Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Ancient Indian Education: An Inquiry into its Origin, Development, and Ideals c6: Chapter III. Buddhist Education

Ancient Indian Education: An Inquiry into its Origin, Development, and Ideals c6

Language
English

Chapter III. Buddhist Education

c6.2

AT the time when Gautama the Buddha lived and taught his doctrines, those philosophical ideas which were afterwards organized into the Vedānta, Yoga, and other systems recognized as permissible to those within the fold of Brāhmanism were already being discussed, though they had not assumed the final form as enshrined in the recognized Sūtras. The doctrine of *karma* and transmigration was generally accepted by thinking persons, and the question which earnest inquirers after truth sought to answer was how release could be obtained from the endless round of births and rebirths. Buddhism was one among many answers to the question, and it has its roots deep in Hindu philosophic thought. It differed from the recognized Brāhmanic philosophy, however, in several important details, and the teaching of Buddha was characterized by great earnestness and by a broad spirit of philanthropy. It might easily, however, have been assimilated as a part of the Brāhmanic system, as many other beliefs and practices were, but for the fact that it contained certain elements which were destined to bring it into hostility with that system. These included the non-recognition of the Vedas, and of the Brāhman hierarchy, as well as of the religious aspect of the caste system. Buddha carried on no crusade against any of these, but the opposition was implicit in his system, and in course of time the hostility worked itself out into a struggle for existence which ended in Buddhism ceasing to exist in India as a separate faith, though several of its ideas were incorporated into Hinduism. For over fifteen hundred years, however, it was in vogue, and developed a system of education which was a rival of the Brāhmanic system, though in many ways similar to it.

c6.3

One main difference between the Brāhmanic and Buddhist education was that the latter was not based on Vedic study and its teachers were not Brāhmans, unless those who had become converted to Buddhism. It was open to all comers, and not merely to the three ‘twice-born’ castes. All castes were equally admissible to the Buddhist community, though it seems to have been specially welcomed by the wealthy and respectable and supported by rich merchants and powerful rulers, to whose influence it owed a great deal for its advancement.

c6.4

Lay adherents were recognized and duties laid down for their guidance, but it was a logical conclusion from Buddha’s views of life that for rapid progress in spiritual improvement a life of retirement from the world was necessary, and this was urged upon those who wished to be earnest in their pursuit of freedom from earthly desires. A life of meditation in the solitude of a forest was considered to be the best of all, but from the first this was adopted only by the most earnest, and the majority of the monks, or *bhikkhus*, lived in companies in monasteries, or *vihāras*. These *vihāras* formed a characteristic feature of Buddhism, and for many centuries they were widely spread in India.

c6.5

In order to be admitted to the *sangha*, or community of *bhikkhus*, the conditions were very simple. The applicant must be free from certain diseases, and be neither a slave, a debtor, nor in the king’s service. If under age he must first obtain the consent of his parents. The ceremony of admission is thus described in the *Vinaya Piṭaka*¹:—

c6.6

¹ *Mahāvagga*, i. 38.

c6.7

‘Let him who desires to receive ordination first cut off his hair and beard; let him put on yellow robes, adjust his upper robe so as to cover one shoulder, salute the feet of the *bhikkhus* with his head; and sit down squatting; then let him raise his joined hands, and tell him to say: “I take my refuge in the Buddha, I take my refuge in the Dhamma, I take my refuge in the Sangha”.’

c6.8

This first act of admission was called the *pabbajja*, and after admission the candidate became a novice. The ceremony for full admission was called the *upasampada* and was very similar. No one could receive the *pabbajja* ordination till he was eight years of age, nor the *upasampada* ordination till he was twenty. There were strict rules as to chastity, poverty, and abstinence from worldly pleasures, and also as to food and clothes. A few simple rules as to discipline were laid down, but the monk took no vow of obedience. Respect for superiors was required from the novice, and the chapter, consisting of at least ten monks, might impose penances for offences and even expel a *bhikkhu* from the order in case of serious offence. The usual mode of obtaining subsistence was for the monk to beg his food, taking with him his begging bowl and going from house to house. But from the first it was also permitted for wealthy laymen to invite monks to feed occasionally at their houses and even on certain occasions to take food to the monastery. The offences which were to be avoided by the members of the order are summed up in the *Pātimokkha*, a work which dates from the very early days of Buddhism. Twice every month this document should be publicly repeated in an assembly of monks at each monastery, and when this takes place a monk who has broken any rule is expected to confess his misdemeanour and a penance is imposed upon him according to the gravity of his offence. All the monks took part in the work of begging for food, but the manual labour in connection with the *vihāra* was performed by the novices, and the senior members of the community were expected to devote themselves to meditation and to trances, and to learning thoroughly the doctrines of the faith and spreading them abroad in the world. During part of the year the *bhikkhus* often travelled from place to place, spreading their doctrines and teaching the adherents of the Buddhist faith, but during the rainy season they settled down at a monastery. The residents of a monastery must often therefore have changed, and in becoming *bhikkhus* it was membership in the order rather than in any particular monastery that was obtained.

c6.9

Each *sāmanera*, or novice, was required to choose a *bhikkhu*, who was a full member of the order, as his preceptor, or *upajjhāya* (or *āchāriya*). A pupil was called a *saddhivihārika*.¹

c6.10

¹ *Mahāvagga*, i. 25.

