Part 95 (1/2)

[Footnote 3: Details of Buddhism in China and Chin-India will be found in the erudite commentaries of KLAPROTH, REMUSAT, and LANDRESSE.]

Whilst Brahmanism, without denying the existence, practically ignores the influence and power of a creating and controlling intelligence, Buddhism, exulting in the idea of the infinite perfectibility of man, and the achievement of the highest attainable happiness by the unfaltering practice of every conceivable virtue, exalts the individuals thus pre-eminently wise into absolute supremacy over all existing beings, and attempts the daring experiment of an _atheistic morality._[1] Even Buddha himself is not wors.h.i.+pped as a deity, or as a still existent and active agent of benevolence and power. He is merely reverenced as a glorified remembrance, the effulgence of whose purity serves as a guide and incentive to the future struggles and aspirations of mankind. The sole superiority which his doctrines admit is that of goodness and wisdom; and Buddha having attained to this perfection by the immaculate purity of his actions, the absolute subjugation of pa.s.sion, and the unerring accuracy of his unlimited knowledge, became ent.i.tled to the homage of all, and was required to render it to none.

[Footnote 1: M. REMUSAT announces, as the result of his researches, that neither the Chinese; the Tartars, nor Monguls have any word in their dialects expressive of our idea of a G.o.d.--_Fo[)e] Kou[)e] Ki_, p. 138; and M. BARTHELEMY SAINT-HILLAIRE adds, that ”il n'y a pas trace de l'idee de Dieu dans le Bouddhisme entier, ni au debut ni au terme.”--_Le Bouddha_, &c., Introd. p. iv. Colonel SYKES, in the xiith vol. of the _Asiatic Journal_, pp. 263 and 376, denies that Buddhism is _atheistic;_ and adduces, in support of his views, allusions made by FA HIAN. But the pa.s.sages to which he refers present no direct contradiction to those metaphysical subtleties by which the Buddhistical writers have carefully avoided whilst they closely approach the admission of belief in a deity.

I am not prepared to deny that the faith in a supreme being may not have characterised Buddhism in its origin, as the belief in a Great First Cause in the person of Brahma is still acknowledged by the Hindus, although honoured by no share of their adoration. But it admits of little doubt that neither in the discourses of its priesthood at the present day nor in the practice of its followers in Ceylon is the name or the existence of an omnipotent First Cause recognised in any portion of their wors.h.i.+p. MAUPIED has correctly described Buddhism both in Ceylon and China as a system of refined atheism (_Essai sur l'Origine des Peuples Anciens_, ch. x. p. 277), and MOUNTSTUART ELPHINSTONE gives the weight of his high authority in the statement that ”The most ancient of Baudha sects entirely denies the being of a G.o.d; and some of those which admit the existence of G.o.d still refuse to acknowledge him as the creator and ruler of the world.... The theistical sect seems to prevail in Nepaul, and the _atheistical to subsist in perfection in Ceylon._”--_History of India_, vol. i. pt. ii. ch. 4. An able writer in the fourth volume of the _Calcutta Review_ has also controverted the a.s.sertion of its atheistic complexion; but whatever truth may be developed in his views, their application is confined to Buddhism in Hindustan and Nepal, and is utterly at variance with the practice and received dogmas in Ceylon.]

Externally coinciding with Hinduism, so far as the avatar of Buddha may be regarded as a pendant for the incarnation of Brahma, the wors.h.i.+p of the former is essentially distinguished from the religion of the latter in one important particular. It does not regard Buddha as an actual emanation or manifestation of the divinity, but as a guide and example to teach an enthusiastic self-reliance by means of which mankind, of themselves and by their own una.s.sisted exertions, are to attain to perfect virtue here and to supreme happiness hereafter. Both systems inculcate the mysterious doctrine of the metempsychosis; but whilst the result of successive embodiments is to bring the soul of the Hindu nearer and nearer to the final beat.i.tude of absorption into the essence of Brahma, the end and aim of the Buddhistical transmigration is to lead the purified spirit to _Nirwana_[1], a condition between which and utter annihilation there exists but the dim distinction of a name. Nirwana is the _exhaustion_ but not the _destruction_ of existence, the _close_ but not the _extinction_ of being.

[Footnote 1: ”Nirwana” is Sanskrit, _ni_ (_r_ euphon. causa) _wana_ desire. The Singhalese name ”Nirwana” is also derived from _newanawa_, to extinguish. See J. BARTHELEMY SAINT-HILAIRE, _Le Bouddha_, 133, 177, &c.]

In deliberate consistency with this principle of human elevation, the doctrines of Buddha recognise the full eligibility of every individual born into the world for the attainment of the highest degrees of intellectual perfection and ultimate bliss; and herein consists its most striking departure from the Brahmanical system in denying the superiority of the ”twice born” over the rest of mankind; in repudiating a sacerdotal supremacy of race, and in claiming for the pure and the wise that supremacy and exaltation which the self-glorified Brahmans would monopolise for themselves.

