Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History and Doctrines of the Ajivikas: A Vanished Indian Religion c14: Chapter VI. The Early Ājīvika Community (I)

History and Doctrines of the Ājīvikas: A Vanished Indian Religion c14

Language
English

Contents

Chapter VI. The Early Ājīvika Community (I)

The Wandering Philosophers

c14.s1.1

It is now generally agreed that the ground for the development of non-brāhmaṇic religious sects in India was prepared before the days of the great reforming leaders of the sixth and fifth centuries B.C. In the case of the Ājīvikas there is evidence which points to the fact that Makkhali Gosāla found already in existence ascetic groups following a more or less common way of life and looking back to teachers of previous generations. By knitting these local groups together under his own leadership he established the Ājīvika sect. The tradition, preserved in the Buddhist scriptures, linking Makkhali Gosāla’s name with those of Nanda Vaccha and Kisa Saṅkicca,¹ and that of the *Bhagavatī Sūtra*, which seems to record a succession of religious teachers preceding Gosāla,² are evidence pointing strongly in that direction.

c14.s1.2

¹ V. supra, pp. 27 ff.

c14.s1.3

² V. supra, pp. 30 ff.

c14.s1.4

As Charpentier recognized,³ Ājīvika ascetics are met in the Pāli scriptures at a time when Makkhali Gosāla cannot have commenced his ministry, if we accept the chronology suggested in a previous chapter.⁴ The most striking of these is Upaka the Ājīvika, who, as a symbol of benevolent incredulity, has found a small but significant place in the legends of Buddhism. Upaka is said to have encountered the Buddha on the road to Gayā, immediately after the latter’s enlightenment. He noticed the supernal calmness and peace in the bearing of the great teacher, and asked who he was, who was his instructor, and what were his doctrines. When the Buddha told Upaka of his enlightenment he merely said “It may be so, sir!” (*hupeyya āvuso*), and went on by another way. The historicity of this story is perhaps strengthened by the fact that it is mentioned no less than four [Figure: THE BUDDHA MEETS UPAKA THE ĀJĪVIKA. (From Krom, The Life of the Buddha on the Stūpa of Barabuḍur.)]

c14.s1.5

³ *JRAS*. 1913, pp. 673–4.

c14.s1.6

⁴ V. supra, p. 74.

c14.s1.7

This image is completely blank. There is no text or content to transcribe.

c14.s1.8

times in the Pāli texts ¹ with little variation, and occurs also in the Mahāyāna scriptures.²

c14.s1.9

¹ *Jāt.* i, p. 81; *Vin.* i, p. 8; *Majjh.* i, pp. 170–1; *Dhammapad’-aṭṭhakathā* iv, pp. 71–2.

c14.s1.10

² E.g. *Lalitavistra* xxvi, p. 405, where Upaka’s words “*Tad bhaviṣyasi Gautama!*” are couched in the future tense in place of the Pāli optative, and seem to imply faith rather than doubt.

c14.s1.11

Upaka the Ājīvika does not vanish from the scene after his meeting with the Buddha. In the *Therīgāthā*,³ where he is called Kāla, he is said to have fallen madly in love with a hunter’s daughter Cāpā, whom he married and by whom he had a son, Subhadda. His wife appears to have treated him badly, continually taunting him for his earlier Ājīvika connections. One day he remembered his meeting with the Buddha, left his wife, and went to the Buddha at Sāvatthi. There he entered the Buddhist order, and later became an *anāgāmī*. On his death he was reborn in the Aviha heaven.

c14.s1.12

³ *Therīg.*, 291–311, with comm., pp. 220 ff.

c14.s1.13

Upaka was a Magadhan. According to the *Therīgāthā* Commentary ⁴ he was born at the village of Nāla, near the Bodhi Tree, and lived there with Cāpā after abandoning his asceticism for the life of a householder. If the legend of Upaka be accepted it must be taken to imply that Ājīvika mendicants roamed the roads of Magadha at least a generation before the commencement of Gosāla’s ministry.

c14.s1.14

⁴ *Paramattha Dīpanī* v, p. 225.

c14.s1.15

The towns mentioned in connection with the seven reanimations of Udāī in the *Bhagavatī Sūtra* ⁵ also suggest that, even before Gosāla’s ministry, the regions of Kosala, Magadha, Kāsī, Videha, and Campā were the homes of peripatetic naked philosophers of the Ājīvika type. It is probable that these travelling philosophers, however abstruse their metaphysical doctrines, aimed at gaining the support of the populace, and very often obtained it. An interesting picture of the conditions which must have prevailed at the time is given in *Neru Jātaka*,⁶ where we find a certain Buddhist *bhikkhu* preaching in an unnamed frontier village, and winning considerable support from the villagers. On his departure his place is taken by an “eternalist” (*sassatavādi*), then by an “annihilationist” (*ucchedavādi*), and finally by a naked ascetic (acelaka), who in turn gain the temporary loyalty of the villagers.

c14.s1.16

⁵ V. supra, pp. 31–32.

c14.s1.17

⁶ *Jāt.* iii, pp. 246 ff.

c14.s1.18

The religious atmosphere of the time is perhaps comparable to that which prevailed in the Roman Empire, when many people had lost their implicit faith in traditional verities, and were ready to support any new cult which offered a more plausible and attractive system of belief. In Rome the changing spiritual requirements were met in large measure by mystery cults imported from the East. In India, in the sixth and fifth centuries B.C., the wandering ascetics filled the need.

c14.s1.19

It is quite evident that these wanderers maintained a wide range of doctrines and varied rules of conduct. They were known by various titles, which usually denoted loosely knit classes of ascetic rather than regularly organized orders, as the Buddhist bhikkhus and the Jaina samaṇas later became. Beside these two terms we find others such as acelaka, nigaṇṭha, and of course ājīvika, which are used quite loosely, and obviously do not imply membership of any organized religious body. Thus in the Majjhima Nikāya¹ the Buddha declares that in his long experience of transmigration he has known no Ājīvika to go to heaven but one, and that one was a believer in karma and the efficiency of works.² This suggests either that all the early Ājīvikas did not accept Makkhali Gosāla’s quietist determinism and that the term was sometimes used to denote a wider class of heretical mendicant with varying beliefs, or that there were early schisms of Makkhali’s sect which rejected the cardinal doctrine of the founder. The former is the more probable explanation.

c14.s1.20

¹ Majjh. i, 483.

c14.s1.21

² So p’ āsi kammavādī kiriyavādī. Loc. cit.

