Hundreds of names try
to express the deep emotion. He is the King of Righteousness, the Master,
the Blessed One, the Lord of the World, the Teacher of gods and men; daily
they speak of Him in Ceylon and Burma as the Omniscient Lord. Yet they believe
that He was a man, as all men, and not one to be worshipped as divine in
ways that He did not share with His fellow-men. The greater the wonder, then,
at this devotion to a man.
How can one, not a
Buddhist, however learned he be, get to the heart of Buddhism without feeling
the [Page
3] love and gratitude and reverence
that those in Buddhist lands have to the great Master ? Can a Hindu be said
to understand what is the love of Christ that made the saints and martyrs,
inspired the art of the Renaissance and the builders of the cathedrals of
Europe, by mere perusal of the Gospels ? Can he get to the spirit, with
none to guide him, by merely reading the letter ? Can he be said to
understand the Christ, if to him the Christ is a mere philosopher and
theorist, like a Hegel or a Kant ?
It is because Edwin
Arnold imagines himself a Buddhist and with his poetic fancy enters into
a Buddhist atmosphere, that in his poem the Buddha is the central figure,
and so his work is to the Buddhist a satisfactory exposition of Buddhism.
Go to Ceylon, that center of Buddhism, or to Burma, and watch what the religion
is. Be present at a temple on a full-moon day and observe what takes place.
Each
full-moon day is a festival, and from morn till night the temple life is
busy. With the early dawn come the pious men and women who that day
dedicate themselves to devotion and meditation. They are dressed in
white, and all ornaments and jewels, the vanities of the world, have been
left at home. To them a yellow-robed monk repeats in Pãli the simple
vows every Buddhist makes, not to kill, not to take by fraud what belongs to
another, not to commit adultery, not to lie, and not to take intoxicants. They
repeat the vows [Page
4] after
the monk, but the whole ceremony begins with
“Reverence to the Master, the Blessed One, the Omniscient Lord”. Three
times this is said, and then follows, thrice repeated, “I take my refuge
in the Buddha, in His Truth, and in His Saints”.
It is always with the
thought of the Master that every ceremony begins. Then they take fresh flowers
and go into the holy of holies, where is the image of the Master. The image
is often cross-legged in the attitude of ecstasy, or standing up in the attitude
of benediction, or reclining on the right side as was His custom when meditating;
but always the eyes are bent down on the pious devotee. To one side of the
image of Gautama, and standing always, is the image of the next Buddha to
come, the Bodhisattva Maitreya, but already in anticipation of His next appearance
called by the people the Buddha Maitreya. The image of Gautama is
brown, for He was a Hindu; this image is white, according to tradition. In
His own good time He will come, when the world is ready for Him, once
again to do what all Buddhas have ever done, to dispel ignorance and
proclaim the eternal truths.
The
flowers are laid on the altar, and in ancient Pãli the devotees repeat
the praise and adoration of the Buddha, “perfect in knowledge, who has
come the good journey that led to the Buddhahood, the Teacher of Gods
and men, who has done that which was to be done, who has crossed to the
other [Page
5] shore
(Nirvana)”; of His Doctrine, the Truth, the Dhamma, “inviting all comers,
to be understood by the wise for themselves”; of His
Saints of the Yellow Robe, the ancient “ Brotherhood of the Noble Ones”,
who have entered the Path.
In the
evening the temple is lit with thousands of tiny lights; crowds, dressed in white
or in their best of gorgeous silks, gather now to hear the sermon, to reverence
the Master, to take refuge in Him, to take the
vows, to offer flowers and burn incense, all moving with eagerness in the tropical
moonlight hardly less bright than the white they wear. Then at the
appointed time, to the beating of drums, comes the monk, with his escort of
devout attendants, to give the discourse. Following immemorial tradition,
he begins chanting musically in sonorous Pãli, “Reverence to the Master,
the Blessed One, the Omniscient Lord”. After him the people repeat this,
and the three Refuges and the five vows.
