2500 Years Of Buddhism
P.V.
Bapat
---o0o---
CHAPTER IV
FOUR
BUDDHIST COUNCILS
The
First Council
According to Pali
tradition recorded in canonical and non-canonical literature three
Sangitis (recitals) or Councils were held to draw up the canonical text
and the creed in their pure form. The first council was held at Rajagrha
immediately after the parinirvana of the Buddha. It is accepted by
critical scholarship that the First Council settled the Dhamma and
the Vinaya and there is no ground for the view that the
Abhidhamma formed part of the canon adopted at the First Council. It
is held that Mahakassapa presided over the assembly in which Upali
and Ananda took an important part. There was seldom dissension over
doctrinal matters but Council was necessitated by the pious determination
of the disciples of the Lord to preserve the purity of his teaching.
The tradition preserved in the 11th
khandhaka of the Cullavagga has been accepted as authoritative
in the different accounts found in extra-canonical literature such as the
Dipavamsa and the Mahavamsa.
It is asserted in the Cullavagga that
Mahakassapa was not present at the mahaparinirvana of the Buddha at
Kushinagara. While he was proceeding from Pava to Kushinagara with a large
retinue, the news of the decease of the Master was brought to him by a
naked ascetic of the Ajivika sect. It is recorded that a thera
called Subhadda exhorted the monks who were vociferous in their
lamentations, to refrain from expressing grief, and called upon them think
the occasion a good riddance. Since they were treated as so many
schoolboys by the Master, who often admonished them for their unbecoming
conduct, they would now be free to do as they thought fit without let or
hindrance. This irreverent remark filled the Venerable Mahakassapa with
alarm for the future safety and purity of the Dhamma preached by
the Master. Mahakassapa also had other reasons for anxiety as pointed out
in the Mahavamsa.
He received the garment of the Master as a token of authority equal to
that of the Master and was determined to fulfil the Master’s command to
establish the holy truth. The remark of Subhadda was a clear indication of
the necessity of convening a Council for the fulfilment of this noble
objective.
It may be observed in this connection that
Subhadda was not the only person to have such thoughts. There were many
others who felt that with the passing of the Master the Dhamma, he
had taught, would disappear. The account in the Tibetan Dulva and
also that of Yuan Chwang refer to this general feeling of doubt and
consternation as having been motive for the convocation of the First
council.
After some deliberation the town of Rajagrha was
selected for the meeting of the Council. It is said that the Council was
held near the Saptaparni Cave, though according to the Tibetan Dulva
it is supposed to have taken place at the Nyagrodha Cave. The
authority of the Cullavagga, however, need not be called in
question and it has been followed by almost all subsequent accounts.
The Lokottaravada account places the venue
of the Council on the northern side of Mount Vebhara (or Vaibhara), while
in Asvaghosa’s account, the Indrasala Cave of Mount Grdhrakuta is
mentioned. It is stated in the Pali Chronicle that the Saptaparni Cave was
situated on the side of Mount Vebhara and that a pandal was erected at the
instance of King Ajatashatru outside of this cave. The site of the cave,
however, has not yet been definitely identified. None the less, there is
no dispute about the fact that it is at Rajagrha that the First Council
met. It was evidently selected because accommodation was plentiful and
there was no difficulty about supplies. It is also said in the Dulva
the Rajagrha was selected because King Ajatashatru was a firm believer
in the Buddhist faith and that he would, therefore, make ample provision
for food and lodge. The accounts in the Mahavamsa and
Samanta-pasadika lend support to this assertion. Hence, the omission
of the name Ajatashatru in the Cullavagga need not be regarded as
evidence against the authenticity of this account.
The meeting actually took place in the second
month of the rainy season. In the Samanta-pasadika we find a
detailed description of the ceremonies which took place about six weeks
before the actual opening of the season. Allowing for natural
exaggerations, it may be affirmed that Mahakassapa took the initiative and
chose four hundred and ninety-nine bhikkhus to from the Council. It
is stated in the Cullavagga and confirmed in the Dipavamsa
that the number of monks was chosen in pursuance of a vote by the general
congregation of monks assembled on the occasion and at the place of the
parinibbana of the Master.
There is general agreement that the number of the
monks selected was five hundred. Yaun Chwang, however, makes it a thousand
which may be an excusable exaggeration considering the long interval
between the event and Yuan Chwang’s time.