c14.s1.22

In some texts Ājīvikas are clearly distinguished from nigaṇṭhas,³ but the Sandaka Sutta seems to embrace all six of the heretical teachers, including the great leader of the nigaṇṭhas, Nigaṇṭha Nātaputta or Mahāvīra, in the general category of Ājīvikas.⁴ In the Dhammapada Commentary⁵ Buddhaghosa describes the ascetic with unsettled mind (anavaṭṭhita-citto), who may start as an acelaka, then become an Ājīvaka, then a nigaṇṭha, and finally a tāpasa. Yet in the same work he tells the story of Migāra,¹ the banker of Sāvatthi, who is a follower of naked ascetics (nagga-samaṇā), but who falls foul of them when his daughter-in-law becomes a devotee of the Buddha. Here the five hundred ascetics who besiege him in his house are referred to indiscriminately as nagga-samaṇā, acelakā, and ājīvikā. Similarly the Divyāvadāna, in the story of Aśoka, seems to use the terms Ājīvaka and Nirgrantha synonymously.²

c14.s1.23

³ E.g. Sutta-nipāta, 381. Ye ke c’ ime titthiyā vādasīlā, Ājīvikā vā yadi vā nigaṇṭhā.

c14.s1.24

⁴ Majjh. i, pp. 513 ff. V. supra, pp. 18 19.

c14.s1.25

⁵ Dhp. Comm. i, p. 309.

c14.s1.26

¹ Ibid. i, pp. 390 ff.

c14.s1.27

² V. infra, pp. 147–48.

c14.s1.28

The significance of this apparent confusion may perhaps be explained by reference to another story in the Dhammapada Commentary,³ in which the boy Jambuka is handed by his parents to a community of Ājīvikas and initiated into their order; but his asceticism takes a form too loathsome even for the Ājīvikas to tolerate, and he is expelled from the community. After this he obtains a great reputation for sanctity as a “wind-eater” (vāta-bhakkho), until he is ultimately converted by the Buddha. Buddhaghosa states that his career as a wind-eater lasted for fifty-five years, thus giving a further indication of the existence of Ājīvikas before Makkhali Gosāla. But the significance of the story in this context lies in the fact that even fifty-five years after his expulsion from the order of Ājīvikas he is still referred to by the Buddha as “Jambuka the Ājīvika”. We have here a clear indication that the term was used not only for the organized ascetic order of Makkhali, but for free-lance ascetics of a similar type, or for followers of other leaders who later merged with the Ājīvika order.

c14.s1.29

³ Dhp. Comm. ii, pp. 52 ff.

c14.s1.30

This has been recognized by Barua in his latest work on the subject.⁴ “The term Ājīvika,” he writes, “is used in Indian literature; (1) in its widest sense to denote the Parivrājakas or Wanderers as distinguished from the Tāpasas or hermits; (2) in its narrower sense to denote the religious orders represented by the five Tīrthaṅkaras, Pūraṇa Kassapa, Makkhali Gosāla and the rest, considered heretics by the Buddhists; and (3) in its narrowest sense to denote the disciples and followers of Makkhali or Maṅkhaliputta Gosāla.”

c14.s1.31

⁴ ABORI. viii, p. 183.

c14.s1.32

We are doubtful about Dr. Barua’s first category, although in the Jānakī-haraṇa the term may have been intended in this sense.¹ We have seen that the second usage is very common in early Buddhist literature. But we must add a rider to Barua’s statement, to the effect that some at least of the heretical tīrthaṅkaras seem to have been loosely allied, and to have had many points of doctrine in common.

c14.s1.33

¹ V. infra, pp. 165 ff.

c14.s1.34

Dr. Barua has attempted to provide an ancestry for the Ājīvikas. “I cannot but strongly feel that all possible inquiries concerning Nanda Vaccha and Kisa Saṅkicca are sure to lead the historian back to a typical representative of the Vānaprastha or Vaikhānasa order of Indian Hermits.”² In his latest article he is even more definite. “The Ājīvika as a religious order and school of philosophy is known in the Vedic hymns, the Brāhmaṇas, the Āraṇyakas, and other ancient Sanskrit compilations and treatises that can safely be regarded as literary products of a pre-Jaina and pre-Buddhistic age.”³ Unfortunately he gives no references to or quotations from any of these works. This being the case we can only regret that Dr. Barua did not develop his surprising theory more fully, and declare that no statements known to us in pre-Buddhist literature suggest the existence of any such order. To the best of our knowledge the earliest non-Buddhist and non-Jaina reference suggesting the Ājīvikas occurs in the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad,⁴ which is of comparatively late date.⁵ Our own views on the origin of Ājīvikism have already been expressed—we do not believe that it derived from Vedic or Brāhmaṇical sources.⁶

c14.s1.35

² JDL. ii, p. 4.

c14.s1.36

³ ABORI. viii, pp. 183-4.

c14.s1.37

⁴ V. infra, pp. 228-29.

c14.s1.38

⁵ Macdonnell, Sanskrit Literature, pp. 233-4.

c14.s1.39

⁶ V. supra, pp. 6-9.

c14.s1.40

We must also disagree with Dr. Barua’s first statement, which implies that the Ājīvikas derived from the forest hermits. Whatever the status of the mysterious predecessors of Makkhali Gosāla, the first Ājīvika of whom the Buddhist scriptures bear record, Upaka, is not a hermit with a settled āśrama in the forest, but a mendicant, wandering from place to place. We believe also that Barua is mistaken in suggesting that the vānaprasthas were an order, in the sense of a body of ascetics with an organized system of practice and doctrine. Rather we believe that the terms vānaprastha and vaikhānasa were approximately synonymous and of broad connotation, both implying a forest hermit of the third *āśrama*; the diversity of the doctrines and disciplines of these hermits is clear from the *Upaniṣads* and from the Pāli scriptures.

c14.s1.41

Hoernle, in his discussion of the origin of the Ājīvikas, pins his faith on the derivation of the name Makkhali. “It describes Gosāla as having originally belonged to the Maṅkhali or Maskarin class of religious mendicants . . . The Maskarin, as a rule, led a solitary life and the adoption of this manner of life was open to very grave abuses. Hence some men of commanding personality conceived the task of regulating the tendency (to abuses) . . . by organizing the mendicants into communities governed by strict rules of conduct.” ¹

c14.s1.42

¹ *ERE.* i, p. 260.

c14.s1.43

Much of Hoernle’s statement seems correct. He appears, however, to imply by the word “class” a degree of precision only slightly less than Barua’s “order”. The term *maskarin* was in fact a very loose one. Pāṇini’s etymology ² seems only to imply that the word means a mendicant bearing a staff, of whatever class or order. Admittedly there is evidence, beside that of Makkhali’s name, to show that the early Ājīvikas carried staves. Hoernle himself quotes *Tittira Jātaka*, ³ the twelfth and thirteenth verses of which describe a mendicant, said in the commentary to be an Ājīvika, as carrying a bamboo staff (*vetācāra*). “The verses occurring in the Buddhist Jātakas,” Hoernle adds, “embody the most ancient folklore—of a much older date than Buddhism itself,” thereby implying that long before Makkhali a body of staff-bearing ascetics existed, from which the later Ājīvikas developed.

c14.s1.44

² V. supra, p. 78.

c14.s1.45

³ *Jāt.* iii, p. 542.

