Film

Religion 36 (2006) 91e106
www.elsevier.com/locate/religion

Astonishment: A study of an ethically valorised
emotion in Buddhist narrative literature
Susanne Mrozik
Department of Religion, Mount Holyoke College, 50 College Street, South Hadley, MA 01075, USA

Abstract

This essay explores the role that Buddhist narrative literature plays in fostering the cultivation of
´
ethically valorised emotions. The essay focuses on astonishment, as it ﬁgures in Arya Sura’s Jtakaml,
a aa
´
a collection of Sanskrit narratives. The essay examines how and why Arya Sura valorises astonishment
and what this valorisation reveals about the signiﬁcance of emotions in Buddhist ethical life. The key dis-
´
tinction implicit in Arya Sura’s work between natural and cultivated emotions is worked out.
Ó 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction

Ranjini Obeyesekere observes of her childhood in Sri Lanka that listening to Buddhist stories
‘was how we learned to be Buddhists’ (R. Obeyesekere, 1991, p. x; quoted in Hallisey and Hansen,
1996, p. 310). Buddhist stories have long played an important role in ‘the dissemination of Bud-
dhist values and doctrine’ (R. Obeyesekere, 1991, p. x) because, as Gananath Obeyesekere argues,
these are ‘given an immediacy, a concreteness and an ethical salience . through storytelling’
(G. Obeyesekere, 1992, p. 151; see also R. Obeyesekere, 1991, p. x). Scholars such as Gananath
Obeyesekere, Charles Hallisey and Anne Hansen have demonstrated the critical role that Bud-
dhist narratives play in creating the conditions for moral agencydfor instance, by enabling the
internalisation of ethical norms, or the development of ‘sympathetic imagination’ (see G. Obeyesekere,
1991, pp. 219e39; Hallisey and Hansen, 1996, pp. 305e27; on the term ‘sympathetic imagination’,

E-mail address: smrozik@mtholyoke.edu

0048-721X/$ - see front matter Ó 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.religion.2006.07.004

92 S. Mrozik / Religion 36 (2006) 91e106

see Nussbaum, 1997, pp. 85e112). In this essay I examine yet another way in which Buddhist
stories teach one ‘to be Buddhist’. They do so by fostering the cultivation of ethically valorised
emotions, that is, emotions assigned great value because they are believed to promote ethical
conduct.
There is a growing interest among scholars of Buddhism in the link between emotions and
ethics. Like me, some of these scholars are especially interested in the role that Buddhist narra-
tives play in ‘shaping an affective ethos’ (Trainor, 2003, p. 525).1 This essay seeks to advance
scholarly understanding of the role Buddhist narratives play in ‘shaping affective ethos’ by exam-
ining how an important collection of Sanskrit stories fosters the cultivation of one particular

ethically valorised emotion: astonishment (vismaya). The collection of stories is Arya Sura’s ´
Jtakaml (Garland of Birth Stories), a set of narratives from approximately the fourth century
a aa
CE about the Buddha’s past lives as a Bodhisattva. The Jtakaml as a whole highlights the
a aa
importance of a range of emotions valorised in Buddhist literature for their positive ethical ef-
fects. These emotions include serene joy (prasda); respect (bahumna, gaurava); gratitude
a a
(k rtajnã); shame (vrda, hr); shock or fear concerning the miseries of sa msra (sa mvega);
ı ı a
and_ an emotion variously translated as astonishment, amazement, surprise and wonder
_ _ _
(vismaya). Astonishment functions as an ethically valorised emotion in the Jtakaml when it
a aa
characterises the response of living beings to the Bodhisattva, especially to his extraordinary
generosity.
Astonishment, which appears frequently throughout the Jtakaml, receives particular atten-
a aa
tion in the Viva mtara story. Hence I focus the bulk of my analysis on this story. I begin the essay
s
_ ´
by investigating what astonishment means and how and why Arya Sura chooses to valorise this
particular emotion. I close the essay by considering what the valorisation of astonishment can tell
us more broadly about the nature and significance of emotions in Buddhist ethical life. I am es-
´
pecially interested in a distinction implicit in Arya Sura’s Viva mtara story between natural and
s
_
cultivated emotions. As we will see, ethically valorised emotions are not always natural emotions.
Sometimes they require cultivation.

Summary of story

The Viva mtara story, one of the most famous Buddhist Jtaka stories, narrates a past rebirth
s a
of the Buddha. _ Here he was born a prince named Viva mtara, who makes a series of gifts in order
s
_
to cultivate generosity, one of the perfections needed to attain Buddhahood. One day, Viva mtara
s
_
enrages the citizens of his kingdom by giving away the royal elephant to some brahmins. For this
act, Viva mtara and his family are banished. While in exile, Viva mtara gives away his two
s s
children to _another brahmin and finally his wife, Madr to yet another brahmin. This last brah-
ı, _
´ ´
min is in reality the god Sakra, who is merely testing the extent of Viva mtara’s generosity. Sakra
s
reveals himself, and the story ends happily with the restoration to Viva s_ mtara of his wife, his
children and his kingdom. _

1
Trainor’s article serves as an introduction to a collection of articles published in the Journal of the American Acad-
emy of Religion, on ‘Ethics and Emotions in South Asian Buddhism’. The contributors to this issue are Heim, 2003, pp.
531e54; Rotman, 2003, pp. 555e78; and Berkwitz, 2003, pp. 579e604.

S. Mrozik / Religion 36 (2006) 91e106 93

What is astonishment?

´
Astonishment is an emotion that appears often in Arya Sura’s Jtakaml. In fact, this emotion
a aa
is cited in twenty out of the thirty-four stories in the Jtakaml.2 Astonishment is, of course, an
a aa
emotion of surprise. It occurs in the Jtakaml when something totally out of the ordinary hap-
a aa
pens. For example, when sailors lost at sea encounter strange sea creatures and oceans that are
silver and gold in colour, they are astonished (vismaya) (see Khoroche, 1989, pp. 98e9; Kern,
1914, pp. 90.11, 90.24, 91.9). They are even more astonished ( parama-vismaya) when their ship
sails out of immediate peril as a result of the Bodhisattva’s statement (see Khoroche, 1989,
s ı ´
p. 102; Kern, 1914, p. 94.5). As Viva mtara, the Bodhisattva astonishes Madr and Sakra with
_
a generosity that seems to go against human nature itself. He gives away what he loves most:
´
his children and wife. Hence both Madr and Sakra express astonishment at his lack of selfishness.
ı
Although astonishment may occur for a number of reasons, the most common cause in the
collection as a whole is the Bodhisattva himself. Living beings are astonished by his generosity,
morality, revulsion for worldly pleasures, compassion, forbearance, physical splendour and super-
normal powers.3
´
Surprises can be pleasant or unpleasant, welcome or unwelcome. Arya Sura, however, charac-
terises astonishment, whose Sanskrit form comes from the verbal root smi, meaning ‘to smile’, as
a largely pleasant and welcome experience. Thus he frequently pairs astonishment with emotions
of delight ( pramud-, h r s-, and prah r s-), serene joy ( prasda) and respect (bahumna) in the
a a
Jtakaml.4 For example, when the _Bodhisattva, reborn as King Sibi, utters a truth statement
a aa __ _ ´
that restores his eyes, the entire universe responds with astonishment and joy:
The earth shook, and so did the mountains. The ocean broke its bounds and surged forward.
The drums of the celestial gods rolled deep and steadyda delightful (manojnã) sound. The
whole expanse of heaven looked beautifully clear, and the sun shone with an autumn bright-
ness. Out of the sky fell a shower of bright flowers tinged with the sandal powder that was
whirling around. The gods gathered there with a bevy of celestial nymphs, wide-eyed in
amazement (vismaya-phulla-locana). The breeze that blew was peculiarly pleasant (manojnã),
and joy (har sa) blossomed out in the heart of every living thing. All around, lovely voices
_

