§ 4. Reply by Gautama (concluded)

1. “I have been wounded by the strife of the world, and I have come out longing to obtain peace; I would not accept any empire in the third heaven, for saving me from all the ills of the earth; how much less amongst men?

2. “But as for what thou has said to me, O King, that the universal pursuit of the three objects is the supreme end of man,–and thou saidst that what I regard as the desirable is misery,–thy three objects are perishable and also unsatisfying.

3. “And as for what thou saidst, ‘wait till old age comes, for youth is ever subject to change’;–this want of decision is itself uncertain; for age too can be irresolute and youth can be firm.

4. “But since Fate is so well skilled in its art as to draw the world in all its various ages into its power,–how shall the wise man, who desires tranquillity, wait for old age, when he knows not when the time of death will be?

5. “When death stands ready like a hunter, with old age as his weapon, and diseases scattered about as his arrows, smiting down living creatures who fly like deer to the forest of destiny, what desire can there be in anyone for length of life?

6. “It well befits the youthful son or the old man or the child so to act with all promptitude, that they may choose the path of the religious man whose soul is all mercy.

7. “And as for what thou saidst, be diligent in sacrifices for religion, such as are worthy of thy race and bring a glorious fruit’,–honour to such sacrifices! I desire not that fruit which is sought by causing pain to others!

8. “To kill a helpless victim through a wish for future reward,–it would be unseemly action for a merciful, good-hearted man, even if the reward of the sacrifice were eternal.

9. “And even if true religion did not consist in quite another rule of conduct, by self-restraint, moral practice and a total absence of passion,–still it would not be seemly to follow the rule of sacrifice, where the highest reward is described as attained only by slaughter.

10. “Even that happiness which comes to a man while he stays in this world, through the injury of another, is hateful to the wise compassionate heart; how much more if it be something beyond our sight in another life?

11. “I am not to be lured into a course of action for future reward,–my mind does not delight, O King, in future births; these actions are uncertain and wavering in their direction, like plants beaten by the rain from a cloud.”

12. The king himself, folding his hands, replied, “Thou art obtaining thy desire without hindrance; when thou has at last accomplished all that thou has to do, thou shall show hereafter thy favour towards me.”

13. Having received a firm promise from Gautama to visit him again, the monarch, taking his courtiers with him, returned to the palace.

§ 5. News of Peace

1. While Gautama was staying in Rajagraha there came five other Parivrajakas, who also put up a hut by the side of the hut which Gautama had erected for himself.

2. These five Parivrajakas were Kaundinya, Ashvajit, Kasyapa, Mahanam, and Bhaduka.

3. They too were struck by Gautama’s appearance, and wondered what could have led him to take Parivraja.

4. They questioned him over the issue in the same way as did King Bimbisara.

5. When he explained to them the circumstances which led him to take Parivraja, they said, “We have heard of it. But do you know what has happened since you left?” they asked.

6. Siddharth said, “No.” Then they told him that after he left Kapilavatsu, there was a great agitation among the Sakyas against going to war with the Koliyas.

7. There were demonstrations and processions by men and women, boys and girls, carrying flags with such slogans as, “Koliyas are our brothers,” “It is wrong for a brother to fight against brother.” “Think of the exile of Siddharth Gautama,” etc.

8. The result of the agitation was that the Sakya Sangh had to call a meeting and reconsider the question. This time the majority was for compromise with the Koliyas.

9. The Sangh decided to select five Sakyas to act as their envoys and negotiate peace with the Koliyas.

10. When the Koliyas heard of this they were very glad. They too selected five Koliyas to deal with the envoys of the Sakyas.

11. The envoys on the two sides met and agreed to appoint a permanent Council of Arbitration, with authority to settle every dispute regarding the sharing of the waters of the river Rohini, and both sides to abide by its decision. Thus the threatened war had ended in peace.

12. After informing Gautama of what had happened at Kapilavatsu, the Parivrajakas said, “There is now no need for you to continue to be a Parivrajaka. Why don’t you go home and join your family?”

13. Siddharth said, “I am happy to have this good news. It is a triumph for me. But I will not go back to my home. I must not. I must continue to be a Parivrajaka.”

14. Gautama asked the five Parivrajakas what their programme was. They replied, “We have decided to do tapasya. Why don’t you join us?” Siddharth said, “By and b ; I must examine other ways first.”

15. The five Parivrajakas then left.

§ 6. The Problem in a New Perspective

1. The news brought by the five Parivrajakas that the Koliyas and Sakyas had made peace, made Gautama very uneasy.

2. Left alone, he began to reflect on his own position, and to make sure if any reason was left for him to continue his Parivraja.

3. He had left his people for what?, he asked himself.

4. He had left his home because he was opposed to war. “Now that the war is over, is there any problem left to me? Does my problem end because war has ended?”

5. On a deep reflection, he thought not.

6. “The problem of war is essentially a problem of conflict. It is only a part of a larger problem.

7. “This conflict is going on not only between kings and nations, but between nobles and Brahmins, between householders, between mother and son, between son and mother, between father and son, between sister and brother, between companion and companion.

8. “The conflict between nations is occasional. But the conflict between classes is constant and perpetual. It is this which is the root of all sorrow and suffering in the world.

9. “True, I left home on account of war. But I cannot go back home, although the war between the Sakyas and Koliyas has ended. I see now that my problem has become wider. I have to find a solution for this problem of social conflict.

10. “How far do the old-established philosophies offer a solution of this problem?”

11. Can [=Could] he accept any one of the social philosophies?

12. He was determined to examine everything for himself.

Book One, Part III—In Search of New Light

1. *Halt at Brighu’s Ashram* — 2. *Study of Sankhya* — 3. *Training in Samadhi Marga* — 4. *Trial of Asceticism* — 5. *Abandonment of Asceticism*

§ 1. Halt at Brighu’s Ashram

1. With the desire to pursue other ways, Gautama left Rajagraha to meet Arada Kalam.

2. On his way he beheld the hermitage of Brighu, and entered it out of curiosity.

3. The Brahmin inmates of the Ashram who had gone outside for the sake of fuel, having just come back with their hands full of fuel, flowers, and kusa grass, pre-eminent as they were in penances, and proficient in wisdom, went just to see him, and went not to their cells.

4. Then he, being duly honoured by those dwellers of the hermitage, paid his homage to the Elders of the Ashram.

5. He, the wise one, longing for liberation, traversed that hermitage, filled with the holy company desirous of heaven,–gazing at their strange penances.