c14.s1.46

The Ājīvika Upaka is also referred to as bearing a staff. ⁴ Indeed staves probably became a regular mark of the Ājīvika order. But it must be noted that, except for its employment in the *sūtra* of Pāṇini, and as an epithet of Gosāla, the word *maskarin* is not to be found until the classical period of Sanskrit literature, and then seems to be used with very varied connotations. Kumāradāsa equates *maskarin* and *ājīvika*, ⁵ but the *Bhaṭṭikāvya*, of the sixth or seventh century A.D. ⁶ uses the word in a sense which certainly does not suggest a follower of Gosāla. ⁷ Bāṇa describes a *maskarin* with a skull for a begging-bowl and wearing a red robe, who must surely have been a Śaivite.¹ The commentator Utpala seems to equate the words *ājīvika* and *ekadaṇḍin*,² the latter certainly meaning an ascetic with a single staff as part of his insignia. But Halāyudha the lexicographer quotes the word *ājīvika* as a member of a class containing various other terms for a heretical ascetic,³ while *maskarin* occurs in the same verse as do the names of more orthodox and respectable ascetics, such as *tapasvin*, *parivrājaka*, *tāpasa*, etc.⁴ Hemacandra also includes the word *maskarin* with *vaikhānasa* *vānaprastha* and *yati* in a group not including *ājīvika*.⁵ In fact we have no reason to believe that the term *maskarin* ever meant more than a staff-bearing mendicant of any order. Certainly it was sometimes used to designate the Ājīvikas, but it included a group much wider than they, as Dr. Barua ultimately recognized.⁶ This being the case we cannot believe that an "order" of *maskarin*s existed before Gosāla's day, and that the Ājīvikas developed from them.

c14.s1.47

⁴ *Laṭṭhi-hattho*, *Therīg.*, 291.

c14.s1.48

⁵ *Jānakī-haraṇa* x, 76. V. infra, p. 165, n 4.

c14.s1.49

⁶ Keith, *History of Sanskrit Literature*, p. 116.

c14.s1.50

⁷ V. infra, p. 166.

c14.s1.51

¹ *Harṣa-carita* ed. Führer, pp. 152–3. V. infra, p. 167.

c14.s1.52

² V. infra, pp. 169 ff.

c14.s1.53

³ *Abhidhāna-ratnamālā* ii, 189–190. V. infra, p. 182.

c14.s1.54

⁴ Ibid. ii, 254.

c14.s1.55

⁵ *Abhidhāna-cintāmaṇi*, 809–810. V. infra, p. 182.

c14.s1.56

⁶ ABORI. viii, p. 184. For a further consideration of the term *maskarin* v. infra, pp. 163 ff.

c14.s1.57

It seems, in fact, an anachronism to suggest that any organized *sanghas* existed before the time of Buddha, Mahāvīra, and Makkhali Gosāla. Certainly there existed hermits, either solitary or living in colonies, and wandering mendicants. We suggest that the hermit colonies gathered round locally respected leaders, the fame of some of whom probably spread far beyond the locality of their hermitages and often survived their deaths. But the picture painted by the Buddha, when describing his search for truth among the forest teachers,⁷ and the flourishing and often fantastic speculations of the *Upaniṣads*, suggest that even within local groups there existed considerable differences of doctrine. In fact India at the time of the emergence of the heterodox sects seems to have been in a state of theological anarchy, mitigated only by orthodox Brāhmaṇism, which was by no means satisfying to the best minds of the times.

c14.s1.58

⁷ *Jāt.* i, pp. 66 ff.

c14.s1.59

The solitaries, whether hermits or wanderers, must by their very nature have been laws unto themselves. That they often held certain doctrines and followed certain practices in common might be expected from the basic similarity of human temperaments and the imitative propensities of the human animal. But there is no reason to believe that they were bound by any rules other than self-made ones, such as vows taken on embarking on their careers of mendicancy. The disciplinary innovations of the reforming leaders consisted partly in persuading some of these independent roving philosophers to accept common rules, and in linking them to hermit communities and giving them coherence by insisting on their residence in *vihāras* during the rainy reason. We believe that these wandering sophists and ascetics, rather than hermits or non-existent ascetic "orders", played the biggest part in the development of the heretical *saṅghas* of Buddhism, Jainism, and Ājīvikism.

Etymology of the Term Ājīvika

c14.s2.1

Among the earliest views on the derivation of the word Ājīvika are those of Burnouf and Lassen. The former ¹ believed that the term had no derogatory significance, but meant "one who lives on the charity of others", deriving it from *a-jīva*, "the absence of livelihood," with the addition of the suffix *-ka* and the consequent lengthening by *vṛddhi* of the initial vowel. As an alternative explanation Burnouf supported Lassen, who, on the basis of a similar etymology, believed that the word meant an ascetic who ate no living or animal food.² Neither of these interpretations is acceptable. The presence of the alternative form *Jīvaka*, attested by the lexicographers ³ and by the astrologer Vaidyanātha Dīkṣita,⁴ proves that the first syllable of the word cannot be a privative.

c14.s2.2

¹ *Le Lotus de la Bonne Loi* (2nd edn.), ii, p. 777.

c14.s2.3

² *Indische Altertumskunde* ii, p. 107, n. 2, quoted Burnouf, op. cit., loc. cit.

c14.s2.4

³ V. infra, pp. 182–83.

c14.s2.5

⁴ V. infra, pp. 184–85.

c14.s2.6

The most widely accepted theory is that the term Ājīvika or Ājīwaka is derived from the word *ājīva*. This, in Hoernle's words, means "the mode of life, or profession, of any particular class of people, whether they live as householders . . . or as religious mendicants ”. Hoernle adds that “ the word *ājīvika*, being a derivative of *ājīva*, means one who observes the mode of living appropriate to his class . . . . There is some ground for believing that Gosāla held peculiar views as to the *ājīva* of a mendicant who is truly liberated from the fetters of *karma*. It was probably for this reason that he and his adherents came to be known as *Ājīvika*, or the men who held the peculiar doctrine of *ājīva* . . . . The name ‘ Ājīvika ’, it appears, was originally meant to stigmatize Gosāla and his followers as ‘ professionals ’; though, no doubt, in later times, when it became the distinctive name of a mendicant order, it no longer carried that offensive meaning ”.¹

c14.s2.7

¹ *ERE.* i, p. 259.

c14.s2.8

Hoernle’s hypothesis requires some qualification. From the examples given above ² it is obvious that the term *ājīvika*, like *nirgrantha*, originally had a wider connotation than the organized followers of Makkhali Gosāla, and might be applied to almost any non-brāhmaṇical naked ascetic. Furthermore it is possible to suggest an alternative etymology.

c14.s2.9

² V. supra, pp. 96–98.

c14.s2.10

Admittedly religion offers a number of examples of derogatory nicknames ultimately becoming the regular titles of heterodox sects—the words “ quaker ” and “ methodist ” come immediately to mind. In this connection the story of *Paṇḍara Jātaka* may be of some significance.³ A man suffers shipwreck and is cast ashore near the port of Karambiya in a state of nudity (*nagga-bhoggo*). Like Makkhali Gosāla and Pūraṇa Kassapa in Buddhaghosa’s stories,⁴ he is mistaken for an ascetic, and is given alms. Thereupon he declares with relief: “ I’ve found a way to make a living ! ” (*Laddho me jīvik’-opāyo*). This story surely indicates that the connection between the words *ājīva* and *ājīvika* was recognized in ancient India, at least by the Ājīvikas’ opponents.

