English
), a special conference (council) was held in Pataliputra, on the [26] INNER DEVELOPMENT Ganges, in those days the capital of India, where only the stricter wing of the monastical orders was assembled. This council, therefore, is not recognized by the Chinese Buddhists. The latter accept only the great general councils: namely, the first, held in Bajagriha, 477 B.c., the year in which Buddha died; the second, in Vaisali, 377 B.c.;and the third, in Jullun- dur, under King Kanishka, about the year A.D. 100. The same king, Asoka, identical with Piyadasi, whose name is engraved on the now famous Bairath stone, has, in a very striking manner, let his de- scendants know the causes which brought about his conversion to Buddhism. Chief of all was the feeling of guilt. (He had carried on bloody wars.) When he himself, through Buddhism, had attained deliverance, he exhorted all to consecrate themselves to “the three great values,’ Buddha, dharma, and sangha (Buddha, the doctrine, and the society). In this connection he also mentions some of the writings that should be read. This inscription on the Bairath stone is of the greatest importance. In the first place, it gives a fixed chronological point. Moreover, it gives us information about certain writings which already, at that period, were looked upon as classics. The first Buddhist canon was in process of being compiled. But what interests us most in this connection is the fact that King Asoka acted openly as the mediating and reconciling element among the many schools which already, at that time, were so divergent in character. His words are stamped with the wider vision and the great devotion of Mahayana. [27] TRUTH AND TRADITION IN BUDDHISM This school, little by little, gained the ascendancy in northern India, and held sway also over the Greco- Scythian people in the north-western part of the country. Thence, through Kashmir and Nepal, it travelled steadily northward and eastward as the “Buddhism of the Great Vehicle’? (Mahayana), often gathering to itself the most heterogeneous religious conceptions. In Tibet we meet it weighed down with dark deviltry and fanaticism, until it becomes virtu- ally unrecognizable. Mahayana, however, had taken with it a large part, at least, of the principal classic writings of Buddhism, and these, in the main, were in Sanskrit. Sanskrit became, speaking generally, the religious language of North India, while Pali was that of South India, Ceylon, and Burma. When, therefore, we investigate the inner development of Mahayana, it will be largely the old Sanskrit texts from Kashmir and Nepal which will be the basis. In addition to this, however, we must remember the fact that Mahayana’s development continued — indeed, first reached its bloom — on Chinese soil. Therefore the first Chinese writings which reflect this development must be treated as first-hand sources of the typical Mahayana ‘Buddhism. Moreover, a number of the most genuine Mahayana writings from India were not included in the defective Sanskrit collection which the churches in Kashmir and Nepal adhere to. These writings are saved from oblivion and annihilation by the fact that they were later included in the Chinese translation. When, again, one calls to mind the fact that it was just during [28] INNER DEVELOPMENT the reconstruction period, when Mahayana was being crystallized into its final form, that Buddhism came to China, one can understand what an important role it was which China played in this process. A number of Mahayanistic classical sutras were also written on Chinese soil. There are two figures, especially, which emerge in the reconstruction period in India, two figures which in China also are well known and deeply respected. The one is the keen-witted and broad-minded Asva- ghosha, who probably lived in the beginning of the second century after Christ: the other, the unswerving and spirit-filled Nagarjuna, who later, together with his disciple, Vasubandhu, gave Mahayana its distinctive form. Asvaghosha (Chinese: Ma-ming, 4% 1), in his whole development, stood in a peculiar position within the Buddhist society. He was originally a Brahmin. His religious studies and profound thinking brought him over, however, into the Buddhist flock, where, by virtue of his spiritual force, he very soon became a leader and pioneer. His conduct, on the one hand, is marked by deep reverence for Buddha. It is stated expressly that it was he who wrote the famous life of Buddha, “Buddha Charita Kavya.” On the other hand, he seems to have had an eye for the flaws and weaknesses in the old system. As one follows his thinking, one gets a lively feeling that he not only brought with him some of the best ideas from the Brahmin doctrines, but that he also may have come into contact with the Western systems of salvation. [29] TRUTH AND TRADITION IN