c6.11

‘I prescribe, O *bhikkhus*, that young *bhikkhus* choose an *upajjhāya* (or preceptor). The *upajjhāya*, O *bhikkhus*, ought to consider the *saddhivihārika* (i.e. pupil) as a son; the *saddhivihārika* ought to consider the *upajjhāya* as a father. Thus these two united by mutual reverence, confidence, and communion of life, will progress, advance, and reach a high stage in this doctrine and discipline.’

c6.12

The choosing of an *upajjhāya* is to be as follows:² ‘Let him who is going to choose an *upajjhāya* adjust his upper robe so as to cover one shoulder, salute the feet of the intended *upajjhāya*, sit down squatting, raise his joined hands, and say, “Venerable Sir, be my *upajjhāya*”’. This was to be repeated three times, and if the *bhikkhu* who was addressed expressed his consent by word or gesture, then the choice was complete and the relationship of preceptor and pupil began.

c6.13

² *Ibid.*, i. 25.

c6.14

There were strict regulations³ for the conduct of the pupil towards the preceptor.

c6.15

³ *Ibid.*

c6.16

‘Let him arise betimes; and having taken off his shoes and adjusted his upper robe so as to cover one shoulder let him give to the *upajjhāya* the teeth-cleanser, and water to rinse his mouth with. Then let him prepare a seat for the *upajjhāya*. If there is rice-milk, let him rinse the jug, and offer rice-milk to the *upajjhāya*. When he has drunk it, let him give water to the *upajjhāya*, take the jug, hold it down, rinse it properly without damaging it by rubbing, and put it away. When the *upajjhāya* has risen let him take away the seat. If the place is dirty let him sweep the place.’ After this he was to help the preceptor to dress and get his alms-bowl ready if he wished to go out to beg. If the preceptor desired it, the pupil was to follow him as his attendant on the begging tour, keeping not too far away and not too near him. If the preceptor speaks he is not to interrupt him. After the begging is over the pupil was to get back quickly to the monastery, prepare a seat, get water for the washing of his feet, a foot-stool, and a towel. Then he must go and meet the preceptor and take his bowl and robe from him. He must fold the robe and attend to the clothes of the preceptor. If the preceptor wishes to eat the food in the alms-bowl, he must bring him water and then offer him food. After the meal the pupil must wash and dry the bowl and put it away, and also put away the robe. After the preceptor has risen the pupil must take away the seat, and put away the water for the washing of feet, the foot-stool and the towel. If the place was dirty he was to sweep it. Then he was to help the preceptor to bathe, getting for him cold or hot water, or accompanying him to the bathing-place if he wished to go there. The pupil also bathed at the same time, but had to dry and dress himself quickly so as to be ready to help the preceptor. After the bathing was completed he was to ask the preceptor for a discourse, or ask him questions. Elaborate directions are given as to the procedure to be followed by the novice in cleaning out the Vihāra—the cell, store-room, refectory, fire-room, etc. The novice must also see that there is drinkable water and food, and water for rinsing the mouth. The pupil was also to act as a check, as it were, upon the preceptor, in keeping him steadfast in the faith. If he became discontented the pupil was to try and appease him, or get some one else to do this. If indecision arose in his mind or he had become tainted with false doctrines the pupil was to try and win him back. If the preceptor was guilty of a grave offence, the pupil was to take care that the *sangha* sentenced him to discipline and also that he was rehabilitated after the penance was complete, but he was at the same time to get the *sangha* to forego, or mitigate, any severe discipline which it might wish to impose upon his preceptor. The pupil was to see that the robe of the preceptor was washed, or made, or dyed, according to need. He was not to accept presents, or give presents, or wait on any one else, or go out, without the permission of the preceptor. If the preceptor was sick he was to wait upon him and nurse him diligently.¹

c6.17

¹ *Mahāvagga*, i. 25.

c6.18

The preceptor, on the other hand, had his responsibility towards the pupil.²

c6.19

² *Ibid.*, i. 26.

c6.20

‘The *upajjhāya*, O *bhikkhus*, ought to observe a strict conduct towards his *saddhivihārika*. Let the *upajjhāya*, O *bhikkhus*, afford spiritual help and furtherance to the *saddhivihārika* by teaching, by putting questions to him, by exhortation, by instruction.’ He was to see that he possessed an alms-bowl, a robe, and the other simple articles which a *bhikkhu* was allowed to possess. If the pupil was sick the preceptor was not only to nurse him, but to wait upon him and attend to him, just as the pupil was required to wait upon himself in health. He was to see that the pupil washed his robe, and show him how to make and dye it.

c6.21

Only in certain prescribed cases could a pupil be turned away by his preceptor. A *bhikkhu* could not accept the office of preceptor till he had himself been a *bhikkhu* for ten years, and was learned and competent.³

c6.22

³ *Ibid.*, i. 27.

c6.23

These were the regulations for the mutual conduct of preceptor and pupil, which were drawn up at some early period before the days of King Aśoka. A Chinese visitor, I-Tsing, who was in India between 673 and 687 A.D., shows us how the system was working at the time of his visit. After referring to the directions in the *Vinaya* text quoted above, he says¹:—

c6.24

¹ I-Tsing (Takakusu’s trans.), p. 120.

c6.25

‘The following is also the manner in which a pupil waits on his teacher in India. He goes to his teacher at the first watch and at the last watch of the night. First the teacher bids him sit down comfortably. Selecting some passages from the *Tripitaka*, he gives a lesson in a way that suits circumstances, and does not pass any fact or theory unexplained. He inspects his pupil’s moral conduct, and warns him of defects and transgressions; whenever he finds his pupil faulty he makes him seek remedies and repent. The pupil rubs the teacher’s body, folds his clothes, or sometimes sweeps the apartment and the yard. Then having examined water to see whether insects be in it, he gives it to the teacher. Thus, if there be anything to be done, he does all on behalf of his teacher. This is the manner in which one pays respect to one’s superior. On the other hand, in case of a pupil’s illness, his teacher himself nurses him, supplies all the medicine needed, and pays attention to him as if he were his child.

