After Buddha's Death.

From Buddha's death we turn to Buddha's religion and its progress. And I think the narrative form will help us best, but a few preliminary remarks are necessary.

What is Buddhism?

"The religion of Buddha," says Professor Max MÜller in his "Chips from a German Workshop," "was made for a madhouse."

"Buddha," says Sir Monier Williams in his "Buddhism," "altogether ignored in human nature any spiritual aspirations."

Having heard the dictum of Oxford, perhaps it is fair to listen to a real Buddhist. In a work called "Happiness," an anonymous writer sketches his religion.

The teaching of Buddha, as set forth by him, is simple and sublime. There are two states of the soul, call them ego and non-ego—the plane of matter and the plane of spirit—what you will. As long as we live for the ego and its greedy joys, we are feverish, restless, miserable. Happiness consists in the destruction of the ego, by the Bodhi, and Gnosis. This is that interior, that high state of the soul, attained by Fenelon and Wesley, by Mirza the Sufi and Swedenborg, by Spinoza and Amiel.

"The kingdom of God is within you," says Christ.

"In whom are hid the treasures of sophia and gnosis," says St. Paul.

"The enlightened view both worlds," says Mirza the Sufi, "but the bat flieth about in the darkness without seeing."

"Who speaks and acts with the inner quickening," says Buddha, "has joy for his accompanying shadow. Who speaks and acts without the inner quickening, him sorrow pursues as the chariot wheel the horse."

Let us give here a pretty parable, and let Buddha speak for himself:—

"Once upon a time there was a man born blind, and he said, 'I cannot believe in a world of appearances. Colours bright or sombre exist not. There is no sun, no moon, no stars. None have witnessed such things.' His friends chid him; but he still repeated the same words.

"In those days there was a Rishi who had the inner vision; and he detected on the steeps of the lofty Himalayas four simples that had the power to cure the man who was born blind. He culled them, and, mashing them with his teeth, applied them. Instantly the man who was born blind cried out, 'I see colours and appearances. I see beautiful trees and flowers. I see the bright sun. No one ever saw like this before.'

"Then certain holy men came to the man who was born blind, and said to him, 'You are vain and arrogant and nearly as blind as you were before. You see the outside of things, not the inside. One whose supernatural senses are quickened sees the lapis-lazuli fields of the Buddhas of the Past, and hears heavenly conch shells sounded at a distance of five yoganas. Go off to a desert, a forest, a cavern in the mountains, and conquer this mean thirst of earthly things.'"

The man who was born blind obeyed; and the parable ends with its obvious interpretation. Buddha is the old Rishi, and the four simples are the four great truths. He weans mankind from the lower life and opens the eyes of the blind.

I think that Sir Monier Williams's fancy, that Buddha ignored the spiritual side of humanity is due to the fact that by the word "knowledge" he conceives the Buddhist to mean knowledge of material facts. That Buddha's conceptions are nearer to the ideas of Swedenborg than of Mill is, I think, proved by the Cingalese book, the Samanna Phala Sutta. Buddha details, at considerable length, the practices of the ascetic, and then enlarges upon their exact object. Man has a body composed of the four elements. It is the fruit of the union of his father and mother. It is nourished on rice and gruel, and may be truncated, crushed, destroyed. In this transitory body his intelligence is enchained. The ascetic, finding himself thus confined, directs his mind to the creation of a freer integument. He represents to himself in thought another body created from this material body—a body with a form, members, and organs. This body, in relation to the material body, is like the sword and the scabbard, or a serpent issuing from a basket in which it is confined. The ascetic, then, purified and perfected, commences to practise supernatural faculties. He finds himself able to pass through material obstacles, walls, ramparts, etc.: he is able to throw his phantasmal appearance into many places at once; he is able to walk upon the surface of water without immersing himself; he can fly through the air like a falcon furnished with large wings; he can leave this world and reach even the heaven of Brahma himself.