BUDDHISM One cannot point out in detail how this has taken place; but, with the connection which was established at that time between Persia and India, one can easily imagine that Persian and other occidental trends of _thought might have penetrated into India at that period: It is also stated that this remarkable man wrote a book on “The Awakening of Faith”? (Chinese: “Ch‘4 Hsin Lun,” i f@ its) (Sanskrit: Mahayana Sraddat- pada), which contributed more than anything else towards giving Mahayana Buddhism its form, in one sense so concentrated, in another sense so all-inclusive. The book was first translated into Chinese in a.p. 550 by an immigrant Buddhist monk, an Indian named Paramartha (Chinese: Chén-ti, J& i). As we shall see later, it came to play a large réle in China; and, at the 10onsiderable light is cast upon this question by the most recent investigations of the great Indiologue, Dr. Farquhar. His book, “The Religious Literature of India,” is especially significant. Here it is asserted that the spiritual life which, just at that time, had developed in Turkestan and the north-western part of India, eame to have a stimulating effect on the West as well as on the East. In other words, we stand here before one of the main sources of the spiritual life of the West as well as of the East. On the possibility of Western influences in the formative period of Mahayana, Professor K. B. Westman points out that such a possibility cannot be denied, since in Kanishka’s kingdom (i. e., Punjab and Afghanistan) at that time Hellenistic and Persian civilization was not unknown. The religious art, there introduced into Mahayana, was essentially Hellenistic (Gandhara art). There may have been other influences as well from the Hellenistic mystical religions of the Near East. Such a hypothesis might explain the similarity in many of the customs and paraphernalia of worship between Mahayana and Greek and Roman Catholicism, since it is well known es the ancient church borrowed many of these things from these Hellenistic religions. That the Indian Bhakti movement, which advocates an inward con- secration to the deity, through prayer and meditation, has also been opera- tive in connection with the later development of Mahayana on Indian ground, is now generally acknowledged, and that China, through its many pilgrims who went to India, took its share from this rich spring, is also certain. [30] INNER DEVELOPMENT present time, there is probably no other book except The Lotus Scripture’”’ which is studied so eagerly by Mahayana’s more enlightened adherents. The Chinese account of the work done by Asvagho- sha is somewhat bewildering. In fact, quite a number of persons by the same name are mentioned during the first centuries of the Buddhist propaganda in China. Chinese scholars, such as Mr. Liang Chi-chao, think that the work “Chi Hsin Lun” was written by another of the Chinese patriarchs. Nagarjuna (Chinese: Lung-shu, #2 ®t) carried As- vaghosha’s thoughts further. Not only so, but he also bound these abstract ideas and instructions for worship to certain definite conceptions of Buddha, particularly to the idea of the great All-Father, Amitabha (Chinese: O-mi-t‘o Fu, [J # bé ), who later came to play such a dominating part in Mahayana’s world of ideas. Since Amitabha’s name is absolutely unknown in the history and literature of Buddhism in southern India, we must conclude that he was not of any importance in the consciousness of the monks in the early days of Buddhism. Probably as early as under Vasubandhu (Chinese: Shih-ch‘in, lt #1), a disciple of Nagarjuna, another figure pushed its way to the fore, standing beside Amitabha, in the consciousness of the people. This was the famous and beloved Avalokitesvara (Chinese: Kuan-yin, i #), who later, together with the “Mightiest One” (Chinese: Ta-shih-chih, % $ +) and Amitabha, came to form the trinity group in the “Pure Land” School. [31] TRUTH AND TRADITION IN BUDDHISM When the first two Buddhist missionaries, Matanga and Gobharana, came to China, they do not seem to have emphasized any particular school. Their main object was to introduce Buddhism. The fermentation and schism in India could not, in the end, be kept out of the missionary work, however, and we therefore soon see China dragged into the discussion — indeed, before very long, it became the principal arena where the battle took place. If it cannot be said, therefore, that it was a pure Mahayana form of Buddhism which was introduced into China, at least it must be definitely asserted that it was a distinct Mahayana which was developed in the course of the first centuries. We have preserved for us the names of some of the men who did the most towards giving Chinese Buddhism its peculiar stamp. As one might expect, it was. not until after a couple of centuries that such leaders arose in China.