2
Astonishment (vismaya) occurs in the following stories: 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 19, 22, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31,
and 33.
3
Astonishment occurs in response to the Bodhisattva’s generosity, including bodily self-sacrifice, in the following
stories: 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 (his asceticism also produces astonishment in this story) 8, 9, 27, 30 and 31. It occurs as a result
of his morality, as is sometimes evidenced by the efficacy of his truth statements (satya-vacana), in the following stories:
13, 14 and 15. It occurs as a result of his revulsion for worldly pleasures in 19, of his compassion in 25 and 26 (his phys-
ical splendour also produces astonishment in this story), of his forbearance in 33, and of his supernormal powers in 29.
There is also one instance (22) in which astonishment arises from the virtues of the Bodhisattva’s companion rather
than from the Bodhisattva himself.
4
Occasionally, astonishment is also paired with curiosity (kauthala). Astonishment is accompanied (in Kern, 1914)
u
by forms of pramudd pp. 7.5, 30.7, 138.9; by forms of h r s and prah r sdpp. 13.9, 16.21, 59.8, 66.12, 94.5, 132.17, 137.12;
by bahumnadpp. 24.7, 114.11, 216.18; by gauravadp._ 136.17; by_kauthaladp. 139.11; by a combination of prasda
a _ _ u a
and bahumnadpp. 173.18, 216.9e10, and 235.7; by a combination of bahumna and kauthaladp. 179.6; and by
a a u
a combination of bahumna, prasda and prema (love)dp. 221.10.
a a


were heard, raised in a paean of praise for the king’s extraordinary deed; hosts of supernat-
ural beings were exclaiming in wonder (savismaya) and rapture (har sa-parta-mnasa): ‘Oh,
ı a
_
what nobility! oh what compassion! See how pure is his heart! how little he cares for his own
happiness!’ (Khoroche, 1989, p. 16; Kern, 1914, p. 13.3e12)
Similarly, in another story when the Bodhisattva, who has been reborn as a hare, resolves to
offer his body as food to his guests, the gods respond with delighted amazement ( pramudita-
vismita) (see Khoroche, 1989, p. 35; Kern, 1914, p. 30.7). In another story when the
Bodhisattva, reborn this time as a buffalo, bears patiently the abuse of a monkey, a Yak sa is
overcome (v rj-) with a mixture of serene joy ( prasda), amazement (vismaya) and respect
a a _
(bahumna) (see
a _ Khoroche, 1989, p. 248; Kern, 1914, p. 235.7). When, in the Viva mtara story, Sakra
s ´
_
learns that the Bodhisattva has given away his children, he becomes ‘giddy with wonder and delight
( prahar sa-vismaya-ghr n;ita-manas)’ (Khoroche, 1989, pp. 71e2; Kern, 1914, p. 66.12).
a u

Arya _Sura portrays the experience of astonishment as a largely pleasurable one. He also por-
´ _
´
trays it as extremely intense. We have just seen that Sakra becomes ‘giddy with wonder and de-
light’ when he learns that Viva mtara has given away his children. The word that Peter Khoroche
s
_
translates as ‘giddy’ (ghr n-) can also be translated as ‘stagger’. In a number of instances living
a u
_
beings are overcome or overwhelmed (varjita) with astonishment (see Khoroche, 1989, pp. 12,
a
15, 26, 230, 248; Kern, 1914, pp. 8.3, 11.16, 23.3, 216.18, 235.7). Astonishment not only is a power-
´
ful emotion but also affects living beings physically. Sakra staggers, beings are literally overcome
or overwhelmed, and in many instances they are said to be ‘wide-eyed’ with astonishment (see
Khoroche, 1989, pp. 16, 65, 71, 180; Kern, 1914, pp. 13.7, 59.8, 66.10e1, 170.4). On two occasions
astonishment is also accompanied by ‘horripolation’, that is, a tingling or bristling of body hairs
(see Khoroche, 1989, pp. 147, 217; Kern, 1914, pp. 135.15, 204.18). These physical responses can
indicate intense fear as well as delight. The two incidents of horripolation, however, are not
accompanied by fear. Nor does fear occur elsewhere in conjunction with astonishment. In the
Jtakaml, when vismaya arises in response to the deeds of the Bodhisattva, it is a strong
a aa
emotion that combines elements of surprise, joy and admiration.
Maria Heim has pointed to the prominence of ‘excessive emotions’ such as fear, grief, horror
and astonishment in Buddhist stories, including the Viva mtara (Pli: Vessantara) story (see
s a

Heim, 2003, p. 536 and passim). Arya S _
´ ura’s Viva mtara story, which Heim cites, is clearly an
s
instance. Heim discusses a wide range of ‘excessive _ emotions’, focusing particular attention on
fear and horror. Different storiesdand even different versions of the same storydmay fore
ground different emotions. Thus fear and horror are more prominent in some of the Pli versions a

of the Viva mtara story, cited by Heim, than in Arya S
s ´ ura’s version. The dominant emotions in
´ _
Arya Sura’s version are anger, grief and ultimately astonishment.
Different versions of a single story can have different emotional tones which can produce dif-
ferent nuances in meaning and effect. For example, the account of the Viva mtara story preserved
s
u a a _
in the monastic regulations of the Mlasarvstivda, an early Indian Buddhist sect, highlights
´
a different emotion than that highlighted by Arya Sura in his account of the story. The most
important emotion in the Mlasarvstivda account is gratitude (k rtajnã). The Mlasarvstivda
u a a u a a
_
version occurs in the course of a series of narratives about Devadatta, told in the
Sanghabhedavastu section of the Mlasarvstivda monastic regulations (vinaya). Devadatta is
_ u a a
the Buddha’s cousin and arch-rival. He is also the present incarnation of Jujjuka, the cruel


brahmin who asks Viva mtara to give him his children. Although Viva mtara complies with his
s s
request and also asks his father, the King, to bestow great wealth on _Jujjuka, Jujjuka never
_
expresses gratitude. The central theme in the Mlasarvstivda version of the Viva mtara story
u a a s
is Devadatta’s past and present ingratitude to the Bodhisattva/Buddha.5 _

Arya S´ ura’s version of the Viva mtara story displays different concerns from those of the
s
Mlasarvstivda version. Gratitude _ an important emotion in the Jtakaml as a whole but
u a a is a aa
not in the Viva mtara story. The Viva mtara story contains no references to gratitude. Instead,
s s
we find multiple_ references to astonishment. Additionally, Arya Sura does not even identify
_ ´

Jujjaka as a past incarnation of Devadatta. Arya S ´ ura tells a different story than do the editors
of the Mlasarvstivda monastic regulations. Telling a different story highlights a different
u a a
ethically valorised emotion.