Another faculty is now conquered by his force of will, as the fashioner of ivory shapes the tusk of the elephant according to his fancy. He acquires the power of hearing the sounds of the unseen world as distinctly as those of the phenomenal world—more distinctly, in point of fact. Also by the power of Manas he is able to read the most secret thoughts of others, and to tell their characters. He is able to say, "There is a mind that is governed by passion. There is a mind that is enfranchised. This man has noble ends in view. This man has no ends in view." As a child sees his earrings reflected in the water, and says, "Those are my earrings," so the purified ascetic recognises the truth. Then comes to him the faculty of "divine vision," and he sees all that men do on earth and after they die, and when they are again reborn. Then he detects the secrets of the universe, and why men are unhappy, and how they may cease to be so.

I will now quote a conversation between Buddha and some Brahmins which, I think, throws much light on his teaching. It is given in another Cingalese book, the "Tevigga Sutta."

When the teacher was dwelling at ManasÂkata in the mango grove, some Brahmins, learned in the three Vedas, came to consult him on the question of union with the eternal Brahma. They ask if they are in the right pathway towards that union. Buddha replies at great length. He suggests an ideal case. He supposes that a man has fallen in love with the "most beautiful woman of the land." Day and night he dreams of her, but has never seen her. He does not know whether she is tall or short, of Brahmin or Sudra caste, of dark or fair complexion; he does not even know her name. The Brahmins are asked if the talk of that man about that woman be wise or foolish. They confess that it is "foolish talk." Buddha then applies the same train of reasoning to them. The Brahmins versed in the three Vedas are made to confess that they have never seen Brahma, that they do not know whether he is tall or short, or anything about him, and that all their talk about union with him is also foolish talk. They are mounting a crooked staircase, and do not know whether it leads to a mansion or a precipice. They are standing on the bank of a river and calling to the other bank to come to them.

Now it seems to me that if Buddha were the uncompromising teacher of atheism that Sir Monier Williams pictures him, he has at this point an admirable opportunity of urging his views. The Brahmins, he would of course contend, knew nothing about Brahma, for the simple reason that no such being as Brahma exists.

But this is exactly the line that Buddha does not take. His argument is that the Brahmins knew nothing of Brahma, because Brahma is purely spiritual, and they are purely materialistic.

Five "Veils," he shows, hide Brahma from mortal ken. These are—

1. The Veil of Lustful Desire.

2. The Veil of Malice.

3. The Veil of Sloth and Idleness.

4. The Veil of Pride and Self-Righteousness.

5. The Veil of Doubt.

Buddha then goes on with his questionings:—

"Is Brahma in possession of wives and wealth?"

"He is not, Gautama!" answers Vasettha the Brahmin.

"Is his mind full of anger, or free from anger?"

"Free from anger, Gautama!"

"Is his mind full of malice, or free from malice?"

"Free from malice, Gautama!"

"Is his mind depraved or pure?"

"It is pure, Gautama!"

"Has he self-mastery, or has he not?"

"He has, Gautama."

The Brahmins are then questioned about themselves.

"Are the Brahmins versed in the three Vedas in possession of wives and wealth, or are they not?"

"They are, Gautama!"

"Have they anger in their hearts, or have they not?"

"They have, Gautama."

"Do they bear malice, or do they not?"

"They do, Gautama."

"Are they pure in heart, or are they not?"

"They are not, Gautama."

"Have they self-mastery, or have they not?"

"They have not, Gautama."

These replies provoke, of course, the very obvious retort that no point of union can be found between such dissimilar entities. Brahma is free from malice, sinless, self-contained, so, of course, it is only the sinless that can hope to be in harmony with him.

Vasettha then puts this question: "It has been told me, Gautama, that Sramana Gautama knows the way to the state of union with Brahma?"

"Brahma I know, Vasettha!" says Buddha in reply, "and the world of Brahma, and the path leading to it!"

