Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History and Doctrines of the Ajivikas: A Vanished Indian Religion c23: Chapter XIII. Ājīvika Cosmology

History and Doctrines of the Ājīvikas: A Vanished Indian Religion c23

Language
English

Contents

Chapter XIII. Ājīvika Cosmology

The Categories of the Sāmañña-phala Sutta

c23.s1.1

We have shown that for the early Ājīvika all the processes of nature, including the actions of human beings, were rigidly fixed by *Niyati*. According to the inherent character of that impersonal principle the universe retained its shape and size, and new entities replaced those which passed away in rigidly determined order. The total of the contents of the universe was always absolutely the same. That this was the Ājīvika view even before the emergence of the later doctrine of *Avicalita-nityatvam* is evident from the long list of categories in the *Sāmañña-phala Sutta*.¹

c23.s1.2

¹ V. supra, p. 14.

c23.s1.3

The full significance of this remarkable list is by no means clear, but from the last sentence of the relevant passage of the *Sutta* it would appear that it is no mere catalogue of the contents of the cosmos, but a list of conditions and states, the whole range of which must be passed through before emancipation. It seems that Buddhaghosa² often did not understand the text upon which he was commenting, but merely guessed at its meaning. The accuracy of the list itself cannot be relied on, for before being written it must have been passed down by word of mouth by several generations of Buddhists who did not understand its full significance and were often careless of the accuracy of what was to them an unimportant passage. That later copyists introduced further errors seems probable, in view of the large number of variant readings quoted in the PTS. edition of the text. Nevertheless the partial accuracy of the *Sāmañña-phala Sutta’s* catalogue is confirmed by Jaina sources.³ As it is, it gives us the best available picture of the fantastic universe conceived by the early Ājīvikas. We consider the items of the list, in the order which they are given in the *Sutta*.

c23.s1.4

² *Sum. Vil.* i, pp. 161–4.

c23.s1.5

³ V. supra, pp. 218–19.

c23.s1.6

*Yoni-pamukha*. Chief sorts of womb, or birth. Of these there are 1,400,000 and 6,000 and 600, or 1,406,600 in all. This figure probably applies to the total number of species of living beings in the universe, and the final phrase of the list ("through which fool and wise alike will take their course") ¹ implies that each transmigrating soul must be reborn in each state in the course of its *saṃsāra*.

c23.s1.7

¹ *Yāni bāle ca paṇḍite ca sandhāvitvā saṃsaritvā dukkhass' antam karissanti*. V. supra, p. 14, n. 3.

c23.s1.8

*Kamma*. The classification of the *kammas* is very obscure, and the significance of the term in this context is not absolutely certain. We have seen that the place of *karma* in early Ājīvikism was taken by *Niyati*.² Yet on the lower level of truth the transmigratory chain of cause and effect does not seem to have been categorically denied. Possibly the numerous *karmas* are the ways in which an individual's behaviour can, on the *vyāvahārika* plane only, affect his future condition. On the *pāramārthika* level of truth, of course, the only effective agent is *Niyati*.

c23.s1.9

² V. supra, p. 224.

c23.s1.10

The *kammas* are divided into groups. There are five hundred, five, three, one, and one-half a *kamma*. On the first group of five hundred Buddhaghosa comments: "By mere sophistry he explains a useless heresy."³ The five are interpreted by Buddhaghosa as actions connected with the five senses, although he seems to prefer the alternative theory that the five are an appendage to the five hundred.⁴ The three, he states, are act, speech, and thought; the one is either act or word; and the half is thought. This interpretation is far from complete or satisfactory, but Buddhaghosa's explanation of the *addha-kamma* is supported by a passage in Yaśomitra's commentary to the *Abhidharma Kośa*.⁵ This implies that the Ājīvika disagrees with the Buddhist view of *kāma* as the covetous imaginings of the mind, and maintains that passions only arise from sensuous perceptions, and not from thought alone. With the Ājīvikas *kāma* was external to the man, with the Buddhists it was internal. On the Ājīvika theory, even the Buddha was liable to *kāma* with all its consequences, on looking at sense-objects. Thus thought could not be productive of such strong karmic effects as physical activity or the operation of the senses. This may account for the Ājīvika conception of the inactivity and silence of the Lord Markali,¹ and for the practice of penance in large jars,² perhaps to avoid the use of the senses, and hence the development of *kāma*.

c23.s1.11

³ *Takka-mattakena niratthakam diṭṭhim dīpeti*. Sum. Vil., loc. cit.

c23.s1.12

⁴ *Ādisu pi es' eva nayo. Keci pan' āhu pañca kammān' iti pañc'-indriya-vaseṇa bhanati*. Ibid.

c23.s1.13

⁵ *Abhidharmakośa-vyākhyā*, ed. Wogihara, vol. i, pp. 257-8. V. also De la Vallée Poussin, *L'Abhidharma-kośa de Vasubandhu*, vol. iii, pp. 7-8.

c23.s1.14

¹ V. infra, p. 276.

c23.s1.15

² V. supra, p. 111.

c23.s1.16

The *Bhagavatī Sūtra* gives different figures for the totals of *kammas*, but it confirms the Pāli source in showing that the Ājīvikas believed in a large number of these, which were divided into groups. In the *Bhagavatī* there are 500,000 *kammas*, 60,000 and 600, together with three parts of *kamma*,³ which must be worked out in order before the process of salvation is completed. Here the figures 60,000 and 600 suggest the totals of the *yoni-pamukha* in the Pāli text, and the *kamm’-amse*, or parts of a *kamma*, perhaps correspond to the act, speech, and thought of Buddhaghosa. Although our translation of *tinni ya kamm’-amse* is based on the commentator Abhayadeva,⁴ it seems possible that a second *ya* is to be understood at the end of the phrase, in which case it should be translated as three (*kammas*) and a part of a *kamma*. Thus the *kamm’-amse* of the *Bhagavatī* would represent the *addha-kamma* of the *Sāmañña-phala Sutta*.

c23.s1.17

³ *Bh. Sū.* xv, *sū.* 550, fol. 673. V. supra, p. 14, n. 3.

c23.s1.18

⁴ *Triṃś ca karma-bhedān*. Op. cit., fol. 675.

c23.s1.19

The *Sūtra* shows that, whatever the correct total of the *kammas* according to Ājīvika doctrine, they were types of action affecting the individual soul in its transmigration, which each must perform in regular order (*aṇupuvveṇaṃ khavaittā*). On the higher level of truth they were not causal factors, but from the relative viewpoint they had to be taken into account.

c23.s1.20

*Paṭipadā*. "Paths." These are sixty-two in number and are unexplained by Buddhaghosa. Rhys Davids renders the word as "modes of conduct". Perhaps it should be taken in its pregnant Buddhist sense, and signifies religious systems of conduct, of which the *majjhimā paṭipadā* of Buddhism was one. We may infer that the transmigrating soul must pass through each in the course of its pilgrimage.

