Chapter III: Introduction

The 'Garland of Birth-stories' belongs to the Canon of the Northern Buddhists. For the discovery of this work we are indebted to Mr. Brian H. Hodgson, who as early as 1828 mentioned it among the interesting specimens of Bauddha scriptures communicated to him by his old Patan monk, and also procured copies of it. One of these was deposited in the library of the college of Fort William, now belonging to the Bengal Asiatic Society, and was described, in 1882, by Râ_g_endralâla Mitra. Another was forwarded to the Paris library. Burnouf, who thoroughly studied other works belonging to the Sûtra and Avadâna classes, which form part of the Hodgson MSS. in Paris, seems to have had a merely superficial acquaintance with the _G_âtakamâlâ, if we may judge from the terms with which he deals with it in his 'Introduction à l'histoire du Bouddhisme indien.' p. 54 of the second edition: 'Je dis les livres, quoiqu'il n'en existe qu'un seul dans la liste népalaise et dans la collection de M. Hodgson, qui porte et qui mérite le titre de _Djâtaka_ (naissance); c'est le volume intitulé _Djâtakamâlâ_ ou la Guirlande des naissances, qui passe pour[7] un récit des diverses actions méritoires de Çâkya antérieurement à l'époque où il devint Buddha.' In fact, he has never given a summary, still less a detailed account of its contents. It was not until 1875 that M. Féer gave such an account in the Journal Asiatique, VII^e Sér., t. 5, p. 413.

[7] I have spaced the words that prove my statement.

Moreover, Burnouf's statement is not quite correct with respect to the Nepal list. Not one, but three _G_âtaka works are named there[8], the _G_âtakâvadâna (No. 32), the _G_âtakamâlâ (No. 33), and the Mahâ_g_âtakamâlâ (No. 34). Of these only one, indeed, is extant, viz. No. 33, our 'Garland of Birth-stories.' No. 34 may be the work, containing 550 or 565 _G_âtakas, spoken of by the Bauddha monk who imparted so much valuable information to Hodgson[9], or, perhaps, the original of the Tibetan collection of 101 tales, including also our _G_âtakamâlâ, to which two Russian scholars, Serge d'Oldenburg and Ivanovski, have of late drawn the attention of the public[10]. As to No. 32, its title, _G_âtakâvadâna, allows the supposition that it is either a collection of _G_âtakas and avadânas, or that it contains 'great religious exploits' (avadâna) performed by the Bodhisattva, who afterwards became Buddha, the Lord. Nothing is more common than the use of both terms in a nearly synonymous manner. Our _G_âtakamâlâ bears also the appellation of Bodhisattvâvadânamâlâ[11]. In translating _G_âtaka by 'birth-story,' I comply with the general use and official interpretation of that term by the Buddhist Church. The original meaning must have been simply 'tale, story,' as Prof. Kern has demonstrated in his 'History of Buddhism in India[12].' Additional evidence of this statement may be drawn from the fact, that in several of the old and traditional headings of these stories the former part of the compound denotes not the Bodhisattva, but some other person of the tale, as Vyâghrî_g_âtaka, 'the Story of the Tigress,' or a thing, as Kumbha_g_âtaka, 'the Story of the Jar;' Bisa_g_âtaka, 'the Story of the Lotus-stalks,' which are respectively Nos. I, XVII, and XIX of this collection; or an action, as Sîlavîma_m_sa(ka)_g_âtaka, the common heading of Nos. 86, 290, 305, and 330 in Fausböll's Pâli _G_âtaka, Na_kk_a_g_âtaka, ibid., No. 32, or a quality, as Sîlânisa_m_sa_g_âtaka, ibid., No. 190.

[8] See Hodgson, Essays on the Languages &c. of Nepal and Tibet,
1874, p. 37.

[9] See Hodgson, Essays, pp. 17 and 37.

[10] See the paper of d'Oldenburg, translated by Dr. Wenzel in the
Journ. Roy. As. Soc. of 1893, p. 304.

