After the death of Vasubandhu few names of even moderate magnitude stand out in the history of Indian Buddhism. The changes which occurred were great but gradual and due not to the initiative of innovators but to the a.s.similative power of Hinduism and to the attractions of magical and emotional rites. But this tendency, though it doubtless existed, did not become conspicuous until about 700 A.D.
The accounts of the Chinese pilgrims and the literature which has been preserved suggest that in the intervening centuries the monks were chiefly occupied with scholastic and exegetical work. The most distinguished successors of Asanga were logicians, among whom Din?naga was pre-eminent. Sthiramati[238] and Gun?amati appear to have belonged to the same school and perhaps Bhavaviveka[239] too. The statements as to his date are inconsistent but the interesting fact is recorded that he utilized the terminology of the Sankhya for the purposes of the Mahayana.
Throughout the middle ages the study of logic was pursued but Buddhists and Jains rather than by Brahmans.[240] Vasubandhu composed some treatises dealing exclusively with logic but it was his disciple Din?naga who separated it definitely from philosophy and theology. As in idealist philosophy, so in pure logic there was a parallel movement in the Buddhist and Brahmanic schools, but if we may trust the statements of Vacaspatimisra (about 1100 A.D.) Din?naga interpreted the aphorisms of the Nyaya philosophy in a heterodox or Buddhist sense. This traces the beginnings of Indian logic to a Brahmanic source but subsequently it flourished greatly in the hands of Buddhists, especially Din?naga and Dharmakirti. The former appears to have been a native of Conjevaram and a contemporary of Kalidasa. Both the logician and the poet were probably alive in the reign of k.u.maragupta (413-455). Din?naga spent much time in Nalanda, and though the Sanskrit originals of his works are lost the Tibetan translations[241] are preserved.
The Buddhist schools of logic continued for many centuries. One flourished in Kashmir and another, founded by Candragomin, in Bengal.
Both lasted almost until the Mohammedan conquest of the two countries.
From about 470 to 530 A.D. northern India groaned under the tyranny of the Huns. Their King Mihiragula is represented as a determined enemy of Buddhism and a systematic destroyer of monasteries. He is said to have been a worshipper of Siva but his fury was probably inspired less by religious animosity than by love of pillage and slaughter.
About 530 A.D. he was defeated by a coalition of Indian princes and died ten years later amid storms and portents which were believed to signify the descent of his wicked soul into h.e.l.l. It must have been about this time that Bodhidharma left India for he arrived in Canton about 520. According to the Chinese he was the son of a king of a country called Hsiang-Chih in southern India[242] and the twenty-eighth patriarch and he became an important figure in the religion and art of the Far East. But no allusion to him or to any of the Patriarchs after Vasubandhu has been found in Indian literature nor in the works of Hsuan Chuang and I-Ching. The inference is that he was of no importance in India and that his reputation in China was not great before the eighth century: also that the Chinese lists of patriarchs do not represent the traditions of northern India.
Religious feeling often ran high in southern India. Buddhists, Jains and Hindus engaged in violent disputes, and persecution was more frequent than in the north. It is easy to suppose that Bodhidharma being the head of some heretical sect had to fly and followed the example of many monks in going to China. But if so, no record of his school is forthcoming from his native land, though the possibility that he was more than an individual thinker and represented some movement unknown to us cannot be denied. We might suppose too that since Nagarjuna and aryadeva were southerners, their peculiar doctrines were coloured by Dravidian ideas. But our available doc.u.ments indicate that the Buddhism of southern India was almost entirely Hinayanist, a.n.a.logous to that of Ceylon and not very sympathetic to the Tamils.