c23.s1.21

*A n t a r a - k a p p a*. Lesser periods within the *kappa* or aeon. Buddhaghosa points out that there are actually sixty-four *antarakappas* to each *kappa*, whereas Makkhali allowed only sixty-two. Either Ājīvika chronometry differed in this particular from that of the Buddhists, or an error crept into the text at an early date.

c23.s1.22

*A b h i j ā t i*. Classes of men. These we have already discussed in another context.¹ The Ājīvika sixfold classification is given in full in the *Aṅguttara*, where it is ascribed to Pūraṇa Kassapa.² The *Aṅguttara* passage is borrowed, with few alterations, by Buddhaghosa.³ That the Ājīvikas divided humanity into six groups, classified according to their psychic colour, is confirmed by Tamil sources.

c23.s1.23

¹ V. supra, p. 139.

c23.s1.24

² *Aṅg.* iii, p. 383 f.

c23.s1.25

³ *Sum. Vil.* i, p. 162.

c23.s1.26

The classification of the Pāli text is as follows :—

c23.s1.27

1. Black (*kaṇha*) includes all who live by slaughter and cruelty, such as hunters, fowlers, fishermen, thieves, gaolers, and others.

c23.s1.28

2. Blue (*nīla*), contains, according to the *Aṅguttara*, “monks who live as thieves” (*kaṇḍaka-vuttikā*), together with other believers in the efficiency of works. Hare ⁴ translates this phrase as “who live as though with a thorn in their side”, on the strength of Buddhaghosa, who apparently interprets *kaṇḍaka* or *kaṇṭaka* as “thorn”, gives it the secondary sense of “impediment”, and states in a very obscure manner that the four *paccayas* of the Buddhist *bhikkhu* are implied.⁵

c23.s1.29

⁴ *Gradual Sayings*, iii, p. 273. V. supra, p. 139, n. 7.

c23.s1.30

⁵ *Te Kira catusu paccayesu kaṇṭkake pakkhipitvā khādanti. Bhikkhū ca kaṇṭaka-vuttikā ti ayaṃ hi ’ssa pāli yeva. Sum. Vil.* i, 162.

c23.s1.31

3. Red (*lohita*), *nigaṇṭhas*, who wear a single garment. The exact significance of this apparently simple phrase is far from clear, as we have already shown.⁶ It probably applies to all monks of a Jaina type.

c23.s1.32

⁶ V. supra, p. 139, with n. 6, and p. 109.

c23.s1.33

4. Green (*halidda*) are the lay disciples of the *acelakas*. This passage also has its obscurities,⁷ but seems to refer to Ājīvika laymen, who are promoted above the ascetics of other communities.

c23.s1.34

⁷ V. supra, p. 139, with n. 5.

c23.s1.35

5. White (*sukka*). *Ājīvikas* and *Ājīvinīs* (the latter called in the *Aṅguttara* *Ājīvakiniyo*). Ājīvika ascetics of both sexes.

c23.s1.36

6. Supremely White (*parama-sukka*). According to the texts, this class contains three names only, those of Nanda Vaccha, Kisa Saṅkicca, and Makkhali Gosāla.¹ We cannot believe that the class was such a small one, and suggest that it contained all the *arhants*, *tīrthaṅkaras*, or *āptas* of Ājīvika mythology.²

c23.s1.37

¹ V. supra, pp. 27 ff.

c23.s1.38

² V. infra, p. 275.

c23.s1.39

The omission of the non-Ājīvika layfolk, who did not live by killing man or beast, suggests that the list of categories is incomplete. No system could ignore such people in its classification.

c23.s1.40

The Ājīvika use of the term *abhijāti* is confirmed by the *Bhagavatī Sūtra*; here, when Gosāla declares that his body is now inhabited by the soul of Udāī,³ he states that the soul of the original Gosāla was of the white class (*sukk-abhijāie*).

c23.s1.41

³ Bh. Sū. xv, sū 550, fol. 673. V. supra, p. 31.

c23.s1.42

That the Ājīvikas classified humanity according to its spiritual colour is confirmed by *Maṇimēkalai* and *Civañāṇa-cittiyār*. The former text⁴ quotes the colours of the births (*pirappu*, equivalent to Sanskrit *abhijāti*) as follows: (1) Black (*karu*), (2) dark blue (*karu-nīla*); (3) green (*pacu*); (4) red (*cem*); (5) golden (*poṉ*), and (6), white (*veṇ*). It is further stated that those in the pure white (*kaḷi-veṇ*) category reach salvation.⁵ It may be suggested that the *poṉ* category in this list corresponds to the *sukka* of the Pāli, and the *veṇ* to *parama-sukka*. The text, however, also mentions a pure white category, the colour of salvation, and this is confirmed by the *Civañāṇa-cittiyār*, which includes “supremely white” as one of the six colours, stating that it only exists in those who are saved from *saṃsāra* (*viṭṭiṉ*), while the others are to be found on earth.⁶ It will be noted that in the *Maṇimēkalai* list green is lower in the scale than red. If we attribute the colours to the same classes as those in the Pāli list, this would place the nirgranthas above the Ājīvika laymen, and is not wholly impossible. The *Maṇimēkalai* order is that of the Jaina *leśyās*, to which the Ājīvika *abhijātis* are closely akin.

c23.s1.43

⁴ Maṇi. xxvii, 150–5.

c23.s1.44

⁵ Kaḷi-veṇ pirappir kaḷantu viṭ-aṇaikuvar.

c23.s1.45

⁶ CÑC., p. 263, v. 8.

c23.s1.46

The list of colours given in *Civañāṇa-cittiyār* seems to be without order: white (*veṇmai*), golden (*poṉmai*), red (*cemmai*), blue (*nīl*), pure white (*kaḷi-veṇmai*), and green (*paccai*).⁷ The black of the other two lists is omitted. The disorderly arrangement of the colours seems to indicate that the author of Civañāṉa-cittiyār was unaware of their full significance; apparently at this late stage of Ājīvikism the doctrine of abhijāti was becoming confused.

c23.s1.47

⁷ Ibid.

c23.s1.48

The abhijātis have much in common with the Jaina leśyās. According to this classification the six colours are: (1) black (kaṇha), (2) blue (nīla), (3) grey (kāū), (4) red (teu), (5) yellow (pamha), and (6) white (sukka).¹ All have characteristic psychic tastes and smells, and give characteristic sensations of touch. In the black class is the man of blood and violence; in the blue among others, are the envious, the deceitful, and the luxurious; in the grey are the heretic and the thief; these three are evil leśyās. The three latter leśyās contain men of good karmic character; in the red category are the well-disciplined and studious; in the yellow those men who are calm, attentive, and subdued; while in the white are men who meditate on the law and the truth with their minds at ease, and are self-controlled, even though they may not be wholly free from passion. The leśyās are conceived as substances, which may adhere to the soul for a longer or shorter time, and all living beings are subject to them,² although men only are quoted as examples.

