An Examination Of the Pali Buddhistical Annals
by the Hon'ble George Turnour, Esq. of the Ceylon Civil Service.
The Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal
Vol. VI, Part II.
July-December, 1837
The Inscription fronting West.
1. Dewananpiya Pandu so raja hewan aha. "Sattawisati wasa
2. abhisitena me, iyan dhanmalipi likhapita. Rajjaka me
3. bahusu panasatasahasesu janesuayanti. Tesan yo abhipare
4. dandawe atapati, ye me kathi kin? Te rajjaka aswata abhita
5. kinmani, pawatayewun janasa janapadasa hitasukan rupadahewun;
6. anugahenewacha, sukhiyana dukhiyana janisanti; dhanmaya te nacha-
7. wiyewa disanti janan janapadan. Kin tehi attancha paratancha
8. aradhayewun? Te rajjaka parusata patacharitawe man purisanipime
9. * [The letter chh is read as r throughout; and the letter u as ru.— Ed.] rodhanani paticharisanti; tepi chakkena wiyowadisanti ye na me rajjaka
10. charanta arundhayitawe, athahi pajanwiya taye dhatiya nisijita;
11. aswatheratiwiya ta dhati, charanta me pajan sukhan parihathawe.
12. Hewan mama rajjaka kate, janapadasa pitasukhaye; yena ete abhita
13. aswatha satan awamana, kamani pawateyewuti. Etena me rajjakanan
14. abhikarawadandawe atapatiye katke, iritawyehi esakiti
15. wiyoharasamuticha siya. Dandasamatacha, awaitepicha, me awute,
16. bandhana budhanan manusanan tiritadandinan patawadhanan,tinidiwasani, me
17. Yutte dinne, nitikarikani niripayihantu, Jiwitaye tanan
18. nasantanwa niripayantu: danan dahantu: pahitakan rupawapanwa karontu.
19. Irichime hewan nira dhasipi karipiparatan aradhayewapi: janasacha
20. wadhati: wiwidhadanmacharane; sayame danasan wibhagoti."
[By comparing this version with that published in July, it will be seen to what extent the license of altering letters has been exercised. The author has however since relinquished the change of the Raja's name, in consequence of his happy discovery of Piyadasi's identity.— Ed.]
-- Further notes on the inscriptions on the columns at Delhi, Allahabad, Betiah, &c., by the Hon'ble George Turnour, Esq. of the Ceylon Civil Service, The Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, Vol. VI, Part II, Jul-Dec, 1837
The design of my last article [I.—An examination of the Pali Buddhistical Annals, No. 2, by the Hon'ble George Turnour, Esq. Ceylon Civil Service, P. 713, Sept. 1837; III.—An examination of the Pali Buddhistical Annals, No. 3, by the Hon'ble George Turnour, Esq. Ceylon Civil Service, P. 686, Aug. 1838; V.—An Examination of the Pali Buddhistical Annals, No. 3, by the Hon'ble George Turnour, Esq. Ceylon Civil Service, P. 789, Sept. 1838] was to prove, that the chronological authenticity of the Buddhistical records was intentionally deranged or destroyed at the period of Sakya's advent. In entering now upon the examination of that portion of the Pali annals, which professes to contain the genealogy of the royal dynasties of India, from the last regeneration of the world to the manifestation of Gotamo I have to adduce in my own case another instance, to be added to the many already on record, of the erroneous and exaggerated estimates, into which orientalists may be betrayed in their researches, when they rely on the information furnished by Indian pandits, without personally analyzing the authorities, from which that information is alleged to be obtained. I should, however, be doing the Buddhist priesthood of the present day in Ceylon very great injustice, if I did not at the same time avow, that the too favorable expectations in which I have indulged, as to the continuity, after having fully convinced myself of the chronological extravagancies, of the Pali genealogical annals anterior to the sixth century before the birth of Christ, have in no degree been produced by wilful misrepresentations on their part. It has been already noticed* [Introduction to the Mahawanso.] by me elsewhere, that the study of the Pali language is confined, among the natives of Ceylon, almost entirely to the most learned among the priesthood, and is prosecuted solely for the purpose of acquiring a higher order of qualification, for their sacerdotal functions, than those priests possess, who can consult only the vernacular versions of their scriptures. Their attention, therefore, is principally devoted to the examination of the doctrinal and religious questions contained in their sacred books; and that study is moreover conducted in a spirit of implicit faith and religious reverence, which effectually excludes searching scrutiny, and is almost equally unfavorable to impartial criticism. The tone of confidence with which my native coadjutors sought in the Pitakattayan [Tripitaka] for the several 'resolves' or 'predictions' of Buddho which are alluded to in a former paper*, [Journal for September, 1837.] and the frankness of the surprise they evinced, when they found that none of those 'resolves' were contained in the Pitakattayan, and only some of them in the Atthakatha, preclude the possibility of my entertaining any suspicion of wilful deception being practised. Confiding in their account of the historical merits of Buddhaghoso's commentaries, which appeared to me to be corroborated by the frequency of the reference made in the Tika of the Mahawanso to those Atthakatha, for details not afforded in the Tika, I had impressed myself with the persuasion, that the Atthakatha thus referred to were Buddhaghos's Pali commentaries. Great, as may be readily imagined, was our mutual