[11] Also cp. the passage of the Avadânakalpalatâ, quoted infra, p.
xxiii.

[12] See I, p. 257 of the original (Dutch) edition.

Some time after M. Féer's compte-rendu of the Paris MS. was published two new MSS. of the _G_âtakamâlâ came to Europe. They belong to the valuable set of Sanskrit Buddhist works which Dr. Wright acquired for the Cambridge University Library, and are described by Prof. Cecil Bendall in his excellent Catalogue (1883). Prof. Kern was the first to appreciate the great literary merits of the _G_âtakamâlâ, and soon planned an edition, availing himself of the two Cambridge MSS. (Add. 1328 and 1415) and the Paris one[13]. This editio princeps was published at the end of 1891 as the first volume of the Harvard Oriental Series of Prof. Lanman. It has every right to bear the name of 'princeps,' not only because Ârya _S_ûra's work has never been edited before, but on account of the critical acumen and the untiring care of the editor, whose exertions have almost purged the text from the clerical errors and blunders which greatly encumber the Nepal manuscripts[14]. Thus, thanks to Prof. Kern, this masterpiece of Sanskrit Buddhist literature is now accessible to Sanskritists in an excellent edition. I have undertaken to translate it, as I consider it a most valuable document for the knowledge of Buddhism.

[13] Dr. d'Oldenburg mentions two more copies; they are at St.
Petersburg. See his paper in the Journ. Roy. As. Soc., p. 306.

[14] Compare the complaint of Prof. Cowell, p. xii of the
Introduction to his translation of the Buddha_k_arita (Sacred
Books, vol. xlix).

Properly speaking, _G_âtakamâlâ is a class-name. It has been pointed out above that in the Northern Buddhist Canon several writings of that name have been made known, and though, so far as I know, this appellation does not occur in the book-titles of the Pâli Tripi_t_aka, such texts as the Pâli _G_âtaka and the _K_ariyâpi_t_aka may have some right to be thus designated. That it is a generic appellation is made plain from Somendra's Introduction to the Avadânakalpalatâ of his father Kshemendra. It is said there, verses 7 and 8:--

'â_k_âryaGopadattâdyair avadânakramo_ggh_itâ_h_
u_kk_ityo_kk_itya vihitâ gadyapadyavi_sri_ṅkhalâ_h_,
ekamârgânusâri_n_ya_h_ para_m_ gâmbhîryakarka_s_â_h_
vistîr_n_avar_n_anâ_h_ santi _G_ina_g_âtakamâlikâ_h_.'

'There exist many "Garlands of Birth-stories of the _G_ina" by Gopadatta and other teachers, who, discarding the usual order of the Avadânas, gathered tales _carptim_, and told them at length in elaborate prose (gadya) interspersed with verse, holding themselves free as to the proportions of the two styles, which they made interchange. They all treat of the praise of the Right Path, but, owing to their profoundness, are hard to understand.'

This definition of that class exactly suits the work, the translation of which is here published. This composition consists, indeed, of verse intermingled with flowery prose built up according to the rules and methods of Sanskrit rhetoric; it claims to be a florilegium, a selection of _G_âtakas, with the avowed object of rousing or invigorating the true faith in the minds of the reader; and the stories are told at length. It has perhaps been the most perfect writing of its kind. It is distinguished no less by the superiority of its style than by the loftiness of its thoughts. Its verses and artful prose are written in the purest Sanskrit[15], and charm the reader by the elegance of their form and the skill displayed in the handling of a great variety of metres, some of which are rarely to be met with elsewhere[16], and are sometimes adorned with the additional qualities of difficult and refined rhymes, and the like. Apparently _S_ûra, to whom the _G_âtakamâlâ is ascribed, was a poet richly gifted by Nature, whose talent must have been developed by thorough and extensive literary studies. Above all, I admire his moderation. Unlike so many other Indian masters in the art of literary composition, he does not allow himself the use of embellishing apparel and the whole luxuriant _mise en scène_ of Sanskrit ala_m_kâra beyond what is necessary for his subject. His flowery descriptions, his long and elaborate sermons, his elegant manner of narration, are always in harmony with the scheme of the whole or the nature of the contents. Similarly, in the choice of his metres he was guided by stylistic motives in accordance with the tone and sentiment required at a given point of the narrative. It is a pity that most of these excellencies are lost in the translation.

