when it was coupled with *ṣila*. *Dāna* and *ṣila* were regarded as the laymen’s special duties, which paved the way to a happy re-birth. The well-known sentence, which describes Buddha’s preaching, begins thus: “*dāna-katham sīla-katham sagga-katham*.”¹⁹ This was the complete gospel for the layman-householder. The higher virtues of renunciation and celibacy are then mentioned in the latter part of the same sentence: “*kāmānam ādīnavam okāram samkilesam*,” etc. (*Dīgha*, i, 110.2, 148.7). *Dāna* was thus the first step that an ordinary person was taught to take; and it was placed before *ṣila* as a distinct duty, though it is logically included in moral conduct (*ṣila*). It may be inferred that *dāna* and *prajñā* were added to the central dyad of *ṣila* and *samādhi*, and they were emphasised on account of the influence of Hinduism. Vasubandhu clearly explains in the *M. S. Al.* commentary that the six *pāramitās* are fundamentally related to the three *ṣikṣās*. The first three *pāramitās* correspond to *adhi-ṣila*, and the fifth and sixth to *adhi-citta* and *adhi-prajñā* respectively; while the fourth (*vīrya*) is regarded as belonging to all the three branches of discipline. The third *pāramitā* is sometimes coupled with the fourth, thus making three pairs of *pāramitās*.²⁰

c9.11

In this connection, it may be pointed out that the division of the *pāramitās* into two sections (with *vīrya* as the common or neutral middle term) is based on the doctrine of the twofold Equipment (*sambhāra*) of a *bodhisattva*, which has already been referred to above. *Sambhāra* means “what is carried together”, hence “materials and requisite ingredients”, “necessary conditions”, “equipment”. It consists of *puṇya* (Merit acquired by good deeds in social life) and *jñāna* (Knowledge acquired by concentration and wisdom).²¹ “Merit” leads to happiness, sense-pleasure, and welfare on earth and in the heavens; but “Knowledge” confers final Liberation. The accumulation of “Merit” is therefore the aim of the layman, while the acquisition of “Knowledge” is the goal of the monk. According to Vasubandhu, the first two *pāramitās* (*dāna* and *śīla*) lead to Merit, the last *pāramitā* (*prajñā*) constitutes Knowledge, while the other three partake of the characteristics of both kinds of *sambhāra*. Thus one may even speak of three divisions of *sambhāra*. But the application of the results of all the *pāramitās* for the attainment of Enlightenment really abolishes the distinction between mundane Merit and supra-mundane Knowledge, and all the *pāramitās* may be regarded as conducive to the equipment of Knowledge.²² In this way, Vasubandhu attempts to unify and sublimate social Action and ascetic Meditation in the single ideal of the quest for *bodhi*.

c9.12

The six *pāramitās* are thus related to several basic concepts of early Buddhism. The Buddhist Sanskrit writers attach the greatest importance to the *pāramitās*, which distinguish the *bodhisattvas* from the inferior *arhats* and *pratyeka-buddhas*. These latter are regarded as representatives of merely *negative* ethical ideals, while the *pāramitās* are put forward as a scheme of *positive* moral development. It is not easy to understand the claims advanced by the Mahāyānists in this respect. There is nothing new in the formula of the six *pāramitās*: all the items are found in the old Buddhist scriptures. But the Mahāyānists really contrast their *pāramitās* with the thirty-seven *bodhi-pakṣa-dharmas*, which are supposed to constitute the highest ideal of the so-called Hīnayāna. It is certainly surprising that the terms *dāna*, *śīla* and *kṣānti* are absent from that curious and comprehensive catalogue of a monk’s duties, which does not seem to include social sympathy and altruistic service. The early Mahāyānists were perhaps proud of having combined the social virtues of a righteous layman-householder with the ascetic ideals of a meditative monk in this formula of the *pāramitās*. They thus bridged the gap that yawned between popular and monastic Buddhism. They taught that a *bodhisattva* should not cease to practise charity and forbearance in social life, when he ascended to the higher stages of Concentration and Wisdom. The six *pāramitās* were not new, but the new method of juxtaposition was devised by the Mahāyānists. They preferred their new formula to the thirty-seven *bodhi-paksya-dharmas*, which were regarded as too monastic and anti-social in their scope and tendency. Charity and moral conduct, which could lead a Buddhist only to the gates of a heaven of temporary pleasure in the old Dispensation, were now considered to be as important as Concentration and the higher Wisdom. All are classed together as indispensable factors in the attainment of Enlightenment.

