The acceptance of the mythology, whether early or fully developed, has been a crucial factor in the development of Buddhism. Without the rich mythology associated with the Buddha, the religion collapses, and nothing is left but a demythologized, supposedly historical figure in whom it makes little sense to “take refuge.” He becomes a wandering ascetic of ancient India, like many others, and the appeal and growth of his religion has no adequate explanation. It was therefore the extraordinary combination of the historical Shakyamuni and the mythology that became associated with him that set the great religion known as Buddhism on its historical course.
In Buddhism myth is continually used at second or even third remove to bolster the primary Buddha myth. These subsidiary forms include, for example, stories about the recitation of the Buddhist canon soon after Shakyamuni’s decease, details of his previous lives, and descriptions of the six spheres of rebirth. Some Buddhist traditions take these subsidiary myths more seriously than others, and in each tradition there are also variations among individual adherents. But, even for those Buddhists who are most skeptical, the myths associated with the Buddha and his saving activity remain central and useful. Shakyamuni in literature and art Traditional literary accounts
The traditional biographies of the Buddha Shakyamuni all derive ultimately from early Indian extracanonical rearrangements of the still-earlier scattered canonical accounts of his great acts. The best-known of the Indian “biographies” are the Sanskrit works the Mahavastu" class="md-crosslink">Mahavastu (“Great Story”), the Buddhacharita" class="md-crosslink">Buddhacharita (“Poetic Discourse on the Acts of the Buddha”), and the Lalitavistara (“Detailed Narration on the Sport [of the Buddha]”); the Chinese Abhiniskramana-sutra (“Discourse on the Going Forth”), translated from an Indian original; and the Pali introduction to the Jatakas" class="md-crosslink">Jatakas, the Nidanakantha (“Account of the Origins”), as well as the commentary on the Buddhavamsa (“Chronicle of the Buddhas”). These early works grew out of earlier traditions, and ascertaining the dates of their final versions helps in no way to estimate the actual age or reliability of much of the material they contain. All that can be said is that this material agrees substantially with the earliest-known fragmentary canonical accounts and that, once presented in biographical form, there are only minor variations in the “national” versions of the story. The later Sinhalese, Thai, Myanmar (Burmese), and Cambodian stories are all firmly based on the earlier Pali versions. The Koreans and Japanese derived their accounts directly from the Chinese, who in turn derived their traditions, via Central Asia, from Indian sources. The Tibetans developed their versions from the same earlier Indian versions. The biography of Shakyamuni included by the Tibetan historian Bu-ston (1290–1364) in his Chos ’byung (“History of Buddhism”) differs from other traditional accounts only by its listing of the later Mahayana doctrines as part of Shakyamuni’s teachings on earth. All in all, the unity of the mythological and quasi-historical interpretations of the life and death of the “historical” Buddha, in whatever Buddhist country they have been retold, remains impressive.
The kernel of truth in the claim of the Theravadin Buddhists of Sri Lanka and mainland Southeast Asia to represent unadulterated “original Buddhism” derives from the fact that they have remained faithful to the early enthusiastic acclamation of Shakyamuni as the one and only Buddha of the present dispensation. Although other buddhas were recognized from a very early date, the attention of the early community was focused almost exclusively on the person and activities of Shakyamuni.
All the early canonical accounts agree in describing Shakyamuni’s experience of enlightenment as a definitive victory over Mara, the Evil One, and as resulting in a threefold knowledge: that of his own previous births, that of the births and deaths of all other sentient beings, and that of the saving insight that brings final release from the whole unhappy process. Moreover, Shakyamuni was acclaimed Mahamuni (“Great Sage”) and Bhagavat (“Lord”) in the texts not because he achieved a state of spiritual equilibrium in the context of ordinary existence but because he attained the supramundane state of nirvana. There are no textual indications that he was ever regarded by his followers as a kind of Socratic sage; on the contrary, he was thought to be a perfected yogi who possessed miraculous powers and divine insight, combined with an extraordinary concern for the spiritual advancement of others. Thus, from the first his state of enlightenment, or Buddhahood, was recognized as lokottara (“transcendent”) and as the transient embodiment of supramundane knowledge. Shakyamuni was identified with the pre-Buddhist Indian myth of the Mahapurusha (“Great Man”). As a Great Man, he could have become a universal monarch, but he chose instead the even higher career for which a Great Man was also prepared—the career of a universal religious teacher.
According to one very important early text, Shakyamuni was accepted as the seventh in a series of previous buddhas. His contemporary Mahavira, leader of the Jains, was linked to a similar series of 24 great religious figures. The essential mythical idea consists not in the numbers but in the notion of a necessary soteriological lineage. The title Tathagata, probably meaning “he who has thus attained,” was regularly used by Shakyamuni to refer to himself. Had it not been for his utter confidence in his achievement, his religious movement would doubtless have died with him.
Not only do buddhas appear at more or less regular intervals, but the final appearance of any buddha is the culmination of a whole series of previous lives, characterized by gradual advancement toward enlightenment. The belief accords well with the worldview of the region in which Buddhism originated, and it may be supposed that Shakyamuni believed this of himself. In any case, the earliest-known Buddhist tradition most certainly presented him as so believing. Building on this basis, many stories of events in his previous lives became very popular, some drawn from various folk traditions, others having a more distinctively Buddhist flavour. These stories have played an extraordinarily important role in Buddhist teaching and art.
The fundamental myth, however, was sometimes supplemented by later additions. One such addition concerns Mara, who represented the force of spiritual evil that Shakyamuni was conscious of having confronted and overcome. Mara is explicitly identified as Concupiscence and as Death, the twin foes of all those who strive toward the tranquil and immortal state of nirvana. At the same time, Mara is identified with various demons and evil spirits, and the texts usually describe him in these terms. The definitive victory over Mara, on whatever spiritual or popular level it may be understood, remains an inalienable element of the myth. It is just as important as the belief, universally attested in the earliest traditions of all Buddhists, in the omniscience and the miraculous powers of Shakyamuni.
Since Shakyamuni’s followers were interested in him as a marvelous being and as a transcendent Buddha, historical reminiscences that were preserved in the story are incidental to the recounting of such things as the great acts of his previous lives, his miraculous birth in his last life, the drama of his final enlightenment while sitting under the pipal tree, his stupendous decision to convert and save others (as symbolized by his first sermon in the Deer Park near Varanasi [Benares]), and his final decease at Kushinara. Shakyamuni in art and archaeology