[15] The peculiarities of our author are not many, and bear chiefly
on lexicology, not on grammar or style, which show the most
intimate acquaintance with the classic language. His subject-matter
and his faith, of course, necessitate the use of a number of terms,
found in Buddhist writings only; yet he avoids several of them,
which are not good Sanskrit, as vi_g_ita and most of those
signalized by Cowell and Neil in p. ix of their edition of the
Divyâvadâna. He often employs uddhava=Pâli utthava [which itself
is=Skt. utsava], sumukha='propense,' sâtmîbhavati, ºkaroti, ºbhâva,
a term to express the imbibing of qualities into one's nature,
adhyâ_s_aya=â_s_aya, vitâna and vaitânya='dejected' and
'dejection,' vimana_h_=durmana_h_ 'sad,' pratipat and
pratipatti='(good) conduct' and so on. Likewise he uses such words
as vanîpaka, pratisa_m_-modana, (ahorâtram) atinâmayâm âsa, XXVI,
27 ârabhya [=Pâli ârabbha] in the meaning of
'concerning'=adhik_ri_tya, â_s_ritya and VIII, 20
pratyâham=pratyaham. On the other hand, instances of old words and
expressions, and of such as were hitherto only known from the
Dictionaries, are found in his work. So e.g. addhâ IX, 60 and
elsewhere, âkumbha XVII, 5, XXVIII, 31, dâ_nd_â_g_inika in XXVIII,
37.

[16] Among the less common metres I notice the Mattamayûra V,
22-24, XXIX, 4 and 32; the Pramitâkshara XVII, 17, XVIII, 20,
XXIII, 25; the Bhu_g_aṅgaprayâta XXIX, 26; the Prahara_n_akalitâ
or Kalikâ XVII, 20; some metre akin to the Sumânikâ--cp.
Colebrooke, Misc. Ess. II, 141--XXIII, 34-39, for it does not suit
the scheme taught by Colebrooke, in verses 35-39 each pâda
consisting of two trochees and a bacchius, whereas verse 34 is made
up of two trochees and a molossus.

Thus much for the philologist and the lover of Oriental literature. To the student of Buddhism it is the peculiar character of the _G_âtakamâlâ which constitutes its great importance. Although it is styled 'a garland of stories,' it is really a collection of homilies. Each _G_âtaka is introduced by a simple prose sentence of ethical and religious purport, which is to be illustrated by the story. The whole treatment of the tale bears the character of a religious discourse. Prof. Cowell, in his preface to the translation of the Pâli _G_âtaka, observes that the _G_âtaka-legends are 'continually introduced into the religious discourses ... whether to magnify the glory of the Buddha or to illustrate Buddhist doctrines and precepts by appropriate examples[17].' Our _G_âtakamâlâ has a right to be called a choice collection of such sermons, distinguished by their lofty conception and their artistic elaboration. It is a document of the first rank for the study of ancient Buddhist homiletics, and is for this reason entitled to a place among the Sacred Books of the East.

[17] See The Jātaka, translated from the Pâli by various hands
under the editorship of Prof. E. B. Cowell, Cambridge, 1895, I, p.
vi.