6. He, the gentle one, saw for the first time the different kinds of penances practised by the ascetics in that sacred grove.

7. Then the Brahmin Brighu, well-versed in the technique of penance, told Gautama all the various kinds of penances and the fruits thereof.

8. “Uncooked food, growing out of water, and roots and fruits,–this is the fare of the saints according to the sacred texts; but the different alternatives of penance vary.

9. “Some live like the birds on gleaned corn; others graze on grass like the deer,=; others live on air like the snakes, as if turned into ant-hills.

10. “Others win their nourishment with great effort from stones; others eat corn ground with their own teeth; some, having boiled for others, keep for themselves what may chance to be left.

11. “Others, with their tufts of matted hair continually wet with water, twice offer oblations to Agni with hymns; others, plunging like fishes into the water, dwell there with their bodies scratched by tortoises.

12. “By such penances endured for a time,–by the higher they attain heaven, by the lower the world of men, by the path of pain they eventually dwell in happiness,–pain, they say, is the root of merit.”

13. On hearing this Gautama said, “Today is my first sight of such a hermitage, and I do not understand this rule of penance.

14. “This is all I would say at the moment. This devotion of yours is for the sake of heaven–while my desire is that the ills of life on earth be probed and a solution found. Will you allow me to take your leave? I wish to learn the Sankhya Philosophy and train myself in the Samadhi marga, and see what help it can give me for the solution of my problem.

15. “There is sorrow to me when I reflect that I shall have to depart, leaving you who are thus engaged, you who are such a refuge and who have shown such excessive kindness to me,–just as there was when I had to leave my kindred behind.

16. “It is not, therefore, any dislike on my part, or the wrong conduct of another, which makes me go away from this wood; for ye are like great sages, standing fast in the religious duties which are in accordance with former sages.

17. “I wish to go to Muni Arada Kalam, who is known to be the master of the subject.”

18. Seeing his resolve, Brighu, the chief of the hermitage, said, ” Prince, brave indeed is thy purpose, who, young as thou art, having pondered thoroughly between heaven and liberation have [=having] made up your mind for liberation, ye are indeed brave!

19. “If what you have said is thy settled purpose go quickly to Vindhyakoshth ; the Muni Arada lives there, who has gained an insight into absolute bliss.

20. “From him thou wilt learn the path; but as I foresee, this purpose of thine will go further, after having studied his theory.”

21. Gautama thanked him, and having saluted the company of sages he departed; the hermits also, having duly performed to him all the rites of courtesy, entered again into the ascetic grove.

§ 2. Study of Sankhya

1. Leaving the Ashram of Brighu, Gautama started [out] to find the abode of Arada Kalam.

2. Arada Kalam was staying at Vaishali. Gautama went thither. On reaching Vaishali, he went to his Ashram.

3. Approaching Arada Kalam, he said, “I wish to be initiated into your doctrine and discipline.”

4. Thereupon Arada Kalam said: “You are welcome. Such is my doctrine that an intelligent man like you in no long time may of himself comprehend, realise and attain my teaching and abide by it.

5. “Verily thou art a worthy vessel to receive this highest training.”

6. The prince, having heard these words of Arada, was filled with great pleasure and thus made reply.

7. “This extreme kindliness which thou showest to me, makes me, imperfect as I am, seem even already to have attained perfection.

8. “Will you, therefore, deign to tell me what your doctrine is?”

9. Said Arada, “I am so much impelled by your noble nature, by your sincerity of character, and by your resolution, that I need not put you to any preliminary examination to test your worthiness.

10. “Listen, best of listeners, to our tenets.”

11. He then expounded to Gautama the tenets of what was known as the Sankhya Philosophy.

12. At the conclusion of his discourse Arada Kalam said:

13. “These are, O Gautama, the tenets of our system. I have told them to you in a summary form.”

14. Gautama was greatly pleased with the clear exposition given by Arada Kalam.

§ 3. Training in Samadhi Marga

1. At the time when Gautama was examining the various ways of finding a solution to his problem, he thought of getting himself acquainted with the Dhyana Marga (Concentration of the Mind).

2. There were three schools of the Dhyana Marga.

3. All of them had one thing in common, namely, that control of breathing was the means of achieving Dhyana.

4. One school followed a way of controlling breathing which is called Anapanasati.

5. Another school followed the way of control of breathing known as Pranayama. It divided the breathing process into three parts: (1) Breathing in (Puraka); (2) holding the breath (Kumbhaka); and (3) breathing out (Rechak). The third school was known as Samadhi School.

6. Arada Kalam was well known as the master of Dhyana Marga. Gautama felt that it might be well for him if he could get some training in the Dhyana Marga under Arada Kalam.

7. So he spoke to Arada Kalam and asked him if he would be so good as to give training in the Dhyana Marga.

8. Arada Kalam replied, “With great pleasure.”

9. Arada Kalam taught him his technique of the Dhyana Marga. It consisted of seven stages.

10. Gautama practised the technique every day.

11. After acquiring complete mastery over it, Gautama asked Arada Kalam if there was anything further to be learned.

12. Arada Kalam replied, “No friend, that is all that I have to teach.” With this, Gautama took leave of Arada Kalam.

13. Gautama had heard of another yogi, by name Uddaka Ramaputta, who was reputed to have devised a technique which enabled a Dhyani to go one stage higher than that devised by Arada Kalam.

14. Gautama thought of learning his technique, and experiencing the highest stage of Samadhi. Accordingly he went to the Ashram of Uddaka Ramaputta, and placed himself under his training.

15. Within a short time did Gautama master the technique of Uddaka’s eighth stage. After having perfected himself in the technique of Uddaka Rama-putta, Gautama asked him the same question which he had asked Arada Kalam, “Is there anything further to be learned?”

16. And Uddaka Ramaputta gave the same reply, “No, friend, there is nothing more that I can teach you.”

17. Arada Kalam and Uddaka Ramaputta were famous for their mastery of Dhyana Marga in the country of the Kosalas. But Gautama had heard that there were similar masters of Dhyana Marga in the country of the Magadhas. He thought he should have a training in their system also.

18. Gautama accordingly went to Magadha.

19. He found that their technique of Dhyana Marga, though based on control of breathing, was different from what was in vogue in the Kosala country.

