by Will Durant
* Dates before 1600 A.D. are uncertain; dates before 329 B.C. are guesswork.
* Tradition gives Mahavira’s dates as 599-527 B.C.; but Jacobi believes that 549-477 B.C. would be nearer the fact.16
* It has often been remarked that this period was distinguished by a shower of stars in the history of genius: Mahavira and Buddha in India, Lao-tze and Confucius in China, Jeremiah and the Second Isaiah in Judea, the pre-Socratic philosophers in Greece, and perhaps Zarathustra in Persia. Such a simultaneity of genius suggests more intercommunication and mutual influence among these ancient cultures than it is possible to trace definitely today.
* “Birth-stories” of Buddha, written about the fifth century A.D. Another legend, the Lalitavistara, has been paraphrased by Sir Edwin Arnold in The Light of Asia.
† I.e., vows appropriate to the Uposatha, or four holy days of the month: the full moon, the new moon, and the eighth day after either of them.26
‡ I.e., one destined to be a Buddha; here meaning the Buddha himself. Buddha, meaning “Enlightened,” is among the many titles given to the Master, whose personal name was Siddhartha, and whose clan name was Gautama. He was also called Shakya-muni or “Sage of the Shakyas,” and Tathagata, “One Who Has Won the Truth.” Buddha never applied any of these titles to himself, so far as we know.27
* His mother had died in giving him birth.
* The Bodhi-tree of later Buddhist worship, still shown to tourists at Bodh-gaya.
† The philosophy of Schopenhauer stems from this point.
* The oldest extant documents purporting to be the teaching of Buddha are the Pitakasy or “Baskets of the Law,” prepared for the Buddhist Council of 241 B.C., accepted by it as genuine, transmitted orally for four centuries from the death of Buddha, and finally put into writing, in the Pali tongue, about 80 B.C. These Pitakas are divided into three groups: the Sutta, or tales; the Vinaya, or discipline; and the Abhidhamma, or doctrine. The Sutta-pitaka contains the dialogues of Buddha, which Rhys Davids ranks with those of Plato.34 Strictly speaking, however, these writings give us the teaching not necessarily of Buddha himself, but only of the Buddhist schools. “Though these narratives,” says Sir Charles Eliot, “are compilations which accepted new matter during several centuries, I see no reason to doubt that the oldest stratum contains the recollections of those who had seen and heard the master.”35
* In Buddha, says Sir Charles Eliot, “the world is not thought of as the handiwork of a divine personality, nor the moral law as his will. The fact that religion can exist without these ideas is of capital importance.”57
* Cf. the beautiful form of greeting used by the Jews: Shalom aleichem—“Peace be with you.” In the end men do not ask for happiness, but only for peace.
* The modern Patna.
† “This is a great thing in India,” says Arrian, “that all the inhabitants are free, not a single Indian being a slave.”4
* The excavations of Sir John Marshall on the site of Taxila have unearthed delicately carved stones, highly polished statuary, coins as old as 600 B.C., and glassware of a fine quality never bettered in later India.8 “It is manifest,” says Vincent Smith, “that a high degree of material civilization had been attained, and that all the arts and crafts incident to the life of a wealthy, cultured city were familiar.”9
* “Their women, who are very chaste, and would not go astray for any other reason, on the receipt of an elephant have communion with the donor. The Indians do not think it disgraceful to prostitute themselves for an elephant, and to the women it even seems ar honor that their beauty should appear equal in value to an elephant.”—Arrian, Indica, xvii.
* These antedated by three centuries the first hospital built in Europe—viz., the Maison Dieu erected in Paris in the seventh century A.D.47
* But cf. Arrian on ancient India: “In war the Indians were by far the bravest of all the races inhabiting Asia at that time.”58
† “No place on earth,” says Count Keyserling about Chitor, “has been the scene of equal heroism, knightliness, or an equally noble readiness to die.”61
* In this medley of now almost forgotten kingdoms there were periods of literary and artistic—above all, architectural—creation; there were wealthy capitals, luxurious palaces, and mighty potentates; but so vast is India, and so long is its history, that in this congested paragraph we must pass by, without so much as mentioning them, men who for a time thought they dominated the earth. For example, Vikramaditya, who ruled the Chalyukans for half a century (1076-1126), was so successful in war that (like Nietzsche) he proposed to found a new chronological era, dividing all history into before him and after him. Today he is a footnote.
* Among these modest possessions were twelve thousand wives.65
* Mogul is another form of Mongol. The Moguls were really Turks; but the Hindus called—and still call—all northern Moslems (except the Afghans) Moguls.85 “Babur” was a Mongol nickname, meaning lion; the real name of the first Mogul Emperor of India was Zahiru-d din Muhammad.86
* Later he came to recognize the value of books, and—being still unable to read—listened for hours while others read to him, often from abstruse and difficult volumes. In the end he became an illiterate scholar, loving letters and art, and supporting them with royal largesse.