disappointment, when after a diligent search, persevered in by the priests, with a zeal proportioned to the interest they took in the inquiry, we were compelled to admit the conviction that Buddhaghoso in translating the Sihala (Singhalese) Atthakatha into Pali, did not preserve the Indian genealogies in a connected and continuous form. He is found to have extracted only such detached parts of them, as were useful for the illustration of those passages of the Pitakattayan, on which, in the course of his compilation, he might be commenting. He himself says in his Atthakatha on the Dighanikayo, [Vide Journal of July, 1837.] "for the purpose of illustrating this commentary, availing myself of the Atthakatha, which was in the first instance authenticated by the five hundred Arahanta at the first convocation, as well as subsequently at the succeeding convocations, and which were thereafter brought (from Magadha) to Sihala by the sanctified Mahindo, and for the benefit of the inhabitants of Sihala were transposed into the Sihala language, from thence I translated the Sihala version into the delightful (classical) language, according to the rules of that (the Pali) language, which is free from all imperfections; omitting only the frequent repetition of the same explanations, but at the same time, without rejecting the tenets of the theros resident at the Mahawiharo (at Anuradhapura), who were like unto luminaries to the generation of theros and the most accomplished discriminators (of the true doctrines)." All, therefore, of these genealogies, excluded from his Atthakatha, which are now found only in the Tika of the Mahawanso, or in the Dipawanso, as well as much more perhaps, illustrative of the ancient history of India, which the compilers of these two Ceylonese historical works did not consider worth preserving, Buddhaghoso must have rejected from his commentaries, to which he gave almost exclusively the character of a religious work.
My Buddhist coadjutors are consequently now reluctantly brought to admit, that the Mahawanso, with its Tika, and Dipawanso are the only Pali records extant in Ceylon, which profess to contain the Indian genealogies from the creation to the advent of Sakya; and that even those records do not furnish the genealogies in a continuous form. And, now that my mind is divested of the bias which had been created by their previous representations, and which led me to attach great importance to the historical portions of Buddhaghoso's Atthakatha I cannot but take blame to myself for having even for a time allowed that impression to be made on me. [/size][/b]
-- An Analysis of the Dipawanso. An examination of the Pali Buddhistical Annals, No. 4., by the Honorable George Turnour, Esq., Ceylon Civil Service, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, November, 1838 (p. 930).
At a period when there is a concurrence of evidence, adduced from various quarters, all tending to establish the historical authenticity of that portion of the Buddhistical annals which is subsequent to the advent of Sakya, or Gotamo Buddho, an attempt to fix the date at which, and to ascertain the parties by whom, some of the most important of those annals were compiled, cannot be considered ill-timed; and in reference to the character of the notices that have recently appeared in the Bengal Asiatic Journal, I would wish to believe that discussions in its pages, having for their object the establishment of those points, would not be deemed out of place.
As far as our information extends at present, supported by an obvious probability arising out of the sacred character, and the design of those works, which renders the inference almost a matter of certainty, the most valuable and authentic, as well as the most ancient, Buddhistical records extant are those which may be termed the Buddhistical scriptures and their ancient commentaries, called, respectively, in the Pali or Maghada language, the Pitakattayan and the Atthakatha.
Tripiṭaka, meaning "Triple Basket", is the traditional term for ancient collections of Buddhist sacred scriptures.
The Pāli Canon maintained by the Theravāda tradition in Southeast Asia, the Chinese Buddhist Canon maintained by the East Asian Buddhist tradition, and the Tibetan Buddhist Canon maintained by the Tibetan Buddhist tradition are some of the most important Tripiṭaka in contemporary Buddhist world.
Tripiṭaka has become a term used for many schools' collections, although their general divisions do not match a strict division into three piṭakas....
Tripiṭaka means "Three Baskets". … The "three baskets" were originally the receptacles of the palm-leaf manuscripts on which were preserved the collections of texts of the Suttas, the Vinaya, and the Abhidhamma, the three divisions that constitute the Buddhist Canons....
The Tripiṭaka is composed of three main categories of texts that collectively constitute the Buddhist canon: the Sutra Piṭaka, the Vinaya Piṭaka, and the Abhidhamma Piṭaka...
The Vinaya Piṭaka appears to have grown gradually as a commentary and justification of the monastic code (Prātimokṣa), which presupposes a transition from a community of wandering mendicants (the Sūtra Piṭaka period) to a more sedentary monastic community (the Vinaya Piṭaka period). The Vinaya focuses on the rules and regulations, or the morals and ethics, of monastic life that range from dress code and dietary rules to prohibitions of certain personal conducts.
