J Indian Philos (2009) 37:253–272 DOI 10.1007/s10781-009-9068-x

Divine Witness Minoru Hara

Published online: 10 March 2009 Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Abstract When People were falsely accused, and yet there existed no human means to testify to the truth, to whom did they resort for the final judgment? In ancient India, it was a sort of ordeal (divya), which was inseparable from oath (s´apatha) and act of truth (satya-kriya¯). Here we present some examples and investigate who appear in these contexts. As a result, we could classify them into (1) maha¯-bhu¯ta (fire, wind, water, etc.), (2) heavenly bodies (sun moon, etc.), (3) inner principles (heart, soul, etc.) and (4) gods (Agni, Va¯yu, Indra, Yama, etc.). All these witnesses observe (pas´-) the act of a human being, right as well as wrong, either transcendently from above like the sun, or immanently from inside like wind which circulates human body in the form of vital breath. Keywords False accusation
Ordeal
Act of truth
Gods
maha¯-bhu¯ta
Consciousness
Immanence
Transcendence Abbreviations IS O. Bo¨htlingk, Indische Spru¨che I-III (Osnabru¨ck Reprint 1966). MBh The Maha¯bha¯rata (Poona Critical Edition). MS Manusmr: ti (NSP. 1946). NS The Na¯radasmr: ti ed., by R.W. Lariviere (Philadelphia 1989). NSP Nirnaya Sagara Press (Bombay). R The Va¯lmı¯ki-Ra¯ma¯yan: a (Baroda Critical Edition). YS Ya¯jn˜avalkya-smr: ti (NSP. 1949).

M. Hara (&) 1-19-1-201 Ishikawa-cho, Ota-ku, Tokyo 145-0061, Japan

123

254

M. Hara

I When a case was not settled by ordinary human means (ma¯nus: a-prama¯n: a), and yet a certain settlement must be reached in some way or other, one had to resort to nonhuman beings, often gods, for the final judgement (daivika-prama¯n: a).1 That is to say, when the so-called judicial prama¯n: a which consisted of sa¯ks: in (witness), likhita (written document) and bhukti (the fact of enjoyment)2 were absent, one had to resort to the ordeal (divya) which ordinarily consisted of tula¯ (balance), agni (fire), jala (water) and vis: a (poison). A woman whose chastity was doubted, despite her devotion to her husband, also had to resort to such means. In classical Sanskrit, the case is best exemplified by Sı¯ta¯ and S´akuntala¯, the former being accused in the midst of the people by her beloved husband Ra¯ma who was afraid of the people (jana¯pava¯da), and the latter ignored by Duh: s: yanta who, due to his loss of memory, refused to recognize the legitimacy of a child born to her. Despite the purity on which these chaste women piteously insisted,3 they could not find sufficient means to persuade the people. The only way left for them was direct appeal to non-humans, natural beings such as fire and water.4 The fire in such a case testified to her chastity by causing a miracle of not burning her and the water of not causing her to float. These natural phenomena, fire and water, were occasionally deified as Agni and Varun: a and it was their intervention which influenced the outcome of the ordeal. Compared to the description found in act nine of the classical drama Mr: cchakat:ika where the innocent Ca¯rudatta was false accused,5 and later Smr: ti literature which prescribed in detail the process of ordeal, the Epic fire ordeal was not systematically formulated. Also there is not a clear-cut line of demarcation between oath (s´apatha) and ordeal (divya).6 At the same time, such an appeal to the gods is not separable from the well-known Indian practice of the so-called act of truth (satya-vacana or *satya-kriya¯).7 In addition to the two examples mentioned above, in the Epic literature we have also several invocation-passages of a similar sort, that is, the examples of the less formulated ordeal. Though still far from being complete and exhaustive, an attempt is made here to collect such passages from the Epics and to classify them into several categories.

1

Lariviere, p. 13.

2

Cf. V
asis: :tha-dharma-s
utra 16.10, YS. 2. 22 and NS. 1.65.

3

Cf.

na tatha¯smi maha¯-ba¯ho yatha¯ tvam avagacchasi pratyayam : gaccha me svena ca¯ritren: aiva te s´ape (R.6.104.6) 4 These two are the usual divine witnesses. Cf. Hopkins (1932, pp. 323–326). These two are also used for the test of Yas´odhara¯, the wife of S´a¯kyamuni. For this Buddhist ordeal, see my article in the press. 5

6 7

Cf. vis: a-salila-tula¯gni-pra¯rthite me vica¯re krakacam iha s´arı¯re vı¯ks: ya da¯tavyam adya (Mr: cchakat:ika 9.43ab) Lariviere, p. 35. Lu¨ders (1959, 486ff).

123

Divine Witness

255

II (1) Sı¯ta¯ (1-1) Witness in the Singular (1-1-1) Agni In the original version found in the Va¯lmı¯ki Ra¯ma¯yan: a 6.104.24, Sı¯ta¯ invoked only one god, that is Agni, and implored him for protection. She spoke as follows, yatha¯ me hr: dayam : nityam : na¯pasarpati ra¯ghava¯t tatha¯ lokasya sa¯ks: ¯ı ma¯m : sarvatah: pa¯tu pa¯vakah: (R.6.104.24) As my heart never deviates from Ra¯ma, so fire the purifier (pa¯vaka), the world-witness, protect me from everything. Here Agni the purifier (pa¯vaka) is called simply the ‘‘world-witness’’ (lokasya sa¯ks: in), but according to a different version, he is also called the ‘‘superintending (god)’’ of the three worlds (trailokya¯dhis: :thita). eka-patnı¯-vrate yukta¯m : yadi ma¯m : vetti pa¯vakah: trailokya¯dhis: :thitah: so ’tha sarvatah: pa¯tu pa¯vakah: (3237*) If fire knows me devoted to chastity, fire the purifier, superintending over the three worlds, then protect me from everything.8 However in another version he is not portrayed as ‘‘the witness or superintendent from above,’’ but as ‘‘the witness watching from within.’’ tvam agne sarva-bhu¯ta¯na¯m : s´arı¯ra¯ntara-gocarah: tvam sa ks ı mama deha-sthah ¯ ¯ : : : pa¯hi ma¯m : deva-sattama (3242*) You, fire, who pervades the interior of the body of all beings, residing in my body as the witness, protect me, o best of gods! Here he is sa¯ks: in who circulates through inside the body (s´arı¯ra¯ntara-gocara) of all living beings (sarva-bhu¯ta), and thus is considered as living inside her body (dehastha). We understand that Agni is sa¯ks: in not only as the transcendent god, but also the immanent principle, pervading through the inside of all living beings. However, in the different versions Sı¯ta¯ did not invoke Agni as a sa¯ks: in for protection positively, but for punishment negatively in case her statement should be false. manasi vacasi ka¯ye ja¯gare svapna-bha¯ve yadi mama pati-bha¯vo ra¯ghava¯d anya-pum : si (3235*) _ : dı¯pyama¯nam tad iha daha mama¯ngam : huta¯s´a sukr: ta-kukr: ta-jn˜a¯ta¯ sarva-lokaika-sa¯ks: ¯ı (3236*)

8

The phrase ma¯m : sarvatah: pa¯tu pa¯vakah: is repeated in the Bombay edition 6.116.26d=3236d*.