c14.s2.11

³ *Jāt.* v, pp. 75 ff.

c14.s2.12

⁴ V. supra, pp. 37, 82–83.

c14.s2.13

An alternative explanation of the term is provided in the *Dīgha Nikāya*.⁵ It is said that the Buddha met at Vesāli a certain ascetic named Kandara-masuka, who maintained seven lifelong vows. The first of these is: “ As long as I live I will be naked, and will not put on a garment ” (*Yāvaj-jīvam acelako assaṃ, na vatthaṃ paridaheyaṃ*). The second vow is one of perpetual chastity; by the third, surprisingly enough, the ascetic undertakes to beg only spirits and meat, and not to eat gruel or broth; while the last four are vows of a Jaina type, delimiting the area in the four directions beyond which he undertakes not to travel. The ascetic Kandara-masuka is regularly referred to as acela, but nowhere as ājīvika, and we have no evidence that any of his vows, with the exception of the first, were taken by the organized Ājīvika community. Nevertheless the formula yāvajjīvam, which precedes each of the seven vows, may be significant. It suggests the possibility that the word ājīvika may be derived from some such phrase as ā jīvāt, “as long as life.” This view was put forward by Kern,¹ but seems not to have been noticed by later workers in the field, perhaps because the author gave little weight to his theory, and does not appear to have provided references to back it.

c14.s2.14

⁵ *Dīgha* iii, p. 9.

c14.s2.15

¹ Der Buddhismus und seine Geschichte in Indien ii, p. 7, n. 2.

c14.s2.16

Admittedly the preposition ā has more often the force of “until” than “as long as”, but “it may denote the limit ‘to’, ‘until’, ‘as far as’, ‘from’, either including the object named or excluding it”,² and therefore this interpretation is by no means illegitimate.

c14.s2.17

² Monier Williams, Sanskrit-English Dictionary, s.v. ā.

c14.s2.18

The adjective yāvajjīvika meaning “lifelong” is to be found in the Āśvalāyana Śrauta Sūtra,³ composed at a very early period, perhaps before Gosāla’s ministry. It is significant that it is there used in reference to the duration of vows to be taken in penance for errors in sacrificial ritual. The same term, in its Prākrit form jāvajjīvāē, with the same connotation, is to be found in the Bhagavatī Sūtra.⁴ It is by no means impossible that the word ājīvika had a similar connotation with the religious community using it, and indicated the lifelong character of the vows taken by the followers of Makkhali Gosāla and by the free-lance Ājīvikas, in contrast to the temporary vows of the Buddhist saṅgha. In this case the derogatory etymology from ājīva must have been devised by the opponents of the sect, in the same manner as that in which Buddhaghosa devised derogatory etymologies for Makkhali and Pūraṇa.

c14.s2.19

³ Āśvalāyana Śrauta Sūtra iii, 14, Poona edn., p. 156. Etat saṃvatsaram vratam, yāvaj-jīvikam vā.

c14.s2.20

⁴ Bh. Sū. iii, sū. 133, fol. 286.

c14.s2.21

To this theory it may be objected that at least one Ājīvika, Upaka, is said to have given up his asceticism.¹ But this fact by no means invalidates our etymology, for even lifelong vows may be broken.

c14.s2.22

¹ V. supra, p. 95.

The Ājīvika Initiation

c14.s3.1

New members seem normally to have been inducted into the Ājīvika order after an initiation ceremony. Before the ministry of Makkhali Gosāla, among local Ājīvika groups and independent mendicants, the ceremony seems to have varied considerably from one group to another. We have already met unscrupulous men who initiated themselves into a profitable career of asceticism by the simple process of losing their clothes.² Many spurious mendicants of this type, often loosely called Ājīvikas, must have existed both before and after the days of Makkhali Gosāla. We may, however, assume that Makkhali’s organization of the loosely knit ascetics was effective in introducing some regularity into the procedure of admission to the order and initiation.

c14.s3.2

² V. supra, p. 102.

c14.s3.3

Two Pāli references give us some indication of the processes of entry into the Ājīvika mendicant fraternity. *Tittira Jātaka*³ tells of an unfortunate false ascetic (*niggatiko duṭṭha-tāpaso*), who, after a career of chicanery and fraud, is judged and executed by a lion. The tiger who prosecutes him at the lion’s court describes the prisoner in a few lines of verse of considerable interest; among other things, says the tiger, he has “burnt his hands by grasping a lump”.⁴ The commentary elucidates the phrase: “At the time of his going forth as an Ājīvika his hands were burnt by grasping a heated lump.”⁵ This seems a reliable indication that the early Ājīvika was sometimes initiated by a painful ordeal, and there are faint suggestions of the survival of the practice at a much later date.

c14.s3.4

³ iii. 536.

c14.s3.5

⁴ Hatthā daḍḍhā piṇḍapaṭiggahaṇena. Op. cit., p. 541.

c14.s3.6

⁵ Ājīvika-pabbajjam-pabbajjita-kāle uṇha-piṇḍa-paṭiggahaṇena hatth’ āpi kir’ assa daḍḍhā. Op. cit., p. 542.

c14.s3.7

In *Mahānāradakassapa Jātaka*⁶ the ascetic Guṇa is described as an “ignorant, naked, wretched, and blindly foolish Ājīvika”.⁷

c14.s3.8

⁶ Jāt. vi, pp. 219 ff.

c14.s3.9

⁷ Ajānantam nagga-bhoggam nissirikam andha-bālam Ājīvikam.

c14.s3.10

The word used in this phrase to express his nudity is nagga-bhogga, which the Pāli Text Society’s Dictionary interprets as “one whose goods are nakedness”. The term is thrice employed in the Jātakas,¹ the first and second instances describing the condition of castaways, one of whom became a false ascetic,² and the third being an epithet of Guṇa. Very similar compound adjectives are to be found in use much later than the time of the Jātakas’ composition. An inscription at Belagāmi, Mysore,³ dated A.D. 1162, catalogues the types of ascetic to whom alms were given at the Koḍiya maṭh; as well as the Jaina kṣapaṇakas and the Hindu paramahaṃsas, who seem to have been habitually naked,⁴ the visitors to the maṭh included nagna-bhagnas.⁵ The Rājatarangiṇī refers to rugṇa-nagnāṭaka ascetics, with emaciated or decayed noses, feet, and hands,⁶ who have many points in common with, and may have been, Ājīvikas. We therefore believe that the Pāli word nagga-bhogga should be read as a dvandva adjective, rather than as a bahuvrīhi, and that its second member is equivalent to the Sanskrit bhugna (“bent”), rather than bhogya (“property”); thus the meaning of the term would be not “one whose goods are nakedness”, but “one naked and crippled”. The Ājīvika initiatory ordeals may well have resulted in such mutilation and deformity as to qualify the ascetic for these titles.