Sutras were the doctrinal teachings in aphoristic or narrative format.…
Pali Canon
The Pāli Canon is the complete Tripiṭaka set maintained by the Theravāda tradition is written and preserved in Pali.
The dating of the Tripiṭaka is unclear….
The Theravada chronicle called the Dipavamsa states that during the reign of Valagamba of Anuradhapura (29–17 BCE) the monks who had previously remembered the Tipiṭaka and its commentary orally now wrote them down in books, because of the threat posed by famine and war. The Mahavamsa also refers briefly to the writing down of the canon and the commentaries at this time…
Each Buddhist sub-tradition had its own Tripiṭaka for its monasteries, written by its sangha,…
Chinese Buddhist Canon
An organised collection of Buddhist texts began to emerge in the 6th century CE, based on the structure of early bibliographies of Buddhist texts. However, it was the 'Kaiyuan Era Catalogue' by Zhisheng in 730 that provided the lasting structure. Zhisheng introduced the basic six-fold division with sutra, vinaya, and abhidharma belonging to Mahāyāna, Pratyekabuddhayana and Sravakayana. It is likely that Zhisheng's catalogue proved decisive because it was used to reconstruct the Canon after the persecutions of 845 CE…
Tibetan Buddhist Canon
The Tibetan Buddhist canon is a collection of sacred texts recognized by various sects of Tibetan Buddhism. In addition to sutrayana texts, the Tibetan canon includes tantric texts. The Tibetan Canon underwent a final compilation in the 14th century by Buton Rinchen Drub.
The Tibetan Canon has its own scheme which divided texts into two broad categories:
• Kangyur (Wylie: bka'-'gyur) or "Translated Words or Vacana", consists of works supposed to have been said by the Buddha himself. All texts presumably have a Sanskrit original, although in many cases the Tibetan text was translated from Chinese from Chinese Canon, Pali from Pali Canon or other languages.
• Tengyur (Wylie: bstan-'gyur) or "Translated Treatises or Shastras", is the section to which were assigned commentaries, treatises and abhidharma works (both Mahayana and non-Mahayana). The Tengyur contains 3626 texts in 224 Volumes.
-- Tripiṭaka, by Wikipedia
To Mr. Hodgson, the resident in Nepal, the merit is due of having brought into notice, and under direct European cognizance, the Sanskrit and Tibetan versions of these voluminous works. To this important service he has superadded further claims on the gratitude of the literary world, by the publication of various essays, illustrative of the scope and tendency of the creed, of which Sakya was the author — and those annals the recorded repositories. Fortunately for the interests of oriental research, at that particular juncture, the Asiatic Society received the assistance of Mr. Csoma Korosi in analyzing the Tibetan version also of those works; whose labors being of a more analytic and less speculative character, (although exerted in the examination of the Tibetan which appears to be translated from the Sanskrit version) are better adapted than those of Mr. Hodgson to aid the prosecution of the particular description of investigation to which I am about to apply myself.
In the recently published 20th Volume of the Asiatic Researches is contained Mr. Csoma Korosi's analysis of the first portion of the Kah-gyur, which is readily recognized, and indeed is admitted to be, the Tibetan name for the Pitakattayan; from which analysis I extract his introductory remarks, as they are explanatory of the character of that compilation collectively, while the analysis itself is confined to the Dulva portion of the Kah-gyur.
"The great compilation of the Tibetan Sacred Books, in one hundred volumes, is styled Ka-gyur or vulgarly Kan-gyur, ([x], bkah-hgyur) i.e. 'translation of commandment,' on account of their being translated from the Sanskrit, or from the ancient Indian language ([x], rgya gar skad), by which may be understood the Pracrita or dialect of Magadha, the principal seat of the Buddhist faith in India at the period.
"These books contain the doctrine of Shakya, a Buddha, who is supposed by the generality of Tibetan authors to have lived about one thousand years before the beginning of the Christian era. They were compiled at three different times, in three different places, in ancient India. First, immediately after the death of Shakya, afterwards in the time of Asoka a celebrated king, whose residence was at Pataliputra, one hundred and ten years after the decease of Shakya. And lastly, in the time of Kaniska, a king in the north of India, upwards of four hundred years from Shakya; when his followers had separated themselves into eighteen sects, under four principal divisions, of which the names both Sanskrit and Tibetan, are recorded*. [See p. 25 in the life of Shakya, in the Ka-gyur collection.]