20. The technique was not to breathe, but to reach concentration by stopping breathing.

21. Gautama learned this technique. When he tried concentration by stopping breathing, he found that piercing sounds used to come out of his ears, and his head appeared to him to be pierced as though by a sharp pointed knife.

22. It was a painful process. But Gautama did not fail to master it.

23. Such was his training in the Samadhi Marga.

§ 4. Trial of Asceticism

1. Gautama had given a trial to the Sankhya and Samadhi Marga. But he had left the Ashram of the Brighus without giving a trial to Asceticism.

2. He felt he should give it a trial and gain experience for himself, so that he could speak authoritatively about it.

3. Accordingly Gautama went to the town of Gaya. From there he reconnoitred the surrounding country and fixed his habitation at Uruvela, in the hermitage of Negari, the Royal Seer of Gaya, for practising asceticism. It was a lonely and solitary place on the banks of the river Nairanjana for practising asceticism.

4. At Uruvela he found the five Parivrajakas whom he had met at Rajagraha, and who had brought news of peace. They too were practising asceticism.

5. The mendicants saw him there and approached him, to take them with him. Gautama agreed.

6. Thereon they served him reverently, abiding as pupils under his orders, and were humble and compliant.

7. The austerities and self-mortification practised by Gautama were of the severest sort.

8. Sometimes he visited two but not more than seven houses a day, and took at each only two but not more than seven morsels.

9. He lived on a single saucer of food a day, but not more than seven saucers.

10. Sometimes he had but one meal a day, or one every two days, and so on, up to once every seven days, or only once a fortnight, on a rigid scale of rationing.

11. As he advanced in the practice of asceticism, his sole diet was herbs gathered green, or the grain of wild millets and paddy, or snippets [of?] hide, or water-plants, or the red powder round rice-grains within the husk, or the discarded scum of rice on the boil, or the flour of oilseeds.

12. He lived on wild roots and fruit, or on windfalls only.

13. His raiment was of hemp, or hempen mixture of cerements of rags from the dust-heap, of bark, of the black antelope’s pelt either whole or split down the middle, of grass, of strips of bark or wood, hair of men or animals woven into a blanket, or of owl’s wings.

14. He plucked out the hair of his head and the hair of his beard, never quitted the upright for the sitting posture, squatted and never rose up, moving only squatting.

15. After this wise, in diverse fashions, be lived to torment and to torture his body–to such a length in asceticism did he go.

16. To such a length in loathliness did he go that there became accumulated on his body the dirt and filth for years, till it dropped off by itself.

17. He took up his abode in the awesome depths of the forest, depths so awesome that it was reputed that none but the senseless could venture without his hair standing on end.

18. When the cold season brought chill wintry nights, then it was that in the dark half of the months he dwelt by night in the open air and in the dark thicket by day.

19. But when there came the last broiling month of summer before the rains, he made his dwelling under the baking sun by day and in the stifling thicket by night.

20. In a charnel ground did he lay down, with charred bones for pillow.

21. Thereafter Gautama lived on a single bean a day–on a single sesamum seed a day–or a single grain of rice a day.

22. When he was living on a single fruit a day, his body grew emaciated in the extreme.

23. If he sought to feel his belly, it was his backbone which he found in his grasp; if he sought to feel his backbone, he found himself grasping his belly, so closely did his belly cleave to his backbone, and all because he ate so little.

§ 5. Abandonment of Asceticism

1. The austerities and mortification practised by Gautama were of the severest sort. They lasted for a long period of six years.

2. At the end of six years his body had become so weak that he was quite unable to move.

3. Yet he had seen no new light, and was no nearer to the solution to the problem of misery in the world on which his mind was centred.

4. He reflected to himself, “This is not the way, even to passionlessness, nor to perfect knowledge, nor to liberation.

5. “Some undergo misery for the sake of this world, others meet toil for the sake of heaven; all living beings, wretched through hope and always missing their aim, fall certainly for the sake of happiness into misery.

6. “Has not something like this happened to me?

7. “It is not the effort itself which I blame,–which flinging aside the base pursues a high path of its own.

8. “What I ask is, ‘Can the mortification of the body be called religion?’

9. “Since it is only by the mind’s authority that the body either acts or ceases to act, therefore to control the thought is alone befitting–without thought the body is like a dog.

10. “If there was only the body to be considered, merit may [=might] be gained by purity of food, but then there is merit also in the doer. But of what good is it?

11. “New light cannot be attained by him who has lost his strength and is wearied with hunger, thirst, and fatigue, with his mind no longer self-possessed through fatigue.

12. “How could he who is not absolutely calm, reach the end which is to be attained by his mind?

13. “True calm and the self-possession of the mind is properly obtained by the constant satisfaction of the body’s wants.”

14. At this time there lived at Uruvela a house-holder, by name Senani. Sujata was his daughter.

15. Sujata had uttered a wish to a Banyan Tree, and vowed a yearly offering to it, if she should have a son.

16. The wish having been fulfilled, she sent her maid Punna to prepare the place for the offering.

17. Punna, finding Gautama sitting beneath the Banyan Tree, thought he was the god of the tree who had come down.

18. Sujata came and offered Gautama the food prepared by her, in a golden bowl.

19. He took the bowl to the river bank, bathed at a ford or a bathing place called Suppatitthita, and ate the food.

20. Thus ended his trial of asceticism.

21. The five ascetics who were with Gautama became angry with him for having given up the life of austerity and self-mortification, and in disgust left him.

Book One, Part IV—Enlightenment and the Vision of a New Way

1. *Meditation for New Light* — 2. *Enlightenment* — 3. *The Discovery of a New Dhamma* — 4. *Gautama who was a Bodhisatta, after Sammabodhi becomes a Buddha*

§ 1. Meditation for New Light

1. Having refreshed himself with food, Gautama sat thinking over his past experiences. He realised that all paths had failed.

2. The failure was so complete that it could have led anyone into a state of frustration. He was, of course, sorry. But frustration as such did not touch him.

3. He was always hopeful of finding a way. So much so that on the night of the day on which he partook of the food sent by Sujata, Gautama had five dreams, and when he awoke he interpreted his dreams to mean that he was sure to attain enlightenment.

4. He had also tried to forecast his future. This he did by throwing the bowl of food Sujata’s maid brought, into the river Nairanja, saying, “If I am to have enlightenment let the bowl ascend the stream; if not, let it go down.” The vessel, indeed, began to float against the current and at last sank near the abode of Kala, a Naga king.