c23.s1.49

¹ Uttarādhyāyana, xxxiv.

c23.s1.50

² Ibid., verse 47.

c23.s1.51

The Ājīvika system of spiritual colours is a general classification of humanity according to creed or occupation, while that of the Jainas classifies man’s psychic development and virtue. There can be no doubt that, as Hoernle has suggested,³ the two doctrines are connected. But it cannot be shown that their similarity indicates the dependence of Ājīvikism on Jainism, or the reverse. It seems more probable that the two systems of colour classification are derived from a common body of ideas which were widespread among ascetic groups in the days of the Buddha. Of the two the precisely defined Ājīvika abhijātis are less sophisticated and therefore probably earlier than the Jaina leśyās, the differences of which are mainly of degree, and the dependence of which on moral characteristics is more strongly stressed.

c23.s1.52

³ ERE, i, p. 262.

c23.s1.53

It may be concluded that the Ājīvika believed that the soul must transmigrate through all the abhijātis before its release from *saṃsāra*. Even the most highly developed soul must have spent part of its long existence among the basest and wickedest of mankind.

c23.s1.54

*Purisa-bhūmi*. Stages of human existence. These are said by Buddhaghosa to be eight, namely:—

c23.s1.55

1. *Manda-bhūmi* (stupid stage), the condition of the newborn infant;

c23.s1.56

2. *Khiddā-* (pleasure), the older infant who laughs and weeps without self-control;

c23.s1.57

3. *Vimamsā-* (investigation), the stage at which the child begins to walk, holding his parents’ hands;

c23.s1.58

4. *Ujugata-* (upright walking), when the child is capable of walking without help;

c23.s1.59

5. *Sekha-* (learning), when he learns arts and crafts;

c23.s1.60

6. *Samaṇa-* (monkhood);

c23.s1.61

7. *Jina-* (enlightenment), at the end of his service at the feet of a spiritual instructor; and

c23.s1.62

8. *Pañña-bhūmi*, the stage of highest cognition, when he does not speak at all.

c23.s1.63

It is doubtful whether Buddhaghosa’s interpretation of the eight stages of man is wholly correct, especially as it disregards the stage of the householder, and applies therefore only to those ascetics who abandon their homes in their youth, unless the layman is looked upon as never passing the stage of *sekha-bhūmi*. Another surprising feature of the list is the inclusion of a stage above that of *jina*, which does not here seem to connote the same degree of spiritual excellence as elsewhere. It is possible that Buddhaghosa has reversed the order of the seventh and eighth stages; but it will be remembered that other sources speak of the silence of Makkhali,¹ and the final stage of human development may have been introduced in order to establish his superiority over other leaders of the sect.

c23.s1.64

¹ V. supra, p. 52.

c23.s1.65

If Buddhaghosa had not specified the eight *purisa-bhūmiyo* it would have been logical to interpret them in its literal sense as “worlds of men”, fewer in number than the purgatories and serpent-realms also mentioned in the list, through which the transmigrating soul must pass. We cannot avoid the suspicion that the eight stages of men were devised by Buddhaghosa himself, since there is no confirmation from other sources of this Ājīvika classification of the stages of life.

c23.s1.66

*Ājīva*. This is translated by Rhys Davids, on the basis of Buddhaghosa, as "professions", of which there are 4,900. The scholiast's brief comment (*ājīva-vutti*) does not completely convince us that the term is thus used here. The Siamese version of the text gives it as *Ājīvaka*,¹ and *Ājīva* itself is a legitimate form of the word *Ājīvika*,² in the sense of an ascetic. If we accept Buddhaghosa's interpretation, the phrase must imply that the soul in its rebirths takes up 4,900 different means of earning a living; otherwise it could imply that it is born 4,900 times as an Ājīvika. The latter interpretation is supported by the Tibetan version of the text, which, according to Rockhill, gives this item as "4,900 *akelakas*" (sic).³ Barua ⁴ accepts this interpretation.

c23.s1.67

¹ Teste Rhys Davids, *Dialogues of the Buddha*, i, p. 72, n.

c23.s1.68

² V. supra, pp. 163, n. 1, 181–83.

c23.s1.69

³ *The Life of the Buddha*, p. 103.

c23.s1.70

⁴ ABORI. viii, p. 185, and n. 16.

c23.s1.71

*Paribbājaka*. Wandering mendicants, also to the number of 4,900. We do not believe that this means "sorts of mendicant", as Rhys Davids translates it, but rather that the soul will be reborn as a wandering ascetic 4,900 times in the course of its transmigration.

c23.s1.72

*Nāgāvāsa*. Of these there are again 4,900. They must be, in Buddhaghosa's words *nāga-maṇḍala*, or regions of serpents. The evidence of the Jaina sources indicates that the Ājīvikas were interested in the *nāgas* of popular religion, who played a significant part in their mythology. Thus Gosāla compares himself to a gigantic serpent, destroying those who attack him.⁵ On the last night of the Ājīvika six months' fatal penance those ascetics who yield to the ministrations of the two gods, Puṇṇabhadda and Māṇibhadda, will not be emancipated but will "do the work of serpenthood".⁶ This cryptic phrase probably means that they will be reborn as serpents in one of the *nāgāvāsas*.

c23.s1.73

⁵ V. supra, p. 59.

c23.s1.74

⁶ *Āsīvisattāe kammam pakareti*, V supra, p. 128, and infra, pp. 257 ff.

c23.s1.75

*Indriya*. Of these there are 2,000. Buddhaghosa gives no elucidation of the word, which Rhys Davids translates “ faculties ”.¹ The 2,000 must include not only the human senses, but many supernatural ones, of which the transmigrating soul was thought to make use in the course of its long pilgrimage.

c23.s1.76

¹ *Dialogues of the Buddha*, i, p. 72.

c23.s1.77

*Niraya*. These, 3,000 in number, are certainly purgatories.

c23.s1.78

*Rajo-dhātu*. Of these there are only thirty-six. They are interpreted by Buddhaghosa as “ places covered with dust, such as shelves and foot-rests ”,² an explanation accepted by Rhys Davids for want of a better. Barua translates as “ celestial, mundane, or passionate grades ”,³ without comment or explanation. Franke suggests the possibility of some connection between this phrase and the *rajo guṇa* of Sāṅkhya philosophy.⁴ The Vedic meaning of the word *rajas*, “ atmosphere,” must not be forgotten as a possible interpretation. The most probable meaning of the phrase seems to us to be “ elements of impurity ”, or perhaps “ of passion ”.

