________________
AUGUST, 1891.)
THE INSCRIPTIONS OF PIYADASI.
259
There can hardly be any doubt that the monkish tradition, under the influence of its special pre possessions, has t:ansferred to the clergy, an action which, in truth, should be credited to the sovereign.co
According to legend, Asoka would appear as a fervent adorer of the relics of the Buddha, and as a great builder of stúpas. In this respect the monuments do not permit us to be affirmative. I can only adhere, in spite of the objections of Dr. Bühler, to my explanation of the 4th edict. Piyadasi there, in my opinion, describes religions festivals celebrated after his conversion. In connection with these processions, I applied the word vimana, in rimanailasana. to shrines filled with relics; but I confess that this interpretation, which was of necessity conjectural, appears less probable to me to-day. It would be hardly consonant with the zeal of a neophyte to put, if we take the word in this sense, the vimúnadasand, on the same level with the hastidasand, the agikhandháni, &c. I think then that in the monuments we have no proof that Piyadasi practised the cult of relics, though we have still less proof to the contrary
There is, on the other hand, one point with regard to which we are entitled to strongly charge the literary tradition with an anachronism. According to the Sinhalese, the canon of the sacred writings is said to have been fixed, as early as the time of Asoka, by two successive councils. This appears to me to be irreconcilable with the language which the king uses at Bhabra. No doubt, several of the titles which are quoted in this inscription, are to be found in the Pali scriptures, and the example of the ráhulóvádasutta is of a nature to lead 18 to maintain à priori, with respect to the other titles, that the king really did refer to lessons very similar to those of which the text has been preserved to us. Dr. Oldenberg,ol on the other hand, remarks that the king did not necessarily profess to cite all the lessons of the Buddha, the authority of which he recognised. Nevertheless, it must be confessed that, if there existed, besides them, a defined and consecrated body of scriptures, it would be quite extraordinary that Piyadasi should choose, in order to sum up the mass of Buddhist lessons, pieces so little characteristic, so short, and so devoid of dogmatic importance, as those which he cites appear to be, and that too, without even alluding to the great collection of which the title alone would have been infinitely more significant, and to which it would be so natural to appeal when addressing the highest representatives of the clergy and of the whole Buddhist church. It will be remarked, besides, that the terms employed by the text, - suneyu, upadhalay&yr, - refer only to oral transmission.
These remarks would be incomplete without an examination as to the degree to which they are confirmed by the doctrines which the author of the inscriptions professes.
In the special Edict of Bhabra, the language of Piyadasi is, in several characteristic points, in agreement with the terminology of literary Buddhism. Not only does the king address the clergy (sarigha), but he salutes it by a formula sanctioned on such occasions by the canonical writings. He commences with a confession of faithi (pasáda) in the Buddhist Trinity, - Buddha, dharma, and sarigha. He alludes to the four-fold division of the faithful into bhikshus and bhikshunis, updsakas and upásikás, and finally he refers to certain religions lessons of which, as we have seen, several at least are to be found in a more or less equivalent form in the Tripitaka.
In the other inscriptions the points of contact with the Buddhism of our books are less apparent.
On Ony important and interesting point, -I mean the introduction of Buddhism into Ceylon, our inscriptions do not assist us to come to any certain conclusion. Piyadasi never mentions Taubapapni, except as an extremo limit of his influence. It would appear, however, that we must include this great island amongst the countries evangelined undur his direction. It is altogether another thing to decide whether it was really converted then, or whether this was done by his son, &c.; and in this respect, the silenoe of the monuments seems hardly favourable to the authority of the traditions,
n Mahduagga, pref. p. xl. n.