It is of the life of
the Master the yellow-robed monk tells the people, how at such a place and
under such circumstances He did this or said that; how in the valley of the
Ganges 2,600 years ago the Master, a man, and not a God, lived a perfect
life of compassion, loving His fellow-men as a mother loves her only child,
and showed the way to truth and freedom from sorrow. How can anyone think
he is competent to talk about Buddhism without feeling all this ? He may
write much and learnedly about Buddhism as a
[Page 6] philosopher,
but unless he feels in his heart what the Buddha was, his Buddhism is of the
West, and not of the East, where yet broods the spirit of the great Teacher.
In the sixth century
before Christ, India was already old. Men talked even then of their ancient
philosophers. Reincarnation had been for centuries a fact of the normal consciousness
of the Hindu. Karma, the law of Action,
was as the air he breathed, that none questioned nor dreamed of
questioning.
Philosophy
was the one essential of life. The priestly Brahman, the warrior Kshattriya,
the merchant Vaishya, all had for centuries taken part in philosophical
speculations. Nor were women backward in contributing their share to the
one and all-absorbing topic. Maitreyî discusses philosophical
problems with her husband, the sage Yãjnavalkya; Gãrgî,
too, takes part in many a philosophical tournament, though vanquished in the
end. Many a woman, like Gãrgî, traveled about India, with her
particular phase of the then new thought, and drew many disciples round
her.
Children
also assert their rights to be heard, and courteously their elders listen
to them, for, it may be, the child is an ancient philosopher come back
to life. Nachiketas, a boy — than whom none more famous in
India — because “faith entered him”, visits King Yama, the ruler of the
spirits of the dead, and [Page
7] questions
the King of Death about what he alone could tell, what lay behind all births
and deaths, the final end of evolution for the soul. [Katha Upanishad].
“Young Kavi, the son of Angiras, taught his relatives who were old enough
to be his fathers, and, as he excelled them in sacred knowledge, he called
them Little
Sons '. They, moved with
resentment, asked the gods concerning that matter, and the gods, having
assembled, answered, ' The child has addressed you properly. For a man
destitute of sacred knowledge is indeed a child, and he who teaches him
the Veda is his father; for the sages have always said 'child' to an ignorant
man, and father to a teacher of the sacred science.' ”[Manu,
II. 151-153].
Every village and hamlet
had its lecture hall, where traveling philosophers were made welcome and
entertained, and much all reveled in the keen disputations. All who had any
new theory to propound, men and women, old or young, were equally honored,
for on this platform they were equal as seekers of the Truth.
Many
of the philosophical schools had nicknames that have come down to us; there
were “the hair-splitters, the eel-wrigglers, “the eternalists,
semi-eternalists, extensionists, fortuitous-originationists,the wanderers,
the
Friends" and so on without number. There is hardly a phase of modern [Page
8] philosophic thought — whether
of Bruno, Kant, Nietsche, or any other philosopher you like to mention — hardly
a phase of scepticism and agnosticism, that does not find its prototype
in those far off days in India.
Yet all was not well
in India at this time, the sixth century. B. C.. A restlessness was everywhere
manifest in the world of thought. Orthodoxy held rigidly bound in incredibly
wearisome ritual alike priest, warrior arid merchant. Slowly the priestly
Brahman was asserting his right, as the intermediary between Gods and men,
to be higher than the other two
twice-born castes; and many a Brahman, having little sanctity but much
caste, exercised ruthlessly his priestly power to oppress those beneath
him. A rigid ecclesiasticism held men bound in caste duties and
ceremonial, and originality and individual initiative had little chance under
the all-powerful routine. It seemed too, as though the sages of old had
canvassed all mysteries, human and divine, and nothing more remained to
be said; and yet there was still something lacking. Philosophy after
philosophy was studied, and yet there was felt the need for something,
though none knew what. It was the period of travail of the soul of the
nation, and the general conditions were not unlike what is found in Western
lands in the twentieth century now.
