CHAPTER 2

 

THE BUDDHIST STANDPOINT

 

 

ONE of the noteworthy characteristics that distinguish the Buddha   from all other religious teachers is that he was a human being with 'no connection whatsoever with a God or any other `Supernatural' Being.   He was neither God nor an incarnation of God, nor any mythological figure.   He was a man, but a super-man, an extra­ordinary man (accariya manussa). He was beyond the human state inwardly though living the life of a human being outwardly. Just as he is for this reason called a unique being, man par excellence (purisuttama).

 

The Buddha says: `Even as, monks, a lotus born and grown in water, stands above, unsmeared by water, so the Tathagata, monks, born and grown up in the world, yet lives lord over the world without coming together with the world.' ¹

 

Depending on his own unremitting energy, unaided by any teacher, human or divine, he achieved the highest mental and intellectual attainments; reached the acme of purity, and was perfect in the best qualities of human nature. He was an embodi­ment of compassion and wisdom, which became the two guiding principles in his dispensation (sasana).

 

Through personal experience he understood the supremacy of man, and the concept of a `supernatural' being who rules over the destinies of beings below, he found to be a mere illusion. The Buddha never claimed, to be a saviour who tried to save `souls' by means of a revealed religion. Through his own perseverance and understanding he proved that infinite possibilities are latent in man and that it must be man's endeavour to develop and unfold these possibilities. He proved by his own experience that enlightenment and deliverance lie absolutely and entirely in man's hand. Being an exponent of the strenuous life by precept and example, the Buddha encouraged his disciples to cultivate self-reliance thus: `You are your own refuge, who else could refuge be?’ ²

 

It was also the Buddha who for the first time in the world's history taught that deliverance could be attained independently of an external agency, that deliverance from suffering must be wrought and fashioned by each one for himself upon the anvil of his own actions.

 

None can grant deliverance to another who merely begs for it. Others may lend us a helping hand indirectly, but the highest freedom is attained only through self-realization and self-awakening to Truth. Self-realization can come only to one who is free to think out his own problems without let or hindrance. Each individual should make the appropriate effort and break the shackles that have kept him in bondage, winning freedom from the shackles of existence by perseverance, self-exertion and insight, and not through prayers and petitions to a Supreme Being. The Buddha warns his disciples against shifting the burden to an external agency, a saviour, a God or Brahma, directs them to the ways of discrimi­nation and research, and urges them to get busy with the real task of developing their inner forces and qualities. He says: 'I have directed you towards deliverance. The Dhamma, the Truth, is to be self-realized.’ ³

 

Buddhist monks are not priests who perform rites of sacrifice. They do not administer sacraments and pronounce absolution. An ideal Buddhist monk cannot and does not stand as an inter­mediary between men and 'supernatural' powers; for Buddhism teaches that each individual is solely responsible for his own libera­tion.     Hence, there is no need to win the favour of a mediating priest. 'You yourselves should strive; the Tathagatas only show the path.’ ⁴

 

The path is the same Ancient Path trodden and pointed out by the Enlightened Ones of all ages. It is the Noble Eightfold Path leading to enlightenment and highest security.

 

Another distinguishing characteristic is that the Buddha never preserved his supreme knowledge for himself alone. To the Buddha such a wish is utterly inconceivable. Perfect ,enlightenment, the discovery and realization of the Four Noble Truths (Buddhahood), is not the prerogative of a single being chosen by Divine Providence; nor is it a unique and unrepeatable event in human history. It is an achievement open to anyone who earnestly strives for perfect purity and true wisdom, and with inflexible will cultivates the Noble Eightfold Path.

