A Note on the Jataka Tales 4

Be that as it may Siddhartha Buddha presently after enlightenment wandered throughout the length and breadth of the Aryavarta –that part of Northern India which is being washed by the Ganga and the Jamuna in the main giving sermons at the instance of the gods. Interestingly enough Siddhartha Buddha did not know that he was preaching any new religion. Even the Upanisads are not unanimous on their views. And Siddharta Buddha’s views had their uniqueness. Despite that just as his birth place or the place where his enlightenment took place seems to have the association of traditional sacred places and just as one could read in him the Sun god Kapila incarnate similarly methinks his sermons were tradition retold and refreshed. As per Buddhist tradition he gave 84000
sermons in all and it is claimed that all those sermons were enshrined in the Tripitak or the three baskets of knowledge. It is further claimed that Siddhartaa Buddha delivered his sermons in the language of the common men. He spoke in Pali.

Now one might ask what is Pali language like. Because the common belief is that the language of ancient India was Sanskrit. Well the Buddha we are talking of was a historical personage. Although there is dispute among the scholars as to the exact date of his birth or death or mahaparinibban. He strode the world in the 6th century BC by common consent. So if Pali were the language of the common men of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh in the 6th centuy BC what was the status of Sanskrit in the then India ? This has triggered off numerous theories As per official history the Vedas date back to at least 1500 BC. The present author feels that they were older still. But let us not dwell on that for the time being The point is that those who composed the Vedic hymns composed them in their own tongue Since then Sanskrit language dominated Indian literature in North India till the advent of Islam in the 11th century No wonder that the language of the Vedas and that of classical Sanskrit are quite different

A Note on the Jataka Tales

Here a little digression be allowed. Siddhartha was born at Kapilavastu as we have already observed. Kapilavastu reminds one of the great sage Kapila of Indian mythology. Once upon a time, there was a great king named Sagar. He was an ancestor of sri Rama. The name Sagar means SA+GARA or mingled with Garala or poison. This great king planned a horse sacrifice. But surprisingly enough the horse earmarked for sacrifice was missing.
The king Sagara had sixty thousand sons They set out to search the missing horse They ransacked the earth from east to west and from north to south. Then they dug the earth till they reached the netherworld And lo there they found the horse champing the grass. It was tied to a tree nearby. In the neighbourhood they saw a sage plunged in deep meditation. They thought that the sage had stolen the horse. So they were about to punish the sage. It was the great sage Kapila. No sooner than the children of Sagar proceeded to the sage, the sage flew into rage and fire flashed forth from his third eye and all the sons of Sagara turned into ashes in a nano second. Time passed by and there was a child named Bhagirath He observed hard penance and finally he brought down the Ganga from the heaven or heavens to earth to redeem every being dead or alive including the dead sons of king Sagar. One can read primitive science in this myth. The polluted water is burnt by the sun only to be purged and pure water comes down the hills to refresh the earth. Here the sage Kapila is the sun symbol. And Kapilavastu is the land where the Sun incarnate sage Kapila lived. Is it not significant that Siddharta Bodhisattva was born here only and when he became Buddha or enlightened--- the Buddha or the Enlightened One, his devotees read sun symbol in him.

A note on Jataka Tales--2

A note on Jataka Tales--2
In fact the religious preachers never claim that they are saying anything new. They always claim to have revealed the open secret, the secret open to all but seen almost by none. They always claim to have revealed the eternal truth discovered earlier also but forgotten in course of time to be revived again. This is why they always speak of their predecessors. Thus, the Buddha had predecessors. Mahavira had predecessors. Jesus acknowledged the Jewish lore of the Old Testament as authentic. Islam appropriated the Old Testament. Besides Islam acknowledges Jesus as a prophet. Only thing is that Islam does not acclaim Jesus, as God the son because according to Islam God cannot have a son by a mortal.
By the by the Buddha we are talking of is a historical personage he was Siddhaarta; he was born at Kapilavastu in the southern part of what we know as Nepal today. Miracles happened when he was born. In fact, his birth was itself a miracle. It is said that the king Suddhodan had no physical contact with his consort Maya Devi during and immediately prior to the period when Siddharta Buddha entered the womb of Maya Devi. It is said that Maya Devi saw a white elephant entering her womb and she became carrying. When god incarnates are there they are seldom born of any man. Think of Jesus. Virgin Mary was his mother. Think of Rama his mother was administered a kind of pudding that leaped up from a fire sacrifice priested by the sage Risya-sringa. Be that as it may Siddharta spent his childhood and early youth in the palace only. As soon as he had a child by Gopa he stealthily renounced the world for a life of meditation in the forests. He had named his son----Rahul. Rahul the name means obstacle; he deemed his son as obstacle and left home without giving any intimation to his dear wife. Well Siddharta Buddha surely knew what he was about. But in the context of the values that are current today one asks--- Was Siddharta’s action open and straight forward? Though it must be acknowledged that God men were born of women the divine spirit entering into their body why should be women left in the lurch by those God men even in quest of knowledge and truth ? Shakespeare said --- Frailty thy name is woman. And are we wide off the mark if we dare say --- Ingratitude thy name is man.
Let us however proceed along the high road of narrative where Siddhartha Buddha was the journeyman. After a lot of penance our Siddhartha became enlightened or Buddha. He is the Buddha to whom we have referred earlier and whose Speeches are said to have been enshrined in the Tripitaka.
Here one thing is important to note. As long as Siddhartha remained unenlightened he was not a Buddha but a Bodhisattva. Bodhisattva etymologically means a sattva or a being whose essence is Bodhi or wisdom. It logically follows therefore that when a Bodhisattva becomes Buddha the innate or latent wisdom is manifest in the person of Buddha.