There was, however, some protest regarding the
omission of Ananda from the number of councillors chosen. In the
Cullavagga, it is stated that the Bhikkhus strongly interceded for
Ananda, though he had not attained Arhathood, because of the high moral
standard he had reached and also because he had learnt the Dhamma
and the Vinaya from the Master himself.
Ananda was eventually accepted by Mahakassapa as
a result of motion on the part of the monks. The procedure followed
regarding Ananda has, however, given rise to a controversy. It will be
observed that Ananda was brought to trial in the course of the
proceedings. The Dulva,
however, places the trial before the meeting of the
Council. The account of the Cullavagga
is followed by the
Vinayas of the Mahisasakas and Mahasanghikas
and declares that Ananda had to meet certain charges after the recital of
the Dhamma and
the Vinaya, but
there is no allusion to Ananda’s failings in the
Dipavamsa, and the
Mahavamsa,
Buddhaghosa’s Samanta-pasadika
and the Mahavastu Proceedings of the
Council.
The procedure followed at the Council was a
simple one. With the permission of the Sangha, the Venerable Mahakassapa
asked questions on the Vinaya of the Venerable Upali. All these
questions related to the four Parajikas, the matter, the occasion, the
individual concerned, the principle rule, the amened rule as well as to
the question as to who would be guilty and who innocent of these
Parajikas. In this way the Vinaya text was agreed upon at the
Council.
The turn of Ananda came next. The subject matter
of the sutta-pitaka, in all the five Nikayas, was formulated
as questions for Ananda who gave appropriate answers. These questions
followed the lines adopted in those of the Vinaya- the occasion of
the sermons and the person or persons with references to whom they were
given. The answer given by Ananda settled the corpus of Sutta-pitaka.
Buddhaghosa in the
samanta-pasadika, the entire business of the Council is said to
have been conducted by Mahakassapa, Upali and Ananda. The Dipavamsa,
however, gives a more representative character to the proceedings and
the results achieved. The texts are said to have been complied by the
bhikkhus followed the lead of Upali in the Vinaya and that of
Ananda in respect of the Dhamma. The works as arranged and settled
are ascribed to the collective authorship of the whole Council of
bhikkhus.
The account given
in the Mahavastu differs materially from the Pali tradition. It is
said that Katyayana was the leading exponent and the subject of the
discourse was Dasabhumis. The Mahavastu, however, is the Vinaya
of the Lokottaravadins, a sect which came into existence long after
the Mahasanghikas had brought about the schism in the Church.
There is, however, no mention of the
Abhidamma-pitaka as having been a subject of discussion at the First
Council. In later literature however questions were raised regarding the
authenticity of the Abhidhamma as an integral part of the Cana, and
this is significant.
Charges
against Ananda
As already
mentioned, there was considerable agitation over the admission of Ananda
to the Synod. Mahakassapa is said to have entertained misgivings regarding
his admission on the ground of his failure to reach Arhathood, which he
did actually reach on the eve of the session of the Council. But in spite
of this achievement and of the belief and convention that the attainment
of Arhathood emancipates a man from all guilt and punishment, Ananda was
arraigned by the monks on several charges which he explained as follows:
(1)
He could not formulate the lesser and minor precepts, as he was
overwhelmed with grief at the imminent death of the Master.
(2)
He had to tread upon the garment of the Master while sewing it as
there was no one to help him.
(3)
He permitted women to salute first the body of the Master, because
he did not want to detain them. He also did this for their edification
(4)
He was under the influence of the evil one when he forgot to
request the master to enable him to continue his study for a kalpa
(5)
He had to plead for the admission of women into the Order out of
consideration from Mahaprajapati Gautami who nursed the Master in his
infancy.
The charges are differently framed in the other
Vinayas. According to the Dulva, two other charges also seem to
have been brought against Ananda, first that he failed to supply drinking
water to the Buddha though he had thrice asked for it and secondly, that
he showed the privy parts of the Buddha to men and women of low character.
His replies were (6) that the water of the river was muddy, and (7) that
the exhibition of the privy parts would rid those concerned of their
sensuality. These replies may be taken as having satisfied the Assembly.
Another important item of business transacted at the
First Council was the passing of the highest penalty (Brahmadanda) on
Channa who was the charioteer of the master on the day of the Great
Renunciation. This monk had slighted every member of the Order, high and
low, and was arrogant in the extreme. The penalty imposed was complete
social boycott. When the punishment was announced to Channa he was seized
with profound repentance and grief and was purged of all his weaknesses.