Restless as were men's
minds, there was something that was almost more noticeable still. Pitiable [Page
9] in many ways was the condition
of the non-Aryan members of the nations, the millions that were not twice-born like
the priest, warrior and merchant. Philosophy and the higher aspects of
religion were not for the low-caste millions of men and women. The Veda
could not be heard by them, nor were they taught the Secret, that
the human soul was the Divine Soul of the Universe. They could come merely
to the outskirts of the sacred knowledge, the priceless possession of the
Aryan Hindus. The Vedas would be polluted were they to be known by a
low-caste man, a Shudra; and as to those without any caste at all, the
Pariahs, they were thought of as no part of the Hindu community at all.
Hence terrible threats of reprisal against any such that should dare to put
himself on an equality with the twice-born. The ears a Shudra who listens
intentionally when the Veda is being recited are to be filled with molten
lead; his tongue is to be cut out if he recite it; his body is to be split
in twain if he preserve it in his memory. [Quoted in Vedãnta
Sûtras, I, 3, by both
Shankarãchãrya and Rãmanujãchãrya as valid].
If he assume a position equal to that of twice-born men, in sitting, in lying
down, in conversation or on the road, he is to undergo corporal punishment. [Manu,
and other Law Texts].
Such were the threats
which held in spiritual and social subjection the men of dark color. For
as [Page
10] non-Aryans, who had not been
Aryanised by intermarriage or by religious ceremony, they were without
caste, without
Varna. The three higher castes, originally light-complexioned, invaders
from beyond the Himalayas, blood-brothers to the Greeks and Gauls, had
gradually become browned by the Indian sun; but still they were lighter
than the conquered, and called themselves “the colored people”; and the
non-Aryan conquered people, dark, almost black, were “without color”,
without any Varna or caste at all.
True, a Shudra or an
outcaste who chose to resign the world and dedicate himself to the life of
an ascetic philosopher, became thereby a member of that chosen band of Sannyasis
where all were equal and above all castes whatsoever. King and priest would
honor such an one for what he was, forgetting what he was born. But the multitudes
of the ordinary men and women, who were neither priests nor warriors nor
merchants, whatever their abilities and qualifications might be, were rigidly
barred from coming into direct touch with those higher speculations and discussions
that relieved the monotony of the routine of daily duty. Yet, as events later
showed, these millions of the once-born were true Hindus after all,
for whom it was more practical to die, knowing God, than live without knowing
Him.
The work that Gautama
Buddha did has been called a reformation of Hinduism. Yet there were [Page
11] many others before Him who
led the way. Rebellion against the domination of the priestly caste, heterodoxy
and heresies of all kinds, existed before and were tolerated as all somehow
a part of Hinduism after all. But it was once again the personality of the
Buddha that crystallized the aspirations for freedom of centuries, and gave
them the broad platform of a Universal Faith. His reformation has its two
aspects, social and religious.
As a social reformer
He was the greatest socialist that ever could be, but
different from the socialists of today in that He leveled up and not down.
He, too, proclaimed an equality and a fraternity, but the standard of equality
was not the lowest to which all could descend, but the highest to which all
might ascend. His standard was the Brahmana, the upright man of the
highest caste, the gentleman of those days, noble in conduct, wise
and serene. Up to the time of the Buddha, to be considered a Brahman one had
to be born into the highest caste; it was Gautama who proclaimed that
every man, even of the lowest caste, or more despised still, of no caste at
all, could become a Brahman, by living the perfect life that every man born
in the highest caste ought to live. To be a Brahman was a matter of
conduct, of an education of the heart, of the training of the character; it
was not a matter of caste at all. All were Brahmans “ who live a holy life,
who live an upright life, who live in the way of wisdom, who live [Page
12] a
life fulfilling their duties”. “ He who is tolerant with the intolerant,
mild with the fault-finders, free from passion among the passionate, him
I call indeed a Brahman. I do not call a man a Brahman because of his origin
or of his mother. He may be called 'Sir' ; he may be wealthy; but the poor
who is free from evil qualities, him I call indeed a Brahman”.[Vãsettha
Sutta].