c6.26

Thus the monastic system, which was an important feature of Buddhism, provided that every novice on his admission to the order should place himself under the supervision and guidance of a preceptor, and this state of pupillage was to last for ten years. I-Tsing says² that after five years from the time that the pupil masters the *Vinaya*, he was allowed to live apart from his teacher, but he must put himself under the care of some teacher wherever he went until ten years had elapsed after he was able to understand the *Vinaya*. The main ideas of this connection of teacher and pupil were taken over from the Brāhmanic education, and are in close similarity with it. From this provision for the instruction of novices arose the Buddhist educational system.

c6.27

² *Ibid.*, p. 119.

c6.28

At first, no doubt, the primary idea was to provide for the proper instruction of the novice in the doctrines of the Buddhist faith, and to secure some supervision over his conduct while he was becoming habituated to the monastic life. Buddhism, indeed, exists to abolish ignorance, but it is not primarily concerned with the intellect or with the promotion of learning. The ignorance which is to be abolished is ignorance of a small number of practical doctrines, such as the necessary connection of sorrow with existence, and the need of extinguishing desire. The pursuit of secular knowledge would almost seem, from one point of view, to be contrary to the spirit and purpose of Buddhism, and yet we know that the Buddhist monastic institutions did become to some extent places of general learning. A person who is on his way to the attainment of perfect knowledge of things in themselves—that is, one who is determined to become a future Buddha—is called, according to the *Mahāyāna* form of Buddhism, a *Bodhisattva*. To reach this high estate he has to pass through certain stages, and among some of the stages which came to be recognized by Mahāyāna teaching are those in which intellectual pursuits and study are required.¹ This development of ideas, however, only took place after Buddhism had existed for a long time.

c6.29

¹ See *Enc. Rel. and Ethics*, article on ‘*Bodhisattva*’, pp. 739 ff.

c6.30

The practice of Buddhist education probably varied very much in different countries and at different times, and we have no evidence as to how soon monasteries became centres of educational importance, not only in the doctrines of Buddhism, but also in other subjects. No doubt the existence of Brāhmanic learning would form an example and incentive to the Buddhist monks to engage in study.

c6.31

We get a valuable picture of Buddhist education as it existed in India from the records left by certain Chinese Buddhist scholars, who visited India in the fifth and seventh centuries of our era. Their chief purpose in visiting India was to study Pāli and Sanskrit and secure copies of the sacred books of Buddhism to take back with them to their own land. Their long, toilsome, and dangerous journeys would hardly have been undertaken unless the fame of the Buddhist monasteries in India as places of learning had reached as far as China.

c6.32

Fā-hien, who was in India between 399 and 414 A.D., makes frequent references to monasteries, and says that the regular business of the monks was to perform acts of meritorious virtue and to recite their Sūtras, and sit wrapt in meditation.¹ In speaking of the monastery at Pāṭaliputra, or Patna, he says²:—

c6.33

¹ Fā-hien (Legge’s trans.), p. 44.

c6.34

² Ibid., p. 78.

c6.35

‘By the side of the tope of Aśoka there has been made a Mahāyāna monastery, very grand and beautiful; there is also a Hīnayāna one; the two together containing six or seven hundred monks. The rules of demeanour and the scholastic arrangements in them are worthy of observation. Śāmans (monks) of the highest virtue from all quarters, and students, inquirers wishing to find out truth and the grounds of it, all resort to these monasteries.’

c6.36

Fā-hien spent three years at Patna³ learning Sanskrit and Sanskrit books, and making copies of the Buddhist sacred works. He stayed also at Tamralipti (near the mouth of the Hooghly) and at other places. In the Panjāb he found that the oral method of instruction was used, but in the more eastern regions of India writing was more freely used. Nālanda was visited by Fā-hien, but it had apparently no monks or monastery.

c6.37

³ Ibid., pp. 98 ff.

c6.38

About two hundred years later came Hiuen Tsiang (629 to 645 A.D.). He found Buddhism still flourishing, though a revival of Brāhmanism had taken place. The Mahāyāna form of Buddhism was spreading and the Hinayāna form declining. He mentions monasteries at a great many places, but also speaks of some as in ruins. Some of these monasteries were very large, and often there were groups of them in one place. Thus at Hiraṇyaparvata, on the Ganges, there were ten saṅghārāmas (or monasteries) with about four thousand monks, and at Tamralipti also there were ten with a thousand monks. At Tiladaka, only twenty-one miles west of Nālanda, there was a monastery, with regard to which he says¹:—

c6.39

¹ Hiuen Tsiang (Beal’s trans.), vol. ii. 102.

c6.40

‘This building has four halls, belvideres of three stages, high towers, connected at intervals with double gates that open inwards. It was built by the last descendant of Bimbisāra-rāja. He made much of high talent and exalted the virtuous. Learned men from different cities, and scholars from different countries, flock together in crowds, and reaching so far abide in this saṅghārāma. There are a thousand priests in it, who study the Great Vehicle.’

c6.41

But the most important Buddhist centre of learning by this time was at Nālanda, which was famous far and wide for its learning. Hiuen Tsiang makes frequent reference to it as a place of learning, and describes it as follows²:—

c6.42

² Ibid., ii. pp. 170 ff.