"The first compilers were three individuals of his (Shakya's) principal disciples. 'Upali,' (in Tib. 'Nye-var-hkhor,') compiled the 'Vinaya Sutram,' (Tib. Dulvedo,) 'Ananda' (Tib. 'Kun-dgavo,') the 'Sutrantah,' (Tib. the Do class;) and 'Kashyapa,' (Tib. 'Hot-srung,') the 'Prajnyaparamita,' (Tib. Sher-chhin.) These several works were imported into Tibet, and translated there between the seventh and thirteenth centuries of our era, but mostly in the ninth. The edition of the Ka-gyur in the Asiatic Society's possession appears to have been printed with the very wooden types that are mentioned as having been prepared in 1731 or the last century; and which are still in continual use, at Snar-thang, a large building or monastery, not far from Teshi-lhun-po ([x]).
"The Ka-gyur collection comprises the seven following great divisions, which are in fact distinct works.I. Dulva [x], (Sans. Vinaya) or, 'Discipline', in 13 volumes.
II. Sher-chhin [x], (Sans. Prajnyaramita) or, 'Transcendental wisdom,' in 21 volumes.
III. Phal-chhen [x], (Sans. Buddha-vata sanga) or, 'Bauddha community,' in 6 volumes.
IV. D,kon-seks [x], (Sans. Ratnakuta) or, 'Gems heaped up,' in 6 vols.
V. Do-de [x] (Sans. Sutranta) 'Aphorisms,' or Tracts, in 30 vols.
VI. Nyang-das [x], (Sans. Nirvana) 'Deliverance from pain,' in 2 vols.
VII. Gyut [x], (Sans. Tantra) 'Mystical Doctrine, Charms,' in 22 vols. forming altogether exactly one hundred volumes.
"The whole Ka-gyur collection is very frequently alluded to under the name, De-not-sum [x], in Sanskrit Tripitakah, the 'free vessels or repositories,' comprehending under this appellation. 1st. The Dulva. 2nd. The Do, with the Phal-chhen, Kon-seks, Nyang-das and the Gyut. 3rd. The Sherchhin, with all its divisions or abridgments. This triple division is expressed by these names: 1. Dulva, (Sans. Vinaya.) 2. Do, (Sans. Sutra.) 3. Chhos-non-pa [x], (Sans. Abhidharmah.) This last is expressed in Tibetan also by Non-pa-dsot [x], by Yum [x], and by Mamo [x]. It is the common or vulgar opinion that the Dulva is a cure against cupidity or lust, the Do, against iracundy or passion; and the Chhos-non-pa, against ignorance."
Enough of identity, I conceive, is demonstrated in this preparatory extract to remove all doubt as to the Tibetan version (whether translated from the Sanskrit or "the Pracrit, the dialect of Magadha)," and the Pali or Maghadha version extant in Ceylon being one and the same compilation; designed to illustrate, as well the same sacred history in all its details, as the same religious creed; whatever slight discrepancies may be found to exist between the two in minor points.
Texts and translations
The climate of Theravada countries is not conducive to the survival of manuscripts. Apart from brief quotations in inscriptions and a two-page fragment from the eighth or ninth century found in Nepal, the oldest known manuscripts are from late in the fifteenth century, and there is not very much from before the eighteenth.
The first complete printed edition of the Canon was published in Burma in 1900, in 38 volumes....
Comparison with other Buddhist canons
The other two main canons in use at the present day are the Tibetan Kangyur and the Chinese Buddhist Canon. The former is in about a hundred volumes and includes versions of the Vinaya Pitaka and the Dhammapada (the latter confusingly called Udanavarga) and of parts of some other books. The standard modern edition of the latter is the Taisho published in Japan, which is in a hundred much larger volumes. It includes both canonical and non-canonical (including Chinese and Japanese) literature and its arrangement does not clearly distinguish the two. It includes versions of the Vinaya Pitaka, the first four nikayas, the Dhammapada, the Itivuttaka and the Milindapanha and of parts of some other books. These Chinese and Tibetan versions are not usually translations of the Pali and differ from it to varying extents, but are recognizably the "same" works. On the other hand, the Chinese abhidharma books are different works from the Pali Abhidhamma Pitaka, though they follow a common methodology.
Looking at things from the other side, the bulk of the Chinese and Tibetan canons consists of Mahayana sutras and tantras, which, apart from a few tantras, have no equivalent in the Pali Canon.
-- Tripitaka, by New world Encyclopedia
Beyond the suggestion of this identity, certifying at the same time that the Pitakattayan and the Atthakatha extant in Ceylon are composed in the Pali language, and that they are identical with the Pali versions of these works in the Burmese empire, it is not my intention to advance a single assertion; or to reason on the assumption that any one point required to be established has been already either proved or admitted to be such elsewhere. On the evidences and authorities I have to adduce, the decision will be allowed to rest, as to whether the Ceylon Pali version of the Pitakattayan be, what it purports to be, the one first authenticated in the year Sakya died, (B.C. 543;) and as to whether the Atthakatha, also represented to have been first propounded on the same occasion, and ultimately (after various other authentications) recompiled in this island in the Pali language, by Buddhaghoso, between A.D. 410, and A.D. 432, were composed under the circumstances, and at the epochs, severally, alleged. The importance however of satisfactorily establishing these questions, I wish neither to disguise nor underrate. For on the extent of their authenticity must necessarily depend the degree of reliance to be placed as to the correctness of the mass of historical matter those compilations are found to contain. Although the contemporaneous narrative of historical events furnished in the Atthakatha are comprised between the years B.C. 543 and B.C. 307, (specimens of which, extracted from a Tika [commentary], I have been able to adduce in the introduction to the Mahawanso) those notices are occasionally accompanied by references to anterior occurrences, which in the absence of other data for the illustration of the ancient history of India, acquire an adventitious value far exceeding their intrinsic merits.
