"Although this is the orthodox view of Nirvana, ac- cording to the oldest Buddhistic doctrine, it is necessarj^ to point out two categories of different views which have obscured the original idea of Nirvana, and even induced some modern writers to believe that the final beatitude of the oldest Buddhistic doctrine is not equiv- alent to the absolute annihilation of the soul. The first categorj' of these latter, or, as we may call them, heterodox views, is that which confounds with Nir- vana the preparatory labor of the mind to arrive at that end, and therefore assumes that Nirvana is the ex- tinction of thought, or the cessation, to thought, of all difference between subject and object, virtue and vice, etc., or certain speculations on a creative cause, the con- ditions of the universe, and so on. All these views Buddha himself rejects, as appears from the work Lan- kavatdra, which relates his discourse on the real mean- ing of Nirvana before the Bodhisattwa Mahamati, The erroneousness of these views is obviously based on the fact that the mind, even though in a state of un-
NIRVANA
134
NISAN
consciousness, as when ceasing to think, or when specu- lating, is still within the pale of existence. Thus, to obviate the mistaken notion that such a state is the real Nirvana, Buddhistic works sometimes use the term Nirupadlns esha Nirvana, or " the Nirvana u-ithout a remainder of substratum" (i. e. without a rest of exist- ence), in contradistinction to the '• Nirvana with a re- mainder ;" meaning by the latter expression that condi- tion of a saint which, in consequence of his bodily and mental austerities, immediately precedes his real Nir- vana, but in which, nevertheless, he is still an occupant of the material world. The second category of heter- odox views on the Nirvana is that which, though acknowledging in principle the original notion of Buddhistic salvation, represents, as it were, a compro- mise with the popular mind. It belongs to a later period of Buddhism, when this religion, in extending its conquests over Asia, had to encounter creeds which abhorred the idea of an absolute nihilism. This com- promise coincides with the creation of a Buddhistic pantheon, and with the distribution of Buddhist saints into three classes, each of which has its own Nirvana ; that of the two lower degrees consisting of a vast num- ber of years, at the end of which, however, these saints are born again ; while the absolute Nirvana is reserved for the highest class of saints. Hence Buddhistic sal- vation is then spoken of either simply as A%-vdiia, or the lowest; or as Parinirvdiia,t\\e middle; oras J/««a- parinirvdiia, or the highest extinction of the soul ; and as those who have not yet attained to the highest Nir- vana must live in the heavens of the two inferior classes of saints until they reappear in this world, their condi- tion of Nirvana is assimilated to that state of more or less material happiness which is also held out to the Brahmanical Hindu before he is completely absorbed into Brahman. When, in its last stage, Buddhism is driven to the assumption of an Adi,or primitive Buddiia. as the creator of the universe. Nirvana, then meaning the absorption into him, ceases to have any real affin- ity with the original Buddhistic term" (Chambers).
The word itself, as we have seen above, means nothing more nor less than extinction or blowing out. And however much Max jNIuUer may argue against this terra as giv- ing expression to Buddha's own gospel, the oldest liter- ature of Buddhism will scarcely suffer us to doubt that Gautama intended in its use to express absolute annihi- lation, the destruction of all elements which constitute existence. Tlie learned Burnouf {flist. du Buddhisme, p. 589) takes this ground understandingly, and there is none better competent to judge in this question than he is; yet Mliller comes forward and, in approving this statement, impeaches its accuracy by stating that the Buddhistic literature truly teaches such a doctrine, but that as Christ's saj-ings must be held distinct from the writings of the apostles (which we who believe in the inspiration of the Scriptures can hardly understand), so the gospel of Buddhism must be examined apart from the personal utterances of Gautama, who Muller insists never taught the doctrine of annihilation, because " a religion has never been founded by such teaching," and because, too, a man like Buddha, who knew man- kind (?), must have known (!) that he could not with such weapons overturn the tyranny of the Brahmans." He therefore concludes thus: "Either we must bring ourselves to believe that Buddha taught his disci- ples two diametrically opposed doctrines on Nirvana — an exoteric and esoteric one— or we must allow that view of Nirvana to have been the original view of the founder of this marvellous religion which corresponds best with the simple, clear, and practical character of Buddha." '• A very lofty morality"— the Nation (N. Y. Feb. 15, 1872) well answers to this statement of [Muller— "does not necessarily implj- conventionally projier meta- physical opinions, nor is the greatest charity inconsist- ent with the logical carrying on of one's investigations for their own sake; and it is to be hoped that religious teachers, of all men, ^liould seek to extend their intiu-
ence rather by what they consider to be the tnith than by what might be especially useful as a ' powerful weapon.' The last remark sounds strange as coming from one who has studied Buddhism, and is sufficiently refuted by his own words on p. 248, where he shows how in their belief they escaped, by means of Nirvana, transmigration and the misery of living." We might add, this sounds as if Buddha, like Miiller, had enjoyed the high plane of Christian ethics, and could have been expected to comprehend the wants of humanity as we now understand them, with the light afforded by Jesus the Christ's teachings and labors. Surely Buddha would do for the Messiah of the world if he could have done and taught as Max Miiller would have us believe. The truth is he was simply a philosopher, and fed humanity not upon a relative, but an absolute empty Nothing; a philosophical myth, such as Strauss attempted in the 19th century, but with different motives. In his still more recent publication, as translator of the Dhammapada, or "Path of Virtue," Muller returns to the argument in favor of Gautama's teachings of a hereafter as foUows :