A NOTE ON THE JATAKA TALES

A NOTE ON THE JATAKA TALES- 1

JATAKA TALES ARE PART AND PARCEL OF BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES . BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES ARE BROADLY DIVIDED UNDER TWO HEADS. THE FIRST ONE CONSISTS OF THE TRIPITAKA . THE BUDDHISTS ALL OVER THE GLOBE BELIEVE THAT BUDDHA'S SPEECHES HAAVE BEEN AD VERBATIM RECORDED THERE. THE SECOND ONE CONSISTS OF WRITINGS EXPLAINING AND EXPLICATING BUDDHA THAT HAVE BEEN ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE BUDDHISTS AS SACRED TEXTS .THERE ARE DIFFFERENT SCHOOLS OF BUDDHISM. WHILE THE TRIPITAKA IS ACKNOWLEDGEED AND VENERATED BY ALL OF THEM THE OTHER SCRIPTURES ARE VENERATED BY EITHER THIS SCHOOL OR BY THAT SCHOOL . OUR JATAKA TALES BELONG TO THE TRIPITAKA . TRI MEANS THREE; PITAKA HAS A CORRESPONDING WORD IN PATRA EMPLOYED IN THE EXPRESSION BAKSO PATRA ; PITAKA MEANS BASKETS OF KNOWLEDGE. THUS TRIPITAKA MEANS THREE BASKETS OF WISDOM .

TRIPITAKA AS I HAVE ALREADY POINTED OUT RECORDS THE ORIGINAL SAYINGS OF LORD BUDDHA HIMSELF.ONE MIGHT ASK----IN WHICH LANGUAGE DID THE LORD SPEAK? IN WHICH LANGUAGE DID JESUS SPEAK? THE SCHOLARS OPINE THAT JESUS SPOKE IN ARAMAIC. OUR LORD THE BUDDHA SPOKE IN PALI. WHY DID I SAY THE BUDDHA?
WHY DID I SAY THE BUDDHA? THE WORD LITERALLY MEANS - THE ENLIGHTENED ONE. AND THE BUDDHIUSTS CLAIM THATTHERE WERE MANY BUDDHAS WHO CAME BEFORE THE BUDDHA WE ARE TALKING OF. ALSO THERE WILL BE OTHER BUDDHAS AFTER THE BUDDHA. HISTORY HAS ITS LIMITATIONS . .BE THAT AS IT MAY THERE IS NO SO CALLED HISTORICAL EVIDENCE OF ANY BUDDHA AS THE FORERUNNER OF THE BUDDHA. THE JAINS ALSO IN THE. SELFSAME WAY CLAIM THAT THERE WERE A NUMBER OF TIRTHANKARS WHO APPEARED BEFORE MAHAVIR MAHAVIR IS THE ACKNOWLEDGED PROPOUNDER OF JAINA RELIGION BUT ONE OF HIS PREDECESSORS PARSVANATH WAS A HISTORICAL PERSONAGE.