Limited reliable information is available about the life of Buddhaghosa. Three primary sources of information exist: short prologues and epilogues attached to Buddhaghosa's works; details of his life recorded in the Mahavamsa, a Sri Lankan chronicle; and a later biographical work called the Buddhaghosuppatti....
The biographical excerpts attached to works attributed to Buddhaghosa reveal relatively few details of his life,... Largely identical in form, these short excerpts describe Buddhaghosa as having come to Sri Lanka from India and settled in Anuradhapura. Besides this information, they provide only short lists of teachers, supporters, and associates of Buddhaghosa, whose names are not generally to be found elsewhere for comparison.
The Mahavamsa records that Buddhaghosa was born into a Brahmin family in the kingdom of Magadha. He is said to have been born near Bodh Gaya, and to have been a master of the Vedas, traveling through India engaging in philosophical debates. Only upon encountering a Buddhist monk named Revata was Buddhaghosa bested in debate, first being defeated in a dispute over the meaning of a Vedic doctrine and then being confounded by the presentation of a teaching from the Abhidhamma. Impressed, Buddhaghosa became a bhikkhu (Buddhist monk) and undertook the study of the Tipiṭaka and its commentaries. On finding a text for which the commentary had been lost in India, Buddhaghosa determined to travel to Sri Lanka to study a Sinhala commentary that was believed to have been preserved.
In Sri Lanka, Buddhaghosa began to study what was apparently a very large volume of Sinhala commentarial texts that had been assembled and preserved by the monks of the Anuradhapura Maha Viharaya. Buddhaghosa sought permission to synthesize the assembled Sinhala-language commentaries into a comprehensive single commentary composed in Pali. Traditional accounts hold that the elder monks sought to first test Buddhaghosa's knowledge by assigning him the task of elaborating the doctrine regarding two verses of the suttas; Buddhaghosa replied by composing the Visuddhimagga. His abilities were further tested when deities intervened and hid the text of his book, twice forcing him to recreate it from scratch. When the three texts were found to completely summarize all of the Tipiṭaka and match in every respect, the monks acceded to his request and provided Buddhaghosa with the full body of their commentaries.
Buddhaghosa went on to write commentaries on most of the other major books of the Pali Canon, with his works becoming the definitive Theravadin interpretation of the scriptures. Having synthesized or translated the whole of the Sinhala commentary preserved at the Anuradhapura Maha Viharaya, Buddhaghosa reportedly returned to India, making a pilgrimage to Bodh Gaya to pay his respects to the Bodhi Tree.
The details of the Mahavamsa account cannot readily be verified; while it is generally regarded by Western scholars as having been embellished with legendary events (such as the hiding of Buddhaghosa's text by the gods), in the absence of contradictory evidence it is assumed to be generally accurate.SHIFTING THE BURDEN OF PROOF
The burden of proof is always on the person making an assertion or proposition. Shifting the burden of proof, a special case of argumentum ad ignorantium, is the fallacy of putting the burden of proof on the person who denies or questions the assertion being made. The source of the fallacy is the assumption that something is true unless proven otherwise.
-- The Burden of Proof, Philosophy of Religion, by qcc.cuny.edu
While the Mahavamsa claims that Buddhaghosa was born in northern India near Bodh Gaya, the epilogues to his commentaries make reference to only one location in India as being a place of at least temporary residence: Kanci in southern India....
The Buddhaghosuppatti, a later biographical text, is generally regarded by Western scholars as being legend rather than history. It adds to the Mahavamsa tale certain details, such as the identity of Buddhaghosa's parents and his village, as well as several dramatic episodes, such as the conversion of Buddhaghosa's father and Buddhaghosa's role in deciding a legal case. It also explains the eventual loss of the Sinhala originals that Buddhaghosa worked from in creating his Pali commentaries by claiming that Buddhaghosa collected and burnt the original manuscripts once his work was completed.
