Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History and Doctrines of the Ajivikas: A Vanished Indian Religion c21: Chapter XI. Ājīvika Scriptures

History and Doctrines of the Ājīvikas: A Vanished Indian Religion c21

Language
English

Contents

Chapter XI. Ājīvika Scriptures

The Mahāṇimittas, the Maggas, and the Oṇpatu-katir

c21.s1.1

The contempt in which the Ājīvikas were held by their opponents does not conceal the fact that the sect possessed a fully elaborated system of belief, and that it produced its own philosophers and logicians, uninspired though they may have been, whose works and names are unfortunately lost to us. Moreover, it seems that Ājīvika doctrine, like that of Hinduism and Buddhism, did not remain static during the two millennia of the sect's existence, but developed by a process comparable to that by which the Mahāyāna system emerged from early Buddhism.

c21.s1.2

That the Ājīvikas had a canon of sacred texts in which their doctrines were codified, is clear from several passages cited in the Pāli and Prākrit texts of Buddhism and Jainism, or by the Jaina commentators, which give the impression of being adaptations or actual quotations from these scriptures.

c21.s1.3

The Jaina version of the origin of the Ājīvika canon is given in the *Bhagavatī Sūtra*,¹ where it is said that the six *disācaras* "extracted the eightfold *Mahāṇimitta* in the *Puvvas*, with the *Maggas* making the total up to ten, after examining hundreds of opinions ", and that this was approved by Gosāla Maṅkhaliputta after brief consideration. Abhayadeva gives the names of the eight *aṅgas* of the *Mahāṇimitta* as follows :—

c21.s1.4

¹ *Bh. Sū. xv, sū. 539, fol. 658-9. V. supra, pp. 56 ff.*

c21.s1.5

1. *Divyam*, " of the Divine."
2. *Autpātam*, " of portents."
3. *Antarikṣam*, " of the sky."
4. *Bhaumam*, " of the earth."
5. *Aṅgam*, " of the body."
6. *Svāram*, " of sound."
7. *Lākṣaṇam*, " of characteristics "; and
8. *Vyāñjanam*, " of indications."

c21.s1.6

These eight *Mahānimittas* are listed in the *Sthānāṅga Sūtra*,¹ with the variation *Suviṇe* (dreams) for *Divyam*; here the commentator Abhayadeva makes it quite clear that they are systems of prognostication. The *Uttarādhyayana Sūtra*² gives a similar list, and adds that the Jaina *bhikkhu* should not live by such means. The Jaina saint Kālaya, or Kālaka is said to have learnt the *Mahānimittas* from the Ājīvikas.³ We have seen that the Ājīvika mendicant often acted as an astrologer or reader of omens,⁴ and it may be that the early scriptures of the Ājīvikas did contain considerable sections on these topics.

c21.s1.7

¹ *Sthānāṅga*, viii, 608.

c21.s1.8

² *Uttarādhyayana*, xv, 7.

c21.s1.9

³ *Pañcakalpa Cūrṇī*, teste Jain, *Life in Ancient India* . . ., p. 208.

c21.s1.10

⁴ V. supra, p. 127.

c21.s1.11

That the Jainas, despite the veto of the *Uttarādhyayana*, also employed the eightfold *Mahānimitta* is shown by Kālaka’s knowledge of it, and by an inscription at Śravaṇa Beḷgoḷa, which states that the pontiff Bhadrabāhu “knowing the eightfold *Mahānimitta*, seeing past, present, and future, foretold in Ujjayinī a calamity of twelve years’ duration”.⁵

c21.s1.12

⁵ *Epi. Carn.* ii, no. 1.

c21.s1.13

The two *Maggas* are said by Abhayadeva to have been those of song and dance.⁶ This statement, although disbelieved by Barua, may be based on accurate information, and the *Maggas* may represent texts containing Ājīvika religious songs and directions for ritual dances respectively.

c21.s1.14

⁶ V. supra, pp. 116–17.