ú
How does Arya Sra valorise astonishment?

´
Arya Sura highlights the importance of astonishment by creating a tension in the narrative be-
tween the way living beings should respond to Viva mtara and the way they do respond to
s
s _
Viva mtara. Although living beings should respond to Viva mtara’s generosity with astonishment,
s
_ far more likely to respond with anger or grief because Viva mtara’s gifts come at the ex-
they are _ s

pense of his kingdom’s and family’s well being. Arya S ´ ura introduces _this tension at the outset of
the story with the gift of the royal elephant. A neighbouring king, hearing of Viva mtara’s gener-
s
osity, sends some brahmins to ask Viva mtara for the royal elephant. When the brahmins make
s _
_
their request, they say to Viva mtara: ‘Present us with this elephant . and, in so doing, completely
s
astound (vismaya-ekarasa) the _ universe’ (Khoroche, 1989, p. 59; Kern, 1914, p. 53.11e12).
Although the brahmins predict that Viva mtara’s gift will produce astonishment, it instead
s
produces only a host of angry emotions. The_ Sibis, the citizens of Viva mtara’s kingdom, are
´ s
_
not astonished when they learn that their prince has given away the royal elephant. Instead,
they are upset (sa mk subh-), agitated (samudr na), angry (krodha), enraged (sa mrambha), alarmed
ı
_ _ _ _
(sa mbhrama) and indignant (amara) (Khoroche, 1989, p. 60; Kern, 1914, p. 54.1e6). Arya Sura
s ´
_
pointedly and explicitly attributes a number of emotions to the S ´ ibis, but not one of these is the
´
predicted response of astonishment. Arya Sura uses this initial gift of the royal elephant to intro-
duce a tension that will run throughout the narrative: that between the way that living beings
should respond to Viva mtara and the way they in fact respond.
s
_
The second gift of the children is also not initially received as it should be. Viva mtara gives his
s
_
children to a cruel and poor brahmin in need of servants. We are told that the brahmin is in such
haste to leave that he delivers only a cursory blessing (sa mk sipta-pada asr-vacana) (see Khoroche,
ı
1989, p. 68; Kern, 1914, p. 62.13). Additionally, the children _ _ and Madr far from being astonished,
ı
are grief stricken. The predicted response of astonishment does not occur until the end of the

5
The story closes with the following condemnation of Jujjuka’s ingratitude and admonition to the monastic commu-
nity to cultivate gratitude: yo’sau jujjuka h e sa evsau devadatta h tena klena tena samayena; tadpy e sa ak rtajnã h
a a a
_ _ı _ a _ _a _
ak rtaved; etarhy apy e sa ak rtajnã h ak rtaved; tasmt tarhi bhik sava h evam sik sitavyam yat k rtajn˜ bhavi syma h,
ı a
_
k rtavedina h, svalpam api _ k rtam na_ nsyayi syma h; prgeva prabhtam; ity evam vo bhik sava h _sik sitavyam _ (Gnoli,
_ a _ a a _u _ _ _
_ _
1978, p. 133). _ _ _ _ _ _


story. Madr who had been out during the brahmin’s visit, is overcome with grief when she
ı,
returns to find her children missing. At first, she believes they must be dead. Her grief turns to
astonishment, however, when she learns that Viva mtara has given them away:
s
_
When Madr whose deepest fear had been that the children were dead, heard that they were
ı,
still alive, her anguish abated. Not wanting her husband to falter, she dried her eyes, and
looking up at him with wonder (vismaya), said: ‘Astonishing (scaryam)! What else can I
a
say? Surely even the gods above must be amazed (vismaya) to see how selfishness (matsara)
has no sway over your heartdwhich is why, in their eagerness to spread your fame, they
have filled the heavens with a continuous but distinct flow of words, while, all around, the
roll of celestial drums reverberates in every direction. The Earth heaves her breasts, the great
mountains, as though shivering in ecstasy. Flowers of gold fall from the heavens so that the
sky seems ablaze with lightening. So do not give way to sorrow. Be glad that you have made
a gift. Be a refuge (nipna-bhta) for all creationdand give yet again’! (Khoroche, 1989, p. 71;
a u
Kern, 1914, pp. 65.22e66.8)
From the opening of this speech to the end of the story, vismaya, so conspicuously absent ear-
lier, occurs five times in rapid succession as Madr and subsequently the World Protectors and
ı
´
Sakra are astonished by Viva mtara’s generosity (see Khoroche, 1989, pp. 71e2; Kern, 1914,
s
_ ´
pp. 65.23e24; 66.1, 10e11, 12, 22). The story reaches its climax when Sakra, ‘giddy with wonder
and delight ( prahar sa-vismaya-ghr nita-manas)’ (Khoroche, 1989, pp. 71e2; Kern, 1914, p.
a u
66.12), disguises himself as a brahmin _and asks Viva mtara for his wife. When Viva mtara grants
_ s s
his request, Sakra is ‘overcome with utter amazement _( parama-vismaya)’ (Khoroche, _1989, p. 72;
´
Kern, 1914, p. 66.22). He then reveals his true identity, and the story ends happily with the res-
toration to Viva mtara of his wife, children and kingdom.
s
Madr speech,_ just quoted, is a turning point in the story. Previously, living beings had not re-
ı’s
sponded as predicted to Viva mtara’s generosity. Instead of being astonished, they were angry or
s
_
grief stricken. It is no accident that Madr response is matched by extraordinary events in the divine
ı’s
and natural realms. As we have just seen, the gods fill the heavens with ‘a continuous but distinct flow
of words’, celestial drums sound, the earth quakes, Mount Meru shakes, and flowers of gold tall from
the sky as if it were ‘ablaze with lightning’. Madr response marks the moment when the brahmins’
ı’s
prediction that Viva mtara’s generosity will ‘completely astound the universe’ finally comes true.
s
_
The delay in extraordinary divine and natural responses to Viva mtara’s generosity is perhaps
s
_
intended to be as pointed as the delay in expressions of astonishment. The delay in these divine and
natural responses contrasts markedly to other Sinhala and Pli versions of the story, which contain
a
diverse kinds of divine and natural responses, reflecting diverse kinds of emotions, including joy,
approval, dread and sorrow. For instance, in the Sinhala Butsarana, a medieval Sri Lankan text,
as soon as Viva mtara has given the seven-hundredfold great almsgiving, ‘the great earth rose
s
_
and quivered, the great mount Meru rejoiced and began to shake as if in a dance, and the Sevenfold
Mountains bent down in salutation like a peeled stick of bamboo’ (Reynolds, 1970, p. 141).6 In the

