Post on 23-Feb-2018




0 download

Embed Size (px)


<ul><li><p>7/24/2019 HERETICAL VIEWS IN EARLY BUDDHIST LITERATURE</p><p> 1/93</p><p>CHAPTER- XI . ,i .r- 215</p><p>HERETI CAL VI EWS I N EARLY BUDDHI ST LI TERATURE.</p><p>Li ke many ot her r el i gi ous precept s, t he pr ecept s of</p><p>Buddha were handed down oral l y f or a number of year s. The</p><p>Buddhi st monks used t o keep t he t eachi ngs of Buddha on t heSoTa.</p></li><li><p>7/24/2019 HERETICAL VIEWS IN EARLY BUDDHIST LITERATURE</p><p> 2/93</p><p>The samgha therefore thought that it was time to assemble</p><p>for the purpose of recitation, verification and collection of</p><p>the Buddhas teachings. Consequently, three councils were held.</p><p>The first council was held at Rajagijha in 483 B. C. (Four months</p><p>after the Mahaparinibbana of the Buddha); the second at Yaisali</p><p>in 383 B. C. and the third at Pataliputra in 247 B. C. The</p><p>first one was presided over by the elder Mahakassapa$ the second</p><p>by thevelder Revata? and the third, by Moggaliputta Tissa.</p><p>When the third council was held, Asoka was the ruler.</p><p>In his kingdom, there were many heretics (tirthikas), i. e.</p><p>teachers of other faiths, who sought honour and patronage by</p><p>entering the Buddhist order, but they were so far denied this</p><p>privilege. The result was that they now claimed their own</p><p>heresies to be the real doctrines and teachings of the Buddha.</p><p>In order to weed out these heretics, A.loka convened a meeting</p><p>and sending for each group in turn asked what really the</p><p>doctrine of the Enlightened one was. Since each of these</p><p>groups held its own doctrine to be that of the Buddha, Asoka,</p><p>with the help of Tissa Moggalioutta (who was the president</p><p>of this Council), threw these heretics out of the order.</p><p>Only the FibhaJ^avadins were found to be the real followers</p><p>of the Buddha. When this task was over, Elder Tissa, Moggalis</p><p>1. cf. The History of Buddhist Thought, pp. 27-37.</p><p>By Edward J. Thomas</p></li><li><p>7/24/2019 HERETICAL VIEWS IN EARLY BUDDHIST LITERATURE</p><p> 3/93</p><p>son, composed the Kathavatthu, In which * five hundred theses,</p><p>put forward by various schools, in opposition to the doctrine</p><p>of the Pitakas, are set out and refuted.</p><p>The canonical texts of the Buddhists, are known as</p><p>Pi|akas. In the first and second Councils, they were only</p><p>recited. It was in the third Council that they were actually</p><p>compiled. It may, nevertheless, be noted that the whole</p><p>KatHffvatthu, In i t . present f o, is not the sae as itoriginally was because many later additions appear to have</p><p>been made therein.</p><p>The Buddhist Canon gives a detailed account of the</p><p>religious doctrines and the disciplinary rules of the Buddhists.</p><p>In the Canon, we find at places, an exposition of the views</p><p>of rival schools, possibly meant for the better appreciation</p><p>and understanding of the Buddha*s own views. An exposition</p><p>thereof is given here, as it might help us in understanding</p><p>the Pravaduka-dystis, discussed in the Nyaya-Sutras. 4.1.11-43.</p><p>Before we proceed to examine the presentation and refu</p><p>tation of such ? heresies, we may first give a brief account</p><p>of the sacred texts of the Buddhists.