Hence the supremacy of ”_caste_” is utterly disclaimed in the sacred books which contain the tenets of Buddha; and although in process of time his followers have departed from that portion of his precepts, still distinction of birth is nowhere authoritatively recognised as a qualification for the priesthood. Buddha being in fact a deification of human intellect, the philanthropy of the system extends its partic.i.p.ation and advantages to the whole family of mankind, the humblest member of which is sustained by the a.s.surance that by virtue and endurance he may attain an equality though not an identification with the supreme intelligence. Wisdom thus exalted as the sole object of pursuit and veneration, the Buddhists, with characteristic liberality, admit that the teaching of virtue is not necessarily confined to their own professors; especially when the ceremonial of others does not involve the taking of life. Hence in a great degree arises the indifference of the Singhalese as to the comparative claims of Christianity and Buddhism, and hence the facility with which, both under the Portuguese, the Dutch, and the British Government, they have combined the secret wors.h.i.+p of the one with the ostensible profession of the other. They in fact admit Christ to have been a teacher, second only to Buddha, but inferior, inasmuch as the latter, who was perfect in wisdom, has attained to the bliss of Nirwana.[1]

[Footnote 1: Sir JOHN DAVIS in his account of the Chinese, states that the Buddhists there wors.h.i.+p the ”_Queen of Heaven_,” a personage evidently borrowed from the Roman Catholics, and that the name of ”_Jesus_” appears in the list of their divinities. (Chap. xiv.)

A curious ill.u.s.tration of the prevalence of this disposition to conform to two religions was related to me in Ceylon. A Singhalese chief came a short time since to the princ.i.p.al of a government seminary at Colombo, desirous to place his son as a pupil of the inst.i.tution, and agreed, without an instant's hesitation, that the boy should conform to the discipline of the school, which requires the reading of the Scriptures and attendance at the hours of wors.h.i.+p and prayer; accounting for his ready acquiescence by an a.s.surance that he entertained an equal respect for the doctrines of Buddhism and Christianity. ”But how can you,” said the princ.i.p.al, ”with your superior education and intelligence, reconcile yourself thus to halt between two opinions, and submit to the inconsistency of professing an equal belief in two conflicting religions?” ”Do you see,” replied the subtle chief, laying his hand on the arm of the other, and directing his attention to a canoe, with a large spar as an outrigger lashed alongside, in which a fisherman was just pus.h.i.+ng off upon the lake, ”do you see the style of these boats, in which our fishermen always put to sea, and that that spar is almost equivalent to a second canoe, which keeps the first from upsetting? It is precisely so with myself: I add on _your_ religion to steady my _own, because I consider Christianity a very safe outrigger to Buddhism._”]

As regards the _structure of the universe_, the theories of the Buddhists, though in a great degree borrowed from the Brahmans, occupy a much less prominent position in their mythology, and are less intimately identified with their system of religion. Their attention has been directed less to physical than to metaphysical disquisitions, and their views of cosmogony have as little of truth as of imagination in their details. The basis of the system is a declaration of the eternity of matter, and its submission at remote intervals to decay and re-formation; but this and the organisation of animal life are but the results of spontaneity and procession, not the products of will and design on the part of an all powerful Creator.

Buddhism adopts something approaching to the mundane theory of the Brahmans, in the multiplicity and superposition of worlds and the division of the earth into concentric continents, each separated by oceans of various fabulous liquids. Its notions of geography are at once fanciful and crude; and again borrowing from the Shastras its chronology, extends over boundless portions of time, but invests with the authority of history only those occurrences which have taken place since the birth of Gotama Buddha.

The Buddhists believe in the existence of _lokas_, or heavens, each differing in glory, and serving as the temporary residences of demiG.o.ds and divinities, as well as of men whose etherialisation is but inchoate, and who have yet to visit the earth in farther births and acquire in future transmigrations their complete attainment of Nirwana. They believe likewise in the existence of h.e.l.ls which are the abodes of demons or tormentors, and in which the wicked undergo a purgatorial imprisonment preparatory to an extended probation upon earth. Here their torments are in proportion to their crimes, and although not eternal, their duration extends almost to the infinitude of eternity; those who have been guilty of the deadly sins of parricide, sacrilege, and defiance of the faith being doomed to the endurance of excruciating deaths, followed by instant revival and a repet.i.tion of their tortures without mitigation and apparently without end.[1]

[Footnote 1: DAVY'S _Account of the Interior of Ceylon_, p. 204.]

It is one of the extraordinary anomalies of the system, that combined with these principles of self-reliance and perfectibility, Buddhism has incorporated to a certain extent the doctrine of fate or ”necessity,”

under which it demonstrates that adverse events are the general results of _akusala_ or moral demerit in some previous stage of existence. This belief, which lies at the very foundation of their religion, the Buddhists have so adapted to the rest of the structure as to avoid the inconsistency of making this directing power inherent in any Supreme Being, by a.s.signing it as one of the attributes of matter and a law of its perpetual mutations.

