p. 239

            The position  of the  Lalitavistara-sutra  in its
        relation to Pali Buddhism has been variously  judged.
        The work  was described  by Rhys  Davids  some  fifty
        years ago as, "a poem of unknown date and authorship,
        but probably  composed in Nepal, and by some Buddhist
        poet who lived  sometime  between  six hundred  and a
        thousand  years  after  the birth  of the Buddha."(1)
        This  illustrates  the  extraordinary  misconceptions
        then prevailing, as well as the attitude  of the Pali
        school, which sought to reconstruct the early history
        of  Buddhism   from  Pali  sources  alone.   But  the
        Lalitavistara  is not a poem, there is no probability
        that  it  was  composed  in  Nepal, and  it  contains
        passages as old as anything in Pali.

            It was against this attitude of the Pali scholars
        that the late L.  de La Vallee Poussin  protested  in
        his Buddhisme, etudes et materiaux (pp. 2-4) where he
        wrote:

            "Pre-occupied  in  establishing  the  history  of
        Buddhism  and in starting  by fixing  its origin, the
        orientalists abandon the path so intelligently opened
        up by Burnouf; they relinquish the examination of the
        Northern sources, and take no account of them, they 
        attach themselves  passionately  to the exegesis
        of the Southern  Scriptures, which in appearance  are
        more archaic and better documented.  The results that
        these labours  give us are of the highest importance,
        both for the history of religions  in general as well
        as for that of Buddhist and Indian ideas. Oldenberg's
        book is a perfect exposition: Pall Buddhism cannot be
        better described, its intellectual  and moral factors
        more  artistically  demonstrated, or  a more  precise
        exposition given of the idea that a Singhalese doctor
        makes  of his religion  and his destiny.  Oldenberg's
        error was to entitle  his book, Buddha, his life, his
        doctrine  and his community.  He should  have  added,
        `according  to Pali sources and the principles of the
        Singhalese Church."'

            And he went on:

            "Far  front  giving  us the key to the origin  of
        Buddhism  and  the  understanding  of its  historical
        evolution, the examination of the canon and the Pali
        ------------------------
        1. Hibbert Lectures, p. 197.


                                 p. 240

        chronicles gives us information about only one of the
        sects of the Southern school.  Futher, these accounts
        have an absolute  value  only for an epoch relatively
        late in the history of this Church.  To describe  the
        fortunes  of the  community, the constitution  of the
        Sangha, the formation of the Scriptures, and the life
        of the Master according to documents  which date from
        the  first  or the fourth  century  of our  era is an
        illusory  undertaking.  Consecrated  by the faith and
        piety of the schools, learnedly  elaborated, proud of
        a  regularity   (suspect,  although  exaggerated   by
        certain  authors) ,  the  Pali  canon  boasts  of  an
        authenticity of little probability. Like the Buddhist
        monks  of naive piety  and imperfect  critical  sense
        European  scholars  have not hesitated  to admit this
        authenticity.  It was only at a recent epoch taht the
        books were fixed in writing; but does not India offer
        us in the  fastidious  preservation  of the  Vedas  a
        marvellous example of memory and fidelity? This pious
        hypothesis does not hold against the facts."

            These incisive  words of the industrious  scholar
        whose  loss  we  are  still  deploring  are  not  yet
        obsolete.  They still stand as a protest  against the
        idea  that  by  excising   the  marvellous   and  the
        contradictory  in the accounts  of the Pali school it
        is possible to arrive at a sound historical basis. It
        may be here remarked  that the recent  investigations
        of Mrs.  Rhys Davids have been equally destructive of
        the theories  of Oldenberg  and T.  W.  Rhys  Davids,
        though without advancing on the lines suggested by La
        Vallee Poussin.

