Brahmi ( / ˈ b r ɑː m i / BRAH -mee ; 𑀩𑁆𑀭𑀸𑀳𑁆𑀫𑀻 ; ISO : Brāhmī ) is a writing system from ancient India that appeared as a fully developed script in the 3rd century BCE . Its descendants, the Brahmic scripts , continue to be used today across South and Southeastern Asia .
118-591: The Mahāsāṃghika ( Brahmi : 𑀫𑀳𑀸𑀲𑀸𑀁𑀖𑀺𑀓, "of the Great Sangha ", Chinese : 大眾部 ; pinyin : Dà zhòng bù ) was a major division ( nikāya ) of the early Buddhist schools in India . They were one of the two original communities that emerged from the first schism of the original pre-sectarian Buddhist tradition (the other being the Sthavira nikaya ). This schism is traditionally held to have occurred after
236-608: A pictographic - acrophonic origin for the Brahmi script, on the model of the Egyptian hieroglyphic script. These ideas however have lost credence, as they are "purely imaginative and speculative". Similar ideas have tried to connect the Brahmi script with the Indus script , but they remain unproven, and particularly suffer from the fact that the Indus script is as yet undeciphered. The mainstream view
354-453: A "very old culture of writing" along with its oral tradition of composing and transmitting knowledge, because the Vedic literature is too vast, consistent and complex to have been entirely created, memorized, accurately preserved and spread without a written system. Opinions on this point, the possibility that there may not have been any writing scripts including Brahmi during the Vedic age, given
472-749: A Phoenician prototype". Discoveries made since Bühler's proposal, such as of six Mauryan inscriptions in Aramaic, suggest Bühler's proposal about Phoenician as weak. It is more likely that Aramaic, which was virtually certainly the prototype for Kharoṣṭhī, also may have been the basis for Brahmi. However, it is unclear why the ancient Indians would have developed two very different scripts. According to Bühler, Brahmi added symbols for certain sounds not found in Semitic languages, and either deleted or repurposed symbols for Aramaic sounds not found in Prakrit. For example, Aramaic lacks
590-513: A connection to the Brahmi script. But in the second half of the 1st millennium CE, some inscriptions in India and Southeast Asia written in scripts derived from the Brahmi did include numerals that are decimal place value, and constitute the earliest existing material examples of the Hindu–Arabic numeral system , now in use throughout the world. The underlying system of numeration, however, was older, as
708-400: A connection without knowing the phonetic values of the Indus script, though he found apparent similarities in patterns of compounding and diacritical modification to be "intriguing". However, he felt that it was premature to explain and evaluate them due to the large chronological gap between the scripts and the thus far indecipherable nature of the Indus script. The main obstacle to this idea
826-492: A corresponding emphatic stop, p , Brahmi seems to have doubled up for the corresponding aspirate: Brahmi p and ph are graphically very similar, as if taken from the same source in Aramaic p . Bühler saw a systematic derivational principle for the other aspirates ch , jh , ph , bh , and dh , which involved adding a curve or upward hook to the right side of the character (which has been speculated to derive from h , [REDACTED] ), while d and ṭ (not to be confused with
944-475: A late date for Kharoṣṭhī. The stronger argument for this position is that we have no specimen of the script before the time of Ashoka, nor any direct evidence of intermediate stages in its development; but of course this does not mean that such earlier forms did not exist, only that, if they did exist, they have not survived, presumably because they were not employed for monumental purposes before Ashoka". Unlike Bühler, Falk does not provide details of which and how
1062-536: A misunderstanding that the Mauryans were illiterate "based upon the fact that Megasthenes rightly observed that the laws were unwritten and that oral tradition played such an important part in India." Some proponents of the indigenous origin theories question the reliability and interpretation of comments made by Megasthenes (as quoted by Strabo in the Geographica XV.i.53). For one, the observation may only apply in
1180-521: A moment of consciousness (citta) can be aware of itself as well as its intentional object. This doctrine arose out of their understanding of the Buddha's enlightenment which held that in a single moment of mind the Buddha knew all things. The Mahāvibhāṣa Śāstra explains the doctrine of self-reflexive awareness as follows: Some allege that the mind ( citta ) and mental activities ( caitta ) can apprehend themselves ( svabhāva ). Schools like Mahāsāṃghika hold
1298-437: A quarter century before Ashoka , noted "... and this among a people who have no written laws, who are ignorant even of writing, and regulate everything by memory." This has been variously and contentiously interpreted by many authors. Ludo Rocher almost entirely dismisses Megasthenes as unreliable, questioning the wording used by Megasthenes' informant and Megasthenes' interpretation of them. Timmer considers it to reflect
SECTION 10
#17330853755031416-536: A relative or conventional (Skt. saṃvṛti ) truth, and the absolute or ultimate (Skt. paramārtha ) truth. For the Mahāsāṃghika branch of Buddhism, the final and ultimate meaning of the Buddha's teachings was "beyond words," and words were merely the conventional exposition of the Dharma. K. Venkata Ramanan writes: The credit of having kept alive the emphasis on the ultimacy of the unconditioned reality by drawing attention to
1534-408: A significant source for Brahmi. On this point particularly, Salomon disagrees with Falk, and after presenting evidence of very different methodology between Greek and Brahmi notation of vowel quantity, he states "it is doubtful whether Brahmi derived even the basic concept from a Greek prototype". Further, adds Salomon, in a "limited sense Brahmi can be said to be derived from Kharosthi, but in terms of
1652-461: A single utterance, all of his sayings being true, his physical body being limitless, his power ( prabhāva ) being limitless, the length of his life being limitless, never tiring of enlightening sentient beings and awakening pure faith in them, having no sleep or dreams, no pause in answering a question, and always in meditation ( samādhi ). A doctrine ascribed to the Mahāsāṃghikas is, "The power of