6 ´
Vessantara (Sanskrit: Viva mtara) presents this gift right before going into exile with his family. Arya Sura does not
s
_
refer to a seven-hundredfold almsgiving but does state that Viva mtara gives away his entire fortune before going into
s
exile (see Khoroche, 1989, p. 64). _


same text, when Viva mtara gives away his children, there is a decidedly mixed emotional response
s
_
on the part of the divine and natural worlds to this gift:
And as soon as he gave away his children, the great earth began to groan, like a faithful ser-
vant weeping with grief of heart. And Meru and Mandaara and the other great mountains
began to quake, as if shaking with grief in their tears for the children who had been given
away. But the gods in their joy sent rains of flowers and began to give shouts of praise. (Rey-
nolds, 1970, p. 156)
Heim draws attention to the often terrifying nature of these responses to Viva mtara’s gifts,
s
_
especially as described in Pli sources. For example, she cites a recurring refrain that accompanies
a
the gifts of the royal elephant, children and Madr in the Pli Jtaka. Of the gift of the children,
ı a a
this text reads: ‘Then there was a frightening thing, then there was something to make your hair
stand on end, for when he gave away the children, the earth shook’ (Cone and Gombrich, 1977,
pp. 59e60; quoted in Heim, 2003, p. 539). There is a similarly terrifying refrain in the Pli Car-
a
iypi taka version of the Viva mtara story: ‘the earth, garlanded with Sineru’s (celestial) Groves,
a s
_ _ ´
trembled then too’ (Horner, 1975, pp. 11, v. 21; 13, v. 48; 13, v. 51). By contrast, Arya Sura delays
these extraordinary responses until the end of the story. And when they do finally come, they are
not nearly so frightening as some of the responses in the Sinhala and Pli versions of the story.
a
The divine and natural responses mark the moment in the narrative when astonishment, rather
than anger or grief, becomes the dominant emotion. As we have seen, astonishment, for all its in-
tensity, is represented as a largely joyful experience.
Delaying the predicted response of astonishment as well as the extraordinary responses to
Viva mtara’s gifts until the end of the story is an intentional literary strategy on the part of
s
´ _
Arya Sura. First, he creates in his audience the expectation that the world will respond to the Bod-
hisattva’s generosity with astonishment, in accordance with the brahmins’ prediction. Then he
promptly and repeatedly defies that expectation by describing responses of anger and grief. He
thereby introduces a contradiction in the narrative that draws attention to the importance of as-
tonishment by virtue of its conspicuous absence.
The philosopher Martha Nussbaum states that ‘Literary form is not separable from philosoph-
ical content, but is, itself, a part of contentdan integral part, then, of the search for and the state-
ment of truth’ (Nussbaum, 1990, p. 3). According to Nussbaum, ‘style itself makes its claims,
expresses its own sense of what matters’ (Nussbaum, 1990, p. 3). Buddhist narratives, such as
Jtakas and Avadnas, have been characterised at times as simple folktales designed to make
a a
Buddhist doctrine accessible to those incapable of understanding more sophisticated forms of
Buddhist literature such as Abhidharma. As Hallisey and Hansen argue, however, ‘The obvious
didactic function’ of Buddhist narratives need not imply that these are intended only for the un-
educated masses (Hallisey and Hansen, 1996, p. 309). Furthermore, much of Buddhist narrative
´
literature is not simple at all, literarily or philosophically. Arya Sura employs a sophisticated lit-
´
erary style in order to articulate his sense of ‘what matters’. What matters to Arya Sura are emo-
tions, specifically ethically valorised emotions, such as astonishment.
´
Arya Sura’s focus on emotions suggests that his Viva mtara story is less about the Bodhisattva
s
_ ´
per se and more about the responses to him. Perhaps for this reason Arya Sura is surprisingly
silent about the larger context of the Bodhisattva’s generosity, namely, his quest for Buddhahood.
Viva mtara is, of course, fulfilling the perfection of generosity, which is a prerequisite for
s
_


attaining Buddhahood. His rebirth as Viva mtara is in fact his penultimate rebirth. In his next life
s
_
he will become the Buddha. Unlike other Sinhala, Pli and Sanskrit versions of the story, all of
a
´
which justify Viva mtara’s generosity in light of his larger quest for Buddhahood, Arya Sura re-
s
mains silent on this _point.
´ ´
Contrast the gift of the children in Arya Sura’s account to this gift in other accounts. Arya Sura
makes no reference to the Bodhisattva’s quest for Buddhahood in the course of describing this
gift. Instead, he simply describes the grief that Viva mtara feels over the loss of his children:
s
_
‘By an effort of his will, water fell from the water pot. Effortlessly it fell from his eyes, dark
red as lotus petals’ (Khoroche, 1989, p. 68; Kern, 1914, p. 62.10e1).7 By contrast, the Pli Jtaka
a a
version says:
There he took water in a pot, and calling the brahmin to him, he formed an aspiration for
omniscience; and as he poured out the water he made the earth resound with the words, ‘Om-
niscience is a hundred times, a thousand times, a hundred thousand times more precious to
me than my son!’ and so made the gift of his dear children to the brahmin. (Cone and Gom-
brich, 1977, p. 59)8
Similarly, the Sinhala Butsarana reads: ‘He poured water from his pitcher over the brahmin’s
hand, saying ‘‘By the merit of giving away these lovely children may I reach the supra mundane
All-Buddhahood’’’ (Reynolds, 1970, p. 156). Likewise, in the Sanskrit Mlasarvstivda monastic
u a a
regulations, Viva mtara says: ‘May I attain the great [karmic] fruit of the gift of my children and
s
thereby enable the _world to cross over the ocean of sa msra’ (Gnoli, 1978, p. 126). Additionally,
a
_
the Pli and Sinhala versions state that the gift of the children serves to perfect the perfection of
a
generosity, which is necessary for attaining Buddhahood. For example, in the Pli Jtaka a a
Viva mtara calls out as follows to his children: ‘Come, my dear son [or daughter], fulfil my Per-
s
_
fection.. Be a steady boat to carry me on the sea of becoming. I shall cross to the further shore of
birth, and make the world with its gods cross also’ (Cone and Gombrich, 1977, pp. 58e9; see also
Cone and Gombrich, 1977, pp. 54, 75, 92; Reynolds, 1970, pp. 152, 158).
´
In contrast to other versions of the Viva mtara story, Arya Sura’s version contains no refer-
s
_ ´
ences to either the perfections or the Bodhisattva vow. The closest Arya Sura comes to tying
Viva mtara’s gifts to his larger quest for Buddhahood is in describing the gift of Madr ‘Taking
s ı:
Madr_with his left hand and a water pot with his right, he poured water over the brahmin’s fin-
ı
gers but scorching fire on Mra’s soul’ (Khoroche, 1989, p. 72; Kern, 1914, p. 66.18e19). This
a

verse anticipates the future Buddha’s victory over Mra under the Bodhi tree. Arya Sura does
a ´
not devote nearly so much attention to the larger context of the Bodhisattva’s gifts as these other

7
According to Khoroche, ‘To take one’s oath on water, either by pouring it or by having a pot full of water
( pr naptra) beside one, seems to have been a common Indo-European inheritance. The pouring of water to ratify
u a
_
any solemn transference of property is common in the Indian tradition’ (Khoroche, 1989, p. 260, n. 5).
8
The gift of Madd (Sanskrit: Madr is also accompanied by a vow (Cone and Gombrich, 1977, pp. 76e7). Similarly,
ı ı)
of the gift of his children and wife, the Cariypi taka says: ‘Jli (my son), Ka nhjin my daughter, the lady Madd
a a a a ı,
_ _
a chaste wifedrelinquishing them I did not think; it was for the sake of Awakening itself. Neither child was disagreeable
to me, the lady Madd was not disagreeable. Omniscience was dear to me, therefore I gave away those who were dear’
ı
(Horner, 1975, pp. 13e4, vv. 52e3).


versions do. His story is less about the Bodhisattva and his progress towards Buddhahood than
´
about the responses to the Bodhisattva. Arya Sura’s primary concern in telling this story is to
draw the audience’s attention to the importance of responding with astonishment to the Bodhi-
sattva’s generosity.
ú
Why does Arya Sra valorise astonishment?

