Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Obscure Religious Cults as Background of Bengali Literature c9: Chapter III: The General Religious Outlook of the Sahajiyās

Obscure Religious Cults as Background of Bengali Literature c9

Language
English

Contents

Chapter III: The General Religious Outlook of the Sahajiyās

c9.1

THE GENERAL RELIGIOUS OUTLOOK OF THE SAHAJIYĀS

(i) Salient features of the religion preached in the Buddhist Dohās and Songs

c9.s1.1

Buddhist Dohās and Songs

(A) The Spirit of Protest and Criticism

c9.s1.t1.1

The poets of the Sahajiyā school laid their whole emphasis on their protest against the formalities of life and religion. Truth is something which can never be found through mere austere practices of discipline; neither can it be realised through much reading, philosophising, fasting, bathing, constructing images and painting the gods and goddesses; it is only to be intuited within in the most unconventional way through initiation in the Tattva and the practice of yoga. This process of yoga is the most natural process for a man; for in the nature of man hunger and sex are recognised by all to be the most primitive and fundamental propensities; and all religions would prescribe strict rules for their suppression; but that is a way, say these Yogins, which is absolutely unnatural. The continual suppression of natural propensities only makes a man morbid and neurotic, but never helps him in realising the truth. The Sahajiyās would never prescribe any unnatural strain on human nature, but would take human nature itself as the best help for realising the truth. It is for this reason that this path has always been described as the easiest and most natural. It will be totally wrong to suppose that the question of moral discipline was in any way less emphasised in the Sahajiyā school (barring the cases of abuses and aberrations) than in the other schools of religion; but the difference of the view-point of the Sahajiyās from that of other schools lies in the fact that while the other schools recommend the total annihilation of the sexual impulse, the Sahajiyās would recommend the transformation and sublimation of them. The question of annihilation is regarded by the Sahajiyās as unnatural and impossible, and therefore, the wisest way is the way of transformation and sublimation.¹

c9.s1.t1.2

¹ For further discussion on the point see *infra*.

c9.s1.t1.3

Thus the name Sahaja-yāna is doubly significant: it is Sahaja-yāna because its aim is to realise the ultimate innate nature (*Sahaja*) of the self as well as of the Dharmas, and it is Sahaja-yāna also because of the fact that instead of suppressing and thereby inflicting undue strain on the human nature it makes man realise the truth in the most natural way, *i.e.*, by following the path along which the human nature itself leads him. In the *Sampuṭikā* it has been said that this supreme process of yoga is eternal,—it originates from our sex-passions; our sex-passions are part and parcel of our nature and our nature is never transgressible,—it is, therefore, wise to transform these sex-passions in the yogic process for realising the truth.² What is natural is the easiest; and thus Sahaja, from its primary meaning of being natural, acquires this secondary meaning of being easy, straight or plain. In a song Śānti-pāda says that truth is purely of a self-intuited nature, there cannot be any speculation as to its transcendental nature;—those who have trodden the straight path have been able to reach the other shore.³ Śānti-pāda warns the foolish beginners against missing this straight path (*uju-vāṭa*),—it is called by him the royal road (*rāja-patha*) for attaining perfection. Again Saraha-pāda says in a song,—"O Yogins, do not leave off this straight and easy path and follow the crooked and curved path;—bodhi lies near you,—do not go to Laṅkā (Ceylon) in search of it. Do not take the glass (*dāpaṇa*) to see the bracelets in your hands,—realise your own pure *citta* for yourself (and within yourself). ¹ If the Sahaja or the Bodhi-citta can once be realised, everything is attained,—and so there remains no more necessity for the muttering of the mantras, or of penances, fire-sacrifices, Maṇḍala (circle) or the other rites in the Maṇḍala; the Sahaja or the Bodhi-citta in the form of Mahā-sukha is the Mantra, penance, sacrifice, circle (*maṇḍala*) and everything belonging to the circle.²

c9.s1.t1.4

² Cf. *asau hi bhagavān yogaḥ sthira-śāśvata-paramaḥ | manmathataḥ pratyutpannaḥ (sadā caiva) svabhāvo duratikramaḥ* || *Sampuṭikā*, MS. p. 7 (B).

c9.s1.t1.5

³ *saa samveaṇa sarua viāreṃ alakkha-lakkha na jāi | je je ujūvāṭe gelā anāvāṭā bhailā soi* || Song No. 15.

c9.s1.t1.6

¹ *uju re uju chāḍi mā lehu re baṅka |* *niaḍi bohi mā jāhu re lāṅka ||* *hāthera kāṅkaṇa mā leu dāpaṇa |* *apaṇe apā bujhatu niamaṇa ||* Song No. 32.

c9.s1.t1.7

² *na mantra-jāpo na tapo na homo na maṇḍalayam na ca maṇḍalaṁ ca |* *sa mantra-jāpaḥ sa tapaḥ sa homaḥ sa maṇḍalayam tan maṇḍalaṁ ca ||*

(B) Aversion to recondite scholarship

c9.s1.t2.1

Thus we see that the Sahajiyās were averse to the elaborate formalities of religion and concentrated their whole attention on the attainment of the blissful ultimate nature as the highest truth, for which attainment they took help of the natural propensities of man. Deepest was their hatred towards those recondite scholars who would try to know the truth through discursive reason. Tillo-pāda (and also Saraha-pāda) says that the truth which can fully be realised only by the self, can never be known by the scholars,—for, what comes within the scope of our mind, can never be the absolute truth.¹ Kanha-pāda also says that the scholars who generally depend on their reason and scholarship, are indifferent to (or rather ignorant of) the true path of religion.² Saraha says,—Those who go on reciting and explaining, cannot know the truth, it is not only unknown, but also unknowable to them.³ Those who do not drink eagerly (to their heart's content) the nectar of the instructions of the Guru, die of thirst like fools deceived by the mirage of the desert.⁴ Scholars explain the scriptures, but do not know of the Buddha who is residing in their own body; by such scholarship they can never escape the cycle of coming and going,—yet those shameless creatures think themselves to be Pundits.⁵ Saraha regrets that the whole world is checked in its course of progress by mere thought-constructions of discursive reason,—by the mere functions of the citta,—but the acitta which transcends the function of the mind is not sung by any one.⁶ The world is rather sick of scholarship,—none is illiterate here,—but Saraha says, all scholarship will be upset when one will attain that state which transcends all letters (i.e., scholarship).⁷ People pride themselves that the secret of the great truth has long been in their keeping,—but Kānha says that even out of crores of people rarely does one become absorbed in perfectly pure truth.¹ They read the Āgamas, the Vedas and the Purāṇas and are always proud of their knowledge,—but they are like bees hovering round the ripe marmelos fruits.² As the bees outside go on humming at the mere smell of the marmelos fruit but can never break into the hard kernel and have the taste of the fruit thereby,—so also all the scholars boast of their knowledge of the truth, but they can have only a very faint smell of the truth from outside, but can never break into it and have a direct perception of it. Sahaja is something supreme, declares Kāṇha to all,—but the Pundits read and hear the scriptures and the Āgamas, and know absolutely nothing.