123

256

M. Hara

If in mind, speech and body,9 awake or in sleep, if my chastity is directed to a man other than the scion of Raghu, then, O fire, flaming burn my body on this very spot, you, the knower of one’s deeds, good and evil, the sole witness of the whole world! Here Agni is invoked as ‘‘the sole witness’’ (eka-sa¯ks: in) of the whole world (sarvaloka) and styled as ‘‘the knower (jn˜a¯tr: ) of good and evil deeds (sukr: ta-kukr: ta).’’10 (1-1-2) Another single deity whom Sı¯ta¯ invoked is the earth (ma¯dhavı¯) in whom she found her final resort as the mother goddess.We have another Sı¯ta¯-s´apatha in R.7.88.10. yatha¯ham : ra¯ghava¯d anyam : manasa¯pi na cintaye tatha¯ me ma¯dhavı¯ devı¯ vivaram : da¯tum arhati (R.7.88.10) As I have never thought of a man other than Ra¯ma even by mind, so the goddess earth give me a hole (to swallow me).11 (1-2) Witnesses in the Plural The deity whom Sı¯ta¯ called upon is not always singular like Agni or Ma¯dhavı¯, but occasionally they appear in the plural. According to another version she invoked several non-divine beings. a¯dityo bhagava¯n va¯yur dis´as´ candras tathaiva ca ahas´ ca¯pi tatha¯ sam : dhye ra¯tris´ ca pr: thivı¯ tatha¯ ye ca¯nye ’py abhija¯nanti tatha¯ ca¯ritra-bhu¯s: ita¯m (3240*) The sun, wind, quarters, moon, day and night, and both the twilights, earth, and others know me embellished by chastity. Here, the sun, wind, quarters, moon, day and night, twilight in the morning as well as in the evening, and the earth are called for as witnesses, but they are simply natural phenomena to which no divinity is attributed. The same natural phenomena also appear in the abridged Maha¯bha¯rata version of the Ra¯mopa¯khya¯na. They are the elements, technically called the ‘‘five great

9

Cf. karman: a¯ manasa¯ va¯ca¯ yatha¯ na¯ticara¯my aham ra¯ghavam : sarva-dharma-jn˜am : tatha¯ ma¯m : pa¯tu pa¯vakah: (3238*) As I have never transgressed by deed, mind, speech the scion of Raghu, conversant with all righteousness, so fire as the purifier protect me.

10

Cf. also, atha va¯ pum : s´calı¯ pa¯pa¯ ra¯ma¯tikrama-ca¯rin: ¯ı tatha¯ sam : vartako bhu¯tva¯ bhasmı¯-kurya¯t tu pa¯vakah: (3239*) But if I am an evil harlot who transgresses Ra¯ma, then the fire, taking the form of Sam : vartaka the destroyer, must reduce me to ashes.

11

For the earth as a witness-goddess, cf. Hopkins (1932, pp. 326–327). Another example of earth as the single witness is found in the dialogue between Ma¯ra and Buddha. We may refer to it later in the section addendum.

123

Divine Witness

257

beings’’ (pan˜ca maha¯-bhu¯ta), which compose the world. Contrary to that found in another Epic, Sı¯ta¯ invoked the natural phenomena negatively for punishment. antas´ carati bhu¯ta¯na¯m : ma¯taris´va¯ sada¯-gatih: sa me vimun˜catu pra¯n: a¯n yadi pa¯pam : cara¯my aham (23) agnir a¯pas tatha¯ka¯s´am pr thivı va yur eva ca ¯ ¯ : : vimun˜cantu mama pra¯n: a¯n yadi pa¯pam : cara¯my aham (24) va¯yur uva¯ca bho bho ra¯ghava satyam : vai va¯yur asmi sada¯-gatih: apa¯pa¯ maithilı¯ ra¯jan sam : gaccha saha bha¯ryaya¯ (26) agnir uva¯ca aham antah: -s´arı¯rastho bhu¯ta¯na¯m : raghu-nandana susu¯ks: mam api ka¯kustha maithilı¯ na¯para¯dhyati (27) varun: a uva¯ca rasa¯ vai mat-prasu¯ta¯ hi bhu¯ta-dehes: u ra¯ghava aham : vai tva¯m : prabravı¯mi maithilı¯ pratigr: hyata¯m (MBh.3.275.28) The wind of restless motion that breathes in all creatures shall leave my spirit, if I have done wrong! Fire, water, ether, earth, and wind shall leave my spirit, if I have done wrong! The Wind said: O Ra¯ghava, it is the truth! I am the wind of restless motion. Maithilı¯ is innocent, king—reunite with your wife! The Fire said: I am the one that dwells within the body, scion of Raghu, Maithilı¯ has not erred in the least, Ka¯kutstha. Varun: a said: The juices in all creatures’ bodies spring from me, Ra¯ghava. Verily I tell you to take Maithilı¯ back! (van Buitenen) Here the phrase yadi pa¯pam : cara¯my aham is repeated and Sı¯ta¯ invoked wind, fire, water, ether and earth, that are the five maha¯-bhu¯ta-s, for punishment. These maha¯-bhu¯tas are considered not transcendently, but immanently (antas´ carati bhu¯ta¯na¯m, antah: -s´arı¯rastho bhu¯ta¯na¯m, bhu¯ta-dehes: u). Out of these five elements, fire, water and wind are anthropomorphised and properly respond to Sı¯ta¯’s request, but not the remaining two, a¯ka¯s´a and pr: thivı¯. It seems to me that mobility (sada¯-gati) is responsible for the distinction of the first three12 from the remaining two which are rather statically imagined.

12

Cf. sarva-bhu¯ta¯ni bhu¯ta¯tma¯ maha¯tma¯ purus: ottamah: a¯po va¯yus´ ca tejas: ca trayam etad akalpayat (MBh.6.63.3) a¯po ’gnir ma¯rutas´ caiva nityam : ja¯grati dehis: u (MBh.12.177.39cd)

123

258

M. Hara

(2) S´akuntala¯13 In S´akuntala¯’s case, the contextual atmosphere differs considerably from what we have seen above in the case of Sı¯ta¯. Here ‘‘heart’’ (hr: daya), the concept equivalent to our ‘‘conscience,’’ appears in addition to the other witnesses and the statement is somewhat spiritually interiorized. In a sense the tone sounds more threatening to the false accuser. In her deploring, we read, atra te hr: dayam : veda satyasyaiva¯nr: tasya ca kalya¯n: a bata sa¯ks: ¯ı tvam : ma¯tma¯nam avamanyatha¯h: (25) eko ’ham asmı¯ti ca manyase tvam : na hr: cchayam : vetsi munim : pura¯n: am yo vedita¯ karman: ah: pa¯paka yasya¯ntike tvam : vr: jinam : karos: i (27) manyate pa¯pakam kr tva : : ¯ na kas´ cid vetti ma¯m iti vindanti cainam deva ¯ s´ ca svas´ caiva¯ntara-pu¯rus: ah: (28) : a¯ditya-candra¯v anila¯nalau ca dyaur bhu¯mir a¯po14 hr: dayam : yamas´ ca ahas´ ca ra¯tris´ ca ubhe ca sam : dhye dharmas´ ca ja¯na¯ti narasya vr: ttam (29)15 yamo vaivasvatas tasya nirya¯tayati dus: kr: tam hr: di sthitah: karma-sa¯ks: ¯ı ks: etrajn˜o yasya tus: yati (MBh.1.68.30) Your heart knows the truth of it! Good sir, alas you yourself are the witness to your truth and your lie—do not despise yourself! (25) You think you are alone with your self, but don’t you know the ancient seer who dwells in your heart? Him who knows your evil deeds? It is before him that you speak your lie! (27) A man who has done wrong thinks, ÔNobody knows me.’ But the Gods know him, and his own inner soul. (28)16 Sun and Moon, Wind and Fire, Heaven, Earth, and Water, and his heart and Yama, and Day and Night, and both the Twilights, and the Law all know the doings of each man. (29)

13

Kane, p. 369.

