Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History and Doctrines of the Ajivikas: A Vanished Indian Religion c11.s9: Gosāla Attains Magical Power, and Becomes the Leader of the Ājīvikas

History and Doctrines of the Ājīvikas: A Vanished Indian Religion c11.s9

Language
English

Gosāla Attains Magical Power, and Becomes the Leader of the Ājīvikas

c11.s9.1

After his experiences with the sesamum plant and with Vesiyāyaṇa Gosāla seems to have determined to acquire magic power and superhuman insight equal to those of Mahāvīra. He therefore practised penance in the manner which Mahāvīra had laid down, seated facing the sun in the vicinity of a lake, with his hands raised above his head, and eating only one handful of beans every three days.¹ Thus, at the end of six months, he acquired magic power (*saṅkhitta-viula-teyalesse jāe*).

c11.s9.2

¹ *Bh. Sū.* xv, *sū.* 545, fols. 666-7. Jinadāsa (*Āvaśyaka cūrṇi* i, p. 299) states that Gosāla performed this penance in the pottery at Sāvatthi, and adds that he tested his newly acquired power on a passing serving-girl, whom he reduced to ashes.

c11.s9.3

If we accept the tradition of the six years spent with Mahāvīra,² this event must be placed about seven years after Gosāla's abandonment of the profession of a *maṅkha*. As Hoernle has pointed out,³ Gosāla claimed to have attained *jina*-hood some two years before Mahāvīra. He is said to have spent sixteen years at Sāvatthi as a pseudo-*jina* before his death,⁴ which Mahāvīra survived for sixteen and a half years.⁵ But Mahāvīra is said to have lived as a *jina* for a little less than thirty years.⁶ If the Jaina scriptures give approximately accurate figures the events here described must have taken place some two or three years before Mahāvīra laid claim to *jina*-hood.

c11.s9.4

² V. supra, p. 40.

c11.s9.5

³ *Uv. Das.* ii, p. 108, n.

c11.s9.6

⁴ V. supra, p. 32.

c11.s9.7

⁵ V. infra, p. 67.

c11.s9.8

⁶ *Kalpa Sūtra*, *Sū.* 147.

c11.s9.9

The *Bhagavatī Sūtra* gives us no further information about Makkhali Gosāla's activities until the twenty-fourth year of his career as an ascetic,¹ when he had made his headquarters at Sāvatthi in the workshop of the potter-woman Hālāhalā, and was surrounded by many disciples. At this time, according to the *Bhagavatī* account, he was visited by six *disācaras*, in consultation with whom he codified the Ājīvika scriptures; and his denunciation by Mahāvīra and subsequent death took place soon after this. Thus of the total of twenty-four years of Gosāla’s life as an ascetic six were spent with Mahāvīra at Paṇiyabhūmī, and sixteen as a religious leader at Sāvatthi. The two years intervening between these two periods were no doubt filled by the journey to Kummāragāma,² the six months’ penance,³ and preliminary wanderings before making Sāvatthi his headquarters.

c11.s9.10

¹ *Caüvvīsa-vāsa-pariyāye*, interpreted by Abhayadeva as *caturviṃśati-vārṣika-śramaṇa-paryāya*.

c11.s9.11

² *Bh. Sū.* xv, sū. 539, fol. 658.

c11.s9.12

³ *Bh. Sū.* xv, sū. 540; cf. *supra*, p. 50.

c11.s9.13

Gosāla’s acquisition of magic power must represent an Ājīvika tradition similar to those of the Jainas and Buddhists, in which the enlightenment of the founders of the respective sects is described. Between this and the meeting with the *disācaras*, something over sixteen years must have elapsed. In this period it is not likely that Gosāla resided continuously at Sāvatthi; probably, like his greater rivals Buddha and Mahāvīra, he travelled from place to place among the towns and villages of the Ganges valley, preaching and gathering converts. There is evidence that Ājīvikas of a sort, both ascetics and laymen, existed already at the time,⁴ and his mission probably consisted largely in knitting together locally influential Ājīvika holy men and their followers, regularizing their doctrines, and gaining converts by the display of pseudo-supernatural powers. The Jaina tradition about Gosāla agrees with that of the Buddhists concerning the six heretics, that magical performances were part of his stock in trade, and it appears that he was capable, either honestly or by fraud, of producing psychic phenomena.

c11.s9.14

⁴ V. infra, pp. 94 ff.