The humbled Brahmins learned in the three Vedas then ask Buddha to "show them the way to a state of union with Brahma."

Buddha replies at considerable length, drawing a sharp contrast between the lower Brahminism and the higher Brahminism, the "householder" and the "houseless one." The householder Brahmins are gross, sensual, avaricious, insincere. They practise for lucre black magic, fortune-telling, cozenage. They gain the ear of kings, breed wars, predict victories, sacrifice life, spoil the poor. As a foil to this, he paints the recluse, who has renounced all worldly things, and is pure, self-possessed, happy.

To teach this "higher life," a Buddha "from time to time is born into the world, blessed and worthy, abounding in wisdom, a guide to erring mortals." He sees the universe face to face, the spirit world of Brahma and that of MÂra the tempter. He makes his knowledge known to others. The houseless one, instructed by him, "lets his mind pervade one quarter of the world with thoughts of pity sympathy, and equanimity; and so the second, and so the third, and so the fourth. And thus the whole wide world, above, below, around, and everywhere, does he continue to pervade with heart of pity, sympathy, and equanimity, far-reaching, grown great, and beyond measure."

"Verily this, Vasettha, is the way to a state of union with Brahma," and he proceeds to announce that the bhikshu, or Buddhist beggar, "who is free from anger, free from malice, pure in mind, master of himself, will, after death, when the body is dissolved, become united with Brahma." The Brahmins at once see the full force of this teaching. It is as a conservative in their eyes that Buddha figures, and not an innovator. He takes the side of the ancient spiritual religion of the country against rapacious innovators.

Sir Monier Williams quotes a part of this Sutta, and, oddly enough, still maintains that Buddha was an atheist.

There are two great schools of Buddhism, and they are quite agreed on this point that Buddhism is the quickening of the spiritual vision.

Let us now consider how the two great schools of Buddhism diverge.

1. The earliest school, the Buddhism of Buddha, taught that after NirvÂna, or man's emancipation from re-birth, the consciousness of the individual survived, and that he dwelt for ever in happiness in the Brahma heavens. This is the Buddhism of the "Little Vehicle."

2. The second, or innovating school, maintained that after NirvÂna the consciousness of the individual ceased. Their creed was the blank atheism of the Brahmin S'unyavÂdi.

The first serious study of Buddhism took place in one of our colonies, and the first students were missionaries. Great praise is due to the missionaries of Ceylon for their early scholarship, but naturally they ransacked the Buddhist books less as scholars than missionaries. Soon they discovered with delight the teaching of the atheistic school, and statements that the Ceylon scriptures were the earliest authentic Buddhist scriptures, brought to the island by Mahinda, King Asoka's son (B.C. 306). In consequence of this the missionaries concluded that Ceylon had preserved untainted the original teaching of Buddha, and that the earliest school, that of the "Little Vehicle," was atheistic.

But the leading Sanscrit scholar of the world, Dr. Rajendra Lala Mitra, has completely dissipated this idea. In his work, "Nepalese Buddhist Literature," p. 178, he shows conclusively that it is the Buddhism of the innovating school, that of the "Great Vehicle," which preaches atheism. About the epoch of Christ, Kanerkos or Kanishka, a king who conquered India, introduced this innovating teaching. Hweng Thsang, the Chinese pilgrim, who visited India in the seventh century, confirms this. There was in India at this date amongst the followers of Siva, a school who held that Nothingness was God, and Nothingness the future of man. They were called the S'unyavÂdis, the proclaimers of Nothingness. Two priests, Parsvika and Vasabandhu, were with Kanerkos, and they persuaded this monarch to force this Pyrrhonism on the Buddhists. A mighty conflict was the consequence. The old Buddhists remonstrated. They said that Buddha knew nothing of all this. They called the "Great Vehicle" Sunyapushpa (the Carriage that drives to Nowhere). But Parsvika packed a convocation like Constantine, and forced the new teaching down their throats. ("Hweng Thsang, Hist." p. 114., et. seq. "Memoirs," pp. 174, 220.) Rajendra Lala Mitra says that the Buddhist books of the "Great Vehicle" are in a servile manner copied from Brahmin treatises.