The pilgrims Sung-Yun and Hui-Sheng[243] visited Udyana and Gandhara during the time of the Hun domination (518-521). They found the king of the former a pious Buddhist but the latter was governed by an Ephthalite chieftain, perhaps Mihiragula himself, who was a worshipper of demons. Of the Yetha or Ephthalites they make the general observation that "their rules of politeness are very defective." But they also say that the population of Gandhara had a great respect for Buddhism and as they took back to China 170 volumes, "all standard works belonging to the Great Vehicle," the Ephthalite persecution cannot have destroyed the faith in north-western India. But the evil days of decay were beginning. Henceforward we have no more pictures of untroubled piety and prosperity. At best Buddhism receives royal patronage in company with other religions; sectarian conflicts increase and sometimes we hear of persecution. About 600 A.D. a king of Central Bengal named Sasan?ka who worshipped Siva attempted to extirpate Buddhism in his dominions and destroyed the Bo tree at Bodh Gaya.[244] On the other hand we hear of the pious Purn?avarman, king of Magadha, who made amends for these sacrileges, and of Siladitya, king of the country called Mo-lo-po by the Chinese, who was so careful of animal life, that he even strained the water drunk by his horses and elephants, lest they should consume minute insects.
We know more of Indian Buddhism in the seventh century than in the periods which precede or follow it. The epoch was marked by the reign of the great king, or rather emperor, Harsha-Vardhana (606-648 A.D.), and the works written by Ban?a, Bhartrihari and others who frequented his court have come down to us. Also we are fortunate in possessing the copious narrative of Hsuan Chuang, the greatest of the Chinese pilgrims, who spent sixteen years (629-645) in India as well as the work known as the "Record of the Buddhist religion as practised in India and the Malay Archipelago," composed by I-Ching who travelled in those countries from 671 to 695. I-Ching also wrote the lives of sixty Chinese pilgrims who visited India during the seventh century and probably there were many others of whom we have no record.
The reign of Harsha is thus ill.u.s.trated by a number of contemporary dateable works unusual in India. The king himself wrote some Buddhist hymns,[245] and three dramas are ascribed to him but were probably composed by some of the literary men whom he patronized. For all that, the religious ideas which they contain must have had his approval. The Ratnavali and Priyadarsika are secular pieces and so far as they have any religious atmosphere it is Brahmanic, but the Nagananda is a Buddhist religious drama which opens with an invocation of the Buddha and has a Jataka story for its plot.[246] Ban?a was himself a devout Brahman but his historical romance Harshacarita and his novel called Kadambari both describe a mixture of religions founded on observation of contemporary life. In an interesting pa.s.sage[247] he recounts the king"s visit to a Buddhist ascetic. The influence of the holy man causes the more intelligent animals in his neighbourhood, such as parrots, to devote themselves to Buddhist lore, but he is surrounded by devotees of the most diverse sects, Jains, Bhagavatas, Pancaratras, Lokayatikas with followers of Kapila, Kan?ada and many other teachers.
Mayura, another literary protege of Harsha"s, was like Bana a Brahman, and Subandhu, who flourished a little before them, ignores Buddhism in his romance called Vasavadatta. But Bhartrihari, the still popular gnomic poet, was a Buddhist. It is true that he oscillated between the court and the cloister no less than seven times, but this vacillation seems to have been due to the weakness of the flesh, not to any change of convictions. For our purpose the gist of this literature is that Hinduism in many forms, some of them very unorthodox, was becoming the normal religion of India but that there were still many eminent Buddhists and that Buddhism had sufficient prestige to attract Harsha and sufficient life to respond to his patronage.
About 600 A.D. India was exhausted by her struggle with the Huns.
After it there remained only a mult.i.tude of small states and obscure dynasties, but there was evidently a readiness to accept any form of unifying and tranquillizing rule and for nearly half a century this was provided by Harsha. He conquered northern India from the Panjab to Bengal but failed to subdue the Deccan. Though a great part of his reign was spent in war, learning and education flourished. Hsuan Chuang, who was his honoured guest, gives a good account of his administration but also makes it plain that brigandage prevailed and that travelling was dangerous.