1770-448: Is a Mahasamghika Vinaya work which also provides a history of early Buddhism and its schisms. Some scholars such as Yao and Tse Fu Kuan consider the Ekottara Āgama (Taishō Tripiṭaka 125) to belong to the Mahāsāṃghika school, though this is still up for debate. The Lokānuvartanā sūtra (Chinese: 佛説内藏百寶經, pinyin: fóshuō nèi zàng bǎi bǎo jīng, Taishō Tripiṭaka , Volume 17, text No. 807)
1888-477: Is a later alteration that appeared as it diffused away from the Persian sphere of influence. Persian dipi itself is thought to be an Elamite loanword. Falk's 1993 book Schrift im Alten Indien is a study on writing in ancient India, and has a section on the origins of Brahmi. It features an extensive review of the literature up to that time. Falk sees the basic writing system of Brahmi as being derived from
2006-503: Is a text preserved in some Sanskrit fragments as well as in Tibetan and Chinese translation. Brahmi script Brahmi is an abugida and uses a system of diacritical marks to associate vowels with consonant symbols. The writing system only went through relatively minor evolutionary changes from the Mauryan period (3rd century BCE) down to the early Gupta period (4th century CE), and it
2124-532: Is also found among the Mahāsāṃghika tradition, and further evidence of this is given in the Samayabhedoparacanacakra , which describes the doctrines of the Mahāsāṃghikas. These two concepts of contemporaneous bodhisattvas and contemporaneous buddhas were linked in some traditions, and texts such as the Mahāprajñāpāramitāupadeśa use the principle of contemporaneous bodhisattvas to demonstrate
2242-530: Is also not totally clear in the original Greek as the term " συντάξῃ " (source of the English word " syntax ") can be read as a generic "composition" or "arrangement", rather than a written composition in particular. Nearchus , a contemporary of Megasthenes , noted, a few decades prior, the use of cotton fabric for writing in Northern India. Indologists have variously speculated that this might have been Kharoṣṭhī or
2360-412: Is held by "nearly all" Western scholars, and Salomon agrees with Goyal that there has been "nationalist bias" and "imperialist bias" on the two respective sides of the debate. In spite of this, the view of indigenous development had been prevalent among British scholars writing prior to Bühler: a passage by Alexander Cunningham , one of the earliest indigenous origin proponents, suggests that, in his time,
2478-512: Is no evidence to support this conjecture. The chart below shows the close resemblance that Brahmi has with the first four letters of Semitic script, the first column representing the Phoenician alphabet . According to the Semitic hypothesis as laid out by Bühler in 1898, the oldest Brahmi inscriptions were derived from a Phoenician prototype. Salomon states Bühler's arguments are "weak historical, geographical, and chronological justifications for
SECTION 20
#17330853755032596-552: Is said to be defiled. But these defilements, not being of the original nature of the mind, are called adventitious." The Kathāvatthu (III, 3) also cites this idea as a thesis of the Andhakas. According to Vasumitra, the Mahāsāṃghikas held that there were nine dharmas (phenomena, realities) which were unconditioned or unconstructed (asaṃskṛta): According to Bart Dessein, the Mohe sengzhi lu (Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya) provides some insight into
2714-479: Is supported by some Western and Indian scholars and writers. The theory that there are similarities to the Indus script was suggested by early European scholars such as the archaeologist John Marshall and the Assyriologist Stephen Langdon . G. R. Hunter in his book The Script of Harappa and Mohenjodaro and Its Connection with Other Scripts (1934) proposed a derivation of the Brahmi alphabets from
2832-524: Is that Brahmi has an origin in Semitic scripts (usually Aramaic). This is accepted by the vast majority of script scholars since the publications by Albrecht Weber (1856) and Georg Bühler 's On the origin of the Indian Brahma alphabet (1895). Bühler's ideas have been particularly influential, though even by the 1895 date of his opus on the subject, he could identify no fewer than five competing theories of
2950-523: Is the Samayabhedoparacanacakra ( The Cycle of the Formation of the Schismatic Doctrines , Ch: 異部宗輪論) of Vasumitra (a Sarvāstivāda scholar, c. 2nd century CE), which was translated by Xuanzang . According to this source, some of the key doctrines defended by Indian Mahāsāṃghikas include: The Mahāsāṃghikas advocated the transcendental and supramundane nature of the buddhas and bodhisattvas , and
3068-473: Is the lack of evidence for writing during the millennium and a half between the collapse of the Indus Valley civilisation around 1500 BCE and the first widely accepted appearance of Brahmi in the 3rd or 4th centuries BCE. Iravathan Mahadevan makes the point that even if one takes the latest dates of 1500 BCE for the Indus script and earliest claimed dates of Brahmi around 500 BCE, a thousand years still separates
3186-430: Is thought that as late as the 4th century CE, a literate person could still read and understand Mauryan inscriptions. Sometime thereafter, the ability to read the original Brahmi script was lost. The earliest (indisputably dated) and best-known Brahmi inscriptions are the rock-cut edicts of Ashoka in north-central India, dating to 250–232 BCE. The decipherment of Brahmi became the focus of European scholarly attention in
3304-649: The Samavāyāṅga Sūtra (3rd century BCE). These Jain script lists include Brahmi at number 1 and Kharoṣṭhi at number 4, but also Javanaliya (probably Greek ) and others not found in the Buddhist lists. While the contemporary Kharoṣṭhī script is widely accepted to be a derivation of the Aramaic alphabet , the genesis of the Brahmi script is less straightforward. Salomon reviewed existing theories in 1998, while Falk provided an overview in 1993. Early theories proposed
3422-631: The Buddha and other bodhisattvas . It is considered a primary source for the notion of a transcendent ( ''lokottara'' ) Buddha, who across his countless past lives developed various abilities such as omniscience (sarvajñana), the lack of any need for sleep or food and being born painlessly without the need for intercourse. The text shows strong parallels with the Pali Mahakhandhaka. The Śariputraparipṛcchā ( Shelifu Wen Jing , 舍利弗問經, Taisho 1465, p. 900b), translated into Chinese between 317 and 420,
