166 THE REV. R. COLLINS; ON 



port an idea that "Nirvana is a brief period of bliss (of course 

 in this Hfe) followed by eternal death." The argument is un- 

 doubtedly clever and learned. But I do not think that any of 

 the passages produced are conclusive on his side of the ques- 

 tion. For instance, in those very remarkable verses 153 and 

 154 of the Dhammapada, where Professor Childers translated, 

 " my soul, arrived at the gates of annihilation (visankhara), has 

 attained the destruction of human passion," Professor Max 

 Miiller translates, "the mind approaching the Eternal (visan- 

 khara), has attained-to the extinction of all desires." Again, in 

 Dhammapada, 203, where Professor Childers translates, " Hun- 

 ger is the worst disease, existence is the worst suffering, to 

 him who realises this truth extinction is the highest bliss,'' 

 Professor Max Miiller translates, " Hunger is the Avorst of 

 diseases, the body the greatest of pains ; if one knows this 

 truly, that is Nirvana, the highest happiness." In not a few 

 other passages Professor Childers has introduced the idea of 

 annihilation of being, where the original does not appear to 

 demand it, as notably in his rendering of JJh. 368, the mean- 

 ing of which he gives thus : — " The man who lives in charity 

 with all, rejoicing in the commandment of Buddha, will attain 

 the tranquil blessed lot which is the cessation of existence." 

 The same passage is, in Professor Max Miiller's rendering : — 

 " The Bhikshu who acts with kindness, who is calm in the 

 doctrine of Buddha, will reach the quiet place (Nirvana), 

 cessation of natural desires, and happiness." In none of these 

 passages is annihilation of existence necessarily implied as the 

 only real idea of Nirvana. I am strongly of opinion that 

 Professor Max Miiller's explanation of the " apparent co- 

 existence of two irreconcilable doctrines of Nirvana," is the 

 correct one, viz., that " the two opposite sets of expressions 

 represent two phases of the doctrine, the one ancient and the 

 other modern ; of these the original doctrine taught by Buddha 

 is that of ' the entrance of the soul into rest,' while the dogma 

 of annihilation is a perversion introduced by metaphysicians 

 in later times " (Childers' Diet, under Nibbanam). Indeed, I 

 have shown above, that Buddha himself seems, at any rate, 

 in words attributed to him, to deny that he taught annihilation 

 of existence. 



The exact application of the many terms used in the 

 Buddhist ontology, as understood by the men of Buddha's 

 own age, is by no means easy of apprehension. Thus in one 

 of the examples given above, the comparatively common 

 word Sankhdra, which is the same as the Sanscrit Samskdra, is 