c9.s1.t2.2

¹ *saa-samuccaṇa tatta-phala tilapāa bhaṇanti |* *(jo maṇa-goara paiṭṭhai so paramattha ṇa honti || )* Dohākoṣa. Dr. P.C. Bagchi's Edition, No. 9.

c9.s1.t2.3

² *yo mana-goara so udāsa ||* Song No. 7.

c9.s1.t2.4

³ *are putto vojjhu rasa-rasaṇa susaṇṭhia avejja |* *vakkhāṇa paḍhantehi jagahi ṇa jāṇiu sojjha ||* Dohākoṣa of Saraha-pāda. (Dr. P.C. Bagchi's Edition).

c9.s1.t2.5

⁴ Ibid., p. 27.

c9.s1.t2.6

⁵ *paṇḍia saala sattha vakkhāṇai |* *dehahim buddha vasanta ṇa jāṇai ||* *avaṇā-gamaṇa ṇa teṇa vikhaṇḍia |* *tovi ṇilajja bhaṇai haum paṇḍia ||* Ibid.

c9.s1.t2.7

⁶ Ibid.

c9.s1.t2.8

⁷ *akkhara-vādhā saala jagu ṇāhi ṇirakkhara koi |* *tāva se akkhara gholia jāva ṇirakkhara hoi ||*

c9.s1.t2.9

¹ loaha gavva samuvvahai hauṃ paramatthe pavīṇa | koḍiha majjheṃ ekku jai hoi nirañjana liṇa || Dohā No.

c9.s1.t2.10

² āgama-vea-purāṇeṃ paṇḍia māṇa vahanti | pakka siriphale alia jima vāheria bhamanti ||

c9.s1.t2.11

(C) Scathing Criticism of the Formalities of Life and Religion

c9.s1.t2.12

The formal rules and regulations of religion were also severely criticised by the Sahajiyās. The most penetrating and scathing criticism was made by Saraha-pāda in his Dohākoṣa. His first revolt is against the orthodox system of the fourfold division of colours (caturvarṇa) placing the Brahmins at the top. Saraha says that the Brahmins as a caste cannot reasonably be recognised to be the highest of men,—for the saying that they dropped from the mouth of Brahmā is a myth invented by a section of clever and cunning people; if, on the other hand, a man becomes Brahmin by religious initiations (saṃskāra), then even the lowest of men may be a Brahmin. If a man becomes a Brahmin by reciting the Vedas, let the people of the lower classes also recite the Vedas and they will also become Brahmins; and they also do read the Vedas, for, they read grammar which contains many words of the Vedas. The Brahmins take earth, water, *kuśa* grass and recite Mantras and perform fire-sacrifices in their houses,—in vain do they offer ghee to the fire, for thereby their eyes will only be affected with intense smoke.¹ They become holders of single-fold or of three-fold sacred threads,—but this is of no avail unless truth is realised. Deceived is the whole world by false illusion,—none does know the all-excelling truth where both religion and non-religion become one. The devotees of the Lord (*Īśvara*), again, anoint the whole body with ashes, wear matted hair on the head, sit within the house and light lamps and ring bells seated in a corner; they take a yogic posture (*āsana*) with their eyes fixed; they whisper (religious doctrines) into the ears (of credulous people) and deceive them thereby.² The widows, the Muṇḍis (women taking the vow of fasting for the whole month)³ and others taking different vows, get themselves initiated by these devotees who do it only in greed of money (*dakṣiṇā*). Against the Jaina Kṣapaṇaka-yogins it is said that they keep long nails, put on a pale air, become naked and shave the head; but by all these they merely lead themselves astray and never attain perfection. “If only the naked attain liberation, the dog and the fox would also attain it; if liberation is attained by tearing off of hairs, the hips of young women would also attain it; if liberation can be attained by merely putting on the feathers of the

c9.s1.t2.13

¹ > *kajje virahia huavaha homem* |

c9.s1.t2.14

² > *airiehim uddulia cchāre* |

c9.s1.t2.15

³ > *muṇḍi'ti māsiko-pavāsiki yā* -Com.

c9.s1.t2.16

*akkhi uhāvia kaḍuem dhumem* ||
Dohākoṣa of Saraha-pāda (Dr. P. C. Bagchi's Edition).

c9.s1.t2.17

*sīsasu vāhia-e jaḍabhārem* ||
*gharahī vaisī divā jāli* |
*koṇahim vaisī ghaṇḍā cālī* ||
*akkhi ṇivesī āsana vandhi* |
*kaṇṇehim khusukhusāi jaṇa dhandhi* || Ibid.

c9.s1.t2.18

peacock, then the peacock and the deer should themselves attain liberation; if the eating of grass ensure liberation, why should not elephants and horses be liberated? ”¹ The Cellas, the Bhikṣus and the Sthaviras (i.e., the elders)² take the vow of *pravrajyā* (i.e., renouncing the world and going away in search of truth); some of them are lost in explaining the Sūtras, some again in strenuous thinking and reading. Others again rush into the Mahāyāna fold,—but none of them get at the ultimate truth. The Lord (Buddha) has prescribed ways according to the capacities of his disciples, but can one attain liberation only by meditation?³ What will one do with lamps, offerings, Mantras and services,—what is the good of going to holy places or to the hermitage?—can liberation be attained only by bathing in holy waters? Tear off all these irrational ties of superstition, drive away all doubt, —no mokṣa (liberation) can be compared with Sahaja,—and all kinds of liberation are included in Sahaja. Sahaja is what is read, what is gauged, what is explained in the scriptures and the Purāṇas. Saraha says, “ The world is bound to existence by all kinds of nonsense,—the childish Yogins like the Tīrthikas and others can never find out their own nature; they lead the life of *Pravrajyā* without knowing the truth at all. One has no need of Tantra or Mantra, or of the images or the Dhāraṇīs—all these are causes of confusion. In vain does one try to attain Mokṣa by meditation,⁴—by meditation one will only be entangled in snares. Through self-conceit

c9.s1.t2.19

² The commentary explains cella as *daśa-śikṣā-padi*, bhikṣu as *koṭi-śikṣā-padi* and sthavira as *daśa-varṣo-papannah*.

