human. When this belief becomes a conviction, the CHAPTER V. eating of flesh meat must seem to the believer to be akin to cannibalism. It is strange that this feeling finds so little expression in the legend of Gótama; on the contrary, Gótama is said to have died in consequence of having eaten too much pork. But it is easy to infer from the edicts that the legend of his biography was compiled in a later and corrupt age of Buddhism, and cannot be accepted as a faithful picture of his life and teaching. Be this as it may, Raja Priyadarsi was no monk. He was a philanthropist of a practical stamp, and imbued with a deep love of animal beings. Probably he had eaten flesh meat from his boyhood, without a thought of the nature of the animal he was eating, or of the misery which was inflicted to procure his daily meal. Like other Hindú sovereigns he had also performed sacrifices of animals to the gods, without a thought of the death to which the creature was subjected. But when he realized the pain and suffering caused by such butchery, his heart seems to have revolted from flesh, in the same way that a woman revolts from the idea of eating a pet lamb or bird. Accordingly he promulgated an edict, in which he prohibited all slaughter of animals, whether for food or sacrifice, because of the cruelty which it involved. He also announced that the daily slaughter of animals in the royal kitchen would be discontinued for the future. In the same edict he prohibited all convivial meetings on the ground that much evil attended such assemblies.5

Perhaps no despotic order has been issued, since

Sce Tablet i. in Appendix I.

Result of the edict.

CHAPTER V. the first establishment of a civil government, which was so calculated to create a profound impression. The Brahmans, however abstemious in their own diet, had sacrificed animals, and poured out libations to the gods, from immemorial antiquity. The Kshatriyas were equally celebrated as warriors and hunters, and had lived on meat and wine from their earliest history. The edict was thus directed against the daily worship of the Brahmans and the daily pursuits and daily meals of the Kshatriyas; whilst it was based upon broad principles of benevolence, which neither priest nor soldier could be expected to understand. The Brahman would never regard his sacrificial knife as an instrument of cruelty; nor was the Kshatriya likely to desist from the sports of the field, or to abstain from his ancient flesh feasts, because of the pain they might inflict on the antelope or wild boar.

Failure of the

edict.

Enforcement of the edict by an

stration.

The promulgation of the first edict against the slaughter of animals thus appears to have been a failure. The general population of the Gangetic valley might possibly have received it with indifference, for they had subsisted on grain and vegetables for unrecorded ages; but still they had always sacrificed animals to the gods, and especially to the female deities who were supposed to revel in flesh meat and strong liquors."

The Raja, however, was not to be thwarted in imperial demon his benevolent intentions by the opposition or disaffection of unbelievers. He repeated the edict in another form, and promulgated it with all the pomp and ceremony of an imperial demonstration. This

6 See the vows of Sítá to the goddesses of the Ganges and Jumna rivers, ante, page 47.

time it was not associated with the decree against CHAPTER V. convivial entertainments, but placed foremost amongst those precepts of duty which had received universal recognition. Again, it was not issued as an ordinary decree, but surrounded with all the emblems of power and authority that would excite universal reverence, and ensure universal obedience. Magnificent spectacles were exhibited at every important station throughout the empire, such as the people had not witnessed for centuries. There were grand processions of elephants and chariots, accompanied by imposing displays of rich and costly articles, and winding up with fire-works and illuminations. Vast assemblages of people were thus gathered together in orderly but overwhelming multitudes, such as are still to be witnessed at the great Indian festivals. The drums were beaten and proclamation was made by a special messenger from the sovereign. "Thus saith the Raja :7 —' Animals are not to be sacrificed, living creatures are not to be put to death, kinsfolk are to be kindly regarded, Bráhmans and Srámans are to be respected and reverenced, fathers and mothers are to be dutifully served, and spiritual pastors are to be received with filial veneration: By these righteous observances the religion of the heaven-beloved Raja will flourish throughout the world; and under his sons, and his grandsons, and his great-grandsons, it will prosper throughout all generations: It is the ordinance of duty and should be as stable as a mountain: Let every virtuous man obey it: Let no man think of opposing it: The law which di

7 The name of the Raja, and his appellation of "heaven-beloved" or "beloved of the gods," is repeated in every edict.

CHAPTER V. rects ceremonial rites must conform to the ordinance of duty.'" 8

Significance of the prohibition.

Raja Priyadarsi is perhaps the first sovereign on record who authoritatively declared that the national religion must conform to justice and humanity. Gótama Buddha had already brought his monastic teaching into conformity with moral duty by prohibiting sons to enter upon monastic vows without the consent of their parents. But Raja Priyadarsi aimed a mortal blow at the old Brahmanical ritual by asserting that the sacrifice of animals was contrary to humanity. In enforcing this decree he did not appeal to any religious sentiment, such as precludes the Brahman from eating beef, or the Mussulman from eating pork. He did not refer to the dogma of the metempsychosis, which taught that animals were mere embodiments of human souls. He did not even prohibit animal food, but only the slaughter of the animal. But the force of the appeal to humanity against the bloody ritual was irresistible. A powerful antagonism was excited which lasted for ages; but in the end humanity triumphed over the Brahman and the Kshatriya. In the present day animal sacrifices have almost passed away from

See Appendix, Tablet iv. The paraphrase will appear somwehat free if it is only compared with Professor Wilson's translation of Tablet iv.; but it will be found in perfect conformity with the real meaning of the inscription as exhibited in Professor Wilson's comments on the original text of the edict. See Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. xii., page 180. Speaking of the last sentence, Professor Wilson says that it is intended to raise moral duty above ceremonial rites.

This point has already been discussed, see ante, page 142.

It is curious to notice the contrast between the practical working of the Buddhist commandment against slaughter, and that against getting drunk. Although killing is forbidden, the Buddhist may still eat meat, provided the animal has been killed by another, or has died a natural or accidental death. But the law against getting drunk is treated as a prohibition against all intoxicating liquors and drugs.

India; they have been superseded by the more 'CHAPTER V. innocent offerings of rice and milk, butter and cakes, such as the ancient Rishis presented to the gods of the elements.10 In like manner the royal and imperial sacrifices of the Rajasúya and Aswamedha have disappeared from the land; and although the love of the chase is still as strong in the Kshatriya as in days of yore, yet the national sentiment of the Hindú is opposed to the idea of slaughter of any living thing."

lishments for

mals.

The edict for the establishment of medical dis- Medical estabpensaries or hospitals is of a still more remarkable men and anicharacter. It is the expression of an enlightened morality, which is a lesson for all time. It is the embodiment of that practical benevolence, which cares for the body as well as for the soul. The Raja saw with that true philanthropy which grows out of the religion of the affections, that health is as essential to happiness as spiritual culture; and accordingly, whilst seeking to inculcate religion or Dharma, he provided the means for removing disease and pain from the temple of the body. Here, again, his loving-kindness was not confined to the human race, but extended over the entire range of animal being. Mr Prinsep alludes to it as the fastidious humanity of the Buddhist creed; but the alleviation of agony in animals, especially in those who

10 In Bengal goats and kids are still sacrificed to the goddess Kalí or Durga. 11 The antagonism of the Brahmans to the milder precepts of Buddhism could scarcely have found much expression during the reign of a tolerant sovereign like Raja Priyadarsi. The author of the Vishnu Purána, which was composed in the age of Brahmanical revival, is exceedingly bitter against the Buddhists and Jains, who had seduced the people from their ancient sacrifices and sraddhas. (See Book iii. chap. xviii.) The transition from animal sacrifices to the bloodless offerings of rice and milk is fully indicated in the Rámáyana. See History, vol. ii., part iv., Rámáyana, chap. ii.