c21.s1.15

These ten scriptures are said to have been plagiarized from the *Puvvas*. By the *Puvvas* it seems that the author of the *Bhagavatī* meant the Jaina *Pūrvas*, the earliest scriptures of the sect, which are now lost. The accusation of plagiarism, whether correct or not, is a further indication of the close connection of Ājīvikism and Jainism in origin. Hoernle makes this point strongly in his article on the Ājīvikas.⁷ Barua, on the other hand, interprets the word *puvva* in the text not in the specialized Jaina sense, but merely as “past traditions”.⁸ The commentator Abhayadeva is himself vague, and defines the *puvvas* as “certain scriptures called *Pūrvas*”.⁹ Barua’s view is perhaps strengthened by the fact that the eightfold *Mahānimitta* of the Ājīvikas bears no resemblance to the titles of the fourteen lost *Pūrvas* of the Jaina tradition.¹ The whole passage defies definitive interpretation. It indicates, however, that the Ājīvikas had scriptures at an early period, that the latter included considerable sections on divination, and that they may have had something in common with the earliest scriptures of the Jainas.

c21.s1.16

⁷ *ERE*, i, p. 261.

c21.s1.17

⁸ *JDL*. ii, p. 41.

c21.s1.18

⁹ *Pūrv’-ābhidhāna-śruta-viśeṣa*. *Bh. Sū.*, fol. 659.

c21.s1.19

¹ *Ibid.*, xxvii, 108.

c21.s1.20

The Tamil sources make it clear that the Dravidian Ājīvikas also had scriptures, which they prized very highly. The Ājīvika sage in *Maṇimēkalai* is "the knower of the Book of the Ājīvikas",² and his lecture is said to contain the essence of the teaching of this text, which is also called "the Book of Maṛkali".³ Apparently this is no mere fortune-teller’s manual, but a dissertation on the nature of the universe and the means of salvation. The Ājīvika teacher in *Nīlakēci* further gives the name of the scripture as *Oṉpatu-katir* ("The Nine Rays").⁴ It is said in the text to describe the atomic structure of the universe,⁵ and is one of the four cardinal points of the Ājīvika faith, the other three being the Lord (*Aṉṉal*), the Elements (*Poruḷ*), and their modifications (*Nikaḻvu*).⁶ Around the Ājīvika *nūl* a mythology seems to have grown. The scripture was delivered by the divine Maṛkali,⁷ who is otherwise characterized by his perfect silence. Very reasonably the Jaina interlocutor asks how, if the God is silent, he could have declared the scriptures.⁸ Besides Maṛkali two divinities, Okkali and Ōkali, are mentioned as being responsible for the diffusion of the text among men.⁹ They were probably thought to have acted as intermediaries between Maṛkali and his worshippers; in the words of the commentator Vāmaṇamuni; they instructed in the scriptures.¹⁰

c21.s1.21

² *Ibid.*, xxvii, 108.

c21.s1.22

³ *Maṛkali-nūl*. *Ibid.*, xxvii, 163.

c21.s1.23

⁴ *Nīl.*, 671.

c21.s1.24

⁵ *Ibid.*, 674.

c21.s1.25

⁶ *Ibid.*, 679. Vāmaṇamuni gives the Sanskrit equivalents of the four as *Āpta*, *Āgama*, *Padārtha*, and *Pravṛtti*.

c21.s1.26

⁷ *Ibid.*, 680.

c21.s1.27

⁸ *Ibid*, loc. cit.

c21.s1.28

⁹ *Ibid.*, 681. V. infra, pp. 272–73.

c21.s1.29

¹⁰ *Akam’-ōpatēcañ ceyyum*.

c21.s1.30

The accounts of the Ājīvika scriptures in the Jaina *Sūtra* and the Tamil poems differ considerably. In place of the eightfold *Mahānimitta* and the two *Maggas* of the former the latter gives us the *Markali-nūl* or the *Oṉpatu-katir*. It is possible that the Southern Ājīvikas produced new scriptures in the same manner as did the Mahāyāna Buddhists.

Pāli and Prākrit Quotations

c21.s2.1

Buddhist and Jaina texts and commentaries contain fragments in verse and prose which appear to be adaptations or quotations from Ājīvika sources and may indeed be paraphrases of the scriptures of the sect. The very important passage in the *Sāmañña-phala Sutta*,¹ already quoted, with its Māgadhisms and its impressive simile of the ball of thread, may well be authentic. Another such passage may be the story of the merchants in the *Bhagavatī Sūtra*,² which Gosāla is said to have told to the monk Ānanda, and which may have been borrowed by the Jaina author from an Ājīvika collection of *jātakas* or cautionary tales.

c21.s2.2

¹ V. supra, pp. 13-14.

c21.s2.3

² V. supra, p. 59.

