Short Essays on Buddhism by T
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SHORT ESSAYS ON BUDDHISM BY T. W. RHYS DAVIDS TAKEN FROM THE ENCYCLOPÆDEDIA OF RELIGION AND ETHICS EDITED BY JAMES HASTINGS 1908–1926 Contents THE MONK LIFE SECTS --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 ARHANT ----------------------------------------------------------------- 6 ELDER -------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 PRECEPTS -------------------------------------------------------------- 11 CELIBACY -------------------------------------------------------------- 13 DISCIPLINE ------------------------------------------------------------ 14 TONSURE --------------------------------------------------------------- 16 HYMNS ------------------------------------------------------------------ 18 HĪNAYĀNA ------------------------------------------------------------- 20 THE DOCTRINE PATIMOKKHA --------------------------------------------------------- 25 ĀGAMA ----------------------------------------------------------------- 30 WHEEL OF THE LAW ------------------------------------------------ 30 WISDOM TREE -------------------------------------------------------- 32 AṄGUTTARA NIKĀYA ---------------------------------------------- 36 APADĀNA -------------------------------------------------------------- 37 ANĀGATA VAṂSA -------------------------------------------------- 38 PLACES IN BUDDHIST HISTORY BUDDHISM IN CEYLON -------------------------------------------- 40 ANURĀDHAPURA ---------------------------------------------------- 47 ABHAYAGIRI ---------------------------------------------------------- 52 ADAM’S PEAK -------------------------------------------------------- 52 KANDY ------------------------------------------------------------------ 55 LUMBINĪ ---------------------------------------------------------------- 57 BHĪLSA ------------------------------------------------------------------ 59 PEOPLE IN BUDDHIST HISTORY MOGGALLĀNA ------------------------------------------------------- 61 ĀNANDA ---------------------------------------------------------------- 65 DEVADATTA ---------------------------------------------------------- 65 BUDDHAGHOṢA ------------------------------------------------------ 70 DHAMMAPĀLA ------------------------------------------------------- 73 MILINDA ---------------------------------------------------------------- 75 ASPECTS OF BUDDHIST SOCIETY AHIMSĀ ----------------------------------------------------------------- 79 CHARITY --------------------------------------------------------------- 80 FAMILY ----------------------------------------------------------------- 81 HOSPITALITY --------------------------------------------------------- 83 CHASTITY -------------------------------------------------------------- 85 ADULTERY ------------------------------------------------------------- 86 LAW ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 86 CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS ------------------------------------- 89 EXPIATION AND ATONEMENT ---------------------------------- 91 The Monk’s Life SECTS SECTS (Buddhist).—In none of the older books—the four Nikāyas, e.g., or the Sutta Nipāta—is there any mention of sects. Divisions or dissensions in the order are referred to as follows. He who stirs up such dissensions is guilty of a ‘black act’ (kammaṃ kaṇhaṃ).1 When diversities of opinion exist, it is not a suitable time for effort or energy in self-training.2 Four reasons—not complimentary—are given for members of the order approving of such divisions.3 In one passage ‘ten points’ (dasa vatthūni) are given as constituting such a division in the order (sangha-bhedo). These are: the setting forth as truth what is not truth, and vice versa; as a rule of the order what is not such a rule, and vice versa; as the word or the practice or the precept of the Master what he had not said or practiced or enjoined, and vice versa.4 The same ten points are elsewhere stated to result in harm to the laity.5 Here it is said that by means of these ten points members of the order drag others after them, draw them asunder, hold separate sessions of the chapter at which the formal business of the order is conducted, and recite the Pātimokkha (the 227 rules of the order) at such separate sessions. This is a step towards the foundation of a sect. It is not merely a difference of opinion; it is also an innovation in the conduct of business. But there is no question so far of a sect in the European sense—i.e. of a body of believers in one or more doctrines not held by the majority, a body with its own endowments, its own churches or chapels, and its own clergy ordained by itself. In the Vinaya we get a little farther, but it is still no question of a sect. Devadatta (q.v.), to whose schism the 17th khandaka