Indian Antiquary Vol 48

SR No.: 032540
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications
Publication Year: 1984
Total Pages: 458
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 18 MB

Page 15

11
JANUARY, 1919] IDENTIFICATION OF ASCE 8 VINAYASAMUKASE
by Asoka, particularly in his Twelfth Rock Edict, the very expressions of which betray. a likeness, so much so that the king's principle might be regarded as a logical inference drawn straight from the teaching of the sutta, as can be seen from the summary given below with a view to facilitate comparison -1. The Sappurisasutta.-A bad man, although learned, who follows a certain course of conduct, exalts himself by his-learning and system and disparages others who are not learned likewise, and do not follow exactly the same system; whereas a good man, instead of exalting himself because of his learning and method, and disparaging others who are not likewise learned and do not follow the same method, considers a person worthy of honour and praise (pujjo, pâsamso), if the latter has only adhered to good form and if he only acts up to the Norm. Thus what the Sappurisa really bears in mind (antaran karoti) is the conformation of people to the path (patipadan yeva), i.e., the standard.
2. The Toleration Edict.-Aśoka as a good man inculcates on the same lines that he cares not (na manati, Khålsi text) "so much for gifts or external reverence as that there should be a growth of the essence of the matter (såravaḍhi," Girnar text) in all sects. The growth of the essence of the matter assumes various forms, but the root of it is restraint of speech, to wit, a man must not do reverence to his own sect or disparage that of another man without reason" (atpapásamḍapújá va parapásamḍagarahâ va no bhave apakaranamhi, Girnår text).
In an interesting note on the Bhabra Edict (JRAS., 1915, p. 805 ff.) Dr. B. M. Barua calls attention to a number of dialogues in the Nikayas, the themes of which are moral, characterised by the familiar expression ariyassa vinaya. He appends a list of these dialogues, although he lays great stress upon the Singalovadasutta (Digh. Vol. III, P.T.S.), otherwise styled the gihivinaya in the Sumangalavilasini, the fifth-century commentary on the Dighanikaya. But, although he seems to come much nearer the truth, the vagueness attaching to his long list is evident. In calling attention to the ariyassa vinayas and emphasizing the Singâtóvâdasutta, he seems to have taken his clue from the character of Aśoka's ethical system, which is evidently meant for the householders. The adjectival genitive ariyassa (of the Elect) corresponding to the adjective samukkamsika (meaning uttama and attached to dhammadesanâ and pañhâ in the canonical texts), is not without its influence upon him. But, as we are persuaded to think, the clue ought to have been taken from the naming of Asoka's selections and then verifying the result obtained, by the bearings of the selected canonical text upon Aśoka's system as a whole. I am, howver, grateful to Dr. Barus for drawing my attention to a discourse in the Anguttara, called the Sugatavinaya, the theme of which is the stability of the saddhamma (saddhammassa thiti); and it is interesting to note that this also was the single object that Aśoka kept in view in selecting his dhammapaliydyas (sadhame cilathitike hâsatiti). Whether or not the Ariyassavinaya or the Sugatavinaya may be identified with Aśoka's Vinayasamukase is an open question, but it cannot be denied that they have an intimate bearing on the teaching inculcated by the Great Maurya.
? The Saropamasuta of the Majjhima may be taken alongside of the Sappurisa to account for saravadhi, implying a wider notion of toleration. The Mahasaropama extends toleration expressly to all religious sects,