c14.s3.11

¹ Jāt. iv, p. 160; v, p. 75; vi, p. 225.

c14.s3.12

² V. supra, p. 102.

c14.s3.13

³ Epi. Carn. vii, Shikarpur no. 102.

c14.s3.14

⁴ V. infra, p. 114.

c14.s3.15

⁵ Professor B. A. Saletore (Mediæval Jainism, p. 219), following Rice’s translation, believes that this word represents two classes of ascetic, the nagnas and the bhagnas. This view of the existence of similar terms in the Pāli and in the Kannada inscription cannot apply to more than a single class.

c14.s3.16

⁶ Rājatarangiṇī vii, 1092–4. V. infra, p. 206.

c14.s3.17

Another element in the Ājīvika initiation, for which there is confirmation in a later source, is described in the Dhammapada Commentary, in the story of Jambuka, to which we have already referred.⁷ The events there described ostensibly refer to the unorganized pre-Makkhali Ājīvikas, but the details of the account of Jambuka’s initiation may have been provided by Buddhaghosa, and perhaps apply to the organized community of Makkhali. Jambuka’s habits are so disgusting that his parents decide that he is not fitted for ordinary life, but only for the Ājīvikas (*Ājīvikānam esa anucchaviko*). Therefore they take him to a local group of Ājīvika ascetics, apparently while he is still a child, and request that he be initiated into their community. The boy is placed in a pit up to his neck, planks are laid over the pit, above his collar-bones, and, sitting on the planks, the Ājīvikas pull out his hair with a piece of the rib of a palm-leaf.¹ It seems that the early Ājīvikas, like the Jainas, extracted the hair by the roots, and that the custom persisted among them is attested by the Tamil text *Civañāṇa-cittiyār*.²

c14.s3.18

⁷ Dhp. Comm. ii, p. 52. V. supra, p. 97.

c14.s3.19

¹ *Gala-ppamāṇe āvāṭe thapetvā, dvinnam jattūnam upari padarāṇi datvā, tesam upari nisīditvā, tāl-aṭṭhi-khaṇḍena kese luñcimsu.*

c14.s3.20

² *CNC.* ed. Mudaliyar, p. 255. V. infra, p. 202.

c14.s3.21

Yet Gosāla Mankhaliputta is described as tearing his beard in his last delirium, and in Kumāradāsa’s *Jānakī-haraṇa* the Ājīvika’s head, like that of the orthodox Hindu ascetic, is covered with a pile of matted locks.³ The Ājīvikas depicted at Borobudur have hair (Plate II).⁴ Thus it seems that Ājīvikas were not always tonsured or clean-shaven. The extraction of the hair by the roots, like the grasping of the heated lump, was probably an ordeal intended to render the novice oblivious to physical pain, and to test his resolution, and, as with the Jainas,⁵ was not usually repeated after initiation, or was only repeated at distant intervals.

c14.s3.22

³ *Dambh’-ājīvikam uttuṅga-jaṭā-maṇḍita-mastakam Kañcin maskariṇam Sītā dadarś’ āśramam āgatam.* *Jānakīharaṇa* x, 76. V. infra, pp. 150 ff.

c14.s3.23

⁴ V. infra, p. 108.

c14.s3.24

⁵ Schubring, *Die Lehre der Jainas*, p. 159.

c14.s3.25

The other feature of Jambuka’s initiation, burial up to the neck, is mentioned in Japanese Buddhist sources as being part of the Ājīvika’s ascetic technique.⁶ The pit in which the novice was placed may have symbolized his spiritual rebirth from the womb of Mother Earth, or, since burial was not unknown in Ancient India, his “death to the world”.

c14.s3.26

⁶ V. infra, p. 112.

c14.s3.27

Two further points connected with entry into Ājīvika asceticism may here be noted. The story of Jambuka indicates that, as with the Buddhists and Jainas, novices were accepted by the Ājīvikas while still children. And the Ājīvika sixfold classification of men, as described in the *Aṅguttara Nikāya* and by Buddhaghosa, shows that women were permitted to enter the Ājīvika order, and that their status was not significantly lower than that of the male members of the sect.¹

c14.s3.28

¹ *Itthī-purisa-nānattanti vadati*. Sum. Vil. i, p. 162; Aṅg. iii, p. 38.

Ājīvika Nudity

c14.s4.1

The ascetics called Ājīvika in the Pāli texts, whether the pre-Makkhali mendicants and hermits whom we may call proto-Ājīvikas, or members of the organized Ājīvika sect, appear usually to have lived in a state of nakedness. Makkhali Gosāla and Pūraṇa Kassapa are described as completely unclothed,² and it would seem that in the early days of Ājīvikism the lesser members of the community were also habitually naked.³

c14.s4.2

² V. supra, pp. 37, 40, 83, 87.

c14.s4.3

³ V. supra, pp. 97, 102.

c14.s4.4

In later times the rule of nudity does not seem to have been so regularly followed. The *Bhagavatī Sūtra* states that on his death the corpse of Gosāla Maṅkhaliputta was arrayed in a splendid robe and bedecked with ornaments,⁴ which suggests that some form of pontifical finery was not unknown to the leaders of Ājīvikism. The *Dhammapada Commentary* seems sometimes to distinguish between the words *ājīvika* and *acelaka*,⁵ the latter of which was a term of wide connotation and was probably used to refer to any unclothed ascetic. The Ājīvikas depicted at Borobudur wear clothes,⁶ and Canarese texts confuse the Ājīvikas with yellow-robed Buddhists.⁷ There is ample evidence that wide differences of doctrine existed within the later Ājīvika community,⁸ and with some of its sub-sects, as with the Jainas, the cult of nakedness may have tended to die out at an early date.

c14.s4.5

⁴ V. supra, p. 95.

c14.s4.6

⁵ Dhm. Comm., i, 300.

c14.s4.7

⁶ V. supra, p. 96.

c14.s4.8

⁷ V. infra, pp. 203–4.

c14.s4.9

⁸ V. infra, pp. 279–280.

c14.s4.10

Pictorial and sculptural representations of Ājīvikas contribute little to our knowledge of the usual Ājīvika garb. Representations of naked ascetics occur occasionally in Buddhist art, but in most cases there is no evidence that these are Ājīvikas and not members of the Digambara Jaina order. A figure in one of the Ajaṇṭā frescos has been identified by Foucher as Pūraṇa Kassapa at the great miracle contest at Sāvatthi,⁹ and this is completely naked. Certain sculptures of the Gandhāra school, depicting the Buddha’s *parinirvāṇa*, also show a naked ascetic, who seems to be the Ājīvika in the act of informing the *bhikkhu* Mahākassapa of the great event (Plate III)¹; but a similar character in other works of the same school depicting the same subject is dressed in a garb resembling that of the orthodox Hindu ascetic.²

c14.s4.11

⁹ Foucher, *L'Art gréco-bouddhique*, vol. ii, p. 264; also *JA.*, 1909, pp. 21–3. V. supra, pp. 84 ff.