 

Those who cultivate the path and reach the highest stage of realization (arahatta), the final liberation from suffering, have been solemnly declared by the Buddha to be his equals as far as the emancipation from defilements and ultimate deliverance is con­cerned:

 

`Victors like me are they, indeed,

They who have won defilements' end.' ⁵

 

The Buddha, however, also made clear to his disciples the difference between a fully Enlightened One and the Arahats, the Accomplished Saints:

 

‘The Tathagata, O disciples, while being an Arahat, ⁶ is fully Enlightened. It is he who proclaims a path not proclaimed before, he is the knower of a path, who understands a path, who is skilled in a path. ⁷ And now his disciples, are way-farers who follow in his footsteps. That, disciples, is the distinction, the specific feature which distinguishes the Tathagata, who being an Arahat, is Fully En­lightened, from the disciple who is freed by insight.’ ⁸

 

When communicating the Dhamma to his disciples the Master made no distinction whatsoever amongst them; for there were no specially chosen favourite disciples. Amongst his adherents all those who were Arahats, who were passion-free, and had shed the fetters binding them to renewed existence, had equally perfected themselves in purity. But there were some outstanding ones who were skilled in different branches of knowledge and practice, and because of their mental endowments, gained positions of distinc­tion, but special favours were never granted to anyone by the Master. Upali, for instance, who came from a barber's family, was made the chief in matters of discipline (vinaya) in preference to many Arahats who belonged to the class of the nobles and warriors.

 

There is not even an indication that the Master entrusted the dispensation (sasana) to any particular disciple before he passed away; not even to his two chief disciples, Sariputta and Maha Moggallana. He did not appoint anyone as his successor. In this connection it is interesting to note that the Buddha made clear to his disciples, before he passed away, that he never thought of controlling the Order. Addressing the monks round his death-bed the Master said:

 

`The doctrine and the discipline (Dhamma-vinaya) which I have set forth and laid down for you, let them after I am gone be the teacher to you.' ⁹   

 

Even during his life time it was the Dhamma-vinaya that controlled and guided the monks. He was no potentate. The Buddha's Ancient Path, the Eightfold Path, is the teaching for free men.

 

The Buddha appeared at a time when autocracy was prevalent in India. But his teaching was somewhat of a threat to such auto­cratic government. He did not, however, interfere with the politics and the government of the country; for he was never an interferer in things where interference was useless, but that did not deter him from giving voice to his democratic thoughts and views. The Buddha's teaching definitely encourages democratic ideas and institutions. Though the Buddha wisely refrained from interfering with the then existing governments, he made the sangha, the community of monks, an absolutely democratic institution.

 

As the Marquess of Zetland, a former Viceroy of India, said:

 

'It is probable that the tendency towards self-government evidenced by these various forms of corporate activity received fresh impetus from the Buddhist rejection of the authority of the  priesthood and further by its doctrine of equality as exemplified by its repudiation of caste. It is indeed to the Buddhist books we have to turn for an account of the manner in which affairs of these early examples of representative self-governing institutions were conducted. And it may come as a surprise to many to learn that in the assemblies of Buddhists in India two thousand years and more ago are to be found the rudiments of our own parliamentary practice of the present day. The dignity of the assembly was preserved by the appointment of a special officer--the embryo of "Mr. Speaker" in our House of Commons. A second officer was appointed to see that when necessary a quorum was secured--the prototype of the Parliamentary Chief Whip, in our own system. A member initiating business did so in the form of a motion which was then open to discussion.  In some eases, this was done once only, in others three times, thus anticipating ­the practice of Parliament in requiring that a Bill be read a time before it becomes law. If discussion disclosed a difference of opinion the matter was decided by the vote of the majority, the voting being by ballot.’ ¹⁰

 

Characteristic, again, is the Buddha's method of teaching the Dhamma. The Buddha disapproved of those who professed to have `secret doctrines'; saying: `Secrecy is the hall-mark of false doctrine.' Addressing the Venerable Ananda, the personal attendant of the tester, the Buddha said: 'I have taught the Dhamma, Ananda, without making any distinction between esoteric and esoteric doctrine, for in respect of the Truth, Ananda, the Tathagata has no such thing as the "closed fist" of a teacher, who hides some essential knowledge from the pupil.’ ¹¹ He declared the Dhamma freely and equally to all. He kept nothing back, and never wished to extract from his disciples blind and submissive faith in him and his teaching. He insisted on discriminative examination and intelli­gent inquiry. In no uncertain term did he urge critical investigation when he addressed the inquiring Kalamas in a discourse that has been rightly called `the first charter of free thought'.