Again and again he outlines the conduct of the true Brahman. “As a
mother, even at the risk of her own life, protects her son, her only son,
so let him cultivate goodwill without measure among all beings. Let him
cultivate good-will without measure toward the whole world, above, below,
around, unstinted, unmixed with any feeling of differing or opposing
interests. Let a man remain steadfastly in this state of mind all the while
he is awake, whether he be standing, sitting-or lying down. This state of
heart is the best in the world”.[Mettã Sutta, trans, by Rhys
Davids]. “And he
lets his mind pervade one quarter of the world with thoughts of love, 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 love, far-reaching, grown great and beyond measure”.[Mahã Sudassana
Sutta, trans, by Rhys Davids].
With such an ideal
open to all, Gautama Buddha proclaimed a Socialism that appealed to the highest
in men and not to their lower material interests. Caste still [Page
13] exists in India today, and
even in Buddhist lands; primitive ethnological instincts gained the day and
caste was stronger than the Buddha Himself. But the ideal He proclaimed of
the true Brahman is still the light for nearly a third of the human race.
The
religious reformation that Gautama Buddha brought about was not novel to
the thinkers of His day. Many of His ideas others had proclaimed before
Him. But the way He enunciated them, the commanding and tender personality
that men saw in Him — these were new. He proclaimed nothing
new, but enabled each hearer to see the same old facts for himself from a
new dimension. He taught men to put aside speculation and philosophical
discussion, to aim first at an inner change of heart by a perfect life of
harmlessness and compassion, to make perfectly calm the stormy sea of
man's nature with its surging desires for pleasure or gain, so that when
stilled it could reflect like a mirror the deep intuitions within them. Thus
could a man be independent of priests and intercessors; thus alone could
a man be a light unto himself and tread the Path . “Be ye lamps unto
yourselves. Be ye a refuge to yourselves. Betake yourselves to no external
refuge. Hold fast to the Truth as a lamp. Hold fast as a refuge to the Truth.
Look not for refuge to any one besides yourselves”.[Mahã Parinibbãna
Sutta].
How the perfect life
is to be lived is explained over and over again. First come the Four
Efforts,
1. To do no fresh
evil;
2. To get rid of evil done;
3. To produce goodness not previously existing;
4. To increase goodness already
existing.
Ten are the meritorious acts that the devotee must perform:
1. Charity;
2. Observing the precepts
3. Meditation;
4. Giving an opportunity
to others to partake in one's good actions;
5. Taking delight in the meritorious
acts done by another;
6. Attending upon others;
7. Honoring those worthy of
honor;
8.Explaining the doctrine;
9. Listening to explanations of the doctrine;
10. Going for refuge to the Three
Treasures — the Buddha,
the Truth, and the Saints.
The meditations are five, on love, pity, joy, impurity
and serenity.
Thus living he enters the
Path and
comes to liberation — Nirvana. Is Nirvana
the cessation of all desires, the ending of existence, annihilation of being
? But the books say we can know about Nirvana in three ways; first, by
personal experience (pachchakkha siddhi); second, indirectly, at second
hand, by reasoning and analysis (anumeyya siddhi); and similarly, third, by
faith in the statements of those who have experienced it (saddheyya
siddhi). Faith in the statements of those who have been annihilated ?
Can
one truly believe that millions of men and women, of normal affections
and aspirations, go before the image of Buddha, lay flowers before Him,
saying, “I take my refuge in Thee”, and believe that He taught [Page
15] the
highest aim of existence was annihilation ? When at a preaching in a
temple, the monk in his discourse mentions merely the word Nirvana, and
the audience send up a rapt and ecstatic shout of “Sãdhu! Sãdhu!”
(Amen! Amen!) — can it be they feel Nirvana is annihilation ?