</p><p>The Buddhist canon Is classified In three main divisions</p><p>known as Pitakas. They are s</p><p>1. cf. ** Buddhism *% p, 226 by T. . Rhys Davids.</p></li><li><p>7/24/2019 HERETICAL VIEWS IN EARLY BUDDHIST LITERATURE</p><p> 4/93</p><p>(A) Vinaya Pitaka;</p><p>(B) Sutta Pitaka;</p><p>(C) Abhidhamma Pitaka.</p><p>(A) The lnaya Pitaka comprises</p><p>(i) Sutta Yibhaiiga,</p><p>(ii) The Khandhakas which consist of the Mahavagga</p><p>and the Culavagga, .</p><p>(iii) Parivara.</p><p>(B) The Sutta Pitaka comprises five Nikayas s</p><p>(i) Digha Nikaya,</p><p>(ii) Majjhima Nikaya,</p><p>(iii) Samyutta Nikaya,</p><p>(iv) Anguttara Nikaya,</p><p>(v) Khuddaka Nikaya.</p><p>The Khuddaka Nikaya, in its turn,</p><p>minor works which are as under :</p><p>(1) Khuddaka Patha,</p><p>(2) D hammapada,</p><p>(3) lid ana,</p><p>(4) Itivuttaka,</p><p>(5) Sutta pfiLpata,</p><p>(6) imanavatthu,</p><p>(?) Petaratthu,</p><p>(8) Ther^gatha,</p><p>consists of some</p></li><li><p>7/24/2019 HERETICAL VIEWS IN EARLY BUDDHIST LITERATURE</p><p> 5/93</p><p>' (9) Therigatha,</p><p>(10) Jitaka,</p><p>(11) Niddesa,</p><p>(12) Patisambhidamagga,</p><p>(13) Apadana,</p><p>(14) Buddhavamsa,</p><p>(15) Cariyipitaka.</p><p>(C) In the Abhidhamma Pitaka, we find seven Independent</p><p>works x</p><p>(1) Dhammasangani,</p><p>(2) Vibhanga,</p><p>(3) Dhatukatha,</p><p>(4) Puggalapannatti,</p><p>(5) Kathavatthu,</p><p>(6) Yamaka,</p><p>(7) PatthSna.</p><p>sKenMIt m e t be noted that this is the Abhidhamma of the</p><p>h-</p><p>Theravadins and the Sarvastivadins have an Abhidhannapitaka</p><p>in Sanskrit; the books of which, even though also seven in</p><p>number, differ entirely from those of the Pali Abhidhamma</p><p>1Pitaka.</p><p>l.See A History of Indian Literature,1 p. 173</p><p>by M. Wlnternitz;</p><p>also f* The History of Buddhist Thought,'* pp. 274-275</p><p>by B. J. Thomas</p></li><li><p>7/24/2019 HERETICAL VIEWS IN EARLY BUDDHIST LITERATURE</p><p> 6/93</p><p>I l l t h i s c o n c e r n s t h e c a n o n i c a l t e x t s o f t h e B u d d h i s t s</p><p>B u d d h i s t t h o u g h t w a s l a t e r d i v i d e d i n s e v e r a l s c h o o l s a m o n g </p><p>w h i c h f o u r a r e p r e m i n e n t . T h e s e a r e :</p><p>d( 1 ) B a h y a p r a t y a k s a v a d i n s o r V a i b h a s i k a B a u d d h a s ( D i r e d t R e a l i s t s ) #</p><p>R.( 2 ) B a h y a n u m e y a v a d i n s o r S a u t r a n t i k a b a u d d h a s ( C r i t i c a l R e a l i s t s ) ,</p><p>( 4 ) T h e S u n y a v a d i n s o r M a d h y n u k a B a u d d h a s ( N i h i l i s t s ) .</p><p>W e n e e d n o t e n t e r i n t o a n y d e t a i l s r e g a r d i n g t h e s e v i e w s . </p><p>W e s h a l l o n l y r e f e r t o a f e w o f t h e t r e a t i s e s o f t h e s e s c h o o l s </p><p>w h i c h a r e a s u n d e r :</p><p>( a n d f l o u r i s h e d a t a b o u t t h e t u r n i n g p o i n t o f t h e s e c o n d </p><p>a n d t h i r d c e n t u r y A . D . ) </p><p>( 3 ) Y o g a e a r a b h u m i o f A s a n g a ( w h o l i v e d i n t h e f o u r t h C e n t u r y A . D .)</p><p>( 4 ) J a t a k a m a l a o f A r y a s u r a ( 4 t h C e n t u r y A . D . ) ;</p><p>( 5 ) L a r i k a v a t a r a S u t r a k n o w n a s S a d d h a r m a - L a n k a v a t a r a s u t r a a l s o </p><p>( o f t h e 4 t h C e n t u r y A . D . I t s f i r s t C h i n e s e t r a n s l a t i o n</p><p>i s o f 4 4 3 A . D . ) , </p><p>1 . T h e d a t e s o f t h e s e w o r k s a r e a c c o r d i n g t o w i n t e r n i t z * s</p><p>vol-X-'*&amp; H i s t o r y o f I n d i a n L i t e r a t u r e p p . 