            Although  this  article  is  concerned  with  the
        doctrinal  relations  of the Lalita-vistara  with the
        Sarvastivada school, it is necessary to say something
        about the structure  of the sutra.  When the Sanskrit
        text  was first  published  (1877-8) it was found  to
        contain  many verse passages  embedded  in the prose.
        The question  was raised  as to which  was the older,
        the prose or the verse; but it ws a futile proceeding
        to try  and  solve  the problem  by setting  up rival
        theories  of  the  structure  of the  sutra  without
        looking for the sources of the verse passages. It can
        now be seen  that many  come  from  the canon  of the
        Sarvastivadins.  On the other  hand, when  we find  a
        passage in Sardulavikridita metre, it suggests a very
        late period of literary activity. But there is now no
        doubt that not only many of the verses  but also many
        of the prose passages are textually taken from the


                                p. 241

        Sarvastivadin scriptures. That there was such a canon
        was not even recognized  when Childers declared, "the
        North  Buddhist  books have no claim  to originality,
        but are partly adaptations  of the Pali sacred books,
        made  several  centuries  after  Gautama's  time, and
        partly  late outgrowths  of Buddhism  exhibiting  the
        religion in an extraordinary  state of corruption and
        travesty."(2)

            The real  facts  have  been  stated  by La Vallee
        Poussin.  It should  be almost self-evident  that the
        most  widely-spread  group  of schools  in India, the
        Sarvastivadins, a group  that  continued  to flourish
        widely  long after  the Pali school  had been cut off
        from its Indian home, should  have had a canon of its
        own.  Although not entirely identical  with the Plai,
        the structure  of the Agamas  and much of the wording
        is the same.  As La Vallee Poussin said, "We speak in
        the singular of the canon.  It is not doubtful that a
        considerable  body of scriptures  served as basis for
        the two canons of Sthavirian  sects, the canon in the
        Pali  language   and  the  Sanskrit   canon   of  the
        Sarvastivadins.   This  body  of  scriptures  may  be
        referred  to under  the name of the Buddhist  canon."
        (3) It is from  the  Sarvastivadin  source  that  the
        ancient   passages   both  prose   and  verse, in the
        Lalita-vistara  were take.  How the whole  sutra  was
        compiled will need more detailed investigation.  Here
        we have only to consider how the Mahayana compiler or
        compilers  of  the  Lalita-vistara   dealt  with  the
        doctrinal matters in the passages incorporated.

            Althought the metaphysical  doctrines of Mahayana
        are not ignored, the whole  interest  is concentrated
        on the nature of a Bodhisattva  and his attinment  of
        Buddhahood, when he becomes an omniscient  Tathagata.
        The Boddhisattva-doctrine itself was not new, for all
        the schools recognized it, as well as the doctrine of
        a Tathagata with his ten powers.  But while according
        to the older doctrine the
        ---------------------
        2. Childers' Dictonary, preface, p. xii.
        3. Le dozme et la philosophie du Bouddhisme, p. 97.


                                p. 242

        Bodhisattva  in his last birth was a being  who still
        had to learn the painful  facts of old age, sickness,
        and  death,  in  Mahayana   he  knew   the  essential
        doctrines  already and had acquired all the qualities
        of a Buddha except those peculiar to a Tathagata.  At
        the very beginning of the actual sutra (ch. 2) we are
        told  how  the  Bodhisattva   was  dwelling   in  the
        excellent abode of Tusita. Then follow over four pages
        of epithets beginning thus:

            "Adored  by adorable  ones, having  obtained  his
        abhiseka, praised, lauded, and extolled  by hundreds
        of thousands  of gods, having  obtained  the abbiseka
        produced  from his vow, having acquired  the full and
        purified   buddha--knowledge    due   to   all   the
        buddha-qualities, having  won the highest  perfection
        of skill in means, knowing the brahma-states of great
        friendliness, compassion, joy, and equanimity, having 
        reached the peak of fulfilment of all the bodhipaksikadharmas
        consisting  of the stations of mindfulness, the right
        effort, the bases  of psychic  power, the faculties,
        the powers, the parts  of enlightenment, and the way,
        having  his body  adorned  with  the marks  and minor
        marks due to the accumulation  of unmeasured  merit."
        (Lal. p. 8).

