Indian Antiquary Vol 37

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

Page 15

JANUARY, 1908.)
THE BUDDHIST COUNOILS.
9
is merely indicated, and the author does not draw all the desirable advantages possible from the positions that he occupies and the weapons which he has at his command. Lastly, his manner may repel a reader who sees himself, from the first line, treated somewhat "cavalierly," - 18 is the case with Prof. Oldenberg - and who sees the venerable Suttantas treated with even still less respect. In fact, and this is the main point, Prof. Oldenberg was mistaken concerning the thought of Minayeff on the historical value of the Council and the episodes, and it is the fault neither entirely of Minayeff nor of Prof. Oldenberg : the latter does not believe in the Council, but he is so very near it! the former seems to claim to make bistory with the Culla, although he believes neither in the Sutras nor in the Culla.
These attempts at internal criticism are extremely delicate, especially for those who resign themselves to being ignorant of many things and who have not the faith of the coal-heaver in the texts. They are afraid, for subjective reasons, to distinguish that which can be historical from that which has not the slightest chance of being so ; never, and the mere thought of it disconcerts them, never will they believe that the silence of a Sūtra about a dogma or an ecclesiastical event can furnish anything but an hypothesis. They read again two or three times Prof. Oldenberg's remark about the absence of allusion to the First Council in the Mahaparinibbana: "This silence is as valuable as the most direct testimony. It shows that the author of the Mahāparinibbānasutta did not know anything of the First Council "30; still they are not quite sure they have read correctly, For very little they would desert a discussion without issue, because it is without possible control and without any known principle. Bat if, like Minayeff, they think it necessary to take part in it, nobody shall be able to reproach them with relying upon data which they themselves do not accept without reserve, for their adversaries admit them. And it is a principle formulated by Dignāga in his controversy with the Brahmans, that in a dialectical tournament, every argument is of value, as soon as the adversary cannot refuse to accept it: it matters little what the arguer himself may think of it. Either I am mistaken, or Minayeff was too good a Buddhist to remain a stranger to this state of mind, and it is one of the reasons why he so often provokes his erudite and convinced antagonist.
I am, however, persuaded, as he was himself, that the Culla can furnish something better than a pretext for clevernesses. It will suffice to establish that the want of harmony between the account of the conclave and the episodic data is still more radical than Prof. Oldenberg thinks; and perhaps the reader will admit that Minayeff judged rightly when he recognised in these episodes, not historical data properly speaking, but an old fund of authentic tradition of inappreciablo value for a right understanding of ancient Buddhism.
Let us once again consider in its different parts the study of Minayeff, taking advantage, as it is right to do, of the indications and materials furnished by Prof. Oldenberg.
1. The 16 of Culla XI. recalls that “five hundred bhikkhus took part in this recitation of the Vinaya; in consequence this recitation of the Vinaya is called that of the Five Hundred."
Now $ 8 sets forth the recitation of the Dharma, that is to say, of the five Nikāyas. Why does the final paragraph ignore the work of Ananda ? Does it mean that the Council was occupied exclusively with discipline, and that $ 8 has been interpolated after Chapter XI. had received its title? Midayeff did not judge this little remark worthy of him; however, it borrows a certain interest from the fact that the Culla does not breathe a word of a recitation of the Abhidharma (a proof of antiquity, as M. Oldenberg very rightly observes),40 whilst the Vinayas of several sects, Dharmagtptas, Sarvästirädins, speak of the Abhidharme in their chapters corresponding to Culla XL. The Mabicāsakas and the Mahäsāmghikas, on the contrary, imitate the reserve of the Culla in that which concerns the books of scholastic nomenclature "41: it would be curious if the Culla XI., in the edition which its title supposes, should, in omitting the five Nikāyas, have possessed over the Mahicāsakas the advantage which it shares with the Mahicāsakas over the Dharmaguptas, and the Sarvāstivādins by omitting the Abhidharma,
do Seo Intr. to the Mahāvagga, loc. land, above, note 85. - There is a very simple and attractive idea I owe to my friend M. Louis Finot: the history of the Council was formerly the end of the Satta dealing with Buddha'a nirvana, 1. e., the M. P. 8. When the Scriptures were tabulated in the Pitakas, it seemed more approprious to have the Council in the Vinaya (se above, note 36, 2nd 8). ** Buddh. Stud. p. 628. See above, note 12.
Mātrkās. Boo Kern, Man. pp. 2-3.