´
Arya Sura valorises astonishment because he recognises that it is not a natural response to
´
Viva mtara’s generosity. It is a cultivated response and thus requires education. Arya Sura grants
s
that it _ is more natural to feel anger or grief than to feel astonishment when someone’s actions,
however well intentioned, threaten one’s own well being. Even the Bodhisattva finds the gift of
´
his children almost impossible to bear. Arya Sura portrays the Bodhisattva as an individual strug-
gling to overcome anger and grief, including a struggle against an impulse to regret the gift:
Though shaken by his children’s pathetic lament, the Bodhisattva asked himself how anyone
could feel remorse after making a gift in such circumstances. But his heart was consumed by
a burning grief that was not to be assuaged. He felt so greatly disturbed, it was as though he
were being drugged by some powerful poison, and he sank down on the spot. The cool wind
fanned him, and he regained consciousness. But when he noticed how still the hermitage was
without the children, he said to himself, choking with sobs and tears: ‘Oh, that shameless
brahmin! How is it that he did not hesitate to strike quite openly at my heart, that is, my
children?.. Oh! it sears my heart to be deprived of my children, Yet, could anyone
who knows where a good man’s duty lies feel regret?’ (Khoroche, 1989, p. 69; Kern, 1914,
pp. 63.16e64.6)
´
Arya Sura goes as far as to suggest that Madr fears that her husband might falter if she con-
ı
tinues to give way to grief. Thus, as we have seen, she dries her eyes, gazes upon her husband with
astonishment, praises his selflessness and encourages him to continue giving (see Khoroche, 1989,
p. 71; Kern, 1914, pp. 65.22e66.8). If even so extraordinary being as the Bodhisattva responds to
loss with anger and grief, how much more so must ordinary living beings?
´
Arya Sura recognises that even those not directly negatively affected by the Bodhisattva’s ac-
tions might find it difficult to approve of these actions. Thus he opens his story with the following
statement: ‘Those who are mean of heart (alpa-sattva) scarcely even approve of the way a Bodhi-
´
sattva acts, let alone follow his example’ (Khoroche, 1989, p. 58; Kern, 1914, p. 51.22). Arya Sura
singles out the ‘mean of heart’, but even those who are generous of heart might find it difficult to
approve of a generosity that flies in the face of convention. Viva mtara’s generosity might seem
s
_
downright outrageous. Good fathers do not give away their children. Good husbands do not give
away their wives.
A later story in the collection underscores the morally ambiguous nature of the gift of Madr ı.

Arya Sra tells the story of Unmdayant in which the Bodhisattva, reborn as the King of the
u a ı,
´
Sibis, has fallen in love with his minister’s wife. The minister is so devoted to his King that he
offers his wife to the Bodhisattva, saying: ‘By helping me in an act of generosity, you would in
fact be doing a good deed, whereas by not accepting her from me you would be preventing an
act of generosity’ (Khoroche, 1989, p. 92; Kern, 1914, p. 84.20e21). The Unmdayant story
a ı
comes after the Viva mtara story. Some readers might expect that the Bodhisattva would approve
s
_
of his minister’s generosity, but he does not. Instead, he says: ‘This intense devotion to me has


apparently blinded you to the fact that counselling generosity does not in every instance lead to
good (dharma)’ (Khoroche, 1989, p. 92; Kern, 1914, p. 85.4e5). He refuses the gift, saying that it
would be sin ( ppa) and quite wrong (akrama) (see Khoroche, 1989, p. 93; Kern, 1914, pp. 85.9,
a
85.21).
´
Arya Sura is well aware that the Bodhisattva’s generosity violates conventions, especially that
of kingship. Just as good fathers do not give away their children and good husbands do not give
away their wives, so good rulers do not give away the royal elephant. Peter Khoroche argues that
´
the Jtakaml ‘reflects a courtly milieu’ and that Arya Sura ‘is concerned to show how the Bud-
a aa
dhist morality should be adopted by the ruler in preference to the realpolitik (nti) advocated by
ı
the Arthaastra’ (Khoroche, 1989, p. xviii; see also Johnston, 1929, pp. 80e4). Viva mtara’s ac-
s s
_
tions hardly fit realpolitik. When Viva mtara gives away the royal elephant, he endangers his
s
_
kingdom and its inhabitants. His is a highly imprudent gift. Indeed, Viva mtara’s generosity is
s
a a a _
initially portrayed as an addiction (dna-prasa mga, dna-anurga) (see Khoroche, 1989, p. 59;
_ who defends his son to the Sibis, admits that
Kern, 1914, p. 53.1, 3). Even Viva mtara’s father,
s ´
his son is so ‘passionately addicted _to giving things’ away, that he utterly disregards ‘consider-
ations of state (nti-krama)’ (Khoroche, 1989, p. 61; Kern, 1914, p. 54.18e19). When Viva mtara
ı s
´
gives away the royal elephant, Arya Sura writes: _

Though he knew that for reasons of state (rja-astra) one had to stray from the path of
a s
goodness (dharma) in pursuit of one’s advantage, he nonetheless gave away that magnificent
elephant, so attached was he to doing good (dharma-anurga). Base considerations of expe-
a
diency (nti) could not sway him.. The city, however, preferred the path of prudence and
ı
was upset. (Khoroche, 1989, p. 60; Kern, 1914, pp. 53.21e54.2)
´
Arya Sura characterises the Bodhisattva as a ruler whose addiction to giving leads him to dis-
regard accepted political practice. This theme is central to the Jtakaml as a whole. For exam-
a aa
ple, in the Maitrıbala story the Bodhisattva is reborn as a king who gives his flesh and blood to
hungry Yak sas. His ministers tell him that his passion for generosity makes him ‘heedless of the
_
consequences for good or evil’ to his subjects (Khoroche, 1989, p. 52; Kern, 1914, p. 46.6e7). As
a prince in the Sutasoma story, he has pledged to give his life to a cannibal ( puru sa-ada). To no
ı s _
avail, his father counsels him that ‘political experts (nti-kuala) regard it as misguided and per-
verse of kings to hold to moral considerations when these obviously clash with material interests
and personal happiness’ (Khoroche, 1989, p. 229; Kern, 1914, p. 215.13e14). When, as the king of
monkeys, the Bodhisattva sacrifices his life for the sake of his tribe of monkeys, he admits that his
action goes against political practice (rja-nti) (see Khoroche, 1989, p. 190; Kern, 1914, p.
a ı
´
179.20). Again and again, Arya Sura informs his audience that the Bodhisattva follows a different
morality than that commonly accepted by kings and their courts. In doing so, he tries to convince
his audience that political expediency is not the most important consideration, which should be
Buddhist morality.
´
Arya Sura is aware that many persons may not respond favourably to Viva mtara’s extraordi-
s
_
nary generosity because it flies in the face of conventions. As we have seen, anger and grief are far
more natural responses to this generosity than astonishment. Astonishment, as it occurs in the
Viva mtara story, is a cultivated, not a natural, emotion. The tension that runs throughout the
s
_
story between the way that living beings should respond to the Bodhisattva’s gifts and the way
that they do respond is a tension between cultivated and natural emotional responses. Arya


´
Sura describes many different emotions in the Viva mtara story and the collection as a whole, but
s
_
not all emotions are valued equally. In the Viva mtara story the preferred emotional response to
s
the Bodhisattva is astonishment rather than anger _ or grief. Arya Sura acknowledges the natural-
´
ness of anger and grief. Even the Bodhisattva struggles with these emotions. Nevertheless, the pre-
ferred emotional response to the Bodhisattva is a cultivated emotion. Ideally, anger and grief
should give way to astonishment.

