spirit of practical benevolence was already at work CHAPTER V. among the Sráman monks, and had probably been at work from an immemorial antiquity. the edicts of A new and unexpected light is thrown upon this Discovery of movement by the discovery of the rock and pillar Priyadarsi. edicts of Raja Priyadarsi. Megasthenes only saw the surface of missionary operations, which he could scarcely be expected to appreciate at their right value. Indeed he seems to describe the labours of the itinerant doctors and teachers with all the covert contempt which a cultured Greek would feel as regards the philanthropic labours of Indian barbarians. But the edicts by which Raja Priyadarsi explained his measures and promulgated his views, furnish a much deeper insight into a religious revolution, which was calculated to regenerate the Indian world. Indeed these edicts are amongst the most interesting relics in the religious history of man. They also serve to indicate the extent of the Indian empire of Priyadarsi, for they are to be found in such widely separated localities as Guzerat in western India, Behar and Cuttack in eastern India, as well as in Allahabad, Delhi, and Affghanistan. Dharma as dis tinet from mo nasticism. The edicts of Priyadarsi inculcate goodness, vir- Conception of tue, kindness, and religion, as summed up in the one emphatic term Dharma. This conception of Dharma is free from every monastic element. There is no warring against the affections under the monastic plea of quenching the fire of the passions. There is no trace of that ascetic spirit which would take away all the poetry of life, and deprive youth of all its pleasures and beauty of all its charms. There are no sentimental sorrowings over the miseries and illusions of existence, no yearnings for a life of celi CHAPTER V. bacy and seclusion, no taste for metaphysical speculations, and no morbid aspirations after Nirvána. Dharma might be almost defined as a religion without a creed and without a theology; for it indicates the simple belief that by acts of goodness and kindness all human beings may promote their own happiness both in this life, and in the life hereafter, without any reference whatever either to worship or deity. Moreover, Dharma cannot be positively identified with Buddhism, although the Buddhist monks of a later age applied the name of Dharma to their own law. The edicts refer to both Bráhmans and Srámans, and to the respect due to both classes of holy men, but that is all. There is one solitary edict in which Priyadarsi recognizes the religion of Gótama Buddha, and refers to the law and assembly at Magadha; and this edict will be brought under consideration hereafter. But with this single exception, the edicts of Priyadarsi contain no allusion whatever to Buddha, either as a teacher or an apostle, or by any of his names; and consequently they do not express the formula of the Buddhist faith:-"I take refuge in Buddha, the Law, and the Assembly." They teach Dharma, and Dharma alone.3 The edicts of Priyadarsi promulgate Dharma in 3 The edicts of Raja Priyadarsi were originally translated by the late Mr James Prinsep, and his version was subsequently revised by Professor H. H. Wilson, in the Journal of the Asiatic Society, vol. xii., article v., on the "Rock Inscriptions of Kapur di Giri, Dhauli, and Girnar." Compare also vol. viii., article xv. The versions of Professor Wilson are no doubt the more accurate transliterations, and are accordingly printed in parallel columns with those of Mr Prinsep in the Appendix to the present volume. It will be seen that in the original renderings of Mr Prinsep there is a greater depth of religious feeling, and a keener sympathy with the natural piety which finds expression in the edicts, than is displayed in the severer versions of Professor Wilson. of the edicts. the form of certain precepts of morality, which lie CHAPTER V. at the root of that religion of the heart which is Subject matter developed by the affections. They inculcate dutiful service to father and mother; kindness and help to all kinsfolk, neighbours, and acquaintance; filial veneration to spiritual pastors; reverence and almsgiving to Bráhmans and Srámans; respect and obedience to masters; kindly consideration towards servants and dependents; frugality and temperance for the sake of increasing the ability to be kind and benevolent; abstinence from all evil speaking and slandering; and last, though not least, a tender regard for the whole animal creation. These edicts are not, however, confined to the promulgation of duties. Some of them specify the measures which were carried out by the Raja for the promotion of the welfare of his subjects. Others, again, are a vindication of his policy, and throw considerable light upon his reign and character. The edicts may therefore be regarded from three different points of view; as conveying his ideas of religious duty; as indicating the progress of his administration; and as illustrating his personal history. affections. The edicts which refer to religion or duty scarcely Duties of the call for comment. They commend themselves to the judgment of all men. They express the universal religion of humanity. The duties they enunciate are taught by every creed; by Christians and Jews, as well as by Buddhists, Bráhmans, and Mussulmans. They are enforced in the edicts by the simple plea that their fulfilment will ensure happiness both in this world and in the next. In some edicts the idea of happiness in the next life is associ CHAPTER V. ated with a conception of heaven. Otherwise there is no allusion to that succession of future lives which finds expression in the doctrine of the transmigration of the soul. Still less is there any allusion to that ultimatum of monastic teaching,-eternal rest and annihilation in Nirvána. Expression of duties in the edicts. Measures of Prohibition of the slaughter of animals. The general character of the edicts which enforce the fulfilment of duty may be gathered from the following paraphrase:-"Men celebrate a variety of festivals; on recovery from sickness, on marriage, on the birth of a son, and on commencing a journey. But such festivals bear no fruit. The great festival of all is duty;-the pious devotion of children to their parents, the respect of servants to masters, the kindness of masters to slaves and dependents, generous help to friends and kinsfolk, alms-giving to Bráhmans and Srámans, and a tender regard for all living creatures. This is the festival that brings forth fruits, for by so doing men may attain heaven."4 The edicts which refer to the administration of Raja Priyadarsi had three main objects in view. First, the abolition of the slaughter of animals, whether for food or sacrifice. Secondly, the establishment of medical dispensaries throughout the empire. Thirdly, the introduction of a state system of instruction in moral conduct. Kindness to animals is an important element in the religion of the edicts. It was perhaps the development of that deeply-rooted belief in the metempsychosis, which fondly imagines that every living thing is animated by a soul that once was See Tablets ix. and xi. in Appendix I. human. When this belief becomes a conviction, the CHAPTER V. eating of flesh meat must seem to the believer to be akin to cannibalism. It is strange that this feeling finds so little expression in the legend of Gótama; on the contrary, Gótama is said to have died in consequence of having eaten too much pork. But it is easy to infer from the edicts that the legend of his biography was compiled in a later and corrupt age of Buddhism, and cannot be accepted as a faithful picture of his life and teaching. Be this as it may, Raja Priyadarsi was no monk. He was a philanthropist of a practical stamp, and imbued with a deep love of animal beings. Probably he had eaten flesh meat from his boyhood, without a thought of the nature of the animal he was eating, or of the misery which was inflicted to procure his daily meal. Like other Hindú sovereigns he had also performed sacrifices of animals to the gods, without a thought of the death to which the creature was subjected. But when he realized the pain and suffering caused by such butchery, his heart seems to have revolted from flesh, in the same way that a woman revolts from the idea of eating a pet lamb or bird. Accordingly he promulgated an edict, in which he prohibited all slaughter of animals, whether for food or sacrifice, because of the cruelty which it involved. He also announced that the daily slaughter of animals in the royal kitchen would be discontinued for the future. In the same edict he prohibited all convivial meetings on the ground that much evil attended such assemblies.5 Perhaps no despotic order has been issued, since • See Tablet i. in Appendix I. |