 

A summary of the Kalama sutta is as follows:

 

Kesaputta was a small town in the kingdom of Kosala. The Inhabitants of this town were known as Kalamas. When they heard that the Buddha had entered their town, they came to him for guidance and said:

 

`Venerable sir, there are some recluses and brahmins who visit Kesaputta. As to their own view they expound it in full, but as to the view of others, they condemn, revile and cripple it. Other recluses and brahmins, on coming to Kesaputta, do likewise. Venerable Sir, we doubt and waver as to which of these worthies speak truth and which falsehood.'

 

'Yes, Kalamas, right it is for you to doubt, doubt has arisen in a doubtful matter. Come, O Kalamas, be ye not led by reports or tradition, or hearsay, nor by what is in a religious text, nor by mere logic or inference, nor by considering appearances, nor after re­flection on an approval of some theory, nor by seeming possibilities, nor upon the consideration "this recluse is our teacher". But, O Kalamas, when you know for yourselves: "these things are un­wholesome, these things are blameable and unprofitable," then indeed, do ye reject them......

 

'And when you know for yourselves: "these things are whole­some, blameless and profitable," then do you, having undertaken them, abide therein.' Then the Buddha questioned them thus: `Now, what think ye, O Kalamas, when greed, hate and delusion arise in a man do they arise to his profit or to his loss? Are they blameable or not?'

 

- To his loss, Venerable Sir, they are blameable.

- Now, what think ye, Kalamas, when freedom from greed, hate and delusion arise in a man, do they arise to his profit or loss? Are they blameable or not?

- To his profit, Lord.    They are blameless.

- So then, Kalamas, as to my words to you just now: 'Be ye not led by reports--abide therein.' Such was my reason for saying them. ¹²

 

To take anything on trust is not in the spirit of Buddhism, so we find this dialogue between the Master and his disciples:

 

- If, now, knowing this and preserving this, would you say: 'We honour our Master and through respect for him we respect what he teaches?'

- No, Lord.

- That which you affirm, O disciples, is it not only that which you yourselves have recognized, seen and grasped?

- Yes, Lord. ¹³

 

And in conformity with this thoroughly correct attitude of true inquiry, it is said, in a Buddhist treatise on logic: 'As the wise test gold by burning, by cutting it and rubbing it (on a touchstone), so are you to accept my words after examining them and not merely out of regard for me.' ¹⁴

 

Buddhism is free from compulsion and coercion and does not demand of the follower blind faith. At the very outset the sceptic will be pleased to hear of its call for investigation. Buddhism, from beginning to end, is open to all those who have eyes to see and mind to understand.

 

Once, when the Buddha, was dwelling in a mango grove at Nalanda, Upali       , a fervent follower of Nigantha Nataputta (Jaina Mahavira), ¹⁵ approached the Master with the sole intention of debating with him and defeating him in argument. The subject was the theory of karma which both the Buddha and Mahavira professed, although their views on it differed. At the end of the very friendly discussion, Upali being convinced by the arguments of the Buddha, agreed with his views, and was ready to become a follower, a lay disciple (upasaka). Nevertheless cautioning him, the Buddha said: 'Of a truth, householder, make a thorough investiga­tion. It is good for well-known men like yourself to make a thorough investigation.' Upali, however, became more satisfied and delighted with the Buddha for thus cautioning him, and took refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha (the Order). ¹⁶  

 

This episode clearly explains that the Blessed One was not anxious to gain followers except through their own conviction--a lesson this that missionaries should learn.

 

The Buddha never interfered with another man's freedom of thought; for freedom of thought is the birthright of every individual. It is wrong to force someone out of the way of life which accords with his outlook and character, spiritual inclination and tendencies. Compulsion in every form is bad. It is coercion of the blackest kind to make a man swallow beliefs for which he has no relish; such forced feeding cannot be good for anybody, anywhere.

