4. Published by Childers, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1869.

5. Published by Fausboll, 1855.

6. Thirty translated by Sir Coomara Swamy; the whole by Fausboll, in Sacred Books of the East, vol. x.

7. Published by Fausboll, translated by Rhys Davids.]

p. xxix

Patisambhidamagga, the road of discrimination, and intuitive insight. Apadana[1], legends. Buddhavamsa[1], story of twenty-four preceding Buddhas and of Gotama. Kariyapitaka[1], basket of conduct, Buddha's meritorious actions[2].III. Abhidhamma-pitaka.

Dhammasangani, numeration of conditions of life[3]. Vibhanga, disquisitions (18). Kathavatthupakarana, book of subjects for discussion (1000 suttas). Puggalapannatti or pannatti, declaration on puggala, or personality. Dhatukatha, account of dhatus or elements. Yamaka, pairs (ten divisions). Patthanapakarana, book of causes. Taking this collection as a whole we may lay it down as self-evident that the canon, in its collected form, cannot be older than any of the events related therein.

There are two important facts for determining the age of the Pali canon, which, as Dr. Oldenberg[4] has been the first to show, should take precedence of all other arguments, viz.

1. That in the Tipitaka, as we now have it, no mention is made of the so-called Third Council, which took place at Pataliputta, under King Asoka, about 242 B.C.

2. That in the Tipitaka, as we now have it, the First Council of Ragagaha (477 B.C.) and the Second Council of Vesali (377 B.C.) are both mentioned.

From these two facts it may safely be concluded that the Buddhist canon, as handed down to us, was finally closed

[1. Buddhaghosa does not say whether these were recited at the First Council.

2. Partly translated by Gogerly, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Ceylon, 1852.

3. Cf. Gogerly, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Ceylon. 1848, p. 7.

4. See Oldenberg's Vinaya-pitaka, Introduction. p. xxv. The kings Agatasatru (485-453 B.C.), Udayin (453-437 B.C.), and Munda (437-429 B.C.) are all mentioned in the Tipitaka. See Oldenberg, Zeitschrift der D. M. G., XXXIV. pp. 752, 753.]

p. xxx after the Second and before, or possibly at, the Third Council. Nay, the fact that the description of the two Councils stands at the very end of the Kullavagga may be taken, as Dr. Oldenberg remarks, as an indication that it was one of the latest literary contributions which obtained canonical authority, while the great bulk of the canon may probably claim a date anterior to the Second Council.