3 4 2 , 3 5 0 , 3 5 5 ,</p><p>2 7 6 a n d 3 3 7 r e s p e c t i v e l y .</p><p>( 3 ) V l j n a n a v a d i n s o r Y o g a c a r a B a u d d h a s</p><p>( 1 ) T h e M l d h y a m a k a S a s t r a o f N a g a r j u n a ( 2 n d C e n t u r y A . D . ) ;</p><p>( 2 ) S a t a s a s t r a o f A r y a d e v a w h o w a s t h e d i s c i p l e o f N a g a r j u n a</p></li><li><p>7/24/2019 HERETICAL VIEWS IN EARLY BUDDHIST LITERATURE</p><p> 7/93</p><p>' i,</p><p>(6) Upayahrdayam - this is a book of which the original Sanskrit</p><p>text is lost.^ It is a very ancient work according to</p><p>Giuseppe Tucci, who has translated it from the Chinese</p><p>l into Sanskrit again. This book is ascribed to Nagarjuna,</p><p>but no such name is found in the list of books generally</p><p>regarded as composed by NSgarjuna; and as Tucci observes,2</p><p>it must be the work of some other Nagarjuna.</p><p>Besides the buddhist canonical texts, a non canonical</p><p>3treatise namely Milindapanho (first cdntury A. D.) and the</p><p>books noted above which are of quite an early date, refer to</p><p>several heretical views of their time; which were traditionally</p><p>handed down. We cannot pronounce any opinion whether some of</p><p>them as actually presented were prior to the Nyaya Sutras but</p><p>we are confident that their exposition will help us in under</p><p>standing the Pravaduka drstis in the Nyaya Sutras.</p><p>We shall first discuss the main heretical doctrines,</p><p>found in the Canonical buddhist texts. These views are as</p><p>under s</p><p>1. cf. Pre-Dinnaga Buddhist texts of logic from Chinese</p><p>Sources,by Tucci, Introduction, page XI.</p><p>2. cf. Ibid, p. XII.</p><p>3. cf. A. History of Indian Literature JL</p><p>p. 175, by Winternitz</p></li><li><p>7/24/2019 HERETICAL VIEWS IN EARLY BUDDHIST LITERATURE</p><p> 8/93</p><p>* (1) Akriyavada</p><p>(2) Ahetuka Suddhivada,(3) tJ cchedavada,</p><p>(4) Sa/vatavada,</p><p>(6) Akrtavada,</p><p>( 6) Anis cayavada,</p><p>(7) Theory of eight ineaplicable problems,</p><p>(8) Sasvata - asasvatav'ada,</p><p>(9) Santa-anantavada,</p><p>(10) Isvaravada.</p><p>(1) AKRTYAVAPA s</p><p>An exposition of th is theory is found a t length</p><p>in the Samannaphala su tta of the Digha Nikaya. Prince AJatasatru</p><p>approaches Buddha in order to know the immediate f ru it which the</p><p>li fe of a recluse can y ie ld , such a f ru it as is visib le in thi s</p><p>very world. Buddha asks him whether he, (A jatasatru), had put</p><p>the same question to other teachers as w ell. And AJatas'atru,</p><p>admitting that he had put the question to some others, relates</p><p>the answer which Purana Kassapa had given to him as under t -</p><p>'* To him, who acts, 0 king, or causes another to act,</p><p>to him who mutilates or causes another to mutilate,to him who</p><p>punishes or causes another to punish, to him who causes grief</p><p>or torment, to him who trembles or causes another to tumble,</p><p>to him who k i l ls a liv ing crea ture, who breaks into houses,</p><p>who commits dacoity, or robbery, or highway robery, or adultery,</p></li><li><p>7/24/2019 HERETICAL VIEWS IN EARLY BUDDHIST LITERATURE</p><p> 9/93</p><p>or who speaks lies, to him thus acting, there is no (|Uilt.