In short, he became an Arhat. The punishment automatically ceased to be
effective.
Briefly, the proceedings of the First Council achieved
four results: (1) the settlement of the Vinaya under the leadership
of Upali, (2) the settlement of the texts of the Dhamma under the
leadership of Ananda, (3) the trial of Ananda, and (4) the punishment of
Channa.
There is, however, a difference between the account of
the Cullavagga and that of the Dulva regarding the trial of
Ananda. According to the former, the trial took place practically after
the conclusion of the main business, whereas in the Dulva it comes
before his admission to the Council.
Prof. Oldenberg is sceptical about the historical
authenticity of the First Council. The irreverent remark of Subhadda is
also found in the Mahaparinibbana-sutta, but there is not the
slightest allusion to the holding of the Council. This doubt based on
omission is at best an argumentum ex silentio. The unanimous
tradition among all the schools of Buddhism cannot therefore be brushed
aside as a pious fabrication. In spite of the minor discrepancies there is
a substantial core of agreement regarding the convention of the First
Council, which was a logical and ecclesiastical necessity. It was natural
that the creed of the Church should be determined in a systematic way
after the passing of the Master. Fortunately, Prof. Oldenberg appears to
plough a lonely furrow. Scholars; both Eastern and Western, are all united
in their rejection of this scepticism.
The
Second Council
The second council was held at Vaisali a century after
the passing of the Master. The time recorded should be taken as a round
number. It is recorded in the Cullavagga that the monks of the
Vajji country were in the habit of practising the ten Points (dasa
vatthuni) which were regarded as unorthodox by Yasa, the son of
Kakandaka. He declared these practices to be illegal and immoral in the
extreme. The Vajji monks, however, pronounced the penalty of
patisaraniyakamma upon him. This necessitated the offender’s
apologizing to the laity who had been forbidden by Yasa to carry out the
precepts of the Vajji monks.
Yasa defended his own view before the laity and by his
eloquent advocacy won them over to his side. This increased the fury of
the offending monks who pronounced the punishment of ukkhepaniyakamma
upon him, which meant his virtual expulsion from the Brotherhood.
The ten Points or Indulgences described in the
Cullavagga are as follows:
(i)
Singilonakappa, or the practice of carrying salt in a horn. This
practice is contrary to pacittiya 38 which prohibits the storage of food.
(ii)
Dvangulakappa, or the practice of taking meals when the shadow is
to fingers broad. This is against pacittiya 37 which forbids the taking of
food after midday
(iii)
Gamantarakappa, or the practice of going to another village and
taking a second meal there on the same day. This is opposed to pacittiya
35 which forbids over-eating.
(iv)
Avasakappa, or the observance of the Uposatha ceremonies in various
places in the same parish. This practice contravenes the Mahavagga
rules of residence in a parish (sima).
(v)
Anumatikappa, or obtaining sanction for a deed after it is done.
This also amounts to a breach of monastic discipline.
(vi)
Acinnakappa, or using customary practices as precedents. This
practice is in contravention of pacittiya 35 which prohibits over-eating.
(vii)
Amathitakappa, or the drinking of buttermilk after meals. This
practice is in contravention of pacittiya 35
(viii)
Jalogim-patum, or the drinking of toddy. This practice is opposed
to pacittiya 51 which forbids the drinking of intoxicants.
(ix)
Adasakam-nisidanam, or using a rug which has no fringe. This is
contrary to pacittiya 89 which prohibits the use of borderless sheets.
(x)
Jataruparajatam, or the acceptance of gold and silver which is
forbidden by rule 18 of the Nissaggiya-pacittiya.
The Venerable Yasa openly declared these practices to
be unlawful. After the sentence of excommunication had been passed on him,
he went to Kausambi and sent messengers to the bhikkhus of the
Western Country and of Avanti and of the Southern Country, inviting them
to assemble and decided the question in order to arrest the growth of
irreligion and ensure the preservation of the Vinaya.