c11.s9.15

No doubt Sāvatthi was his headquarters, where he spent the rainy seasons, and where he obtained strongest support. The habits of the Sāvatthi Ājīvikas are vividly described in the *Jātaka*⁵; and it would seem that the Kosalan king Pasenadi was more favourably disposed to them than was his contemporary, Bimbisāra of Magadha.⁶

c11.s9.16

⁵ *Jātaka*, i. 493.

c11.s9.17

⁶ V. infra, p. 86.

c11.s9.18

During this period Gosāla seems to have acquired a reputation for his taciturnity, as well as for his asceticism. This is shown by a verse in the *Saṃyutta Nikāya*, wherein he is described as "having abandoned speech" (*vācam pahāya*),¹ and by Buddhagosa, who, in his version of the Ājīvika classification of the eight stages of the ascetic's career, states that the ascetic in the highest stage does not speak.² Gosāla's silence is confirmed by the Tamil text *Nīlakēci*, which states that the deified Maṅkali never speaks for fear of injuring living creatures.³ On the other hand, both the *Bhagavatī Sūtra* and the *Uvāsaga Dasāo* refer to Gosāla as speaking, even at the time of his death,⁴ so we must conclude that his silence was by no means absolute.

c11.s9.19

¹ *Sam. i*, p. 66. V. infra, p. 217.

c11.s9.20

² *Sum. Vil. i*, p. 163. V. infra, p. 246.

c11.s9.21

³ *Nīl. v*, 672. V. infra, p. 276.

c11.s9.22

⁴ V. infra, p. 64.

c11.s9.23

The sources give few indications of Makkhali Gosāla's movements and activities during his career as a religious leader. That he sometimes left Sāvatthi is shown by the *Uvāsaga Dasāo*,⁵ which describes the conversion by Mahāvīra of a wealthy Ājīvika layman of Polāsapura, Saddālaputta the potter. Hearing of the defection of his disciple, Gosāla is said to have visited Polāsapura soon after Mahāvīra's departure, attended by a crowd of followers. He went first to the *Ājīviya-sabhā*, where he left his begging bowl, and then, accompanied only by a few of his chief followers, visited Saddālaputta. The latter greeted him without the reverence due from a disciple to his spiritual master. After some discussion Gosāla is purported to have admitted that Mahāvīra was a *mahā-māhaṇa*,⁶ and to have praised him in Jaina terms. Saddālaputta then asked him whether he felt himself competent to dispute with Mahāvīra, and he admitted that he did not. Finally the potter offered him hospitality, but only because he had praised his new teacher Mahāvīra. For some time Gosāla resided in the potter's workshop, but Saddālaputta, in spite of much persuasion, was unable to convert him to Jainism.

c11.s9.24

⁵ *Uv. Das.* ed. Hoernle i, pp. 105 ff. V. infra, p. 132.

c11.s9.25

⁶ *Māhaṇa* is usually translated "a brāhmaṇa". In this context this cannot be the literal meaning, since Mahāvīra was a *kṣattriya*.

c11.s9.26

The town of Polāsapura is referred to only in the Jaina scriptures, and no clear indications of its location are given.⁷ We may assume that it was a small town somewhere in the Ganges watershed. The description of Gosāla, attended on his journeyings by many disciples, bears a generic likeness to the stories of the progresses of Buddha and Mahāvīra as recorded in the Buddhist and Jaina scriptures. It is to be noted that the town is depicted as having already an Ājīviya-sabhā, or meeting-place of the Ājīvikas,¹ but that Gosāla did not reside in it, but in the workshop of one of his local supporters; he followed the same practice at Sāvatthi, where his usual place of residence was in Hālāhalā’s pottery. These two instances suggest that he gave his special patronage to the potter caste.

c11.s9.27

⁷ V. infra, p. 133.

c11.s9.28

¹ V. infra, pp. 115–16.

c11.s9.29

The adulatory terms in which Gosāla is said to have praised Mahāvīra may have no basis of fact. This passage, like many others in the Jaina scriptures, seems to have been composed with the disparagement of Gosāla and the Ājīvikas in view; but if it has any historical significance it is as an indication that the rift between the two teachers was by no means so profound as the Bhagavatī Sūtra indicates. Saddālaputta, even after his conversion by Mahāvīra, continued to give some patronage to Gosāla, thus anticipating the practice of Aśoka and other Indian monarchs of later times, who, while maintaining one specially favoured doctrine, were quite ready to support the representatives of several others.