c21.s2.4

The Pāli scriptures contain a number of verse passages praising the heretic teachers or propounding unorthodox doctrines, which may also have been taken, perhaps with some alteration, from Ājīvika sources. Thus the *Saṃyutta Nikāya* ³ contains verses in praise of the heretics, said to have been sung by various *devaputtas* in the presence of the Buddha.

c21.s2.5

³ *Sam. i*, pp. 66 ff.

c21.s2.6

The verse sung in praise of Pūraṇa Kassapa closely follows the doctrine ascribed to him in the *Sāmañña-phala Sutta*,⁴ and may be the concoction of an early Buddhist poet:

c21.s2.7

⁴ V. supra, p. 13.

c21.s2.8

“Kassapa sees neither sin nor merit for the self in this world in maiming, slaying, striking, or violence. Since he has declared our faith, the Master is worthy of honour.” ⁵

c21.s2.9

⁵ *Sam. i*, p. 66.

c21.s2.10

The verse praising Makkhali Gosāla, on the other hand, ascribes to him qualities which elsewhere in the Pāli canon he is not said to possess, and may be a genuine Ājīvika composition :

c21.s2.11

“ Self-restrained, with penance and aversion (from things of the senses), abandoning speech (and) quarrelling with mankind, equable, abstaining from things to be avoided, truthful—now surely such a man commits no sin ! ” 1

c21.s2.12

Finally, after a verse in praise of Nigaṇṭha Nātaputta, occurs one in which four heretics are praised together :

c21.s2.13

“ Pakudhaka Kātiyāna, Nigaṇṭha, and these two Makkhali and Pūraṇa, leaders of a school, versed in asceticism—surely now they are not far removed from the righteous ! ” 2

c21.s2.14

This verse, as we have seen,³ looks back to a period when the non-Buddhist heterodox sects were not sharply differentiated.

c21.s2.15

³ *V. supra*, p. 80.

c21.s2.16

The *Mahānāradakassapa Jātaka* ⁴ also contains a number of verses expressing heterodox views, which may have been taken from authentic sources. These are put into the mouth of the ascetic teacher Guṇa, who is called indiscriminately *acelaka* and *ājīvika*, and are verse paraphrases of some of the doctrines assigned in the *Sāmañña-phala Sutta* to Makkhali, Pūraṇa, and Pakudha. Similar passages may be found in *Mahābodhi Jātaka*,⁵ and in the *Petavatthu*.⁶ These verses, and the similar prose passages in the *Sāmañña-phala Sutta* seem to have had a common source, whether in prose or verse, in an authentic Ājīvika work.

c21.s2.17

⁴ *Jāt.* vi, pp. 219 ff.

c21.s2.18

⁵ *Jāt.* v, pp. 227 ff. *V. supra*, p. 18.

c21.s2.19

⁶ *Petavatthu*, iv, 3, p. 57 f. *V. supra*, pp. 20, 146, and infra, pp. 271-72.

c21.s2.20

Comparison between the expressions of Ājīvika views in Buddhist and Jaina texts shows notable similarities. Thus the *Sāmañña-phala Sutta*’s version of Makkhali’s doctrine contains the phrases : *N’atthi attakāre, n’atthi parakāre, n’atthi purisakāre, n’atthi balam, n’atthi viriyam, n’atthi purisa-thāmo, n’atthi purisa-parakkamo . . . Sabbe satta niyati-saṅgati-bhāva-pariṇatā . . .*

c21.s2.21

¹ *Tapo-jigucchāya susamvullatto, Vācam pahāya kalaham janena, Samo, savajjā-virato, saccavādi, Na hi nūna tādisam karoti pāpam.* *Sam.*, loc. cit.

c21.s2.22

² *Pakudhako Kātiyāno, Nigaṇṭho, Ye ca p’ime Makkhali-Pūraṇāse, Gaṇassa satthāro, sāmañña-pattā, Na hi nūna te sappurisehi dūre.* *Sam.*, loc. cit.

c21.s2.23

sukha-dukkham paṭisaṃvedenti.¹ With this we may compare the words of the Ājīvika deva, addressed to the Jaina layman Kuṇḍa-koliya in the Uvāsaga Dasao : N’atthi uṭṭhāṇe i vā kamme i vā bale i vā vīrie i vā purisakkāra-parakkame i vā. Niyayā savvabhāvā.² (“There is no effort nor deed (karma), nor strength, nor courage, nor human action, nor prowess. All beings are determined.”)