14

Cf. MBh.13.18.47ab.

15

Cf. Hopkins (1932, p. 327). This verse often appears in the context of an oath. Cf. Sternbach 4721* (p. 1145). 16

Cf. pracchanna¯ni manus: ya¯n: a¯m : pa¯pa¯ni sukr: ta¯ni ca yatha¯vad eva ja¯nı¯s: e na vidur ya¯ni ma¯nus: a¯h: (NS.20.23)

123

Divine Witness

259

Yama Vaivasvata takes away the evil one has done when the soul in his heart, witness to his doings, remains content with him. (30) (van Buitenen)17 Here the ‘‘conscience’’-equivalent is termed either by hr: daya, which is called sa¯ks: in of satya and anr: ta, or by ks: etrajn˜a, which is called hr: di-stha karma-sa¯ks: in. Another expression for it is hr: cchaya muni pura¯n: a, who is termed as veditr: karman: ah: . It is called also sva antara-purus: a (one’s own inner man). The word a¯tman in verse 25 is not simply the reflexive pronoun meaning ‘‘one’s self’’ but may imply ‘‘inner spiritual principle,’’ that is soul. Such heavenly bodies as sun and moon, heaven and earth, and such natural phenomena as wind, fire, water are also here called for. But in this list of celestial and natural phenomena, the tinge of pan˜ca maha¯-bhu¯ta seems to retreat, for the earth (bhu¯mi) is here not the element, but rather juxtaposed with heaven (div) which is in its turn not the same as the element a¯ka¯s´a. The juxtaposition of heaven and earth is here further compared to that of the sun and moon, day and night, morning and evening twilight. As the deity, Yama appears beside the personified Dharma and these deities of punishment seem to contribute to the general spiritual and religious atmosphere. (3) Yas´odhara¯ A similar story of the chaste woman who is accused for her unchastity is met also in the case of Buddha’s wife. However, the story is a kind of mixture of Sı¯ta¯ and S´akuntala¯, for here it was not only Yas´odhara¯ who was accused for her unchastity, but also the legitimacy of her son Ra¯hula was doubted. Since the present writer had already an occasion to write on this subject in detail, here only the gist of the story is given. The story is told in connection with Ra¯hula’s birth, but it differs from the one transmission to the other. According to the Pali Ja¯taka, he was born on the seventh day before Buddha’s departure from the palace at Kapila-vastu, but several Chinese versions and their Indian equivalents have a transmission that Ra¯hula was born on the same day as the enlightenment of his father Buddha. It is this latter transmission which causes several problems. According to a general Hindu belief, a child was born on the ninth or tenth month after his mother conceived his father’s seed. Thus if Ra¯hula was born on the same day as Buddha’s enlightenment, he was conceived in his mother’s womb nine or ten months before that. Yet, his father left his mother six years before his birth and reached his enlightenment after six years of severe effort by himself alone. The

17

Cf. a¯tmaiva hy a¯tmanah: sa¯ks: ¯ı gatir a¯tma¯ tatha¯tmanah: ma¯vamam : stha¯h: svam a¯tma¯nam : nr: n: a¯m : sa¯ks: in: am uttamam (84) manyante vai pa¯pa-kr: to na kas´ cit pas´yantı¯ti nah: ta¯m : s tu deva¯h: prapas´yanti svasyaiva¯ntara-pu¯rus: ah: (85) dyaur bhu¯mir a¯po hr: dayam : candra¯rka¯gni-yama¯nila¯h: ra¯trih: sam : dhye ca dharmas´ ca vr: ta-jn˜a¯h: sarva-dehina¯m (MS.8.86) eko ’ham asmı¯ty a¯tma¯nam : yat tvam : kalya¯n: a manyase nityam : sthitas te hr: dy es: ah: pun: ya-pa¯peks: ita¯ munih: (MS.8.91)

123

260

M. Hara

contradiction leads to an alternative, either Ra¯hula’s father was a man other than the Buddha, or he was conceived on the same day as his father’s departure from the palace and stayed there for six years. As a matter of fact, we have a legendary story _ that he stayed in his mother’s womb for six years, like Su¯rya and Candra or S´ankha and Likhita.18 But, it is a more natural conjecture that the child in question is an illegitimate son as the result of Yas´odhara¯’s immoral behaviour during her husband’s absence. It is the second alternative that has a relation with our subject. Despite her protest of purity, Yas´odhara¯’s chastity was doubted, as was the case with Sı¯ta¯, Yet, Yas´odhara¯’s case is more serious, for the suspicion is not limited to herself, but further extended to her son, whose legitimacy as the grand son of S´uddhodana is to be doubted. As a matter of fact, her father in law got angry and tried to kill her, but he was persuaded by his subjects to throw her into a fire-pit instead. Unlike Sı¯ta¯’s case, she was forced to enter into fire not quite from her own will, but rather forcibly by others. Holding her newly born child in her hand, and having her husband Bodhisattva in her mind, Yas´odhara¯ then resorted to the satyakriya¯ in front of the fire-pit. No sooner did she enter into it, the fire pit turned into a pond with clean water and she sat peacefully on the lotus flower in the middle of a pond. Through this fire-ordeal, she was able to prove her chastity.19 (4) Damayantı¯ Though not openly accused as being unchaste as Sı¯ta¯, nor rejected by her husband as S´akuntala¯, a similar resort to the deified natural phenomena is seen in the negative statement of the heroine in the Nalopa¯khya¯na.Toward the end of the story, the hero in the disguise of Ba¯huka bewails the stratagem (upa¯ya) invented by Damayantı¯ as follows. katham : nu na¯rı¯ bharta¯ram anuraktam anuvratam utsr: jya varayed anyam : yatha¯ tvam : bhı¯ru karhi cit (21) du¯ta¯s´ caranti pr: thivı¯m : kr: tsna¯m : nr: pati-s´a¯sana¯t bhaimı¯ kila sma bharta¯ram : dvitı¯yam : varayis: yati (MBh.3.74.22) But how could a woman ever abandon her loving and faithful husband, and, like you, timid woman, choose another husband? Messengers coursed all over earth at the king’s command, saying, ÔBhı¯ma’s daughter will choose herself another husband.’ (van Buitenen) To this complaint the heroine answers ayam : carati loke ’smin bhu¯ta-sa¯ks: ¯ı sada¯-gatih: es: a mun˜catu me pra¯n: a¯n yadi pa¯pam : cara¯my aham (7) tatha¯ carati tigma¯m : s´uh: paren: a bhuvanam : sada¯ sa vimun˜catu me pra¯n: a¯n yadi pa¯pam : cara¯my aham (8) 18

Cf. Maha¯vastu 3.172-5. Cf also Peri 23-4, Lamotte (1949, 1006) and Hara (1997, pp. 256–257).

19

However, the majority of the transmissions says that water testified to her chastity in the place of the fire. Here, either Yas´odhara¯ or S´uddhodana put Ra¯hula on a stone-boat and threw it into the pond, saying if the baby was a legitimate son of the Buddha, let the water float the stone on the pond. By not making the stone-boat sink, but float over the pond, water proved his legitimacy.

