ON MIRACLES. 



51 



occur. We have already seen the unreasonableness of the 

 limitation to the yellow-robed priests, and the impropriety 

 of the laity being excluded from the influence of miracles. 



It is indeed unreasonable to believe that Gotama could 

 have ever intended to confine his miracles to the priest- 

 hood, who were dressed in yellow, or to any other denomi- 

 nation of Ascetics. We think we may reject the words 

 ' clad in white' as an addition of the compilers : and still 

 we have the word ■ laity' which also occurs in the Vinay.a 

 Lib : iii. 



It has been suggested to us that the intention of 

 Gotama to restrict the prohibition to the working of 

 miracles before the laity, was shewn with sufficient clear- 

 ness in the Pingola Bharadvaja Sutta — that intention being 

 * to prevent his disciples from acquiring pacaya, or the 

 necessaries of life by the exhibition of miracles.' That in- 

 tention, it will be observed, is not expressly stated. It m;.y 

 certainly be gathered from the legend ; but against the 

 acceptance of such an intention there are several reasons. 

 In the first place the express reason given in the Kevatta 

 Sutta against Iddhi patiharlya generally, is, that miracles 

 which could be worked — and they are enumerated — were of 

 a kind similar to wonderful acts of a Chirmachargist, and 

 that therefore the populace might ascribe them to magic. 

 This reason appears to enter into the very essence of the 

 question, and is inconsistent with the belief that the pro- 

 hibition had for its object the prevention of abuse of power. 

 It establishes the absolute impropriety of the act. It admits 

 of no exception. And if an exception were possible, the alle- 

 ged exception in favour of the laity is cut from under the 

 ground of the party alleging it; for it is quite clear that the 