c9.13

The *pāramitās* are extolled to the skies in many passages of Buddhist literature. They are "the great oceans of all the bright virtues and auspicious principles", and confer prosperity and happiness on all creatures.²³ They are a *bodhisattva*'s best friends. They are "the Teacher, the Way and the Light". They are "the Refuge and the Shelter, the Support and the Sanctuary". They are indeed "Father and Mother to all".²⁴ Even the Buddhas are their "children".²⁵

c9.14

Certain general characteristics are ascribed to all the *pāramitās* as a group. They are sublime, disinterested, supremely important and imperishable.²⁶ They lead to welfare, happy re-births, serenity, unremitting spiritual cultivation, successful Concentration and the highest Knowledge.²⁷ They are free from contamination by sensual pleasure, partiality, love of reward and culpable self-complacency.²⁸ They are placed in this order, as they imply one another and form a progressive scheme of action. The practice of each *pāramitā* is impossible without the cultivation of the preceding one.²⁹ Each Perfection has three degrees: it may be ordinary, extraordinary, or superlatively extraordinary (i.e. good, better, and the best).³⁰ It is ordinary, when it is practised by the ordinary worldly persons for the sake of happiness in this life or the next; it is extraordinary, when it is cultivated by the Hīnayānists for the sake of personal *nirvāṇa*; but it is of the highest degree, when it is acquired by the Mahāyānists *bodhisattvas* for the welfare and liberation of all beings. All the Perfections can be cultivated only by means of attentive thought, resolute purpose, self-mastery, and wisdom in the choice of means.³¹ But foolish and boastful persons may abuse all the *pāramitās* to their own destruction, as they may be puffed up with pride and arrogance on account of their moral superiority.³² In that case, the Perfections really become obstacles and hindrances. Such disastrous consequences may be avoided by applying and devoting them only to the attainment of Enlightenment.

c9.15

The different Perfections may now be considered in detail.

c9.16

1. DĀNA-PĀRAMITĀ. The word *dāna* literally means “giving”, and this seems to be the best rendering in this context. The other equivalents, “generosity,” “liberality,” “charity,” “munificence,” do not suggest the vast variety of the things that a *bodhisattva* gives away, when he practises the Perfection of Giving.

c9.17

The practice of *tyāga* (renunciation, Pāli : *cāga*) is almost synonymous with *dāna*, though the former term is not employed in the formula of the *pāramitās*. The Mahāyānists attach great importance to this Perfection, and *dāna* or *tyāga* is included in several numerical lists. It figures among the six or ten *anusmṛtis* (subjects of recollection), the seven *dhanas* (treasures), the four *sampads* (blessings, accomplishments), the three, four or five items of meritorious action (*puṇya-kriyā-vastūni*), the four means of conversion or sympathy (*saṅgraha-vastūni*) and the four resolutions (*adhiṣṭhānāni*).³³ Such frequency of occurrence in these different formulae indicates its crucial importance for a *bodhisattva’s* discipline. The Mahāyānists speak much and speak often of what they love. They simply maintain and develop a very ancient Indian tradition in thus exalting and inculcating the practice of charity and self-sacrifice. The duty of *dāna* is emphasised in the *Upaniṣads*, the *Gṛhya-sūtras* and other Hindu scriptures.³⁴ The motives, methods and merits of Giving are also discussed in detail in several striking passages of the Pāli canon.³⁵ The Mahāyānists developed the idea of *dāna* in five ways. They coloured it with the avarice and selfishness of a mendicant monastic Order. They extended its scope and included life and limb among the objects, which should be sacrificed for others. They introduced a spirit of exaggerated sentimentality by praising imaginary men and women, who sacrificed themselves for the protection of animals. They gradually eliminated the noble self-regarding motive of attaining *nirvāṇa* or *bodhi*, and taught that *dāna* should be based solely on the feeling of mercy and compassion (*karuṇā*). They evolved the new and revolutionary idea of the “gift of Merit”, by which a *bodhisattva* could save all sinners from punishment or bestow undeserved happiness on all creatures. The spirit of the Mahāyāna may be described in Wordsworth’s words :—

c9.18

“Give all thou hast. High Heaven rejects the lore
Of nicely calculated less or more.”

c9.19

Dāna is classified and analysed in the first place according to the things given away. The *Dh. S.*, which divides each Perfection into three parts, speaks of three kinds of *dāna*: the gift of wealth and material objects, of religious instruction and of friendliness (or security and protection).³⁶ Śāntideva teaches that a *bodhisattva* gives away his body, his pleasures and his Merit.³⁷ The author of the *Bo. Bhū.* divides *dāna* into three categories: personal *dāna* (i.e. the gift of life and limb), external *dāna* (i.e. the gift of material objects), and such *dāna* as is partly personal and partly external.³⁸ The love of logic, however, leads him into a difficult situation, as he is at a loss to find an example of the third species of *dāna*. He mars his valuable dissertation on *dāna* by the repellent remark that the gift of food, which has been eaten and then vomited by a *bodhisattva*, is partly personal and partly external! The same writer has also devised a scheme of classification under nine headings, which he applies to all the Perfections. *Dāna*, for instance, is described as being of nine kinds ³⁹ :—