c23.s1.79

² *Dīgha-nikāya*, iii, 7, 1, 1, “... th’-ādīni. Sum. Vil. i, p. 163.

c23.s1.80

³ [Text obscured]

c23.s1.81

⁴ [Text obscured]

c23.s1.82

The three following categories, of which each of which there are seven members only, are best considered together. They are :—

c23.s1.83

*Saññi-gabbha*, according to Buddhaghosa types of sentient birth, such as camels, oxen, etc. ;

c23.s1.84

*Asaññi-gabbha*, types of unconscious birth, such as rice, barley, wheat, etc. ; and

c23.s1.85

*Nigaṇṭhi-gabbha*, types of birth from knots, as examples of which Buddhaghosa gives the sugar-cane, the bamboo, and the reed.⁵

c23.s1.86

⁵ [Text obscured] dayo. *Sum. Vil.*, loc. cit.

c23.s1.87

We can feel no confidence in Buddhaghosa’s explanation of these three items. First in the catalogue of Ājīvika categories occurs the item, “ 1,406,000 *yoni-pamukha*,” which seem to be chief sorts of birth. On this interpretation the twenty-one classes of birth above are but a drop in the ocean of the *yoni-pamukha*, and seem quite unworthy of being placed in a category of their own. To this it might be objected that the *yoni-pamukha* represent species, while the seven members of each of the three above classes are genera. The three categories are followed by those of *deva*, *mānusa*, and *pesāca*, and it is therefore not impossible that this section of the list is an enumeration of the chief types of each category of living being, all of which are included in the *yoni-pamukha* at the head of the list. Thus the seven *saññi-gabbha* might well be divided in some such way as human, mammal, bird, reptile, fish, insect, and worm, and the seven *asaññi-gabbha* in a similar way. But Buddhaghosa must surely have been mistaken in his interpretation of the *niganthi-gabbhā*; we cannot believe that the larger grasses played so great a part in the Ājīvika scheme that they required a category to themselves. We would tentatively suggest that the *niganthi-gabbhā* were "those not bound", not in this case members of the Nirgrantha sect, but beings not so closely tied to gross matter as are mortals.¹ Thus the category of *niganthi-gabbhā* would link with the *devā* who follow, and correspond to the *satta sañjūhe* of the *Bhagavatī Sūtra* list, which we consider in the following paragraph. We believe that the *niganthi-gabbhā* were seven types of demigod, *yakṣa*, *apsaras*, etc.

c23.s1.88

¹ This interpretation is partially confirmed by the Tibetan version, which gives "seven modes of existence as asuras" in place of the *niganthi-gabbhā* of the Pāli, which appears as "49,000 of the nirgrantha species (of mendicant)". Rockhill, op. cit., pp. 103-4.

c23.s1.89

The *Bhagavatī Sūtra* throws some further light on these obscure categories, and must modify our interpretation. Here Gosāla is said to have maintained that before its final release the soul must pass through seven divine (births), seven *sañjūhe*, and seven conscious births, using for the latter the same phrase as the Pāli text, *sanni-gabbhe*.² The first group of seven is interpreted by the commentator Abhayadeva as existences as a god, the second as existences in the seven *samyūthas* or groups (of demigod), and the third as human existences. These lives, as Gosāla himself explains later in the *Sūtra*, will all be lived at intervals by the soul nearing salvation.³

c23.s1.90

² *Satta divve, satta sañjūhe, satta sannigabbhe*. *Bh. Sū.* xv, sū. 550, fol. 673.

c23.s1.91

³ *Sapta divyān, devabhāvān; . . . sapta samyūthān, nikāyaviśeṣān; . . . (sapta) sañjñi-garbhān, manuṣya-garbha-vasatiḥ; ete ca tan-matena mokṣa-gāminām sapta-śantarā bhavanti, vakṣyati c' aiv' aitān svayam eva*. Abhayadeva to *Bh. Sū.*, fol. 675.

c23.s1.92

These groups of seven births occur at the end of the soul's long cosmic journey of 8,400,000 *mahākappas'* duration. The text of the *Bhagavatī Sūtra* gives a list of the last fourteen births, as follows:—

c23.s1.93

1. In the *Uvarille Māṇase* or upper Māṇasa heaven, as a god ;
2. The first conscious birth (*saṇṇi-gabbhe*) ;
3. In the middle (*Majjhile*) Māṇasa ;
4. Second conscious birth ;
5. In the lower (*Heṭṭhile*) Māṇasa ;
6. Third conscious birth ;
7. In the upper Superior Māṇusa (*Māṇusuttare*) ;
8. Fourth conscious birth ;
9. In the middle Māṇusuttara ;
10. Fifth conscious birth ;
11. In the lower Māṇusuttara ;
12. Sixth conscious birth ;
13. In the heaven of Bambhaloga, or of Brahma, where the soul resides for the duration of ten divine *sāgarovama* periods ; and finally
14. The seventh and last conscious birth, at the end of which the soul performs the seven reanimations (*paüṭṭa-parihāra*),¹ and finally passes to *nirvāṇa* after the penance of the “Pure Drink”.²

c23.s1.94

¹ V. supra, pp. 30 ff.

c23.s1.95

² V. supra, pp. 127 ff.

c23.s1.96

It will be seen that the names of the Ājīvika heavens are not the same as those of the Jainas,³ except for Bambhaloga. The difference in the names of the three higher heavens and those of the lower, *Māṇusuttara* and *Māṇasa*, is unexpected, and is probably the result of the error of an early scribe.⁴

c23.s1.97

³ Saudharma, Īśāna, Sanatkumāra, Māhendra, Brahmaloka, Lāntaka, Mahāśukra, Sahasrāra, Ānata, Prāṇata, Araṇa, and Acyuta, in rising order of excellence.

c23.s1.98

⁴ This is reads *Māṇas’-ottara*. *Bh. Sū.* comm., fol. 676.

c23.s1.99

It seems probable that the seven *saññi-gabbhā* of the Pāli list are the same as those of the *Bhagavatī*; on the analogy of the latter text’s account of the heavenly births it is also probable that each of the “sentient births” was in a different state or condition. The *Bhagavatī* list makes no mention of the *asaññi-gabbhā* of the Pāli, but it is possible that the latter’s *nigaṇṭhi-gabbhā* represent the *Bhagavatī*’s seven *sañjūhe*. The latter term is also used with each of the *Māṇasas* and *Māṇusuttaras* in the second *Bhagavatī* list,⁵ and in this context is interpreted by Abhayadeva as "a god of a special class".¹ The wording of the first list (satta divve, satta sañjūhe, satta sannigabbhe), however, indicates that the seven sañjūhe were thought of as distinct from the divve, or divine births in the Mānasas and Māṇusuttaras.