5. Fortified with hope and determination, he left Uruvela and towards evening went along the wide road to Gaya. There he saw a Banyan Tree. He thought of sitting under it in meditation, in the hope of a new light dawning upon him and enabling him to find a way which would solve his problem.

6. After trying each of the four directions he chose the East, which is always chosen by all the great sages for the removal of all defilements.

7. Gautama sat down cross-legged and upright under the Banyan Tree. Determined to achieve enlightenment, he said to himself, “Skin, sinew and bone may dry up as they will, my flesh and blood may dry in my body, but without attaining complete enlightenment I will not leave this seat.”

8. Then Kala, the king of the Nagas, whose majesty was like the lord of elephants, and his wife Suvarnaprabhasa, having been awakened by the vision of Gautama sitting under the Banyan Tree, uttered this in praise of him, being sure that he was destined to attain perfect knowledge.

9. “Inasmuch as the earth, pressed down by thy feet, O Sage, resounds repeatedly, and inasmuch as thy splendour shines forth like the sun, thou shalt assuredly reap the desired fruit.

10. “Inasmuch as flocks of birds fluttering in the sky offer thee reverential salutation, O Lotus-eyed One; and inasmuch as gentle breezes blow in the sky, thou shalt certainly attain thy object.”

11. As he sat down for meditation, a crowd of evil thoughts and evil passions–mythologically called the children of Mara (Kama), which is another name for evil passions–entered his mind.

12. Gautama was greatly frightened lest they should overpower him and defeat his purpose.

13. He knew that in this battle with evil passions many Rishis and Brahmins had succumbed.

14. So he summoned all the courage he had and said to Mara, “Faith is found in me, and heroism and wisdom. How can ye evil passions defeat me? The streams even of rivers may this wind dry up. Ye would be unable to dry up my resolutions, when I am so intent. Better to me is death in battle than that I should be defeated in life.”

15. The evil passions entered the mind of Gautama as a crow goes after a stone that looks like a hump of fat, thinking surely, “here I shall find a tender morsel, here perchance is something sweet.”

16. And finding no sweetness there, the crow departs thence. So like a crow attacking a rock, the evil passions left Gautama in disgust.

§2. Enlightenment

1. To feed himself during the period of meditation, Gautama had collected enough food to last him for forty days.

2. Having routed the evil thoughts that disturbed his mind, Gautama refreshed himself with food and gained strength. He thus prepared himself for meditation with the aim of obtaining enlightenment.

3. It took Gautama four weeks of meditation to obtain enlightenment. He reached final enlightenment in four stages.

4. In the first stage he called forth reason and investigation. His seclusion helped him to attain it easily.

5. In the second stage he added concentration.

6. In the third stage he brought to his aid equanimity and mindfulness.

7. In the fourth and final stage he added purity to equanimity and equanimity to mindfulness.

8. Thus with mind concentrated, purified, spotless, with defilement gone, supple, dexterous, firm, impassionate [=dispassionate], not forgetting what he is [=was] after, Gautama concentrated himself on the problem of finding an answer to the question which had troubled him.

9. On the night of the last day of the fourth week, light dawned upon him. He realised that there were two problems. The first problem was that there was suffering in the world, and the second problem was how to remove this suffering and make mankind happy.

10. So in the end, after meditation for four weeks, darkness was dispelled, light arose, ignorance was dispelled and knowledge arose. He saw a new way.

§ 3. The Discovery of a New Dhamma

1. Gautama, when he sat in meditation for getting new light, was greatly in the grip of the Sankhya Philosophy.

2. That suffering and unhappiness [were] in the world, he thought was an incontrovertible fact.

3. Gautama was, however, interested in knowing how to do away with suffering. This problem the Sankhya Philosophy did not deal with.

4. It is, therefore, on this problem–how to remove suffering and unhappiness–that he concentrated his mind.

5. Naturally, the first question he asked himself was–”What are the causes of [the] suffering and unhappiness which an individual undergoes?”

6. His second question was–”How to remove unhappiness?”

7. To both these questions he got a right answer, which is called ‘Samma Bodhi’ (Right Enlightenment).

8. It is because of this that the Banyan Tree has come to be known as the Bodhi Tree.

§ 4. Gautama who was a Bodhisatta, After Sammabodhi Becomes a Buddha

1. Before enlightenment Gautama was only a Bodhisatta. It is after reaching enlightenment that he became a Buddha.

2. Who and what is a Bodhisatta?

3. A Bodhisatta is a person who is seeking to be a Buddha.

4. How does a Bodhisatta become a Buddha?

5. A Bodhisatta must be a Bodhisatta for ten lives in succession. What must a Bodhisatta do in order to qualify himself to become a Buddha?

6. In his first life he acquires Mudita (joy). The Bodhisatta, having blown off his impurities as the smith blows the dross from silver, reflects that man who has been reckless and becomes sober brightens up the world like the moon freed from clouds. Joy springs up in him, realising this, and he is fervent in his desire to benefit all beings.

7. In his second life he acquires Vimala (Purity). The Bodhisatta has now removed all thoughts of lust; he is kind; he is kind to all; he neither flatters the vices of men nor disparages their virtues.

8. In his third life he acquires Prabhakari (Brightness). The intellect of the Bodhisatta now becomes as bright as a mirror. He fully knows and grasps the truths of Anatta and Anicca. His only wish is for the highest wisdom, and for this he is ready to sacrifice anything.

9. In his fourth life he acquires Arcishmati (Intelligence of Fire). The Bodhisatta in this life fixes his mind on the Eightfold Path, the Four Contemplations, the Fourfold Contest, the Fourfold Will Power, the Fivefold Morality.

10. In his fifth life he acquires Sudurjaya (Difficult to Conquer). He fully understands the connection of the relative and the absolute.

11. In his sixth life he becomes Abhimukhi. In this stage the Bodhisatta is now prepared fully to grasp the evolution of things, its cause, the Twelve Nidanas; and this knowledge, called Abhimukhi, awakens the most profound compassion in his heart for all beings blinded by Avidya.

12. In his seventh life the Bodhisatta becomes a Durangama (going far off). The Bodhisatta is now beyond time and space ; he is one with Infinity, but he still retains nama-rupa out of his great compassion for all beings. He is secluded from others, in that the lusts of the world no more cling to him than water to a lotus leaf. He quenches desires in his fellow beings, practices charity, patience, tactfulness, energy, calmness, intelligence, and the highest wisdom.