c9.20

(1) *Svabhāva-dānam* (i.e. *dāna* in its essential aspects).
(2) *Sarva-dānam* (i.e. *dāna* in general).
(3) *Duṣkaram dānam* (i.e. difficult *dāna*).
(4) *Sarvato-mukham dānam* (i.e. all-round *dāna*).
(5) *Satpuruṣa-dānam* (i.e. the *dāna* of a virtuous man).
(6) *Sarvākāram dānam* (i.e. omniform *dāna*).
(7) *Vighātārthikam dānam* (i.e. the *dāna*, which prevents other persons from being hostile and converts them into suppliants; or, which makes poor persons rich).
(8) *Ih-āmutra-sukham dānam* (i.e. the *dāna*, which is pleasant in this life and the next).
(9) *Viṣuddham dānam* (i.e. purified *dāna*).

c9.21

This elaborate scheme of classification is used only as a framework for a lengthy disquisition on the *pāramitās*.

c9.22

(1) The recipients of a *bodhisattva*’s gifts are frequently mentioned. In a general way, all suppliants (*arthī, yācaka*) ⁴⁰ should be helped. But certain classes of people are especially indicated. They may be divided into three categories. First, a *bodhisattva* should bestow gifts on his friends and relatives (*bandhuṣu; mitra-sva-janebhyaḥ; kalyāṇa-mitra-mātā-pitṛbhyaḥ*).⁴¹ Secondly, he should help the needy, the poor, the sick, the afflicted and the helpless (*daridra-sattva-parigrahaḥ; dīn-ātura-modakaḥ; kṛpaṇa-vanīpaka-yācakebhyaḥ; dīne jane; duḥkhito niḥpratisaraṇo*).⁴² Thirdly, he should offer gifts to the Buddhist monks and the Hindu priests (śramaṇa-brāhmaṇebhyaḥ). These two classes are often mentioned together with the poor and the needy as deserving recipients of charity. The phrase śramaṇa-brāhmaṇa-kṛpaṇa-vanipakebhyaḥ recurs frequently in Buddhist literature.43 The claims of the poor are not overlooked; but monasticism slowly casts its sombre shadow on Buddhist ethics, and the poor are sometimes forgotten. But we find that only the poor are spoken of in certain passages. The miseries and difficulties of the indigent sections of society are described with real sympathy and insight by Kṣemendra and other writers. We seem to hear the cry of the poor of India in such verses as the following: “His heart melted with pity, when he saw the afflicted and helpless farmers. Their hair looked yellow, as it was covered with dust; their hands and feet were torn and rent; they suffered from hunger, thirst and fatigue; they were troubled with the wounds and hard scratches inflicted by the plough and the spade.”44 Śāntideva teaches that a monk should even share his scanty alms with the poor.45 But it must be admitted that the Buddhist authors often forget the poor and speak only of charity to the monks and the priests. In such passages, mendicant monasticism stands out naked and unashamed.46 In the story of Aṣoka’s gifts to the monks, the poor are not mentioned at all.47 The economic interests of the monastic Order also led to the formulation of the curious doctrine that the merit of a charitable deed depended on the spiritual status of the recipient, and not on the greatness of his need or the nature of the social service rendered by the donor. It is more meritorious to give to a monk than to a pious layman or an ordinary person.48 A Buddha is the worthiest recipient of gifts (a kṣetra or field).49 This teaching throws a lurid light on the sub-conscious psychology of the monks, who depended for their subsistence on the alms of the laity.

c9.23

(2) As regards the objects that should be given in charity, a bodhisattva should give all that he has,50 his wealth, his limbs, his life, his “Merit” (puṇya), and also his wife and children, who are evidently regarded as a man’s property. The heroes of many edifying legends are kings and princes, and they are described as giving away “food, beverages, medicine, couches, seats, gardens, houses, villages, towns, perfumes, garlands, ointments, silver, gold, elephants, horses, chariots, clothes, corn, gems, ornaments, musical instruments, men-servants and maid-servants”, etc.51 But there is also a moving story of "the widow's mite" in the *Avadāna-śataka*.52 A poor woman gives a piece of cotton cloth (*paṭaka*), which is all that she can afford. A monk does not need superfluous luxuries, and accepts only his simple "requisites", viz. clothing, food, lodging and medicine.53