After 643 Harsha, who was growing elderly, devoted much attention to religion and may be said to have become a Buddhist, while allowing himself a certain eclectic freedom. Several creeds were represented among his immediate relatives. Devotion to Siva was traditional in the family: his father had been a zealous worshipper of the Sun and his brother and sister were Buddhists of the Sammitiya sect. Harsha by no means disowned Brahmanic worship, but in his latter years his proclivity to Buddhism became more marked and he endeavoured to emulate the piety of Asoka. He founded rest houses and hospitals, as well as monasteries and thousands of stupas. He prohibited the taking of life and the use of animal food, and of the three periods into which his day was divided two were devoted to religion and one to business. He also exercised a surveillance over the whole Buddhist order and advanced meritorious members.
Hsuan Chuang has left an interesting account of the religious fetes and spectacles organized by Harsha. At Kanauj he attended a great a.s.sembly during which a solemn procession took place every day. A golden image of Buddha was borne on an elephant and Harsha, dressed as Indra, held a canopy over it, while his ally Raja k.u.mara,[248] dressed as Brahma, waved a fly-whisk. It was subsequently washed by the king"s own hands and in the evening his Majesty, who like Akbar had a taste for religious discussion, listened to the arguments of his Chinese guest. But the royal instructions that no one was to speak against the Master of the Law were so peremptory that even his biographer admits there was no real discussion. These edifying pageants were interrupted by disagreeable incidents which show that Harsha"s tolerance had not produced complete harmony. A temporary monastery erected for the fetes caught fire and a fanatic attempted to stab the king. He confessed under examination that he had been instigated to the crime by Brahmans who were jealous of the favours which the Buddhists received. It was also established that the incendiaries were Brahmans and, after the ringleaders had been punished, five hundred were exiled. Harsha then proceeded to Allahabad to superintend a quinquennial distribution of alms. It was his custom to let treasure acc.u.mulate for five years and then to divide it among holy men and the poor. The proceedings lasted seventy-five days and the concourse which collected to gaze and receive must have resembled the fair still held on the same spot.
Buddhists, Brahmans and Jains all partook of the royal bounty and the images of Buddha, Surya and Siva were worshipped on successive days, though greater honour was shown to the Buddha. The king gave away everything that he had, even his robes and jewels, and finally, arrayed in clothes borrowed from his sister, rejoiced saying "all I have has entered into incorruptible and imperishable treasuries."
After this, adds Hsuan Chuang, the king"s va.s.sals offered him jewels and robes so that the treasury was replenished. This was the sixth quinquennial distribution which Harsha had held and the last, for he died in 648. He at first favoured the Hinayana but subsequently went over to the Mahayana, being moved in part by the exhortations of Hsuan Chuang.
Yet the substance of Hsuan Chuang"s account is that though Buddhism was prospering in the Far East it was decaying in India. Against this can be set instances of royal piety like those described, the fame enjoyed by the shrines and schools of Magadha and the conversion of the king of Tibet in 638 A.D. This event was due to Chinese as well as Indian influence, but would hardly have occurred unless in north-eastern India Buddhism had been esteemed the religion of civilization. Still Hsuan Chuang"s long catalogue of deserted monasteries[249] has an unmistakable significance. The decay was most p.r.o.nounced in the north-west and south. In Gandhara there were only a few Buddhists: more than a thousand monasteries stood untenanted and the Buddha"s sacred bowl had vanished. In Takshasila the monasteries were numerous but desolate: in Kashmir the people followed a mixed faith. Only in Udyana was Buddhism held in high esteem. In Sind the monks were numerous but indolent.
No doubt this desolation was largely due to the depredations of Mihiragula. In the Deccan and the extreme south there was also a special cause, namely the prevalence of Jainism, which somewhat later became the state religion in several kingdoms. In Kalinga, Andhra and the kingdom of the Colas the pilgrim reports that Jains were very numerous but counts Buddhist monasteries only by tens and twenties. In Dravida there were also 10,000 monks of the Sthavira school but in Malakuta among many ruined monasteries only a few were still inhabited and here again Jains were numerous.
For all Central India and Bengal the pilgrim"s statistics tell the same tale, namely that though Buddhism was represented both by monasteries and monks, the Deva-temples and unbelievers were also numerous. The most favourable accounts are those given of Kanauj, Ayodhya and Magadha where the sacred sites naturally caused the devout to congregate.