3540-604: The Lipisala samdarshana parivarta, lists 64 lipi (scripts), with the Brahmi script starting the list. The Lalitavistara Sūtra states that young Siddhartha, the future Gautama Buddha (~500 BCE), mastered philology, Brahmi and other scripts from the Brahmin Lipikāra and Deva Vidyāsiṃha at a school. A list of eighteen ancient scripts is found in the early Jaina texts , such as the Paṇṇavaṇā Sūtra (2nd century BCE) and
3658-561: The Old Persian dipi , in turn derived from Sumerian dup . To describe his own Edicts, Ashoka used the word Lipī , now generally simply translated as "writing" or "inscription". It is thought the word "lipi", which is also orthographed "dipi" in the two Kharosthi -version of the rock edicts, comes from an Old Persian prototype dipî also meaning "inscription", which is used for example by Darius I in his Behistun inscription , suggesting borrowing and diffusion. Scharfe adds that
Mahāsāṃghika - Misplaced Pages Continue
3776-502: The Parthian monk An Shigao came to China and translated a work which describes the color of monastic robes (Skt. kāṣāya ) utilized in five major Indian Buddhist sects, called Da Biqiu Sanqian Weiyi (Ch. 大比丘三千威儀). Another text translated at a later date, the Śāriputraparipṛcchā , contains a very similar passage corroborating this information. In both sources, the Mahāsāṃghikas are described as wearing yellow robes. The relevant portion of
3894-545: The Samayabhedoparacanacakra to the Mahāsāṃghikas (Ekavyāvahārika, Lokottaravāda, and Kukkuṭika), twenty concern the supramundane nature of buddhas and bodhisattvas. According to the Samayabhedoparacanacakra , these four groups held that the Buddha is able to know all dharmas in a single moment of the mind. Yao Zhihua writes: In their view, the Buddha is equipped with the following supernatural qualities: transcendence ( lokottara ), lack of defilements, all of his utterances preaching his teaching , expounding all his teachings in
4012-561: The Sanskrit language, it is a feminine word meaning literally "of Brahma" or "the female energy of the Brahman ". In popular Hindu texts such as the Mahabharata , it appears in the sense of a goddess, particularly for Saraswati as the goddess of speech and elsewhere as "personified Shakti (energy) of Brahma , the god of Hindu scriptures Veda and creation". Later Chinese Buddhist account of
4130-518: The Second Buddhist council , which occurred at some point during or after the reign of Kalashoka . The Mahāsāṃghika nikāya developed into numerous sects which spread throughout ancient India . Some scholars think that the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya ( monastic rule ) represents the oldest Buddhist monastic source. While the Mahāsāṃghika tradition is no longer in existence, many scholars look to
4248-424: The grammar of the Vedic language probably had a strong influence on this development. Some authors – both Western and Indian – suggest that Brahmi was borrowed or inspired by a Semitic script, invented in a short few years during the reign of Ashoka, and then used widely for Ashokan inscriptions. In contrast, some authors reject the idea of foreign influence. Bruce Trigger states that Brahmi likely emerged from
4366-664: The phonetic retroflex feature that appears among Prakrit dental stops, such as ḍ , and in Brahmi the symbols of the retroflex and non-retroflex consonants are graphically very similar, as if both had been derived from a single prototype. (See Tibetan alphabet for a similar later development.) Aramaic did not have Brahmi's aspirated consonants ( kh , th , etc.), whereas Brahmi did not have Aramaic's emphatic consonants ( q, ṭ, ṣ ), and it appears that these unneeded emphatic letters filled in for some of Brahmi's aspirates: Aramaic q for Brahmi kh, Aramaic ṭ (Θ) for Brahmi th ( ʘ ), etc. And just where Aramaic did not have
4484-447: The āstika and nāstika traditions of Indian philosophy. The Śramaṇa movement gave rise to diverse range of heterodox beliefs, ranging from accepting or denying the concept of soul, atomism, antinomian ethics, materialism, atheism, agnosticism, fatalism to free will, idealization of extreme asceticism to that of family life, strict ahimsa (non-violence) and vegetarianism to the permissibility of violence and meat-eating. Magadha kingdom
4602-492: The Śāriputraparipṛcchā reads: The Mahāsāṃghika school diligently study the collected sūtras and teach the true meaning, because they are the source and the center. They wear yellow robes. The lower part of the yellow robe was pulled tightly to the left. According to Dudjom Rinpoche from the tradition of Tibetan Buddhism , the robes of fully ordained Mahāsāṃghika monastics were to be sewn out of more than seven sections, but no more than twenty-three sections. The symbols sewn on
4720-623: The 'Middle Country', i.e. Ganges Basin region in the north of India. The Mahāsāṃghikas and the Lokottaravāda subschool also had centres in the Gandhara region. The Ekavyāvahārika are not known from later times. The Caitika branch was based in the Coastal Andhra region and especially at Amarāvati and Nāgārjunakoṇḍā . This Caitika branch included the Pūrvaśailas, Aparaśailas, Rājagirikas, and
4838-430: The 22 North Semitic characters, though clearly, as Bühler himself recognized, some are more confident than others. He tended to place much weight on phonetic congruence as a guideline, for example connecting c [REDACTED] to tsade 𐤑 rather than kaph 𐤊, as preferred by many of his predecessors. One of the key problems with a Phoenician derivation is the lack of evidence for historical contact with Phoenicians in
Mahāsāṃghika - Misplaced Pages Continue
4956-612: The 6th century CE also supports its creation to the god Brahma , though Monier Monier-Williams , Sylvain Lévi and others thought it was more likely to have been given the name because it was moulded by the Brahmins . Magadha (Mahajanapada) Magadha was an ancient Indian kingdom and one of the sixteen Mahajanapadas during the Second Urbanization period, based in the eastern Ganges Plain . Magadha played an important role in
5074-854: The Aramaic alphabet. Salomon regards the evidence from Greek sources to be inconclusive. Strabo himself notes this inconsistency regarding reports on the use of writing in India (XV.i.67). Kenneth Norman (2005) suggests that Brahmi was devised over a longer period of time predating Ashoka's rule: Support for this idea of pre-Ashokan development has been given very recently by the discovery of sherds at Anuradhapura in Sri Lanka , inscribed with small numbers of characters which seem to be Brāhmī. These sherds have been dated, by both Carbon 14 and Thermo-luminescence dating , to pre-Ashokan times, perhaps as much as two centuries before Ashoka. However, these finds are controversial, see Tamil Brahmi § Conflicting theories about origin since 1990s . He also notes that