c9.24

A *bodhisattva* should exercise his discretion in the choice of gifts. He should not give anything which may be used to inflict injury on other living beings.54 He should also refrain from supplying others with the means of gratifying their sensual appetites and passions 55 (*rati-krīḍā-vastu*). He should not give away poisons, weapons, intoxicating liquor, and nets for the capture of animals.56 He should not bestow on others a piece of land, on which the animals may be hunted or killed.57 He should not give anybody the instruments for suicide or self-torture. He should not offer unsuitable gifts: thus, for example, he should not give alcoholic beverages to teetotalers or unwholesome food to the sick. The wealth, that he gives in charity, must be acquired righteously and peacefully.58 If he has little, he gives what he has. If he possesses something, which is very rare and precious, or which has been obtained with great difficulty, he does not refuse to part with it.59

c9.25

Besides wealth and material objects, a *bodhisattva* should be ready to sacrifice his limbs for the good of others, "his hand, foot, eye, flesh, blood, marrow, limbs great and small, and even his head." 60 This teaching is, however, modified by the sensible author of the *Bodhisattva-bhūmi*, who expresses the opinion that a *bodhisattva* need not give away his body and limbs, if his mind is pure. But he can sacrifice his body by becoming a servant or a slave for the sake of others.61 The idea of giving away one's limbs has given rise to some curious stories, which are intended to be highly instructive and inspiring, but which are simply silly and puerile.

c9.26

A *bodhisattva* should also give away his wife and children to such suppliants as need their services.62 But he may not sacrifice his parents in the same way, as they should be honoured and protected.63 The gift of one's wife and children is regarded as the acme of liberality. It is indeed necessary for an advanced *bodhisattva* to be married in order that he may be able to exhibit this virtue in its perfection!

c9.27

(3) A *bodhisattva* should also know *how* to give. He should always be very courteous to the suppliants, and receive them with every mark of respect and deference (*satkṛtya*).⁶⁴ He should also be happy and joyful, when he gives away anything.⁶⁵ This condition is important and essential. The donor should be even happier than the recipient of the gift. A *bodhisattva* should not repent of his generosity after bestowing gifts on others.⁶⁶ He should not talk of his charitable deeds.⁶⁷ He should give quickly (*tvaritam*) and with a humble heart.⁶⁸ He should make no distinction between friends and enemies, but should give to all alike.⁶⁹ He should give to the deserving and the undeserving, the wicked and the righteous, everywhere and at all times.⁷⁰ But he should not lose the sense of measure and proportion in his charity. He owes a duty to many living beings and must not sacrifice himself in vain for an unimportant purpose. He must combine wisdom with mercy.⁷¹

c9.28.1

(4) A *bodhisattva*, who knows *what* to give and *how* to give, should also understand *why* he should give. The Buddhist writers have mentioned almost all the motives, high and low, that may actuate a donor. Charity confers fame on the generous man (*dātṛ-kīrti*).⁷² The love of fame, that "last infirmity of noble minds", is regarded as a motive, that should not be severely condemned. Charity leads to the accumulation of *puṇya* (Merit) and to happy rebirths on earth or in a heaven of the *devas*.⁷³ It should be practised even by selfish persons, as it confers inward happiness and peace of mind. It also affords protection against premature death and all other evils.⁷⁴ It is indeed the source of power, longevity, welfare and prosperity during many æons.⁷⁵ A gift cannot fail to bring a corresponding reward in the next life: they who give food, money or a lamp will get strength, beauty or lovely eyes respectively as their recompense.⁷⁶ Gautama Buddha himself enjoyed good health on account of his charitable deeds in a former life,⁷⁷ and a *bodhisattva*'s great physical strength is acquired in the same way.⁷⁸ A very generous donor (*dāna-pati*) is praised by the poets as a sandal-tree, a cloud, a drug-tree, a *kalpa-vṛkṣa* (wish-fulfilling tree), a *cintāmaṇi* (philosopher's stone) and a baited hook;

c9.28.2

and other similes are employed in order to exalt and glorify him.⁷⁹ The Buddhists put their well-known *dāna-sūtra* (text or aphorism on *dāna*) into the mouth of Gautama Buddha, who is represented as speaking these words: "If the living beings knew the fruit and final reward of charity and the distribution of gifts, as I know them, then they would not eat their food without giving to others and sharing with others, even if it were their last morsel and mouthful. If they should meet a person, who is worthy of receiving a gift, selfishness (niggardliness), that has once arisen, would not abide in their hearts. But they do not know the fruit and final reward of charity and the distribution of gifts, as I know them. For this reason, they eat without giving and sharing with others; and selfishness, that has once arisen, abides in their hearts.” 80 This passage describes the merits of charity in a general way, but the author of the *Samādhirāja-sūtra* mentions ten advantages resulting from the practice of *dāna*. He says: “A *bodhisattva*, who is devoted to charity, conquers the sin of selfish niggardliness; his heart is ennobled by the spirit of renunciation; he really enjoys pleasures in sharing them with many persons; he is born in wealthy families, which command many enjoyments; he is of a charitable disposition from the moment of his birth; he becomes popular among the four kinds of assemblies (i.e. monks, nuns, laymen and laywomen);