Cultivating astonishment

How does one cultivate astonishment? By learning about the Bodhisattvadspecifically, by
learning about his svabhva, a word that means innate ‘nature’, ‘character’, or ‘disposition’.
a
´ ´
Arya Sura informs us that the Sibis and Madr respond so differently to Viva mtara’s gifts
ı s
´ _ ´
because the Sibis do not understand his nature (svabhva), whereas Madr does. Arya Sura links
a ı
correct emotional response to the Bodhisattva’s generosity with correct understanding of his
nature. Thus the cultivation of astonishment goes hand in hand with the cultivation of knowledge.
The experience of astonishment is rooted in understanding.
´ ´
Arya Sura draws a sharp contrast between the Sibis’ and the Madr responses to Viva mtara’s
ı’s s
´
generosity. When Viva mtara learns that he has been banished by the Sibis, he states: ‘The Sibis
s _ ´
_
are, of course, fickle by nature (capala-svabhva), and, it would appear, ignorant (anabhijn of my
a ã)
nature (tma-svabhva)’ (Khoroche, 1989, p. 63; Kern, 1914, p. 56.13e14). Unlike the Sibis,
a a ´
Madr knows her husband’s nature. Presumably, her loyalty to her husband, demonstrated by
ı
´
her following him into exile, indicates that she also has a different nature than the Sibis. She is
the opposite of fickle. But Arya S ´ ura does not elaborate on this point. Instead, he contrasts

´
her knowledge to the Sibi’s ignorance. He makes this contrast when he describes Madr response
ı’s
to Viva mtara’s final gift, namely, the gift of Madr herself. He informs us that ‘Madr was not
s ı ı
_
angry, neither did she weep’. Why? ‘For she knew (vid-) his character (svabhva)’ (Khoroche,
a
1989, p. 72; Kern, 1914, p. 66.20). This final gift comes immediately after Madr learns the fate
ı
of her children. Once Madr learns their fate, the story moves rapidly to a close. As soon as Madr
ı ı
´
expresses her astonishment that her husband has given away their children, Sakra expresses aston-
´
ishment and comes to ask Viva mtara for his wife. Arya Sura’s audience thus learns that Madr
s ı
knows her husband’s nature soon _ after she expresses her astonishment. The implication is that
Madr is able to respond appropriately to her husband’s generosity precisely because she, unlike
ı
´
the Sibis, knows his nature.
´
What is the Bodhisattva’s nature? Immediately after criticising the Sibis for their ignorance,
Viva mtara himself defines his nature as follows:
s
_
Quite apart from outward possessions, I would give away my own eyes, my headdit is
purely for the good of the world that I keep my body alive. As to clothes or beasts of burden,
that goes without saying. If a beggar demands it, I am ready to offer him my whole body.
´
And they [the Sibis] imagine that by intimidating me they can stop me giving. That shows
how foolish and superficial they must be. Let the entire nation come and banish me or
put me to death; I shall never stop giving. (Khoroche, 1989, p. 63; Kern, 1914, p. 56.15e20)

The Bodhisattva’s nature is to be generous. He is incapable of refusing a beggar’s request even
were a beggar to demand his life. Moreover, the Bodhisattva gives without expectation of


´
reward. He gives because it is his nature to give. As we have seen, Arya Sura does not justify
Viva mtara’s gifts in light of his larger quest for Buddhahood, at least not in the Viva mtara
s s
_ this penultimate birth of the Buddha, the one in which he perfects the perfection of_ gen-
story. In
erosity, generosity is never represented as a means to an end, however great that end. Thus the
Bodhisattva does not even appear to give in expectation of Buddhahood. His generosity is alto-
gether selfless.
´
Sakra and Madr both comment on Viva mtara’s selflessly generous nature. They appear to be
ı s
even more astonished by his nature than by_ his actions. For example, when Viva mtara gives
s
´ ´
Madr to Sakra, Sakra is ‘overcome with utter amazement ( parama-vismaya)’ and exclaims:
ı _

Oh! what a gulf lies between the good and bad in the way they behave. The spiritually
ignorant (ak rta-tman) could not even believe such an act possible. Still to feel love, and
a
_
yet to give away one’s own dear wife and children like this, unselfishly (ni hsangam)dwhat
_
true nobility. (Khoroche, 1989, p. 72; Kern, 1914, pp. 66.22e67.2) _

Similarly, when Madr learns the fate of her children, she exclaims: ‘Astonishing! What else
ı
can I say? Surely even the gods above must be amazed (vismaya) to see how selfishness (mat-
sara) has no sway over your heart’ (Khoroche, 1989, p. 71; Kern, 1914, pp. 65.24e66.2).
The gift of the children, which is generally represented in the various versions of the Viva mtara
s
story as the most difficult gift to give, is a turning point for Madr This gift, more than any
ı. _
other, demonstrates the Bodhisattva’s selflessly generous nature. Thus Madr grief gives way
ı’s
to astonishment.
Those who understand the Bodhisattva’s nature do not give in to feelings of anger or grief. Any
anger or grief they might feel turns into astonishment as they realise Bodhisattva’s nature. They
are, in the end, simply amazed that so extraordinary a being exists.
´
It turns out, however, that few persons are capable of astonishment in Arya Sura’s story.
Astonishment marks a level of understanding that many simply do not possess. In the entire story
the only persons who express astonishment are Madr and the gods. Although we are never told
ı
´
that the gods, especially Sakra, know the Bodhisattva’s nature, it would appear that their status as
gods gives them a knowledge that most humans lack.
Additionally, the natural world also seems to have an innate understanding of the Bodhisatt-
´
va’s nature.9 Although Arya Sura delays until the end of the story extraordinary natural events
like earthquakes, which commonly mark Viva mtara’s gifts, the natural world does respond fa-
s
_
vourably to his presence at an earlier point. When Viva mtara’s family first sets out into exile,
s
_
tree branches laden with fruit incline themselves towards the family, ponds appear spontaneously
when the family is thirsty, and clouds provide shade (see Khoroche, 1989, p. 66; Kern, 1914, pp.
59.24e60.4). Furthermore, when Viva mtara gives away the horses that are drawing the family’s
s
carriage on this journey into exile, four _Yak sas in the guise of deer come up to the carriage and
_
begin to pull it themselves (see Khoroche, 1989, p. 65; Kern, 1914, p. 59.5e7). This act produces
the one early occasion of astonishment in the story. Madr sees what the animals have done and
ı
grows ‘wide-eyed with astonishment (vismaya) and delight (har sa)’, speculating that her husband’s
a a _
superhuman powers ( prabhva atimnu sa) are somehow responsible (see Khoroche, 1989, p. 65;
_
9 ´
Maria Heim, who does not address the issue of svabhva, nevertheless argues concerning Arya Sura’s Viva mtara
a s
story that ‘the earth is capable of experiencing and indicating awe’ (Heim, 2003, p. 541). _