c6.43

‘The priests, to the number of several thousands, are men of the highest ability and talent. Their distinction is very great at the present time, and there are many hundreds whose fame has rapidly spread through distant regions. Their conduct is pure and unblameable. They follow in sincerity the precepts of the moral law. The rules of this convent are severe and all the priests are bound to observe them. The countries of India respect them and follow them. The day is not sufficient for asking and answering profound questions.

c6.44

From morning till night they engage in discussion; the old and the young mutually help one another. Those who cannot discuss questions out of the *Tripitaka* are little esteemed and are obliged to hide themselves for shame. Learned men from different cities, on this account, who desire to acquire quickly a renown in discussion, come here in multitudes to settle their doubts, and then the streams of their wisdom spread far and wide. For this reason some persons usurp the name (of Nālanda students) and in going to and fro receive honour in consequence. If men of other quarters desire to enter and take part in discussions, the keeper of the gate proposes some hard questions; many are unable to answer, and retire. One must have studied deeply both old and new (books) before getting admission.' He goes on to say that seventy or eighty per cent. of such would-be residents of Nālanda failed to pass the test for admission. He also mentions a long list of celebrated teachers who lived at Nālanda and not only taught but composed treatises, commentaries, and other works.

c6.45

Not very long after Hiuen-Tsiang's departure another Chinese scholar, I-Tsing, came to India. He was in the country from 673 to 687 A.D. His travels in India were not so extended as those of Fā-Hien and Hiuen-Tsiang, but he stayed ten years at Nālanda which was still a flourishing centre of learning. He says¹ with regard to it that the rites of the monastery were very strict and consequently the number of residents was great and exceeded three thousand. It had eight halls and three hundred apartments.² The lands in its possession contained more than two hundred villages. They had been bestowed upon it by kings of many generations. 'Thus,' says I-Tsing,³ 'the prosperity of the religion continues ever owing to nothing but the fact that the *Vinaya* is being strictly carried out.' The hours of work and of worship in Nālanda, as well as in other monasteries, were regulated by using clepsydrae.¹

c6.46

¹ I-Tsing, p. 65.

c6.47

² *Ibid.*, p. 154.

c6.48

³ *Ibid.*, p. 65.

c6.49

¹ I-Tsing, p. 145.

c6.50

I-Tsing gives us a most interesting idea of the study carried on at Nālanda. He says² that the pupil, after attending to the service of his teacher, ‘reads a portion of scripture and reflects on what he has learnt. He acquires new knowledge day by day, and searches into old subjects month after month, without losing a minute’. In speaking of the method of learning he refers to Pāṇini’s Sūtras and other grammatical works which he says³ had to be learnt by heart. Apparently some preliminary study was often done before entering Nālanda, for he says that ‘after studying grammar, etc., under instructors, they pass two or three years at Nālanda or in the country of Valabhi (Western India)’. Grammar seems to have been the foundation of all other studies and to have received great attention.

c6.51

² Ibid., p. 116.

c6.52

³ Ibid., p. 167.

c6.53

‘Grammatical science,’ he says,⁴ ‘is called in Sanskrit Śabdavidyā, one of the five Vidyās.’ (The five Vidyās are: (1) Śabdavidyā, grammar and lexicography; (2) Śilpasthānavidyā, arts; (3) Chikitsavidyā, medicine; (4) Hetuvidyā, logic; and (5) Adhyātmavidyā, science of the universal soul, or philosophy.) ‘Śabda means “sound,” and vidyā “science.” The name for the general secular literature of India is Vyākaraṇa (i.e. Grammar), of which there are about five works, similar to the Five Classics of the Divine Land (China).’ These five he enumerates as follows:—

c6.54

⁴ Ibid., pp. 169 ff.

c6.55

(1) ‘The Siddha—composition for beginners. . . . Children learn this book when they are six years old, and finish it in six months.’

c6.56

(2) ‘The Sūtra is the foundation of all grammatical science. . . . It contains a thousand ślokas and is the work of Pāṇini. . . . Children begin to learn the Sūtra when they are eight years old, and can repeat it in eight months’ time.’

c6.57

(3) ‘The book on Dhātu’ (Verbal roots).

c6.58

(4) ‘The book on the three Khilas (or “pieces of waste land”), viz. Aṣṭadhātu, Manda, and Uṇādi.’ (The first deals with cases and conjugations, and the others with the formation of words from root and suffix or suffixes.) ‘Boys begin to learn the book on the three Khilas when they are ten years old, and understand them thoroughly after three years’ diligent study.’

c6.59

(5) ‘The Vṛtti-Sūtra’ (Kāśikāvṛtti). ‘This is a commentary on the foregoing Sūtra (i.e. Pāṇini’s Sūtra). . . . Boys of fifteen begin to study this commentary, and understand it after five years.’

c6.60

There thus seems to have been a long course of grammatical study of the Sanskrit language, beginning when a boy was six years of age and lasting till he was twenty, which was a preliminary to the study of higher subjects. With regard to this further study I-Tsing says¹: ‘After having studied this commentary, students begin to learn composition in prose and verse and devote themselves to logic (*hetuvidyā*) and metaphysic (*abhidharmakośa*). In learning the *Nyāya-dvāra-tarka-śāstra* (introduction to logic), they rightly draw inferences (*anumāna*); and by studying the *Jātakamālā* (stories of Buddha in previous births) their powers of comprehension increase. Thus instructed by their teachers, and instructing others, they pass two or three years, generally in the Nālanda monastery in Central India, or in the country of Valabha (Walā) in Western India. These two places are like Chinma, Shihch’u, Lungmen, and Ch’ueli in China, and there eminent and accomplished men assemble in crowds, discuss possible and impossible doctrines, and after having been assured of the excellence of their opinions by wise men, become far-famed for their wisdom. To try the sharpness of their wit they proceed to the king’s court to lay down before it the sharp weapon of their abilities; there they present their schemes and show their (political)

c6.61

¹ I-Tsing, pp. 176 ff.