123

Divine Witness

261

candrama¯h: sarva-bhu¯ta¯na¯m antas´ carati sa¯ks: ivat sa vimun˜catu me pra¯n: a¯n yadi pa¯pam : cara¯my aham (9) ete deva¯s trayah: kr: tsnam : trailokyam : dha¯rayanti vai vibruvantu yatha¯-satyam ete va¯dya tyajantu ma¯m (10) ‘‘The ever-restless wind that courses through the world, spying on all creatures, shall rid me of my life, if I have done any wrong. (7) So the sting-rayed sun that forever travels over the world of beings shall rid me of my life, if I have done any wrong. (8) The moon that moves through all creatures as a witness to their doings shall rid me of life, if I have done any wrong. (9) These three Gods who support all the three worlds shall pronounce the truth or leave me on the spot!’’ (10) Then the Wind as a divine witness defended her as follows. evam ukte tato va¯yur antariks: a¯d abha¯s: ata nais: a¯ kr: tavatı¯ pa¯pam : nala satyam : bravı¯mi te (11) ra¯jan˜ s´¯ıla-nidhih: sphı¯to damayantya¯ suraks: itah: sa¯ks: in: o raks: in: as´ ca¯sya¯ vayam : trı¯n parivatsara¯n (12) upa¯yo vihitas´ ca¯yam : tvad-artham atulo ’naya¯ na hy eka¯hna¯ s´atam : ganta¯ tvad-r: te ’nyah: puma¯n iha (13) upapanna tvaya¯ bhaimı¯ tvam : ca bhaimya¯ mahı¯pate _ ¯ tvaya¯ ka¯rya¯ sam na¯tra s´anka : gaccha saha bha¯ryaya¯ (MBh.3.75.14) No sooner had she spoken than the Wind spoke from the sky, ‘‘I swear it is the truth, Nala, that she has done no wrong! (11) King, Damayantı¯ has preserved her vast treasure of honour, we have been her guardians for these three years. (12) This stratagem that she devised for your sake was unmatched, for no man on earth but you can go one hundred leagues in a day. (13) Bhı¯ma’s daughter has found you, king of the earth, and you have found her. Harbour no suspicions in this matter, rejoin your wife!’’ (14) (van Buitenen) Here she invoked three deities (deva¯s trayah: ), wind, sun and moon, who move around the world (sada¯-gati) as the witnesses. According to Lu¨ders, among these three the wind is a representative of atmosphere (Luftraum), the sun of the heaven and the moon of the earth, respectively.20 Here only the wind stood up to testify to her purity. Among these three the wind is invoked as ‘‘the witness of all the living beings (bhu¯ta-sa¯ks: in),’’ and the moon is said to ‘‘circulate through inside (antah: carati) all living beings (sarva-bhu¯ta) as a witness (sa¯ks: ivat).’’ Though the moon’s ‘‘being inside all the beings’’ sounds strange, it is just a distant echo of the Upanishadic identification of moon and manas, a correspondence between the macrocosmos and micro-cosmos.21

20 21

Lu¨ders, p. 667. Cf. Lu¨ders, p. 667, and Gonda, pp. 423-460.

123

262

M. Hara

III Though not in the context of women’s self-defense as we have seen above, a similar invocation for witness (sa¯ks: in) is made by men. Three examples are quoted here. (4-1) Ra¯ma It is not only a woman in distress who seeks the help of gods, but even a man like Ra¯ma resorts to the sun and wind in his search for the lost Sı¯ta¯ in the third book of the Ra¯ma¯yan: a. a¯ditya bho loka-kr: ta¯kr: tajn˜a lokasya satya¯nr: ta-karma-sa¯ks: in mama priya¯ sa¯ kva gata¯ hr: ta¯ va¯ s´am : sasva me s´oka-vas´asya satyam lokes: u sarves: u na ca¯sti kim : cid yat te na nityam : viditam : bhavet tu s´am : sasva va¯yo kula-s´a¯linı¯m : ta¯m : hr: ta¯ mr: ta¯ va¯ pathi vartate va¯ (R.3 Appendix l No. 13 103-110) What here is done, what not, thou, O sun, knowest it, witness to the works of truth and falsehood. Whither then went my darling? Did a robber take her? Tell me of all, who am the mark of sorrow. Nothing, nothing is in the universe to find whereof, O wind, thou shouldst no knowledge have. Tell of her that is the treasure of her house; is she dead? carried off? still on the way? (Meyer, pp. 297–298) Here the sun (a¯ditya) is said to be the knower of both what people have done and not done (loka-kr: ta¯kr: ta-jn˜a), and is invoked as the witness (sa¯ks: in) of human deeds, true as well as false (satya¯nr: ta-karma). Similarly the wind (va¯yu) is styled as the deity to whom nothing is unknown (nityam : vidita) in this world. (4-2) Sudars´ana It is expected that a man in the house-holder stage (gr: hastha) should perform atithipu¯ja¯ (guest entertainment) as his duty (dharma). He should be prepared to offer to the atithi at his request everything he possesses, including his wife, as is exemplified in the story of Sudars´ana and his wife Oghavatı¯. In the statement of his vow (vrata), he resorts to a witness for protection and punishment. pra¯n: a¯ hi mama da¯ra¯s´ ca yac ca¯nyad vidyate vasu atithibhyo maya¯ deyam iti me vratam a¯hitam (70) nih: sam : digdham : maya¯ va¯kyam etat te samuda¯hr: tam tena¯ham : vipra satyena svayam a¯tma¯nam a¯labhe (71) pr: thivı¯ va¯yur a¯ka¯s´am a¯po jyotis´ ca pan˜camam

123

Divine Witness

263

buddhir a¯tma¯ manah: ka¯lo dis´as´ caiva gun: a¯ das´a (72) nityam ete hi pas´yanti dehina¯m : deha-sam : s´rita¯h: sukr: tam : dus: kr: tam : ca¯pi karma dharma-bhr: ta¯m : vara (73) yathais: a¯ na¯nr: ta¯ va¯n: ¯ı maya¯dya samuda¯hr: ta¯ tena satyena ma¯m : deva¯h: pa¯layantu dahantu va¯ (MBh.13.2.74) My life, my wife and whatever other possessions I have, are all dedicated to the use of my guests. Even this is the vow that I have taken. (70) Undoubtedly, I have made this statement in front of you. By that truth, O Brahmin, I myself shall take hold of myself (a¯labh-) (for the oath’s sake). (71)22 Earth, wind, ether, water and fire as the fifth. Intellect, soul, mind, and time and quarters. These ten strands (72) are ever present in the bodies of men, and behold the good and evil deeds (that men do), o best of righteous men! (73) This true speech has been uttered by me at this present moment, by this truth let the gods protect me, or burn me (if I have spoken falsely). (74) Upon uttering this oath, Dharma in his disguise of a begging mendicant manifested his real form and said to him, na ca¯sti s´aktis trailokye kasyacit purus: ottama pati-vrata¯m ima¯m : sa¯dhvı¯m : tavodvı¯ks: itum apy uta (80) raks: ita¯ tvad-gun: air es: a¯ pativrata-gun: ais tatha¯ adhr: s: ya¯ yad iyam : bru¯ya¯t tatha¯ tan na¯nyatha¯ bhavet (MBh.13.2.81) O best of men, no one in the three worlds has the ability to examine (udvı¯ks: -: insult with a look?) this chaste lady of yours, devoted to her husband. (80) Since she is protected by your virtue as well as by her virtue of chastity, she should not be insulted. Whatever she might say, that could not be otherwise (=always true). (81) Here a group (gun: a) of ten items stand as witness, including the five elements (pan˜ca maha¯-bhu¯ta). In addition to the five, here appear the three inner senseorgans (buddhi, manas, a¯tman), and time and space (ka¯la, dis´). They reside in the human body (deha-sam : s´rita) and watch over (pas´-) his acts (karman), good (sukr: ta) as well as evil (dus: kr: ta). It is remarkable that these ten are invoked as deities (deva) as immanent in a human body instead of being transcendent.