c14.s4.12

¹ Foucher, *L’Art Gréco-Bouddhique*, vol. i, pp. 568 ff. V. infra, p. 136. ² Foucher, *L’Art Gréco-Bouddhique*, vol. ii, pp. 259 ff. ³ Krom, *The Life of the Buddha*, plate 110; also *Barabuḍur*, vol. i, pp. 220–1. V. supra, p. 94. ⁴ Krom, *Barabuḍur*, vol. ii, p. 203. ⁵ Grünwedel, *Alt-Buddhistische Kultstätten*, figs. 344, 353. V. plate I. ⁶ Grünwedel, *Alt-Kutscha* ii, pp. 21–2. ⁷ Hoernle, *ERE.* i, p.

c14.s4.13

Representations of Ājīvikas exist outside India. A sculpture at Borobudur shows the encounter of the newly enlightened Buddha with Upaka the Ājīvika; Upaka is here accompanied by two fellow Ājīvikas, and all three wear a peculiar skirt-like garment and have carefully arranged hair (Plate II).³ Krom is of the opinion that no reliance can be placed on the accuracy of these figures,⁴ but it must be remembered that at the time of the building of the Borobudur *stūpa* the Javanese were in contact with Cōḷamaṇḍalam, and that Ājīvikas were to be found in that region. Therefore it is not wholly impossible that the Javanese sculptor was working from personal knowledge, or from an authentic report, of the appearance of Dravidian Ājīvikas.

c14.s4.14

Central Asian frescos show the Buddha disputing with the heretical leaders.⁵ Of the latter some are partly naked, but he whom Grünwedel identifies as Makkhali Gosāla, by virtue of his staff (Plate I, ii), is attired in the garb of the orthodox ascetic, and wears the typical *sannyāsī’s* topknot.⁶

c14.s4.15

It is generally agreed that Mahāvīra founded his order upon a looser group of ascetics, wearing clothing and by no means strict in their chastity, who looked back to the shadowy Pārśva Nātha, the twenty-third *tīrthaṅkara* of Jaina hagiology. Jainism in its later form, it is suggested, was but a development of the older proto-Jainism of Pārśva.⁷ It seems, moreover, that the early Jaina monk, although called *acela*, was not normally completely nude, but wore a loincloth⁸; while Mahāvīra himself was habitually naked, he permitted his followers to wear a minimum of covering to avoid embarrassment and the accusation of indecency. On the other hand the nudity of the Ājīvika seems usually at this period to have been total. This point has been clearly made by Hoernle,¹ who shows that in the Ājīvika sixfold classification of men² the white class (*sukk’-ābhijāti*) consisted of Ājīvikas and Ājīvinīs, while the red (*lohit’-ābhijāti*), two stages below it, contained nigaṇṭhas wearing one cloth (*eka-sāṭaka*). The complete nudity of the Ājīvika is further made clear from the description of Pūraṇa in the *Divyāvadāna*, which precludes the wearing even of a loincloth.³ Thus the Ājīvika seems to have gone further in his nudity than the early Jaina. We may assume that his motive was the same as that which inspired Mahāvīra in instituting the custom in the Jaina order, the acquisition of complete indifference to all physical sensation.⁴

c14.s4.16

²⁶⁵ Full references in Shah, *Jainism in N. India*, pp. 1–12. ⁸ *Ācārāṅga Sūtra* i, 7, 7, 1.

c14.s4.17

¹ *ERE.* i, p. 262.

c14.s4.18

² *Sum. Vil.* i, p. 162; *Aṅg.* iii, p. 383. V. infra pp. 243 ff.

c14.s4.19

³ *Purastāl lambate daśā.* *Divyāvadāna*, p. 165.

c14.s4.20

⁴ *Ācārāṅga Sūtra*, loc. cit.

c14.s4.21

If our synchronisms are correct,⁵ and if we can accept the indications given by the stories of Upaka and Jambuka,⁶ it would seem that neither Mahāvīra nor Gosāla was the originator of the cult of nudity, which must have existed before either reformer commenced his ministry. If we accept the existence of the clothed proto-Jainas we can only assume with Hoernle that Mahāvīra introduced his reform in their dress under the influence of Gosāla and the proto-Ājīvikas, adopting the latter’s views on the necessity of nakedness for salvation, but making slight concessions to public opinion and human frailty. Gosāla, in this respect more extreme than his former colleague, seems to have insisted on the maintenance of total nudity.

c14.s4.22

⁵ V. supra, p. 74.

c14.s4.23

⁶ V. supra, pp. 94. 97.

c14.s4.24

Thus, although later developments may have led to some relaxations in the rules, we may envisage the typical Ājīvika of the early period as usually completely naked, no doubt covered with dust and dirt, perhaps bent and crippled, and armed with a bamboo staff.

Ājīvika Asceticism

c14.s5.1

Whatever relaxation of discipline may have taken place in private, the early Ājīvika performed penance of the most rigorous nature in public. Significant descriptions of his asceticism occur in the Pāli texts, but in reading them it must be borne in mind that some of the penances described may not have been regularly practised by the organized followers of Makkhali Gosāla, but are rather indicative of the activities of the free-lance proto-Ājīvikas.

c14.s5.2

For instance in *Lomahaṃsa Jātaka*¹ it is stated that the Bodhisatta himself had once become an Ājīvika. Naked and solitary, he fled like a deer at the sight of men. He ate refuse, small fish, and dung. In order that his austerities should not be disturbed he took up his abode in the depths of the jungle. In winter he would leave his thicket and spend the night exposed to the bitter wind, returning to the shade as soon as the sun rose. By night he was wet with melted snow (*himodakena*), and by day with the water dripping from the branches of trees. In summer he reversed the process, and was scorched by the sun all day, while at night the thicket shielded him from the cooling breeze.

c14.s5.3

¹ *Jāt.* i, p. 390.

c14.s5.4

This account seems not to represent a typical member of the Ājīvika order, although it is possible that certain solitary hermits were loosely affiliated to it. The figure here described, however, seems to be that of a forest hermit of the most psychopathic type, and the passage is yet another example of the very loose manner in which the term Ājīvika was used in the Pāli texts. It does indicate, however, how closely the word was connected in the popular mind with extreme asceticism.

c14.s5.5

A picture of Ājīvika penances which seems more probably to apply to the regular order is contained in the prologue to *Naṅguṭṭha Jātaka*.² Here it is stated that a company of Ājīvikas was stationed behind the Jetavana at Sāvatthi, and performed false penances (*micchā-tapam*) of various types. These penances included "exerting themselves in a squatting posture" (*ukkuṭika-ppadhāna*), the bat-penance (*vagguli-vata*),³ lying on beds of thorns (*kaṇṭaka-ppasaya*), and the penance of the five fires (*pañca-tapana*). The acts of self-mortification here named seem to be those practised by Indian ascetics of all periods, but we have no reason to believe that they were not also practised by the Ājivika saṅgha. At Sāvatthi Gosāla seems to have made use of a "penance-ground", as well as the pottery in which he regularly resided.¹ It is possible that this adjoined the Jetavana, and that the Ājīvikas described in the Jataka were the train of followers with which Gosāla was usually surrounded.