The statistics which he gives as to sects are interesting.[250] The total number of monks amounted to about 183,000. Of these only 32,000 belonged definitely to the Mahayana: more than 96,000 to the Hinayana, and 54,500 studied both systems or at any rate resided in monasteries which tolerated either course of study. Some writers speak as if after our era Mahayanism was predominant in India and the Hinayana banished to its extreme confines such as Ceylon and Kashmir. Yet about A.D. 640 this zealous Mahayanist[251] states that half the monks of India were definitely Hinayanist while less than a fifth had equally definite Mahayanist convictions. The Mahayana laid less stress on monasticism than the Hinayana and therefore its strength may have lain among the laity, but even so the admitted strength of the Hinayana is remarkable. Three Hinayanist schools are frequently mentioned, the Sthaviras, Sarvastivadins and Sammitiyas. The first are the well-known Sinhalese sect and were found chiefly in the south (Conjeevaram) and in East Bengal, besides the monks of the Sinhalese monastery at Gaya.
The Sarvastivadins were found, as their history would lead us to expect, chiefly in the north and beyond the frontiers of India proper.
But both were outnumbered by the Sammitiyas, who amounted to nearly 44,000 monks. The chief doctrine[252] of this sect is said to have been that individuals (puggalo) exist as such in the truest sense.
This doctrine was supported by reference to the sutra known as the Burden and the Burden bearer.[253] It does not a.s.sert that there is a permanent and unchangeable soul (atta) but it emphasizes the reality and importance of that personality which all accept as true for practical purposes. It is probable that in practice this belief differed little from the ordinary Brahmanic doctrine of metempsychosis and this may be one reason for the prevalence of the sect.
I-Ching, though he does not furnish statistics, gives a clear conspectus of Buddhist sects as they existed in his time. He starts from the ancient eighteen sects but divides them into four groups or Nikayas. (_a_) The arya-Mahasanghika-nikaya. This comprised seven subdivisions but was apparently the least influential school as it was not predominant anywhere, though it coexisted with other schools in most parts. The Lokottaravadins mentioned by Hsuan Chuang as existing at Bamiyan belonged to it. They held that the Buddha was not subject to the laws of nature. (_b_) arya-Sthavira-nikaya. This is the school to which our Pali Canon belongs. It was predominant in southern India and Ceylon and was also found in eastern Bengal. (_c_) The arya-Mula-sarvastivada-nikaya with four subdivisions. Almost all belonged to this school in northern India and it was nourishing in Magadha. (_d_) The arya-Sammitiya-nikaya with four subdivisions flourished in Lat?a and Sindhu. Thus the last three schools were preponderant in southern, northern and western India respectively. All were followed in Magadha, no doubt because the holy places and the University of Nalanda attracted all shades of opinion, and Bengal seems to have been similarly catholic. This is substantially the same as Hsuan Chuang"s statement except that I-Ching takes a more favourable view of the position of the Sarvastivada, either because it was his own school or because its position had really improved.
It would seem that in the estimation of both pilgrims the Maha-and Hinayana are not schools but modes in which any school can be studied.
The Nikaya[254] or school appears to have been chiefly, though not exclusively, concerned with the rule of discipline which naturally had more importance for Buddhist monks than it has for European scholars.
The observances of each Nikaya were laid down in its own recension of the scriptures which was sometimes oral and sometimes in writing.
Probably all the eighteen schools had separate Vinayas, and to some extent they had different editions of the other Pitakas, for the Sarvastivadins had an Abhidharma of their own. But there was no objection to combining the study of Sarvastivadin literature with the reading of treatises by Asanga and Vasubandhu[255] or sutras such as the Lotus, which I-Ching"s master read once a day for sixty years.
