Early Monastic Buddhism v2.c30.s1: Principal centres of Buddhism

Early Monastic Buddhism v2.c30.s1

Language: English

Principal centres of Buddhism

v2.c30.s1.1

The names of monks and the geographical information as furnished by the accounts of the Second Council throw interesting light on the extent of the area which came under the influence of the Buddhist church. The leading monks of the time were counted as eight, viz., Sabbakāmī, Sāḷha, Revata, Khujjasobhita, Yasa, Sambhūta Sāṇavāsī, Vāsabhagāmika and Sumana.¹ The first six were disciples of Ānanda, and the remaining two of Anuruddha. Ānanda died during the latter part of the reign of Ajātasattu, and so the age of his disciples at the time of the Second Council exceeded, in any case, 90 years. Sabbakāmī was then the Saṅghatthera but Revata was the recognised leader. In the Sanskrit tradition, Sambhūta Sāṇavāsī gets more prominence as he, according to this tradition, was selected by Ānanda as the monk to take charge of the religion after him. In the Chinese traditions, he is shown as taking the leading part in the deliberations of the Council. The Vesālians were monks of the eastern countries (*pācinakā*) so also were Sabbakāmī, Sāḷha of Sahajāti,² Khujjasobhita and Vāsabhagāmika.¹ In Buston's account, Sabbakāmī is said to have been residing at Vesālī. Hiuen Tsang tells us that Khujjasobhita belonged to Pāṭaliputra while Sāḷha came from Vesālī. It will be observed that Sāḷha of Sahajāti or Vesālī was at first in an indecisive mood. King Kālāsoka also like Sāḷha was at first in favour of the Vesālians, but later on, at the intervention of his sister Bhikkhunī Nandā, he changed towards the Westerners. In the early history of Buddhism, Vesālī is described as a town seething with non-Buddhistic thinkers and as a centre of the followers of Nigaṇṭha Nāṭaputta, hence it is quite in keeping with the traditions of the country that non-orthodox Buddhists should find a footing there.

v2.c30.s1.2

¹ Buston (II, p. 93) gives a slightly different list: Yaśas, Sāḍha, Dhanika, Kubjita, Ajita, Sambhūta, Revata.

v2.c30.s1.3

² Soṇaka, according to Buston, II, p. 93. Sahajāti is identified with Bhiṭā 9 miles S.S.W. from Allahabad. Sir John Marshall identifies Sahajāti with Bhiṭā on the basis of the inscription: ‘Māgadhi Sahajātiye nigamaśa’. See N. N. Ghosh, *Early His. of Kausambi*, p. 89.

v2.c30.s1.4

¹ Buston (p. 93) gives the following geographical information:— i Sarvakāmin of Vaiśālī ii Yaśas of Dhanika iii Sāḍha of Soṇaka iv Dhanika of Saṃkāsya (in Magadha, see Przyluski, *Le Concile de Rājagaha*, p. 286) v Kubjita of Pāṭaliputra vi Ajita of Śrughna vii Sambhūta of Mahiṣmati viii Revata of Sahajāti.

v2.c30.s1.5

Yasa, the most active figure in the account and the one who started the commotion, hailed, according to Hiuen Tsang, from Kosala. He left Vesālī for Kosambī, where he organised a party with sixty monks of Pāvā (Pāveyyakā)² and eighty monks of Avantī, all of the Western countries.³ He proceeded with them first to Sambhūta Sāṇavāsī of Mathurā and met him at Ahogaṅga.⁴ Accompanied by him they went to meet Revata, another Westerner, belonging to Kanauj and met him at Soreyya. The fourth Western monk was Sumana. Thus we see that there was a clear geographical division among the monks. The opposition to the Vesālian practices was started by Yasa of Kosala,¹ and supported by Revata of Soreyya (Kanauj),² Sambhūta Sāṇavāsī of Mathurā, and Sumana, whose native place is not mentioned anywhere. This testifies to the fact that the monks of the Western countries, viz. Kauśāmbī,³ Avantī Mathurā were more orthodox in their observance of the Vinaya rules as adopted by the Theravādins. In the deliberations of the Council, Sabbakāmī, though the Saṅghatthera, was not given the lead, and this also proves the lack of his whole-hearted support to the agitation started by Yasa. Sāḷha's attitude, as mentioned above, was at first indecisive and similar probably was also the view of Khujjasobhita of Pāṭaliputra.

v2.c30.s1.6

² Pātheyyakā is another reading.

v2.c30.s1.7

³ *Vamsatthappakāsini*, p. 166: *Pacchimikā yeva Pāveyyakā*.

v2.c30.s1.8

⁴ Ahogaṅga is a mountain near the sources of the Ganges. Moggaliputta Tissa resided there immediately before the Third Council see B. C. Law, *Geog. of Early Buddhism*, p. 40.

v2.c30.s1.9

¹ Dhanika, according to Buston (II, p. 91).

v2.c30.s1.10

² Kauśāmbī is identified with the ruins at Kośam, 38 miles from Allahabad above the Yamunā. Watters, II, p. 75.

v2.c30.s1.11

³ In the Sarvāstivādin Vinaya account of the Kauśāmbī dispute, one party is described as Vesālian and the other Kauśāmbian.

v2.c30.s1.12

Prof. Przyluski also has noted the geographical division of monks in his *Concile de Rājagṛha* (p. 308-9) and remarks that there were definitely three centres, viz., Vaiśālī,⁴ Kauśāmbī and Mathurā. Kauśāmbī and all south-western countries became later on the seat of the Theravādins while Mathurā and the north-western countries of the Sarvāstivādins. The Westerners of this Council were therefore the group of monks who came to be later on known as the Sthaviras and Sarvāstivādins while the Easterners, who made their seat at Vaiśālī, were the Mahāsaṅghikas and their offshoots. Whatever may have been the differences between the Easterners and Westerners, it is apparent that Buddhism was prevalent at the time all over the central belt of India from Avanti¹ to Vaiśālī and from Mathurā to Kauśāmbī. The chief centre of Buddhism, it seems, was shifted at that time from Rājagṛha to Pāṭaliputra which became then also the royal seat of the rulers. The Mahāsanghikas made Pāṭaliputra their chief centre.²