Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History and Doctrines of the Ajivikas: A Vanished Indian Religion c17.s5: Lexicographical References

History and Doctrines of the Ājīvikas: A Vanished Indian Religion c17.s5

Language
English

Lexicographical References

c17.s5.1

Several lexicographers of the tenth to the twelfth centuries mention the Ājīvikas in the company of a motley collection of ascetics. Their citations are significant in that they indicate that the name was not forgotten, but can be accepted as evidence of the continued existence of Ājīvikas only in South India, for which much stronger evidence may be found elsewhere. Halāyudha and Yādava were southerners,¹ and had no doubt come into contact with the Tamil Ājīvikas, whom we consider in the next chapter. For Hemacandra and Ajayapāla, who wrote in Gujarāt,² we cannot suggest personal knowledge of the Ājīvikas; they probably included the word in their lists by borrowing from the Southern dictionaries, or because of its presence in Jaina literature.

c17.s5.2

¹ *History of Sanskrit Literature*, pp. 133, 478.

c17.s5.3

² *Ibid.*, 478.

c17.s5.4

The earliest surviving lexicographer, Amara, does not mention the word Ājīvika, although *maskarin* occurs in his *Kośa*,³ with the names of a few other ascetics both orthodox and heretical.

c17.s5.5

³ *Amarakośa* ii, 4 1.

c17.s5.6

Halāyudha gives two lists of unorthodox ascetics in separate verses,⁴ the first of which, including such words as *muni*, *yati*, *śvetavāsāḥ*, and *sitāmbara*, contains clothed heretical ascetics, and the second members of the naked category:—

c17.s5.7

⁴ *Abhidhāna-ratnamālā* ii, 189–190.

c17.s5.8

*Nagnāṭo digvāsāḥ kṣapaṇaḥ śramaṇaś ca jīvako jainaḥ*
*Ājīvo maladhārī nirgranthaḥ kathyate sadbhiḥ.*

c17.s5.9

"By the educated a naked wanderer is called *digvāsāḥ*, etc."

c17.s5.10

*Maskarin* is included by Halāyudha among a further group of holy men, which contains such orthodox types as *pārāśarin* and *tapasvin*.⁵

c17.s5.11

⁵ *Ibid.*, ii, 254.

c17.s5.12

Hemacandra's *Abhidhāna-cintāmaṇi* does not mention the Ājīvika, but *maskarin* is included in two verses containing the names of mendicants of more or less orthodox types.⁶ The same author's *Anekārtha-saṅgraha* gives *kṣapaṇa* as one of the several possible meanings of *Ājīvaka*.⁷

c17.s5.13

⁶ *Abhidhāna-cintāmaṇi* vv, 809–810.

c17.s5.14

⁷ *Anekārtha-saṅgraha*, ed. Zachariae, 3, 41.

c17.s5.15

Yādava's *Vaijayantī* gives the following names of naked heretics:—

c17.s5.16

*Kṣapaṇa-śramaṇau nagno nagnāṭaś ca digambaraḥ*
*Ājīvo jīvako jaino nirgrantho malavāry api.*¹

c17.s5.17

¹ *Vaijayantī*, ed. Oppert, p. 202, v. 16.

c17.s5.18

Finally Ajayapāla, probably following Hemacandra, quotes *kṣapaṇa* as one possible meaning of *jīvaka*.²

c17.s5.19

² [Missing text in source] . . v. 3.

c17.s5.20

Of these lexicographical references Hoernle notes only one, that of Halāyudha, who "enumerates a large number of names of the two Jain divisions, the Śvetāmbaras . . . and the Digambaras . . . The latter, he says, are also known as the Ājīva, which is only a shorter form of Ājīvika. . . It is evident now, from what has been said, that the terms Niggantha and Ājīvika denote the two Jaina orders which are known to us as Śvetāmbaras and Digambaras ".³

c17.s5.21

³ [Missing text in source] . . .

c17.s5.22

This appears to be an over-simplification. The verse which, according to Hoernle, enumerates the titles of Śvetāmbaras, actually includes such broad general terms as *tapasvin*, *śānta*, *muni*, and even *liṅgin*, which probably refers to a Śaivite ascetic bearing a *liṅgam*. On the other hand the next verse, giving names of naked ascetics, contains the word *śramaṇa*, a term certainly used by the Śvetāmbaras and Buddhists as well as the Digambaras, and also *nirgrantha*, which term, on Hoernle's theory, specifically denoted the Śvetāmbara, as opposed to the Ājīvika or Digambara.

c17.s5.23

We can only conclude that these verses do not contain exactly synonymous terms, but the names of various types, clothed and otherwise, who were not attached to any orthodox Hindu order, and had various characteristics in common. That the Ājīvikas shared many characteristics with the Jainas cannot reasonably be denied, but that at the time of Halāyudha they had wholly merged with the Digambaras is not established. Hoernle's theory rests on a very dubious interpretation of the relevant reference, and is quite untenable against much contrary evidence, such as that provided by the Southern Digambara sources found by K. B. Pathak,⁴ which show that, at about the same time as the lexicographers were, according to Hoernle, identifying the Ājīvikas with the Digambaras, the latter sect was confusing them with the Buddhists.

c17.s5.24

⁴ *IA.* XII, pp. 88-90. *v. infra*, pp. 203-4.

c17.s5.25

Hoernle's further suggestion, that the term *nirgrantha* implied only a Śvetāmbara Jaina, is quite unfounded. The evidence of Halāyudha¹ and Yādava,² both of whom include the *nirgrantha* in the same category as the *nagnāṭa*, should be adequate to disprove the theory. The term was obviously used for a Jaina of any type.

c17.s5.26

¹ V. supra, p. 182.

c17.s5.27

² V. supra, p. 183.

Linked texts (6)