Gitas in Mahabharata - Introduction - 4

- Ramesh Mukhopadhyaya
The present reader has a culture of his own time. No doubt it has
the traces of the past when the hymns of the Vedas & the songs of the
Mahabharata burst forth. But at the same time it is mingled with the
culture that is capitalism & computer. Of course one must read the
gitas, from the cultural stand-point of one’s own time. At the same
time one must try to read them in the context of the culture & shared
language of the time of the Mahabharata.
Since no absolute meaning of any text is possible we propose
hereby to read each one of the gitas as unique and complete in itself,
from close reading stand-point. Close-reading & explicatio de texte
are very much akin to each other. Mallinatha or Sayana revelled in
their respective exigesis of Kalidasa or the Vedas almost in a likely
manner. Since poetry or any narrative moves in time as opposed to
painting that manifests in space we will proceed reading the text bit by
bit and explicate the same in its literal sense as well as in its suggestions
or laksmana. To explore the laksmana we could employ different
devices such as grammatical & linguistic, psychological & sociological.
The grammatical device of interpreting language is perfectly in harmony
with the ancient Sanskrit tradition. For example. The Devi gita of the
Devi Bhagavata posits :
Svaprakasanca caitanyam na parena prakasitam
Anavastha dosasattvaya svenapi prakasitam
Karmakartrivirodhah syat tasmattaddipavat svayam (II, 12, 13)
Consciousness is self-effulgent. It is not manifest by any one else.
Or else there would be the fallacy of anavastha. Again, one cannot
say that consciousness expresses itself. Because in that case there
would be the conflict between subject & object.
Again, the same Devi Bhagavata employs linguistic device and goes
beyond the literal meaning.
Padarthavagatih purvam vakyarthavagatihstatah
Tatpadasya ca vacyartha gireham parikirtitah
Tvam padasya ca vacyartho jeeva eva na samsayah
Ubhayorai –kyamasina padena procyate vudhaih (IV,20,21)
The word tat signifies the consciousness. The speaker here identifies
herself with the consciousness pure & boundless. The work ‘tvam’ on
the other hand signifies a limited being. The two cannot be the same.
And yet the verb meaning the be verb in the form of “are” identifies
the two. The identification as the speaker of the Devigita herself says
is never possible on the plane of literal meaning. One must take to
laksana to decode the same.
Truth as Srimad Bhagavad Gita itself observes could be at least on
three planes. adhibhautivika, adhidaivika and adhyatmika. The
adhibhautika meaning could be the literal meaning itself. The
adhidaivika and adhyatmika sense of the speech must be inferred.
Well inference must have two criteria in perception as well as regular
concommitance or pervasion, Gautama points out that while the
concomitance is natural and lawful in verbal authority, judgements or
the concommitance is based on man-made conventions. Yes, literature
creates a world of its own, and it must be judged by the criteria set by
itself. Vatsyayana argues that in inference the concomittance in question
is between two things both of which can be observed. But verbal
authority may well relate a word with a type of object never perceived
or even perceptible. Jayanta further posits that authority operates
through single world alone while inference requires well made
propositions for its operation.
Sabda or verbal authority has been largely neglected in western
philosophy. But the close reading school especially and the schools
based on linguistics generally look upon language as its own referent.
Poetry in general & the gitas under study fall within the scope of Sabda
pramana. Nyaya admits of upamana or comparison as a source of
knowledge. Often in poetry we compare the perceptible with that the
perception of which is not verifiable—in other words not perceptible.
Although in the 1930s the Vienna circle posited verifiability as the sole
criteria for truth, can we verify everything one perceives? Dona saw a
dream. Can we verify its truth? Yet did not Dona dream?
When the Brahmana Gita said that language can comprehend or
create the suprasensual, we must take such language as sabda
pramana. By way of studying the upamana and by way of inference
we will seek hereby to explore the meaning of each gita. on as many
levels as possible.
Finally we will take into account the recurrent imagery, or phrases
or single words even, that are significant in all the gitas including the
Srimad Bhagavad Gita. They will include such motifs like, Prakriti,
Purusa, Jivatman, paramatman, manas, ahamkara, buddhi,
pancabhuta, five senses, human body, knowledge, transmigration of
soul, karmaphala & so on.
We will try to understand these notions in the context of the gitas
as well as in the context of modern science & philosophy, sociology
etc. as well.
Much of the language of the gitas speaks of the imperceptible or
the unverifiable. It is not ordinary language. It goes beyond the grasp
of our mind & catches the glimpse of the suprasensual. This is perhaps
the province of poetry as distinguished from that of prose. Prose dwells
on what we can perceive with senses. Poetry looks beyond. Hence it
lies in the logic of affairs to read the gitas as poetry. The recurrent
imagery that do not belong to any truth discourse need be also decoded
in the aesthetic light. It logically follows thereby that we can reach our
conclusions as to philosophy & poetry, & religion & poetry, which
will form separate chapters.
Looking into the gitas from all these diverse angles, cannot however
distract us from our premise which was to check the pratijna of this
treatise. On the other hand, constant reference to the Srimad Bhagavad
Gita and searching for variations & identities among the gitas will
indicate how far the message of the Bhagavad Gita is reflected on the
other gitas.
( From A Study of Gitas in Mahabharata by Ramesh Chandra Mukhopadhyaya)