5192-450: The Aramaic script (with extensive local development), but there is no evidence of a direct common source. According to Trigger, Brahmi was in use before the Ashoka pillars, at least by the 4th or 5th century BCE in Sri Lanka and India, while Kharoṣṭhī was used only in northwest South Asia (eastern parts of modern Afghanistan and neighboring regions of Pakistan) for a while before it died out in
5310-600: The Aramaic script being the prototype for Brahmi has been the more preferred hypothesis because of its geographic proximity to the Indian subcontinent, and its influence likely arising because Aramaic was the bureaucratic language of the Achaemenid empire. However, this hypothesis does not explain the mystery of why two very different scripts, Kharoṣṭhī and Brahmi, developed from the same Aramaic. A possible explanation might be that Ashoka created an imperial script for his edicts, but there
5428-614: The Bodhisattva was subject to the law of karma. If one attained arhathood, he was free of the karmic law; and once the arhat died, he entered nirvāṇa never to return to the world of saṃsāra. But living in the cycle of saṃsāra, the Bodhisattva was bound to the law of karma. In contrast to this school the Mahāsāṃghika held that the Bodhisattva has already sundered karmic bondage and, therefore, is born in durgati out of his own free will, his deep vow ( praṇidhāna ) of salvation. The concept of many bodhisattvas simultaneously working toward buddhahood
5546-451: The Chinese version calls him Bhagavan . This points to the idea that the Buddha was already awakened before descending down to earth. Similarly, the idea that the lifespan of a Buddha is limitless is also based on very ancient ideas. The Mahāparinirvānasūtra states that the Buddha's lifespan is as long as an eon (kalpa) and that he voluntarily chose to give up his life. Another early source for
5664-587: The Indian state of Bihar . The region of Greater Magadha also included neighbouring regions in the eastern Gangetic plains and had a distinct culture and belief. Much of the Second Urbanisation took place here from ( c. 500 BCE ) onwards, and it was here that Jainism and Buddhism arose. Some scholars have identified the Kīkaṭa tribe—mentioned in the Rigveda (3.53.14) with their ruler Pramaganda—as
5782-468: The Indus script, the match being considerably higher than that of Aramaic in his estimation. British archaeologist Raymond Allchin stated that there is a powerful argument against the idea that the Brahmi script has Semitic borrowing because the whole structure and conception is quite different. He at one time suggested that the origin may have been purely indigenous with the Indus script as its predecessor. However, Allchin and Erdosy later in 1995 expressed
5900-539: The Indus valley and adjacent areas in the third millennium B.C. The number of different signs suggest a syllabic script, but all attempts at decipherment have been unsuccessful so far. Attempts by some Indian scholars to connect this undeciphered script with the Indian scripts in vogue from the third century B.C. onward are total failures." Megasthenes , a Greek ambassador to the Mauryan court in Northeastern India only
6018-478: The Kharoṣṭhī script, itself a derivative of Aramaic. At the time of his writing, the Ashoka edicts were the oldest confidently dateable examples of Brahmi, and he perceives in them "a clear development in language from a faulty linguistic style to a well honed one" over time, which he takes to indicate that the script had been recently developed. Falk deviates from the mainstream of opinion in seeing Greek as also being
SECTION 50
#17330853755036136-579: The Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya (Chinese: Mohe Sengqi Lü) translated by Faxian (337–422 CE) contains proto-Mahayana elements and "reflects the nascent formation of the Mahāyāna Dharma teachings." The Mahāvastu (Sanskrit for "Great Event" or "Great Story") is the most well known of the Lokottaravāda branch of the Mahāsāṃghika school. It is a preface to their Vinaya Pitaka and contains numerous Jātaka and Avadāna tales, stories of past lives of
6254-405: The Mahāsāṃghika nikāya, although it is not agreed upon by all what the cause of this split was. According to Jan Nattier and Charles S. Prebish, the best date for the first schism and the creation of the Mahāsāṃghika as a separate community is 116 years after the Buddha's nirvana. Some Buddhist historical sources mention that the cause for schism was a dispute over vinaya (monastic rule), mainly
6372-447: The Mahāsāṃghika tradition as an early source for some ideas that were later adopted by Mahāyāna Buddhism . Some of these ideas include the view that the Buddha was a fully transcendent being (term " lokottaravada ", "transcendentalism"), the idea that there are many contemporaneous Buddhas and bodhisattvas throughout the universe, the doctrine of the inherent purity and luminosity of the mind ( Skt: prakṛtiś cittasya prabhāsvarā ),
6490-466: The Mahāsāṃghika view that a Buddha was a transcendent being is the idea of the thirty-two major marks of a Buddha's body. Furthermore, the Simpsapa sutta states that the Buddha had way more knowledge than what he taught to his disciples. The Mahāsāṃghikas took this further and argued that the Buddha knew the dharmas of innumerable other Buddhas of the ten directions. Of the 48 special theses attributed by
6608-492: The Mahāsāṃghika vinaya is the oldest. According to Skilton, future historians may determine that a study of the Mahāsāṃghika school will contribute to a better understanding of the early Dhamma-Vinaya than the Theravāda school. Regarding the issue with Mahadeva's doctrine, this seems to have been a later doctrinal dispute within the Mahāsāṃghika community (which happened after the schism). The followers of Mahadeva seem to have been
6726-469: The Pali language was Magadhi Prakrit , and that because pāḷi means "line, row, series", the early Buddhists extended the meaning of the term to mean "a series of books", so pāḷibhāsā means "language of the texts". Nonetheless, Pali does retain some eastern features that have been referred to as Māgadhisms . Magadhi Prakrit was one of the three dramatic prakrits to emerge following the decline of Sanskrit. It