 

The Buddha's sole intention was to make clear to others that seeing things as they are is not the result of mere belief in, and fear of, some external power, either human, superhuman or even infra-human. In the understanding of things, belief and fear do not play any role in Buddhist thought. The truth of the Dhamma can be grasped only through insight never through blind faith, or through fear of some known or unknown being. The history of religions reveals that it is fear in man, enmeshed in ignorance, which creates the idea of an omnipotent external agency; and once that idea is created, men move in fear of the child of their own creation, and work untold harm to themselves, and, at times, to others, too.

 

Instructing the monks the Buddha says: `Those who have mere faith in me, mere affection in me, they are bound for a good state of existence (but they do not attain the highest, arahatta, final emancipation). Those who are striving for Dhamma, who are bent on the path, they are bound for awakening, for arahatta.’ ¹⁷

 

These are clear indications that the Buddha did not want his followers to recognize anything indiscriminately and without reason.

 

Not only did the Buddha discourage blind belief, and fear of the omnipotent as unsuitable approaches for understanding the truth, but he also denounced adherence to unprofitable rites and rituals, because the mere abandoning of outward things, such as fasting bathing in rivers, animal sacrifice and similar acts, do not tend to purify a man, do not make a man holy and noble.

 

We find this dialogue between the Buddha and the brahmin Sundarika Bharadvaja. Once the Buddha addressing the monks explained in detail how a seeker after deliverance should train himself, and further added that a man whose mind is free from taints, whose life of purity is perfected, and the task done, could be called one who bathes inwardly.

 

Then Bharadvaja seated near the Buddha heard these words and asked him:

 

- Does the Venerable Gotama go to bathe in the river Bahuka?

- Brahmin, what good is the river Bahuka?

- Indeed, Venerable Gotama, the river Bahuka is believed by many to be holy. Many people have their evil deeds (papa) washed away in the river Bahuka.

 

Then the Buddha made him understand that bathing in rivers would not cleanse a man of his dirt of evil, and instructed him thus:

 

`Bathe just here (in this Doctrine and Discipline--Dhamma­-vinaya), brahmin, give security to all beings. If you do not speak falsehood, or kill or steal, if you are confident, and are not mean, what does it avail you to go to Gaya (the name of a river in India during the time of the Buddha)? Your well at home is also a Gaya.’ ¹⁸

 

The Buddha proclaimed a path free from all superstition and cruelty, that is, he made it impossible for his followers to behave in any manner detrimental to the welfare of living beings, by prohibiting all oppression, spoliation, and plunder.

 

What then is Buddhism?

 

Some prefer to call the teaching of the Buddha a religion, others call it a philosophy, still others think of it as both religion and­ philosophy. It may, however be more correct to call it a ‘Way of Life’. But that does not mean that Buddhism is nothing more than an ethical code. Far from it, it is a way of moral, spiritual and intellectual training leading to complete freedom of mind. The Buddha himself called his teaching Dhamma-vinaya', the Doctrine and the Discipline. But Buddhism, in the strictest sense of the word, cannot be called a religion, for if by religion is meant `action or conduct indicating belief in, reverence for, and desire to please, divine ruling power; the exercise or practice of rites or obser­vances implying this... ; recognition on the part of man of some higher unseen power as having control of his destiny, and as being entitled to obedience, reverence, and worship,’ ¹⁹ Buddhism certainly is not such a religion.

 

In Buddhist thought, there is no awareness or conviction of the existence of a Creator of any form who rewards and punishes the good and ill deeds of the creatures of his creation. A Buddhist takes refuge in the Buddha (Buddham saranam gacchami) but not in the hope that he will be saved by the Master. There is no such guarantee. The Buddha is only a teacher who points out the way and guides followers to their individual deliverance.

 

A sign-board at the parting of roads, for instance, indicates directions, and it is left to the wayfarer to tread along the way watching his steps. The board certainly will not take him to his desired destination.