c9.28.3

he enters all assemblies with self-confidence; his noble fame as a donor spreads in all directions; his hands and feet are soft and small; . . . 81 he is always blessed with good friends until he acquires Enlightenment.” (*Sam. Rā.*, fol. 112a, lines 4 ff.) The author of the *Bodhisattva-bhūmi* also speaks of the four glorious powers (*prabhāva*) of charity. A *bodhisattva* gives up the vice of selfish niggardliness, which is the opposite of generosity. He matures himself and others for Enlightenment, and his gifts are the means of converting the people. He experiences heartfelt joy before giving, during the act of giving, and after it. He thus serves his own best interests. He allays the pain suffered by others through hunger, thirst, heat and cold. He acquires wealth and power, and also learns to love charity for its own sake (*Bo. Bhū.*, fol. 31a, 5.2-7.2.). Charity thus brings great rewards, but niggardliness (*mātsarya*) is a sin that is punished in the next life, especially if a gift is refused to a monk.82 The selfish miser is reborn as a *preta*, who is perpetually tormented with hunger and thirst. The ordinary worldly motives for charity are thus fully and adequately set forth by these Buddhist writers. But the highest teaching of the Mahāyāna seems to be that a *bodhisattva* should practise charity without any selfish motives whatsoever. His generosity should be absolutely disinterested.

c9.28.4

He should not think of the reward of *dāna*, and he should not desire or expect any recompense.83 He should not wish to secure rebirth as a king or a deva as the result of his sacrifice.84 He should not give in order to obtain honour and fame.85 He does not desire to be respected as a dāna-pati by the king, ministers, priests and citizens.86 He knows that all such advantages and enjoyments are impermanent and valueless, and this wisdom helps him to act without the thought of reward (phala-darçanam).87 He gives unselfishly and also teaches others to do likewise.88

c9.29

(5) Karuṇā. If a bodhisattva has no selfish motives for his charitable deeds, he can be actuated and inspired only by love, pity, mercy and compassion (karuṇā, anukampā, kṛpā, dayā). This great virtue, karuṇā, which has already been mentioned as an attribute of a perfect Buddha and of a budding bodhisattva, is exhibited, practised and developed chiefly by dāna. It is intimately associated with the dāna-pāramitā, though it is also the guiding-star of a bodhisattva's entire career. It should be rendered in English by such words as "love", "pity", "mercy", "compassion", and all their synonyms or approximate synonyms put together. No one word can convey an adequate idea of what karuṇā means. It is mentioned in an enormous number of passages in all the principal treatises.89 It is perhaps the word that occurs most frequently in Mahāyānist literature. According to the Pr. Pā. Ṣata., a bodhisattva shows his karuṇā chiefly by resolving to suffer the torments and agonies of the dreadful purgatories during innumerable æons, if need be, so that he may lead all beings to perfect Enlightenment.90 He desires Enlightenment first for all beings and not for himself.91 He is consumed with grief on account of the sufferings of others, and does not care for his own happiness.92 He desires the good and welfare of the world.93 All his faults and sins are destroyed, when his heart is full of karuṇā.94 He loves all beings, as a mother loves her only child.95 This famous simile sums up a bodhisattva's ideal of karuṇā. He loves all creatures more than he loves himself or his wife and children.96 He does not love his own children more than other children, as his love is the same for all.97 He is like a mother, a father, a relative, a friend, a slave and a teacher for all beings.98 Āryaçūra and Çāntideva exalt karuṇā above all other virtues and attributes. Āryaçūra says: "The earth, with its forests, great mountains and oceans, has been destroyed a hundred times by water, fire and wind at the close of the æons: but the great compassion of a bodhisattva abides for ever." 99 The same author goes so far as to declare that even Liberation and the highest Knowledge are superfluous, if *karuṇā* is mistress of the soul. Another great poet says: "Of what use are Knowledge (Gnosis), salvation or ascetic practices (matted hair and besmearing the body with ashes) to the man, whose heart melts with pity for all living creatures?" Cūra teaches that Mercy (*dayā*) is really the sum and substance of ethics and religion, as wickedness and corruption will be impossible, when all men learn to love others as their kinsmen.100 He also anticipates Shakespeare's well-known simile by comparing Mercy to "the gentle rain from heaven".101 As the rain makes all the crops grow, so Mercy produces all the virtues that should adorn a *bodhisattva*'s personality. Cāntideva also regards *karuṇā* as the one thing needful. He teaches that a *bodhisattva* need not learn many things, but only *karuṇā*, which leads to the acquisition of all the principles and attributes of Buddhahood. As the soldiers follow their king, and as all the activities of mankind depend on the sun, even so all the principles, which are conducive to Enlightenment, arise and grow under the aegis of *karuṇā*. It is indeed the life and soul of Religion (*jīvit-endriya*).102

