Indian Antiquary Vol 37

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 14

8
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[JANUARY, 1908.
At the most we can only speak, in one sense, of a certain Discrepanz,- for we must never lose the feeling for nuances: "Von einer Discrepanz kann meines Erachtens nur in dem Sinne gesprochen werden, dass die Konzilerzählung [§§ 1-5, 7-8, 16] offenbar, wie ich eben gesprochen habe, an den Hauptvorgang ein paar dem Mahap. S. entnommene Daten resp. auf Grund dieser Daten hergestellte Konstructionen herangeschoben hat." That is, "At the most we may speak of a want of harmony, in this sense that the Culla has joined to the principal account [that is, to the account otherwise legendary or tendencious of the Council ]a certain number of data borrowed from M. P. S., or rather reconstructions suggested by these data." But what does it matter that these reconstructions and these data are contradictory to the principal account? This principal account is innocent of all contradiction: "Jene Erzählung ist das werden wir nach allem hier erörterten gegen Min. fest halten durfen von inneren Widersprüchen frei."
Wishing to set forth the primitive compilation of the Scriptures, postulated by orthodoxy, the compiler of Culla XI. has naturally brought forward Kaçyapa, Ananda and Upali. He has added the story of Kaçyapa's journey and the episode of the lesser precepts, has grouped and developed several other souvenirs relative to this period: almost all were known to him through the M. P. S. At the most can we notice that the adoration of the remains of Buddha by the women is not mentioned in this venerable Sutta.37
In one word, M. Oldenberg belies that all our chapter of the Culla is a "forgery," but a forgery very well done and that the analysis does not permit us to draw from it the conclusions formulated by Minayeff.
The Russian savant did not read with sufficient attention the proofs of his admirable book; he would have avoided some mistakes over which his adversary triumphs.38 On the other hand, the chapters which he devotes to the Councils are composed in a mediocre manner; the thought often
But the Buddhists have not understood it any better than Minayeff, as is proved by the variants of the episode. Only the Mahaparinibbanasutta, translated by Fa-hien (Nanjio, 118) imitates the reserve of the Päli text. But in the Sarrastivadavinaya (Nanjio, 1115) "An old, bad and stupid bhika. . . . Kagyapa heard his words, but others did not perceive them, because through deva's miraculous power they were kept secret." In the Mulasarcastivādanikayasamyuktavastu (Nanjio 1121) which, I may say in passing, makes the M. P. 8. followed by the account of the Council, this suits very well; "An old bhikgu....: many gods in the sky hearing his unjust utterance kept his voice secret by their miraculous power and let nobody hear it except Käpyapa. Kaçyapa understood his words. Then the Venerable One, to exhort him, stood for a little at the wayside and addressed the assembly n'etam thanam vijjatiti' (M. P. S. VI. 41)." saying, 'Sabbeh'eva piyehi manapshi
In other sources, the words of Subhadra (whose name varies) are, at least, mentioned by the narrator: Nanjio, 119" Ban-do of Çakya-olan. . . Kaçyapa was displeased;" Nanjio, 545, 2: "A Çakyaputra called Ba-nan-da. ..; Kaçyapa hearing this was sad." Similarly the Vinaya of the Dharmaguptas (Nanjio, 1117). In the Nanjio 552 (which would be, it is said, a translation anterior to 118, 119 and 515, 2), things happen less simply: "One bhikgu.... all other bhikpus disagreed with him and they complained to a deva, who, seizing that old bhiksu, threw him outside of the assembly;" and in the Mahasamghika Vinaya (Nanjio 1119): "Kagyapa was sad, and as he snapped his right hand finger, fire came out of it, and he stamped the ground with his right foot."
M. Kern very usefully recalls the Bhadra, incarnation of the devil, whom we shall find again in discussing the Council of Pataliputra.
It seems that the disconnectedness of our report (M. P. 8. VI. 1.- Nanjio 118 Culla XI.) is a mark of authenticity, and it is not without some reservations that I ament to M. Oldenberg's thought. "Wie sich sein (Culla's) Verfasser die Sache gedacht hat, kann doch schlechterdings nicht zweifelhaft sein." It seems that this editor has not taken any care to picture the things to himself.
37 "Merkwürdiger weise nicht in M. P. 8. berichtet wie schon 8. B. E. XI. 379, bemerkt ist." (Buddh. Stud, 618, n. 3.)
5.See above, p. 7, the confusion of the atticatuttha and the fattidutiya; below, note 55, the interpretation of ubhato vinaye and p. 18, inexact expression "in the canon." These are not serious faults.
• This quotation, as well as those which follow, are, according to a kind communication, from M. N. Wogibara,