Early Monastic Buddhism v1.c2: Preface
Early Monastic Buddhism v1.c2
- Language
- English
Preface
v1.c2.1
The scope of the present work as indicated by the title is "Early Monastic Buddhism" as distinguished from 'Early Buddhism', which is supposed to have been preached by Gotama the Buddha and his co-founders as Mrs. Rhys Davids would call them.¹ The Pāli Piṭakas undoubtedly passed through several redactions with accretions and omissions till the texts reached the form in which we have them now. The artificial and stereotyped form of each sutta takes away the original freshness of the sayings and distinctly reveals the clipping and shaping hands of the redactors of a time far away from the time of the Teacher. While recognising that Gotama Buddha's teaching might have been a little different from what is found in the Pāli Nikāyas, it appears to my mind to be beating about the bush to ascertain what Gotama Buddha had in mind and actually preached. All that is permissible at the present stage is to state what the Nikāyas and the Vinaya have got to say without confusing the already confused issues.
v1.c2.2
¹ Mrs. Rhys Davids, *Sākya* (1931), *Buddhism* (1934).
v1.c2.3
To be accurate according to Mrs. Rhys Davids, the scope of the present treatise is limited to the texts as edited by the ancient monks and preserved in the monasteries, and interpreted by the ancient commentators, and does not aspire to delve into the unknown, and so the word 'monastic' is used in the title in conformity to the suggestion of Miss I. B. Horner.²
v1.c2.4
² *The Early Buddhist Theory of Man Perfected* (1936), Ch. I.
v1.c2.5
In the present volume an attempt has been made to answer three principal questions, *viz.*, what is *not* Buddhism, what is early (monastic) Buddhism, and how a Buddhist should live. The first seven chapters (pp. 1-92) are devoted to the first question while in the next four and the last chapter is delineated the career of Buddhism during the century immediately following Buddha's demise along with an account of the first council. The second question is dealt with in chapters XII-XV (pp. 198-273) and the third in the rest.
v1.c2.6
For the answer to the first question we have depended mainly on the *Brahmajāla* and *Sāmaññaphala* suttas supplemented by Nāgārjuna's comments as far as they were needed to elucidate the enigmatic expressions of the *Brahmajāla*. This has led to a discussion of two of the most complicated problems of Buddhist thought, viz., the conceptions of *Tathāgata* and *Anatta*.
v1.c2.7
In dealing with the second question we have depended on the Nikāyas but have taken the *Visuddhimagga* as our guide. There is no gainsaying the fact that Buddhaghosa is still the best expositor of early monastic Buddhism and his statements are always supported by quotations from the Pāli texts, and so we may state that by following the *Visuddhimagga* we have not deviated from the original interpretation of the Theravādins.
v1.c2.8
For the third question we have utilised as far as possible the *Pātimokkha* codes and the Vinaya texts and tried to remove the misconceptions of the present day writers on ancient Indian democracy about the constitution of the Buddhist Saṅgha.
v1.c2.9
Some of the chapters were published some time ago in the *Indian Historical Quarterly*, the *Mahābodhi* and other periodicals and my work,—the *Early History of the Spread of Buddhism*.
v1.c2.10
As there are still many problems of Early Monastic Buddhism to be discussed, another volume devoted to the same will be published in the near future. The Index of both the volumes will appear with Vol. II.
v1.c2.11
Before I conclude I must express my deep gratitude to Dr. Narendra Nath Law; but for the help rendered by him in several ways it would not have been possible for me to present this work to the students of Buddhism.
v1.c2.12
My thanks are also due to Mr. P. Das, Manager of the *I.H. Quarterly* for arranging my mss. and getting them through the press—a task exceedingly arduous, particularly for an author.
v1.c2.13
N. DUTT