13. While in this life, he knows the Dharma, but presents it in ways understood by the people; he knows he must be tactful and patient. Whatever men do to him he bears with equanimity, for he knows that it is through ignorance [that] they misunderstand his motives. At the same time he never slackens his energy to benefit all beings, nor does he withdraw his mind from wisdom; therefore misfortune can never turn him from the righteous path.

14. In his eighth life he becomes Acala. In the stage of Acala, or ‘immovable,’ all strivings on the part of the Bodhisatta cease. He follows good spontaneously; whatever he will do he will succeed in.

15. In his ninth life he becomes Sadhumati. This is the stage or condition of one who has vanquished and penetrated all dharmas or systems, all quarters, and does not enter time.

16. In his tenth life he becomes Dharmamegha. The Bodhisatta attains the infinite divine eye of a Buddha.

17. The Bodhisatta acquires these ten powers which are necessary for him when he becomes a Buddha.

18. The Bodhisatta must not only acquire these ten powers as he evolves from stage to stage, but he must also practice to perfection the ten Paramitas.

19. One Paramita is to be the end of one life. Specialisation in the Paramitas must go stage by stage. One Paramita in one life and not a little of one and a little of the other.

20. It is only when he is doubly equipped that a Bodhisatta becomes qualified for becoming a Buddha. The Buddha is a culminating point in the life of a Bodhisatta.

21. The theory of the Jatakas or the birth stages of a Bodhisatta appears analogous to the Brahmanic theory of Avataras, i.e., the theory of incarnations of God.

22. The Jataka theory is based upon the Buddha having the highest degree of purity as the essence of his being.

23. The Avatar theory does not require that the God should be pure in his making. All that the Brahmanic theory of Avatar says is that God saves his followers by taking different forms although the God may be very impure and immoral in his conduct.

24. The theory that to be a Bodhisatta for ten lives as a condition precedent for becoming a Buddha has no parallel anywhere. No other religion calls upon its founder to answer such a test.

http://www.columbia.edu/…/00a…/ambedkar_buddha/01_5.html

Book One, Part V—The Buddha and His Predecessors

1. *The Buddha and the Vedic Rishis* — 2. *Kapila—The Philosopher* — 3. *The Bramhanas* — 4. *The Upanishads and their Teachings*

§1. The Buddha and the Vedic Rishis

1. The Vedas are a collection of Mantras, i.e., hymns or chants. The reciters of these hymns are called Rishis.

2. The Mantras are mere invocations to deities such as Indra, Varuna, Agni, Soma, Isana, Prajapati, Bramba, Mahiddhi, Yama and others.

3. The invocations are mere prayers for help against enemies, for gift of wealth, for accepting the offerings of food, flesh and wine from the devotee.

4. There is not much philosophy in the Vedas. But there were some Vedic sages who had entered into speculations of a philosophical nature.

5. These Vedic sages were: (1) Aghamarsana; (2) Prajapati Parmesthin; (3) Brahmanaspati, otherwise known as Brihaspati; (4) Anila; (5) Dirghatamas; (6) Narayan; (7) Hiranyagarbha; and (8) Visvakarman.

6. The main problems of these Vedic philosophers were: How did the world originate? In what manner were individual things created? Why have they their unity and existence? Who created, and who ordained? From what did the world spring up, and to what again will it return ?

7. Aghamarsana said that the world was created out of Tapas (heat). Tapas was the creative principle from which eternal law and truth were born. From these were produced the night (tamas). Tamas produced water, and from water originated time. Time gave birth to the sun and the moon, the heaven and the earth, the firmament and light, and ordained the days and nights.

8. Brahmanaspati postulated the genesis of being from non-being. By the term non-existence, he denoted apparently the infinite. The existent originally sprang up from the non-existent. The non-existent (asat, nonens) was the permanent foundation of all that is existent (sat, ens) and of all that is possible and yet non-existent (asat).

9. Prajapati Parmesthin started with the problem: “Did being come out of non-being?” His view was that this was an irrelevant question. For him water was the original substance of that which exists. For him the original matter–water–came neither under the definition of being nor under that of non-being.

10. Paramesthin did not draw any distinction between matter and motive power. According to him, water transformed itself into particular things by some inherent principle to which he gave the name Kama, Cosmic Desire.

11. Anila was another Vedic Philosopher. To him the principal element was air (vayu). It possesses the inherent capacity for movement. It is endowed with the generating principle.

12. Dirghtamas maintained that all living beings rest and depend ultimately on the sun. The sun, held up and propelled by its inherent force, went backward and forward.

13. The sun is composed of a grey-coloured substance, and so are lightning and fire.

14. The sun, lightning, and fire formed the germ of water. Water forms the germ of plants. Such were the views of Dirghatamas.

15. According to Narayana, Purusha (God) is the first cause of the universe. It is from Purusha that the sun, the moon, the earth, water, fire, air, mid-air, the sky, the regions, the seasons, the creatures of the air, all animals, all classes of men, and all human institutions, had originated.

16. Hiranyagarbha. From [a] doctrinal point of view he stood midway between Parmeshthin and Narayan. Hiranyagarbha means the golden germ. It was the great power of the universe, from which all other powers and existences, divine and earthly, were derived.

17. Hiranyagarbha means [=refers to] fire. It is fire that constituted the solar essence, the generating principle of the universe.

18. From the point of view of Vishvakarman, it was quite inadequate and unsatisfactory to hold that water was the primitive substance of all that is, and then to derive from it this world as a whole by giving it an inherent power of movement. If water be the primitive substance which is endowed with the inherent principle of change, we have yet to account for that from which water derived its being, and derived the motive power, the generating principle, the elemental forces, the laws and all the rest.

19. Vishvakarman held the view that it was God which was the motive power. God is first and God is last. He is earlier than the visible universe; he had existed before all cosmic forces came into being. He is the sole God who created and ordained this universe. God is one, and the only one. He is the unborn one (aja) in whom all the existing things abide. He is the one who is mighty in mind and supreme in power. He is the maker–the disposer. As father he generated us, and as disposer he knows the fate of all that is.

20. The Buddha did not regard all the Vedic Sages as worthy of reverence. He regarded just ten Vedic Rishis as the most ancient, and as the real authors of the Mantras.

21. But in the Mantras he saw nothing that was morally elevating.

22. In his view the Vedas were as worthless as a desert.

23. The Buddha, therefore, discarded the Mantras as a source from which to learn or to borrow.

24. Similarly, the Buddha did not find anything in the philosophy of the Vedic Rishis. They were groping to reach the truth. But they had not reached it.