Like all the leading doctrines of Buddhism, however, its theories on this subject are propounded with the usual admixture of modification and casuistry; only a portion of men's conduct is presumed to be exclusively controllable by _fate_--neither moral delinquency nor virtuous actions are declared to be altogether the products of an inevitable necessity; and whilst both the sufferings and the enjoyments of mortals are represented as the general consequences of merit in a previous stage of existence, even this fundamental principle is not without its exception, inasmuch as the vicissitudes are admitted to be partially the results of man's actions in this life, or of the influence of others from which his own deserts are insufficient to protect him. The main article, however, which admits neither of modification nor evasion, is that neither in heaven nor on earth can man escape from the _consequences_ of his acts; that morals are in their essence productive causes, without the aid or intervention of any higher authority; and hence forgiveness or atonement are ideas utterly unknown in the despotic dogmas of Buddha.

Allusion has already been made to the subtleties entertained by the priesthood, in connexion with the doctrine of the _metempsychosis_, as developed in their sacred books; but the exposition would be tedious to show the distinctions between their theories, and the opinions of transmigration entertained by the ma.s.s of the Singhalese Buddhists. The rewards of virtue and the punishment of vice are supposed to be equally attainable in this world; and according to the amount of either, which characterizes the conduct of an individual in one stage of being, will be the elevation or degradation into which he will be hereafter born.

Thus punishment and reward become equally fixed and inevitable: but retribution may be deferred by the intermediate exhibition of virtue, and an offering or prostration to Buddha, or an aspiration in favour of faith in his name, will suffice to ward off punishment for a time, and even produce happiness in an intermediate birth; hence the most flagitious offender, by an act of reverence in dying, may postpone indefinitely the evil consequence of his crimes, and hence the indifference and apparent apathy which is a remarkable characteristic of the Singhalese who suffer death for their offences[1].

[Footnote 1:

Et vos barbaricos ritus, moremque sinistrum Sacrorum Druidae positis repetistis ab armis.

Solis nosse deos, et coeli numina vobis Aut solis nesclre datum: nemora alta remoti Incolitis lucis: _vobis auctoribus umbrae Non tacitas Erebi sedes Ditisque profundi Pallida regna petunt: regit idem spiritus arius...o...b.. alio: longae (si canitis cognita) vitae Mors media, st. Certe populi quos despicit Arcios Felices errore suo, quos ille timorum Maximus haud urget leti metus, etc._

LUCAN, l. i. 450 ct seq.]

To mankind in general Buddha came only as an adviser and a friend; but, as regards his own priesthood, he a.s.sumes all the authority of a lawgiver and chief. Spurning the desires and vanities of the world, he has taught them to aspire to no other reward for their labours than the veneration of the human race, as teachers of knowledge and examples of benevolence. Taking the abstract idea of perfect intelligence and immaculate virtue for a divinity, Buddhism accords honour to all in proportion to their approaches towards absolute wisdom, and as the realisation of this perfection is regarded as almost hopeless in a life devoted to secular cares, the priests of Buddha, on a.s.suming their robe and tonsure, forswear all earthly occupations; subsist on alms, not in money, but in food; devote themselves to meditation and self-denial; and, being thus proclaimed and recognised as the most successful aspirants to Nirwana, they claim the homage of ordinary mortals, acknowledge no superior upon earth, and withhold even the tribute of a salutation from all except the members of their own religious order.

To mankind in general the injunctions of Buddha prescribe _a code of morality_ second only to that of Christianity, and superior to every heathen system that the world has seen.[1] It forbids the taking of life from even the humblest created animal, and prohibits intemperance and incontinence, dishonesty and falsehood--vices which are referable to those formidable a.s.sailants, _raga_ or concupiscence, _doso_ or malignity, and _moha_, ignorance or folly.[2] These, again, involve all their minor modifications--hypocrisy and anger, unkindness and pride, ungenerous suspicion, covetousness, evil wishes to others, the betrayal of secrets, and the propagation of slander. Whilst all such offences are forbidden, every excellence is simultaneously enjoined--the forgiveness of injuries, the practice of charity, a reverence for virtue, and the cheris.h.i.+ng of the learned; submission to discipline, veneration for parents, the care for one's family, a sinless vocation, contentment and grat.i.tude, subjection to reproof, moderation in prosperity, submission under affliction, and cheerfulness at all times. ”Those,” said Buddha, ”who practise all these virtues, and are not overcome by evil, will enjoy the perfection of happiness, and attain to supreme renown.”[3]

[Footnote 1: ”Je n'hesite pas a ajouter que, sauf le Christ tout seul, il n'est point, parmi les fondateurs de religion de figure, plus pure ni plus touchante que celle de Bouddha. Sa vie n'a point de tache.”--_Le Bouddha_, par J. BARTHELEMY SAINT-HILAIRE, Introd. p. v.]

[Footnote 2: The Rev. Mr. GOGERLY's _Notes on Buddhism_. LEE's _Ribeyro_, p. 267.]

[Footnote 3: Discourse of Buddha ent.i.tled _Mangala_.]