* The army was supplied with the best ordnance yet seen in India, but inferior to that then in use in Europe. Akbar’s efforts to secure better guns failed; and this inferiority in the instruments of slaughter coöperated with the degeneration of his descendants in determining the European conquest of India.
* Two of his children died in youth of chronic alcoholism.96
* The Moslems hated Birbal, and rejoiced at his death. One of them, the historian Badaoni, recorded the incident with savage pleasure: “Birbal, who had fled from fear of his life, was slain, and entered the row of the dogs in Hell.”99
* With the exception of the transient persecution of Islam (1582-5).
* I.e., “Light of the World”; also called Nur Mahal–“Light of the Palace.” Jehangir means “Conqueror of the World”; Shah Jehan, of course, was “King of the World.”
† This throne, which required seven years for its completion, consisted entirely of jewels, precious metals and stones. Four legs of gold supported the seat; twelve pillars made of emeralds held up the enameled canopy; each pillar bore two peacocks encrusted with gems; and between each pair of peacocks rose a tree covered with diamonds, emeralds, rubies and pearls. The total cost was over $7,000,000. The throne was captured and carried off to Persia by Nadir Shah (1739), and was gradually dismembered to defray the expenses of Persian royalty.114
* The following analysis will apply for the most part to post-Vedic and pre-British India. The reader should remember that India is now in flux, and that institutions, morals and manners once characteristic of her may be disappearing today.
† Vijayanagar was an exception; its people ate fowl and flesh (barring oxen and cows), as well as lizards, rats and cats.4
* We do not know what these “ants” were; they were more probably anteaters than ants.
* Cf. the red rug, from seventeenth-century India, presented to the Metropolitan Museum of Art (Room D 3) by Mr. J. P. Morgan.
* The story of how Nasiru-d-din poisoned his father Ghiyasu-d-din, Sultan of Delhi (1501), illustrates the Moslem conception of peaceable succession. Jehangir, who did his best to depose his father Akbar, tells the story:
“After this I went to the building containing the tombs of the Khalji rulers. The grave of Nasiru-d-din, whose face is blackened forever, was also there. It is well known that that wretch advanced himself by the murder of his father. Twice he gave him poison, and the father twice expelled it by means of a poison-antidote amulet he had on his arm. The third time the son mixed poison in a cup of sherbet and gave it to his father with his own hand. . . . As his father understood what efforts the son was making in this matter, he loosened the amulet from his arm and threw it before him; and then
, turning his face in humility and supplication towards the throne of the Creator, said: ‘O Lord, my age has arrived at eighty years, and I have passed this time in prosperity and happiness such as has been attained by no king. Now as this is my last time, I hope that thou wilt not seize Nasir for my murder, and that, reckoning my death as a thing decreed, thou wilt not avenge it.’ After he had spoken these words, he drank off that poisoned cup of sherbet at a gulp, and delivered his soul to his Creator.
“When I went to his (Nasir’s) tomb,” adds the virtuous Jehangir, “I gave it several kicks.”54
† Still more sadistic refinements of penology may be found in Dubois, p. 659.
* Père Dubois, who, though unsympathetic to India, is usually truthful, gives us a picture of the ordeals used in his time (1820). “There are,” he says, “several other kinds of trial by ordeal. Amongst the number is that of boiling oil which is mixed with cow-dung, and into which the accused must plunge his arm up to the elbow; and that of the snake which consists in shutting up some very poisonous snake in a basket in which has been placed a ring or a piece of money which the accused must find and bring out with his eyes bandaged; if in the former case he is not scalded, and in the latter case is not bitten, his innocence is completely proved.”62
† Tod believes that some of these charters were pious frauds.66
* Among the Dravidians, however, inheritance followed the female line.69
* Certain sexual perquisites seem to have belonged to some Brahman groups. The Nambudri Brahmans exercised the jus primœ noctis over all brides in their territory; and the Pushtimargiya priests of Bombay maintained this privilege until recent times.81 If we may believe Père Dubois, the priests of the Temple of Tirupati (in southeastern India) offered to cure barrenness in all women who would spend a night at the temple.82
† Not all priests were Brahmans, and latterly many Brahmans have not been priests. In the United Provinces a large number of them are cooks.88
‡ This word is from the Tamil paraiyan, meaning one of low caste.
* On the caste system in our time cf. Chap, XXII, Sect, iv, below.
* It should be added that Gandhi denies that this precocity has any physical basis. “I loathe and detest child marriage,” he writes. “I shudder to see a child widow. I have never known a grosser superstition than that the Indian climate causes sexual precocity. What does bring about untimely puberty is the mental and moral atmosphere surrounding family life.”109
* From the Hindu nâch, dancer.