            Nor were these attainments  lying dormant, for we
        are  told  that  while  the  Bodhisattva  was  in his
        seraglio,

            "He was not deprived  of hearing  the doctrine, or
        deprived of meditating on the doctrine. Why was that:
        It  was  because  the  Bodhisattva   had  long  shown
        reverence  for  the  doctrines  and  reciters  of the
        doctrine, he was eagerly  earnest  for the  doctrine,
        delighting    in   the    doctrine,   unwearied    in
        investigating  the doctrine, exceedingly  liberal  in
        bestowing  the doctrine, teaching  it without reward,
        ungrudging  in the gift  of the  doctrine, not having
        the closed fist of a teacher." (Lal. p. 215).

        Yet the narrative  retains  the story  as told in all 
        schools, and when  the Bodhisattva  acts like  an
        ordinary man of the world, it is repeatedly said that
        this  is due  to lokanuvartanakriyadharmata, the rule
        of acting  in accordance  with  the  practice  of the
        world.  In the  same  way, when  as an infant  he was
        being  taken  to  the  temple, he knew  that  It  was
        unnecessary as he was devatideva, but he consented to
        go "in accordance with the custom of the world."

            When in the older story he first learns  the dark
        facts of human life, he is distressed  and returns to
        his palace in agitation of heart.


                                p. 243

        The Lalita-vistara retains the accounts of his asking
        what an old man, a sick man and the others  were, but
        adds  the words, jananncva, although  he knew, for he
        was not really  an ignorant  youth, but a Bodhisattva
        already  understanding  the reality of existence, and
        he asked in accordance with the dharmata, the rule of
        action followed by all Bodhisattvas.

            These are instances of direct modification of the
        story, but the  latter  portion  of the  Sutra  gives
        example of a different way of expressing  the special
        teaching   introduced   into   the   narrative.   The
        traditional  course of events remains unchanged.  The
        contest with Mara is recounted  with the addition  of
        much mythological  detail, then the attainment of the
        four dhyanas, the divine eye, the remembrance  of the
        former  births,  the  chain  of  causation   and  the
        destruction of the asravas, all given in the words of
        the  older  sutras.  The  events  at the  Bodhi  tree
        follow, the journey to Benares, and the first sermon.
        Most of the essential narrative is given in the words
        of the older  texts  and  the Mahayana  protions  are
        distinct insertions. These display what may be called
        devotional  Mahayana, for although  sunyata  and such
        Mahayana doctrines  are taken for granted, no attempt
        is made to emphasise  them or expound them.  When the
        Bodhisattva   is  going  to  the  Bodhi  tree  Brahma
        Sahampati  informs  the gods, and his speech consists
        of a repetition of the Bodhisattva's achievements.

            It might have been thought that after the recital
        of the chain  Of causation  some  explanation  of the
        formula  in the style  of Nagarjuna  would  have been
        given, but what follows is chiefly a series of stutis
        by various  gods.  In one of them Buddha replies, and
        gives a verse  account  of his enlightenment, but the
        nearest approach to any Mahayana metaphysics is where
        he says he has attained by enlightenment  the void of
        the world (jagacchunyam), which arises from the chain
        of causation, and which is like a mirage or a city of
        Gandharvas.  That the standpoint  is Mahayana  can be
        seen from the


                                p. 244                                                                                                                               use of certain terms, such as dharmatathata, bhutakoti, tathagatagarbha,

        use   of  certain   terms,  such   as  dharmatathata,
        bhutakoti,  tathagatagarbha,  and  sunya.  Even  maya
        occurs, but in the  sense  of "deceit, and  it merely
        illustrates  the dependence  on Sarvastivada, in this
        case on the Abhidharma.(4) The terms occur along with
        matasrya  and irsya, and they also occur together  in
        the  Sarvastivadin  list  of upaklesas, and here  are
        mentioned  among  the  forest  of vices  (klesaranya)
        which Buddha had cut off.