´
Kern, 1914, p. 59.8e12). Although Arya Sura tells us only that Madr knows her husband’s na-
ı
ture, the events of the story suggest that both the natural and the divine worlds have some knowl-
edge of this nature as well.
Astonishment is the product of understanding and as such is a cultivated rather than natural re-
sponse to the Bodhisattva’s generosity. Cultivating this emotional response to the Bodhisattva is
precisely the point of the Viva mtara story. By teaching his audience about the Bodhisattva’s na-
s
´ _
ture, Arya Sura provides them with an opportunity to be astonished by that nature. In effect, Arya
S´ ura invites his audience to place themselves in the privileged position of Madr and the divine and
ı
natural realms. He employs his sophisticated literary skills to make possible the experience of an
ethically valorised emotion. Thus one of the ways in which narrative literature teaches individuals
‘how to be Buddhists’ is by enabling them to cultivate particular kinds of emotions.
´
Arya Sura’s interest in emotions, including those of his audience, must be placed within the
larger context of Sanskrit literary theory on rasa. Rasa, a multivalent word often translated as
‘taste’ in the context of Sanskrit literary theory, refers there to the emotional ‘flavour’, or
mood, of a work of literature. From ancient times, Sanskrit literary theorists were interested in
emotions. Initially, these theorists confined their investigations to the representation of emotions
in a text, but eventually some turned their attention to the experience of emotions on the part of
an audience. Sheldon Pollock has demonstrated that beginning in the ninth century in Kashmir,
literary theorists such as Abhinivagupta (ca. 1000) shifted the focus of rasa theory from text to
audience. Whereas most literary theorists had assumed that rasa was a property of the text, the
Kashmiri theorists assumed that it was a property of the audience. According to Pollock,
‘What had long been the defining question, how the literary artefact embodies human affect,
was transformed into a question of reception, how the reader actually experiences this aestheti-
cised emotion [rasa]’ (Pollock, 2001, p. 198; see also Pollock, 1998, pp. 117e92).
The influence of Kashimiri discourse on rasa has been so great on subsequent generations of
scholars that, as Pollock argues, it is ‘often taken to represent rasa-doctrine tout court and trans-
´
historically’ (Pollock, 1998, pp. 125e6; see also Pollock, 2001, p. 198). Arya Sura lived many cen-
´
turies before Kashmiri theorists shifted the focus of rasa theory. Nevertheless, Arya Sura, who is
cognisant of rasa theory, shares their interest the emotional state of the audience. This awareness
is apparent not only in the Viva mtara story but also in a brief reference to rasa in the Jtakaml
s a aa
_
itself. The reference occurs in ‘The King of the Monkeys’ story, in which the Bodhisattva has been
reborn as a monkey king.
We have already encountered this story above in our discussion of how the Bodhisattva
violates realpolitik when he sacrifices his life to save his tribe of monkeys. The monkeys are
placed in danger because they live in a tree filled with delicious fruit. A human king wants
the fruit for himself and thus orders the monkeys killed. Prior to his attack, however, Arya
´ ura describes the human king’s first experience of the fruit. It is here that we find the reference
S
to rasa: ‘He was amazed (vismi-) by its wonderful flavour (adbhuta rasa), as one is by the feeling
of wonder (adbhuta rasa) that grips one during a play’ (Khoroche, 1989, p. 187; Kern, 1914,
´
p. 176.18e9).10 This single verse tells us that Arya Sura had some knowledge of rasa theory,
although we do not know what form that theory took. More important, the verse also indicates

10
The verse reads: adbhutena rasentha n rpas tasya visismiye | adbhutena raseneva prayogagu nahri n ||
a a a
_ _ _


´
that Arya Sura was attentive not only to the emotions of the characters but also to the emo-
tions of the audience. He likens the king’s astonishment to that of an audience gripped by
the feeling of wonder that arises while watching a play.
Strikingly, the emotion cited in the verse is that of astonishment, which is one of the eight
´
emotions listed in Bharata’s famous Ntyaastra.11 Although Arya Sura lived long before
a s
Kashmiri theorists shifted the location of _rasa from text to audience, he is by no means indif-
ferent to the emotional impact literary works have on their audiences. Thus I would argue that
his Viva mtara story does more than valorise astonishment. It creates an opportunity for the
s
_
audience to experience astonishment as they come to understand the Bodhisattva’s selfless
nature.

Conclusion

Scholars of Buddhism have only recently turned their attention to the subject of emotions.
Kevin Trainor outlines a number of reasons for this lacuna in scholarship. One reason is the value
that Buddhist traditions place on the ideal of nonattachment. As Trainor notes, Buddhist
traditions can be ‘sharply critical of subjective affective attachments’ (Trainor, 2003, p. 524).
Additionally, according to Buddhist doctrine, the source of all suffering is one particularly prob-
lematic form of attachment, namely, craving or thirst (t r s n) (see Trainor, 2003, p. 524). Trainor
a
suggests that ‘the Buddhist ideal of nonattachment has _perhaps turned attention away from the
__
positive role that some kinds of emotion play in Buddhist tradition’ (Trainor, 2003, p. 524).
Similarly, Damien Keown has argued that the reduction of all desires to their most negative
formdcraving or thirstdhas given rise to a misperception that there is no place for ‘the affective
faculties’ in Buddhism (Keown, 1992, p. 222). The opposite, however, is the case. Buddhists have
been as interested in cultivating ethically valorised emotions as in eradicating emotions deemed
ethically detrimental.
Narratives like the Viva mtara story are critical to the cultivation of ethically valorised emo-
s
tions. Arya Sura teaches his_ audience that the correct emotional response to the Bodhisattva’s
´
generosity is astonishment. This cultivated rather than natural response is to a generosity that
threatens the immediate well being of the Bodhisattva’s kingdom and family. Arya Sura’s ´
Viva mtara story thus demonstrates that ethically valorised emotions are not necessarily natural
s
_
ones. In the case of astonishment, the cultivation of this emotion goes hand in hand in the
Viva mtara story with the cultivation of knowledge. Only those who understand the Bodhisatt-
s
_
va’s nature are able to respond with astonishment rather than anger or grief. Arya Sra’s version
u
of the story, however, does more than simply valorise astonishment. By teaching his audience
about the Bodhisattva, he actually creates an opportunity for that audience to experience aston-
ishment as they come to understand the Bodhisattva’s remarkable nature.
Different versions of the Viva mtara story have different emotional tones that produce different
s
nuances in meaning and effect. _The Mlasarvstivda version of this story foregrounds the
u a a

11 ´
Bharata’s Ntyaastra, which pre-dates Arya Sura by several centuries, outlines eight primary emotions
a s
a a _
(sthyibhvas). Under the right conditions these primary emotions develop into their corresponding rasas, which are
heightened or refined emotions. Wonder (adbhuta) is one of the eight rasas in Bharata’s work and corresponds to
the primary emotion of vismaya. For a complete list, see Vijayavardhana, 1970, p. 82.