c11.s9.30

Our doubts as to the reliability of the story of Gosāla’s praise of Mahāvīra are strengthened by a reference in the Sūtrakṛtāṅga,² wherein he speaks of his former comrade in far less friendly terms. Here Gosāla is involved in discussion with a certain Adda, an earnest disciple of Mahāvīra, and criticizes his rival on various grounds. Mahāvīra had formerly been a solitary ascetic, but was now surrounded by monks, to whom he taught the law. One or other of these courses must be wrong.³ He was afraid to stay in public guest-houses or gardens for fear of meeting skilful men, whether base or noble, talkative or taciturn, who might put awkward questions to him.⁴ Finally Gosāla alleged that Mahāvīra was a mercenary teacher, vending his wares like a merchant.¹

c11.s9.31

² Sū. kr. ii, 6, 1 ff., fol. 388 ff.

c11.s9.32

³ Egantam evam aduvā vi iṇhiṃ, do-v annam-annam na sameti jamhā. Loc. cit., v, 3.

c11.s9.33

⁴ Mehāvino sikkhiya buddhimantā suttehi atthehi ya ṇicchayannā. Pucchimsu mā ṇe aṇagāru aṇṇe iti saṅkamāṇe ṇa uveti tattha. Loc. cit., v. 16, fol. 392.

c11.s9.34

¹ *Pannam jahā vaṇij udayaṭṭhī ... saṅgam.* Taūvame samaṇe Nāyaputte icc' ... Ibid., v, 19, fol. 394.

c11.s9.35

We have no reliable information about the circumstances of this discussion. Adda, the Jaina protagonist, is said in the niryukti to the passage to have been the son of one Adda, of Addapura ²—a statement which adds nothing to our knowledge, but rather casts doubt on the reliability of the account. If the story has any historical significance it is to suggest that the relations of Gosāla and Mahāvīra worsened with the passage of time. Details of the account of the incident of Saddālaputta suggest that it took place soon after Mahāvīra's "enlightenment", when he was not so widely known as he later became. Gosāla's debate with Adda, on the other hand, presupposes a strong Jaina community, defending itself against all comers.

c11.s9.36

² V., 187, fol. 385.

c11.s9.37

A brief and obscure reference is contained in the *Vihimaggapavā* of Jinapaha Sūri,³ to the effect that Gosāla was disappointed that no gifts had been received, and therefore his followers did not accept (alms) from their female relatives.⁴ This phrase by a late Jaina writer may refer to a lost Ājīvika story of the prophet being without honour in his own country.

c11.s9.38

³ Quoted in Weber, *Verzeichnis*, vol. ii, MS. 1944, p. 870. I have been unable to procure a copy of this text.

c11.s9.39

⁴ *Gosālo jaī dattīhim aladdhiyāhim uvahaō c'eva ahava have jogavāhiṇo to helo ṇa sambandhiṇīo gheppanti.*

c11.s9.40

Turning to the Pāli scriptures we can find few references to the Ājīvika leader except in conjunction with the five other heretical teachers of the Buddhist canon. Two passages, however, make it clear that the Buddha knew of Makkhali Gosāla, and thought his doctrine exceedingly pernicious. In the *Aṅguttara Nikāya*⁵ he declares that Makkhali is a stupid man (*mogha-puriso*), and that he knows of no other person born to the detriment grief and disadvantage of so many people, or to such disadvantage and sorrow of gods and men. Makkhali is like a fisherman, casting his net at the mouth of a river, for the destruction of many fish.

c11.s9.41

⁵ *Aṅg.* i, p. 33; cf. *Aṅg.* i, p. 287.

c11.s9.42

In another passage of the *Aṅguttara*⁶ the Buddha expresses a very forcible opinion on the value of Makkhali’s teaching. Just as a hair blanket (*kesakambala*) is the worst of all fabrics in texture, appearance, and utility, so of all unorthodox doctrines (*samaṇa-ppavādānaṃ*) that of Makkhali is the worst. It seems that this attack was originally levelled against Ajita Kesakambalī, since the striking simile is especially appropriate to him. But the change of the name to Makkhali is itself significant; it must have been made at a time when Ajita was almost forgotten, and the forces of Buddhism needed further ammunition against the Ājīvikas.

c11.s9.43

⁶ *Aṅg.* i, p. 286.

c11.s9.44

These severe strictures of the Buddha upon Makkhali, and the simile of the fisherman in particular, seem to indicate the great success of the latter’s mission. Rather than Mahāvīra it is Makkhali Gosāla who emerges as the Buddha’s chief opponent and most dangerous rival.

Linked texts (10)