            The  additions  to  the  first  sermon  are  more
        extensive, but still without any tendency  to develop
        the doctrine.  It is followed by a versified  version
        of the chain of causation addressed to Kaundinya, the
        first  of the five  disciples.  Then Maitreya, one of
        the Bodhisattvas  present asks Buddha for the sake of
        Bodhisattvas  present to expound how the Wheel of the
        Doctrine has been turned. But no exposition is given.
        What  follows   is  little  more  than  a  string  of
        epithets. Buddha replies;

            "Profound, Maitreya, is the Wheel, for  it cannot
        be acquired  by grasping: hard  to  perceive  is  the
        Whell through the disappearance  of duality...." 
            This list then passes into a description of the 
        Tathagata:

            "Even so, Maitreya  has the Wheel of the Doctrine
        been turned by the Tathagata;  through the turning of
        which  he  is called  Tathagata;  he is called  fully
        enlightened  Buddha;  he is called  Svayambhu;  he is
        called Dharmasvami; he is called Nayaka; he is called 
        Vinayaka; he is called Parinayaka; he is called 
        Sarthavaha.... "

            This  extraordinary   list  continues   for  over
        fourteen  pages, and this, Buddha  tells Maitreya, is
        the turning of the Wheel and a summary exposition  of
        the virtues of the TAthagata.  If explained at length
        the Tathagata  might expound  for a kalpa or the rest
        of a kalpa.  Of real  explanation  there  is nothing,
        although in a poem immediately  following the turning
        of the Wheel  is said  to be anutpadam.  This  is the
        very  word which  forms  the basis  of the system  of
        Nagarjuna in his Madhyamakarikas. There can be little
        -------------------------
        4. Lal., p. 486. Maya is translated `esprit de deception' 
           by La Vallee Poussin in his translation of the 
           Abhidharmakosa. vol. I, bk. ii, $ 27. Cf. Mahavyutpatti, 
           104.



                                p. 245

        doubt that this avoidance of points of difference and
        metaphysical  subjects  of dispute is due to the fact
        that  the  sutra  is intended  for  lay  people.  The
        compilers have aimed at harmonising  the old accounts
        with the more exalted conception  of the Bodhisattva.
        There is one place where a severe judgment  is passed
        on the holders of other views.  In the account of the
        Bodhisattva's  passing  from  the Tusita  heaven  and
        being  conceived  Ananda  expresses  his  wonder, and
        Buddha replies  that in the future there will be some
        who  will  disbelieve  that  the  Bodhisattva  passed
        through the processes  of conception  and birth.  But
        those who reject the excellent  sutra, whether  monks
        or lay people, will be hurled  at death into the hell
        of Avici. Faith is needed, and Buddha illustrates by a
        parable:

            "It  is as if, Ananda, a certain  man had  a son,
        and the man was  of fair  speech, received  presents,
        and had many friends.  The son, when his father died,
        was not left  desolate, but was well received  by his
        father's  friends.  Even so, Ananda, any of those who
        shall believe in me I receive as my friends --  those
        who have taken refuge in me.  The Tathagata  has many
        friends,  and  these   friends   of  the   Tathagata,
        truth-speakers, not speakers of falsehood, I hand on.
        They  that  are  truth-speakers  are  friends  of the
        Tathagata, the  Arhats  and  perfect  Buddhas  of the
        future.  Faith should  be practised.  Herein  this is
        what I make you to understand."

            But the basis of the faith has been changed.  The
        sport, lalita, of the Bodhisattva  is not merely  his
        sport  in the seraglio, but all  the  acts  which  as
        Bodhisattva he had to perform. His fight with Mara is
        expressly  said to be done in sport, and finally  the
        whole  sutra is said to be played  (vikridita) by the
        great Bodhisattva.