What, then, is Nirvana
? What did the Buddha Himself say ? First, that none could know it at first
hand who did not live the perfect life. It was not a
mere question of intellectual grasp; you might speculate about it, but you
could not know it, without living the life. There are experiences possible
to the human soul that no intellect will ever analyze without proving their
impossibility. And yet they are. How can one not steeped in the
Upanishads, who does not feel what Plato meant by his noumenal World of
Ideas, see anything but a negation of existence in Nirvana ? Any life that
is super-personal, beyond the understanding of our senses, beyond our
limited individuality, at once becomes unreal or a vague unindividual diluted
unconscious existence.
Thus speak the Upanishads
about the one source of existence, Brahman.
“There shines not sun,
nor moon and stars, nor do these lightnings shine, much less this fire. When
He shines forth, all things shine after Him; by His shining shines all here
below”. “Nor inwards conscious, nor outwards
conscious not conscious yet both ways; nor yet ingathered as to
consciousness, nor even conscious nor yet [Page
16] unconscious;
what none can see, nor grasp nor comprehend, void of distinctive mark, unthinkable,
past definition, naught but self-consciousness alone, that ends all going
out, peaceful, benign, and secondless — this men think of as Fourth
[The fourth state is Nirvana; the other three being Jagrat, waking (physical
and astral); Svapna, sleep; the mental plane, the heavenly world;
Sushupti,
deep sleep, the plane of Buddhi] ; He is the Self, 'tis He
who must be known. [Mãndûkya Upanishad, trans
by Mead and Chatterji]
Surely
all this seems abstraction, mere negation. But not so to the Hindu mind,
which is trying to cognize something beyond the limitations of time, space
and causality. The intense reality of That, its influence on daily life,
is seen in many a verse like this: “Alone within this universe He comes
and goes; 'tis He who is the fire, the water He pervadeth. Him and Him
only knowing, one crosseth over death; no other path at all is there to
go”.
It is the same thing
that is taught to Socrates. It is through Beauty and purified love that the
That is to be realized. Thus Plato in the Symposium:
“For he
who hath thus far had intelligence of love, and hath beheld all fair things
in order and aright, — he drawing near to the end of things lovable
shall behold a Being marvelously fair; for whose sake in truth it is that all
the previous labors have been undergone: One who is from everlasting,
and neither is born nor perisheth, nor can wax nor wane, nor hath change
or turning or alteration of foul or fair; nor can that beauty be imagined after
the fashion of face or hands or bodily parts and members, nor in any form
of speech or knowledge, nor in dwelling in aught but itself; neither in beast
nor man nor earth nor heaven nor any [Page
17] other
creature; but Beauty only and alone and separate and eternal, which, albeit
all other fair things partake thereof and grow and perish, itself without
change or increase or diminution endures for everlasting”.
And finally thus Gautama Buddha speaks of Nirvana,
the fourth state
of consciousness of Hinduism. In Udãnam, VIII, 2-3, is an extremely
philosophic definition which is as follows:“There
is, 0 Brethren, that Abode, where there is indeed no earth nor water nor
air; nor the world of the Infinity-of-Space, nor the world of the Infinity-of-Intelligence,
nor the world of No-Thing-Whatsoever, nor the world of Neither-Cognition-nor-Non-Cognition;
nor this World, nor the world yonder, and neither the sun nor the moon. That
I call, O Brethren, neither coming nor going nor standing, nor birth nor
death. Without foundation, without origination, beyond thought is That. The
destruction of sorrow verily is That.
“There
is, O Brethren, that which is unborn, unmanifested, uncreate and unconditioned.
Unless, O Brethren, it were not unborn, unmanifested, uncreate and unconditioned,
there could not be cognized in this world the coming forth of what is born,
manifested, created and conditioned. And inasmuch as there exists what
is unborn, unmanifested, uncreate and unconditioned, therefore is cognized
the coming forth of what is born, manifested, created and conditioned.
One
of the most brilliant of modern historians of Philosophy, Prof. Harald
Höffding of Copenhagen, thus truly describes a Buddhist's conception
of Nirvana.