25. Their theories were mere speculations, not based on logic nor on facts. Their contributions to philosophy created no social values.

26. He therefore rejected the philosophy of the Vedic Rishis as useless.

§2. Kapila— The Philosopher

1. Among the ancient philosophers of India, the most pre-eminent was Kapila.

2. His philosophical approach was unique, and as philosopher he stood in a class by himself. His philosophy was known as the Sankhya Philosophy.

3. The tenets of his philosophy were of a startling nature.

4. Truth must be supported by proof. This is the first tenet of the Sankhya system. There is no truth without proof.

5. For purposes of proving the truth, Kapila allowed only two means of proof–(1) perception, and (2) inference.

6. By perception is meant mental apprehension of a present object.

7. Inference is threefold: (1) from cause to effect, as from the presence of clouds to rain; (2) from effect to cause, as from the swelling of the streams in the valleys to rain in the hills; and (3) by analogy, as when we infer from the fact that a man alters his place when he moves that the stars must also move, since they appear in different places.

8. His next tenet related to causality–creation and its cause.

9. Kapila denied the theory that there was a being who created the universe. In his view a created thing really exists beforehand in its cause, just as the clay serves to form a pot, or the threads go to form a piece of cloth.

10. This is the first ground on which Kapila rejected the theory that the universe was created by a being.

11. But there are other grounds which he advanced in support of his point of view.

12. The non-existent cannot be the subject of an activity; there is no new creation. The product is really nothing else than the material of which it is composed: the product exists before its coming into being ,in the shape of its material of which it is composed. Only a definite product can be produced from such material; and only a specific material can yield a specific result.

13. What then is the source of the empirical universe?

14. Kapila said the empirical universe consists of things evolved (Vyakta) and things that are not evolved (Avyakta).

15. Individual things (Vyakta Vastu) cannot be the source of unevolved things (Avyakta Vastu).

16. Individual things are all limited in magnitude, and this is incompatible with the nature of the source of the universe.

17. All individual things are analogous one to another, and therefore no one [of them] can be regarded as the final source of the other. Moreover, as they all come into being from a source, they cannot constitute that source.

18. Further, argued Kapila, an effect must differ from its cause, though it must consist of the cause. That being so, the universe cannot itself be the final cause. It must be the product of some ultimate cause.

19. When asked why the unevolved cannot be perceived, why does it not show movement which would make it perceivable, Kapila replied:

20. “It may be due to various causes. It may be that its fine nature makes, it imperceptible, just as other things of whose existence there is no doubt, cannot be perceived; or because of their too great a distance or proximity; or through the intervention of a third object; or through admixture with similar matter; or through the presence of some more powerful sensation; or the blindness or other defect of the senses or the mind of the observer.”

21. When asked, “What then is the source of the universe? What makes the difference between the evolved and unevolved part of the universe?

22. Kapila’s reply was: “Things that have evolved have a cause, and the things that have not evolved have also a cause. But the source of both is uncaused and independent.

23. “The things that have evolved are many in number, and limited in space and name. The source is one, eternal and all-pervasive. The things evolved have activities and parts; the source is imminent in all, but has neither activities nor parts.”

24. Kapila argued that the process of development of the unevolved is through the activities of three constituents of which it is made up, Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas. These are called three Gunas.

25. The first of the constituents, or factors, corresponds to what we call as light in nature, which reveals, which causes pleasure to men; the second is that [=what] impels and moves, what produces activity; the third is what is heavy and puts under restraint, what produces the state of indifference or inactivity.

26. The three constituents act essentially in close relation; they overpower and support one another, and intermingle with one another. They are like the constituents of a lamp, the flame, the oil, and wick.

27. When the three Gunas are in perfect balance, none overpowering the other, the universe appears static (Achetan) and ceases to evolve.

28. When the three Gunas are not in balance, one overpowers the other, the universe becomes dynamic (sachetan), and evolution begins.

29. Asked why the Gunas become unbalanced, the answer which Kapila gave was [that] this disturbance in the balance of the three Gunas was due to the presence of Dukha (suffering).

30. Such were the tenets of Kapila’s philosophy.

31. Of all the philosophers, the Buddha was greatly impressed by the doctrines of Kapila.

32. He was the only philosopher whose teachings appeared to the Buddha to be based on logic and facts.

33. But he did not accept everything which Kapila taught. Only three things did the Buddha accept from Kapila.

34. He accepted that reality must rest on proof. Thinking must be based on rationalism.

35. He accepted that there was no logical or factual basis for the presumption that God exists or that he created the universe.

36. He accepted that there was Dukha (suffering) in the world.

37. The rest of Kapila’s teachings he just bypassed as being irrelevant for his purpose.

§ 3. The Bramhanas

1. Next to the Vedas are the religious books known as the Bramhanas. Both were held as sacred books. Indeed the Bramhanas are a part of the Vedas. The two went together and were called by a common name, Sruti.

2. There were four theses on which the Bramhanic Philosophy rested.

3. The first thesis was that the Vedas are not only sacred, but that they are infallible, and they are not to be questioned.

4. The second thesis of the Bramhanic Philosophy was that salvation of the soul–that is escape from transmigration–can be had only by the due performance of Vedic sacrifices, and observances of religious rites and ceremonies, and the offering of gifts to Brahmins.

5. The Brahmins had not only a theory of an ideal religion as contained in the Vedas, but they also had a theory for an ideal society.

6. The pattern of this ideal society they named Chaturvarna. It is imbedded in the Vedas, and as the Vedas are infallible, and as their authority cannot be questioned, so also Chaturvarna as a pattern of society was binding and unquestionable.

7. This pattern of society was based upon certain rules.

8. The first rule was that society should be divided into four classes: (1) Brahmins; (2) Kshatriyas; (3) Vaishyas; and (4) Shudras.

9. The second rule was that there cannot be social equality among these four classes. They must be bound together by the rule of graded inequality.

10. The Brahmins to be at the top, the Kshatriyas to be kept below the Brahmins but above the Vaishyas, the Vaishyas to be below the Kshatriyas but above the Shudras, and the Shudras to be the lowest of all.

11. These four classes were not to be equal to one another in the matter of rights and privileges. The rule of graded inequality governed the question of rights and privileges.