Next, he proceeded to the Ahoganga hill where Sambhuta
Sanavasi dwelt. He saluted the venerable monk and expounded the ten Thesis
advocated by the Vajjian monks. He invited him to take up this question in
earnest. The Venerable Sanavasi agreed to do so. About the same time some
sixty Arhats came from the Western Country and assembled on the Ahoganga
hill. About eighty-eight from Avanti and the Southern Country also joined
them. These monks declared the question to be hard and subtle. They
thought of the Venerable Revata who was at Soreyya and was celebrated for
his learning and piety. They proposed to meet him and enlist his support.
After a good deal of travelling they met the Venerable Revata at Sahajati.
On the advice of Sambhuta Sanavasi, he approached the Venerable Revata and
placed the issue before him. One by one, Bhikkhu Yasa brought up
the Ten Points and asked for his opinion. Each one them was declared to be
invalid by the Venerable Revata.
Meanwhile, the Vajjian monks were not idle. They also
went to Sahajati in order to enlist the support of the Venerable Revata.
They offered him rich presents which the Venerable Revata refused with
thanks. However, they induced his disciple, Uttara, to take up their
cause, but failed. At the suggestion of revata, the monks proceeded to
Vaisali in order to settle the dispute at the place of its origin. Seven
hundred monks met in a Council, but there was much rambling talk and
fruitless discussion. In order to avoid further waste of time and
irrelevant discussion, the matter was referred to a committee consisting
of four monks from the East and four from the West. Bhikkhu Ajita
was appointed the seatregulator. The Venerable Sabbakami was elected
president. The Ten Points were put one by one and they were declared
unlawful. The questions were stated again and the same decision was
arrived at in the full assembly of the Council.
The unanimous verdict of the assembly declared the
conduct of the Vajjian monks to be unlawful.
The account given above is taken from the
Cullavagga. The accounts in the Mahavagga and the Dipavamsa
add certain points and raise the number of the bhikkhus to an
extraordinarily high figure. According to the Dipavamsa and the
Samanta-pasadika, the Council was held in the reign of King Kalashoka,
a descendant of Ajatashatru. Kalasoka, though formerly in favour of the
Vajjian monks, was prevailed upon to give his support to the Council of
the Theras. The Dipavamsa mentions that the bhikkhus
of Vaisali held another Council which was attended by ten thousand monks.
It was called the Great Council (Mahasangiti). According to the
Mahavamsa, a council of seven hundred theras compiled the
Dhamma. In the Samanta-pasadika, Buddhaghosa observes that
after the final judgement, the seven hundred bhikkhus engaged in
the recital of the Vinaya and the Dhamma and drew up a new
edition resulting in the Pitakas, Nikayas, Angas and
Dharmaskandhas.
There are slight divergences in the Chinese and Tibetan
versions. The northern version generally puts the date of the Council 110
years after the nirvana of the Buddha. In spite of these minor differences
there is substantial agreement on the genesis of the Council and the
matters discussed and decided. Prof. Oldenberg, however, throws doubt on
the genuineness of the Council on the ground that the Vinaya text
does not take note of the propositions discussed at Vaisali, but these
points are neither positive nor strong enough to prove the unanimous
tradition of the Buddhist schools to be an invention of later writers. The
story of the Second Council has every reason to be accepted as genuine. It
resulted in a schism in the Buddhist Church and the session of the
Mahasanghikas which is confirmed by later evidence.
The
Third Council
The Third Council was held at Pataliputra under the
aegis of the celebrated Buddhist monarch, Priyadarsi Ashoka. Ashoka was
won over to the Buddhist faith within a few of his accession to the
throne. The occasion for the Third Council was supplied by the need to
establish the purity of the Canon which had been imperilled by the rise of
different sects and their rival claims, teachings and practices. According
to Kern, the Third Council was not a general Council but a party meeting
of the Sthaviravadins or Vibhajjavadins. Tissa Moggaliputta, who is
reputed to have converted the Emperor to the Buddhist faith, was pained to
observe the corrupt practices that had crept into the Brotherhood and the
heretical doctrines preached by sectarians of various descriptions. He
succeeded in subduing the heresies and expelling the sectarians from the
Church. The most significant outcome of the Council was that he restored
the true faith and propounded the Abhidamma treatise, the
Katha-vatthu, during the session of the Council.
There is an account of the miraculous birth of
Moggaliputta Tissa and his conservation to the Buddhist faith in the
Mahavamsa. The cardinal points in the life of Tissa are that he was
born in a Brahmin family and learned the three Vedas before he was
sixteen. He was, however, won over to the new faith by Thera Siggava and
very soon attained to Arhatship with all its attendant supernatural
powers. It was under his influence that the Emperor made over to the
Buddhist faith.
