Asoka has been compared with Constantine but it has been justly observed that the comparison is superficial, for Constantine (more like Kanishka than Asoka) merely recognized and regulated a religion which had already won its way in his empire.  He has also been compared with St Paul and in so far as both men transformed a provincial sect into a religion for all mankind the parallel is just, but it ends there.  St Paul was a constructive theologian.  For good or evil he greatly developed and complicated the teaching of Christ, but the Edicts of Asoka if compared with the Pitakas seem to curtail and simplify their doctrines.  No inscription has yet been found mentioning the four truths, the chain of causation and other familiar formulae.  Doubtless Asoka duly studied these questions, but it was not theology nor metaphysics which drew him towards religion.  In the gallery of pious Emperors—­a collection of dubious moral and intellectual value—­he stands isolated as perhaps the one man whose only passion was for a sane, kindly and humane life, neither too curious of great mysteries nor preoccupied with his own soul but simply the friend of man and beast.

For the history of doctrine the inscription at Rummindei is particularly important.  It merely states that the King did honour or reverence to the birthplace of the Buddha, who receives no titles except Sakyamuni and Bhagavan here or elsewhere in the inscriptions.  It is a simple record of respect paid to a great human teacher who is not in any way deified nor does Asoka’s language show any trace of the doctrines afterwards known under the name of Mahayana.  He does not mention nirvana or even transmigration, though doubtless what he says about paradise and rewards hereafter should be read in the light of Indian doctrines about karma and samsara.

CHAPTER XIII

THE CANON

1

There are extant in several languages large collections of Buddhist scriptures described by some European writers as the Canon.  The name is convenient and not incorrect, but the various canons are not altogether similar and the standard for the inclusion or exclusion of particular works is not always clear.  We know something of four or five canons.

(1) The Pali Canon, accepted by the Buddhists of Ceylon, Burma and Siam, and rendered accessible to European students by the Pali Text Society.  It professes to contain the works recognized as canonical by the Council of Asoka and it is reasonably homogeneous, that is to say, although some ingenuity may be needed to harmonize the different strata of which it consists, it does not include works composed by several schools.

(2) The Sanskrit Canon or Canons.

(a) Nepalese scriptures.  These do not correspond with any Pali texts and all belong to the Mahayana.  There appears to be no standard for fixing the canonical character of Mahayanist works.  Like the Upanishads they are held to be revealed from time to time.