Gitas in Mahabharata - Introduction - 4

The present reader has a culture of his own time. No doubt it has
the traces of the past when the hymns of the Vedas & the songs of the
Mahabharata burst forth. But at the same time it is mingled with the
culture that is capitalism & computer. Of course one must read the
gitas, from the cultural stand-point of one’s own time. At the same
time one must try to read them in the context of the culture & shared
language of the time of the Mahabharata.
Since no absolute meaning of any text is possible we propose
hereby to read each one of the gitas as unique and complete in itself,
from close reading stand-point. Close-reading & explicatio de texte
are very much akin to each other. Mallinatha or Sayana revelled in
their respective exigesis of Kalidasa or the Vedas almost in a likely
manner. Since poetry or any narrative moves in time as opposed to
painting that manifests in space we will proceed reading the text bit by
bit and explicate the same in its literal sense as well as in its suggestions
or laksmana. To explore the laksmana we could employ different
devices such as grammatical & linguistic, psychological & sociological.
The grammatical device of interpreting language is perfectly in harmony
with the ancient Sanskrit tradition. For example. The Devi gita of the
Devi Bhagavata posits :
Svaprakasanca caitanyam na parena prakasitam
Anavastha dosasattvaya svenapi prakasitam
Karmakartrivirodhah syat tasmattaddipavat svayam (II, 12, 13)
Consciousness is self-effulgent. It is not manifest by any one else.
Or else there would be the fallacy of anavastha. Again, one cannot
say that consciousness expresses itself. Because in that case there
would be the conflict between subject & object.
Again, the same Devi Bhagavata employs linguistic device and goes
beyond the literal meaning.
Padarthavagatih purvam vakyarthavagatihstatah
Tatpadasya ca vacyartha gireham parikirtitah
Tvam padasya ca vacyartho jeeva eva na samsayah
Ubhayorai –kyamasina padena procyate vudhaih (IV,20,21)
The word tat signifies the consciousness. The speaker here identifies
herself with the consciousness pure & boundless. The work ‘tvam’ on
the other hand signifies a limited being. The two cannot be the same.
And yet the verb meaning the be verb in the form of “are” identifies
the two. The identification as the speaker of the Devigita herself says
is never possible on the plane of literal meaning. One must take to
laksana to decode the same.
Truth as Srimad Bhagavad Gita itself observes could be at least on
three planes. adhibhautivika, adhidaivika and adhyatmika. The
adhibhautika meaning could be the literal meaning itself. The
adhidaivika and adhyatmika sense of the speech must be inferred.
Well inference must have two criteria in perception as well as regular
concommitance or pervasion, Gautama points out that while the
concomitance is natural and lawful in verbal authority, judgements or
the concommitance is based on man-made conventions. Yes, literature
creates a world of its own, and it must be judged by the criteria set by
itself. Vatsyayana argues that in inference the concomittance in question
is between two things both of which can be observed. But verbal
authority may well relate a word with a type of object never perceived
or even perceptible. Jayanta further posits that authority operates
through single world alone while inference requires well made
propositions for its operation.
Sabda or verbal authority has been largely neglected in western
philosophy. But the close reading school especially and the schools
based on linguistics generally look upon language as its own referent.
Poetry in general & the gitas under study fall within the scope of Sabda
pramana. Nyaya admits of upamana or comparison as a source of
knowledge. Often in poetry we compare the perceptible with that the
perception of which is not verifiable—in other words not perceptible.
Although in the 1930s the Vienna circle posited verifiability as the sole
criteria for truth, can we verify everything one perceives? Dona saw a
dream. Can we verify its truth? Yet did not Dona dream?
When the Brahmana Gita said that language can comprehend or
create the suprasensual, we must take such language as sabda
pramana. By way of studying the upamana and by way of inference
we will seek hereby to explore the meaning of each gita. on as many
levels as possible.
Finally we will take into account the recurrent imagery, or phrases
or single words even, that are significant in all the gitas including the
Srimad Bhagavad Gita. They will include such motifs like, Prakriti,
Purusa, Jivatman, paramatman, manas, ahamkara, buddhi,
pancabhuta, five senses, human body, knowledge, transmigration of
soul, karmaphala & so on.
We will try to understand these notions in the context of the gitas
as well as in the context of modern science & philosophy, sociology
etc. as well.
Much of the language of the gitas speaks of the imperceptible or
the unverifiable. It is not ordinary language. It goes beyond the grasp
of our mind & catches the glimpse of the suprasensual. This is perhaps
the province of poetry as distinguished from that of prose. Prose dwells
on what we can perceive with senses. Poetry looks beyond. Hence it
lies in the logic of affairs to read the gitas as poetry. The recurrent
imagery that do not belong to any truth discourse need be also decoded
in the aesthetic light. It logically follows thereby that we can reach our
conclusions as to philosophy & poetry, & religion & poetry, which
will form separate chapters.
Looking into the gitas from all these diverse angles, cannot however
distract us from our premise which was to check the pratijna of this
treatise. On the other hand, constant reference to the Srimad Bhagavad
Gita and searching for variations & identities among the gitas will
indicate how far the message of the Bhagavad Gita is reflected on the
other gitas.
( From A Study of Gitas in Mahabharata by Ramesh Chandra Mukhopadhyaya)