With the conversation of Ashoka, the material
prosperity of the monasteries grew by leaps and bounds and the monks lived
in ease and comfort. The heretics who had lost their income and honour
were attracted by these prospects to enter their own old faiths and
practices and preached their doctrines as the doctrines of the Buddha.
This caused extreme distress to Thera Moggaliputta who retired to a
secluded retreat on the Ahoganga mountain up the Ganges and stayed there
for seven years.
The numbers of the heretics and false monks became far
larger than that of the true believers. The result was that for seven
years no Uposatha or Pavarana ceremony was held in any of the monasteries.
The community of the faithful monks refused to observe these festivals
with the heretics. The Emperor was filled with distress at this failure of
the Brotherhood and sent commands for the observance of the Uposatha.
A grievous blunder was committed by the Minister who
was entrusted with task. He misunderstood the command and beheaded several
monks for their refusal to carry out the King’s order. When this sad news
was reported to Ashoka he was seized with grief and apologized for this
misdeed. He asked the Brotherhood whether they held him responsible. Some
thought him guilty, some not. The King was perplexed and enquired if there
was any among the monks who could set his doubts at rest. They all said
that only Thera Tissa, the son of Moggali, could answer his question.
Thereupon the King sent messengers to the monks asking him to come down to
Pataliputra.
After several unsuccessful attempts, the Elder Tissa
was prevailed upon to consent to journey by boat. On the arrival of the
great monk, the monarch himself came forward to receive him. He went knee
deep into the water and extended his right hand to the Thera as a token of
great reverence.
The Venerable monk instructed the King in the holy
religion of the Buddha for a week. The King thereafter convoked as
assembly of the whole community of bhikkhus. He called the
bhikkhus of several persuasions to his presence and asked them to
expound the teachings of the Blessed One. They set forth their misguided
beliefs, such as the doctrine of the eternal soul, and so on. These
heretical monks numbering sixty thousands were expelled from Brotherhood
by the King. He thereafter interrogated the true believers about the
doctrine taught by the Blessed One and they answered that it was
Vibhajjavada (the religion of analytical reasoning). When the Thera
corroborated the truth of this answer, the King made the request that the
Brotherhood should hold the Uposatha ceremony so that the whole community
might be purified of evil elements. The Thera was made the guardian of the
Order.
Thera Tissa thereafter elected a thousand bhikkhus
of the Brotherhood who were well versed I the three Pitakas to make a
compilation of the true doctrine. For nine months he worked with the monks
and the compilation of the true Tripitaka was completed. This council was
held in the same manner and with the same zeal as those of Mahakassapa and
Thera Yasa respectively. In the midst of the Council Thera Tissa set forth
the Kathavatthu-pakaran wherein the heretical doctrines were
thoroughly examined and refuted. Thus ended the Third council in which a
thousand bhikkhus took part.
One of the momentous results of this Council was the
despatch of missionaries to the different countries of the world foe the
propagation of the Saddhamma. Mahinda, the son of Ashoka, and Sanghamitta,
his daughter, were charged with missionary work in the island of Ceylon.
We have already mentioned the singular success of this mission in that
island, from the edicts of Ashoka we know of the various Buddhist missions
he sent to far-off countries in Asia, Africa and Europe. It is to a large
extent due to these missionary activities that Buddhism became the ruling
religion of a large part of mankind.
The
Fourth Council
The Fourth Council was held under the auspices of
Kanishka who was a powerful King of the Saka or Turuska race. He held sway
over a wide tract of the country including Kabul, Gandhara, Sindh,
North-West India, Kashmir and part of Madhyadesa. He was esteemed as
highly by the Northern Buddhists as was Ashoka. From numismatic evidence
it appears that originally he was Ashoka. From numismatic evidence it
appears that originally he was an adherent of some form of Iranian
religion and was later converted to the Buddhist faith. Though we have no
indisputable evidence of the date of his conversion, it is almost certain
that the date of the Council held under his inspiration and patronage was
about 100 A.D The place of the Assembly was, according to one authority,
Jalandhar, and according to another, Kashmir. The Southern Buddhists do
not recognize this Council and there is no references to it in the
Chronicles of Ceylon. It would not be wrong to assume that the Buddhists
of Theravada schools did not participate in the Council. According to a
Tibetan record, one of the results of the Council was the settling of the
dissensions in the Brotherhood. The eighteen sects were all acknowledged
to be the repositories of the genuine doctrine. According to Yuan Chwang,
King Kanishka became interested in the Buddhist scriptures and sent for a
monk every day to give him instruction but, as the instruction differed
and was often contradictory, the King was perplexed and consulted the
Venerable Parsva about the true doctrine. It was on his advice that he
decided to convoke a Council in which the various sects would be
represented. He was anxious to put an end to the dissensions in the
Church. The King built a monastery for the accommodation of 500 monks who
were called upon to write commentaries on the Pitakas. The
commentary on the Sutta-pitaka was composed in 100,000 slokas.
