Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History and Doctrines of the Ajivikas: A Vanished Indian Religion c21.s1: The Mahāṇimittas, the Maggas, and the Oṇpatu-katir

History and Doctrines of the Ājīvikas: A Vanished Indian Religion c21.s1

Language
English

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.

Linked texts (6)