c9.s1.t2.20

³ *mokkha ki labbhai jjhāṇa-(pa)viṭṭho |* Ibid.

c9.s1.t2.21

⁴ This *jhāna* (i.e., *dhyāna*) seems to refer to the system of meditation as promulgated in the scholastic texts like the *Visuddhi-magga*, etc.

c9.s1.t2.22

1 *jai ṇaggā via hoi mutti tā suṇaha siālaha |*
*lomupāḍaṇeṃ atthi siddhi ta juvai ṇiamvaha |*
*picchigahaṇe diṭṭha mokkha (tā moraha camaraha) |*
*uccheṃ bhoaṇeṃ hoi jāṇa tā kariha turaṅgaha |*
Ibid.

c9.s1.t2.23

the truth is never perceived,—but the blame is often put wrongly on the *yānas* (i.e., the ways or schools for attaining *bodhi*). All are hypnotised by the system of the *jhānas* (meditation), but none cares to realise his own self.¹ This is the truth which Saraha preaches,—never does he care for any Tantra or Mantra.²

c9.s1.t2.24

¹ *ahimāṇa-doseṃ ṇa lakkhiu tattva |* *teṇa dūsai saala jāṇu so datta ||* *jhāneṃ mohia saala vi loa |* *nia svahāva ṇau lakkhai koa ||* *Saraha's Dohākoṣa.*

c9.s1.t2.25

² *evā maṇe muṇi saraheṃ gāhiu |* *tanta manta ṇau ekkavi cāhiu ||* *Ibid.*

c9.s1.t2.26

Lui-pā says in a song,—“ Of what consequence are all the processes of meditation? Inspite of them you have to die in weal and woe. Take leave of all the elaborate practices of Yogic *bandha* (control) and false hope for the deceptive supernatural gifts, and accept the side of Śūnyatā to be your own.”³ “ Of what use are Mantras, Tantras and the explanation of the different kinds of meditation?”⁴ Kanha-pāda says in another place that the Sahaja Ḍombī⁵ sells the loom (*tanti*) and bamboo-baskets⁶ (as is the general custom with the women of the Ḍoma classes). The word (*tanti*) which is derived from the Sanskrit word (*tantri*) suggests the net-work of the false mental construction which, again, can very well be compared to the loom, the only business of which is to weave; and the basket, referred to here, is symbolic of the superstitious mental complexes. Kānha-pāda explains elsewhere that conventional practices and the outward garment do not really make a man a Kāpālika Yogin. A real Kāpālika is he who shakes off all conventionalism and realises the great bliss of the nature of the Bodhi-citta (kaṃ mahā-sukhaṃ saṃvṛti-bodhi-cittaṃ pālayati'ti kāpālikaḥ—com). The Yogin Kānha says that his nerves are fully under his control and the ḍamaru of the spontaneous sound¹ is rising tremendously. Kānha, the Kāpālika Yogin, is engaged in his yogic practices and is roaming about in the city of his body in a non-dual form.² The āli and the kāli³, i.e., the principles of all kinds of duality are made the bell and the anklets; and the sun and the moon (i.e., Upāya and Prajñā) have been made the ear-rings.⁴ The poet has burnt into ashes all his passions, hatred and false attachment and is rubbing his body with the ashes therefrom; he is wearing the pearl-necklace of final salvation. Again, for his Tāntric Sādhanā, which requires a female companion, the poet has the Sahaja-damsel as his female consort. The Yogin says that he has killed the mother-in-law of breath (sāsu)⁵, and done away with the sister-in-law (naṇanda) of his consort, which is the senses,⁶ and has also put to death his mother (*māa*) of illusion (*māyā*),¹ and thus Kāṇha has become a real Kāpālika.²

c9.s1.t2.27

³ Song No. 1.

c9.s1.t2.28

⁴ *kinto mante kinto tante kinto re jhāṇa-bakhāne |* Song No. 34.

c9.s1.t2.29

⁵ The conception of the Ḍombī or Sahaja-damsel will be explained later on.

c9.s1.t2.30

⁶ *tānti bikaṇaya ḍomvī avara nā cāmgeḍā |*

c9.s1.t2.31

¹ The text has anahā ḍamaru. The word anahā refers to the anāhata (literally, unobstructed; spontaneous) sound. It is held in the texts on Yoga that when all the senses are shut up and the nerves controlled and the breath suspended through a yogic process, there arises a spontaneous sound within, which is known as the anāhata dhvani. For this theory of sound see Introduction to Tāntric Buddhism by the present writer. Beating of the drums is one of the customs of many sects of Yogins and ascetics.

c9.s1.t2.32

² To roam about in different localities, generally in forests, lonely out-skirts of villages and in cremation grounds is a custom with the Kāpālika Yogins.

c9.s1.t2.33

³ For a detailed discussion on the meaning of the pair of words āli and kāli see infra and also Introduction to Tāntric Buddhism by the present writer.

c9.s1.t2.34

⁴ Some sects of Yogins bear bells, anklets, ear-rings and such other ornaments

c9.s1.t2.35

⁵ There is a pun on the word sāsu here which may be associated with both Sk. śvaśrū (=the mother-in-law) and with Sk. śvāsa (=breath).

c9.s1.t2.36

⁶ Again there is a pun on the word naṇanda which may mean the sister-in-law of a woman, or it may mean that which gives pleasure, i.e., the senses.

c9.s1.t2.37

It is interesting to note here that the Jaina Apabhraṃśa Dohās which seem historically to synchronise with the Buddhist songs and Dohās, are also strikingly similar in spirit as well as in form to the Buddhist songs and Dohās. The spirit is well exemplified in the collection of Dohās called *Pāhuḍa-dohā* of Muni Rāma-siṃha (1000 A.D.).³ There it is said,—"O the Pundit of Pundits, you are leaving aside the grains of corn and gathering husk instead. You are satisfied with the scriptures and their meaning, but O ye foolish people—you know nothing about the ultimate meaning of the world. Those who are proud of their knowledge of bombastic words do not know the *raison d'être* of things and like a Ḍoma of a very low origin is always at the mercy of others. O fools, what is the utility of reading much? A single flame of real knowledge is sufficient to burn within a moment all virtue and vice. Everyone is impatiently eager to be a perfect man,—but

c9.s1.t2.38

Similar spirit found in the Jaina Dohās.