6844-525: The Prakrit/Sanskrit word for writing itself, lipi is similar to the Old Persian word dipi , suggesting a probable borrowing. A few of the Ashoka edicts from the region nearest the Persian empire use dipi as the Prakrit word for writing, which appears as lipi elsewhere, and this geographic distribution has long been taken, at least back to Bühler's time, as an indication that the standard lipi form
6962-416: The Semitic emphatic ṭ ) were derived by back formation from dh and ṭh . The attached table lists the correspondences between Brahmi and North Semitic scripts. Bühler states that both Phoenician and Brahmi had three voiceless sibilants , but because the alphabetical ordering was lost, the correspondences among them are not clear. Bühler was able to suggest Brahmi derivatives corresponding to all of
7080-541: The Semitic hypothesis are similar to Gnanadesikan's trans-cultural diffusion view of the development of Brahmi and Kharoṣṭhī, in which the idea of alphabetic sound representation was learned from the Aramaic-speaking Persians, but much of the writing system was a novel development tailored to the phonology of Prakrit. Further evidence cited in favor of Persian influence has been the Hultzsch proposal in 1925 that
7198-686: The Siddhārthikas. Finally, Madhyadesa was home to the Prajñaptivādins . The ancient Buddhist sites in the lower Krishna Valley , including Amarāvati, Nāgārjunakoṇḍā and Jaggayyapeṭa , "can be traced to at least the third century BCE, if not earlier." The cave temples at the Ajaṇṭā Caves , the Ellora Caves , and the Karla Caves are associated with the Mahāsāṃghikas. Between 148 and 170 CE,
SECTION 60
#17330853755037316-515: The Sthaviras as being a breakaway group which was attempting to modify the original Vinaya and to make it more strict. Scholars have generally agreed that the matter of dispute was indeed a matter of vinaya, and have noted that the account of the Mahāsāṃghikas is bolstered by the vinaya texts themselves, as vinayas associated with the Sthaviras do contain more rules than those of the Mahāsāṃghika vinaya. Modern scholarship therefore generally agrees that
7434-401: The Vedic hymns may well have been achieved orally, but that the development of Panini's grammar presupposes writing (consistent with a development of Indian writing in c. the 4th century BCE). Several divergent accounts of the origin of the name "Brahmi" (ब्राह्मी) appear in history. The term Brahmi (बाम्भी in original) appears in Indian texts in different contexts. According to the rules of
7552-448: The actual forms of the characters, the differences between the two Indian scripts are much greater than the similarities". Falk also dated the origin of Kharoṣṭhī to no earlier than 325 BCE, based on a proposed connection to the Greek conquest. Salomon questions Falk's arguments as to the date of Kharoṣṭhī and writes that it is "speculative at best and hardly constitutes firm grounds for
7670-425: The appearance of the Brahmi and scripts up into the third century CE. These graffiti usually appear singly, though on occasion may be found in groups of two or three, and are thought to have been family, clan, or religious symbols. In 1935, C. L. Fábri proposed that symbols found on Mauryan punch-marked coins were remnants of the Indus script that had survived the collapse of the Indus civilization. Another form of
7788-782: The areas that are today the nations of Bangladesh and Nepal . The ancient kingdom of Magadha is heavily mentioned in Jain and Buddhist texts . It is also mentioned in the Ramayana , the Mahabharata and the Puranas . There is little certain information available on the early rulers of Magadha. The most important sources are the Buddhist Pāli Canon , the Jain Agamas and the Hindu Puranas . Based on these sources, it appears that Magadha
7906-546: The best evidence is that no script was used or ever known in India, aside from the Persian-dominated Northwest where Aramaic was used, before around 300 BCE because Indian tradition "at every occasion stresses the orality of the cultural and literary heritage", yet Scharfe in the same book admits that "a script has been discovered in the excavations of the Indus Valley Civilization that flourished in
8024-476: The characters to stick figures . It was known by a variety of other names, including "lath", "Laṭ", "Southern Aśokan", "Indian Pali" or "Mauryan" ( Salomon 1998 , p. 17), until the 1880s when Albert Étienne Jean Baptiste Terrien de Lacouperie , based on an observation by Gabriel Devéria , associated it with the Brahmi script, the first in a list of scripts mentioned in the Lalitavistara Sūtra . Thence
8142-539: The context of the kingdom of "Sandrakottos" (Chandragupta). Elsewhere in Strabo (Strab. XV.i.39), Megasthenes is said to have noted that it was a regular custom in India for the "philosopher" caste (presumably Brahmins) to submit "anything useful which they have committed to writing" to kings, but this detail does not appear in parallel extracts of Megasthenes found in Arrian and Diodorus Siculus . The implication of writing per se
8260-414: The countless buddhas of the ten directions." It is also stated, "All buddhas have one body, the body of the Dharma." In the view of Mahāsāṃghikas, advanced bodhisattvas have severed the bonds of karma , and are born out of their own free will into lower states of existence (Skt. durgati ) in order to help liberate other sentient beings. As described by Akira Hirakawa: The Sarvāstivādin also taught that
8378-463: The culture of Magadha was in fundamental ways different from the Vedic kingdoms of the Indo-Aryans . According to Bronkhorst, the śramana culture arose in " Greater Magadha ," which was Indo-Aryan, but not Vedic . In this culture, Kshatriyas were placed higher than Brahmins , and it rejected Vedic authority and rituals. He argues for a cultural area termed " Greater Magadha ", defined as roughly
8496-600: The cyclic rounds of rebirth and karmic retribution through spiritual knowledge. Beginning in the Theravada commentaries, the Pali language has been identified with Magadhi , the language of the kingdom of Magadha, and this was taken to also be the language that the Buddha used during his life. In the 19th century, the British Orientalist Robert Caesar Childers argued that the true or geographical name of
8614-500: The desire of certain Sthaviras (elders) to add extra rules to make the vinaya more rigorous. Other sources, especially Sthavira sources like those of the Sarvastivada school, argue that the main cause was a doctrinal issue. They blame a figure named Mahadeva with arguing for five divisive points, four of which see arhatship as a lesser kind of spiritual attainment (which still has ignorance and desire). Andrew Skilton has suggested that