* Strabo (ca. 20 A.D.), relying on Aristobulus, describes “some novel and unusual customs at Taxila: those who by reason of poverty are unable to marry off their daughters, lead them forth to the market place in the power of their age to the sound of both trumpets and drums (precisely the instruments used to signal the call to battle), thus assembling a crowd; and to any man who comes forward they first expose her rear parts up to the shoulders, and then her front parts, and if she pleases him, and at the same time allows herself to be persuaded, on approved terms, he marries her.”128
† Among the Rajputs, if we may believe Tod, it was usual for the prince to have different wives for each day of the week.125
* We must compare this attitude not with our contemporary European or American views, but with the reluctance of the medieval clergy to allow a general reading of the Bible, or the intellectual education of woman.
* More properly sati, pronounced suttee, and meaning “devoted wife.”
* In considering alien customs we must continually remind ourselves that foreign practices cannot be judged intelligently by our own moral code. “The superficial observer who applies his own standard to the customs of all nations,” says Tod, “laments with affected philanthropy the degraded condition of the Hindu female, in which sentiment he would find her little disposed to join him.”163 On contemporary changes in these customs cf. Chapter XXII below.
* A great Hindu, Lajpat Rai, reminded Europe that “long before the European nations knew anything of hygiene, and long before they realized the value of tooth-brush and a daily bath, the Hindus were, as a rule, given to both. Only twenty years ago London houses had no bath-tubs, and the tooth-brush was a luxury.”171
* Chess is so old that half the nations of antiquity claim its birthplace. The view generally accepted by archeologists of the game is that it arose in India; certainly we find there its oldest indisputable appearance (ca. 750 A.D.). The word chess comes from the Persian shah, king; and checkmate is originally shah-mat—“king dead.” The Persians called it shatranj, and took both the word and the game, through the Arabs, from India, where it was known as chaturanga, or “four angles”—elephants, horses, chariots and foot-soldiers. The Arabs still call the bishop al-fil—i.e., elephant (from aleph-hind, Arabic for “ox of India”).200
The Hindus tell a delightful legend to account for the origin of the game. At the beginning of the fifth century of our era (the story goes), a Hindu monarch offended his Brahman and Kshatriya admirers by ignoring their counsels and forgetting that the love of the people is the surest support of a throne. A Brahman, Sissa, undertook to open the eyes of the young king by devising a game in which the piece that represented the king, though highest in dignity and value (as in Oriental war), should be, alone, almost helpless; hence came chess. The ruler liked the game so well that he invited Sissa to name his reward. Sissa modestly asked for some grains of rice, the quantity to be determined by placing one grain upon the first of the sixty-four squares of the chess-board, and then doubling the number of grains with each succeeding square. The king agreed at once, but was soon surprised to find that he had promised away his kingdom. Sissa took the opportunity to point out to his master how easily a monarch may be led astray when he scorns his counsellors.201 Credat qui vult.
* From the Tibetan word pulu, Hindu Balti dialect polo, meaning ball; cf. the Latin pila.
* In one of the Puranas there is a typical legend of the king who, though deserving heaven, stays in hell to comfort the sufferers, and will not leave it until all the damned are released.2
† “The Buddhists,” says Fergusson, “kept five centuries in advance of the Roman Church in the invention and use of all the ceremonies and forms common to both religions.”3 Edmunds has shown in detail the astonishing parallelism between the Buddhist and the Christian gospels.4 However, our knowledge of the beginnings of these customs and beliefs is too vague to warrant positive conclusions as to priority.
* Today there are in India proper only 3,000,000 Buddhists—one per cent of the population.
† The temple at Kandy contains the famous “eye-tooth of Buddha”—two inches long and an inch in diameter. It is enclosed in a jeweled casket, carefully guarded from the eyes of the people, and carried periodically in a solemn procession which draws Buddhists from every corner of the Orient. On the walls of the temple, frescoes show the gentle Buddha killing sinners in hell. The lives of great men all remind us how helplessly they may be transmogrified after their death.
* In the census of 1921 the religions of India divided the population as follows: Hinduism, 216,261,000; Sikhs, 3,239,000; Jains, 1,178,000; Buddhists, 11,571,000 (nearly all in Burma and Ceylon); Zoroastrians (Parsees), 102,000; Moslems, 68,735,000; Jews, 22,000; Christians, 4,754,000 (chiefly Europeans).12
† Nevertheless the name of Shiva, like that of Brahman itself, cannot be found in the Rig-veda. Patanjali the grammarian mentions Shiva images and devotees ca. 150 B.C.16
* The priests of Shivaism, however, are seldom Brahmans; and the majority of the Brahmans look with scorn and regret upon the Shakti cult.26
* Excerpt from the 1901 Census Report to the British Government of India: “The general result of my inquiries is that the great majority of Hindus have a firm belief in one Supreme Being.”29
* Teacher.
* Advaitam; this is the central word of Hindu philosophy; cf. page 549 below.
* When the Hindu is asked why we have no memory of our past incarnations, he a
nswers that likewise we have no memory of our infancy; and as we presume our infancy to explain our maturity, so he presumes past existences to explain our place and fate in our present life.
† A monk explained his appetite on the ground that in a previous existence he had been an elephant, and Karma had forgotten to change the appetite with the body.36 A woman of strong odor was believed to have been formerly a fish.37