c9.s1.t2.39

1 The word used is *māa* which may be associated with both the words *matā* (mother) and *māyā* (illusion).

c9.s1.t2.40

2 *nāḍi śakti diḍha dharia khaṭṭe |* *aṇahā ḍamaru bājai vīranāde ||* *kāhṇa kapāli yogī paiṭho acāre |* *deha naarī biharai ekākāreṃ ||* *āli kāli ghaṇṭā neura caraṇe |* *ravi-śasi kuṇḍala kiu ābharaṇe ||* *rāga deṣa moha lāiu chāra |* *parama mokha lavae muttāhāra ||* *māria sāsu naṇanda ghare śāli |* *māa māria kāhṇa bhaia kavāli ||* Song No. 11

c9.s1.t2.41

3 "As verses from this work are quoted by Hemacandra who wrote about 1000 A.D., and as it quotes verses from *Sāvaya-dhamma-dohā* which was composed about 933 A.D., the present work may be taken to have been produced about 1000 A.D." Preface to the *Pāhuḍa-dohā* by the editor of the text, Hiralal Jain. Ambādāsa Gavare Digambara Jaina Granthamālā, No. 3.

c9.s1.t2.42

perfection can be attained only through the purity of heart.¹ Much has been read, but foolishness has not been removed,—only the throat has been parched into the bargain. Read a single letter through which alone you may be able to go to the city of supreme goodness.² Caught up in the meshes of the six systems of philosophy the mind finds no way of getting rid of illusion. The one God is divided in six ways in the six systems, and hence none attains Mokṣa or liberation through them.³ What can one do with the letters which will shortly die with the times? That is, O fool, called Mokṣa by which a man becomes changeless (*anakkharu*).⁴ What good can the reading of books render to a man whose mind is not pure? Even the hunter, when hunting a deer bows his head down before the deer (for throwing his arrow). (The idea is that actions have no objective value in the religious sphere,—the value is always subjective). You are getting emaciated by reading books of many kinds,—but even now you have no access to the mystery of coming and going.”⁵

c9.s1.t2.43

¹ Pāhuḍa-dohā, verses (85-88).

c9.s1.t2.44

² Ibid., verse 97.

c9.s1.t2.45

³ Ibid., verse 116.

c9.s1.t2.46

⁴ kim kijjai bahu akkharaham je kālim khau jamti | jema anakkharu samtu muṇi tava vaḍha mokkhu kahaṃti || Ibid., verse 124.

c9.s1.t2.47

⁵ Ibid., verses 146, 173.

c9.s1.t2.48

About going on pilgrimage or wandering in forests and on mountains it is said,—“Prevent this elephant of the mind from going to the mountain of Vindhya,—for it will trample under feet the forest of Śīla (*i e.*, good conduct of discipline) and once more fall into the pitfall of the world. There are stone-images in the temples, water in the sacred places and poetry in the books; all these will but be fuel to the fire (of decay). Of no avail is travelling from one sacred place to another; for the body may be cleansed with water, but what about the mind? When the body is being washed with water, the mind is being made dirty with the filth of sin, which cannot be washed away with water.¹ What may penances do when there is impurity within? Hold fast your mind to the Nirañjana (the Stainless One) and only thereby will the stains of the mind be blotted out. Liberation can be attained only if the mind, stained with worldliness, be fixed on Nirañjana,—the Mantras and the Tantras are of no use.² The Jinas say,—‘Worship and worship;’ but if the self residing within one's own body be once realised in its ultimate nature, who else remains to be worshipped?'³

c9.s1.t2.49

¹ *Ibid.*, Verses 155, 161-163, 178.

c9.s1.t2.50

² *Ibid.*, Verses 61, 62, 205.

c9.s1.t2.51

³ *vamdahu vamdahu jiṇu bhaṇai ko vamdau hali itthu | niyadehāhaṃ vasamlayahaṃ jai jāṇiu paramatthu* || *Ibid.*, Veres 41.

c9.s1.t2.52

Again, it is said about people who are particular about their religious garb.—“The snake shakes off its slough, but its poison is not destroyed thereby. Putting on of religious dress can never remove the internal desire for worldly enjoyment. O, you, the head of all the shaven-headed,—you have indeed got your head shaven,—but you have not got your heart free from worldly desires;—he who has shaven his heart, *i.e.*, has made his heart free from desires, has indeed done away with this world of bondage.”⁴

c9.s1.t2.53

⁴ *Ibid.*, Verses, 15, 135. Also *Cf.* Verse 154.

c9.s1.t2.54

The above will give us an idea of the spirit of Indian literature during the proto-vernacular period and the earliest period of the vernaculars. This spirit of heterodoxy and criticism that characterises the Buddhist and the Jaina songs and Dohās is a very noteworthy phenomenon in the history of the vernacular literatures of India; for, here we find the inception of a new type of literature, which grew abundantly in many parts of India during the mediaeval period, and the type is not extinct even in modern times. This type of literature is generally known as Sahajiyā or the Maramiyā school of literature.⁵ The Vaiṣṇava Sahajiyās of Bengal and the host of village poets roughly known under the general name of Bāul belong directly to the same school of thought¹; the Santa-poets of Northern and Upper India and the other devotional lyrists, the mystics of Mārāṭhā, and even the Sikh and Sūfi poets belong to the same school of heterodoxy and criticism.² Thus we see that this type of literature has a continued history in the vernaculars from the earliest period down to the modern times. As we are now dealing elaborately with the early Sahajiyās and shall also deal later on with different types of mediaeval Sahajiyā literature we think it necessary here to discuss in detail the possible sources of the critical spirit of the various Sahajiyā schools. The utility and relevancy of such an elaborate discussion on the point will be clearer, we hope, when the different mediaeval Sahajiyā schools will be studied in the succeeding chapters and also in the appendix.

c9.s1.t2.55

⁵ The popular vernacular word *maramiyā* comes from the Skt. word *marma*, which means the vital part or the very core of anything. The *Maramiyā* school is

c9.s1.t2.56

¹ Vide infra. Chs. V., VII.

c9.s1.t2.57

² Vide infra. Appendix (A).