c21.s2.24

¹ V. supra, pp. 13-14.

c21.s2.25

² Uv. Das. vi, 166. V. supra, p. 133.

c21.s2.26

The Praśnavyākaraṇa Sūtra³ contains a passage which also suggests the text of the Sāmañña-phala Sutta. This purports to describe the doctrines of nāstikas, but some parts of it are perhaps derived from the same sources as Makkhali Gosāla’s doctrine in the Sutta. Thus, the first phase, n’atthi jīvo, na jāī iha pare vā loe, suggests the slogan of the materialist Ajita Kesakambalī, n’atthi ayaṃ loko, n’atthi paro loko.⁴ But the terms in which the Praśnavyākaraṇa speaks of the view that no merit accrues from religious activities, dāṇa-vaya-posahāṇaṃ tava-sañjama-bambha-cera-kallāṇaṃ āiyāṇaṃ n’atthi phalam, resemble Makkhali Gosāla’s na . . . sīlena vā vatena vā tapena vā brahmacariyeṇa vā in the Sāmañña-phala Sutta.⁵ The phrase in the Praśnavyākaraṇa, ammā-piyaro n’atthi na vi atthi purisakāro seems to look back to the sources which provided n’atthi mātā, n’atthi pitā⁴ in Ajita’s creed, and n’atthi purisakāre⁵ in that of Makkhali. The dialectical peculiarities of the two passages have already been noticed.⁶

c21.s2.27

³ Praśnavyākaraṇa, sū. 7, fols. 26-8.

c21.s2.28

⁴ V. supra, p. 15.

c21.s2.29

⁵ V. supra, p. 14.

c21.s2.30

⁶ V. supra, p. 15.

c21.s2.31

A further recollection of Ājīvika sources may be contained in the Mahābhārata, wherein the fatalist Maṅki declares haṭhe n’aiva pauruṣam, “there is no valour in force.”⁷ Similar complaints of the uselessness of courage and human effort (pauruṣa or puruṣakāra) may be found in the epic, for instance, in the words of Bhīma to the python in whose coils he struggles; “Who can conquer Fate by human effort (puruṣakāreṇa). I consider fate to be supreme, but human effort (pauruṣam) useless.”⁸

c21.s2.32

⁷ Mbh., xii, 177, 34 (Poona edn.). V. supra, pp. 38-39.

c21.s2.33

⁸ Vana, 176, 27. (Poona edn.). Numerous verses of similar import are to be found in the Mbh., e.g. Udyoga, 40, 30; Bhīṣma, 58, 1. (Poona edn.).

c21.s2.34

An impressive parallel to Makkhali Gosāla’s description of the cosmic process in the Sāmañña-phala Sutta is to be found in the *Bhagavatī*. Here Gosāla, after declaring his seven *pauṭṭa-parihāras* ¹ states that all those who had reached or were reaching or would reach salvation must " finish in order 8,400,000 *mahākappas*, seven divine births, seven groups, seven sentient births, seven 'abandonments of transmigration' (*pauṭṭa-parihāra*), 500,000 *kammas*, and 60,000 and 600 and the three parts of *kamma*. Then, being saved, awakened, set free, and reaching *nirvāṇa* they have made or are making or will make an end of all sorrow." ² The phrase *caūrāsītiṃ mahākappa-saya-sahassāiṃ* in this passage corresponds to the *Sāmañña-phala Sutta's cull' āsīti mahākappuno sata-sahassāni*.³ The seven " divine births " (*divve*) are perhaps represented by the *satta devā* of the Pāli, and the seven sentient births (*sanni-gabbhe* in Prākrit and *saññi-gabbhā* in Pāli) occur in both texts. The totals of *kammas* differ, but in the *Bhagavatī's* enumeration of the *kammas* and the *Sāmañña-phala Sutta's* total of chief uterine births (*yoni-pamukha*) the formulas are similar. The former has *pañca kammāni saya-sahassāiṃ, saṭṭhiṃ ca sahassāiṃ chac ca sae, tiṇni ya kammamse*, while the latter has *cuddasa kho pan' imāni yoni-pamukha-sata-sahassāni, saṭṭhiñ ca satāni, cha ca satāni, pañca ca kammuno satāni, pañca ca kammāni, tiṇi ca kammāni, kamme ca aḍḍha kamme ca*.³ The close similarity shows that both passages are garbled borrowings from a common source.