c23.s1.100

⁵ *Uvarille Māṇase Sañjūhe deve ūvavajjati*, etc. *Bh. Sū.*, loc. cit.

c23.s1.101

¹ *Nikāya-viśeṣe deve*. Abhayadeva to above, fol. 676.

c23.s1.102

*D e v a*, of which there are seven. Buddhaghosa takes this term as meaning gods, and naïvely states that there is in fact a very large number of gods, thus stressing the Ājīvika’s ignorance. The word should surely be interpreted adjectivally, as equivalent to the Sanskrit *daiva*, corresponding to the *satta divve* of the *Bhagavatī* list. These are the seven divine births in the Mānasa and Māṇusuttara heavens.

c23.s1.103

*M ā n u s a*. These are also seven. Buddhaghosa accepted this word literally, and noted that the total number of men was not seven, but infinite. Were it not for the equivalence of the *Bhagavatī’s* *sanni-gabbhe* and of the *saññi-gabbhā* of the Pāli, it might be suggested that the seven *mānusa* were the last seven human births of the soul. It is also possible that they are connected with the *paüṭṭa-parihāras*, and represent the seven human bodies which the soul reanimates in its last existence, but these are better represented by the *paṭuvā* below. We have already seen that, according to the *Bhagavatī Sūtra* the Ājīvika heavens were called *mānasa* and *māṇusuttara*. It is possible that *mānusa* in the Pāli list is an error, and that the term should be *mānasa*, the seven heavens which the soul inhabits in its last seven divine births. It will be recalled that the confusion of *mānasa* and *māṇusa* occurs in the Prākrit text itself.

c23.s1.104

*P e s ā c a*. Again seven. Both the readings *pisāca* and *pesāca*² occur, of which Buddhaghosa accepts the former, and contents himself with stating that the total of goblins is in fact very large. We believe that the word is adjectival, and refers to seven births as *pisācas* or goblins, which the soul must experience before its release from *saṃsāra*.

c23.s1.105

² *Sum. Vil.* i, p. 164, n. 4. *Dīgha* i, p. 54, n. 2.

c23.s1.106

*S a r a*. Interpreted by Buddhaghosa as "great lakes" (*mahā-sarā*) of which he gives the names: Kaṇṇamuṇḍa, Rathakāra, Anotatta, Sīhappapāta, Tiyaggaḷa, Mucalinda, and Kuṇāladaha. It will be noted that the term used for the Ājīvika heavens, *mānasa*, may also mean "a lake", and that the Ājīvika system of chronometry also knew a period called a sara, of which 300,000 constituted a mahākappa.¹ But possibly Buddhaghosa’s explanation is correct, and these are seven great lakes, in each of which the soul becomes a denizen before the end of its journey. The names given by Buddhaghosa are those of the seven lakes of Himavant according to Buddhist geography.² It is not impossible that the Ājīvikas had a similar classification.

c23.s1.107

¹ V. infra, p. 253.

c23.s1.108

² PTS. Dictionary, s.v. sara.

c23.s1.109

P a ṭ u v ā. Of these, according to the Sutta, there are seven and seven hundred. The word is not translated by Rhys Davids, who admits that he does not know its meaning. While it is given in this form in the Dīgha, Buddhaghosa reads pacuṭā,³ and there are several variants, such as pamuṭā, pamucā, and papuṭā.⁴ Buddhaghosa equates the word with gaṇṭhika, a knot or block, a very improbable meaning. The text of the Sutta gives the total of the paṭuvās, like those of the two following categories, as seven and seven hundred. In the case of the two latter, Buddhaghosa interpreted the seven as being of major and the seven hundred of minor rank, but his commentary makes no reference to seven hundred pacuṭā. We therefore conclude that the text on which he worked gave the total of these as seven only, on the analogy of the previous categories. We believe that the paṭuvā actually represent the seven paüṭṭa-parihāra of the Bhagavatī.⁵ Succeeding generations of scribes, ignorant of the true meaning of the term, might easily corrupt the first element of the Prākrit term into the forms given above.

c23.s1.110

³ Sum. Vil. i, p. 164.

c23.s1.111

⁴ Sum. Vil. i, p. 164, n. 7.

c23.s1.112

⁵ V. supra, p: 31.

c23.s1.113

P a p ā t a. Precipices, seven and seven hundred in number. Perhaps these are falls from a higher to a lower state of being.

c23.s1.114

S u p i n a. This word Barua has identified with the Sanskrit suparṇa, a divine bird,⁶ but we cannot agree. Supina, in Pāli, like suviṇa in Ardha-māgadhī, must be equivalent to the Sanskrit svapna, and mean dream. We can only suggest that the seven and seven hundred supinā are dreams of great psychic significance, supposed to occur just before the final emancipation of the soul.

c23.s1.115

⁶ V. supra, p. 220.

c23.s1.116

M a h ā k a p p a. Great aeons, of which the number is 8,400,000. Through these, and all the preceding categories, fool and wise alike must travel before they " make an end of sorrow ". The same total of *mahākappas* is given in the *Bhagavatī Sūtra*, where it is stated that they and the other categories must all be duly passed before release from transmigration, when the souls accomplish their journey (*sijjhanti*), are enlightened (*bujjhanti*) set free (*muccanti*), and finally emancipated (*parinivvānti*), making an end of all sorrows.¹ These terms may give us some idea of the Ājīvika conception of final bliss, but it must be noted that with some later Ājīvikas even the state of *nirvāṇa* does not seem to have been looked upon as final.²

c23.s1.117

¹ *Bh. Sū. xv, sū. 550, fol. 673.*

c23.s1.118

² *V. infra, pp. 257 ff.*

c23.s1.119

The verb in the final clause of the above passage in the *Bhagavatī* is quoted in its past, present, and future forms.³ This indicates that the Ājīvika cosmos contained many more *mahākappas* even than the enormous figure quoted, and that at any time a soul might complete its 8,400,000 aeons of *saṃsāra* and attain *nirvāṇa*. These *mahākappas* are not the total of universal time, but merely the aeons through which each soul must pass in order to gain salvation.