(D) Possible Sources of the Spirit of Criticism of the Sahajiyās

c9.s1.t3.1

An analysis of and scrutiny into the nature of the spirit of these different Sahajiyā schools of vernacular poetry will reveal the fact that much of their heterodoxy and criticism is a thing of heritage; the ideas found in the vernaculars are but infiltrations from the older ideas found in the different lines of criticism in the history of Indian religious thought, and these infiltrated ideas have been variously emphasised and have received a new colour and tone from the vernacular poets. Older lines of criticism of different kinds have got blended in the critical and revolutionary spirit of the vernacular poetry, and, therefore, to make a critical study

c9.s1.t3.2

thus the school that deals with the vital part or the inner truth of religion to the exclusion of the formalities and outward shows.

c9.s1.t3.3

of it, it is necessary to make a general survey of the different lines of heterodoxy that have moulded the religious history of India in the different periods of its evolution.

c9.s1.t3.4

The earliest trace of heterodoxy and criticism in the history of Indian religious thought is to be found in the Āraṇyakas and the Upaniṣads. In its practical aspect the religion of the Saṃhitās and the Brāhmaṇas was pre-eminently sacrificial with innumerable accessories of chants, ceremonies and rituals. Though the sacrifices were generally made to some particular god or gods they were nothing of the kind of an attempt at establishing any sort of personal contact between the god or gods in question and the sacrificer. The desired effect of the sacrifice does not depend on the will of the god to whom the sacrifice is offered,—it depends absolutely on the rigorous correctitude of the sacrificial method in all the minutest details. But when we pass on from the Saṃhitās and the Brāhmaṇas to the Āraṇyakas and the Upaniṣads we find a remarkable change in the fundamental religious spirit. In the hymns and ritualistic and sacrificial net-work of the Saṃhitās we do not find any unified idea of the Brahman or the Supreme Being, though, however, we often find a tendency towards monotheism. In some of the Brāhmaṇas we first have, in a rudimentary form, the conception of the Brahman as the ultimate principle and the highest reality and the conception was established in the Āraṇyakas and the Upaniṣads. With the establishment of the conception of the Brahman the religion of the Āraṇyakas and the Upaniṣads was no longer the objective and deterministic religion of ritualism and sacrifice,—all these are made subordinate to the final end of self-realisation or Brahma-realisation. In the Āraṇyakas and the Upaniṣads ritualism and sacrifice began to be replaced by meditation, and the spirit of sacrifice sometimes began to have a

c9.s1.t3.5

The spirit of the Āraṇyakas and the Upaniṣads.

c9.s1.t3.6

Evolution of the conception of Brahman and the stress on Brahma-realisation or self-realisation.

c9.s1.t3.7

philosophic interpretation.¹ When we find Maitreyī, wife of the famous seer Yājñavalkya, exclaiming,—"What shall I do with that, which will not make me immortal?"²—we discover the key-note of the Upaniṣadic thought, a hankering, not after any mundane happiness and prosperity,—nor after any enjoyment of bliss in heaven,—but after the realisation of the self which is of the nature of the Brahman. It has been said that those who know the self or the Brahman and seek for truth reach the region of the Brahman wherefrom they never turn back; but those who acquire better regions through sacrifice or gift or penances roam about from this region to that and constantly suffer under the whirl of coming and going.³ It is neither by the making of sacrifices, nor by hearing and memorising the Vedas that one can realise the Brahman or the supreme truth, it is only through the absolute purification of heart,—through the removal of the veil of ignorance that one can realise the self or the ultimate truth. Thus we see that the whole emphasis of the Upaniṣads is on the subjective side of religion, which seems to be conspicuous by its absence in the Saṃhitās and the Brāhmaṇas. The Upaniṣads discourage much reading, erudition and discursive reason and also sacrifices, ritual and worship of the gods;—they on the other hand emphasise absolute purification of heart; for, it is in the absolutely purified and mirror-like heart that the supreme truth reflects itself in its illuminating and blissful effulgence.

c9.s1.t3.8

¹ Thus the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka begins with a new conception of the Horse of the Horse-sacrifice. There it is said that dawn is the head of the horse, the sun is his eye, wind his breath, heaven the back and the intermediate space between heaven and earth the belly; the quarters are the sides, the seasons the limbs, the stars the bones and the sky his flesh. To mediate on such a horse and to realise the truth of this horse is the real meaning of the Horse-sacrifice.

c9.s1.t3.9

² Ibid., (2.4).

c9.s1.t3.10

³ Bṛhad-āraṇyaka.

c9.s1.t3.11

In the post-Upaniṣadic period a free spirit of religion, leaning mainly to the subjective side, characterises the early epic literature of India, particularly the *Mahābhārata*. There are stories in the *Mahābhārata*, where the teachings of true religion are being received from people belonging to the lowest class of the social order. In the *Anuśāsanika-parva* of the *Mahābhārata*,¹ where Bhīṣma is explaining to Yudhiṣṭhira the really sacred places of pilgrimage, we find that the mind with the transparent water of purity and truth, when associated with the lake of patience, is the best of all places of pilgrimage. He, whose body is washed with water, cannot be said to be the really cleansed one; he, who has controlled all his senses, is the really cleansed one, and he is pure within as well as without. To dive into the water of the bliss of Brahma-knowledge in the lake of the pure heart is the best of all bathing, and it is only he, whom the wise recognise to be a real pilgrim.

c9.s1.t3.12

¹ Ch. 108.

c9.s1.t3.13

The Upaniṣadic spirit, however, is found in the post-Upaniṣadic period bifurcated into the two main lines of religious thought, *viz.*, Vedānta and Vaiṣṇavism. The Śaṅkarite and the post-Śaṅkarite Vedāntic schools cherished nothing but uncompromising antagonism towards the school of Pūrva-mīmāṃsā, the staunchest advocate of the sacrificial religion of the Vedas. Even Rāmānuja, the great exponent of Vaiṣṇavism, tried to make a compromise between *dharma-jijñāsā* and *brahma-jijñāsā* and held that the former leads to the latter; but Śaṅkara stoutly denied this relation of succession between the two; for, he held that the nature and the ultimate end of the two are diametrically opposite to each other. While the aim of *dharma-jijñāsā* is the attainment of prosperity (*abhyudaya*) in life and the attainment of heaven after death, the aim of *brahma-jijñāsā* is liberation (*mukti*); and while the function of the former is to induce one to perform various sacrificial and ritualistic duties, the function of the latter is only to induce one to know the Brahman, and to know the Brahman is to be the Brahman. A hankering after the knowledge of the Brahman presupposes no performance of scriptural duties,—it follows rather from a discriminative knowledge of what is permanent and what is transitory (*nityā-nitya-vastu-viveka*), from absolute indifference to the pleasures of life here and hereafter, the capacity for internal and external control and a true desire for being liberated from the fetters of life.