Let us examine this "Great Vehicle," as writers like Sir Monier Williams tells us that it was this school that introduced the ideas of God and immortality into Buddhism, which until then was pure atheism. Its main Bible is a collection of writings called the "Raksh BhagavatÎ." (Rajendra Lala Mitra, p. 179.) Bryan Hodgson confirms this. ("Literature of Nepal," p. 16.) The work itself is an avowed attack on the HinayÂna or "Little Vehicle," which is "refuted repeatedly," says the learned Hindoo. (p. 178.)

Let us now see what sort of god and what sort of immortality the "Raksh BhagavatÎ" in its title of chapters proclaimed.

Chap. I. The subject of Nothingness (Sunyata) expounded.

Chap. II. Relation of the soul to form colour and vacuity.

Chap. IV. Relation of form to vacuity.

Chap. VII. How a Bodhisattwa merges all natural attributes into vacuity.

Chap. XII. The doctrine of MahÂyÂna and its advantages, derived principally, if not entirely, from its recognition of the greatness of S'unyavÂda (Nihilistic doctrine of the Brahmin sect of S'unyavÂdis).

Chap. XIII. To the Bodhisattwa there is nothing eternal, nothing transient, nothing painful, nothing pleasant. All qualities are unreal as a dream.

Chap. XIV.-XVI. The principle of the Prajn Paramit imparted by Buddha to Indra. The end sought is the attainment of vacuity.

Chap. XXXV. All objects attainable by the study of Nihilism. ("Nepalese Buddhist Literature," p. 180.)

Hodgson gives a bit of what he calls this "pure Pyrrhonism" from the same book. Buddha is made to talk thus:—

"The being of all things is derived from belief, reliance, in this order: from false knowledge, delusive impression; from delusive impression, general notions; from them, particulars; from them, the six seats of the senses; from them, contact; from it, definite sensation and perception; from it, thirst or desire; from it, embryolic (physical) existence; from it, birth or actual existence; from it, all the distinctions of genus and species among animate things; from them, decay and death, after the manner and period peculiar to each. Such is the procession of all things into existence from delusion (avidyÂ), and in the inverse order to that of their procession they retrograde into non-existence." (p. 79.)

Another book, the "Suvarna PrabhÂsa," makes "grand non-existence," the Bodhi, the divine knowledge. "I now instruct you on the means of acquiring the knowledge of nothingness," Buddha is made to say to his disciples. (Rajendra Lala Mitra, p. 243.)

But there is a third school of Buddhism, the Madhyamika, or "Middle Pathway." Unless all this is definitely understood, Buddhism will remain a riddle. For a long time the "Great" and the "Little" Vehicles fought furiously. I believe that the "Middle Pathway" was a rude attempt at conciliation. No one can read many Buddhist writings without observing flat contradictions at every page. Thus the BrahmajÂla SÛtra, much quoted by missionaries, who are plainly unaware that it belongs to the literature of the "Carriage that drives to Nowhere," announces that the existence of the soul after death in a conscious or even an unconscious state is impossible. But there is a passage which the missionaries do not quote. Buddha also tells his disciples that the statement of the Brahmins and Buddhist teachers, that "existing beings are cut off, destroyed, annihilated," is founded on their ignorance and want of perception of the truth. (See my "Popular Life of Buddha," p. 223.)

Having thus cleared the way, I will now proceed with the history of the progress of Buddha's religion. Before, it would have been unintelligible.