c9.30

The Buddhist writers have not only sung the praises of *karuṇā*, but have also attempted to analyse and explain it in a philosophical spirit. They teach that it may be considered from two points of view. It consists in realising the equality of oneself and others (*par-ātma-samatā*) and also practising the substitution of others for oneself (*par-ātma-parivartana*).103 When a *bodhisattva* cultivates the habit of regarding others as equal to himself, he gets rid of the ideas of "I and Thou" and "Mine and Thine".104 He learns to feel the joys and sorrows of others like his own, and does not prefer his own happiness to that of others.105 He loves and guards others, as he loves and guards himself.106 He is also willing to exchange his happiness for the miseries of others.106 He gives himself for the sake of others. He returns good for evil, and helps even those who have injured him. He identifies himself with the poor and the lowly, and looks upon himself as if he were another person.106 He follows the two Golden Rules of the Mahāyāna: (1) "Do unto others as you would do unto yourself"; (2) "Do unto others as they wish that you should do unto them."

c9.31

What is the relation of *karuṇā* to Egoism and Altruism? This question has been answered in different ways by the principal philosophers. Some of them teach that a *bodhisattva* acts for his own good and also for the good of others. His motives are both egoistic and altruistic. He achieves his own purpose (*svārtha*) and also promotes the best interests of others (*par-ārtha*). *Svārtha* and *par-ārtha* are mentioned together in many passages of Mahāyānist literature.¹⁰⁷ The author of the *Bodhisattva-bhūmi* declares that only the perfect Buddhas and very advanced *bodhisattvas* can act from purely altruistic motives, as when they condescend to be born in a lower world for the good of the living beings.¹⁰⁸ All ordinary *bodhisattvas* must work both for themselves and others, as they wish to attain Enlightenment, even though they do not care for any temporal advantages or sensual pleasures. Every charitable action is a step forward on the path to *bodhi*. Many donors declare that the Merit of their good deed may be the means of attaining *bodhi*.¹⁰⁹ This is their higher spiritual egoism. They think of their own final liberation from mundane existence and their goal of Enlightenment, when they help others out of love and compassion. They combine and reconcile self-interest with the service of others.

c9.32

In course of time, the term *svārtha* was dropped, and only *par-ārtha* is spoken of in many passages.¹¹⁰ This development indicates the triumph of the ideal of pure Altruism. The *bodhisattva* should not think of self at all, when he exerts himself for the good of others. He should be filled with love, and love alone, without any admixture of self-interest, however sublime and spiritual it may be. His mind must be so overwhelmed and saturated with the feeling of pity for others, that it is not possible for him to think of his own Enlightenment at the same time. The *bodhisattvas*, who follow this ideal, do not declare that they wish to obtain *bodhi* in exchange for their sacrifices. They utter such sentiments as the following:—

c9.33

“By the Merit of my sacrifice, may I also use my body in my future lives for the good of all creatures.”

c9.34

“I do not make this sacrifice in order to secure a happy rebirth as a king or a *deva*; and I do not think even of the felicity of Liberation. By the Merit of my charitable deed, may I become the guide and saviour of the world, which is lost in the wilderness of mundane existence. I wish to accomplish the good of others.”¹¹¹

c9.35

The hero of the ninety-second story in Kṣemendra’s *Avadāna-kalpa-latā* cries: “For the sake of others, I shall bear this torturing wheel (discus) on my head.”¹¹² The *Pr. Pā. Ṣata.* also teaches that a preacher should not desire even Enlightenment as the reward of his disinterested work.113 Thus only Altruism is finally recognised and recommended as the motive of a *bodhisattva's* self-sacrifice. Śāntideva teaches this ideal as a paradox: “If thou lovest thyself, thou shouldst not love thyself. If thou wishest to protect thyself, thou shouldst not protect thyself.” 114 The last word on this difficult problem is said by the author of the *M. S. Al.*, who declares that Egoism and Altruism are one and the same in the case of an advanced *bodhisattva*. When the *bodhisattva* thinks of others in the same way as he thinks of himself, the words *svārtha* and *par-ārtha* become synonyms, and there is no distinction between them.115 In the highest synthesis, Egoism and Altruism are merged in perfect Love.