(4-3) Vipula In the story of Vipula, the faithful pupil of the sage Devas´arman, the seasons (r: tu) appear in the list of divine witnesses. Devas´arman departed, entrusting to Vipula the task of protecting his lustful wife Ruci during his absence. Vipula entered Ruci’s 22

The verb here a¯-labh- cannot be rendered by a single English word, as will be discussed later. Cf. Hopkins (1932, pp. 320, 325 and 331) (satyena...a¯tma¯nam a¯labhe: I swear by my life=kill myself=take my life [to stake]), 322, 332, 334 (a¯yudham a¯labhe: touch my weapon).

123

264

M. Hara

body by his yogic power and controlled her actions from inside. Thus he was able to protect her from the amorous Indra who approached her in her husband’s absence.23 Devas´arman came back; he praised Vipula’s work, but the latter had not the courage to tell how he had protected her, entering into her body by means of his yogic power. Due to the fault of not telling everything to his teacher, he happened to meet a quarelling couple and six dice-players in his way back from his teacher’s errand. They referred to Vipula’s name in their oath (s´apatha), saying that the one among them who was false should follow the same destiny as Vipula. The couple in the quarrel spoke as follows, a¯vayor anr: tam : pra¯ha yas tasya¯tha dvijasya vai vipulasya pare loke ya¯ gatih: sa¯ bhaved iti (MBh.13.42.21) That one of us who speaks falsely shall, in the next world, meet with the end which will be the twice-born Vipula’s.24 Upon hearing this, Vipula was shocked and when he met his teacher he asked who they had been. Then Devas´arman explained to him as follows, yad vai tan mithunam : brahmann aho-ra¯tram : hi viddhi tat cakravat parivarteta tat te ja¯na¯ti dus: kr: tam (4) ye ca te purus: a¯ vipra aks: air dı¯vyanti hr: s: :tavat r: tu¯m : s ta¯n abhija¯nı¯hi te te ja¯nanti dus: kr: tam (5) na ma¯m : kas´ cid vija¯nı¯ta iti kr: tva¯ na vis´vaset naro rahasi pa¯pa¯tma¯ pa¯pakam : karma vai dvija (6) kurva¯n: am hi naram karma pa pam ¯ : : : rahasi sarvada¯ pas´yanti r: tavas´ ca¯pi tatha¯ dina-nis´e ’py uta (7) aho-ra¯tram : vija¯na¯ti :rtavas´ ca¯pi nityas´ah: purus: e pa¯pakam : karma s´ubham : va¯ s´ubha-karman: ah: (9) tat tvaya¯ mama yat karma vyabhica¯ra¯d bhaya¯tmakam na¯khya¯tam iti ja¯nantas te tva¯m a¯hus tatha¯ dvija (MBh.13.43.10) O Brahmin, know the couple you saw as day and night. They move like a circle and know your evil deed. (4) Recognize the men who play cheerfully with dice as the seasons. They know your evil deed. (5) Oh twice-born, an evil man, committing an evil deed in secret, should not cherish the thought that nobody would know him. (6) The seasons and also day and night always behold a man doing an evil deed in secret. (7)25 Day and night know constantly, the seasons also, the evil deed in a human being, or the good deed of a man of good conduct. (9)

23

For this story, cf. Staal, pp. 80–81, and for the yogic motif in general, cf. Bloomfield.

24

Cf. yo lobham a¯stha¯ya¯sma¯kam : vis: amam : kartum utsahet vipulasya pare loke ya¯ gatis ta¯m ava¯pnuya¯t (MBh.13.42.27)

25

For 6–7, cf. IS.3368-9.

123

Divine Witness

265

O twice-born, they spoke to you in this way, for they knew the terrible action you did for me (i. e. of entering into my wife’s body), which had not been told me because of its improperness (vyabhica¯ra). (10) Day and night are here portrayed as a married couple (mithuna), and the six seasons are as dice-players. Day and night alternately are ever aware of (jn˜a¯-) an evil deed (dus: kr: ta) which takes place in a man, even when he acts wrongly in secret (rahasi). So the six seasons watch over (pas´-) the evil deed (pa¯paka karman). In this story the emphasis is placed more upon the evil (dus: kr: ta, pa¯pa) than the good deed (s´ubha) and these eight appear transcendently, but not immanently. Apparently, here the six seasons (r: tu) are the replacement of time (ka¯la) in MBh.13.2.72 above. (4-4) Ka¯dambarı¯ Two examples from Ba¯n: a’s Ka¯dambarı¯ also speak of the five elements. (4-4-1) Maha¯s´veta¯ cursed a young Brahmin who had approached her against her will. The Brahmin died as a result of her curse. In her explanation to Candrapı¯d: a she refers to her curse, saying, _ te na nipatitam a¯h: pa¯pa, katham evam : vadato ma¯m uttama¯nge : vajram/..../ manye ca na santy eva te ’smin˜ s´arı¯re sakala-loka-s´ubha¯s´ubha-sa¯ks: ibhu¯ta¯ni pan˜ca maha¯-bhu¯ta¯ni/yenaivam : vadan na¯gnina¯ bhasmı¯-kr: to ’si, na va¯yuna¯dhu¯to ’si, na¯mbhasa¯ pla¯vito ’si, na dharitrya¯ rasa¯talam : praves´ito ’si, na¯pi tat-ks: an: am eva¯ka¯s´ena¯tma-nirvis´es: ata¯m nı to’si (Ka ¯ ¯ dambarı¯ : 529.13-530.2) O, wretch, how has a thunderbolt failed to strike your head in the utterance of these words? Surely, in your body the five great elements are lacking, the witnesses of right and wrong of the whole world. For, in speaking thus, you are not reduced to ashes by fire, nor blown away by wind, nor caused to float by water, nor made to enter into hell by earth, nor made to disappear by the atmosphere. It turns out that the man who died here was nobody else but Pun: d: arı¯ka, her beloved, but here the five maha¯-bhu¯tas are called sa¯ks: in, which are supposed to reside in one’s body (s´arı¯re) and are ever watchful of one’s action from within. We also notice here a tinge of ordeal, in which the witness turns out to be the revenger if the statement should be false. (4-4-2) On his way to the rendez-vous with Maha¯s´veta¯, the parrot who is in reality Pun: d: arı¯ka in transformation was caught in the snare of a terrible Can: d: a¯la and taken to the Can: d: a¯la princess. The parrot speaks as follows, sa tu vihasya ma¯m abravı¯t–Ôre moha¯ndha, yasya s´ubha¯s´ubha-karma-sa¯ks: ibhu¯ta¯h: pan˜ca loka-pa¯la¯s tavaiva¯tma-s´arı¯ra-sthita¯ na pas´yanti so ’nyasya bhaya¯d aka¯ryam : na¯carati/tan nı¯to ’si maya¯ sva¯my-a¯jn˜aya¯’ ity evam abhidadha¯na eva ma¯m a¯da¯ya pakkan: a¯bhimukham agacchat (Kadambarı¯ 592.2-5)

123

266

M. Hara

But he (that Can: d: a¯la) said to me with a smile: ‘‘O you blind from delusion! Even such a man who stands outside the sight of the five loka-pa¯las, the witnesses of man’s good and evil deed dwelling in your body, refrains from doing wrong out of the fear of another. That is why I take you by the order of my master.’’ In saying thus, he took me and departed for the hut of the Can: d: a¯las. Apparently, the pan˜ca loka-pa¯la here, who are supposed to be in one’s body (a¯tmas´arı¯ra-stha) and watch (pas´-) over one’s actions, right as well as wrong (s´ubha¯s´ubha-karman), as the witnesses (sa¯ks: in) are nothing but the pan˜ca maha¯bhu¯ta. But they are also deified as loka-pa¯la which are ordinarily four in number (Indra, Yama, Varun: a, Kubera), but here Soma joins according to the commentary. The same commentator says that here this terrible Can: d: a¯la boasts about himself, proclaiming that he does not care about committing evil, even when the five lokapa¯la-s watch over his action. But even a wicked person like him has to obey his master’s order. In these passages the witnesses are the great elements which compose the human body, but somewhat deified at the same time (loka-pa¯la).