 

A doctor diagnoses the ailment and prescribes; it is left to the patient to test the prescription. The attitude of the Buddha towards his followers is like that of an understanding and compassionate teacher or a physician.

 

The highest worship is that paid to the best of men, those great and daring spirits who have, with their wide and penetrating grasp of reality, wiped out ignorance, and rooted out defilements. The men who saw Truth are true helpers, but Buddhists do not pray to them. They only reverence the revealers of Truth for having pointed out the path to true happiness and deliverance. Happiness is what one must achieve for oneself; nobody else can make one better or worse. `Purity and impurity depend on oneself. One can neither purify nor defile another.' ²⁰

 

While lying on his death-bed between the two Sala trees at Kusinara, the eighty-year-old Buddha seeing the flowers offered to him, addressed the Venerable Ananda thus: `They who, Ananda, are correct in life, living according to the Dhamma--it is they who rightly honour, reverence and venerate the Tathagata with the worthiest homage.     Therefore, Ananda, be ye correct in life, living according to the Dhamma. Thus, should you train yourselves.'  ²¹ This encouragement of the Buddha on living according to the Dhamma shows clearly that what is of highest importance is training in mental, verbal and bodily conduct, and not the mere offering of flowers to the Enlightened Ones. The emphasis is on living the right life.

 

Now when a Buddhist offers flowers, or lights a lamp before the Buddha image or some sacred object, and ponders over the supreme qualities of the Buddha, he is not praying to anyone; these are not ritual, rites, or acts of worship. The flowers that soon fade and the flames that die down speak to him, and tell him of the imper­manency (anicca) of all conditioned things.       The image serves him as an object for concentration, for meditation; he gains inspiration and endeavours to emulate the qualities of the Master. Those who do not understand the significance of this simple offering, hastily conclude: `This is idol worship.' Nothing could be more untrue.

 

Jawaharlal Nehru in his autobiography writes:

 

'At Anuradhapura, ²²  I liked greatly an old seated statue of the Buddha. A year later, when I was in Dehra Dun Gaol, a friend in Ceylon sent me a picture of this statue, and I kept it on my little table in my cell. It became a precious companion for me, and the strong, calm features of the Buddha's statue soothed and gave me strength and helped me to overcome many a period of depression.' ²³

 

P. D. Ouspensky, seeing a Buddha image in a monastery near Mount Lavinia in Sri Lanka wrote:

 

`The face of the Buddha was quite alive; he was not looking straight at me, and yet he saw me. At first I felt nothing but wonder. I had not expected and could not have expected anything like it. But very soon wonder and all other feelings and thoughts dis­appeared in new and strange sensations. The Buddha saw me, saw in me that which I could not see myself, all that was hidden in the most secret recesses of my soul. And under his gaze, which, as it were, passed me by, I began to see all this myself. Everything that was small, superfluous, uneasy and troubled came to the surface and displayed itself under this glance. The face of the Buddha was quite calm, but not expressionless, and full of deep thought and feeling. He was lying here deep in thought and I had come, opened the doors and stood before him, and now he was involuntarily judging me. But there was no blame or reproach in his glance. His look was extraordinarily serious, calm and full of understanding. But when I attempted to ask myself what the face of the Buddha expressed, I realized that there could be no answer. His face was neither cold nor indifferent. On the other hand it would be quite wrong to say that it expressed warmth, sympathy or compassion. All this would be too small to ascribe to him. At the same time it would also be wrong to say that the face of the Buddha expressed unearthly grandeur or divine wisdom. No, it was a human face, yet at the same time a face which men do not happen to have. I felt that the words that I could command would be wrong if applied to the expression of this face. I can only say that here was understanding.