c6.62

talent, seeking to be appointed in the practical government. When they are present in the House of Debate, they raise their seat and seek to prove their wonderful cleverness. When they are refuting heretical doctrines all their opponents become tongue-tied and acknowledge themselves undone. Then the sound of their fame makes the five mountains (of India) vibrate, and their renown flows, as it were, over the four borders. They receive grants of land and are advanced to a high rank; their famous names are, as a reward, written in white on their lofty gates. After this they can follow whatever occupation they like.’

c6.63

It is apparently in connection with this higher course that he mentions certain other books which were studied, namely—

c6.64

(6) ‘The *Chūrṇi*’ (i.e. the Mahābhāshya, or Great Commentary of Patañjali on Pāṇini’s *Sūtras*).

c6.65

(7) ‘The *Bhartṛihari śāstra* treats of principles of human life as well as of grammatical science.’

c6.66

(8) ‘The *Vākya* discourse’—a treatise on the Inference supported by the authority of the sacred teaching, and on Inductive argument.

c6.67

(9) ‘The *Pei-na*’ (perhaps Beda or Veda), which was a work on philosophy.

c6.68

The priests also, he tells us, learned besides, all the *Vinaya* works, and investigated the *Sūtras* and *Śāstras* as well.

c6.69

This valuable picture of Buddhist learning and education in the monasteries at the time of I-Tsing’s visit shows a great amount of intellectual activity going on. The main course seems to have been founded on an elaborate study of Sanskrit grammar which led on to logic and finally to metaphysics and philosophy. It is closely connected with Brāhmanic education in that the first six out of the nine works which he mentions as being studied were those also used in the Brāhman schools. The last three, however, were composed, I-Tsing tells us, by Bhartṛihari,¹ who was a member of the Buddhist order. The method seems to have been chiefly oral, and he frequently insists that these various treatises must be learned by heart. I-Tsing has a passage in which he says,² ‘There are two traditional ways in India of attaining to intellectual power: (1) Committing to memory; (2) the alphabet fixes one’s ideas. By this way, after a practice of ten days or a month, a student feels his thought rise like a fountain, and can commit to memory whatever he has once heard. This is far from being a myth, for I myself have met such men.’ The meaning of this passage is by no means clear, but it certainly brings out the prevalent practice of learning everything by heart and shows what facility students seem to have gained in doing this. A great place was also given to discussion and debate, at least in the higher part of the course, and a man’s ability seems to have been very largely judged by his power to vanquish opponents in discussion. It was such men apparently who got royal appointments and whose names were, ‘as a reward, written in white on their lofty gates.’

c6.70

¹ For Bhartṛihari, see Macdonell, *Sans. Lit.*, pp. 340, 381, 382. He died in 651 A.D.

c6.71

² I-Tsing, p. 183.

c6.72

The Jātaka stories and the Vinaya and other texts which were studied gave some of the elements of the study of literature, and I-Tsing mentions³ the composition of poems as one of the occupations of the residents at the monasteries. Great attention seems to have been given at Nālanda to the practice of singing or chanting, and I-Tsing was anxious that this should be introduced in his own country.

c6.73

³ *Ibid.*, p. 154.

c6.74

Medicine seems to have been studied, though not forming part of the ordinary course. It was no doubt taken up by specialists. I-Tsing refers to a Śāstra on medical science and makes considerable mention of various forms of medical treatment; and Fā-hien, who was in India two hundred years before I-Tsing, mentions the dispensaries and hospitals which existed at Patna.¹ Medicine seems to have been specially cultivated by the Buddhists; and Charaka, who is one of the chief Indian authorities on medicine, is said to have been the court physician of the Buddhist King Kanishka in the first century A.D. There is no evidence that law, mathematics, and astronomy were cultivated in the Buddhist schools of learning. Probably law was already regarded too much as an exclusive possession of the Brāhmans to make intrusion by others possible, while Buddhism would not have the need of astronomy that Brāhmanism had for ascertaining auspicious times for sacrifices and other ceremonial.

c6.75

¹ Fā-hien, p. 79.

c6.76

Though Buddhism encouraged a life of separation from the world and the suppression of desire, it did not, like Brāhmanism, advocate asceticism and bodily mortification, and the care of the bodily health was considered as of importance for improvement in the spiritual condition. We find that exercise was encouraged in the Buddhist monasteries of India, and I-Tsing tell us² that ‘in India both priests and laymen are generally in the habit of taking walks, going backwards and forwards along a path, at suitable hours, and at their pleasure; they avoid noisy places. Firstly it cures disease, and secondly it helps to digest food. The walking hours are in the forenoon, and late in the afternoon. They either go away (for a walk) from their monasteries, or stroll quietly along the corridors. . . . If any one adopts this habit of walking he will keep his body well, and thereby improve his religious merit.’

c6.77

² I-Tsing, p. 114.

c6.78

I-Tsing seems to have had a very favourable impression of the school of learning at Nālanda where he spent so many years. He mentions by name many distinguished teachers whom he met and with whom he conversed, and says³: ‘I have always been very glad that I had the opportunity of acquiring knowledge from them personally, which I should otherwise never have possessed, and that I could refresh my memory of past study by comparing old notes with new ones.’