8732-544: The development of Jainism and Buddhism . The territory of the Magadha kingdom proper before its expansion was bounded to the north, west, and east respectively by the Gaṅgā , Son , and Campā rivers, and the eastern spurs of the Vindhya mountains formed its southern border. The territory of the initial Magadha kingdom thus corresponded to the modern-day Patna and Gaya districts of
8850-512: The doctrine of reflexive awareness ( svasamvedana ) and the doctrine of prajñapti-matra (absolute nominalism or pure conceptualism). Most sources place the origin of the Mahāsāṃghikas to the Second Buddhist council . Traditions regarding the Second Council are confusing and ambiguous, but it is agreed that the overall result was the first schism in the Sangha between the Sthavira nikāya and
8968-432: The earliest attested orally transmitted example dates to the middle of the 3rd century CE in a Sanskrit prose adaptation of a lost Greek work on astrology . The Brahmi script is mentioned in the ancient Indian texts of the three major Dharmic religions : Hinduism , Jainism , and Buddhism , as well as their Chinese translations . For example, the 10th chapter of the Lalitavistara Sūtra (c. 200–300 CE), titled
9086-650: The early 19th-century during East India Company rule in India , in particular in the Asiatic Society of Bengal in Calcutta . Brahmi was deciphered by James Prinsep , the secretary of the Society, in a series of scholarly articles in the Society's journal in the 1830s. His breakthroughs built on the epigraphic work of Christian Lassen , Edwin Norris , H. H. Wilson and Alexander Cunningham , among others. The origin of
9204-521: The early Mahāsāṃghikas rejected the abhidharmic developments that occurred within Sarvāstivāda circles. As is the case with their Vinayapiṭaka, also their Sutrapiṭaka seems to have consisted of five parts ( āgama ): * Dīrghāgama ,* Madhyamāgama ,* Saṃyuktāgama , * Ekottarāgama and * Kṣudrakāgama . Dessein also mentions that the school probably also had a Bodhisattvapiṭaka, which included material that "in all likelihood consisted of texts that formed part of
9322-547: The early development of the bodhisattva path as an alternative career to that of the arhant, perhaps serving as a foundation for the later developments of the bodhisattva doctrine". According to Zhihua Yao, the following Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya texts are extant in Chinese: Mahāsāṃghika bhiksuni-vinaya , Pratimoksa-sutra , Sphutartha Srighanacarasamgrahatika, Abhisamacarika-Dharma and the Mahavastu . Zhan Ru also notes that
9440-588: The essential real Buddha was equated with the Dharmakāya . The Mahāsāṃghika Lokānuvartanā sūtra makes numerous supramundane claims about the Buddha, including that: Like the Mahāyāna traditions, the Mahāsāṃghikas held the doctrine of the existence of many contemporaneous buddhas throughout the ten directions. In the Mahāsāṃghika Lokānuvartana Sūtra , it is stated, "The Buddha knows all the dharmas of
9558-582: The fallibility of arhats . Xing also notes that the Acchariyābbhūtasutta of the Majjhimanikāya along with its Chinese Madhyamāgama parallel version is the most prominent evidence for the ancient source of the Mahāsāṃghika view of the Buddha. The sutra mentions various miracles performed by the Buddha before his birth and after. While the Pāli sutta uses the term bodhisattva for the Buddha before his birth,
9676-503: The following view: It is the nature of awareness ( jñāna ) and so forth to apprehend, thus awareness can apprehend itself as well as others. This is like a lamp that can illuminate itself and others owing to its nature ( svabhāva ) of luminosity. Some Mahāsāṃghikas also held that the mind's nature ( cittasvabhāva ) is fundamentally pure ( mulavisuddha ), but it can be contaminated by adventitious defilements. Vasumitra's Nikayabheda-dharmamati-chakra-sastra also discusses this theory, and cites
9794-738: The forefathers of Magadhas because Kikata is used as synonym for Magadha in the later texts; Like the Magadhas in the Atharvaveda, the Rigveda speaks of the Kikatas as a hostile tribe, living on the borders of Brahmanical India, who did not perform Vedic rituals. The earliest reference to the Magadha people occurs in the Atharvaveda , where they are found listed along with the Angas , Gandharis and Mujavats. The core of
9912-604: The format of this school's textual canon. They appear to have had a Vinaya in five parts, an Abhidharmapiṭaka , and a Sutrapiṭaka : Of these texts, their Vinaya was translated into Chinese by Buddhabhadra and Faxian between 416 and 418 CE in the Daochang Monastery in Nanjing, capital of the Eastern Jin Dynasty. In this text, their Abhidharma is defined as "the sūtrānta in nine parts" ( navāṅga ). This suggests that
10030-407: The geographical area in which the Buddha and Mahavira lived and taught. With regard to the Buddha, this area stretched by and large from Śrāvastī , the capital of Kosala , in the north-west to Rājagṛha , the capital of Magadha, in the south-east". According to Bronkhorst, "there was indeed a culture of Greater Magadha which remained recognizably distinct from Vedic culture until the time of
10148-553: The grammarian Patañjali (ca. 150 BCE) and beyond". The Buddhologist Alexander Wynne writes that there is an "overwhelming amount of evidence" to suggest that this rival culture to the Vedic Aryans dominated the eastern Gangetic plain during the early Buddhist period. Orthodox Vedic Brahmins were, therefore, a minority in Magadha during this early period. The Magadhan religions are termed the sramana traditions and include Jainism , Buddhism and Ājīvika . Buddhism and Jainism were
10266-490: The indigenous origin theory is that Brahmi was invented ex nihilo , entirely independently from either Semitic models or the Indus script, though Salomon found these theories to be wholly speculative in nature. Pāṇini (6th to 4th century BCE) mentions lipi , the Indian word for writing scripts in his definitive work on Sanskrit grammar, the Ashtadhyayi . According to Scharfe, the words lipi and libi are borrowed from
10384-402: The indigenous origin was a preference of British scholars in opposition to the "unknown Western" origin preferred by continental scholars. Cunningham in the seminal Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum of 1877 speculated that Brahmi characters were derived from, among other things, a pictographic principle based on the human body, but Bühler noted that, by 1891, Cunningham considered the origins of