-- Buddhaghosa, by Wikipedia
I had contemplated the idea at one period of attempting the analysis of the entire Pitakattayan, aided in the undertaking by the able assistance afforded to me by the Buddhist priests, who are my constant coadjutors in my Pali researches; but I soon found that, independently of my undertaking a task for the efficient performance of which I did not possess sufficient leisure, no analysis would successfully develope the contents of that work, unless accompanied by annotations and explanations of a magnitude utterly inadmissible in any periodical. The only other form in which, short of a translation in extenso, that compilation could be faithfully illustrated, would have been a compendium, which however has been already most ably executed by a learned Buddhist priest, and as ably translated into English, by the best Singhalese scholar in this island, Mr. Armour*. [We regret we have not yet found space for the insertion of Mr. Armour's sketch, which will be found in the Ceylon Almanac for 1835. — Ed.] Under these circumstances, the course I purpose pursuing is merely to array the evidence on which the claim of these sacred works to authenticity is based — to show the extent and the subdivisions of the authentic version of the Pitakattayan, — to define the dates at which the three great convocations were held in India — as well as the date at which the Pitakattayan and the Atthakatha were first reduced to writing in Ceylon, — and lastly, to fix the epoch at which the present version of the Pali Atthakatha was completed by Buddhaghoso in this island. When these points, together with certain intermediate links have been examined, I shall proceed then, by extracts from, and comments on, both the Pitakattayan and the Attakatha [Tipitaka commentaries] illustrate those portions of these works which are purely of an historical character, commencing with the genealogy of the kings of India. The ensuing extracts will show that Mr. Armour's translated essay on Buddhism, as derived from the Wisuddhimuggo, a compendium formed by Buddhaghoso himself, presents an abstract of the doctrinal and metaphysical parts of that creed, which, as being the work of that last great commentator on the Buddhistical Scriptures, acquires an authority and authenticity, which no compendium, exclusively formed by any orientalist of a different faith, and more modern times, can have any claim to.
Aṭṭhakathā (Pali for explanation, commentary) refers to Pali-language Theravadin Buddhist commentaries to the canonical Theravadin Tipitaka. These commentaries give the traditional interpretations of the scriptures. The major commentaries were based on earlier ones, now lost, in Prakrit and Sinhala, which were written down at the same time as the Canon, in the last century BCE...
Below is a listing of fourth- or fifth-century CE commentator Buddhaghosa's fourteen alleged commentaries (Pāli: atthakatha) on the Pāli Tipitaka ....
Only the Visuddhimagga and the commentaries on the first four nikayas are accepted by a consensus of scholars as Buddhaghosa's.
-- Atthakatha, by Wikipedia
Before I proceed to my extracts a few preliminary remarks are necessary for the adaptation of dates to the events described.
The Buddhistical era is dated from the day of Sakya's death, which having occurred on the full moon of the month of Wesakho, 2,480 years ago, the epoch, therefore, falls to the full moon of that month in B.C. 543.
In that year, the first convocation was held at Rajagoha (the modern Rajmahal* [This is the usual supposition but, Rajagriha of Behar is undoubtedly the right place. — Ed.]), then the capital of the Magadha monarch Ajatasatto, in the eighth year of his reign.
The second convocation was held a century afterwards in B.C. 443 , at Wesali (the modern Allahabad) then the capital of the Magadha monarch Kalasoko, and in the tenth year of his reign.
The third convocation was held 134 years after the second one, in B.C. 309 at Patilipura (the ancient Palibothra, and modern Patna), then the capital of the Indian empire, in the 17th year of the reign of Asoko or Dhammasoko.
At the first of these convocations the orthodox version of the Pitakattayan was defined and authenticated, as will be seen by the ensuing quotations, with a degree of precision which fixed even the number of syllables of which it should consist. The commentaries made or delivered on that occasion, acquired the designation of the Atthakatha.
At the second and third convocations certain schismatic proceedings among the Buddhistical priesthood were suppressed, and the above authentic version of the Pitakattayan was rehearsed and reaffirmed on each occasion; and additional Atthakatha were delivered, narrative of the history of Buddhism for the periods that had preceded each of those two CONVOCATIONS.
It is maintained, and the Buddhists in Ceylon implicitly believe, that the whole of the Pitakattayan and Atthakatha were preserved through this long line of the disciples of Sakya exclusively by memorial inspiration, without the aid of inscribed record.
In B.C. 306 Mahindo, the son of emperor Dhammasoko also recognized to be one of those inspired disciples, visited Ceylon, and established Buddhism in it.
The particulars of this interesting historical event will be found in the Mahawanso. In this place I shall only observe that the Pitakattayan in Pali, and the Atthakatha in Singhalese are represented to have been orally promulgated by Mahindo, and orally perpetuated by the priesthood he founded in Ceylon, till the reign of the Ceylonese monarch Wattaganini, who reigned from B.C. 104 to B.C. 76; when they are stated to have been recorded in books for the first time. The event is thus mentioned in the thirty-third chapter of the Mahawanso. I give the Pali passage also, to show, how utterly impossible it is to make it approximate to any rendering, which would admit of the only construction which a reasonable person would wish to place on it, viz.: that these sacred records were then for the first time not recorded, but rendered accessible to the uninitiated.