Buddha died B.C. 470. Asoka, the Buddhist Constantine, gained India B.C. 260. Unfortunately, between these two dates there is scarcely any authentic history at all. Buddha left behind him brief instructions to his disciples, which are called the "Twelve Observances." They were never to sleep under a roof. In Ceylon even to this day a Buddhist monk is called AbhyÂvakÂsika (he whose covering is the heavens). They were never to stop two nights in the same spot. What was to be their food? Refuse victuals. What was to be their dress? Rags from the graveyard, dung-heap, etc. What was his following to be called? The "Mob of Beggars" (Bhikshu Sangha). Jumping from B.C. 470 to B.C. 302, history flashes a sudden light upon these wandering beggars.

At this date Seleucus Nicator sent an ambassador named Megasthenes to King Chandragupta at Patna. His account of the India of that day is, unfortunately, lost; but through Diodorus Siculus, Strabo, Arrian, and Clement of Alexandria, some valuable fragments have come down to us. Patna, it must be remembered, was in the heart of the Buddhist Holy Land. Clement of Alexandria cites a passage from Megasthenes about the Indian "philosophers." "Of these there are two classes, some of them called SarmanÆ (Sramanas) and other Brahmins. And those of the SarmanÆ, who are called Hylobii, neither inhabit cities nor have roofs over them, but are clothed in the bark of trees, feed on nuts, and drink water in their hands. Like those called Encratites in the present day, they know not marriage, nor begetting of children. Some, too, of the Indians obey the precepts of Buddha, whom, on account of his extraordinary sanctity, they have raised to divine honours."

Strabo also describes the Brahmins and the Hylobii, or Germanes, with similar details. He draws a distinction between the Germanes and the Brahmins on the subject of continency, the Brahmins being polygamists.

No doubt these SarmanÆ and Brahmins of Megasthenes were the Brahmins and Buddhist Sramanas, or ascetics. To the first were confided sacrifices and ceremonies. They were a caste apart, and none outside this caste could officiate. Their ideas of life and death, it is announced, were similar to those of Plato and the Greeks. The Brahmins ate flesh and had many wives. Every new year there was a great synod of them. They dwelt in groves near the great cities on "couches of leaves and skins."

The Hylobii, on the other hand, insisted on absolute continence and strict vegetarianism, and water drinking. Clitarchus gives us an additional fact from Megasthenes. The Hylobii "derided the Brahmins." "By their means," says Strabo, "kings serve and worship God." (See for all that can be recovered from Megasthenes, Cory, "Ancient Fragments," pp. 225-227.)

That the Buddhists at first were wandering beggars without any convents is the opinion of the Russian Orientalist, Wassiljew, who supports it from a valuable Chinese history by Daranatha. It asserts that the King Ajatasatru passed Varsha or Lent in a graveyard; and that until the date of Upagupta, a contemporary of Asoka, there were no temples. The first was built at Mathura. (Ch. iv., cited by Wassiljew, "Buddhism," p. 41.)

Daranatha asserts that a disciple of Ananda reached Cashmir. M. Wassiljew remarks that this would mean a spread of the doctrines in intermediate lands. I must point out that the first ritual of Buddhism was the "Praise of the Seven Mortal Buddhas," who were worshipped, as Gen. Cunningham has shown from the Bharhut Stupa, in the form of trees. This seems to have been the sole form of worship even in the days of King Asoka, who enjoins his subjects to worship round Buddha's tree, the ficus indicus.

I think that my readers are now in a position to judge whether India was gained by houseless Parivrajakas, ever marching, ever preaching, ever enduring hunger, thirst, buffets, death if necessary, or by lazy monks, living in sumptuous convents, and debating whether their couches should have fringes and their dress be silk or cotton. This last is the contention of the Buddhist histories, and these dishonest documents have even deceived learned men in the West, more skilful in PÂli roots, perhaps, than judicial analysis. These books record that three months after Buddha's death a vast convocation of monks was assembled at RÂjÂgriha to render canonical certain holy books, in bulk four times as big as our Bible. Eighteen disused monasteries were hastily cleared of their cobwebs and rubbish, and set in order for these monks, and a cave temple, whose columns and splendid stone carvings vied with Ellora, was cut out of the rock in what must be thought a very small space of time, namely, two months. I have shown in my "Popular Life of Buddha" that we have here most probably the details of a real convocation, that of King Kanerkos, assembled about 20 A.D., by the "Carriage that drives Nowhere" (Sunyapushpa) to force their Pyrrhonism on the old faith, and that they have dishonestly antedated this convocation by nearly 500 years, to make it appear that their innovations were the earliest Buddhism. Hweng Thsang, the Chinese pilgrim, has given us the details of the convocation.