c9.s1.t3.14

As the Mīmāṃsakas go to the one extreme of saying that religion always involves some kind of activity,—the Vedāntins go to the other extreme of saying that true religion involves no kind of activity whatsoever. The aim of all activities is to produce some sort of effect,—but Brahma-knowledge cannot be the effect of any activity; it is already there, and it is there for all time; it is, however, veiled by our ignorance—by the world-illusion;—the function of the true knowledge of the scriptures is to remove this veil of ignorance from our mind,—and when this veil of the world-illusion is removed Brahma-knowledge will dawn upon us instantaneously and spontaneously. Brahma-knowledge is not something attainable through human effort,—it is rather self-revealed. Brahma-knowledge is not even a mental function,—for, a mental function presupposes the fact that the agent has the power to do or undo it according to his own will,—but we have no such power in the case of Brahma-knowledge. Moreover, as we have noticed before, to know the Brahman is nothing but to be the Brahman, and knowing and being being identical here, no action is implied even in the knowing.

c9.s1.t3.15

The Vaiṣṇavas, however, represent the spirit of heterodoxy in another way. While the whole emphasis of the Vedāntins is on pure knowledge, the emphasis of the Vaiṣṇavas is on devotion or love. The Vaiṣṇavas always speak very indifferently of heaven and the enjoyment of happiness there,—they discourage even the idea of liberation,—what they want is the blissful realisation of the eternal love of God. It is necessary to remark here that this cult of devotion or love was not and is not limited strictly to the sphere of Vaiṣṇavism,—we have already referred to the Śaivite devotional cult of South India, and even in the Śakta cult of later days (we may mention here the exquisite songs of Rāma-prasāda Sen and others of his time) we find traces of pure devotion and love. But in Northern India and in Eastern India this devotional cult flourished mostly along the line of Vaiṣṇavism and they are commonly taken to be identical.

c9.s1.t3.16

The innovation made by the Vaiṣṇavas (and all devotional cults in general) is the introduction of the element of divine mercy within the deterministic view of the law of Karma. Germs of the law of Karma can be traced to the ritualistic and sacrificial religious thought of the Vedas, and it is a particularly noticeable fact that practically all the systems of Indian thought accept this theory in some form or other. We have seen that the Saṃhitās and the Brāhmaṇas leave no scope for the interference of the gods in the matter of the fruition of the rites, rituals and sacrifices. But already in the Upaniṣadic period we come across a statement like this,—“This self or soul (ātmā) can never be realised through great sayings,—neither by memorising (the scriptures) nor by listening to the scriptures; it is only by him, to whom it reveals itself of its own accord, that it can be realised, and to him this soul or self reveals its real form.'¹ Herein we find germs of the predominance of the divine will, which reigns supreme over all human efforts, and herein comes the question of divine mercy. Along this line developed the theory of divine mercy of all the devotional cults, and the only religious duty left, therefore, to the followers of these schools, was unconditional self-resignation to the divine will.

c9.s1.t3.17

¹ Katha (1.2.22).

c9.s1.t3.18

Up to the eighth and ninth centuries A.D. the dominating feature of Vaiṣṇavism was this spirit of self-resignation and seeking the haven of the infinite mercy of God. This very spirit indicates that the elaborate system of religious duties, customs, rituals and ceremonies—strict rules for food and dress could find no prominence in the Vaiṣṇava school; whenever they were adopted they were adopted with the purpose of preparing a mental atmosphere favourable to the growth and development of the spirit of devotion and self-surrender. Already in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa we find elements of pure love spoken of as the best and highest method through which the direct communion with God becomes possible. There the uncultured rustic cowherd girls of Bṛndāvana are regarded as the best of all religious people for their most sincere and passionate love for Śrīkṛṣṇa, the perfect incarnation of God. Devotion (*bhakti*) in later times was classified under two heads, *viz.*, *vaidhī bhakti*, *i.e.*, devotion that arises through the performance of religious duties, observance of vows and rites, and strict obedience to the rules and regulations laid down in Vaiṣṇava theology; and the other kind of devotion is called *rāgānugā bhakti*, *i.e.*, passionate devotion,—or love for God that depends on no extraneous cause,—it is love absolutely for love's sake. The former kind of devotion has always been spoken of as

c9.s1.t3.19

Unconditional self-resignation.

c9.s1.t3.20

The ideal of passionate love.

c9.s1.t3.21

being much inferior to the latter and as such the former is never recognised as devotion proper. This exclusive stress on love has naturally minimised to a considerable extent all the formalities, conventionalism and ceremonialism in religion. Even a man of the lowest origin, such, for example, as a Caṇḍāla, in spite of being a riteless untouchable, has been acclaimed as being much superior to the twice-born (Brahmin), by being merely a sincere lover of God; on the other hand, a caste Brahmin, inspite of his loyalty to the rites, customs and duties of Brahminic life *minus* his sincerity of love, has been emphatically declared to be inferior to a Caṇḍāla,—and this really represents the true spirit of Vaiṣṇavism.

c9.s1.t3.22

Again, the Yoga-school of Indian thought has a religious perspective of its own, and its emphasis is exclusively on the subjective side of religion. Though all sorts of occultism and necromancy prevailed and still now prevail within the school of Haṭha-yoga, and though with a large number of Indian Yogins Haṭha-yoga has become a science of physical feats, serenity prevails within the school of Yoga proper. As a philosophical system Yoga represents a purely idealistic view and it is the mind in all its states and processes that has been held responsible for the whirl of birth and death and consequent sufferings. Religion, according to Yoga, consists in the final arrest of the states and processes of the mind, and the final arrest of the mind means the final arrest of the flux of coming and going and that is the state of final liberation. Yogic Sādhanā, therefore, consists essentially in a process of psychological discipline against a moral background. It is evident from the very nature of Yoga proper that it leaves no scope for idolatry, ritualism and ceremonialism. The dominant trend of Indian thought is idealism; it is the mind with all its principles of defilement that has been held responsible for the world-process. It is for this reason that in practical Sādhanā elements of Yoga have been adopted in almost all the practical systems of Indian religion ;—even Vaiṣṇavism with all its love-theories is no exception. In the critical spirit of the old and mediaeval vernacular poets we shall find this spirit of Yoga acting strongly in unison with the spirit of the other heterodox systems.

c9.s1.t3.23

Idealism of Yoga and the stress on the subjective side.

c9.s1.t3.24

Inspite of their heterogeneous practices, ritualism and ceremonialism the Tantric schools (both Hindu and Buddhistic) breathe throughout a spirit of revolt against the orthodox schools,—the Hindu Tantras having the same apathy towards the caste-religion or Varṇāśrama-dharma of the Brahminic people as the Buddhist Tantras have against monasticism. We have already seen that the main emphasis of the Tāntrikas is on the practical side of religion, and naturally they discouraged much reading and erudite scholarship, either philosophical or scriptural. The stress of Tantra proper was on Yoga, where discursive knowledge is of little avail. As for the other practices of Tantra, good or bad, their unconventional nature is palpable, and to have these unconventional practices recognised as purely religious practices the Tantras had to decry strongly the conventional practices of both Brahminism and Buddhism. Because of the extremely unconventional nature of the practices, the Tāntrikas had to launch the bitterest attack on the commonly accepted practices and religious views of the orthodox systems. The importance of this critical and revolutionary spirit of the Tantras lies in the fact that the earliest literature of our language (we mean the songs of the Sahajiyā Buddhists) inherited much of its spirit of revolt and criticism directly from the Buddhist Tantras.

