________________
JOHANNES BRONKHORST
created out of the mouth, arms, thighs and feet of the original being. They do so by showing that it is incoherent, in that it has implications which even the Brahmins would be loath to accept.20
We already find such criticism in the Aggañña Sutta of the Digha Nikāya. The Brahmin Vāsesha here reports the position of his fellow-Brahmins, according to whom "only the Brahmins are the real sons of Brahmā, born from his mouth, born from Brahmă, produced by Brahmä, heirs of Brahmā".21 The Buddha responds that they maintain this position, "forgetting what is old" (porāņam assaranta). This expression has been variously interpreted by the commentators: some speak of an old tradition, 22 others of ancient history.23 The context, however, favours a third interpretation: these Brahmins forget the past, that is to say the relatively recent past of their own birth. This is shown by what follows.24 According to the Buddha it is undeniable that the wives of Brahmins (brahmanānam brahmaniyo) have their periods, become pregnant, give birth and feed; in spite of being thus born from a human womb, the Brahmins maintain that they are born from Brahmä.25 In doing so, these Brahmins insult (abbhācikkhanti) Brahmä.26 This criticism is obviously based on the most literal interpretation of the Brahmanical myth. The claim of the Brahmins to have been born from Brahma is in conflict with their birth from a human mother. In other words, the Brahmins are credited with the belief that they were bom, at the beginning of their present life, from the mouth of Brahmä.
The Vajrasūci proceeds in a similar manner. Here the following argument is found:
There is another defect [in your proposition). If the Brahmin is born from the mouth, where is the Brahmin woman born from? Certainly from the mouth. Alas! Then she is your sister! So, you do not regard the convention of licit and illicit sexual intercourse! But that is extremely repugnant to the people of this world. 27
20
Vincent Eltschinger's recent book (2000) has been particularly helpful in writing the • following paragraphs. See further Renou 1960: 43.
DN 111.81: brahmanà va Brahmuno puttă orasa mukhato jätá Brahma-ja Brahma-nimmitá Brahma-dayada. Cf. Meisig 1988: 80-81 for the Chinese parallels. Walshe 1987: 408 ("ancient tradition"); Rhys Davids & Rhys Davids 1921: 78 ("ancient lore"), Sv III. p. 862: poranan ii poránakam aggannam lok'uppartint cariya-vamsam; Franke 1913: 275 (es ist nicht uralte Erinnerung an eine wirkliche Tatsache'). The following remarks also occur in the Assalāyana Sutta (MN 11. 148). DN III81-82: dissanti kho pana Vasertha brahmanānam brahmaniyo utuniyo pi gabbhiniyo pi vijayamaná pi payaman, pi, te ca brahmana yonija va samanā evam ahamsu: brahmană va ... Brahmuno puttå orasă mukhato játå Brahma ja Brahma-nimmitá Brahmadâyáda. Cf. Meisig 1988: 86–87. This last remark does not occur in the Assalāyana Sutla. Vajrasuci, ed. Weber (1860), p. 225, 11. 6-8; ed. Mukhopadhyaya (1960), p. 9 (JJ): anyac ca disanam bhavariyadi mukhato jato brahmano brāhmanyah kuta utpartih mukhad eveti
27