c6.79

³ Ibid., pp. 184, 185.

c6.80

Thus arising out of the duty of the bhikkhus to teach and spread their doctrines and of the relation of teacher and pupil which the discipline of the order required, the Buddhist monastery had become a place where not only the Buddhist doctrines were studied, but also much secular knowledge. No doubt the content of this was meagre judged by modern standards, but it does not compare very unfavourably with the content of other ancient systems of education. Was this system of general culture confined to those who had entered the sacred order either as monks or as novices, or was it also shared by those who were preparing to take a more active part in the affairs of the world? It seems clear from what I-Tsing tells us, that the monastery was a place of instruction not only for those who had joined the order as a lifelong profession, but for others also. He tells us, for instance, in a passage quoted above, that the debate which was held in the king’s court was in order that students might show their talent, and thus obtain appointments in the practical government. He also tells us that after completing their course students could ‘follow whatever occupation they like.’ But there is a passage which puts the matter still more clearly and leaves no doubt upon the question.¹ ‘Those white-robed (laymen) who come to the residence of a priest, and read chiefly Buddhist scriptures with the intention that they may one day become tonsured and black-robed, are called “children” (mānava). Those who (coming to a priest) want to learn secular literature only without having any intention of quitting the world, are called “students” (brahmachārī). These two groups of persons, though residing in a monastery, have to subsist at their own expense. In the monasteries in India there are many "students" who are entrusted to the *bhikkhus* and instructed by them in secular literature. On the one hand the "students" serve under priests as pages, on the other the instruction will lead to pious aspirations. It is therefore very good to keep them, inasmuch as both sides are benefited in this way.'

c6.81

¹ I-Tsing, p. 105.

c6.82

This passage makes it quite clear that there were in the monastery not only the professed monks and novices, but also those who were studying the Buddhist scriptures with a view to joining the order and also those who had no intention of doing so, but were residing at the monastery only for the sake of education. This practice also may have been influenced by the Brāhman schools which were open not only to young Brāhmans who were destined for the priestly office, but to others of the twice-born castes as well. There was nothing to prevent a man who had joined the Buddhist order from returning to the world, and probably many did so, and with regard to Bhartṛihari, who composed some of the works I-Tsing refers to, he tells us¹ that he became seven times a priest, but seven times returned to the laity, and that he wrote the following verses full of self-reproval :—

c6.83

¹ I-Tsing, p. 179.

c6.84

‘Through the enticement of the world I returned to the laity.
Being free from secular pleasures again I wear the priestly cloak.
How do these two impulses
Play with me as if a child ?’

c6.85

I-Tsing adds, ‘At last he returned to the position of a lay devotee (*upāsaka*), and wearing a white garment continued to exalt and promote the true religion, being still in the monastery.’

c6.86

The story of this man illustrates what was probably frequently the case that some joined the order without continuing in it, but it is also interesting as showing how one of the foremost teachers of the monastery was a man who did not continue in the order but finished his career as a layman.

c6.87

After the visits of these Chinese pilgrims we have but scanty evidence as to the course and development of Buddhist education in India, but the monasteries long continued as centres of education and literary study, and only decayed as Buddhism itself decayed in India. Dr. S. C. Vidyabhusana ¹ mentions the following mediæval centres of Buddhist learning, namely, Kāñchīpura,² Nālanda, Odantapurī,³ Śrī Dhanyakataka, Kāśmīra, and Vikramaśilā.

c6.88

¹ *Mediæval School of Indian Logic.*

c6.89

² *I.e.* Conjeeveram.

c6.90

³ Or Uddandapura.

c6.91

Nālanda has already been referred to above in connection with the visits of the Chinese scholars. Its site has been identified with the modern Baragaon, seven miles north of Rajgir, in Bihar. Nāgārjuna, about 300 A.D., and Ārya Deva, about 320 A.D., are said to have been the earliest scholars to take interest in Nālanda as an educational institution, but it was not till about 450 A.D. that it assumed the character of a university when it came under the recognition of the king of Magadha. It must have been at the height of its prosperity about the time of the visits ⁴ of Hiuen-Tsiang and I-Tsing in the seventh century A.D. The latest limit of the existence of Nālanda as a university centre which is known with certainty is 750 A.D., when a certain Kamalśila was teaching the Tantric philosophy there. But it probably existed until about 850 A.D., for it is known that there was for some time intercourse between Nālanda and the later university of Vikramaśilā, which was not founded till about 800 A.D. According to Tibetan accounts the quarter in which the Nālanda University, with its grand library, was located, was called Dharmaganja (“Piety Mart”). It consisted of three grand buildings called Ratnasāgara, Ratnodadhi, and Ratnaranjaka. In Ratnodadhi, which was nine-storied, there were the sacred scripts called *Prajñāpāramitā-sūtra*, and Tāntric works such as *Samāja-guhya*, etc. After the Turuska raiders had made incursions in Nālanda, the temples and *chaityas* there were repaired by a sage named Mudita Bhadra. Soon after this, Kukutasiddha, minister of the king of Magadha, erected a temple at Nālanda, and while a religious sermon was being delivered there, two very indigent Tīrthika mendicants appeared. Some naughty young novice-monks, in disdain, threw washing-water on them. This made them very angry. After propitiating the sun for twelve years, they performed a *yajna*, fire sacrifice, and threw living embers and ashes from the sacrificial pit into the Buddhist temples, etc. This produced a great conflagration which consumed Ratnodadhi. It is, however, said that many of the Buddhist scriptures were saved by water which leaked through the sacred volumes of *Prajñāpāramitā-sūtra* and *Tantra*.’¹

c6.92

⁴ See pp. 96 ff.