12. The Brahmin had all the rights and privileges which he wished to claim. But a Kshatriya could not claim the rights and privileges which a Brahmin could. He had more rights and privileges than a Vaishya could claim. The Vaishya had more rights and privileges than a Shudra. But he could not claim the rights and privileges which a Kshatriya could. And the Shudra was not entitled to any right, much less any privilege. His privilege was to subsist without offending the three superior classes.

13. The third rule of Chaturvarna related to the division of occupations. The occupation of the Brahmin was learning and teaching and the performance of religious observances. The occupations of the Kshatriya was fighting. Trade was assigned to the Vaishyas. The occupations of the Shudras was service of the three superior classes. These occupations assigned to different classes were exclusive. One class could not trespass upon the occupation of the other.

14. The fourth rule of Chaturvarna related to the right to education. The pattern of Chaturvarna gave the right to education to the first three classes, the Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas. The Shudras were denied the right to education. This rule of Chaturvarna did not deny the right to education to the Shudras only. It denied the right to education to all women, including those belonging to the class of Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas.

15. There was a fifth rule. According to it, man’s life was divided into four stages. The first stage was called Bramhacharya; the second stage was called Grahastashram; the third stage was called Vanaprasta and the fourth stage was called Sannyasa.

16. The object of the first stage was study and education. The object of the second stage was to live a married life. The object of the third stage was to familiarise a man with the life of a hermit, i.e., severing family ties, but without deserting his home. The object of the fourth stage was to enable a man to go in search of God and seek union with him.

17. The benefits of these stages were open only to the male members of the three superior classes. The first stage was not open to the Shudras and women. Equally the last stage was not open to the Shudras and women.

18. Such was the divine pattern of an ideal society called Chaturvarna. The Brahmins had idealised the rule and had realised the ideal without leaving any cracks or loopholes.

19. The fourth thesis of Brahmanic Philosophy was the doctrine of Karma. It was part of the thesis of transmigration of the soul. The Karma of the Brahmins was an answer to the question, “Where did the soul land on transmigration with his new body on new birth?” The answer of the Brahmanic Philosophy was that it depended on a man’s deeds in his past life. In other words, it depended on his Karma.

20. The Buddha was strongly opposed to the first tenet of Brahmanism. He repudiated their thesis that the Vedas are infallible and their authority could never be questioned.

21. In his opinion, nothing was infallible and nothing could be final. Everything must be open to re-examination and reconsideration, whenever grounds for re-examination and reconsideration arise.

22. Man must know the truth–and real truth. To him freedom of thought was the most essential thing. And he was sure that freedom of thought was the only way to the discovery of truth.

23. Infallibility of the Vedas meant complete denial of freedom of thought.

24. For these reasons this thesis of the Brahmanic Philosophy was most obnoxious to him.

25. He was equally an opponent of the second thesis of the Brahmanic Philosophy. The Buddha did admit that there was any [=some] virtue in a sacrifice. But he made a distinction between true sacrifice and false sacrifice.

26. Sacrifice in the sense of self-denial for the good of others, he called true sacrifice. Sacrifice in the sense of killing an animal as an offering to God for personal benefit, he regarded as a false sacrifice.

27. The Brahmanic sacrifices were mostly sacrifices of animals to please their gods. He condemned them as false sacrifices. He would not allow them, even though they be performed with the object of getting salvation for the soul.

28. The opponents of sacrifices used to ridicule the Brahmins by saying, “If one can go to heaven by sacrificing an animal, why should not one sacrifice one’s own father? That would be a quicker way of going to heaven.”

29. The Buddha wholeheartedly agreed with this view.

30. The theory of Chaturvarna was as repugnant to the Buddha as the theory of sacrifices was repulsive to him.

31. The organization of society set up by Brahmanism in the name of Chaturvarna did not appear to him a natural organization. Its class composition was compulsory and arbitrary. It was a society made to order. He preferred an open society and a free society.

32. The Chaturvarna of the Brahmins was a fixed order never to be changed. Once a Brahmin always a Brahmin. Once a Kshatriya always a Kshatriya, once a Vaishya always a Vaishya, and once a Shudra always a Shudra. Society was based on status conferred upon an individual by the accident of his birth. Vice, however heinous, was no ground for degrading a man from his status, and virtue, however great, had no value [=ability] to raise him above it. There was no room for worth, nor for growth.

33. Inequality exists in every society. But it was different with Brahmanism. The inequality preached by Brahmins was its official doctrine. It was not a mere growth. Brahmanism did not believe in equality. In fact, it was opposed to equality.

34. Brahmanism was not content with inequality. The soul of Brahmanism lay in graded inequality.

35. Far from producing harmony, graded inequality, the Buddha thought, might produce in society an ascending scale of hatred and a descending scale of contempt, and might be a source of perpetual conflict.

36. The occupations of the four classes were also fixed. There was no freedom of choice. Besides, they were fixed not in accordance with skill, but in accordance with birth.

37. On a careful review of the rules of Chaturvarna, the Buddha had no difficulty in coming to the conclusion that the philosophic foundations on which the social order was reared by Brahmanism were wrong if not selfish.

38. It was clear to him that it did not serve the interests of all, much less did it advance the welfare of all. Indeed, it was deliberately designed to make [the] many serve the interests of the few. In it man was made to serve a class of self-styled supermen.

39. It was calculated to suppress and exploit the weak, and to keep them in a state of complete subjugation.

40. The law of Karma as formulated by the Brahmins, thought the Buddha, was calculated to sap the spirit of revolt completely. No one was responsible for the suffering of man except he himself. Revolt could not alter the state of suffering ; for suffering was fixed by his past Karma as his lot in this life.

41. The Shudras and women–the two classes whose humanity was most mutilated by Brahmanism–had no power to rebel against the system.

42. They were denied the right to knowledge, with the result that by reason of their enforced ignorance they could not realize what had made their condition so degraded. They could not know that Brahmanism had robbed them completely of the significance of their life. Instead of rebelling against Brahmanism, they had become the devotees and upholders of Brahmanism.

43. The right to bear arms is the ultimate means of achieving freedom which a human being has. But the Shudras were denied the right to bear arms.

44. Under Brahmanism the Shudras were left as helpless victims of a conspiracy of selfish Brahmanism, powerful and deadly Kshatriyas, and wealthy Vaishyas.

45. Could it be amended? Knowing that it was a divinely ordained social order, he knew that it could not be. It could only be ended.

