________________
( 276 )
This was the background for the third council held in Pataliputra under the presidency of Moggaliputta Tissa. It is referred to in the Dipavamsi, Maharamsa and Samantapāsādikā. It is recorded in the Tibetan Dulva and some Chinese sources. too. But the Cullaragga does not give an account of the third Council. Asoka's inscriptions also make no reference to it. Historicity of the Council
Some scholars like Minayeff, Keith, Franke, etc. deny its historicity. Their main argument is that it is not mentioned in the Cullavagga, one of the earliest scriputures and in the Asoka's inscriptions. Keith, for example, says: "It is incredible that it ever took place without receiving some mention in the numerous records of A soka."28 In the Buddhist Philo-sophy he says: "the only verdict of scientific history must be that the council was a figment of the pious or fraudulent imaginings of a sect, which desired to secure for its texts, and espcially for the new Abhidhamma, a connection with the greatest Buddhist sovereigns, and that the northern tradition docs well to ignore the Council entirely."29 He even thinks of Tissa in a "Suspicious aspect."30
As regards the absence of any record in Asoka's inscriptions, it can be said that Asoka would have preferred to attach the name of Moggaliputta Tissa to this council since it was the result of his invaluable efforts. Asoka was only the supporter and provider of the purpose.
Actually some of his edicts indicate that this Council did take place. In one of his edicts, for example, King Asoka decrees that heretical monks and nuns shall be excommunicated. 91 G. C. Pande rightly suggests that Asoka might not have been "as intimately connected with the Council as the Pali tradition would have us believe."32
It was only the Vibhajjavadins or the Theravadins who attended this Council. A rift in the Buddhist order took. place after the Second Council and by the time of Asoka it was divided into eighteen sects99, which were refuted byVibhajjavadins in this great Council