IV At this point it is convenient to list in a table the non-human witnesses mentioned above. (1) [1] [2] [3] [4] (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)

Sı¯ta¯: agni ma¯dhavı¯ a¯ditya, va¯yu, dis´, candra, ahas ra¯tri, sam : dhye, pr: thivi ma¯taris´van, agni, ap, a¯ka¯s´a, pr: thivı¯, (va¯yu) S´akuntala¯ : hr: daya, muni, purus: a, a¯ditya, candra, anila, anala, div, bhu¯mi, ap, yama, ahas, ra¯tri, sam : dhye, dharma Yas´odhara¯ Damayantı¯ : sada¯gati, tigma¯m : s´u, candramas Ra¯ma : a¯ditya, va¯yu Sudars´ana : pr: thivı¯, va¯yu, a¯ka¯s´a, ap, jyotis, buddhi, a¯tman, manas, ka¯la, dis´ Vipula : ahas, ra¯tri, r: tu Ka¯dambarı¯ 1 : pan˜ca maha¯-bhu¯ta Ka¯dambarı¯ 2 : pan˜ca loka-pa¯la

In the light of the list here, we shall discuss several problems in the ancient Indian concept of divine witness. (4-1) Elements (maha¯-bhu¯ta) It is remarkable in the above list that the most frequently invoked ones are wind and fire. These two occupy the prominent position among the five great elements (pan˜ca

123

Divine Witness

267

maha¯-bhu¯ta), and water comes next. As we have suggested above, possibly the mobility (sada¯-gati) which is common to and characteristic of these three is responsible for their distinction from the remaining two, the earth and ether. This physical and transcendent mobility as the elements is also evident in their bodily and immanent manifestation as the animating principles, as is seen in wind and vital breath, and fire and digestive heat. They observe a man’s action while circulating through the body. With this general introduction, let us examine each of them, one after another. (4-1-1) Fire: The process of its testifying to one’s purity is rather drastic, for the woman in question dares to enter into it. Furthermore, the result is quite clear to everybody, for, if she is innocent, it does not burn her. But when Sı¯ta¯ invoked the fire, it is not only considered as the element (maha¯-bhu¯ta), but it is deified also as the god Agni.26 It is also believed to reside inside living beings (aham antah: -s´arı¯ra-stho bhu¯ta¯na¯m: 27 MBh.3.275.28, tvam agne sarva-bhu¯ta¯na¯m : s´arı¯ra¯ntara-gocarah: : R.6.3242*), watching human deeds from within. This immanence of fire has an ancient origin, as is attested in Agni Vais´va¯nara (the digestive fire) in the Upanishads.28 (4-1-2) Wind: The mobility is best illustrated in the case of the wind as sada¯-gati (constantly moving). As an element, it penetrates the three worlds, heaven (div), atmosphere (antariks: a) and earth (pr: thivı¯). When deified, it becomes the god Va¯yu and in its immanent manifestation it takes the form of the vital breath (pra¯n: a) as the 29 animating principle (antas´ carati bhu¯ta¯na¯m : ma¯taris´va¯ sada¯-gatih: : MBh.3.275.23). (4-1-3) Water: It circulates not only in the outside world, but also inside one’s body as the vital sap (rasa¯ vai mat-prasu¯ta¯ hi bhu¯ta-dehes: u: MBh.3.275.28). Occasionally it is also deified as Varun: a, the traditional god of justice.30 (4-1-4) Earth: Among the five elements, it is the only one femine in gender, as is illustrated in various aspects of Sanskrit literature.31 The most remarkable example as a witness is met with in Sı¯ta¯’s final invocation. The earth embraced her as a mother does her daughter, for Sı¯ta¯ was originally born out of the earth as the word sı¯ta¯ itself signifies (furrow). Here the earth is deified as the mother-goddess, but not necessarily as one of the pan˜ca maha¯-bhu¯tas.32 26

For the Fire-God as witness, cf. Hopkins (1915, p. 100).

27

Cf. tvam agne sarva-bhu¯ta¯na¯m antas´ carasi sa¯ks: ivat sukr: tam : dus: kr: tam : lokena¯jn˜a¯tam : vidyate tvaya¯ (NS.20.22) 28 ayam agnir vais´va¯naro yo ’yam antah: -purus: e yenedam annam : pacyate yad idam adyate tasyais: a ghos: o bhavati yam etat karn: a¯v apiddha¯ya s´r: n: oti. sa yadotkramis: yan bhavati nainam : ghos: am : s´r: n: oti: Br: hada¯ran: yaka Upanis: ad 5.9.=Maitri Upanis: ad 2.6. Cf. van Buitenen 101. Later it becomes more systematized in the Vais´es: ikas. Cf., for example, Pras´astapa¯da-bha¯s: ya 1.3 (bhuktasya¯ha¯rasya rasa¯di-parin: a¯ma¯rtham udaryam). As for the five sorts of fire in one’s body (pa¯caka¯gni, ran˜jaka¯gni, sa¯dhaka¯gni, a¯locaka¯gni, bhra¯jaka¯gni), cf. Sus´ruta-sam : hita¯, Su¯tra-stha¯na 21.10, as is quoted in Kala¯-tattva-kos´a, A Lexicon of Fundamental Concepts of the Indian Arts, vol. III (New Delhi 1996) pp. 242–243. 29 30

For the Wind-God as witness, cf. Hopkins (1915, p. 95). Lu¨der, pp. 667–670.

31

Cf. Hara (1973).

32

For the earth as witness, cf. Hopkins (1915, p. 80).

123

268

M. Hara

(4-1-5) Ether: It is scarcely anthropomorphised. As a matter of fact, in the story of Damayantı¯ the god Va¯yu spoke from the sky (va¯yur antariks: a¯d abha¯s: ata: MBh.3.75.11). We have the impression that neither a¯ka¯s´a nor antariks: a is neither furnished with a special independent personality as such, nor deified as in the case of the others. (4-1-6) As is evident from our discussion above, these five sa¯ks: ins manifest themselves in three diffferent aspects: first as the physical transcendent elements (maha¯-bhu¯ta), second as the immanent animating principles. The transcendence and immanence of the elements is an echo of the Upanishadic speculation of finding an equivalence between the macro-cosmos and micro-cosmos. Finally they appear also as deified gods. In all these three aspects they serve as a witness, either positively as the benefactor, or negatively as the punisher. (4-2) Heavenly Bodies (4-2-1) The sun: Among the heavenly bodies the sun occupies the prominent position. It observes constantly what man does as the transcendent body by illuminating the world from above.33 (4-2-2) The moon: The sun is often coupled with the moon (a¯ditya-candra). It performs the same function as the sun after sun-set. But, unlike the sun, it is also believed that the moon watches over everyman’s deeds from within.34 Both of them observe human actions day and night alternately. According to Lu¨ders, the sun represents the heaven and the moon the earth.35 (4-2-3) Others: Beside the sun and moon, a similar coupling is found also in the case of heaven and earth (div, bhu¯mi), day and night (aho-ra¯tra), morning and 36 evening twilights (sam : dhya¯), time and space (ka¯la, dis´). As a natural phenomenon the (six) seasons (r: tu) also appear as witnesses. Apparently, they watch over in turns through the year.