10502-451: The interaction between the Indic and the Semitic worlds before the rise of the Semitic scripts might imply a reverse process. However, the chronology thus presented and the notion of an unbroken tradition of literacy is opposed by a majority of academics who support an indigenous origin. Evidence for a continuity between Indus and Brahmi has also been seen in graphic similarities between Brahmi and
10620-561: The kingdom was the area of Bihar south of the Ganges ; its first capital was Rajagriha (modern day Rajgir ), then Pataliputra (modern Patna ). Rajagriha was initially known as 'Girivrijja' and later came to be known as so during the reign of Ajatashatru . Magadha expanded to include most of Bihar and Bengal with the conquest of Vajjika League and Anga , respectively. The kingdom of Magadha eventually came to encompass modern Bihar , Jharkhand, Orissa , West Bengal, eastern Uttar Pradesh , and
10738-417: The late Indus script, where the ten most common ligatures correspond with the form of one of the ten most common glyphs in Brahmi. There is also corresponding evidence of continuity in the use of numerals. Further support for this continuity comes from statistical analysis of the relationship carried out by Das. Salomon considered simple graphic similarities between characters to be insufficient evidence for
10856-466: The name was adopted in the influential work of Georg Bühler , albeit in the variant form "Brahma". The Gupta script of the 5th century is sometimes called "Late Brahmi". From the 6th century onward, the Brahmi script diversified into numerous local variants, grouped as the Brahmic family of scripts . Dozens of modern scripts used across South and South East Asia have descended from Brahmi, making it one of
10974-498: The necessity of contemporaneous buddhas throughout the ten directions. It is thought that the doctrine of contemporaneous buddhas was already old and well established by the time of early Mahāyāna texts such as the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra , due to the clear presumptions of this doctrine. The Mahāsāṃghikas held that the teachings of the Buddha were to be understood as having two principal levels of truth:
11092-416: The non-substantiality of the basic elements of existence ( dharma - śūnyatā ) belongs to the Mahāsāṃghikas. Every branch of these clearly drew the distinction between the mundane and the ultimate, came to emphasize the non-ultimacy of the mundane and thus facilitated the fixing of attention on the ultimate. Some Mahāsāṃghikas held a theory of self-awareness or self-cognition ( svasaṃvedana ) which held that
11210-417: The opinion that there was as yet insufficient evidence to resolve the question. Today the indigenous origin hypothesis is more commonly promoted by non-specialists, such as the computer scientist Subhash Kak , the spiritual teachers David Frawley and Georg Feuerstein , and the social anthropologist Jack Goody . Subhash Kak disagrees with the proposed Semitic origins of the script, instead stating that
11328-427: The origin, one positing an indigenous origin and the others deriving it from various Semitic models. The most disputed point about the origin of the Brahmi script has long been whether it was a purely indigenous development or was borrowed or derived from scripts that originated outside India. Goyal (1979) noted that most proponents of the indigenous view are fringe Indian scholars, whereas the theory of Semitic origin
11446-465: The particular Semitic script, and the chronology of the derivation have been the subject of much debate. Bühler followed Max Weber in connecting it particularly to Phoenician, and proposed an early 8th century BCE date for the borrowing. A link to the South Semitic scripts , a less prominent branch of the Semitic script family, has occasionally been proposed, but has not gained much acceptance. Finally,
11564-556: The phonemic analysis of the Sanskrit language achieved by the Vedic scholars is much closer to the Brahmi script than the Greek alphabet". As of 2018, Harry Falk refined his view by affirming that Brahmi was developed from scratch in a rational way at the time of Ashoka , by consciously combining the advantages of the pre-existing Greek script and northern Kharosthi script. Greek-style letter types were selected for their "broad, upright and symmetrical form", and writing from left to right
11682-607: The precursors of the southern Mahāsāṃghika sects, like the Caitikas. The original center of the Mahāsāṃghika sects was Magadha , but they also maintained important centers such as in Mathura and Karli . The Kukkuṭikas were situated in eastern India around Vārāṇasī and Pāṭaliputra and the Bahuśrutīya in Kośala , Andhra, and Gandhara. The Lokottaravāda subschool itself claimed to be of
11800-549: The presumptive prototypes may have been mapped to the individual characters of Brahmi. Further, states Salomon, Falk accepts there are anomalies in phonetic value and diacritics in Brahmi script that are not found in the presumed Kharoṣṭhī script source. Falk attempts to explain these anomalies by reviving the Greek influence hypothesis, a hypothesis that had previously fallen out of favor. Hartmut Scharfe, in his 2002 review of Kharoṣṭī and Brāhmī scripts, concurs with Salomon's questioning of Falk's proposal, and states, "the pattern of
11918-509: The problems of contradictory accounts about the first schism are solved by the Mahāsāṃghika Śāriputraparipṛcchā , which is the earliest surviving account of the schism. In this account, the council was convened at Pāṭaliputra over matters of vinaya , and it is explained that the schism resulted from the majority (Mahāsaṃgha) refusing to accept the addition of rules to the Vinaya by a smaller group of elders (Sthaviras). The Mahāsāṃghikas therefore saw
12036-400: The quantity and quality of the Vedic literature, are divided. While Falk (1993) disagrees with Goody, while Walter Ong and John Hartley (2012) concur, not so much based on the difficulty of orally preserving the Vedic hymns, but on the basis that it is highly unlikely that Panini's grammar was composed. Johannes Bronkhorst (2002) takes the intermediate position that the oral transmission of
12154-521: The relevant period. Bühler explained this by proposing that the initial borrowing of Brahmi characters dates back considerably earlier than the earliest known evidence, as far back as 800 BCE, contemporary with the Phoenician glyph forms that he mainly compared. Bühler cited a near-modern practice of writing Brahmic scripts informally without vowel diacritics as a possible continuation of this earlier abjad-like stage in development. The weakest forms of