_S_ûra took his thirty-four holy legends from the old and traditional store of _G_âtaka-tales. Almost all of them have been identified with corresponding ones in other collections, both of Northern and Southern Buddhism. So far as I could control those parallels or add to them, I have taken care to notice them at the beginning or at the end of each story. The author himself in his introductory stanzas declares his strict conformity with scripture and tradition; and, however much he has done for the adornment and embellishment of the outer form of his tales, we may trust him, when he implies that he has nowhere changed their outlines or their essential features, but has narrated them as they were handed down to him by writing or by oral tradition. Wherever his account differs from that preserved in other sources, we may infer that he followed some different version. Sometimes he passes over details of minor importance. For instance, in the second story he avoids the hideous particulars of the eye-operation, dwelt upon in the Pâli _G_âtaka. The same good taste will be appreciated in Story XXVIII, when the cruel act of the wicked king against the monk Kshântivâdin has to be told, and in Story VIII. Stories XVII, XXII, XXXI are much simpler than their parallels in the holy Pâli book, which are unwieldy, encumbered as they are by exuberance of details. I cannot help thinking that _S_ûra omitted such particulars purposely. For the rest, he does not pretend to tell stories new or unknown to his readers. He acknowledges their popularity; he puts the story of the tigress at the beginning, in order to honour his teacher, who had celebrated that _G_âtaka. He often neglects to give proper names to the actors in his tales. For instance, of Agastya, Ayog_ri_ha, _K_u_dd_abodhi, the heroes of the _G_âtakas thus named, it is nowhere said that they were so called. _G_û_g_aka, the Brâhman who begged the children from Vi_s_vantara, consequently a well-known figure in the legend, is only named 'a Brâhman.' In the same story (IX) Madrî, the wife of the hero, is introduced as a well-known person, although her name had not been mentioned before.

That he closely adheres to the traditional stock of legends is also shown by a good number of his verses. Generally speaking, the metrical part of the _G_âtakamâlâ admits of a fourfold division. There are laudatory verses, praising and pointing out the virtues of the hero; these are commonly found in the first part or preamble of the tale. There are descriptive verses, containing pictures of fine scenery or of phenomena. Further, there are religious discourses, sometimes of considerable length, put in the mouth of the Bodhisattva; they have their place mostly at the end[18]. The rest consists in verses treating of facts in the story, and it is chiefly there that we find again the gâthâs of the corresponding Pâli _G_âtakas. It is incontestable that in a great many cases _S_ûra worked on the same or a very similar stock of gâthâs as are contained in the Sacred Canon of the Southern Buddhists. For the sake of reference I have registered those parallel verses in a Synoptical Table, which is placed at the end of this book (pp. 337-340). Sometimes the affinity is so striking that one text will assist the interpretation and critical restitution of the other. _S_ûra's stanza, V, 11, for example, has not been invented by the author himself; it is a refined paraphrase in Sanskrit of some Prâkrit gâthâ of exactly the same purport as that which in Fausböll's _G_âtaka III, p. 131, bears the number 158. By comparing pâda c in both, it is plain that in the Pâli text no ought to be read instead of vo[19]. It must have been sacred texts in some popular dialect, not in Sanskrit, that underly the elaborate and high-flown verses of _S_ûra. This is proved, among other things, by the mistake in XIX, 17, pointed out by Prof. Kern in the Various Readings he has appended to his edition.

[18] It is but seldom that the verses contain a mere repetition or
development of what has just been told in the prose immediately
preceding. Of this kind are XIII, 16; XIX, 5; XXV, 1; XXX, 5.

[19] Here are some other instances. In the Bhisa_g_âtaka, Fausb.
IV, 309, 11, read puttî ... sabbakâmî, cp. _G_âtakamâlâ XIX, 13,
ibid. 1. 22 sabbasamattaveda_m_ and 1. 24 pû_g_entu, cp.
_G_âtakamâlâ XIX, 16; ibid. p. 310, 3 lattha, not alattha, cp. XIX,
18.--In the _K_ullaha_m_sa_g_âtaka, F. V, 340, 12 kha_nd_a_m_ the
reading of _B^{ds}_ and _S^{dr}_ is confirmed by _S_ûra, XXII, 37
ûna_m_. Ibid. 343, 16 I read tâvad eva _k_a te lâbho kat' assa
yâ_k_anâ _k_a me, comparing _S_ûra XXII, 50, and from XXII, 80 I
infer that F. V, 350, 16 mama is to be read for dhamma_m_, vasu for
vaso, sabbatth' instead of sabb' atth'.--In F. I, 213, 13 a prose
passage may be corrected from the parallel prose of _G_âtakamâlâ.
(p. 98, 8 of the edition); divide the words thus, ku_kkh_ito _g_âto
a_nd_akosam padâletvâ.