The number of monks was fixed at four hundred and ninety-nine. The ambitious Vasubandhu, leader of the "Great Vehicle" movement, presented himself at the door, but the traditions of early Buddhism were still strong. Some of the monks desired him to depart, as none but Arhats (the fully enfranchised) could remain near the building.

"I care little for the enfranchisement of study" (the rank of Arhat), said Vasubandhu. Then, with some inconsistency, he performed a great miracle to prove that he had attained that dignity. He flung into the air a ball of thread, and one end remained fixed in the sky. A similar prodigy was witnessed by Marco Polo and other old travellers. Vasubandhu was chosen president, and the convocation proceeded to discuss their Pyrrhonism. All this is servilely repeated in the fictitious narrative of the first convocation. A difficulty arose about Ananda, who had not acquired the miraculous powers that stamp the adept in the knowledge of PrajÑ PÂramitÂ, the wisdom of the unseen world. Thus, as first constituted, the convocation consisted of 499 members and a vacant carpet was spread for Ananda. During the night he meditated on the KÂyagast SÂtiyÂ, and in the morning these powers came; and in proof he reached his seat through the medium of the floor of the temple.

To culminate this silliness, Ananda is then called upon to disclose this "wisdom of the unseen world," because, being Buddha's chief disciple, he is the only one who knows much about it. The Bible of the "Carriage that drives Nowhere" is the chief book discussed, the BrahmajÂla SÛtra, which Hoa Yen, the greatest Chinese authority (see RÉmusat, "Pilgrimage of Fa Hian," p. 108), says is distinctly a "Great Vehicle" scripture. In it Buddha discusses every conceivable theory about the next world, and contradicts them all. Could such an insane Bible, in a few years, have tumbled to pieces the great priesthoods of India, China, Persia?

We now come to King Asoka, a monarch whose dominions stretched from GrÂndhÂra, or Peshawur, to Chola and PÂndiya, the extreme southern provinces of India. On the extreme west he cut a rock-inscription at Girnar, on the Gulf of Cutch. On the east coast at Ganjam were the Dhauli and Jaugada inscriptions. His rule was a broad one.

He became a convert to Buddhism, and made it the official creed. He carved his "Edicts" on rocks and stone columns. Let us see from them whether early Buddhism was the atheism and negation of an immortal life that is depicted in popular treatises. He is called DevÂnampiya, the friend of the spirits.

KING ASOKA'S IDEAS ABOUT GOD.

"Much longing after the things [of this life] is a disobedience, I again declare; not less so is the laborious ambition of dominion by a prince who would be a propitiator of Heaven. Confess and believe in God [IsÂna], who is the worthy object of obedience. For equal to this [belief], I declare unto you, ye shall not find such a means of propitiating Heaven. Oh, strive ye to obtain this inestimable treasure." (First separate Edict, Dhauli, Prinsep.)

"Thus spake King DevÂnampiya Piyadasi:—The present moment and the past have departed under the same ardent hopes. How by the conversion of the royal born may religion be increased? Through the conversion of the lowly born if religion thus increaseth, by how much [more] through the conviction of the high born and their conversion shall religion increase? Among whomsoever the name of God resteth, verily this is religion."