c23.s1.120

³ *Savva-dukkhass' antam karemsu vā karenti vā karissanti vā. Bh. Sū., loc. cit.*

c23.s1.121

The *Bhagavatī Sūtra* gives an estimate of the duration of a *mahākappa*, which shows that Ājīvika chronometric speculations were even wider in conception and more awe inspiring than those of other Indian schools, all of which seemed to delight in imagining fantastically long periods of time. After expounding his doctrine of transmigration Gosāla is purported to have said that according to his system the bed of the Ganges was 250 *yojanas* in length, half a *yojana* in width and 500 *dhanus* in depth. Seven *gaṅgās* equal one *mahāgaṅgā*; seven *mahāgaṅgās* equal one *sāḍīṇagaṅgā*; seven *sāḍīṇagaṅgās*, one *maccugaṅgā*; seven *maccugaṅgās*, one *lohiyagaṅgā*; seven *lohiyagaṅgās*, one *āvatīgaṅgā*; and seven *āvatīgaṅgās* equal one *paramāvatī*. The latter therefore equals seven to the seventh power or 117,649 *gaṅgās*. If one grain of sand were removed every hundred years from the bed of this imaginary river the total time required for the removal of all the sand would be one *sara*. 300,000 *saras* of this duration equal one *mahākappa*, and even here Ājīvika chronometry does not stop. Gosāla concludes by stating that 8,400,000 *mahākappas*, the period of the transmigration of a soul, are called one *mahāmāṇasa*.¹

c23.s1.122

¹ *Bh. Sū.*, loc. cit. The text used by Hoernle seems to have differed somewhat in its terminology from the Bombay edition. The commentator Abhayadeva appears to have confused the *sara* with the *māṇasa* heaven, and the *mahāmāṇasa* period with the heaven called *māṇusuttara* (v. supra, p. 250). He believed that the soul would spend *sara* and *mahāmāṇasa* periods in the *māṇasas* and *māṇusuttaras* respectively (to *Bh. Sū.*, fol. 676). The text of the *Bhagavatī* may thus be interpreted as meaning that the last births are excluded from the *mahākappa*, or that the *sara* are to be excluded, and the soul must pass through a number of types of deed outside the period of the *mahākappa*. It is clearly the intention of the text. The commentator's view, however, that the categories are of different types, and refer to the soul in their cosmic locations, all within the *mahākappa*, is probably correct.

c23.s1.123

Buddhaghosa gives another account of the *mahākappa*, according to which its duration seems comparatively modest; a *mahākappa* is the time taken to exhaust a great lake seven times, by removing one drop of water every hundred years.² This definition agrees with that of the *Bhagavatī* in so far as it introduces a lake (*sara*) into the calculations. But here the *mahākappa* consists of only seven *sara*, in place of the 300,000 of the *Bhagavatī*.

c23.s1.124

² *Sum. P.*, i, p. 102.

c23.s1.125

Beside the system of Mahākalpas, the *Bhagavatī Sūtra* also indicates that the Ājīvikas maintained a doctrine of cosmic progress and decay, similar to that of the Jainas, since Gosāla is referred to as the twenty-fourth *tīrthaṅkara* of the Avarsarpiṇī age, or aeon of decline.³ As his status would thus correspond exactly with that of Mahāvīra in Jainism, the suspicion cannot be avoided that the passage is a Jaina interpolation, although, in view of the close connection between the two sects, it is not impossible that it represents authentic Ājīvika teaching.

c23.s1.126

³ V. supra, p. 68.

The Eight Last Things

c23.s2.1

A few further categories are mentioned in the *Bhagavatī Sūtra*, but do not occur in the Buddhist texts. These include the four *pāṇagāim* and the four *apāṇagāim*, the eight *carimāim*, and the six *anaikkamaṇijjāim*. The two former are rules governing the conduct of the ascetic in his last penance, and have already been dealt with.¹ The eight *carimāim* have also been treated in another context,² and require little further attention.

c23.s2.2

¹ V. supra, pp. 127 ff.

c23.s2.3

² V. supra, p. 68.

c23.s2.4

The ultimates or finalities are stated by the *Bhagavatī* to be connected with the last life on earth of the migrant soul, and to herald its final release.³ As Hoernle realized, they are based on the actions of Gosāla in his delirium and on events which occurred at about the time of his death. The *Sūtra* declares that they were laid down by Gosāla to excuse his own objectionable conduct, to which Abhayadeva adds that he declared that there was no sin in these actions since they were inevitable at the death of a *jina*.⁴ The first four items of the list, the last drink, song, dance, and greeting, are evidently related to the behaviour of the dying *tīrthaṅkara*; the following three, the storm cloud, the sprinkling elephant, and the battle with large stones, are portentous events which herald his *nirvāṇa*; while the eighth and last is the *tīrthaṅkara* himself. No information about these eight finalities, as part of the Ājīvika creed, occurs in other sources. They have no philosophical value, but are probably a mere list of omens, borrowed from the popular traditions of the less instructed members of the Ājīvika sect.

c23.s2.5

³ Bh. Sū. xv, sū. 554, fol. 679.

c23.s2.6

⁴ Etāni ca kila nirvāṇa-kāle jinasy’ āvaśyam-bhavin’ iti n’ asty eteṣu doṣaḥ, fol. 684.

The Six Inevitables

c23.s3.1

Another Ājīvika doctrine of little apparent importance, and naïve in its simplicity and triteness, is that of the six inevitables (*anaïkkamaṇijjāim*). These six factors, inevitably accompanying all existence, are said to have been declared by Gosāla immediately after he and the six *disācaras* had codified the Ājīvika scriptures,⁵ and, if we accept the *Bhagavatī Sūtra*’s definition of them, say little for the profundity of those works. The six are: gain (*lābhaṃ*), loss (*alābhaṃ*), joy (*suhaṃ*), sorrow (*dukkhaṃ*), life (*jīviyaṃ*), and death (*maraṇaṃ*).

c23.s3.2

⁵ V. supra, p. 56.

c23.s3.3

It does not seem likely that these six were very important. Some of the Dravidian Ājīvikas, following the doctrine ascribed in the Dīgha to Pakudha Kaccāyana, certainly classed joy, sorrow, and life as atomic, together with the four material atoms.¹ We read nothing of a sixfold classification elsewhere. The nearest approach to such a classification occurs in the Civāñāṇa-cittiyār, wherein Fate (ūli) is said to produce wealth (pēru), poverty (ilavu), obstacles (i.e. misfortunes, iṭaiyūru), joy (inpam), separation (pirivu), dwelling in one place (irukkai), travel (vēr’ oru nāṭṭir cēral), old age (mūppu), and death (cātal).² These categories resemble those of the Bhagavatī Sūtra, but contain additions. We may infer that they derive from the same source as the anatikramaṇīyas of the Prākrit text; this may have been an Ājīvika hymn or popular poem, for the anatikramaṇīyas seem to possess no profound metaphysical significance.

c23.s3.4

¹ V. infra, pp. 262 ff.

c23.s3.5

² CÑC., p. 265, v. 9.