 

`Simultaneously I began to feel the strange effect which the Buddha's face produced on me. All the gloom that rose from the depths of my soul seemed to clear up. It was as if the Buddha's face communicated its calm to me. Everything that up to now had troubled me and appeared so serious and important, now became so small, insignificant and unworthy of notice, that I only wondered how it could ever have affected me. And I felt that no matter how agitated, troubled, irritated and torn with contradictory thoughts and feelings a man might be when he came here, he would go away calm, quiet, enlightened, understanding ...’ ²⁴

 

As to whether Buddhism is a philosophy, that depends upon the definition of the word; and whether it is possible to give a definition that will cover all existing systems of philosophical thought is doubt­ful. Etymologically philosophy means to love (Gr. philein) wisdom (sophia). 'Philosophy has been both the seeking of wisdom and the wisdom sought.' In Indian thought 'philosophy is termed darsana, vision of truth. In brief, the aim of philosophy should be to find out the ultimate truth.

 

Buddhism also advocates the search for truth. But it is no mere speculative reasoning, a theoretical structure, a mere acquiring and storing of knowledge. The Buddha emphasises the practical aspect of his teaching, the application of knowledge to life--looking into life and not merely at it.

 

For the Buddha, the entire teaching is just the understanding of the unsatisfactory nature of all phenomenal existence and the cultivation of the path leading away from this unsatisfactoriness. This is his 'philosophy'.  

 

In Buddhism wisdom is of the highest importance; for purifica­tion comes through wisdom, through understanding. ²⁵ But the Buddha never praised mere intellect. According to him, knowledge should go hand in hand with purity of heart, with moral excellence (vijja-caranasampanna). Wisdom gained by understanding and development of the qualities of mind and heart is wisdom par excellence (bhavanamaya panna). It is saving knowledge, and not mere speculation, logic or specious reasoning. Thus it is clear that Buddhism is neither mere love of, nor inducing the search after wisdom, nor devotion (though they have their significance and bearing on mankind), but an encouragement of a practical applica­tion of the teaching that leads the follower to dispassion, enlighten­ment and final deliverance.

 

Though we call the teaching of the Buddha 'Buddhism', thus including it among the 'isms' and 'ologies', it does not really matter what we label it. Call it religion, philosophy, Buddhism or by any other name you like. These labels are of little significance to one who goes in search of truth and deliverance.

 

When Upatissa and Kolita (who were later to become Sariputta and Mahk Moggallana, the two chief disciples of the Buddha) were wandering in search of the truth of deliverance, Upatissa saw

the Venerable Assaji (one of the first five disciples of the Master) who was on his alms-round. Upatissa was greatly struck by the dignified deportment of the Elder. Thinking it not the right time to inquire and question, Upatissa followed the Elder Assaji to his resting place, and then approached and greeted him and asked about his master's teaching. ²⁶ The Venerable Assaji, rather reluctant to speak much, humbly said: 'I cannot expound the doctrine and discipline at length, but I can tell you the meaning briefly.' Upatissa's reply is interesting: ‘Well, friend, tell little or much; what I want is just the meaning. Why speak many words?' Then the Venerable Assaji repeated a single verse which embraces the Buddha's entire doctrine of causality:

 

'Whatever from a cause proceeds, thereof

The Tathagata has explained the cause,

Its cessation too he has explained.

This is the teaching of the Supreme Sage.’ ²⁷

 

Upatissa instantly grasped the meaning and attained the first stage of realization, comprehending 'whatever is of the nature of arising, all that is of the nature of ceasing’ (yamkinci samudaya-dhammam sabbam tam nirodhadhammam). ²⁸

 

No amount of talk and discussion not directed towards right understanding will lead us to deliverance. What is needed is right instruction and right understanding. We may even derive right instructions from nature, from trees and flowers, from stones and rivers. There are many instances where people gained enlighten­ment and release from taints by merely watching a leaf fall, the flow of water, a forest fire, the blowing out of a lamp. This struck a chord in them, and realizing the impermanent nature of things, they gained deliverance. Yes, the lotus awaits the sunlight, and no sooner does the sun shine than the lotus opens and brings delight to all.

 

Here in this teaching no attempt is made to probe into the ultimate origin of man and things--to inquire into the question: 'Is the universe eternal or not? Is it finite or infinite?'