"Thus spake DevÂnampiya Piyadasi:—Wherefore from this very hour I have caused religious discourses to be preached. I have appointed religious observances that mankind, having listened thereto, shall be brought to follow in the right path, and give glory to God." (Edict No. vii., Prinsep.)

ASOKA ON A FUTURE LIFE.

"On the many beings over whom I rule I confer happiness in this world; in the next they may obtain Swarga [paradise]." (Edict vi., Wilson.)

"This is good. With these means let a man seek Swarga. This is to be done. By these means it is to be done, as by them Swarga [paradise] is to be gained." (Edict ix., Wilson.)

"I pray with every variety of prayer for those who differ with me in creed, that they, following after my example, may with me attain unto eternal salvation." (Delhi Pillar, Edict vi., Prinsep.)

"And whoso doeth this is blessed of the inhabitants of this world; and in the next world endless moral merit resulteth from such religious charity." (Edict xi., Prinsep.)

"Unto no one can be repentance and peace of mind until he hath obtained supreme knowledge, perfect faith, which surmounteth all obstacles, and perpetual assent." (Rock Edict, No. vii., Prinsep.)

"In the tenth year of his anointment, the beloved King Piyadasi obtained the Sambodhi or complete knowledge." (Rock Edict, No. vii., Burnouf.)

"All the heroism that Piyadasi, the beloved of the gods, has exhibited is in view of another life. Earthly glory brings little profit, but, on the contrary, produces a loss of virtue. To toil for heaven is difficult to peasant and to prince unless by a supreme effort he gives up all." (Rock Edict, No. x., Burnouf.)

"May they [my loving subjects] obtain happiness in this world and in the next." (Second separate Edict, Burnouf.)

Early Buddhism had no prayer, no worship, say our popular treatises.

"DevÂnampiya has also said—Fame consisteth in this act, to meditate with devotion on my motives and on my deeds, and to pray for blessings in this world and the world to come." (Dhauli, separate Edict, No. ii., Prinsep.)

"I pray with every variety of prayer for those who differ with me in creed, that they, following after my example, may with me attain unto eternal salvation." (Delhi Pillar, Edict vi., Prinsep.)

Early Buddhism knew nothing of soul, we learn also.

"As the soul itself, so is the unrelaxing guidance of DevÂnampiya worthy of respect." (Dhauli, separate Edict, No. ii., Prinsep.)

On the BairÂt rock the king, too, gives a list of the holy books that his monks were to learn by heart.

1. The Summary of Discipline.

2. The Supernatural Powers of the Masters.

3. The Terrors of the Future.

4. The Song of the Muni.

5. The SÛtra on Asceticism.

6. The Question of Upatishya.

7. The Admonition to RÂhula concerning Falsehood, uttered by our Lord Buddha.

Nothing can be more important than this. If the BairÂt rock-inscription is genuine, the Ceylon history of the convocations is pure fiction.

It must be remembered that in the old Indian creeds, holy books were handed down entirely by recitation. The letters of the alphabet, according to Professor Max MÜller, General Cunningham, and the chief authorities, were not known in India until Asoka's day. We know from the MahÂwanso that the holy books of Ceylon were not committed to writing until the reign of King Wattaganini (104 to 76 B.C.). So the books that Asoka ordered to be handed down by the recitation and chantings of his monks must have plainly constituted the entire body of the recognised scriptures. In what way could any other scriptures come down? Dr. Oldenburg talks of these seven books as if they were "passages" only, he believing that the large body of PÂli scriptures of Ceylon were in existence as early as the second convocation. But if they were "passages," who was to remember and recite the rest of the voluminous canon? Asoka's monks were expressly forbidden so to do.

Of immense importance is one more fact. The Dhauli inscription announces that the four Greek kings (Chapta Yoni Raja), who took over Alexander's empire, had allowed their subjects to "follow the doctrine" of Asoka. He mentions Antiochus and Ptolemy. Also "Gongakenos" and Megas of Cyrene. This plainly proves that his missionaries had reached Egypt and Greece.