On the other hand the Pâli text is of use to correct a passage of
_S_ûra. XXII, 33 c we should read dharmo hy apa_k_ita_h_ samyag
&c., cp. Fausb. V, 339, 22.

As I have already remarked, each story is introduced by a leading sentence, expressing some religious maxim, which, according to Indian usage, is repeated again at the end as a conclusion to the story, being preceded by evam or tathâ, 'in this manner.' But, as a rule[20], the epilogues are not limited to that simple repetition. They often contain more, the practical usefulness of the story thus told being enhanced by the addition of other moral lessons, which may be illustrated by it, or by pointing out different subjects of religious discourses, in connection with which our tale may be of use. Most of these epilogues, in my opinion, are posterior to _S_ûra. Apart from the argument offered by some remarkable discrepancies in style and language and the monkish spirit pervading them, I think it highly improbable that, after the author had put at the head and at the end of each _G_âtaka the moral maxim he desires to inculcate upon the minds of his readers by means of the account of a certain marvellous deed of the Bodhisattva, he should himself add different indications for other employments to serve homiletical purposes. It is more likely that these accessories are of later origin, and were added when the discourses of _S_ûra had gained so great a reputation as to be admitted to the Canon of Sacred Writings, and had come to be employed by the monks as a store of holy and edifying sermons for the purposes of religious instruction.

[20] With the exception of V and XV. In the conclusion of III and
XIII the leading text is repeated, and then more fully developed;
in that of the ninth _G_âtaka it is repeated in an abridged form.

On account of these considerations, I have bracketed in my translation such part of the epilogues as seemed to me later interpolations. Yet I did not think it advisable to omit them. They are not without importance in themselves. They allow us an insight into the interior of the monasteries and to witness the monks preparing for preaching. Moreover, some of them contain precious information about holy texts of the Northern Buddhists, which are either lost or have not yet been discovered. In the epilogue of VIII there is even a textual quotation; likewise in that of XXX, where we find the words spoken by the Lord at the time of his Complete Extinction. As to XI, see my note on that epilogue. In XII and XXI similar sayings of holy books are hinted at.

Concerning the person of the author and his time, nothing certain is known. That he was called Ârya _S_ûra is told in the manuscripts, and is corroborated by Chinese tradition; the Chinese translation of the _G_âtakamâlâ, made between 960 and 1127 A.D., bears Ârya _S_ûra on its title as the author's name (see Bunyiu Nanjio's Catalogue, No. 1312). Tibetan tradition, too, knows _S_ûra as a famous teacher, and as the author of our collection of stories. Târanâtha identifies him with A_s_vaghosha, and adds many more names by which the same great man should be known. It is, however, impossible that two works so entirely different in style and spirit as the Buddha_k_arita and the _G_âtakamâlâ should be ascribed to one and the same author.

