________________
BOOK NOTICE.
JUNE, 1879.]
signification were assigned. As a means, however, of avoiding ambiguity, Mr. Rhys Davids' method of using the two words to express the two distinct things is commendable: and the Pitakas, so far as they have been explored, warrant such usage.
It is interesting to note how exactly the Buddhist Arhat corresponds with the Jivanmukta of the Vedanta'; and his must be an extraordinarily subtle intellect that can discern any appreciable difference between the final goal of the two, 'etween the Buddhistic parinirwana and the Brahmanic mukti. To him who sees a superiority in the latter state we commend the following words of an eminent scholar:-"The absolute state of the soul thus liberated is nowhere clearly defined; it ceases to transmigrate; it loses all bodily individuality; it loses all spiritual individuality; as whether, with the Vedanta, we consider it to be reunited with, or absorbed into, the Supreme Spirit, or whether, with the Sankhyas, we hold it to be commingled with the spiritual element of the universe, individual spirit ceases to exist. Annihilation, then, as regards individuals, is as much the destiny of the soul as it is of the body, and Not to be' is the melancholy result of the religion and philosophy of the Hindus."
Before leaving this part of the subject it may be well to notice a curious statement at the foot of page 31, to the effect that the Påli word Nibbuta (Sk. nirvṛita) " is derived from the same word as Nibbdna, in Sanskrit Nirvana"! In the Pâli Dictionary, s. v. parinibbuto we read: "This word is regularly used as the p. p. p. of parinibbáyati, partly from a confusion between the roots T and T, and partly no doubt to reserve the form parinibbana exclusively for the noun." That is, the past participle of nirwd having been appropriated to another purpose, the corresponding participle of another verb has to be used to express the participial meaning; but to assert calmly that nibbuta or parinibbuta is actually "derived from the same word" as nibbána or parinibbana is as ridiculous as it is unscholarly.
Buddhist chronology has hitherto been almost entirely drawn from three sources, namely, from Greek authors, from data furnished by the recorded travels of Buddhist pilgrims from China, and from the Ceylon Chronicle entitled Mahawanso, which was compiled in the fifth century of our The date assigned by the Chronicle to Buddha's death is B.C. 543, but this is accepted by very few scholars. It has been recently shown however by Dr. Bühler that some at any rate of its most important dates are trust
era.
H. H. Wilson's Works, ii. 118. Vide Ind. Antiq. vol. VI. p. 149 vol. VII. p. 141, and Max Müller's Lectures on the Origin and Growth of
179
worthy. Many years ago, Professor Max Müller and General Cunningham, working independently and from different data, proposed the year B.C. 477-78 as the more probable date of the nirwana; and the discovery by the latter in 1876, of three new edicts of Asoka's, has wonderfully confirmed their view."
Professor Kern, on the other hand, assigns that event to the year B.C. 380; whilst Mr. Rhys Davids, for reasons not given in the work under review, differing from all the above, prefers the year 412 B.C. Unfortunately he is not quite consistent; for on page 86, he tells us that the Council of Asoka was held at Patna "about 250 B.C., that is to say at least 130 years after the death of the teacher," which would bring the latter event down to Professor Kern's date; and then, on page 234, we read that the Pitakas were first reduced to writing "about 160 years after the council of Patna, and 330 years after the death of Gautama," instead of 290 according to his former computation.
At the end of the third chapter of the book which finishes the sketch of the Buddha's life, Mr. Rhys Davids denounces the not uncommon view that that reformer's system was opposed to Brahmanism. He declares that Gautama was quite unconscious of any such opposition, and "lived and died a Hindu"; nay, that " he was the greatest, wisest, and best of the Hindus," and that the growth of Buddhism, "so far from showing how depraved and oppressive Hinduism was, shows precisely the contrary; for none will deny that there is much that is beautiful and noble in Buddhism, and Buddhism was the child, the product of Hinduism."
But let us hear another well-known scholar as to the condition of Hinduism in Buddha's time. He writes: "The system of the Brahmans had run its course. The ascendancy, at first purely intellectual and religious, had gradually assumed a political character. By means of the system of caste this influence pervaded the whole social fabric, not as a vivifying leaven, but as a deadly poison... .... It was impossible for anybody to move or to assert his freedom of thought and action without finding himself impeded on all sides by the web of the Brahmanic law; nor was there anything in their religion to satisfy the natural yearnings of the human heart after spiritual comfort." Again,-"It was impossible to avoid sin without the help of the Brahmans. They alone knew the food that might properly be eaten, the air which might properly be breathed, the dress which might properly be worn. They
Religion, p. 134.
Ind. Antiq. vol. III. p. 79.
Chips from a German Workshop, vol. I. p. 224.