Other Ājīvika Categories

c23.s4.1

The Tibetan version of the Sāmañña-phala Sutta categories, according to Rockhill’s translation,³ differs somewhat from the Pāli. The list contains seven senses (sañjña), seven modes of existence as asuras, seven and seven hundred “kinds of writing”, seven and seven hundred “proofs”, 49,000 “of the garuḍa species”, ten “kinds of ranks”, and eight mahāpuruṣas. Of these the asura existences replace the nigaṇṭhi-gabbhā of the Pāli, which in Rockhill’s version become 49,000 of the nirgrantha species. It is possible that the obscure paṭuvā of the Pāli list are represented by the Tibetan “kinds of writing” or “proofs”, but neither of these is helpful in the elucidation of the Pāli term. The mahāpuruṣas evidently represent the purisa-bhūmiyo of the Pāli, which do not occur in the Tibetan list. The Tibetan totals sometimes differ from the Pāli, as does the order in which the items occur. The list seems to be even more corrupt than the Pāli version, and throws little fresh light upon it.

c23.s4.2

³ The Life of the Buddha, pp. 103-4.

c23.s4.3

A probable recollection of the Ājīvika list of categories is contained in Jiṇapaha Sūri’s Vihīmaggapavā.⁴ After the passage already quoted,⁵ mentioning Ājīvika begging practices, the text reads: “(According to) Gosāla’s instructions there are forty-nine times (*kālā*), beside which they declare 2,600 further (times), time by time.”¹ This fleeting reference appears to recall some of the contents of the original Ājīvika list, but *kālas* are not included in any versions known to us; *Nīlakēci* explicitly states that the Ājīvika does not recognize the category of time.² But the figure forty-nine occurs in the Pāli list, and the enumeration of the times is also suggestive of it. We can only conclude that Jiṇapaha Sūri had obtained a very fragmentary and garbled knowledge of the Ājīvika’s fantastic system of cosmological classification.

c23.s4.4

⁴ Weber, Verzeichniss, vol. ii, p. 870.

c23.s4.5

⁵ V. supra, p. 54, n. 4.

c23.s4.6

¹ *Gosāl’-āṇunnam . . . egūṇavannāsā kālā havanti; tad uvari sesāṇi chavvīsaṃ sayāṇi ekkekkeṇa kāleṇa vaccanti.*

c23.s4.7

² V. supra, p. 236.

Maṇḍala-mokṣa

c23.s5.1

Time for the Ājīvika seems to have been infinite, containing an incalculable number of *mahāmāṇasa* periods. But the time spent by the soul during its passage through *saṃsāra* was finite, and limited to one *mahāmāṇasa*, or 8,400,000 *mahākappas*. “*Saṃsāra* is measured as with a bushel, with its joy and sorrow and its appointed end.”³ The soul passes through *saṃsāra*, and, after being reborn in many forms and conditions, and in various regions of the universe in regular and rigidly unalterable order; after passing seven times from one human body to another without dying; and after performing the suicidal penance of six months’ duration, it may reach the state of bliss beyond *saṃsāra*. It would seem, from an obscure passage in the *Bhagavatī*, that souls were sometimes fated by Niyati to reach the very threshold of the blessed state, only to fall and resume their wanderings through the cosmos. In the description of the final penance it is stated that on the last night of the ascetic’s life the gods Punnabhadda and Māṇibhadda descend and caress his limbs with their cool hands; if he resists or ignores their attentions he will be released from *saṃsāra*, his body consumed by spontaneous combustion; if he submits to them, he will “further the work of serpenthood” (*āsīvisattāe kammam pakareti*).⁴

c23.s5.2

³ V. supra, p. 14.

c23.s5.3

⁴ Bh. Sū. xv, sū. 554, fol. 680. V. supra, p. 128.

c23.s5.4

On the subjective and everyday level of truth this ordeal is the last test of the ascetic's resolution. On the brink of death from thirst and starvation he must resist the divine ministrants, and still maintain his stern self-control. Otherwise his life of penance and asceticism will have been fruitless, and he will be reborn in one of the 4,900 worlds of nāgas. This is the only interpretation which we can place upon the strange phrase of the Sūtra.

c23.s5.5

From the ultimate and absolute point of view the decision whether or not to resist the caresses of the devas is not in the ascetic's hands. His rebirth as a serpent, or his salvation, are determined by Niyati. The passage suggests that, within the period of 8,400,000 mahākappas during which it passed through saṃsāra, the soul was thought to be destined to perform several cycles in regular order, passing through the rigidly fixed series of births, only at the last moment to yield to the devas, fall back, and repeat the dreary process. At the very end of its destined span it would resist, and be freed from birth and death.

c23.s5.6

Thus by the dispensation of Niyati the ultimate salvation of all souls was assured, and thus the gloomy reaches of Gosāla's cosmos were lighted by a faint gleam of optimism. This has been stressed by Barua, anxious to present his "Pre-Buddhistie Indian Philosophers" in the most favourable light possible.¹ But the doctrine that all beings reach ultimate and inevitable perfection raises certain awkward questions, which must have occurred both to the friends and the opponents of Ājīvika fatalism. If all souls are ultimately removed from the material universe of saṃsāra what becomes of that universe? Either it remains uninhabited, or it is absorbed in some sort of pralaya, or new souls must be continually coming into being to replace those entering nirvāṇa. Again, if the period of the soul's existence in the universe is 8,400,000 mahākappas, a time unconscionably long, but certainly not infinite, the soul's existence must have had a beginning. Either at the beginning of its course in the cosmos it was created out of absolute nothingness, or it was in some way injected into the universe from the ground or substratum underlying space and time, to which it returns on its nirvāṇa.

c23.s5.7

¹ Pre-Buddhistie Indian Philosophy, pp. 316-17.

c23.s5.8

Such problems as these were tackled by Hindu, Buddhist, and Jaina theologians, and, we may infer, by the Ājīvikas also. While we have little direct evidence that such questions were ever posed by the Ājīvikas, a new doctrine indicates that they did arise in the Ājīvika community, and were solved to the sect's satisfaction. The new doctrine is that called in *Nilakēci Maṇḍala-mokṣa*, or cyclic salvation. It appears to have emerged some time after the death of Gosāla, and to have been held especially by the Dravidian Ājīvikas.

c23.s5.9

It is first mentioned in the *Sūtrakṛtāṅga*: "It is said by some that the sinless soul is pure, but will again become sinful through pleasure and hatred. He who here has been a restrained monk afterwards becomes sinless. As pure water free from defilement becomes again defiled (so does he again become sinful)." ¹

c23.s5.10

¹ *Suddhe apāvae āyā iham egesim āhiyam*

c23.s5.11

On these verses Śīlāṅka comments that the Trairāśika followers of Gosāla are meant.² He interprets the verses as meaning that the blessed souls in a state of *mokṣa* are still conscious of the affairs of the world. They are liable to feel triumph and joy at the victories of the faith, and anger and hatred when it is in danger. Hence they again fall back into *saṃsāra*.³ Hoernle believed that the verses referred to the Jaina *arhants* from the Ājīvika point of view.⁴ This seems certainly to be a false interpretation, for other sources explicitly state a doctrine of *maṇḍala-mokṣa*, to which this verse and Śīlāṅka’s commentary closely correspond.