</p><p>If with a discus, with an edge as shaWp as a razors, heshould make all the living creatures on the earth one heap,</p><p>one mass of flesh, there would be no guilt thence resulting,</p><p>no increase of </p></li><li><p>7/24/2019 HERETICAL VIEWS IN EARLY BUDDHIST LITERATURE</p><p> 10/93</p><p>In the Majjhima Nikiya, this same theory is stated1</p><p>in the same words, and then a view/guite opposite to it qs&gt; i$</p><p>4WreJ : " T , wku err $/^causes another to act, ..... or who tells lies, to him thus</p><p>acting there does occur quilt. If with a discus.....Increase</p><p>of guilt does ensue, Were he to go along the south hank......</p><p>increase of guilt does ensue. Were he to go along the north</p><p>bank giving alms.... ..there is the increase of merit. In</p><p>generosity, in self-mastery, in control of the senses, in</p><p>speaking truth, there is merit and the increase of merit.1</p><p>tkes^v</p><p>From tha* Buddha seems to be inclined to support</p><p>the theory of Kriyavada, hence he says, ** the view that there2</p><p>is action is the right view .</p><p>In the Samyutta Nikaya, after describing the AkriyS-</p><p>vada in these very words, Buddha says that such a view arises</p><p>because there is rapa (matter), Yedana (feeling), Sam^na</p><p>(ideation), Samskara (conformation) and Vljnana (consciousness).</p><p>And then he explained that the r u p a....... etc. are all momen</p><p>tary and non-eternal and one who knows this, is finally emanci</p><p>pated and is not born again.</p><p>There is another passage in the Samyutta Nikaya</p><p>where different heretical views are stated by Patali and one</p><p>of them is the Akriyavada of Purana. In the same breath, a</p><p> .. - 4 H - - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- :---------</p><p>2. See Majjhima NikSya, (2.10</p><p>3. See Samyutta Nikaya, Karoto sutta, 24.6.</p></li><li><p>7/24/2019 HERETICAL VIEWS IN EARLY BUDDHIST LITERATURE</p><p> 11/93</p><p>yiew quite opposite to it, is stated. Then patali, asks the</p><p>t </p><p>Btiddha which of these the Sramana or the Brahmana was right.</p><p>Buddha tells him that even if the view that to</p><p>one who acts or causes another to act.... there is no sin..</p><p>..... there is no increase of merit1* is right, an Aryasrivaka</p><p>is not affected thereby as he never causes any evil to any</p><p>one. So also even if the view that '* To one who acts or causes</p><p>another to act.....</p><p>there is sin.....</p><p>there does ensure the</p><p>increase of merit1* be right, an Aryasravaka is not affected.</p><p>And at the very thought that he is not affected even if either</p><p>one or the other view be right, he feels a sense of great iy.</p><p>Prom this, it is clear that for Puranas doctrine,</p><p>the name Akriyavada seems quite proper and this is the name</p><p>given to it in the Samannaphala sutta. His is the theory of</p><p>non-action, according to which one is not affected by acts,</p><p>either good or sinful. In other words, the soul according to</p><p>him does not act, it is passive ( ). We must however</p><p>note at thismjuncture that the Akriyavada of Purana Kassapa is</p><p>confounded sometimes with the Ahetuvada of Gosala Mahkhaliputra.