The Vinayavibhasa, a commentary on the Vinaya, also
consisted of 100,000 slokas, and the Abhidharma-vibhasa,
which was composed in the Council, also ran to the same number.
The proceeding of the Council were thus confined to the
composition of the commentaries. And it appears also that the doctrines
which enlisted the greatest common measure of agreement were the most
strongly stressed. It appears also that the monks of the Sarvastivada
School predominated at the Council. It is also highly probable that the
major subdivisions of the Sthaviravada schools including the less orthodox
sections were also represented in fair number. There is no evidence that
Mahayana Buddhism was represented in the proceedings, as it came into
prominence only after the birth of Nagarjuna which was after the Council.
The Rajatarangini holds that Nagarjuna which was after the Council. The
Rajatarangini holds that Nagarjuna flourished after the rule of the
Turuska kings.
Yuan Chwang reports that after the treaties were
composed they were inscribed on copper plates and enclosed in stone boxes
which were deposited in a tope made for the purpose. “The most significant
trait of the Third Council,” says Kern, “is that it closed a period of old
quarrels between the sects; it did not prevent the rise of new
aspirations.”
Though the details appear to be exaggerated, it
would not be reasonable to disbelieve entirely the tradition which
persisted among the Northern Buddhists regarding the historical truth of
the Fourth Council. We therefore demur to accept the view of La Vallee
Poussin that it was “an apologetic quasi-invention.” The fact that Yuan
Chwang records the occurrence of the Council after a lapse of five
centuries, and that the records in the Tibetan Chronicles bearing
testimony to the convocation of the Council are of still later date, does
not warrant complete scepticism.
It is a matter of regret that Yuan Chwang and the
Tibetan chroniclers do not expressly mention the medium in which the works
were composed. It is not unreasonable to suppose that Sanskrit was the
language used at the proceedings. In fact the Abhidharma-Kosa of
Vasubandhu is based upon these Vibhasas, and the commentary of Yashomitra
cites ipsissima verba from old Vibhasa literature.
Furthermore, the discovery of the work of Ghosaka, the
Abhidharmamrta, which is not far removed from the time of Kanishka, should
clinch all controversy. The Fourth Council may thus be regarded as an
epoch-making event in the history of Buddhism in that it made Sanskirt the
vehicle of Buddhist scriptures. “All accounts are silent on the idiom of
the sacred texts approved or revised at the Third Council, but from the
silence we must not infer that the Chinese pilgrims had no notion of a
Canon that was written in another language but Sanskrit. It is an untoward
circumstance that all works of the old Canon, the Tripitaka in the proper
acceptation of the term, so far as they have been preserved, are the only
known through translations of Sanskritized text.
These words of Kern deserve careful consideration, and perhaps sound a
warning against hasty dogmatism.
APPENDIX I
Councils in Ceylon (Sri Lanka)
According to the Mahavamsa and other Ceylonese
traditions three Councils were held in Ceylon.
The first of these was held during the reign of King
Devanampiya Tissa (247-207 B.C.) under the presidentship of the Venerable
Arittha Thera. This Council was held after the arrival in the island of
Buddhist missionaries, headed by Thera Mahinda, a son of Emperor Ashoka.
According to tradition, sixty thousand Arhatas took part in the assembly,
and as desired by Thera Mahinda, the Venerable Arittha, a Simhalese
bhikkhu, recited the canon. Thera Arittha is considered to be the
first pupil of Mahinda in the line of the Simhalease Theras and seventh in
succession of the Acarya-parampara (lineage of teachers). The
Council took place at the site of the Thuparama in Anuradhapura.