c21.s2.35

¹ V. supra, pp. 31--32.

c21.s2.36

² ... añjūhe, saṭṭhiṃ ... pacchā sijjhanti bujjhanti muccanti parinivvāinti savvadukkhānam antam karemsu vā karenti vā karissanti vā. *Bh. Sū.* xv, *sū.* 550, fol. 673. I accept Hoernle's reading of *kammāni* for *kammani* in the text (*Uv. Das.*, vol. ii, app. ii, p. 19, n. 5). India Office MS. 7447 has *kammāiṃ*.

c21.s2.37

³ V. supra, p. 14, n. 3.

c21.s2.38

Barua has recognized that the passages from the Jaina scriptures quoted above resemble that in the *Sāmañña-phala Sutta*, and on this and other evidence has declared that there existed an " Ājīvika language", in which Ājīvika texts were recited and written.⁴ As examples of this Ājīvika language he quotes :—

c21.s2.39

⁴ *JDL.* ii, pp. 46 ff.

c21.s2.40

1. The genitive singular form *mahākappuno* in the *Sāmañña-phala Sutta's* account of Makkhali's doctrine,⁵ which seems to stand in place of the genitive plural and which represents the regular Pāli mahākappassa;

c21.s2.41

⁵ V. supra, p. 14, n. 3.

c21.s2.42

2. The word supina, interpreted by Buddhaghosa as "a dream". This Barua equates with the Ardha-māgadhī suviṇa which, he says, means "a bird" (Sanskrit suparṇa). Actually this word has the same normal meaning as supina in Pāli¹;

c21.s2.43

¹ V. infra, p. 252.

c21.s2.44

3. The form hupeyya, as used in the words of the Ājīvika Upaka, "hupeyya āvuso",² which he believes was specifically an Ājīvika expression. In one version of the story the phrase occurs as huveyya pāvuso,³ from which Barua concludes that "the sounds p and v were interchangeable in the Ājīvika language"; and

c21.s2.45

² Vin. i, p. 8. V. supra, p. 94.

c21.s2.46

³ Majjh. i, p. 171.

c21.s2.47

4. The regular use of the present tense with future meaning. This Barua deduces from a single phrase placed in the mouth of Upaka in the commentary to the Sutta Nipāta, sace Chāvaṃ labhāmi jīvāmi, no ce marāmi⁴ (If I win Chāvā I shall live, if not I shall die).

c21.s2.48

⁴ Paramatthajotikā II, vol. i, p. 259.

c21.s2.49

We do not believe that these four references are sufficient to indicate that there was a special "Ājīvika language". The language of the Sāmañña-phala Sutta passage attributed to Makkhali is, however, sufficient to indicate that some of the earliest Ājīvika religious literature, whether verbal or written, was composed in a Māgadhī dialect probably very like the language of the Jainas.⁵

c21.s2.50

⁵ V. supra, pp. 24 ff.

Quotations by the Commentators

c21.s3.1

Whatever the language of early Ājīvikism, it is probable that, like the Jainas and the Buddhists, the Ājīvikas in later times adopted Sanskrit for their religious writings. Several Sanskrit verses, quoted by Jaina commentators with reference to Ājīvikism or niyativāda seem to be borrowed from such Ājīvika literature. One such verse, indeed, seems to have been specially popular with the commentators as a brief statement of the fundamental doctrine of niyativāda, for it is quoted by no less than three of them, Śīlāṅka, Jñānavimala, and Abhayadeva:

c21.s3.2

“Whatever thing, fortunate or unfortunate, is to be obtained for men will come of necessity by recourse to the power of destiny. Though beings make great effort, that which is not to be will not be, nor does that which is to be perish.” 1

c21.s3.3

In his commentary to the *Praśnavyākaraṇa Sūtra* Jñānavimala quotes further verses :—

c21.s3.4

“Some babble that the universe is produced by Fate, saying ‘Destiny is everywhere the stronger’, (as in) such (verses) as :— “ ‘For what reason does a man obtain that thing which he must obtain? Inevitable Fate! Therefore I do not grieve or despair. That (destiny) which is ours is not that of others. “ ‘Fate suddenly, bringing what is desired even from another continent, even from the midst of ocean, even from the end of (the world in any) direction, makes (it appear) before one’s face. “ ‘According to one’s destiny so is one’s intellect successful, so is one’s resolution, so are one’s companions.’ ” 2

c21.s3.5

The *niyativādins*, to whom these verses are referred by the commentator, are stated by Guṇaratna to be followers of Pūraṇa,³ the prophet of the Southern Ājīvikas; it may therefore be assumed that the verses refer to the Ājīvikas, whose doctrines they well express. Jñānavimala furnishes his commentary with many authentic quotations from orthodox Hindu sources, thus strengthening the probability that he borrowed also from actual Ājīvika works.

