Early Monastic Buddhism v2.c34.s10: XIV. Nirvāṇa in Nāgārjunikoṇḍa inscriptions

Early Monastic Buddhism v2.c34.s10

Language: English

XIV. Nirvāṇa in Nāgārjunikoṇḍa inscriptions

v2.c34.s10.1

In the Nāgārjunikoṇḍa inscriptions, there are a few incidental remarks relating to Buddha and Nirvāṇa. These probably apply to the conceptions held by the Pūrvaśailas or Caityakas. Buddha is described here as *jita-rāga-dosa-moha* (one who has conquered attachment, ill-will and delusion) and *dhatuvarapari-gahita* (possessed of the excellent *dhātu*), and the donor expects as a result of his or her gifts merits which he or she can transfer (*pariṇāmetum*) to his or her relatives and friends—an article of faith not recognised in the Pāli works where *attadīpa attasaraṇa* is the maxim. The fruits expected are (i) religious merits, for himself, his relatives and friends resulting in their happiness in this world and the next (*ubhaya-loka hita-sukhāvahanānāya*),—a merit which reminds us of the Aśokan inscriptions: *esa bādha dekhiye iyam me hidatikāye iyam mana me pālatikāye* ti and (ii) *Nivāṇa-sampati* (*nirvāṇadom*) for himself or herself.¹

v2.c34.s10.2

¹ *Ep. Ind.*, XX, pp. 16, 18, 19, 20, 21: "atano" or "apano"

v2.c34.s10.3

The recording of the view that gifts may bring happiness to all, but *nirvāṇa* only to oneself, deserves our careful consideration. The distinction drawn in this way is rather uncommon and is not made even in the inscription recording the gifts of the Queen of Vanavāsi to the Mahīśāsakas² or in the long inscription of the Sinhalese donor.³

v2.c34.s10.4

² *Ep. Ind.*, XX, p. 24

v2.c34.s10.5

³ *Ibid.*, p. 22.

v2.c34.s10.6

Then the expressions, *dhātuvara-parigahita* or *nivāṇa-sampati-sampādaka* raise the presumption that the Andhaka-conception of Nirvāṇa was different from that of the Theravādins or their sub-sect the Mahīśāsakas. In the *Kathāvatthu*, there are two controversies (ix, 2; xix, 6), relating to the conception of Nirvāṇa as prevailing among the Andhakas. The one attributed to the Pubbaseliyas is that the *Amatapada* (= Nirvāṇa), is "an object of thought of a person not yet free from bondage",¹ and the other attributed to the Andhakas is that "the *Nibbāna-dhātu* is *kusala* (good)" in the sense in which mental states are spoken as *kusala* (good) and it is a faultless state.² Both these statements bear the implication that the Pubbaseliyas or the Andhakas conceived of Nirvāṇa as a 'positive faultless state'—a conception which can hardly be accepted by the Theravādins, who speak of realizing the Nibbāna within one's own self (*paccattam veditabbo viññūhi*) and not of grasping the same as some object producing pure happiness.³

v2.c34.s10.7

¹ Mrs. Rhys Davids, *Points of the Controversy*, pp. 231-3. 2 *Ibid.*, p. 339. 3 See *Majjhima Nikāya*, I, p. 1 f.: *Mūlapariyāyasutta*. 4 Masuda, pp. 35-36.