is devoted, did not originate a sect of Buddhists; he founded a separate order of his own, whose members ceased to be followers of the Buddha. At the end of the chapter, or khandaka, devoted to this subject we are told of the Buddha being questioned by Upāli as to what amounts to a division in the Saṅgha (the order). The reply is the repetition of the above-mentioned ten points, but with eight other points added—points in which bhikkhus put offences against a rule of the order under a wrong category, calling a minor offence a serious one, and so on. Thus we get eighteen occasions for dissension in the order, leading up to the holding of separate meetings of the chapter of the order. Unfortunately we have no historical instance of this having actually happened. There is, however, a case put in illustration of the working of one of the later rules. It occurs in the 10th khandaka,6 the whole of which is concerned with this matter of dissension in the order. There may be some historical foundation for this case, but it is more probably, like so many others, purely hypothetical. It is as follows: 1 Aṅguttara, ii. 234, iii. 146, 436, 439. 2 Ib. iii. 66, 105. 3 Ib. ii. 229. 4 Ib. i. 119. 5 Ib. v. 73 f. 6 Vinaya, i. 337–342 (tr. SBE xvii. 285–291); cf. Majjhima, iii. 152 ff. 1 A bhikkhu (no name is given) thought he had broken one of the rules (which of the rules is not specified). His companions in the settlement thought he had not. Then they changed their minds: he thought he had not broken the rule, they thought he had, and, when be refused to adopt their view, they held a formal meeting of the order and called upon him to retire—in fact, expelled him. The bhikkhu then issued an appeal to other members of the order dwelling in the vicinity, and they took his side. All this being told to the Buddha, he is reported to have said to the expelling party that they should not look only at the particular point in dispute; if the supposed offender be a learned and religious man, they should also consider the possibility of his being so far right that, in consequence of their action, a dissension might arise in the order. He also went to the partisans of the supposed offender and told them, in like manner, that they should consider, not only the particular question, but the possibility of their action leading to dissension. Now the party of the supposed offender held their chapter meetings within the boundary; the other party, to avoid meeting them, held their meetings outside the boundary. The story ends7 with the restoration, at his own request, and at a full chapter held within the boundary, of the expelled bhikkhu. It should be remembered that the order was scattered throughout the countryside, which was divided, for the purpose of carrying out its business, into districts, each about equal in size to two or three English country parishes. Meetings were held as a rule once a fortnight, and every member of the order dwelling within the boundary of the district had either to attend or send to the chapter the reason for his non-attendance. The meeting was quite democratic. All were equal. Each member present had one vote. The senior member present presided and put the resolutions to the meeting; but he had no authority and no casting vote. He was simply primus inter pares. If, then, as in the case just put, a meeting of some only of the resident members in a district was held outside the boundary, all the proceedings of such a chapter became invalid. It will be seen, therefore, how very important the fair fixing of such boundaries (sīmāyo) was to the preservation of the freedom and self-government of the order. Another fact should also be remembered. No one of the 227 rules of the order refers to any question of dogma or belief or meta-physics. No member of the order had any power over any other (except by way of personal influence) in respect of the opinions which the other held. There was no vow of obedience. Of all religious orders mentioned in the history of religions the Buddhist was the one in which there was the greatest freedom, the greatest variety, of thought. One consequence of this, we find, was that, as the centuries passed by, an increasing number of new ideas, not found in the earliest period, became more prevalent among the members of the order. The rules of the order concern such matters of conduct as were involved in the equal division of the limited personal property, held socialistically by the order, among its several members. They are mostly sumptuary regulations or points of etiquette.8 Beliefs or opinions are left free. And this spirit of freedom seems, as far as we can judge, to have survived all through the centuries of Buddhism in India and China. About 100 years after the Buddha’s death there was a formidable dissension in the order,