Life in Ancient India as Depicted in the Jain Canons, with Commentaries: An Administrative, Economic, Social and Geographical Survey c5.s9: Reduction and the Age of the Jain Canon
Life in Ancient India as Depicted in the Jain Canons, with Commentaries: An Administrative, Economic, Social and Geographical Survey c5.s9
- Language
- English
Reduction and the Age of the Jain Canon
c5.s9.1
According to the Jain tradition, the disciples of Mahāvīra, known as Gaṇadharas or heads of Schools, compiled the Master's words in the Angas and Upāngas. Regarding the antiquity and the authority of the Canon, the Śvetāmbara Jains have the following tradition:
c5.s9.2
The original doctrine was contained in the fourteen Puvvas (Pūrvas) "old texts," which Mahāvīra himself had taught to his Gaṇandharas. The knowledge of the "old texts" was, however, soon lost. Only one of Mahāvīra's original disciples handed them down, and they were only preserved for six generations. Now in the second century after Mahāvīra's death, there was a terrible famine in Magadha which lasted for a long period. This seriously affected the study of the Jain monks who could hardly get sufficient alms for their maintenance. In fact, a number of monks, for want of food and drink, had to lose their precious lives In course of time, when the famine was over, a council was convoked at Pāṭaliputra after about 160 years of Mahāvīra's death (i.e., about 307 B.C) and the sacred lore which was in a state of decay, was put in order. We learn from the Āvaśyaka Cūrṇi³ that during the period of a long terrible famine in Magadha the monks had left the country and had migrated to the sea-shore. After the end of the famine they assembled in Pāṭaliputra and by collecting a section (uddesa) from one and a portion (khaṇḍa) from another, compiled the eleven Aṅgas. But nobody remembered the Diṭṭhivāya. Thereupon a couple (saṅghāḍaa) of monks were sent to Bhadrabāhu, who knew the fourteen Pūrvas and who had already retired to Nepal in order to undertake the Mahāprāṇavrata (fast unto death). But Bhadrabāhu declined to teach Diṭṭhivāya since he was engaged in meditation. The monks returned and reported the matter to the Jain Saṅgha of Pāṭaliputra; whereupon two other monks were deputed to Bhadrabāhu to ask him what penalty could be prescribed for disobeying the order of the Saṅgha since he had committed the same offence. Later on, being threatened with ex-communication, Bhadrabāhu agreed to teach Diṭṭhivāya on certain conditions in seven instalments (paḍipucchagaṃ). Then five hundred monks were deputed to Nepal to learn Diṭṭhivāya, but gradually all except Sthūlabhadra dropped out who succeeded in learning all the Pūrvas. But as penalty for some offence which he had committed towards his teacher, he was made to give his word of honour not to teach the last four Pūrvas to anybody. Thus the knowledge of the Pūrvas went into a state of oblivion from the time of Sthūlabhadra.⁴ This is known as the Pāṭaliputra version (vācanā) of the Jain Canons.
c5.s9.3
³ II. pp 187 f. also cf. Titthogāli paṇṇaya quoted in the article ‘Vira Nirvāṇa aur Jain Kāla gaṇanā,’ by Kalyan Vijaya in the Nāgarī Pracāriṇī Patrikā, Vols. X-XI, pp. 94-103.
c5.s9.4
⁴ For the loss of Dṛṣṭivāda see Weber's Sacred Literature of the Jains, pp. 54ff, reprinted from the Indian Antiquary, Bombay, 1893, and C. J. Shah's Jainism in North India, p. 230.
c5.s9.5
Then again in course of time, the sacred books of the Jains, again were reduced to a state of disorder and so between the year 827 and 840 after the death of Mahāvīra (i.e. 360-373 A.D) another council was summoned at Mathurā under the presidentship of Ārya Skandila. We read in the *Nandī Cūrṇi* (p. 8) that during the time of terrible famine which lasted for a very long time it became difficult for the monks to obtain their alms, and so they were unable to continue the study of the scriptures and consequently a great portion of the canon was lost. In course of time, after the famine came to an end, a council was convened at Mathurā and whatever could be gathered from different monks, was collected and was fixed in the form of the Canon known as Kālyasuya. According to another tradition, however, no Canon was lost during this period, but except Ārya Skandila most of eminent monks, versed in the *Āgama* (*Anuyogadharāḥ*) had lost their lives. This is known as the Māthurī version (*vācanā*) of the Canons.