c6.93

¹ *Mediæval School of Indian Logic*, Appendix A.

c6.94

From the foregoing account it will be seen that in the later years at least of Nālanda the Tantric form of Buddhism was studied there, that is, a variety of Mahāyāna Buddhist doctrine, which was closely allied to the Hindu cult of Śiva and illustrates the gradual assimilation of Indian Buddhism to Hinduism. Two other centres of learning which came into being as Nālanda declined were both strongholds of Tantric Buddhism. These were Odantapuri and Vikramaśilā.

c6.95

The monastery of Odantapuri, or Uddandapura, was founded by a certain Gopāla, who was king of Bengal and extended his power westwards over Magadha, or South Bihar. It dates from about the middle of the eighth century A.D.²

c6.96

² V. A. Smith, *Hist. of India*, 3rd edition, p. 397.

c6.97

Vikramaśilā³ had a monastery which is said to have included 107 temples and six colleges. It was founded by King Dharmapāla at the close of the eighth century A.D. It was situated in Bihar on a hill on the right bank of the Ganges, but its precise position is not certain. King Dharmapāla endowed his foundation with rich grants which were to be used for the maintenance of 108 resident monks as well as non-resident monks and pilgrims. A learned and pious sage was always appointed as the head of the monastery. Among the subjects studied were grammar, metaphysics (including logic), and ritualistic books. Pandits who were eminent for learning and character were rewarded by having their images painted on the walls of the university, and the title of ‘pandit’ was conferred on distinguished scholars by the king himself. Six of the most learned of the sages of this foundation were appointed to guard its gates. This university was destroyed by the Muhammadan invader Bakhtiyar Khiljī about 1203 A.D.

c6.98

³ *Mediæval School of Indian Logic*, Appendix C.

c6.99

It seems that, apart from the monasteries, Buddhism did not offer any educational opportunities, but we have to ask the question as to how far, during all the centuries that Buddhism existed in India, Buddhist education influenced the general mass of the people, at least those who adhered to Buddhism, and provided opportunities of popular instruction. In more modern times in some Buddhist countries it is said that almost all boys went to the monastery and received at least some elementary education at the hands of the monks. Thus in Burma, before the country came under British control, almost the whole male population passed through the monasteries, and were taught by the monks.¹ Those who did not intend to join the religious order stayed till they were about twelve years of age, and received instruction in reading, writing, and arithmetic, as well as some religious instruction. There is no doubt that this system of popular education in connection with the Buddhist monastery is an ancient custom, and it has been claimed that the presence of Buddhist monasteries in India in ancient times implies a widespread, popular education there during the time that they flourished.¹ There does not, however, seem to be any very clear evidence of this, and we cannot say how soon it became the practice for the monasteries to give education of a popular kind. The question of the origin of popular education in India will be discussed in the later chapter on that subject, but it may be said here, that even if facilities existed for general instruction as early as the reign of King Aśoka, it was not necessarily in connection with the monasteries that it was given.

c6.100

¹ Shway Yeo, ch. ii.

c6.101

¹ V. A. Smith, *Aśoka*, p. 108.

c6.102

At the time of the visit of Fā-hien, however (399-414 A.D.), we find that the monasteries seem to have begun to undertake instruction of a more general kind than merely instructing those who joined the *sangha* in the precepts of Buddhism. In speaking of the monasteries at Patna, he says² that the rules of demeanour and the scholastic arrangements in them were worthy of observation, and that students and inquirers wishing to find out the truth and the grounds of it resorted thither. In a note on Fā-hien’s reference to the ‘scholastic arrangements’ at Patna, Prof. Legge says: ‘Why should there not have been schools in those monasteries in India as there were in China? Fā-hien himself grew up with other boys in a monastery, and no doubt had to go to school. And the next sentence shows us there might be schools for more advanced students as well as for the *śrāmaṇeras*.’ There seems no reason to doubt that by the time of Fā-hien the monasteries may have given some general instruction not only to young novices, but even to pupils who had no intention of joining the *sangha*. At all events this system was in full swing at the time of I-Tsing’s visit. But even the presence of pupils who were not intending to join the order of monks does not warrant us, without other evidence, in thinking that such education was taken advantage of by a large proportion of the children of Buddhist parents, or included popular elementary instruction. The education which I-Tsing describes was education of a higher rather than of a popular type, and was based on a profound and lengthy study of Sanskrit grammar. It would, of course, seem likely that there were arrangements for teaching reading and writing to the lads who were taking this course, but I-Tsing makes no mention of this, nor of the teaching of arithmetic. It is not, therefore, possible to say for certain, even at the time of I-Tsing’s visit, whether literacy was widely diffused amongst the Buddhist population or not. It would seem, however, not unlikely that when once the monasteries had begun to receive pupils who were not intending to join the community the system might have been gradually extended, and to have catered even for boys who only came to learn the three R’s and receive some simple religious instruction, and the analogy of Buddhist schools as they exist in Burma and Ceylon even down to the present day would seem to confirm this. If, as seems not unreasonable to suppose, the Buddhist monasteries came to supply a good deal of popular elementary instruction, the decay of Buddhism and the consequent disappearance of the monasteries would have meant that this method of giving popular education would also have gradually come to an end, and so the need would arise for this education to be supplied in some other way. This may have been one amongst other causes which led to the spread of the indigenous elementary schools in India.

