It is,
however, just as irreconcilable with the other Buddhist accounts of the
teaching of their opponent; because it is absolutely unimaginable, that
the same man, who lays vows upon his followers, the object of which is to
avoid sin, could nevertheless make virtue and sin purely dependent upon
the disposition of fate, and preach the uselessness of carrying out the
law. The accusation that Nataputta embraced fatalism must therefore be
regarded as an invention and an outcome of sect hatred as well as of the
wish to throw discredit on their opponents. [Footnote: Jacobi _loc.
cit._. p. 159-160.]
The Buddhist remarks on the personality and life of Nataputta are still
more remarkable. They say repeatedly that he laid claim to the dignity of
an Arhat and to omniscience which the Jainas also claim for their prophet,
whom they prefer simply to call 'the Arhat' and who possesses the
universe-embracing '_Kevala_' knowledge. [Footnote: See for example
the account in the _Chullavagga_, in _S.B.E_. Vol. XX. p. 78-79;
_Ind. Antiq._ Vol. VIII, p. 313.] A history of conversions, tells us
further that Nataputta and his disciples disdained to cover their bodies;
we are told just the same of Vardhamana. [Footnote: Spence Hardy,
_Manual of Budhism_, p. 225.] A story in the oldest part of the
Singalese canon gives an interesting and important instance of his
activity in teaching.
Pages:
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50