</p><p>This gives rise to a confusion regarding their teachers also.</p><p>Goslala in fact, held that * there is no cause,</p><p>either ultimate or remote for the depravity of beings, they</p><p>become depraved without reason and without cause. There is</p><p>1. Samyutta Nikaya (42.13)</p></li><li><p>7/24/2019 HERETICAL VIEWS IN EARLY BUDDHIST LITERATURE</p><p> 12/93</p><p>no cause; for the rectitude of beings they become pure without</p><p>reason and cause.</p><p>In Safcyutta Nikaya (22.60), Liechavi Mahal1 comes</p><p>to Buddha; and te l ls him,* Lord l) Pura^a Kassapa says that</p><p>no cause, ultimate or remote, is there fo r the depravity of</p><p>beings, they become depraved without reason and without cause.</p><p>There is no cause, either proximate or remote for the rectitude</p><p>of beings, they become pure, without reason and without cause.'*</p><p>Here we see that the theory of $osala, with the</p><p>same terminology, is ascribed to Purana . Eventhen it is</p><p>difficult to come to any conclusion, whether both of these</p><p>views can result in a single theory or they are quite</p><p>complementary.</p><p>It seems that in both the views, there is a lot</p><p>of difference in the way of laying stress on a particular</p><p>view point. Puraija first refers to action and then explains</p><p>in respect of action that any kind of action, either good or</p><p>bad, cannot bring any f r u i t , either good or bad. While Golala,</p><p>refers to the fruit either good or evil first, and then in</p><p>respect of tha t f ru it , says tha t i t is not brought forth by</p><p>any action, previously existing.</p><p>Thus the problem of the relationship of action and</p><p>fru it is the same, which is faced by both of them from diffe rent</p><p>point of viewjjby the former from the viewpoint of action, by</p></li><li><p>7/24/2019 HERETICAL VIEWS IN EARLY BUDDHIST LITERATURE</p><p> 13/93</p><p>the latter from the viewpoint of fruit. jAnd it is this treatment</p><p>given by each of them, that differentiates their views. It</p><p>dhould nevertheless be noted that both of them, any how accept</p><p>no relationship of cause and effect between the actions and</p><p>the fruits. Could it be that it is only because of this simila</p><p>rity that their views are often confounded ?</p><p>^ilatika, while commenting upon a passage in the</p><p>Sutrakrtahga, I. 1.1.13, says that Aklrakavada is here descri</p><p>bed. The view therein set out is this* * When a man acts or</p><p>causes another to act, it is not his soul (Stman) which acts</p><p>or causes to act. Thus they (i. e. the holders of their view)1</p><p>boldly proclaim.</p><p>j So also, in the Sutrakrtahga 11.14, we have aHvA. Tntory</p><p>^Pancamahabhutavadins. We shall examine it in detail in the</p><p>next chapter. At this stage, we only refer to the last portion</p><p>dam</p><p>of that description from which it may be clearly inferred that</p><p>it is quite similar to the theory of Purana Kassapa. It is</p><p>as follows :</p><p>'* A man buys and causes to buy, kills and causes to</p><p>kill, cooks and causes to cook, he may even sell and kill a</p><p>man - know that even in this case, he does not do any wrong*.</p><p> csr =* fcpyst# j</p><p>ep*rr</p><p>3 TxpTf|w 11</p></li><li><p>7/24/2019 HERETICAL VIEWS IN EARLY BUDDHIST LITERATURE</p><p> 14/93</p><p>This can be interpreted to mean th...</p></li></ul>