12272-591: The religions promoted by the early Magadhan kings, such as Srenika, Bimbisara and Ajatashatru , and the Nanda Dynasty (345–321 BCE) that followed was mostly Jain. These Sramana religions did not worship the Vedic deities , instead of practicing some form of asceticism and meditation ( jhana ) and tending to construct round burial mounds (called stupas in Buddhism). These religions also sought some type of liberation from
12390-692: The robes were the endless knot (Skt. śrīvatsa ) and the conch shell (Skt. śaṅkha ), two of the Eight Auspicious Signs in Buddhism. The Tibetan historian Buton Rinchen Drub (1290–1364) wrote that the Mahāsāṃghikas used Prākrit , the Sarvāstivādins Sanskrit, the Sthaviravādins used Paiśācī and the Saṃmitīya used Apabhraṃśa . An important source for the doctrines of the Mahāsāṃghika
12508-412: The script is still much debated, with most scholars stating that Brahmi was derived from or at least influenced by one or more contemporary Semitic scripts . Some scholars favour the idea of an indigenous origin or connection to the much older and as yet undeciphered Indus script but the evidence is insufficient at best. Brahmi was at one time referred to in English as the "pin-man" script, likening
12626-611: The script uncertain. Most scholars believe that Brahmi was likely derived from or influenced by a Semitic script model, with Aramaic being a leading candidate. However, the issue is not settled due to the lack of direct evidence and unexplained differences between Aramaic, Kharoṣṭhī, and Brahmi. Though Brahmi and the Kharoṣṭhī script share some general features, the differences between the Kharosthi and Brahmi scripts are "much greater than their similarities", and "the overall differences between
12744-454: The source alphabet recite the sounds by combining the consonant with an unmarked vowel, e.g. /kə/, /kʰə/, /gə/ , and in the process of borrowing into another language, these syllables are taken to be the sound values of the symbols. They also accepted the idea that Brahmi was based on a North Semitic model. Many scholars link the origin of Brahmi to Semitic script models, particularly Aramaic. The explanation of how this might have happened,
12862-431: The sutra passage which the Mahāsāṃghikas drew on to defend it. The passage is quoted by Vasumitra as: The self-nature of the mind ( cittasvabhāva ) is luminous ( prabhāsvara ). It is the adventitious impurities ( āgantukopakleśa ) that defile it. The self substance of the mind is eternally pure. The commentary to Vasumitra by Kuiji adds the following: "It is because afflictions ( kleśa) are produced which soil it that it
12980-460: The tathāgatas is unlimited, and the life of the buddhas is unlimited." According to Guang Xing, two main aspects of the Buddha can be seen in Mahāsāṃghika teachings: the true Buddha who is omniscient and omnipotent, and the manifested forms through which he liberates sentient beings through his skillful means (Skt. upāya ). For the Mahāsāṃghikas, the historical Gautama Buddha was merely one of these transformation bodies (Skt. nirmāṇakāya ), while
13098-404: The third century. According to Salomon, evidence of the use of Kharoṣṭhī is found primarily in Buddhist records and those of Indo-Greek, Indo-Scythian, Indo-Parthian, and Kushana dynasty era. Justeson and Stephens proposed that this inherent vowel system in Brahmi and Kharoṣṭhī developed by transmission of a Semitic abjad through the recitation of its letter values. The idea is that learners of
13216-416: The two render a direct linear development connection unlikely", states Richard Salomon. Virtually all authors accept that regardless of the origins, the differences between the Indian script and those proposed to have influenced it are significant. The degree of Indian development of the Brahmi script in both the graphic form and the structure has been extensive. It is also widely accepted that theories about
13334-460: The two. Furthermore, there is no accepted decipherment of the Indus script, which makes theories based on claimed decipherments tenuous. A promising possible link between the Indus script and later writing traditions may be in the megalithic graffiti symbols of the South Indian megalithic culture, which may have some overlap with the Indus symbol inventory and persisted in use up at least through
13452-525: The variations seen in the Asokan edicts would be unlikely to have emerged so quickly if Brahmi had a single origin in the chancelleries of the Mauryan Empire. He suggests a date of not later than the end of the 4th century for the development of Brahmi script in the form represented in the inscriptions, with earlier possible antecedents. Jack Goody (1987) had similarly suggested that ancient India likely had
13570-480: The world's most influential writing traditions. One survey found 198 scripts that ultimately derive from it. Among the inscriptions of Ashoka ( c. 3rd century BCE ) written in the Brahmi script a few numerals were found, which have come to be called the Brahmi numerals . The numerals are additive and multiplicative and, therefore, not place value ; it is not known if their underlying system of numeration has
13688-406: Was also adopted for its convenience. On the other hand, the Kharosthi treatment of vowels was retained, with its inherent vowel "a", derived from Aramaic , and stroke additions to represent other vowel signs. In addition, a new system of combining consonants vertically to represent complex sounds was also developed. The possibility of an indigenous origin such as a connection to the Indus script
13806-606: Was ruled by the Haryanka dynasty for some 200 years, c. 543 to 413 BCE. Gautama Buddha , the founder of Buddhism , lived much of his life in the kingdom of Magadha. He attained enlightenment in Bodh Gaya , gave his first sermon in Sarnath and the first Buddhist council was held in Rajgriha . Several Śramaṇic movements had existed before the 6th century BCE, and these influenced both
13924-442: Was the nerve centre of this revolution. Jainism was revived and re-established after Mahavira , the last and the 24th Tirthankara , who synthesised and revived the philosophies and promulgations of the ancient Śramaṇic traditions laid down by the first Jain tirthankara Rishabhanatha millions of years ago. Buddha founded Buddhism which received royal patronage in the kingdom. According to Indologist Johannes Bronkhorst ,
#502497