Pitakattayapalincha, tassa Atthakathancha tan,
Mukhapathira anesur pubbe bhikkhu mahamati,
Hanin diswara Sattanan tada bhikkhu samagata,
Chiratthittathan dhammassa potthakesu likhapayun.
The profoundly wise (inspired) priests had theretofore orally perpetuated the text of the Pitakattayan and their Atthakatha. At this period, these priests, foreseeing the perdition of the people (from the perversions of the true doctrines) assembled; and in order that religion might endure for ages, recorded the same in books.
In this form (that is to say, the Pitakattayan in Pali, and Atthakatha in Singhalese), the Buddhistical scriptures were preserved in Ceylon till the reign of the Ceylonese monarch Mahanamo, between A.D. 410 and 432, when Buddhaghoso of Magadha visited Ceylon, revised the Atthakatha and translated them into Pali. This is an occurrence, as I have noticed above, of considerable importance to the questions under consideration. I am told that in his revised Atthakatha will be found notices explanatory of his personal history. I have not yet come upon those passages, and even if I had met with them, I should prefer the evidence of a third party to an autobiography, especially when I can quote from such an historian as the author of the Mahawanso, who flourished between the years A.D. 459 and A.D. 477, being at the most fifty years only after the visit of Buddhaghoso to Ceylon. The following extract is from the 37th chapter [of the Mahawanso].
"A brahman youth, born in the neighbourhood of the great bo-tree (in Magadha), accomplished in the 'wijja' and 'sippa;' who had achieved the knowledge of the three wedos, and possessed great aptitude in attaining acquirements; indefatigable as a schismatic disputant, and himself a schismatic wanderer over Jambudipo, established himself, in the character of a disputant, in a certain wiharo, and was in the habit of rehearsing, by night and by day, with clasped hands, a discourse which he had learned, perfect in all its component parts, and sustained throughout in the same lofty strain. A certain Mahathero, named Rewato, becoming acquainted with him there, and saying (to himself), 'This individual is a person of profound knowledge; it will be worthy (of me) to convert him,' inquired, 'who is this who is braying like an ass?' (The brahman) replied to him, 'Thou canst define, then, the meaning conveyed in the braying of asses.' On (the thero) rejoining, 'I can define it;' he (the brahman) exhibited the extent of the knowledge he possessed. (The thero) criticised each of his propositions, and pointed out in what respect they were fallacious. He who had been thus refuted, said, 'Well then, descend to thy own creed;' and he propounded to him a passage from the 'Abhidhammo' (of the Pitakattayan). He (the brahman) could not divine the signification of that (passage); and inquired, 'whose manto is this?' 'It is Buddho's manto.' On his exclaiming 'Impart it to me;' (the thero) replied, 'enter the sacerdotal order.' He who was desirous of acquiring the knowledge of the Pitakattayan, subsequently coming to this conviction: 'This is the sole road (to salvation);' became a convert to that faith. As he was as profound in his (ghoso) eloquence as Buddho himself, they conferred on him the appellation of Buddhoghoso (the voice of Buddho); and throughout the world he became as renowned as Buddho. Having there (in Jambudipo) composed an original work called 'Nanodagan;' he at the same time wrote the chapter called 'Atthasalini,' on the Dhammasangini (one of the commentaries on the Abhidhammo).
"Rewato thero then observing that he was desirous of undertaking the compilation of a 'Parittatthakathan' (a general commentary on the Pitakattayan) thus addressed him: 'The text alone (of the Pitakattayan) has been preserved in this land: the Atthakatha are not extant here; nor is there any version to be found of the "wada" (schisms) complete. The Singhalese Atthakatha are genuine. They were composed in the Singhalese language by the inspired and profoundly wise Mahindo; the discourses of Buddho, authenticated at the three convocations, and the dissertations and arguments of Sariputto and others having been previously consulted (by him); and they are extant among the Singhalese. Repairing thither, and studying the same, translate (them) according to the rules of the grammar of the Magadhas. It will be an act conducive to the welfare of the whole world.'