46. For these reasons the Buddha rejected Brahmanism as being opposed to the true way of life.

§4. The Upanishads and Their Teachings

1. The Upanishads constituted another piece of literature. It is not part of the Vedas. It is uncanonical.

2. All the same, they did form a part of religious literature.

3. The number of the Upanishads is quite large. Some important, some quite unimportant.

4. Some of them were ranged against the Vedic theologians, the Brahmin priests.

5. All of them agreed in viewing Vedic study as a study of nescience or ignorance (avidya).

6. They were all agreed in their estimate of the four Vedas and the Vedic science as the lower knowledge.

7. They were all agreed in questioning the divine origin of the Vedas.

8. They were all agreed in denying the efficacy attributed to sacrifices, to the funeral oblations, and the gifts to the priests which are the fundamentals of the Brahmanic philosophy.

9. This, however, was not the main topic with which the Upanishads were concerned. Their discussions centred round Brahman and Atman.

10. Brahman was the all-pervading principle which binds the universe, and [they maintained] that salvation lay in the Atman realizing that it is Brahman.

11. The main thesis of the Upanishads was that Brahmana was a reality and that Atmana was the same as Brahmana. The Atmana did not realize that it was Brahmana because of the Upadhis in which it was entangled.

12. The question was, Is Brahmana a reality? The acceptance of the Upanishadic thesis depended upon the answer to this question.

13. The Buddha could find no proof in support of the thesis that Brahmana was a reality. He, therefore, rejected the thesis of the Upanishads.

14. It is not that questions on this issue were not put to the authors of the Upanishads. They were.

15. Such questions were put to no less a person than Yajnavalkya, a great seer who plays so important a part in the Brahadarnyka Upanishad.

16. He was asked, “What is Brahmana? What is Atmana ” All that Yajnavalkya could say, “Neti! Neti! I know not! I know not! “

17. “How can anything be a reality about which no one knows anything?” asked the Buddha. He had, therefore, no difficulty in rejecting the Upanishadic thesis as being based on pure imagination.

Book One, Part VI—The Buddha and His Contemporaries

1. *His Contemporaries* — 2. His attitude to His Contemporaries*

§ 1. His Contemporaries

1. At the time when Gautama took Parivraja, there was a great intellectual ferment in the country. Besides the Brahmanic Philosophy there were as many as sixty-two different schools of philosophy, all opposed to the Brahmanic Philosophy. Of them at least six were worthy of attention.

2. Of these schools of philosophy there was one headed by Purana Kassappa. His doctrine was known as Akriyavada. He maintained that the soul was not affected in any way by Karma. One may do, or one may get things done. One may do injury, or one may get someone to kill. One may commit theft or dacoity [=highway robbery], or one may get theft or dacoity committed; one may commit adultery, or one may get adultery committed; one may tell a lie, or one may get a lie told. Nothing affects the soul. An act, however licentious, does not affect the soul with sin. An act, however good, does not bring merit to the soul. Nothing has any Kriya (result) on the soul. When a person dies, all the elements of which he is made join in their originals. Nothing survives after death, neither body nor soul.

3. Another school of thought was known as Niyativada. Its chief propounder was Makhali Ghosal. His doctrine was a kind of fatalism or determinism. He taught that no one can do anything or undo anything. Things happen. No one can make them happen. No one can remove unhappiness, increase it, or diminish it. One must undergo one’s share of the experiences of the world.

4. The third school was known as Ucchedavada. Its chief propounder was Ajit Kesakambal. His doctrine was a kind of Annihilism. He taught that there was nothing in Yajna, Haom; there is no such thing as the fruits or effects of deeds to be enjoyed or suffered by the soul. There is neither heaven nor hell. Man is made up of certain elements of unhappiness in the world. The soul cannot escape it. Whatever sorrow or unhappiness there was in the world, the soul cannot escape. This sorrow or unhappiness will come to an end automatically. The soul must undergo rebirth during eighty-four lakhs [=hundred thousands] of cycles of Mahakalpas. Then only the sorrow and unhappiness of the soul will end, not before nor by any other means.

5. The fourth school was known as Annyonyavad. The head of this school was Pakudha Kacchyana. He preached that there are seven elements which go to make up a being, namely, Prathvi, Apa, Tej, Vayu, Sukha, Dukha and the Soul. Each is independent of the other; one does not affect the other. They are self-existent, and they are eternal. Nothing can destroy them. If any one chops off the head of man, he does not kill him. All that happens is that the weapon has entered the seven elements.

6. Sanjaya Belaputta had his own school of philosophy. It was known as Vikshepavada, a kind of scepticism. He argued, “if anyone asked me is there heaven, if I feel there was I would say yes. But if I feel there was no heaven I would say no. If I am asked whether human beings are created, whether man has to suffer the fruits of his action whether good or bad, and whether the soul lives after death, I say nay to all these because I don’t think they exist. This is how Sanjaya Belaputta summed up his doctrine.

7. The sixth school of philosophy was known as Chaturyamsamvarvad. The head of this school who was alive at the time when Gautama was searching for light was Mahavir, who was also called Nigantha Nathaputta. Mahavir taught that the soul had to undergo rebirth because of the bad karmas done in the past life and in the present life. One must therefore get over the bad, he suggested, by tapascharya. For preventing the doing of bad karmas in this life Mahavira prescribed the observance of chaturyama dharma, i.e., observance of four rule: (1) not to kill; (2) not to steal; (3) not to tell a lie; and (4) not to have property, and to observe celibacy.

§ 2. His Attitude to His Contemporaries

1. The Buddha did not accept the teachings of the new philosophers.

2. His rejection of their teaching was not without reasons. He said that:

3. If the doctrines of Purana Kassyappa or Pakudha Kacchyana were true, then one can do any evil or any harm; one may even go to the length of killing another without involving any social responsibility or social consequences.

4. If the doctrine of Makhali Ghosal is true, then man becomes the slave of destiny. He cannot liberate himself.

5. If the doctrine of Ajit Kesakambal is true, then all that man has to do is to eat, drink and make merry.

6. If the doctrine of Sanjaya Belaputta was true, then man must float about, and live without a positive philosophy of life.

7. If the doctrine of Nigantha Nathaputta was true, then man’s life must be subjected to Asceticism and Tapascharya, a complete subjugation and uprooting of man’s instincts and desires.

8. Thus, none of the paths of life suggested by the philosophers appealed to the Buddha. He thought they were the thoughts of men who had become hopeless, helpless, and reckless. He therefore decided to seek light elsewhere.