(4-3) Inner Principles As the witness which observes human deeds from within like the digestive fire (agni) and vital breath (pra¯n: a), ancient Indians speak of one’s own heart (hr: daya). It is also called ks: etrajn˜a standing in the heart as a witness (hr: di sthitah: karmasa¯ks: in), or an ancient sage (muni pura¯n: a) residing in one’s heart (hr: di-stha), or the inner man (sva antara-purus: a). Apparently, they are the principles equivalent to our conscience.37 The word a¯tman is also used in the sense of ‘‘soul,’’ instead of the mere reflexive pronoun. 33 Cf. Mayu¯ra’s Su¯rya-s´ataka 51: jagati sama-rucih: sarva-karmaika-sa¯ks: in (the sole witness of each and every deed in the world). For the Sun-god as witness, cf. Hopkins (1915, p. 87). 34 candrama¯h: sarva-bhu¯ta¯na¯m antas´ carati sa¯ks: ivat (MBh.3.75.9) 35

Lu¨ders, p. 667. For the Moon-God as witness, cf. Hopkins (1915, p. 91).

36

One may add also ‘‘awake and in sleep’’ (ja¯gare svapna-bha¯ve in R.6.3235*.) Cf. Hopkins (1915, p. 66).

37

123

Divine Witness

269

Other mental faculties such as buddhi, manas, a¯tman are also enumerated as inner witnesses (deha-sam : s´rita: MBh.13.2.73), but they may be later additions. Out of these three, manas is the micro-cosmic counterpart of the macro-cosmic candramas, as we have discussed above.

(4-4) Gods Beside the anthropomorphised deities such as Agni, Va¯yu and others which have their origin in natural phenomena (fire, wind, etc.), the five loka-pa¯las (Indra, Varun: a, Yama, Kubera and Soma) are also invoked, although they are practically the same as the five great elements (pan˜ca maha¯-bhu¯tas). Other than these five, Dharma also makes its appearance: it is often coupled with Yama, both being the gods of justice or punishment. (4-5) How to Witness These witnesses observe (pas´-: MBh.13.2.73, 13.43.7, cf. also pra-pas´-: MS.8.86) and are aware of (vid-: MBh.1.68.25, 27, 28, jn˜a¯-: MBh.1.68.29, 13.43.4-5, vijn˜a¯-: MBh.13.43.6) what a man does, right as well as wrong (narasya vr: tta: MBh.1.68.29, sukr: tam : dus: kr: tam: MBh.13.2.73, sukr: ta-kukr: ta-jn˜a¯tr: : R.6.3236*, loka-kr: ta¯kr: ta-jn˜a, lokasya satya¯nr: ta-karma-sa¯ks: in: R.3 Appendix 13.103-4). It is remarkable, however, that these verbs of observing and knowing are mostly attributed to the inner principles. Though the falsely accused persons appeal to the gods and heavenly bodies for protection, the observing agents are mostly located inside. (4-6) The Divine Witness and the Human Oath (S´apatha) As is evident, one’s appeal to the divine witness is not separable from the oath38 for which true speech (satya-vacana) is indispensable. As has been pointed out by eminent scholars in the past, the ancient Hindu swears by his life, or by anything dear to him, which is sometimes his possessions or even sometimes persons dear to him, like his sons, or brothers.39 In swearing, they are prepared to lose them in cases when what they said is untrue. As H. Lu¨ders once remarked, the Hindu oath as implied by the Sanskrit word s´ap-, s´apatha is nothing but ‘‘Selbstverfluchung zum Tode fu¨r den Fall der Unwahrheit der Aussage.’’40 The situation is best illustrated by the word a¯-labh-, which originally was used in the context of animal sacrifice.41 The original meaning is preserved in the expression a¯tma¯nam a¯labhe (to be prepared to kill oneself), but it is later used in the sense of the act of touching, the

38 39

Lu¨ders (2), p. 674. Lu¨ders, p. 659.

40

Lu¨ders, p. 658.

41

Cf. Oertel, pp. 423–424, 1507–1508.

123

270

M. Hara

ceremonial act in swearing. In a sense people ‘‘stake’’42 in swearing, which is later symbolized in the act of touching.43 It is curious to note here that the Hindus never did swear by a god, as is the case with the Greeks and Romans,44 for it sounds strange in the Hindu context that one should lose the god in the case of failure. In India, divine intervention into cases is only in the form of a witness (sa¯ks: in). As a witness the gods protect them as the benefactors when people speak the truth, but may work as the avengers (‘‘Ra¨cher’’: Lu¨ders) in cases when what they swear is false.45 Hence Sı¯ta¯ implores ‘‘protect me’’ 46 (ma¯m : pa¯tu, pa¯hi) and Sudars´ana’s word pa¯layantu on the one hand, and ‘‘kill me’’ (vimun˜catu me pra¯n: a¯n), or ‘‘reduce me into ashes’’ (daha, bhasmı¯-kurya¯t), or ‘‘abandon me’’ (tyajantu ma¯m) on the other.

IV Addenda Finally, we refer to some passages in the Buddhist literature. (1) In the well-known story of his Ma¯ra-vijaya (defeat of Ma¯ra), which is illustrated in the Buddhist iconography as bhu¯mi-spars´a-mudra¯ we meet the same motif of the earth as the witness. Though we have several different transmissions, the gist of the story goes as follows. When the Buddha gave up his asceticism and decided to take food and sat down under the bodhi-tree for his final enlightenment, Ma¯ra appeared with his family and army with the intention of seducing him back to secular life. Despite his effort, the Buddha did not move from his seat which he had chosen for the final enlightenment. Having failed in his military and sensual assault, Ma¯ra began to threaten him verbally, accusing him of unauthorized occupation of the seat for enlightenment and demanded that he call a witness to the meritorious deed he had done in the past which would authorize his right to occupy the place. Toward the end of the controversy, the Buddha touched the earth with his right hand, calling the earth-goddess as a witness (sa¯ks: in) of his charity-acts in his previous births. Though the earth is the unconscious being (acetana), here apparently the Buddha’s invocation of the earth as a witness is based upon the ancient Indian belief of the earth as the foundation of truth (satya) and righteousness (dharma).47 Upon this invocation, the earth responded properly, repeating that ‘‘I was the witness of yours at that time’’ to the effect that Ma¯ra’s army was forced to retreat (J.1.74.26-9). But since the present writer has discussed this problem on another occasion,48 we do not go into details here. 42 43 44

Hopkins, p. 322. Lu¨ders, p. 660 (Das Beru¨hren gilt also dem Inder als eine Art Todesweihe) Hopkins, p. 328, Lu¨ders, p. 663.

45

Lu¨ders, p. 666.

