[ p. 207 ]
JUST as the Tevigga Sutta is an argumentum ad hominem to the man wise in the Vedas, and seeking through that knowledge for union with the Deity, urging him to adopt rather the Buddhist method of a life of righteousness here on earth; so the present Sutta is a similar argument addressed to the seeker after the various things specified in its different sections. If he should desire any of these things then let him live the life of uprightness as set out in the opening section, and cultivate the intelligent earnestness and spiritual insight described in the refrain.
The two combined amount, as would naturally be expected, to the Nirvâna of a perfect life in Arahatship—the supreme goal not only of every good Buddhist, but of every good Buddhist argument. As applied in the earlier sections it is only a re-statement of a familiar doctrine; as applied in the later sections it has the additional interest of showing us the answer of early Buddhism to the mystics, as the Tevigga shows us its answer to the theologians. And in the answer we find the details of some curious beliefs which existed in India when Buddhism arose, and which in after times, and especially in the northern church, had so disastrous an effect upon it.
With regard to the reality of these mystical powers our Sutta gives an uncertain sound; leaving, however, an impression rather in its favour. The argument is equally good either way, but the author of the Sutta is so engrossed with Arahatship that he does not stay to say [ p. 208 ] whether he regards the belief in the powers referred to as a delusion or not. I have no doubt that he really believed in their theoretical possibility, which is elsewhere also in the Pâli Pitakas accepted or implied; though the practical effect of the belief has greatly varied among Buddhists in different times and countries. In the southern church, which adhered more closely to the simple doctrines of early Buddhism, these beliefs have been relegated to the region of legend and fairy tale; in the northern church there have been found, from time to time, believers who attached to them a practical importance. There is a useful analogy between the expressions used in 1 Samuel xxviii, and those in the latter part of our Suttas; and between the general position of witchcraft in the history of Christianity, and of these beliefs in the history of Buddhism; but it would take too long to carry out the comparison and contrast in detail here, and with due regard to the necessary limitations under which the comparison should be made. The analogy only reaches to their history, and to their relative importance in the religious systems with which they were connected; the two sets of belief themselves are fundamentally different, the Indian beliefs being much more nearly allied to modern spiritualism and mesmerism.
We have a curious instance of the way in which such legends grow in a parallel passage of the earlier and later lives of Gotama as accepted by orthodox Buddhists. In the Mahâ Vagga[1] it is said that during the first watch of the night following on Gotama’s victory over the Evil One, he fixed his mind upon the Chain of Causation, during the second watch he did the same, and during the third watch he did the same—the only difference in the narrative being the verses with which in each of the three watches the meditation closed.
In the life of Gotama prefixed to the Gâtakas[2]. the simplicity of this account is improved away by saying that [ p. 209 ] in the first watch he acquired the knowledge of Past Births (Pubbe-nivâsa-nânâ, described in our § 17), in the second the knowledge of Present Births (Dibba-kakkhu, described in our § 19), and only in the third the knowledge of the Chain of Causation (Patikka-samuppâda). It is curious that in the corresponding passage of the northern Buddhist Sanskrit poem, the Lalita Vistara[3], we find precisely the same tradition, which must therefore have been current in both northern and southern churches before the fifth century of our era.
I think it is quite possible that at that time it had become part of the Buddhist theory that every Arahat possessed this supernatural insight; and as Gotama was supposed by the authors of these two later works to have acquired Arahatship by his victory over the Evil One, it naturally seemed to them proper to say that he then also acquired these particular powers. It is clear that even in the time when the Pitakas were put into their present form it was considered that the Buddha had acquired them[4], and that they could be acquired by less exalted persons[5]. In the later literature several instances are given of particular persons who possessed one or other of them in a greater or less degree; but it is instructive to notice that these are always persons who lived long before the time of the writer who records the instances.
The early Buddhist doctrine as to witchcraft, astrology, omens, auguries, sacrifices, prophecies, and the like, will be found in the Mahâ Sîla (above, pp. 196-200), and in the Third Fetter (below, p. 222).