c9.s1.t3.25

It will be noticed that the above critics of orthodox Brahminism were all theists; but the severest attack came from the atheists of whom the Cārvākas, the Jainas and the Buddhists deserve mention here.

c9.s1.t3.26

Already in the Upaniṣads we find mention of schools of naturalism which recognised no ultimate conscious Being as the author of the universe, but thought of the world-process as a product of the course of nature. The materialists are generally spoken of in early texts as the Lokāyata school or the school which admits the truth only of the visible world. In early Pali texts we find mention of many pre-Buddhistic heretical ascetics, of whom mention may be made of Sañjaya, the sceptic, Ajita Keśakambalin, the materialist, Purāṇa-kaśyapa, the indifferentist, Maṣkarin Gośāla, the wandering ascetic, and Kakuda Kātyāyana.¹ The Cārvāka school of thought deserves special mention here. The Cārvākas were not believers in any kind of divinity,—the whole world-process including the psychosis, has been explained by them as the creation of matter. Let a man be happy so long as he lives;—life is short and none can escape the jaws of death; and if once this body is burnt to ashes there is no returning back;² let one, therefore, eat, drink and be merry. The Cārvākas strongly defied the authority of the scriptures. It has been said that religion is nothing but a device of the cunning priests for earning livelihood as they have no other resources. It is said,—"There is no heaven, no emancipation, no soul,—nothing belonging to the after-world,—never are the duties, prescribed according to the castes and the different stages of life, capable of producing any effect. All fire-sacrifices, the three Vedas, the ascetic practice of holding three sticks (bound together), the practice of rubbing the body with ashes—are inventions of stupid and cowardish people for the earning of their livelihood."³ It has been further said,—"If it be true that an animal, when killed in the Jyotiṣṭoma-sacrifice goes to heaven,—why then should not the sacrificer kill his own father in the sacrifice? If the funeral rite of offering food, drink and other gifts to the departed may produce satisfaction in them, then the supply of oil to an extinct lamp should also increase its flames. Utterly futile is the contemplation of providing food for those who have departed this life,—for, had there been any truth in this practice, one might have had his satisfaction on his way while gifts were being offered to him in his house. If those who are in heaven can be satisfied by offering of gifts here on earth, then why should not offerings be placed on the lower floor of the house for the satisfaction of those who are above the roof? ¹ It is therefore strongly recommended that one should live joyously as long as one lives,—one should borrow money to procure butter;—if body be once burnt to ashes, it can never return. If after dissociating himself from this particular body a man goes to a different region, why should not he come back many times again through his deep affection for the relatives? So, all these are meaningless talks having absolutely no reality behind. It stands obvious that the Brahmins invented all the funeral rites only to find out a source for their livelihood—they have got absolutely no other justification. Those are hypocritical, cunning and demonic people, who have composed all the Vedas,—and it is really strange that meaningless mutterings like *jarbhari*, *turphari*, etc., are said to be the sayings of learned Pundits. The obscene practice that the wife of the sacrificer should hold the penis of the horse in the horse-sacrifice and all such

c9.s1.t3.27

¹ See *A History of Pre-Buddhistic Indian Philosophy* by Dr. B. M. Barua, M.A., D.Lit.

c9.s1.t3.28

² *Sarva-darśana-samgraha* (Govt. Oriental [Hindu] Series), Vol. I, p, 12,

c9.s1.t3.29

³ *Ibid.*, p. 13,

c9.s1.t3.30

¹ *Sarva-darśana-saṃgraha* Govt. Oriental [Hindu] Series, Vol. I, pp. 13-14. It is interesting to note here some of the verses of the *Viṣṇu-purāṇa* which breathe exactly the same spirit.

c9.s1.t3.31

nihatasya paśor yajñe svarga-prāptir yadi syate |
sva-pitā yajamānena tadā kiṃ na nihanyate ||
tṛptaye jāyate puṃso bhuktam anyena cet tataḥ |
dadyāc chrāddhaṃ śramāyānnaṃ na vaheyuḥ pravāsinaḥ ||

c9.s1.t3.32

( *Viṣṇu-purāṇa*, 3.18.85, quoted in the commentary on the *Sarva-darśana-saṃgraha*, p. 13).

c9.s1.t3.33

other practices are prescribed by base hypocrites, and all the injunctions in the Vedas regarding the eating of meat are the sayings of none but the goblins and the demons, who are particularly fond of meat.¹

c9.s1.t3.34

¹ *Sarva-darśana-saṃgraha* (Govt. Oriental [Hindu] Series), Vol. I, p. 15.

c9.s1.t3.35

The Buddhists and the Jainas, though atheists, were not anti-religious like the Cārvākas. From the plane of time-honoured customs, of sacrificial rituals and ceremonies the ground of religion was shifted to a humanitarian plane and the ethical aspect of religion received a great emphasis. Notwithstanding all the differences in metaphysical and theological view-points Buddhism and Jainism had a common front to push in their defiance against the authority of the Vedas, in their absolute denial of any ultimate reality in the form of any Supreme Being, in their emphasis on the cardinal ethical virtues,—particularly on the principle of non-violence. As we have hinted, Jainism viewed religion from a distinctly different perspective from that of the Upaniṣadic or the other Brahminical schools. The ultimate aim is salvation (*mokṣa*),—which can only be attained by the eradication of the Karmas which stick to the soul like dust particles to a body besmeared with oil, and thus bind the soul to this world of sufferings. This inrush of Karma is to be stopped by various kinds of control (*saṃvara*) and *nirjarā* or the purging off of the Karmas from the soul. The controls are generally the vows of non-injury, truthfulness, abstinence from stealing, sex-control, non-acceptance of the objects of desire, gentle and holy talk, full control over body, speech and mind, habits of forgiveness, humility, penance, meditation on the real nature of the world and man, and principles of right conduct (*caritra*). *Ahiṃsā* or non-injury is regarded as the highest virtue in Jainism as well as in Buddhism, and in their practical religious conduct the Jains take the greatest precaution to avoid the slightest injury to the smallest of insects.¹