46

Cf. also, vyavaha¯ra¯bhis´asto ’yam : purus: ah: s´uddhim icchati tad enam : sam : s´aya¯pannam : dharmatas tra¯tum arhasi (NS.20.24) Cf. Tucci, p. 329. Hara, ‘‘A Note on the bhu¯mi-spars´a-mudra¯,’’ to be published in Festschrift D. Schlingloff.

47 48

123

Divine Witness

271

(2) As is mentioned above, Yas´odhara¯ had to undergo the fire-ordeal like Sı¯ta¯, then what happened to Ra¯hula’s legitimacy? Here it was the water who saved him from people’s accusations and proved his legitimacy. Yet, unlike the case with the Hindu ordeal where the accused defendant plunged into water, here again the plaintiff forced Yas´odhara¯ to throw the baby into the water and the water did not make him sink down, but the son himself on a boat reached safely to the other shore. Yet, here also we do not enter into detail, since the present writer once wrote an article on this subject.49 (3) The third story is told in connection with the young Siddhartha’s skill in the martial arts, but here a deity (devata¯) appears in order to prove his excellent skill. Though the transmission itself is complicated, a passage of the Sam : gha-bheda-vastu of the Mu¯la-sarva¯stiva¯da-vinaya reads as follows. kuma¯ra¯h: kathayanti: gaccha¯mah: , chedyam : kurmah: iti. te nirgata¯, s´rutva¯ s´a¯kyamunir bodhisattvah: pan˜ca¯s´ata-pariva¯rah: cchedyam : kartum : nirgatah: , ´ ´ kuma¯ra¯h: kalama-cchedyam kurvanti, tais chinna s chinna h: patanti, ¯ ¯ : bodhisattvah: a¯d: haka-chedyam karoti, tena chinna na patanti, ¯ : tathaiva¯vatis: :thante, kuma¯ra¯h: kathayanti, bhavantah: s´a¯kyamunir bodhisattvo balava¯n s´ru¯yate, pan˜casu stha¯nes: u kr: ta¯vı¯ti, tad ayam : chedyam : api na ja¯na¯ti kartum, na ca¯yam asma¯tto balava¯n, tatha¯ hy asma¯bhih: pa¯dapa¯s´ chinna¯s te sarve nipatita¯h: , anena tu ye chinna¯h: te tathaiva¯vatis: :thanta iti; atha ya¯ devata¯ s´a¯kyamunau bodhisattve abhiprasanna¯ tasya¯ etad abhavat, ime s´a¯kya¯ bodhisattva-balam aja¯nantah: s´ilpe ca kr: ta¯vita¯m : bodhisattvkaris yanti, balam pam sayis yanti, tad upa ya-sam asya¯vajn˜a¯m ¯ : : : : : : vidha¯nam : kartavyam iti. taya¯ ta¯dr: s´am va tam utsr s t am , yena sarve te vr: ks: a¯h: ¯ : : :: : karkara¯yama¯n: a¯h: patita¯h. dr: s: :tva¯ s´a¯kya¯h: param : vismayam a¯panna¯h: (Gnoli ed. p.60 7-20) Young men (of the S´a¯kya race get together, and) speak to each other. ‘‘Let us go out and make a contest of the art of amputation (chedya).’’ Hearing this, with his retinue of five hundred S´a¯kyamuni Bodhisattva also went out to join the contest. The young colleagues use the kamala way of amputation and fell a number of trees. Bodhisattva uses the a¯d: haka way of amputation, but no tree ever falls down. The young men began to speak, ‘‘Friends, we have heard that S´akyamuni Bodhisattva is powerful and has mastered completely the five different modes.50 But he does not know even the one mode of amputation. Thus he is not stronger than us. For when we cut trees, they fall down, but those cut by him remain as they are.’’ Then a deity who was well disposed to S´a¯kyamuni Bodhisattva thought: ‘‘These young men of the S´a¯kya-race, without knowing Bodhisattva’s real 49

Hara (2005, 27ff).

50

These five modes are ordinarily those of archery (vedhya), instead of the art of cutting (chedya). These are du¯ra-vedha, s´abda-vedha, marma-vedha, aks: u¯n: a-vedha, and dr: d: ha-praha¯rita¯.: Cf. Sam : ghabheda-vastu 58.22-26=Taisho 24.220c and Maha¯vyutpatti Section 217. Cf. also Divya¯vada¯na 58.21ff. and Lalitavistara 156.9ff. (Lefmann). However, for the names of these martial arts, another paper needs to be written.

123

272

M. Hara

power and his mastery of (martial) art (s´ilpa), will despise him and defile his (real) power. Therefore, a device must be made here.’’ She caused such a wind to blow to the effect that all the trees fell down with a terrible sound (karkara¯yate?). Seeing this, all the S´a¯kyas were greatly astonished.51 It is evident that the a¯d: haka way of amputation (chedya) which the Bodhisattva resorted to was much superior to the kamala way which the ordinary youngsters used. Apparently, his cutting-skill was so quick and sharp that the tree thus cut through remained unmoved without leaving any trace of amputation. Here the deity (devata¯) who defended the Bodhisattva was neither called for, nor stood as a witness (sa¯ks: in) as such, but simply was so well-disposed that she could not help saving him from people’s false reproach. Incidentally, here the devata¯ is not necessarily feminine, and as a matter of fact, devata¯ here is replaced by the god Indra in another Chinese transmission (*Maha¯ya¯na-ra¯ja-su¯tra=Taisho 4. 942b.)

References Bloomfield, M. (1917). On the art of entering another’s body: A Hindu fiction motif. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 56, 1–43. Gonda, J. (1991). Mind and Moon. J. Gonda Selected Studies volume VI, part 2. Leiden. Hara, M. (1973). The earth as the wife of a king (mahı¯-pati). Asiatische Studien, 27, 97–114. Hara, M. (1997). A note on the Buddha’s Asceticism. Festschrift H. Bechert (pp. 249–260). SwisttalOrdenforf. Hara, M. (2005). Women in ancient India (4). Journal of the International College for Advanced Buddhist Studies, 9, 1–64. Hopkins, E. W. (1915). Epic mythology. Strassburg. Hopkins, E. W. (1932). The oath in Hindu Epic Literature. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 52, 316–337. Kane, P. V. (1973). History of Dharma-s´a¯stra III. Poona. Lamotte, E´. (1949). Le Traite´ de la grande vertu de Sagesse II. Louvain. Lariviere, R. W. (1981). The Divyatattva. New Delhi. Lu¨ders, H. (1959). Der indische Eid. Varun: a II Varun: a und R: ta (pp. 655–670). Go¨ttingen. Lu¨ders, H. (2). Verha¨ltnis von Eid und Ordal. Varun: a II Varun: a und R: ta (p. 674). Go¨ttingen. Meyer, J. J. Sexual life in ancient India (Indian Reprint 1971). Oertel, H. (1994). Kleine Schriften. Stuttgart. ´ cole Franc¸aise d’E ´ xtre˜me-orient, 18(2), Peri, N. (1918). Les Femmes de S´a¯kya-muni. Bulletin de l’E 1–37. Staal, F. (1975). Exploring mysticism. Berkeley. Sternbach (1977). Maha¯-subha¯s: ita-sam : graha (Vol. III). Hoshiarpur. Tucci, G. (1954). Earth in India and Tibet. Eranos Jahrbuch, 22, 323–364. van Buitenen, J. A. B. (1962). The Maitra¯yan: ¯ıya Upanis: ad, ’s-Gravenhage. Zin, M. (2008). The identification of Kizil paintings III. Indo-Asiatische Zeitschrift, 12, 50–61.

51

Cf. Zin, p. 52.

123