c9.36

Kṣemendra also discusses the origin and nature of *karuṇā*. Is it natural and innate? Or is it the result of Merit acquired in a former existence? Or does it depend on practice? The poet teaches that compassion is natural and innate in all creatures, even in such ferocious beasts as lions.116 It can be developed by practice. Thus does the Mahāyāna discover mercy and pity even in the nature and essence of cruel and rapacious brutes. Altruism is here united to the highest optimism. Kṣemendra, like Tennyson, voices the faith that

c9.37

“Love is creation’s final law.” 117

c9.38

(6) *Stories of Dāna.* Buddhist literature abounds in stories and legends of charitable and self-sacrificing men, women and animals. They should be regarded as “parables”, as most of them are the products of the luxuriant Indian imagination. Some animals are represented as models of virtue, partly because Buddhism does not draw a sharp line of demarcation between the human and sub-human species, and partly because the writers wish to indulge in a little caustic irony against mankind.118 The birth of a *bodhisattva* in such a state of woe is explained as being the result of some remnants of Demerit.119 This explanation must be taken for what it is worth. The Buddhists could not resist the temptation of employing the fable as a medium of religious instruction. India is noted as the original home of this interesting and popular literary genre. The Mahāyānists often teach wisdom out of the mouths of the beasts of the field. The heroes and heroines of these stories give away wealth, limbs, life, wives and children in a spirit of exaggerated and fantastic philanthropy. The lack of a sense of proportion and harmony is the fatal flaw of the Indian temperament as exhibited in literature and religion. The Indian thinkers and writers often push a good idea to such extremes that it becomes grotesque and ridiculous. But we can read these quaint parables with pleasure and interest, if we appreciate their spirit without thinking too critically of the details. Only a few typical stories can be related very briefly in this essay.

c9.39

Story of the Tigress. A bodhisattva threw himself before a hungry tigress, which had several little cubs. She would have devoured the cubs, if the bodhisattva had not sacrificed his body for her sake. This curious story is related in the Jātakamālā, the Suvarṇa-prabhāsa and the Avadāna-kalpa-latā.¹²⁰ Kṣemendra narrates it twice and gives Satyavrata and Karuṇarekha as the names of the bodhisattvas. He adds the interesting detail that the cubs were reborn as thieves in their next lives! In the Jātaka-mālā, the scene of the story is quite different from the milieu described in the Suvarṇa-prabhāsa. Āryaśūra’s bodhisattva is a learned teacher, who goes out for a walk with his disciple and sees the tigress in a deep ravine. The bodhisattva’s name is not given, but the disciple is called Ajita. The number of the cubs is not indicated. The bodhisattva asks the disciple to leave him and go in search of food for the tigress. In the meantime, he throws himself down into the ravine near the tigress, which devours his dead body. The legend, according to the Suvarṇa-prabhāsa, is as follows:—

c9.40

Gautama Buddha, wandering about in the region of the Pañcala with his disciples, arrived at a beautiful spot in the woods. He asked Ānanda to prepare a seat for him, and said that he would show them the relics of the great bodhisattvas who had performed difficult feats. He struck the ground with his hands. The earth shook, and a stūpa made of gems, gold and silver rose up. Buddha directed Ānanda to open the stūpa. It contained a golden sarcophagus covered with pearls. Ānanda saw some bones, which were as white as snow and the kumuda flower (white water-lily). All present paid obeisance to the relics. Buddha then told the story of the hero. A long time age, there lived a king named Mahāratha. He had three sons, Mahāpraṇāda, Mahādeva and Mahāsattvavān. These princes were one day wandering about in a great park and came to a lonely place called “The Twelve Shrubs”. Mahāsattvavān was not disturbed by any fears or misgivings, but his brothers were not so brave. Suddenly they saw a tigress in that hollow of “The Twelve Shrubs”. She had whelped seven days before, had five cubs, and was emaciated through hunger and thirst. The three brothers talked of her sad plight and said: "What can this poor creature eat?" Mahāsattvavān asked his brothers to walk on and said, "I shall go into this hollow to do something." He then uttered these words: "I, moved by compassion, give my body for the good of the world and for the attainment of bodhi". When he threw himself before the tigress, she did not do anything to him. The bodhisattva understood that she was very weak. He looked round for a weapon, but could find none. He took a strong hundred-year-old bamboo creeper, cut his throat, and fell dead near the tigress. (Su. Pr., fol. 73b, 3ff.)