c21.s3.6

³ V. supra, pp. 81-82.

c21.s3.7

A further verse is given by Abhayadeva in his commentary to the Uvāsaga Dasāo, following that quoted above. The verse is cited with reference to the story of Kuṇḍakoliya and the Ājīvika deva ¹:—

c21.s3.8

¹ *Yad bhāvyam bhavati na bhāvino ’sti nāśaḥ.* Śīlāṅka to *Sū. kr*, i, 1, 2, 2, and ii, 1, 29; Jñānavimala to *Praśnavyākaraṇa*, 7; Abhayadeva to *Uv. Das.* vi, 165.

c21.s3.9

² Kecin “*niyati-bhāvitam jagad*” iti jalpanti, “*bhavitavyat’ aiva sarvatra balīyas*” *iti, yathā*: “*Prāptavyam artham labhate manuṣyaḥ. Kim kāraṇam? Daivam alaṅghaniyam.* *Tasmān na śocāmi na vismayāmi. Yad asmadīyam na hi tat pareṣām.* *Dvīpād anyasmād api, madhyād api jalanidher, diśo’ py antāt,* *Anīya jhaṭ iti ghaṭayati vidhir abhimatam abhimukhībhūtam.* *Yathā-yathā ca daivam, tathā-tathā ca buddhiḥ, tathā-tathā ca saṅkalpaḥ, tathā-tathā ca tādṛśaḥ,* *tathā-tathā ca saṅgatiḥ.*”

c21.s3.10

¹ V. supra, p. 133.

c21.s3.11

“That which is not to be comes not, that which is to be comes without effort; but it perishes, even in the palm of the hand, of one for whom it is not destined.” ²

c21.s3.12

² Na hī bhavati yan na bhāvyam, bhavati ca bhāvyam vinā 'pi yatnena. Karatala-gatam api naśyati yasya tu bhavitavyatā nāsti. Abhayadeva to Uv. Das. vi, 165.

c21.s3.13

Guṇaratna, the commentator to Haribhadra’s Ṣaddarśana-samuccaya, quotes further verses which he attributes to the niyatavādins:—

c21.s3.14

“Since all things come about in determined form, they are produced by Destiny, conformably to its nature.
“An object, the time of its existence, its origin, and its duration ³ come about in determined order. Who is able to resist it (i.e. Destiny)?” ⁴

c21.s3.15

³ This seems to be the purport of the Sanskrit, which defies literal translation.

c21.s3.16

⁴ Niyaten' aiva rūpeṇa sarve bhāvā bhavanti yat Tato niyati-jā hy ete tat-svarūp’-ānuvedhataḥ. Yad yad' aiva yato yāvat tat tad' aiva tatas tathā Niyatam jāyate nyāyāt. Ka enām bādhitum kṣamaḥ? Guṇaratna to Ṣad-darśana-samuccaya, p. 12.

c21.s3.17

Finally, Malliṣeṇa quotes a remarkable verse in his Syādvāda-mañjarī:—

c21.s3.18

“And thus say those who follow the Ājīvika school:—
“‘The knowers, the founders of the faith, having gone to the highest state, return again to existence, when the faith suffers injury.’” ⁵

c21.s3.19

⁵ Tathā c' āha “Jñānino, Gatv’, āga Syādvāda

c21.s3.20

This quotation states an important point of later Ājīvika doctrine, which is confirmed by other sources. ⁶

c21.s3.21

⁶ V. infra, p. 260.

c21.s3.22

These verses indicate that, besides their early literature in Prākrit, and the Tamil scripture Oṉpatu-katir, the Ājīvikas possessed a later literature in Sanskrit, containing much philosophical poetry. It might be suggested that these verses were composed by the commentators themselves, to illustrate the views they were discussing. Yet here are eight verses, quoted by different commentators in different centuries, and all attributed to Ājīvikas or *niyativādins*. It is more probable that some at least are genuine, than that all are spurious.

Linked texts (18)