Hinduism and Buddhism, An Historical Sketch Volume II Part 21

[Footnote 479: Comment on Vedanta sutras, II. 2. 42.]

[Footnote 480: And, as Schrader observes, the evolutionary system of the Pancaratra is practically concerned with only one force, the Sakti, which under the name Bhuti is manifested as the Universe and as Kriya vitalizes and governs it (p. 31).]

[Footnote 481: On Sutta-nipata, 790, 792. The doctrine of the Vyuhas is expounded in the Mahabharata Santip. CCCXL. 36 ff., 70 ff.; CCCXLI.

26 ff.]

[Footnote 482: Luder's List of Brahmi inscriptions, No. 6, supposed not to be later than 200 B.C. and No. 1112 supposed to be of the first century B.C. Sankarshan?a is also mentioned in the Kaut?iliya Arthasastra, XIII. 3.]

[Footnote 483: Some Sam?hitas emphasize the distinction between the followers of the Veda and the enlightened ones who worship the Lord.

See Schrader, _Pancaratra_, p. 97.]

[Footnote 484: Syam iti Sankalpa, Ahirbudh. Sam. II. 7. In some late Upanishads (_e.g._ Naradaparivrajaka and Br?ihatsannyasa) Cakri is used as a synonym for a Pancaratra.]

[Footnote 485: The same is true of Ramanuja, who never quotes the Bhagavata Purana.]

[Footnote 486: See the quotations from the Sattvata Sam?hita in Schrader, pp. 150-154. As in the Pancaratra there is the Para above the four Vyuhas, so some late forms of Buddhism regard Vairocana as the source of four Jinas.]

[Footnote 487: The Manicheans also had groups of five deities (see Chavannes and Pelliot in _J.A._ 1913, I. pp. 333-338) but they are just as likely to have borrowed from Buddhism as _vice versa._]

[Footnote 488: See Bhattacharya, _Hindu Castes and Sects_, p. 565.]

[Footnote 489: Manu, I. 10-11, identifies him with Brahma and says, "The waters are called Narah because they are produced from Nara, and he is called Narayan?a because they were his place of movement (ayana)." The same statement occurs in the Narayan?iya.]

[Footnote 490: They are said to have been the sons of Dharma (religion or righteousness) and Ahim?sa (not-injuring). This is obvious allegory indicating that the Bhagavata religion rejected animal sacrifices. At the beginning of the Narayan?iya (Santip. cccx.x.xv.) it is said that Narayan?a the soul of the universe took birth in a quadruple form as the offspring of Dharma, _viz._ Nara, Narayan?a, Hari and Kr?ishn?a.

Nara and Narayan?a are often identified with Arjuna and Vasudeva.

_e.g._ Udyogap. xxlx. 19.]

[Footnote 491: Mahabhar. XII.]

[Footnote 492: It is an episode in Mahabhar. VI. and in its present form was doubtless elaborated apart from the rest. But we may surmise that the incident of Kr?ishn?a's removing Arjuna's scruples by a discourse appeared in the early versions of the story and also that the discourse was longer and profounder than would seem appropriate to the European reader of a tale of battles. But as the Vedanta philosophy and the doctrine of Kr?ishn?a's G.o.dhead developed, the discourse may have been amplified and made to include later theological views. Garbe in his German translation attempts to distinguish the different strata and his explanation of the inconsistencies as due to successive redactions and additions may contain some truth. But these inconsistencies in theology are common to all sectarian writings and I think the main cause for them must be sought not so much in the alteration and combination of doc.u.ments, as in a mixed and eclectic mode of thought. Even in European books of the first rank inconsistencies are not unknown and they need not cause surprise in works which were not written down but committed to memory.

A poet composing a long religious poem in this way and feeling, as many Hindus feel, both that G.o.d is everything and also that he is a very present personal help, may very well express himself differently in different parts. On the other hand the editors of such poems are undoubtedly tempted to insert in them later popular doctrines.]

[Footnote 493: The name appears not to be in common use now, but the Pasupata school is reviewed in the Sarva-darsana-san?graha (_c._ 1330).]

[Footnote 494: Sivabhagavata, see his comment on Panin?i, V. 3. 99 and V. 2. 76. The name is remarkable and suggests that the Sivaites may have imitated the Bhagavatas.]

[Footnote 495: I. xxiii. 209. The _Bibliotheca Ind._ edition reads Nakul. Aufrecht (_Bodl. MSS._) has Lakuli. The same story is found in Linga P. chap. XXIV. Lakuli is said to have had four pupils who founded four branches. Lakulin does not play an important part in modern Sivaism but is mentioned in inscriptions from the tenth till the thirteenth centuries. The Sarva-darsana-san?graha describes the Nakulisa-Pasupata system and quotes Nakulisa who is clearly the same as Lakulin. The figures on Kushan coins representing Siva as holding a club may be meant for Lakulin but also may be influenced by Greek figures of Herakles. See for Lakulin Fleet in _J.R.A.S._ 1907, pp. 419 ff. and Bhandarkar _Vaishn?avism and Saivism_, pp. 115 ff. The coins of Wema Kadphises bear the t.i.tle Mahisvara, apparently meaning worshipper of the Great Lord. Temples in south India seem to have been named after Kayarohana in the seventh century A.D. See Gopinatha Rao, _Hindu Iconography_, II. p. 19.]