In spite of this, the next Council which was held
during the time of king Vattagamani Abhaya (101-77)
is considered to be the Fourth by the Theravada school although, in India,
kanishka’s council was recognized as the Fourth.
According to the Simhalese tradition, not only was the
Tripitaka rehearsed, but its commentaries were revised, recast and
arranged subject-wise. It is said that as Buddhist religious practice and
culture were threatened by growing materialism and the moral decline of
mankind through wars and families, the learned Mahatheras decided to hold
this synod so that the entire Canon and the commentaries might be
committed to writing. At the end of the Council, the texts along with the
Attha-kathas were inscribed on palm leaves and the scriptures were checked
over a hundred times.
As many as 500 learned bhikkhus took part in the
deliberations under the presidentship of Mahathera Rakkhita. This is
called the Alu-vihara or the Alokavihara Council as it was held at Aloka
Cave in the village of matale in Ceylon. It is said that for the most
part, it was patronized by a Minister of the King.
About a century ago, in 1865. A.D. another council was
held at Ratnapura in Ceylon under the presidentship of the venerable
Hikkaduve Siri Sumangala. It continued for five months and was patronized
by Iddamalgoda Basnayaka Nilame.
APPENDIX II
Councils
in Thailand (Siam)
The Sangitivamsa
, or the History of the Recitals, written by a royal Thai
patriarch named Somdej Phra Vanarat (Bhadanta Vanaratana) during the reign
of Rama I, in B.E. 2332 (1789 A.D.), records as many as nine Councils. Of
these nine Councils, the first three were held in India, the fourth,
fifth, sixth and seventh in Ceylon, and the eighth and ninth in Thailand.
The history of the five Councils including the first two of Ceylon is the
same as that in the Mahavamsa and other Simhalese traditions. The
remaining two councils, as described in the Sangitivamsa, were not
Councils in the true sense of the term.
The Sixth Council in Sri Lanka
The Sixth Council,
as mentioned in the Sangitivamsa, was held during the reign of the King
Mahanama in B.E. 516 in which only the commentaries were translated from
Simhalese into Magadhi (Pali) by Bhadanta Buddhaghosa whose scholarship
had been tested in many ways by the gods and the learned bhikkhus
of Ceylon.
The Seventh Council in Sri Lanka
The Seventh Council is said to have revised only the
commentaries of the Tripitaka of the Mahatheras and finally these
were recited at the Council held under the presidentship of the Venerable
Mahakassapa. This took place in B.E 1587 in the reign king Parakramabahu
the Great. The Conference, which took place in the royal palace, lasted a
year.
The Eighth Council in Thailand
In order to establish Buddhism on a firm basis, King
Sridharmacakravarti Tilaka Rajadhiraja, the ruler of Northern Thailand
called this Council in Chiengmai, his capital. The Assembly was held in
Mahabodhi Arama between 2000 and 2026 B.C. and continued for a year. All
the learned monks in Thailand took part in this Council.
The Ninth Council in Thailand
This Council was held in Bangkok in B.E. 2331, after a
war between Thailand and a neighbouring kingdom. The old capital Ayuthia
(Ayodhya), was destroyed by the fire and many books and manuscripts of the
Tripitaka were reduced to ashes. Moreover, the brotherhood was
disorganized and morally weakened by reason of the prolonged hostilities.
King Rama I and his brother were perturbed at the moral laxity of the
Sangha. They consulted the learned brethren I order to convene a Council
so that the faith might be restored. Under the royal patronage 218 Elders
and 32 lay scholars assembled together and continued the recitation of the
Tripitaka for about a year. During and after this Council, the
revival of Buddhism was I full swing in Thailand. Monasteries were rebuilt
and pagodas were restored. Owing to the enthusiasm of the general public
many new monasteries and temples were also built.
APPENDIX
Councils in Burma
The first three Councils having been in India and the
fourth in Ceylon (Sri Lanka) where Pali books were committed to writing,
the Fifth was held in order to prepare a uniform edition of the Pali Canon
and to record it on marble slabs. This great Buddhist Council was convened
at Mandalay in 1871 A.D. (B.E. 2414) under the teachers participated. The
Elders Jagarabhivamsa, Narindabhidhaja and Sumangala Sami presided in
turn. The recitation and recoding of the Tripitaka on marble
continued for about five months in the royal palace. Various available
editions of the Tripitaka were used for comparison and colation by
the learned Mahatheras, and the recording done on as many as 729 marble
slabs selected for the purpose.