 

The Buddha was not concerned with such metaphysical problems which only confuse man and upset his mental equilibrium. Their solution surely will not free mankind from misery and ill. That was why the Buddha hesitated to answer such questions, and at times refrained from explaining those which were often wrongly formula­ted. The Buddha was a practical teacher. His sole aim was to explain in all its detail the problem of dukkha, suffering, the universal fact of life, to make people feel its full force, and to convince them of it. He has definitely told us what he explains and what he does not explain. ²⁹

 

Some scholars, however, do not appreciate this attitude of the Master, they even doubt his enlightenment and label him an agnostic. Scholars will ever argue and speculate. These are not questions of today or yesterday, they were raised in the time of the Buddha. Even Sakuludayi, the Wanderer, for instance, asked about the past and the future and the Buddha's reply was categorical:

 

`Let be the past, let be the future, I will teach you the Dhamma:

 

"When this is, that comes to be,

With the arising of this, that arises,

When this is not, that does not come to be,

With the cessation of this, that ceases." ' ³⁰

 

This in a nutshell is the Buddhist doctrine of conditionality or Dependent Arising (paticca samuppada). ³¹  And this forms the foundation of the Four Noble Truths, the central conception of Buddhism.

 

 

1. S. iii. 138.

 

2. Dhp. 160.      

 

3. M. 38.   

 

4. Dph. 276.

 

5. M. 26.

 

6. Sanskrit arhat 'the consummate one’, ‘The worthy one’. One of the titles applied executively to the Buddha and the perfected disciples. As the books reveal, the first application of the term to the Buddha was by himself. That was when, the Buddha was journeying from Gaya to Baranasi to deliver his first sermon to the five ascetics. On the way, not far from Gaya, the Buddha was met by Upaka, an ascetic, who, struck by the senses appearance of the Master, in­quired: 'Who is thy teacher? whose teaching do you profess?’

     Replying in verse, the Buddha said:

     'I, verily, am the Arahat in the world,

     A teacher pealess am I...'

     He used the word for the second time when addressing the five ascetics thus: `I am an Arahat, a Tathagata, fully enlightened.'

     The word is applied only to those who have fully destroyed the taints. In this sense, the Buddha was the first Arahat in the world as he himself revealed to Upaka.

 

7. Maggannu, maggavidu, maggakovido.

 

8. S. iii. 66.

 

9. D. 16, Parinibbana-sutta.

 

10. Legacy of India, Ed. by G. T. Garratt (Oxford,1937), pp. x, xi.

 

11. D. 16.

 

12. A. i. 188, sutta 65. Cf. A. i. sutta 66 and A. ii. Bhaddiya sutta 193.

 

13. M. 47.

 

14. Jnanasara-samuccaya, 31.

 

15. One of the so called six `heretics' or teachers, contemporaries of the Buddha. For accounts of these teachers read Samannaphala sutta, D. 2, or its translation in Dialogues of the Buddha, Part I.

 

16. Upali sutta, M. 56. also read chapter 8.

 

17. M. 22.

 

18. M 7.

 

19. The Short Oxford English Dictionary, 1956.

 

20. Dph. 165.    

 

21. D. 16.  

 

22. In Sri Lanka (Ceylon).

 

23. Jawaharlal Nehru, An Autobiography (John Lane, The Bodley Head, London) p. 271.

 

24. P. D. Ouspensky, A New Model of the Universe, third edition (Kegan Paul, London, 1938), pp. 360-72.

 

25. S. i. 214.

 

26. Compare this with the story of Kassapa,       chapter 4, n.4.­

 

27. Ye dhamma hetuppabhava—tesam hetum tathagato aha

      Tesam ca yo nirodho—evam vadi maha samano.

 

28. Vinaya i. 40

 

29. See chapter 3.

 

30. Imasmim sati idam hoti,

      imassuppada idam uppajjati,

      imasmim asati idam na hoti,

      imassa nirodha idam nirujjhati. M. ii. 32.

      See also the dialogue between the Buddha and Malunkyaputta in M. 63.        

 

31. For the whole formula consisting of the twelve factors, see chapter 4.