[Footnote 496: Mahabhar. XII.]

[Footnote 497: Mahabhar. XII. 13702 ff. It is recited by Daksha when he recognizes the might of Siva after the unfortunate incident of his sacrifice.]

[Footnote 498: Santi-parvan, section cclx.x.xv especially line 10, 470 ff.]

[Footnote 499: See Sarva-darsana-san?graha, chap. VI. and the comments of Ramanuja and Sankara on Vedanta Sutras, II. 2. 36.]

[Footnote 500: _E.g._ San?kara-dig-vijaya. The first notice of these sects appears to be an inscription at Igatpuri in the Nasik district of about 620 A.D. recording a grant for the worship of Kapalesvara and the maintenance of Mahavratins (= Kapalikas) in his temple. But doubtless the sects are much older.]

[Footnote 501: The princ.i.p.al are, the Pasupatas, the Saivasiddhantam of southern India and the Sivaism of Kashmir.]

[Footnote 502: The Sarva-darsana-san?graha, chap. VII. gives a summary of it.]

[Footnote 503: The Pasupatas seem to attach less importance to this triad, though as they speak of Pati, Pasu and the impurities of the soul there is not much difference. In their views of causation and free will they differed slightly from the Saivas, since they held that Siva is the universal and absolute cause, the actions of individuals being effective only in so far as they are in conformity with the will of Siva. The Saiva siddhanta however holds that Siva's will is not irrespective of individual Karma, although his independence is not thereby diminished. He is like a man holding a magnet and directing the movements of needles.]

[Footnote 504: There is some difference of language and perhaps of doctrine on this point in various Sivaite works. Both Sivaites and Pancaratrins sometimes employ the language of the Advaita. But see Schrader, _Int. to Pancaratra_, pp. 91 ff.]

[Footnote 505: The five Kancukas (or six including Maya) are strictly speaking tattvas of which the Saivas enumerate 36 and are kala, niyati, raga, vidya and kala contrasted with nityatva, vyapakatva, purn?atva, sarvajnatva, sarvakartr?itva which are qualities of spirit.

See Chatterji, _Kashmir Saivism_, 75 ff., 160, where he points out that the Kancukas are essentially equivalent to Kant's "forms of perception and conception." See too Schrader, _Int. to Pancaratra_, 64, 90, 115.]

[Footnote 506: See for names and other details Schomerus, _Der Saiva-Siddhanta_, pp. 7, 23: also many articles in the _Siddhanta-Dipika._]

[Footnote 507: They are taken from the agama called Raurava. The Sivaites of Kashmir appear to have regarded the extant Siva-sutras as an agama.]

[Footnote 508: The Sanskrit text and translation of the Mr?igendra are published in the _Siddhanta-Dipika_, vol. IV. 1901 ff. It is sometimes described as an Upagama and sometimes as the Jnanapada of the Kamika agama.]

[Footnote 509: So Tirumular. Nilakant?h?a in his commentary on the Vedanta Sutras says: "I see no difference between the Veda and the Saivagama."]

[Footnote 510: Or Srikan?t?ha. The commentary is translated in _Siddhanta-Dipika_, vol. I. ff. In spite of sectarian views as to its early date, it seems to be influenced by the views and language of Ramanuja.]

CHAPTER XXVIII

SANKARA. SIVAISM IN SOUTHERN INDIA. KASHMIR. LINGaYATS

1

About the sixth century A.D. the decadence of Buddhism and the invigoration of Brahmanism were both well advanced. The Mahabharata existed as a great collection of epic and religious poetry and the older Puranas were already composed. Even at the present day authorities differ as to whether Siva or Vishn?u commands the allegiance of the majority and naturally it is hard to describe the distribution of sects in earlier times. The monuments of the Guptas (for instance the ruins at Eran) suggest that they were Vishnuites but a little later the cult of Siva becomes more prominent. The Emperor Harsha (612-648) and his family were eclectic, honouring Siva, the Sun and the Buddha, but it is not recorded that they worshipped Vishn?u.

Ban?a who lived at his court indicates[511] that Sivaism was the predominant form of worship, but also mentions Buddhists and Bhagavatas. Hsuan Chuang on the other hand holds him up as a devout Buddhist. Great Sivaite shrines in different parts of India such as the temple of Bhuvaneshwar in Orissa and the Kailas at Ellora were probably constructed in the seventh century and it is likely that in the defeat of Buddhism the worshippers of Siva played an active part.

This conflict is connected with the names of k.u.maril?a Bhat?t?a (c.