The Sixth Buddhist Council
The Sixth Buddhist Council was inaugurated in May 1954,
in Rangoon, with the collaboration and participation of the learned
bhikkhus of the various countries of the world particularly India,
Ceylon, Nepal, Cambodia, Thailand, Laos and Pakistan. The Venerable
Abhidhaja Maharattha Guru Bhadsnta Revata presided.
About 500 bhikkhus from Burma, well versed in
the study and practice of the teachings of the Buddha, were invited to
take the responsibility for re-examining the text of the Tripitaka.
Similar groups of monks were organized in each of the Buddhist countries
to examine the texts of the Tripitaka. The Great Council that was
inaugurated in 1954 was to go till the completion of its task at the full
moon of Vaisakha, 1956, that is, the 2,500th anniversary of the
Buddha’s mahaparinirvana. It is believed that this anniversary will
bring about a great revival of Busshism and universal peace throughout the
world.
On the auspicious days of the inauguration of the
Sixth Council, which continued for three days, many valuable and important
messages were received form all corners of the world including India. Here
we reproduce the message of DR. Rajendra Prasads, the President of India,
and Shri Jawaharlal Nehru, the Prime minister:
“In sending my reverential greetings to the
Chattha Sangayana which is being inaugurated in Rangoon on the
Vaisakha Purnima, my thought naturally goes back to similar Councils which
have been held during nearly 2,500 years since the Parinibbana of
the Buddha. The first three of these great historic gatherings were held
respectively at Rajagrha, Vaisali and Pataliputra, the three places famous
in Buddhist history and sanctified by the repeated tread on their soils of
the Great Teacher. The other two were held in Ceylon and Burma
respectively, which received his teachings and have till today kept it
alive in their own life and culture. It is a great idea to have the
original texts revised and re-edited and brought out not only in their
original form in Burmese script with Burmese translation but also the
original texts with translations in the Hindi and English languages and
scripts.
The programme of establishing a great Buddhist
University which will serve as a centre for radiating light as a sequel to
this great gathering will help not only to re-enliven and revive the
teaching of the Master, but will also emphasize the great need in modern
times for the spiritual and moral well-being of mankind, which can be
attained not only by supplying its material needs and requirements in
however abundant a measure that may be possible but kindling in him that
spiritual and moral light which alone can solve the problems born greed,
hatred and delusion which are at the root of all the conflicts that
threaten to involve mankind in destruction.
Let us hope that it will succeed in not only
reviving interest in Buddhism in countries where the religion of the
Buddha is not followed today, but also in reinforcing and strengthening
faith in the lives of those who are fortunate enough even today to follow
that faith. May this great gathering once again bring the message of peace
and goodwill to distracted mankind.”
RAJENDRA PRASAD
“About a year ago or more, the Prime Minister of Burma
told me that a Great Council or Synod of Buddhism was being organized and
would be held in Rangoon. My mind went back to the previous Councils in
the history of Buddhism from the days of the First Council which was
called by King Ajatashatru of Magadha at Rajagrha, to that held in
Mandalay in 1871. These Councils were landmarks in the history of
Buddhism.
And now I welcome the holding of the Sixth
Council of this great religion. It is inaugurated on a date of great
historical significance-the 2,500th anniversary of the Buddha.
The full moon which shone with all its brightness on the day of the birth
of the Buddha, on his attainment of enlightenment and on his
parinibbana, will be shining again on this auspicious day two and a
half millennia of human history.
This world Council will consider the doctrines
and tenets of Buddhism and will perhaps codify them afresh for those of
the Buddhist faith. But the Buddha has been something greater than all
doctrine and dogma, and his eternal message of peace more needed for
suffering and distracted humanity than it is today. May this great Council
spread anew his great message of peace and bring a measure of solace to
our generation.
I pay homage to the memory of the Buddha and send
my respectful greetings to the great Council at Rangoon which is meeting
on an auspicious anniversary at a time of great need for the world”
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU
---o0o---
[Content] [I]
[II]
[
III
] [IV]
[V]
[VI]
[VII]
[VIII]
[IX]
[X]
[XI]
[XII]
[XIII]
[XIV]
[XV]
[XVI]
---o0o---
Typing: Quang Huong Ngoc Tram ; Layout: Nhi Tuong
Update : 01-04-2003