As to his time, Dr. d'Oldenburg observes that the terminus ante quem is the end of the 7th century A.D., since it seems that the Chinese traveller I-tsing speaks of our 'Garland of Birth-stories.' If No. 1349 of Bunyiu Nanjio's Catalogue of the Chinese Tripi_t_aka, being a Sûtra on the fruits of Karma briefly explained by Ârya _S_ûra, is written by our author--and there seems to be no reasonable objection to this--_S_ûra must have lived before 434 A.D., when the latter work is said to have been translated into Chinese. This conclusion is supported by the purity and elegance of the language, which necessarily point to a period of a high standard of literary taste and a flourishing state of letters. Prof. Kern was induced by this reason to place _S_ûra approximately in the century of Kâlidâsa and Varâhamihira, but equally favourable circumstances may be supposed to have existed a couple of centuries earlier. I think, however, he is posterior to the author of the Buddha_k_arita. For other questions concerning the _G_âtakamâlâ, which it would be too long to dwell upon here, I refer to Prof. Kern's preface and d'Oldenburg in Journ. Roy. As. Soc. 1893, pp. 306-309.

Târanâtha, the historian of Tibetan Buddhism, has preserved a legend which shows the high esteem in which the _G_âtakamâlâ stands with the followers of the Buddha's Law. 'Pondering on the Bodhisattva's gift of his own body to the tigress, he [viz. _S_ûra] thought he could do the same, as it was not so very difficult. Once he, as in the tale, saw a tigress followed by her young, near starvation; at first he could not resolve on the self-sacrifice, but, calling forth a stronger faith in the Buddha, and writing with his own blood a prayer of seventy _S_lokas, he first gave the tigers his blood to drink, and, when their bodies had taken a little force, offered himself[21].' In this legend I recognise the sediment, so to speak, of the stream of emotion caused by the stimulating eloquence of that gifted Mahâyânist preacher on the minds of his co-religionists. Any one who could compose discourses such as these must have been capable of himself performing the extraordinary exploits of a Bodhisattva. In fact, something of the religious enthusiasm of those ancient apostles of the Mahâyâna who brought the Saddharma to China and Tibet pervades the work of _S_ûra, and it is not difficult to understand that in the memory of posterity he should have been represented as a saint who professed the ethics of his religion, _non disputandi causa_, as Cicero says of Cato, _ut magna pars, sed ita vivendi_.

[21] I quote the very words, with which Dr. Wenzel translates
d'Oldenburg's quotation from the Russian. See Journ. Roy. As. Soc.,
1. 1. p. 307.

It was no easy task to translate a work of so refined a composition, still less because there is no help to be had from any commentary. The Sanskrit text has none, and the Chinese commentary mentioned by Bunyiu Nanjio is not translated. Repeated and careful study of the original has led me to change a few passages of the translation I formerly published in the Bijdragen voor Taal-Land-en Volkenkunde van Ned. Indië, vols. viii and x of the fifth 'Volgreeks.' Moreover, I have adapted this, which may almost be styled a second edition, to the wants and the arrangements of the 'Sacred Books of the East.'

J. S. SPEYER.

GRONINGEN, _April 16, 1895_.

_G_ÂTAKAMÂLÂ

OR

GARLAND OF BIRTH-STORIES

BY

ÂRYA _S_ÛRA.

_Om! Adoration to all Buddhas and Bodhisattvas!_

INTRODUCTORY STANZAS.

1[22]. Grand and glorious, of inexhaustible praise and charm, comprising excellent virtues and thereby auspicious, are the wonderful exploits which the Muni performed in previous births. Them will I devoutly worship with the handful of flowers of my poem.

[22] The cipher on the left denotes the number of the stanza. The
prose parts of the original are indicated by the absence of the
cipher.

2, 3. 'By those praiseworthy deeds the way is taught that is leading to Buddhahood; they are the landmarks on that way. Further even the hard-hearted may be softened by them. The holy stories may also obtain a greater attractiveness.' So I considered, and for the benefit of men the attempt will be made to find a favourable audience for my own genius, by treating of the extraordinary facts of the Highest One in the world in a manner which is in accordance with the course of facts as recorded by Scripture and Tradition.

4. Him, whose beautiful practice of virtues, while acting for the sake of others, no one could imitate, though bent on self-interest; Him, the blaze of whose glory is involved in his true name of the All-Knowing One; Him, the Incomparable One together with the Law and the Congregation I venerate with bowed head.