´
emotion of gratitude, whereas Arya Sura foregrounds astonishment. This difference raises one fi-
´
nal question: why does Arya Sura foreground astonishment rather than another emotion? Let us

recall that Arya S ´ ura advocates adopting Buddhist morality in place of the realpolitik (nti) of the
ı
court. His goal in telling stories about the Bodhisattva is to change the ethical conduct of his
audience.
´
This goal is evident already in the opening verse of the Viva mtara story, where Arya Sura la-
s
ments that the ‘mean of heart’ do not approve of the Bodhisattva’s _ actions and do not follow his
´
example. How can Arya Sura change the conduct of his audience? By teaching them about the
Bodhisattva’s nature, which is so different from that of most others. Where most persons place
self-interest above the interest of others, the Bodhisattva places the interest of others above his
´
own. No wonder Sakra and Madr find the Bodhisattva’s nature so astonishing. He exemplifies
ı
a different kind of morality, and he thus suggests to them the possibility of living differently,
that is, according to Buddhist ethical principles. He introduces a new hierarchy of values in which
Buddhist concerns trump those of the court.
Vivantha’s Shityadarpa na, an early fourteenth-century Sanskrit text on literary theory,
s a a
gives vismaya (astonishment)_ as a synonym for camatkra (wonder) and defines both as an
a
expansion of the heartmind (citta-vistra) (see Durgaprasad, 1982, p. 78 [3.3]). Although
a
´
this text comes many centuries after Arya Sura, its definition of astonishment is apt for the
Jtakaml. Throughout the Jtakaml, astonishment marks the moment when living beings
a aa a aa
first realise the possibility of living according to different ethical principles because they see the
Bodhisattva doing so. When the Bodhisattva offers his flesh and blood to starving Yak sas in
the Maitr _
ıbala story, these Yak sas experience a variety of strong emotions, including astonish-
ment (see Khoroche, 1989, p. 55; _ Kern, 1914, p. 49.1e2). Consequently, they beg the Bodhi-
sattva to stop mutilating his body for their sake and express hope that by taking refuge (ri-) s
in him, they might put an end to their evil deeds. The Bodhisattva then instructs them in the
five precepts, that is, the Buddhist code of ethical conduct (see Khoroche, 1989, pp. 55e56;
Kern, 1914, pp. 48.25e50.21). The Yak sas’ experience of astonishment thus precedes their em-
brace of the five precepts. In this sense_ astonishment can be characterised as an expansion of
the heart mind. It marks a moment when one realises, perhaps for the first time, that it is
possible to live in accordance with a different set of ethical values. I believe that this is the
´
experience that Arya Sura wants to relay to his audience by telling his version of the
Viva mtara story.
s
_
Acknowledgments

An earlier version of this essay was presented at the New England Conference of the Associa-
tion for Asian Studies, Boston, MA, 10 October 1992. I want to thank Karen Derris for her in-
sightful comments on subsequent drafts of this essay.

References

Berkwitz, S.C., 2003. History and gratitude in Theravda Buddhism. Journal of the Academy of Religion 71, 579e604.
a
Cone, M., Gombrich, R.F. (Trans.), 1977. The Perfect Generosity of Prince Vessantara: A Buddhist Epic. Clarendon
Press, Oxford.


Shityadarpa na of Vivantha. In: Durgaprasad. (Ed.), Panini, New Delhi; reprinted from 1922 edition of Nirnaya
a s a
_
Sagara Press, Bombay.
_
Gnoli, R. (Ed.), 1978. The Gilgit Manuscript of the Sanghabhedavastu: Being the 17th and Last Section of the Vinaya
of the Mlasarvstivdin. Part II. Istituto Italiano Per Il Medio. Estremo Oriente, Rome.
u a a
Hallisey, C., Hansen, A., 1996. Narrative, sub-ethics, and the moral life: some evidence from Theravda Buddhism.
a
Journal of Religious Ethics 24, 305e327.
Heim, M., 2003. The aesthetics of excess. Journal of the American Academy of Religion 71, 531e554.
Horner, I.B. (Trans.), 1975. The Minor Anthologies of the Pali Canon. Part III. Chronicles of Buddhas (Buddhava msa)
and Basket of Conduct (Cariypi taka). Pali Text Society, London.
a _
_
Johnston, E.H., 1929. Two studies in the Arthaastra of Kau tilya. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 77e102.
s
_
Keown, D., 1992. The Nature of Buddhist Ethics. St Martin’s Press, New York.
Kern, H. (Ed.), 1914. The Jataka-Mala: Stories of Buddha’s Former Incarnations Otherwise Entitled Bodhisattva-
´
Avadna-Ml by Arya-Sura. Harvard Oriental Series, Vol. 1. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
a aa
´
Khoroche, P. (Trans.), 1989. Once the Buddha Was a Monkey: Arya Sura’s Jtakaml. University of Chicago Press,
a aa
Chicago.
Nussbaum, M.C., 1990. Love’s Knowledge: Essays on Philosophy and Literature. Oxford University Press, New York.
Nussbaum, M.C., 1997. Cultivating Humanity: A Classical Defense of Reform in Liberal Education. Harvard Univer-
sity Press, Cambridge, MA.
Obeyesekere, G., 1991. Buddhism and conscience: an exploratory essay. Daedalus 120, 219e239.
Obeyesekere, G., 1992. Du t t hagma n and the Buddhist Conscience. In: Allen, D. (Ed.), Religion and Political Conﬂict
a ı
___ _
in South Asia: India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Greenwood Press, Westport, CT, pp. 135e160.
Obeyesekere, R. (Trans.), 1991. Jewels of the Doctrine: Stories of the Saddharma Ratnvaliya. State University of
a
New York Press, Albany, NY.
Pollock, S., 1998. Bhoja’s S´ rngrapraksa and the problem of rasa: a historical introduction and annotated translation.
_ a a
´ _
Asiatische Studien/Etudes asiatiques 70, 117e192.
Pollock, S., 2001. The social aesthetic and Sanskrit literary theory. Journal of Indian Philosophy 29, 197e229.
Reynolds, C.H.B. (Ed.), 1970. An Anthology of Sinhalese Literature up to 1815. UNESCO, London.
Rotman, A., 2003. The erotics of practice: objects and agency in Buddhist Avadna literature. Journal of the American
a
Academy of Religion 71, 555e578.
Trainor, K., 2003. Seeing, feeling, doing: ethics and emotions in South Asian Buddhism. Journal of the American Acad-
emy of Religion 71, 523e529.
Vijayavardhana, G., 1970. In: Outlines of Sanskrit Poetics. Chowkhamba Sanskrit Studies, Vol. LXXVI. Chowkhamba
Sansrit Series Oﬃce, Varanasi, India.

Susanne Mrozik is Assistant Professor of Religion in the Department of Religion at Mount Holyoke College. Mrozik
earned her Ph.D. from the Committee on the Study of Religion at Harvard University. She has a forthcoming book
on Virtuous Bodies: The Physical Dimension of Morality in Buddhist Ethics (New York, Oxford University Press)
and is co-editing a volume on Women Practicing Buddhism: American Experiences. Mrozik has also published articles
on Buddhist ethics in the Journal of Buddhist Ethics and the Journal of Religious Ethics.

Film

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (6)

Ähnlich wie Film

Ähnlich wie Film (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Film