c9.41

King Çivi (Çibi). The story of King Çivi is found in four different versions in Buddhist Sanskrit literature. It is related in the Avadāna-çataka, the Jātaka-mālā and the Avadāna-kalpalatā. According to the Avadāna-çataka,¹²¹ King Çivi, having distributed all his wealth among the people, thinks of the small insects. He inflicts several wounds on his body with a weapon, and feeds the fleas and mosquitoes with his blood, as if they were his children. In the meantime, Çakra, the chief of the devas, assumes the shape of a vulture in order to put King Çivi to the test. The king offers the vulture a feast of his own flesh, and tells him to eat as much as he needs. Çakra then appears in the guise of a Hindu priest (brahmin), and asks for the king's eyes, which are willingly given. Çakra praises and blesses the king for his generosity. In Kṣemendra's first story of Çivi, the king feeds an ogre (rākṣasa) with his flesh and blood as a recompense for a few beautiful verses, which Indra, disguised as an ogre, recites in his presence. Indra asks him if he felt any pain or grief at the sacrifice of his limbs. Çivi replies in the negative, and says: "If it is true that my mind was not touched by that pain, then may I, by the power of this truthful asseveration, regain my body as it was." His body immediately becomes whole and sound again. It may be stated that this device of saty-ādhiṣṭhāna (resolution by Truth) is employed by the later Mahāyānist writers in order to restore their heroes and heroines to their normal physical condition after the mutilation suffered by them in the exercise of charity. In some stories, Indra, who often appears as the tempter, compensates them at the end by his divine power; but Kṣemendra prefers this curious method of saty-ādhiṣṭhāna for avoiding a tragic conclusion of the moving tales. The hero cannot be left torn and bleeding after his superhuman sacrifice. This tendency to finish the stories in a happy vein is most marked in Kṣemendra’s writings, while Ḍūra does not always care to restore his mauled and mangled heroes to their pristine strength and beauty. The same King Ḍivi (or Ḍibi) is also the hero of the second story in Ḍūra’s *Jātaka-mālā*. Ḍakra, in the guise of a blind priest, asks for the gift of one eye, but the king gives him both eyes. Ḍibi remains blind for some time, but Ḍakra restores his eyes to him in the end and bestows on him the power of seeing things at a distance.

c9.42

Kṣemendra also narrates a second story of King Ḍivi. His capital was called Ḍikhi-ghoṣā. When a violent epidemic raged in the country, the physicians declared that the sick could be cured only by drinking the blood of a man, who had always practised forbearance since the day of his birth. The king knew that he had never yielded to anger, and that his mother had also completely eschewed it during the pre-natal period. He gave his blood to the sick during six months.

c9.43

Rukmavatī or Rūpāvatī. The story of Rukmavatī is told in the *Divy-āvadāna* and the *Avadāna-kalpa-latā*.122 In the *Divy-āvadāna*, the name is given as Rūpāvatī. Rukmavatī was a charitable lady of the town of Utpalāvatī. She once saw a famished woman, who had been delivered of a child and who was on the point of eating her own offspring. Rukmavatī was in a dilemma. If she ran home to fetch food for the poor creature, the starving wretch would devour the child in the interval. If she took the child home with her, the mother would perish of starvation. She helped the woman by cutting off her own breasts and giving them to her for food! Indra, the chief of the *devas*, appeared on the scene, and she was transformed into a man as a reward for her sacrifice! According to the *Divy-āvadāna*, she first recovered her limbs by the device of the *saty-ādhiṣṭhāna*. Kṣemendra continues the story into Rukmavatī’s next life. She was born as Sattvavara, the son of the chief of a guild. He took pity on the birds of the air, and cut off bits of his flesh to feed the vultures and other carnivorous birds in the cremation-ground. His eyes were also torn out by the birds, and nothing at last remained of him but a heap of bones.123

c9.44

Jīmūtavāhana. The famous story of Jīmūtavāhana is related in the *Kathā-sarit-sāgara* and the *Avadāna-kalpa-latā*, and it is dramatised in Harṣa’s play, “*Nāgānanda*.” 124 Jīmūtavāhana was a prince, who lived in the forest with his aged father. He was married to a princess, named Malayavatī. As he was walking about, he saw on a certain occasion that a boy, named Śaṅkhacūḍa, was followed by an attendant, who carried two red garments. The boy belonged to the Nāga tribe and was chosen as the victim for Garuḍa, who claimed such a bloody sacrifice every day. His mother was weeping and wailing in the neighbourhood. Jīmūtavāhana offered to give his own life and save the unfortunate creature. In spite of the boy’s protests, he donned the red garments and sat on the stone of sacrifice. Garuḍa came, seized him, and began to devour him. Jīmūtavāhana looked happy and contented. Garuḍa was astonished at this spectacle, and soon learned his mistake. He expiated his error by repenting of his cruelty, promising to kill no living beings in future, and restoring all the dead Nāgas to life. In Harṣa’s play, the goddess Gaurī also appears on the scene and Jīmūtavāhana is restored to life.

First 48 of 411 passages. Read on

Cites (35)