I-Ching himself seems to regard the two Vehicles as alternative forms of religion, both excellent in their way, much as a Catholic theologian might impartially explain the respective advantages of the active and contemplative lives. "With resolutions rightly formed" he says "we should look forward to meeting the coming Buddha Maitreya. If we wish to gain the lesser fruition (of the Hinayana) we may pursue it through the eight grades of sanctification. But if we learn to follow the course of the greater fruition (of the Mahayana) we must try to accomplish our work through long ages."[256]
I-Ching observes that both Vehicles agree in prescribing the same discipline, in prohibiting the same offences and enjoining the practice of the n.o.ble truths. His views, which are substantially those of Hsuan Chuang,[257] must be those current in the seventh century when the Hinayana was allowing the Mahayana to overgrow it without resistance, but the relations of the two creeds are sometimes stated differently. For instance the Angulimaliya sutra,[258] known only in a Tibetan translation, states that whereas for the Hinayana such formulae as the four truths and the eightfold path are of cardinal importance, the Mahayana does not recognize them, and it is undoubtedly true that the Vaipulya sutras frequently ignore the familiar doctrines of early Buddhism and hint that they belong to a rudimentary stage of instruction.
I-Ching makes no mention of persecution but he deplores the decay of the faith. "The teaching of the Buddha is becoming less prevalent in the world from day to day" he says. "When I compare what I have witnessed in my younger days and what I see to-day in my old age, the state is altogether different and we are bearing witness to this and it is hoped we shall be more attentive in future." Though he speaks regretfully of lax or incorrect discipline, he does not complain of the corruption of the faith by Tantrism and magical practices. He does however deprecate in an exceedingly curious pa.s.sage the prevalence of religious suicide.[259]
Except for progressive decay, the condition of Indian Buddhism as described by the two pilgrims is much the same. Meals were supplied to monks in the monasteries and it was no longer usual to beg for food in the streets, since the practice is mentioned by I-Ching as exceptional. On Upavasatha days it was the custom for the pious laity to entertain the monks and the meal was sometimes preceded by a religious service performed before an image and accompanied by music.
I-Ching describes the musical services with devout enthusiasm. "The priests perform the ordinary service late in the afternoon or in the evening twilight. They come out of the monastery and walk three times round a stupa, offering incense and flowers. Then they all kneel down and one of them who sings well begins to chant hymns describing the virtues of the great Teacher and continues to sing ten or twenty slokas. They then return to the place in the monastery where they usually a.s.semble and, when all have sat down, a reciter mounting the lion-seat (which is near the head priest) reads a short sutra. Among the scriptures for such an occasion the "Service in three parts" is often used. This is a selection of Asvaghosha. The first part contains ten slokas of a hymn. The second part is a selection from some scripture consisting of the Buddha"s words. Then there is an additional hymn as the third part of the service, of more than ten slokas, being prayers that express the wish to bring one"s merits to maturity. After the singing the a.s.sembled Bhikshus exclaim Subhas.h.i.ta or Sadhu, that is well-said or bravo. The reader descends and the Bhikshus in order salute the lion-seat, the seats of Bodhisattvas and Arhats, and the superior of the monastery."[260]
I-Ching also tells us of the ceremonial bathing of images and prefaces his description by the remark that "the meaning of the Truths is so profound that it is a matter beyond the comprehension of vulgar minds while the ablution of the holy images is practicable for all. Though the Great Teacher has entered Nirvana yet his image exists and we should worship it with zeal as though in his presence. Those who constantly offer incense and flowers to it are enabled to purify their thoughts and those who perpetually bathe his image are enabled to overcome the sins that involve them in darkness."[261] He appears to contemplate chiefly the veneration of images of Sakyamuni but figures of Bodhisattvas were also conspicuous features in temples, as we know not only from archaeology but from the biography of Hsuan Chuang, where it is said that worshippers used to throw flowers and silk scarves at the image of Avalokita and draw auguries from the way they fell.
Monasteries were liberally decorated with statues, carvings and pictures.[262] They often comprised several courts and temples. Hsuan Chuang says that a monastery in Magadha which he calls Ti-lo-shi-ka had "four courts with three storeyed halls, lofty terraces and a succession of open pa.s.sages.... At the head of the road through the middle gate were three temples with disks on the roof and hung with small bells; the bases were surrounded by bal.u.s.trades, and doors, windows, beams, walls, and stairs were ornamented with gilt work in relief." In the three temples were large images representing the Buddha, Tara and Avalokita.