c6.103

² Fā-hien, p. 78.

c6.104

A description of the education carried on in Ceylon in a Buddhist school, as given by a writer¹ who wrote about the middle of last century, may help us to form some picture of what the Buddhist schools in India were probably like, though difference of country and lapse of time may have brought many changes. He says that there was generally a school attached to a *pansal*, or residence of a Buddhist priest. The children did not all attend at the same period of day, but as they had leisure went to the *pansal* to repeat their lessons, and then returned home, or went to their employment in some other place. The school was a mere shed open at the sides, with a raised platform in one corner covered with sand, on which letters were traced by the finger of the child learning to write. Lessons were usually repeated aloud, and were recited in a singing tone, several boys frequently joining in chorus. The alphabet was first learned, and was usually copied upon *tal* leaves; after that the union of vowels and consonants. Then the pupil began to write the letters upon sand, holding in the left hand a piece of wood to erase what he had written. The course of reading included about fourteen books: (1) A name book, which was a collection of names of villages, countries, temples, caves, etc.; (2) an enumeration of the various signs and beauties upon the person of Buddha; (3) stanzas in honour of Buddha, Truth, etc., with some grammatical rules also; (4) an account of the birth of Ganeśa, etc.; (5) stanzas in praise of Buddha in Elu, Pāli, and Sanskrit; (6) Navaratna (‘The Nine Jewels’)—a description and eulogy of nine most precious things in the world, the principal of which is Buddha; (7) Sanskrit proverbs with explanations; (8) Sanskrit stanzas in honour of Buddha with explanation; (9) Sanskrit stanzas containing the names of the last twenty-four Buddhas, etc.; (10) Pāli stanzas in honour of Buddha; (11) Sanskrit stanzas in honour of the sun; (12) Sanskrit stanzas on the management of the voice in recitation; (13) Pāli stanzas in honour of Buddha; (14) the Amarakośa, or Sanskrit lexicon, with a Singhalese commentary. This was the complete curriculum for a Singhalese student unless he was preparing for the priesthood or for the medical profession. Even this course was only completed by a few of the boys who attended the *pansal* schools.

c6.105

¹ R. S. Hardy, *Eastern Monachism*, pp. 18 and 313 ff.

c6.106

In schools in Buddhist monasteries in Burma¹ the condition of affairs is very similar,² or, at least, was so before the introduction of Western ideas of education. When a boy is about eight or nine years of age he goes as a pupil to the monastery, which is open to all, rich and poor alike. He does not, however, become a novice until twelve or fifteen years of age, when it is the custom to assume the yellow robe of the monastic order at least for a short time. Some boys are boarders, others attend the monastery every day. The instruction begins by teaching a boy the letters of the alphabet written on a rough wooden slate. These he learns by shouting them out at the top of his voice. All the books which are learnt are religious ones, and the curriculum includes the learning of Pāli formulæ and prayers necessary for religious worship. The life and sayings of Buddha and the Jātakas are the chief elements of instruction. The pupils repeat their lessons word for word after their teacher, as they sit in rows before him, and chant after him all in the same key. The amount of secular learning, arithmetic, and so on, is of the most meagre possible description. Boys designated for a monastic life stay on permanently, but those intended for lay life leave at twelve years of age or even earlier. Nowadays many boys attend the government or mission schools, but they often go to the monastery first. Although the curriculum in the monastic schools is of such a meagre description, the educational opportunities which they have provided have led to a very high percentage of literacy amongst the male population of Burma, which is very much higher than in any province of British India.

c6.107

¹ For an interesting account of Buddhist education as it exists in Tibet to-day, see *Indian Pandits in the Land of Snow*, by S. C. Das, 1893, pp. 3-11.

c6.108

² Shway Yeo, ch. ii.

c6.109

The Buddhist monastic order includes not only monks but also nuns (*bhikkhunis*). It was only with great reluctance that the Buddha consented to this arrangement. His aunt, Mahāprājāpati, wished to join the order, but was refused three times. She appealed to Ānanda, who interceded for her, and at last the Buddha yielded. He expressed, however, his sorrow, and said that the admission of women would ruin his work. If they had not been admitted, the doctrine, he said, would have abided a thousand years, but now it would only abide five hundred. The nuns were made closely dependent on the monks, and could only be admitted by them; and there are passages which show that the Buddha shared the low opinion of women which was held by others in India, as we see expressed, for instance, in the Law of Manu. We have no means of ascertaining to what extent Buddhist nunneries spread, and what proportion in numbers they bore to the monasteries. It would seem most likely that they would be much fewer in number, and this is borne out by what is found in Buddhist countries to-day. In Ceylon Buddhist nuns are hardly to be found, and in Burma they are small in numbers compared with the monks. It is not likely, therefore, that Buddhist nunneries in India helped to any great extent to spread education amongst women. No doubt those who joined the order would have received instruction in the Buddhist doctrines, and perhaps also in reading and writing; but we do not know whether the nunneries, like the monasteries, became centres of general instruction, receiving pupils even from amongst those who were not intending to join the order. There is no evidence of this, and the probability seems rather against our supposing it was so. In Ceylon there are no such nunneries to-day where girls are instructed, and in Burma little is done for the education of girls compared with what is done for boys. Some Buddhist nuns visit, it is said, the women in their homes, and there are a few girls' schools at the nunneries, but that is all. It seems hardly safe, therefore, to conjecture that even when Buddhism was at its zenith in India it did very much for the education of women.

First 108 of 112 passages. Read on

Linked texts (15)