c23.s5.12

² *V. supra*, pp 175 ff.

c23.s5.13

³ *c’ ōpalabhya . . .* Śīlāṅka, to *Sū. Kr.*, loc. cit.

c23.s5.14

⁴ *ERE.* i, p. 264.

c23.s5.15

It is thus clear that for some Ājīvika schools at any rate, *nirvāṇa* was not the end. Sin penetrated even beyond the bounds of the universe, and was still liable to drag back the emancipated soul for another round of 8,400,000 *mahākappas* in *saṃsāra*.

c23.s5.16

This doctrine is not elsewhere mentioned in the Pāli or Jaina Prākrit texts, and seems to have loomed large in the minds of the earlier Ājīvikas. But it became an important feature of the doctrines of the Dravidian sect, and is referred to by two of our three main Tamil sources.

c23.s5.17

*Puṇo kiḍḍā padoṣeṇam so tattha avarajjhaï.*
*Iha saṃvuḍe muṇī jāe pacchā hoï apāvae,*
*Viyaḍ-ambu jahā bhujjo nīrayam sarayam tahā.*

c23.s5.18

Sū. kr. i, 1, 3, 11–12, fol. 45.

c23.s5.19

*Nilakēci* states explicitly that the doctrine of *maṇḍala*, the return of souls from the highest bliss, was devised in face of the objections we have suggested above to the older Ājīvika cosmic theories. In a given place there is a limited number (of souls), and so by devising (the doctrine of) *maṇḍala* the Ājīvikas remove objections, bringing back (the saved souls).¹ The elliptical verse is much expanded by the commentator Vāmanamuni, who makes it clear that the Ājīvikas postulated the doctrine to allow for the continuity of the universe. But for that purpose, he continues, it is quite unnecessary, for the number of *jīvas* or living souls in the universe is infinitely infinite (*anantānantam*), and no subtraction from the total can make it less than infinity. The Jaina commentator’s logic is sound, but we have no confirmation that the Ājīvikas did actually believe that the number of souls in the universe was infinite. The sharply defined and classified nature of the Ājīvika cosmos, and the Ājīvika predilection for very high numbers, suggest that the total number of souls in the universe was considered to be finite, as the Jaina commentator’s insistence on the infinity of souls also indicates.

c23.s5.20

¹ *En tanai-y ākki-y iṭavakai-y uṭ poruḷ īru colli maṇṭalam ākki maruttuṇ koṇarum. Nil. v. 716.*

c23.s5.21

*Civañāṇa-cittiyār* contains what seems to be a further refinement of the same doctrine. There are two classes of *arhant*, called *maṇṭalar* (Skt. *maṇḍala*) and *cempōtakar* (Skt. *sambodhaka*), of whom the former return to earth and reveal the scriptures.² This theory would seem to be that mentioned in the verse quoted by Malliṣeṇa, in which the Ājīvika *tīrthaṅkaras* are said to return to earth when the religion is in danger.³ The doctrine may be that implied in Buddhaghosa’s classification of the seventh and eighth of the stages of man, wherein the *jina-bhūmi* is below the *pañña-bhūmi*, whose occupants do not speak at all.⁴

c23.s5.22

² *Civañāṇa-cittiyār*, *parapakkam*, *Ājīvaka-cittāntam*, v. 7; varu-pāṉmaiyar ivar *Civañāṇa-cittiyār*, *parapakkam*, *Ājīvaka-cittāntam*, p. 269, v. 2.

c23.s5.23

Thus the Ājīvikas seem to have developed from the doctrine of *maṇḍala-mokṣa* the tenet that the great teachers of the faith performed from time to time an *avatāra* in order to restore the true scriptures and the pure doctrine. The Ājīvika *nirvāṇa* seems to have been far less rarefied than that of the other sects. Here too *Niyati* held sway, and would from time to time drive souls back to the universe in order to restore the prescribed total of souls in *saṃsāra*. But according to *Civañāṇa-cittiyār* some of the liberated souls had somehow become free of the liability to return. They were the *sambodhaka*, beings completely outside the universe, whose status in this respect resembles that of the Jaina *tīrthaṅkaras*. The *maṇḍalar*, on the other hand, remind us of the Vaiṣṇavite *avatāras*, and the Mahāyāna Buddhist *bodhisattvas*.

c23.s5.24

Our picture is by no means complete, but it shows that the Ājīvika *nirvāṇa* differed from that conceived by more orthodox sects. The supreme state of bliss did not entirely transcend the affairs of the world, and was still subject to *Niyati*. It was in fact little different from the other sects' conception of the highest heaven. This fact may throw light on the surprising statement of Śīlāṅka, who, writing surely with full knowledge of the Jaina attacks on Ājīvika antinomianism and immorality, states in his commentary to the *Sūtrakṛtāṅga* that the followers of Gosāla are called Vainayikas ¹; these, he declares elsewhere, desire the attainment of salvation in heaven, from good conduct alone.² The phrase *svarga-mokṣa* perhaps indicates that the Jaina looked on the Ājīvika *nirvāṇa* as comparable to his own heaven. It will be remembered that both the *Aupapātika Sūtra* and the Jaina commentator Mādhavacandra promise the Ājīvika ascetic an abode in the highest Jaina heaven of Acyuta-kalpa.³ This seems to indicate that the Jaina metaphysicians believed that the state which the Ājīvikas fondly imagined to be the highest was actually a lower and less rarefied paradise. The same view appears to have been held by Buddhaghosa, who states that *brāhmaṇas*, *tāpasas*, *paribbājakas*, and Ājīvikas held the heavens of Brahma-loka, Abhassarā, Subhakiṇhā, and Anantamānasa respectively to be the highest state (*niṭṭhā*). Buddhaghosa adds that all these ascetics believed to be complete emancipation what in fact was only arahat-ship.⁴

c23.s5.25

¹ V. supra, pp. 174 ff.

c23.s5.26

² *Vainayikā vinayād eva kevalāt svarga-mokṣ’-āvāptim abhilasanto mithyā-dṛṣṭayo*. Introduction to *Sū. kr.* i, 12, fol. 208.

c23.s5.27

³ V. supra, pp. 140, 204.

c23.s5.28

⁴ *Brāhmaṇānaṃ hi Brahmaloko niṭṭhā, tāpasānaṃ Abhassarā, paribbājakānaṃ Subhakiṇhā, Ājīvikānaṃ Anantamānaso . . . Sabbe vā c’ete arahattam eva niṭṭhā ti vadanti*. *Papañca Sūdanī*, to *Majjh.* ii, vol. ii, pp. 9–10.

Linked texts (13)