c5.s9.6
Simultaneously, another council was summoned at Valabhī under the presidentship of Nāgārjuna Sūri in which the Canons were fixed and what was forgotten was compiled after careful edition⁵ This fact is corroborated by the statement in the *Jyotiṣkaraṇḍaka Ṭīkā* (p. 41) where it is stated that in the time of Skandila there was a terrible famine when the Jain monks had to discontinue their studies. Later on, at the end of the famine, one *Saṅgha* met at in Valabhī and another at Mathurā. According to Malayagiri, the author of the *Jyotiṣkaraṇḍaka Ṭīkā*, *Anuyogadvāra* and other Canons are based on the Māthurī version, whereas the *Jyotiṣkaraṇḍa* on the Valabhī. This is known as Valabhī version (*vācanā*) of the Canons.⁶
c5.s9.7
⁵ *Kathāvali*, 298 after "Vīra Nuvāṇa" etc., pp 110l
c5.s9.8
⁶ Cf. the Buddhist Councils held at Rājagaha, Vesālī and Pāṭaliputra in order to establish a Canon of the religion and of the discipline of the order, see H Kern, *Manual of Indian Buddhism*, pp. 101ff. The last council was held in the reign of King Asoka in the third century B.C.
c5.s9.9
Unfortunately after redaction of the Canons in these councils, Ācārya Skandila and Nāgārjuna could not get an opportunity to see each other and hence the two different versions of the Canons remained unreconciled. After one hundred and fifty years, in the year 980 (or 993) of Mahāvīra's death (i.e., 513 or 526 A.D) another council was convoked at Valabhī under the able presidentship of Devardhigaṇi Kṣamāśramaṇa in which all the important works of the Jains then available were written down⁷ In this council, as it has been pointed out, a serious attempt was made to reconcile the different readings of the two versions pertaining to the two councils. In cases where reconciliation was not possible, it was thought desirable to note the important variants either in the original *Āgamas* or in their commentaries In this council, however, the entire Jain canonical literature was written down according to the version of the Mathurā council, introducing the important variants generally by the words ‘*vāyanāntare punaḥ*’ (according to another version) or ‘*Nāgārjunīyastvevam vadanti*’ (the disciples of Nāgārjuna say so).⁸
c5.s9.10
⁷ According to Hemacandra, however, the canons were actually written down in the form of books (*pustakeṣu nyastam*) in the last two councils (*yogasāstra* 3, p. 206 a).
c5.s9.11
⁸ See "*Vīra Nirvāṇa*" etc., pp. 112-118.
c5.s9.12
Thus we see that Devardhigaṇi was only a redactor and not the author of the Jain Canons, and the date of compilation of the Āgamas is much earlier than their redaction by Devardhigaṇi. To quote Prof. Jacobi, “Devardhi’s position relative to the sacred literature of the Jainas appears therefore to us in a different light from what is generally believed to have been. He probably arranged the already existing manuscripts in a Canon, taking down from the mouth of learned theologians only such works of which manuscripts were not available. Of this Canon a great many copies were taken, in order to furnish every seminary with books which had become necessary by the newly introduced change in the method of religious instructions. Devardhi’s edition of Siddhānta is therefore only a redaction of the sacred book which existed before his time in nearly the same form. Any single passage in sacred text may have been introduced by the editor, but the bulk of Siddhānta is certainly not of his making”.⁹ Thus the Canon which Devardhigaṇi compiled and which has come down to us is the final result of a literary activity that must have started as soon as the Church was put on a sound footing. The earliest portion of the Canon may therefore quite possibly belong to the period of the first disciples of Mahāvīra himself, or at the latest to the second century after Mahāvīra’s death, the period of Maurya Candragupta, when a council was summoned at Pāṭaliputra.¹⁰
c5.s9.13
⁹ *Jain Sūtras*, Vol. XXII, p. xxxix, also Winternitz, *op. cit.*, pp 433f.
c5.s9.14
¹⁰ Winternitz, *op. cit.*, p. 434f
Linked texts (1)
- Yogaśāstra — Hemacandra, Sanskrit