725 A.D.) and San?kara acarya (c. 800 A.D.). It clearly represents forces which cannot be restricted to the character of individuals or the span of human lives. The elements which compose Hinduism had been vigorous long before the eighth century and Buddhism, though decadent, continued to exist in India later. But probably the careers of these two men are the best record of the decisive turn of the tide. It is often said that they revived Hinduism, but however much they insisted on the authority of ancient tradition, the real result of their labours was not to re-establish the order of things which prevailed before the rise of Buddhism, but to give authority and solidity to the mixture of Brahmanism, Buddhism and popular beliefs which had grown up. k.u.maril?a is said to have been a Brahman of Bihar who was a Buddhist monk but became a worshipper of Siva and so zealous a persecutor of his former faith that he persuaded a king of his time named Sudhanvan to exterminate it from the Himalaya to Cape Comorin.

This is a monstrous exaggeration but he was doubtless a determined enemy of the Buddhists, as can be seen from his philosophical works.[512] He taught little about metaphysics or the nature of G.o.d, but he insisted on the necessity and efficacy of Vedic rites.

More important both as a thinker and an organizer was Sankara. There is some discrepancy in the traditions of his birth, but he was probably born about 788 A.D.[513] in a family of Nambuthiri Brahmans at Kaladi[514] in the Cochin state. Kaladi occupies a healthy position at some height above the sea level and the neighbourhood is now used as a sanatorium. The cocoanut trees and towered temples which mark many south Indian landscapes are absent, and paddy fields alternate with a jungle of flowering plants studded with clumps of bamboos. A broad river broken by sandbanks winds through the district and near the villages there are often beautiful avenues of great trees. Not far distant is Trichur which possesses a Vedic college and a large temple, forbidden to Europeans but like most edifices in Malabar modest in architecture. This is not the land of giant gopurams and mult.i.tudinous sculpture, but of lives dedicated to the acquisition of traditional learning and the daily performance of complicated but inconspicuous rites.

The accounts of Sankara's life are little but a collection of legends, in which, however, the following facts stand out. He was the pupil of Govinda, who was himself the pupil of Gaud?apada and this connection would be important could we be certain that this Gaud?apada was the author of the metrical treatise on philosophy bearing his name. He wrote popular hymns as well as commentaries on the Upanishads, Vedanta Sutras and Bhagavad-gita, thus recognizing both Vedic and post-Vedic literature: he resided for some time on the Narbudda and at Benares, and in the course of the journeys in which like Paul he gave vent to his activity, he founded four mat?hs or monasteries, at Sringeri, Puri, Dwaraka and Badrinath in the Himalaya. Near the latter he died before he was an old man. On his deathbed he is said to have asked forgiveness for going on pilgrimages and frequenting temples, because by so doing he had seemed to forget that G.o.d is everywhere.

It is clear that his work both as an author and organizer was considerable and permanent, and that much of his career was spent outside Dravidian lands. His greatest achievement was his exposition of the Vedanta, of which I treat elsewhere. He based his arguments unreservedly on the Vedic texts and aimed at being merely conservative, but those texts and even the ancient commentaries are obscure and inconsistent, and it was reserved for his genius to produce from them a system which in consistency, thoroughness and profundity holds the first place in Indian philosophy. His work did not consist, as he himself supposed, in harmonizing the Upanishads. In this department of interpretation he is as uncritical as other orthodox commentators, but he took the most profound thoughts of the old literature and boldly constructed with them a great edifice of speculation. Since his time the Vedanta has been regarded as the princ.i.p.al philosophy of India--a position which it does not seem to have held before--and his interpretation of it, though often contested and not suited to popular religion, still commands the respect and to some extent the adherence of most educated Hindus.

In practical religion he clearly felt, as every Indian reformer still must feel, the want of discipline and a common standard, Though the Buddhism of his day had ceased to satisfy the needs of India, he saw that its strength lay in its morality, its relative freedom from superst.i.tion and its ecclesiastical organization. Accordingly he denounced extravagant sects[515] and forbade such practices as branding. He also inst.i.tuted an order of ascetics.[516] In doing this he was not only trying to obtain for Hinduism the disciplinary advantages of the Buddhist church but also to break through the rule prescribing that a Brahman must first be a householder and only late in life devote himself entirely to religion. This rule did the Brahmans good service in insuring the continuity and respectability of their cla.s.s but it tended to drive enthusiasts to other creeds.

It does not seem that any sect can plausibly claim San?kara as founder or adherent. His real religion was Vedantism and this, though not incompatible with sectarian worship, is predisposed to be impartial.

The legend says that when summoned to his mother's deathbed, he spoke to her first of the Vedanta philosophy. But she bade him give her some consolation which she could understand. So he recited a hymn to Siva, but when the attendants of that G.o.d appeared she was frightened.

San?kara then recited a hymn to Vishn?u and when his gentler messengers came to her bedside, she gave her son her blessing and allowed them to take her willing soul.