c14.s5.6

² *Jāt.* i, p. 493.

c14.s5.7

³ Cowell (*The Jātaka* i, p. 307) translates this phrase on the basis of the commentary as "swinging in the air like bats".

c14.s5.8

¹ V. supra, p. 59.

c14.s5.9

The Jaina Aupapātika Sūtra contains a significant list of the types of Ājīvika mendicant.² These include dugharantariyā, who, according to Abhayadeva's commentary, were in the habit of begging food at every third house only; tigharantariyā, who begged at every fourth house; sattagharantariyā, who begged at every eighth house; uppala-beṇṭiyā, who, Abhayadeva explains, under a special vow employed lotus stalks in begging,³ and who perhaps used lotus leaves as begging receptacles; gharasamudāṇiyā, those who begged at every house; vijju-antariyā, who would not go begging when lightning was seen⁴; and finally uṭṭiyā-samaṇā, who, according to Abhayadeva, were ascetics who entered large earthen pots in order to do penance.⁵ It is difficult to provide a satisfactory alternative explanation of the last term, which seems meaningless if interpreted according to the primary meaning of uṣṭrikā (she-camel).

c14.s5.10

² Aupapātika Sūtra, s. 11. Cf. 126.

c14.s5.11

³ ... grāhyatayā bhaikṣatvena yeṣāṁ santi te ...

c14.s5.12

⁴ Vidyut satyam antaram bhikṣu-grahaṇasya yeṣām asti te vidyud-antarikāḥ. Vidyut-sampāte bhikṣāṁ n’ āṭant’ iti bhāv’-ārthaḥ. Abhayadeva to Aupapātika, loc. cit.

c14.s5.13

⁵ Uṣṭrikā mahā-mṛṇmayo bhājana-viśeṣas. Tatra praviṣṭā ye śrāmyanti tapa ... Ibid.

c14.s5.14

For the last item of the list we have partial confirmation from a Tamil source. Nacciṉārkkiṉiyar, the fourteenth century commentator on the early Tamil grammar, Tolkāppiyam, quotes as an example an unidentified verse which mentions the existence of ascetics who perform penances in tāḻi, or funerary urns.⁶ Dr. K. R. Srinivasan, who has noticed this reference,⁷ states categorically that these ascetics were Ājīvikas, who, he seems to believe, were identical with Jainas. In fact the text does not give any information on the sectarian affinities of the ascetics in question, but since we know that Ājīvikas were present in the Tamil country, and since this strange system of penance is ascribed to them in the Jaina text, we may assume that the ascetics referred to in the Tamil verse were Ājīvikas.

c14.s5.15

⁶ ... uṇṇāka

c14.s5.16

⁷ ed. Pillai i, p. 182. Ancient India ii, p. J.

c14.s5.17

The *Sthānāṅga Sūtra* gives a further list of Ājīvika ascetic practices, which are said to be severe penances, terrible penances, the abstention from liquids (*rasa*, which the commentator Abhayadeva interprets as ghee, etc.),¹ and indifference to the pleasures of the sense of taste.² Unfortunately we are given no detailed explanation of the distinction between the first and second forms of *tapas*, and the list is only of value as confirmation of the statements of other sources to the effect that, at least in public, the Ājīvikas were given to severe self-mortification.

c14.s5.18

¹ *Ghṛt-ādi-rasa-parityāgaḥ*.

c14.s5.19

² *Tapaḥ . . . uggatave, ghoratave, rasa-nijjūhaṇatā*, *Sthānāṅga* iv, 309.

c14.s5.20

The Ājīvikas' reputation for asceticism apparently reached the Far East. Chinese and Japanese Buddhist Literature classes the *Ashibikas* (i.e. Ājīvikas) with the *Nikendabtras* or Nirgranthas as practising severe penance. "They both hold that the penalty for a sinful life must sooner or later be paid and since it is impossible to escape from it it is better that it be paid as soon as possible so that the life to come may be free for enjoyment. Thus their practices were ascetic—fasting silence immovability and the burying of themselves up to the neck were their expressions of penance."³

c14.s5.21

³ *Sugiura, Hindu Logic as Preserved in China and Japan*, p. 16, quoting *Hyaku-ron So* i, 22. The passage has been noticed by Hoernle (*ERE*. i, p. 269) who, adhering to his own theory, identifies the Ashibikas with the Digambara Jainas.

c14.s5.22

That the Ājīvikas continued to practise severe asceticism at a late period is shown by one of our most recent sources, the Tamil *Civañāṉa-cittiyār*, which speaks of them as prescribing great suffering to all souls (as a necessary means of salvation).⁴

c14.s5.23

⁴ *Pār meṉ maṉṉ uyir evarriṉukkum varunta vēyaraṉkaḷ collum*. *CÑC*. ed. Mudaliyar, p. 255, v. 1.

c14.s5.24

A reference in *Tittira Jātaka*⁵ indicates that the early Ājīvikas performed secret magical rites of a repulsive tantric type. The unfortunate Ājīvika is there said by his prosecutor the tiger to have "removed blood at midnight".⁶ The commentary elucidates this cryptic phrase thus: "*Pupphakam* means blood. . . . He cut off the hands and feet of offenders against the king for his living, took them away, threw them into a room, and let the blood run out from the openings of the wounds; going there at midnight he made a heap of red rice-powder."¹ Francis and Neil, in their translation of this *Jātaka* ignore the commentary, and give:—

c14.s5.25

⁵ *Jāt*. iii, pp. 541-2. V. supra, p. 104.

c14.s5.26

⁶ *Abbhūhitaṃ pupphakaṃ aḍḍharattaṃ*.

c14.s5.27

¹ P u p p h a k a m t i lohitaṃ, idaṃ vuttaṃ hoti; iminā kira jīvikaṃ nissāya rājāparādhikānaṃ hattha-pāde chinditvā te ānetvā sālāyaṃ nipajjāpetvā vaṇa-mukhehi paggharantam lohitaṃ addharatta-samaye tattha gantvā kaṇuka-thupaṃ katvā thapitan ti. I prefer Fausböll's variant reading to that in the text, kuṇḍakadhūmam nāma datvā, which does not make good sense. It is possible that the word te in the commentary refers to the criminals themselves, in which case it seems that the Ājīvika stanched their wounds with rice-powder, but in this case a magical ceremony is also suggested.

c14.s5.28

. . . in midnight fray
wounded, he washed the blood away."²

c14.s5.29

² The Jātaka, vol. iii, p. 322.

c14.s5.30

This is a brilliantly imaginative interpretation, but is by no means consistent with the commentary. Whatever the meaning of the strange phrase in the text, the commentary indicates that the wicked Ājīvika was thought of as performing magical ceremonies. This single reference is not reliably confirmed by other sources, although a significant passage in the *Vāyu Purāṇa* also suggests that the Ājīvikas performed mysterious secret rites.³

c14.s5.31

³ V. infra, pp. 162 ff.