c9.s1.t3.36

The rudest shock to orthodox Brahminism came from the Buddhists who brought about a revolution not only in the religious sphere, but also in the sphere of philosophical thought. The truth, which Śākyasiṃha realised through his great renunciation and profound meditation and by the realisation of which he became the Buddha or the perfectly enlightened one is the truth of *pratītya-samutpāda* or dependent origination which presents an entirely new perspective in the field of philosophy. The fundamental notions of causality, substance, time and space underwent complete change and the general tendency of all logical and metaphysical enquiries was directed not towards any thesis but towards contradicting all kinds of thesis of the established schools. From the religious side, the authority of the Vedas was openly challenged and the efficacy of the rituals and sacrifices was stoutly denied. Moreover the inhuman cruelties inflicted on the beasts in the different kinds of sacrifices was severely condemned.¹ The existence of any ultimate reality, at least in the form of the Supreme Being, was denied or at least strict silence was maintained on all such ontological points; the *summum bonum* of life was declared to be the final liberation from this life of suffering by a strict code of moral discipline and this was declared to be the true meaning of religion. Thus the sacrificial religion of the Vedas was replaced by the Buddhists by the principles of moral virtues and good conduct (*śīlācāra*).¹ Leaving aside the innovations of later Mahāyāna Buddhism or Tāntric Buddhism where Buddhism developed innumerable gods and goddesses and the paraphernalia of worship, partly as a reaction against the negativistic regorism, partly through the influence of Hindu idolatry, and mainly through the influence of indigenous religious cults or such other cults of the neighbouring localities, Buddhism denied godhood unreservedly and even the existence of any supreme creator of the universe (*cf.* the Brahminic conception of Brahmā, the creator of the universe) as no positive evidence of any such being can ever be demonstrated. The spirit of monastic Buddhism on this point is best illustrated in the *Tevijja Sutta* of the *Dīgha-nikāya* where the belief in the existence of Brahmā and the belief in the Brahminical religious systems have been compared to the funny belief of a foolish man in the existence of some beautiful girl somewhere and his wish to enjoy her without knowing absolutely anything about her and her whereabouts.

c9.s1.t3.37

¹ It is to be noticed that orthodox Jainism like other dogmatic schools incorporated various dogmatic beliefs like the self-revealing eternal nature of Jainism as a religion, the godhood of the Tīrthaṅkaras and many others of this nature; and a fighting within Jainism itself began between the two main sects, *viz.*, the Śvetāmbaras (*i.e.*, wearers of white cloth) and the Digambaras (*i.e.*, the naked). The peculiar beliefs of the Digambaras are that the Tīrthaṅkaras live without food, that a monk, possessing property and wearing clothes, cannot attain liberation and that no woman is entitled to liberation. The Jaina monks generally bear clothes of a blanket, an alms-bowl, a stick, a broom to sweep the ground, a piece of cloth to cover his mouth lest any insect may enter it by chance. The Digambaras bear a similar outfit, but they always remain naked and carry brooms of peacock's feather or long hairs of the tail of animals (*cāmara*). The monks have their head shaven; there is often the custom of plucking the hair out and this plucking of the hair is sometimes regarded as a cardinal religious practice.

c9.s1.t3.38

¹ *Cf. nindasi yajña-vidher ahaha śruti-jātam* *sadaya-hṛdaya-darśita-paśu-ghātam |* *keśava dhṛta-buddha-śarīra* *jaya jagadīśa hare ||* *Gita-govinda* of Jayadeva (1, 13).

c9.s1.t3.39

The Buddhists were strongly opposed to the caste-system and the Varṇāśrama religion of the caste Hindus. A great campaign against the caste-system is found in the *Vajra-sūcī* of Aśvaghoṣa where the author tried to prove on the basis of the evidences found in the Vedic literature and the standard Brahminical texts like the *Manu-saṃhitā*, the *Mahābhārata*, etc., that the Brahmins as a class can never be superior to the other castes and that the superiority or the inferiority of man can never be determined by the accidental fact of birth. The orthodoxy and conventionalism of the Śramaṇas and the Brāhmaṇas¹ were constantly criticised by the Buddhists. Whenever and wherever we find mention of the Śramaṇas and the Brāhmaṇas we find them as representing the mistaken or distorted spirit of religion as contrasted to the true spirit of religion represented by the well-disciplined and perfectly enlightened Buddhists.² Without entering into the details, let us give here a few specimen of criticism that were levelled by the Buddhists against these orthodox sects. A good specimen of popular criticism is to be found in the Vatthupama-sutta where Buddha preached to the audience that a man can be said to have bathed only when he has become pure in heart.³ At this a Brahmin from among the audience asked Buddha,—"Does your Holiness go to the Bāhukā river to bathe?" The Lord replied,—"What's the need of going to the Bāhukā river,—what may it do?" The Brahmin said,—"O Gautama, the river Bāhukā is known to many and recognised by many as associated with Mokṣa and virtue and as rendering liberation and destroying sin; many people wash away their sin of past deeds in the river Bāhukā". Then the Lord addressed the following verse—"Indeed there are (sacred) rivers like the Bāhukā, Adhikakkā, Gaya, Sundarikā, Sarasvatī, Prayāga and the Bāhumatī; there the fool, the evil-doers take their bath everyday; but surely they are not purified thereby. What will the Sundarikā do? What can the Prayāga and the Bāhukā do? He who does harm to living beings and who is the doer of all evil deeds, is never purified by (the water of) these rivers."' Another instance of the criticism of the same nature can be cited from the dialogue between the nun Puṇṇikā and a Brahmin in the *Theri-gāthā*. Puṇṇikā asks the Brahmin, who was bathing early in the morning in an extremely cold weather,—"I indeed used to plunge into water in cold weather with a view to bring water,—but that was only out of fear of punishment or rebuke from the ladies I serve; but of whom are you so much afraid, O Brāhmaṇa, that you plunge into water and bear extreme cold with a shivering body?" "The reason is known to you",—replied the Brahmin,—"why then this question? I acquire virtue and destroy the effect of my evil deeds (by bathing). Whoever performs evil deeds, whether an old man or young, will escape the fruition of such evil acts by taking bath in holy water." "Who is the fool of fools" asked Puṇṇikā "that has instructed you that the effects of evil-deeds can be washed away by bathing in the water? Had it been the fact, all frogs and tortoises and snakes and porpoises and other aquatic creatures would certainly have gone to heaven. Should all sheep, boar, fish hunters, thieves and murderers and other evil-doers be liberated from all evil deeds by their bathing in water? If this river should wash away all the sins you have accumulated by your former evil deeds, she should wash away all your merits too;—but what

First 105 of 202 passages. Read on

Linked texts (24)