The great centres of Buddhist learning and monastic life, mentioned by both pilgrims, were Valabhi or Balabhi in Gujarat and Nalanda. The former was a district rather than a single locality and contained 100 monasteries with 6000 monks of the Sammitiya school. Nalanda was in Magadha not far from Gaya. The date of its foundation is unknown but a great temple (though apparently not the first) was built about 485 A.D.[263] Fa-Hsien mentions a village called Nala but without indicating that it was a seat of learning. Hence it is probable that the University was not then in existence or at least not celebrated.
Hsuan Chuang describes it as containing six monasteries built by various kings and surrounded by an enclosing wall in which there was only one gate. I-Ching writing later says that the establishment owned 200 villages and contained eight halls with more than 3000 monks. In the neighbourhood of the monastery were a hundred sacred spots, several marked by temples and topes. It was a resort for Buddhists from all countries and an educational as well as a religious centre.
I-Ching says that students spent two or three years there in learning and disputing after which they went to the king"s court in search of a government appointment. Successful merit was rewarded not only by rank but by grants of land. Both pilgrims mention the names of several celebrities connected with Nalanda. But the worthies of the seventh century did not attain to more than scholastic eminence. The most important literary figure of the age is Santideva of whose life nothing is known. His writings however prove that the Buddhism of this period was not a corrupt superst.i.tion, but could inspire and nourish some of the most beautiful thoughts which the creed has produced.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 230: See Vasilief, _Le Bouddhisme_, Troisieme supplement, pp. 262 ff. Koppen, _Rel. des Buddha_, I. 151. Takakusu in _J. Pali Text Society_, 1905, pp. 67-146.]
[Footnote 231: _Records_, translated by Takakusu, p. 15.]
[Footnote 232: They are mentioned in the Sarva-darsana-san?graha.]
[Footnote 233: Kern (_Indian Buddhism_, p. 126) says they rejected the authority of the Sutras altogether but gives no reference.]
[Footnote 234: See Vasilief, pp. 301 ff. and various notices in Hsuan Chuang and Watters. Also de la Vallee Poussin"s article in E.R.E.]
[Footnote 235: Hsuan Chuang informs us that when he was in Srughna he studied the Vibhasha of the Sautrantikas, but the precise significance of this term is not plain.]
[Footnote 236: Fa-Hsien"s _Travels_, chap. XVI.]
[Footnote 237: This figure is probably deduced from some artificial calculation of possible heresies like the 62 wrong views enumerated in the Brahma-Jala sutra.]
[Footnote 238: He must have lived in the fourth century as one of his works (Nanjio, 1243) was translated between 397 and 439.]
[Footnote 239: Watters, _Yuan Chw.a.n.g_, II. 221-224. Nanjio, 1237. The works of Gun?amati also are said to show a deep knowledge of the Sankhya philosophy.]
[Footnote 240: For the history of logic in India, see Vidyabhusana"s interesting work _Mediaeval School of Indian Logic_, 1909. But I cannot accept all his dates.]
[Footnote 241: Din?naga"s princ.i.p.al works are the Praman?a-samuccaya and the Nyaya-pravesa. Hsuan Chuang calls him Ch"en-na. See Watters, II. 209. See Stcherbatskoi in _Museon_, 1904, pp. 129-171 for Din?naga"s influence on the development of the Naiyayika and Vaiseshika schools.]
[Footnote 242: His personal name is said to have been P"u-ti-to-lo and his surname Ch"a-ti-li. The latter is probably a corruption of Kshatriya. Hsiang-Chih possibly represents a name beginning with Gandha, but I can neither find nor suggest any identification.]
[Footnote 243: See _B.E.F.E.O._ 1903, pp. 379 ff.]
[Footnote 244: His evil deeds are several times mentioned by Hsuan Chuang. It required a miracle to restore the Bo tree.]
[Footnote 245: See Ettinghausen, _Harshavardhana_, Appendix III.]