c14.s5.32

Whatever may have been the practices of the primitive solitary Ājīvika in *Lomahaṃsa Jātaka*,⁴ the organized Ājīvika community does not seem to have countenanced the performance of ascetic practices of the most repulsive type. The boy Jambuka, to whom we have already referred,⁵ developed a propensity to nudity and the eating of ordure at a very early age, and for this reason his parents had him initiated into the Ājīvika *saṅgha*. As he was quite satisfied by his repulsive diet he refused to go on the usual begging rounds with his fellow mendicants, who, when they learned of the disgusting behaviour of the boy in their absence, promptly expelled him from the community. The *Dhammapada* commentary gives as their motive for his expulsion the fear that the Buddhist monks might discover Jambuka's evil habits and expose the Ājīvikas to scorn and ridicule. But it seems probable that the Ājīvikas, extremists in asceticism though they were, had definite rules of ascetic conduct, and that their penances were exceeded in repulsiveness by those of some independent ascetics.

c14.s5.33

⁴ V. supra, p. 110.

c14.s5.34

⁵ V. supra, pp. 97, 105-6.

c14.s5.35

That the Ājīvikas lived in communities is clear from this and numerous other references. But it is probable that some Ājīvikas at any rate withdrew themselves from human contacts. Hoernle,¹ on the strength of Weber's paraphrase of the *Paramahaṃsa Upaniṣad*,² has pointed out the existence of two classes of mendicant among the *ekadaṇḍins*, of which the higher, or *paramahaṃsa*, abandoned his loincloth, staff, and begging bowl, and lived absolutely unimpeded by worldly possessions. Some such distinction may have existed among the Ājīvikas, who were sometimes looked upon as a species of the genus *ekadaṇḍin*.³ But we have seen that even Gosāla, although he seems to have been habitually naked, did not discard his begging bowl⁴; and the mendicants described in the *Paramahaṃsa Upaniṣad* are evidently orthodox Hindu ascetics; thus the conclusion is by no means certain.

c14.s5.36

¹ *ERE.* i, p. 260.

c14.s5.37

² *IS.* ii, pp. 174-5.

c14.s5.38

³ V. infra, pp. 169 ff.

c14.s5.39

⁴ V. supra, p. 52.

c14.s5.40

The strange Bodhisatta Ājīvika to whom reference has already been made,⁵ may be such a solitary, although it seems more probable that he was not thought of as being in any way affiliated to the order of Gosāla. A more striking indication of the existence of such solitary ascetics is to be found in the *Sūtrakṛtāṅga*, in the course of the debate between Gosāla and Adda.⁶ Gosāla attacks Mahāvīra, who, he declares, was formerly a solitary ascetic (*egantacārī samaṇe*), but is now surrounded by disciples. One or other course must be wrong. To this Adda replies that there is no sin in preaching the *dhamma* to others.⁷ Gosāla then changes the subject and maintains that, according to his doctrine, there is no sin for the *egantacārī* in drinking cold water, eating seeds, accepting food specially prepared, or in women.⁸

c14.s5.41

⁵ V. supra, p. 110.

c14.s5.42

⁶ V. supra, p. 53.

c14.s5.43

⁷ *Sū. kr.* ii, 6, vv. 1-5, fols. 388-9.

c14.s5.44

⁸ *Sīodagam sevaī bīyakāyam, āhāyakammam taha itthiyāo. Egantacāriss’ iha amha dhamme, tavassino n’ ābhisameti pāvam.* Ibid., v. 7, fol. 390.

c14.s5.45

We have here a definite indication of lonely wanderers, not gathered in communities, living according to the ascetic rules laid down by Gosāla.

c14.s5.46

The later Dravidian Ājīvikas developed the concept of Maṟkali, whom they confused with Pūraṇa, as remote, motionless, and silent—the Lord who, although he knew all things, did not speak.¹ He appeared and disappeared mysteriously, "like the rainbow, of incomprehensible form, by nature without defect, Pūraṇaṉ, famed for his perfect knowledge."² These passages suggest that the superior grade of Ājīvika monk, the leaders of the *saṅgha*, lived in almost inapproachable solitude, perhaps somewhat relaxing their ascetic discipline, and very occasionally bestowing a theophany upon the lesser members of the community. That "fasting silence and immovability" were among the ascetic practices of the Ājīvikas is confirmed by the Far Eastern sources.³ Yet our authorities speak with two voices. The consensus of the Buddhist and Jaina references seems to indicate that both Makkhali Gosāla and Pūraṇa were often surrounded by crowds of disciples, and freely conversed with their lay supporters.

c14.s5.47

¹ *Aṟintāṉ iṟaivaṉ avaṉ ākutalār ceṟintāṉ* . . . *Nīl.* v, 672.

c14.s5.48

² . . . *terivill-uruvam-* . . . *Ibid.* v, 673.

c14.s5.49

³ V. *supra*, p. 112.

c14.s5.50

THE ĀJĪVIKA *SABHĀ

c14.s5.51

It would appear that the Ājīvikas had regular places for meetings and religious ceremonies. The *Uvāsaga Dasāo*⁴ refers to an *Ājīviya-sabhā* at the town of Polāsapura. When Gosāla visited this town, attended by the *Ājīviya-saṅgha*, he went first to the *sabhā*, where he deposited his begging-bowl (*bhaṇḍaga-nikkhevaṃ kareï*), and from whence he issued, attended by only a few followers, to visit his backsliding lay disciple Saddālaputta.

c14.s5.52

⁴ V. *supra*, p. 52.

c14.s5.53

From this it is evident that, whatever may have been the habits of free-lance Ājīvika ascetics, the organized sect of Makkhali Gosāla was a religious body with a normal corporate and social life, a *saṅgha* in fact, as were the Buddhist and Jaina orders, with a regular meeting place. The use of the word *sabhā* in this connection is striking, since the term seems to imply a building of the type used for royal courts or for folk-moots of the free tribes, and is rarely used to designate a religious edifice. Of the latter usage the Pāli texts seem to present only one example.¹ The word may mean " a public rest house or hostelry ",² and it may therefore be suggested that the Ājīviya-sabhā at Polāsapura was merely a rest house for ascetics of the order. But it seems more appropriate to accept the word in its more usual meaning of " an assembly hall ". Its use suggests that the Ājīvika community employed their meeting-place not only for religious ceremonies but for secular meetings, and was tending, even at this early date, to cut itself off from other communities. In the Dravidian Deccan, at a much later period, it appears with some of the attributes of a caste,³ and it is possible that it began to develop caste characteristics very early. A closely knit corporate life, embracing monk and layman alike, may have arisen as a reaction to the opposition and scorn levelled at the community by other Indian sects, both orthodox and heretical, and the rarity of references to Ājīvikism in later Sanskrit literature may in part be due to the isolation in which the Ājīvika community existed.

First 186 of 208 passages. Read on

Linked texts (37)