"Having been thus advised, this eminently wise personage, rejoicing thereat, departed from thence, and visited this island, in the reign of this monarch (Mahanamo). On reaching the Mahawiharo (at Anuradhapura) he entered the Mahapadhano hall, the most splendid of the apartments in the wiharo, and listened to the Singhalese Atthakatha, and the Therawada, from beginning to the end, propounded by the three Sanghapali; and became thoroughly convinced that they conveyed the true meaning of the doctrines of the lord of Dhammo. Thereupon, paying reverential respect to the priesthood, he thus petitioned: 'I am desirous of translating the Atthakatha; give me access to all your books.' The priesthood, for the purpose of testing his qualifications, gave only two gatha, saying: 'hence prove thy qualification; having satisfied ourselves on this point, we will then let thee have all the books.' From these (taking these gatha for his text, and consulting the Pitakattayan together with the Atthakatha, and condensing them into an abridged form), he composed the compendium called the Wisuddhimaggo. Thereupon having assembled the priesthood who had acquired a thorough knowledge of the doctrines of Buddho, at the bo-tree, he commenced to read out (the work he had composed). The dewatas, in order that they might make his Buddhaghoso's gifts of wisdom celebrated among men, rendered that book invisible. He, however, for a second and third time recomposed it. When he was in the act of producing his book for the third time, for the purpose of propounding it, the dewatas restored the other two copies also. The (assembled) priests then read out the three books simultaneously. In those three versions, neither in a verse, in a signification, nor in a single misplacement by transpositions; nay, even in the thero controversies, and in the text (of the Pitakattayan) was there in the measure of verse, or in the letter of a word, the slightest variation. Therefore the priesthood rejoicing, again and again fervently shouted forth, saying, 'most assuredly this is Metteyyo (Buddho) himself;' and made over to him the books in which the pitakattayan were recorded, together with their Atthakatha. Taking up his residence in the secluded Ganthakaro wiharo, at Anuradhapura, he translated, according to the grammatical rules of the Magadhi, which is the root of all languages, the whole of the Singhalese Atthakatha (into Pali). This proved an achievement of the utmost consequence to all the languages spoken by the human race.
"All the theros and achariyas held this compilation in the same estimation as the text (of the Pitakaytayan). Thereafter, the objects of his mission having, been fulfilled, he returned to Jambudipo, to worship at the bo-tree (at Uruweliya in Magadha)."
The foregoing remarks, sustained by the ensuing translation of the account of the first convocation, show that the following discrepancies exist between the Tibetan version of the Kah-gyur and the Pali version of the Pitakattayan extant in Ceylon.
1stly, in making the age in which Sakya lived about one thousand years before the Christian era, instead of its being comprised between B.C. 588 and 543.
2ndly, in the omission of the second convocation.
3rdly, in placing the third convocation, which was held in the reign of Asoko, in the 110th instead of the 234th year after the death of Sakya.
4thly, in stating that the next and last revision of the Pitakattayan took place only five hundred, instead of nearly a thousand, years after the death of Sakya. In this instance, however, from the absence of names, there is no means of ascertaining whether the revision in question, applies to that of Buddhaghoso, or to that of any other individual. From the date assigned, as well as mention being made of Kaniska, the author of that revision, may possibly be Nagarjuna, the Nagaseno of Pali annals, whose history I have touched upon in a former article. The foregoing extract from the Mahawanso does certainly state that Buddhaghoso returned to India, and that the Atthakatha were not extant then, at the time he departed to Ceylon, but I have no where met with any intimation of the propagation of his version in India; while in the "Essai sur le Pali par Messrs. Burnouf et Lassen," it is shown that Buddhaghoso did visit the eastern peninsula, taking his compilation with him.
5thly, in the Tibetan version of the Kah-gyur consisting of one hundred volumes* [These volumes contain much less than might be thought by those who had not seen them, being printed in a very large type. — Ed.], while the Pali version of the Pitakattayan does not exceed 4,500 leaves, which would constitute seven or eight volumes of ordinary size (though bound up in Ceylon in various forms for convenience of reference), the subdivisions of which are hereafter given. This difference of bulk would be readily accounted for, if Mr. Korosi had explained whether the accounts of the Convocations he gives were found in the text of the Kah-gyur which he was analyzing, or in a separate commentary. If they were found in the text, it necessarily follows that the commentaries (which alone could contain an account of Convocations held subsequent to the death of Sakya) must have become blended with the entire version of the Tibetan text, in the same manner that the "Jatakan" division of the Pali version in Ceylon, has become blended with the Atthakatha appertaining to it. By this blending together of the text and the commentary of the Jatakan, that section has been swelled into three books of nine hundred leaves, instead of constituting the fourth part of one book, comprised in perhaps about one hundred leaves.
I have not yet obtained any accurate table of the contents of the whole series of Buddhaghoso's Atthakatha. They are very voluminous, as may be readily imagined, when it is considered that they furnish both a commentary and a glossary for the entire Pitakattayan.
The Atthakatha on the whole of the Winayopitako is called the Samantapasadika. It commences with an account of the three convocations. For the Sattapitako there is a separate Atthakatha for each section of it. The Atthakatha on the Dighanikayo is called "Sumangala Wilasini." It opens with a description of the first convocation only, and then refers to the above mentioned Samantapasadika, for an account of the other two convocations. As the Sumangala Wilasini, however, gives the most detailed account of the first convocation, I have selected it for translation, in preference to the description given in the Samantapasadika, to which I must have recourse for the accounts of the second and third convocations. This circumstance will explain why an occasional reference is made in the ensuing translation, to a previous account of the first convocation.
The histories of the other two convocations which I reserve for a future communication, are less detailed, but embody more data of an historical character.