Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Some Jaina Canonical Sutras c14: Chapter IX: Antakṛta-Daśāṅga (Aṃtagaḍa-Dasāo)

Some Jaina Canonical Sūtras c14

Language
English

Chapter IX: Antakṛta-Daśāṅga (Aṃtagaḍa-Dasāo)

c14.2

The Amtagada-dasāo (Antakrta-daśāṅga) is known as the eighth anga of the Śvetāmbara canon. It consists of eight vaggas or divisions, each forming a group of a certain number of lessons. The number of lessons is ten in the first, fourth, and eighth divisions; eight in the second; thirteen in the third and seventh, and sixteen in the sixth. Each lesson is conveyed through an appropriate personal story of a legendary character. The stories are those of ‘the end-winners’, meaning the persons who died either attaining liberation with death or being assured of it at the time of death. The stories placed in a group appear to be more or less of the same pattern as regards the nature of the end attained. The anga took its name from the stories of the end-winners’ narrating their antagadadasā or happy ends. The stories of such achievements on the part of different persons, men and women, are related with reference to the dispensation of the two Tīrthankaras, Aritthanemi (Ariṣṭanemi) the twenty-second Jina and Mahāvīra the last Jina. Accordingly the divisions with the stories and lessons mark on the whole two stages in the continuation of the main dialogue, namely, pre-Mahāvīra and Mahāvīra. The earlier stage is covered by the career of Aritthanemi and the reign of Kanha Vāsudeva of Western India, and the later stage by the career of Mahāvīra and the reign of king Seṇiya of Rāyagiha (Rājagṛha). The text as a whole is presented in the shape and form of a dialogue between the Ārya Suddharman the only Gaṇadhara or leading disciple who survived Mahāvīra, and his pupil the Ārya Jambu. The scene of action is laid in the city of Campā, at the shrine of (the Yakkha) Punnabhadda. It was translated for the first time into English by Dr. L. D. Barnett, and subsequently by Mr. M. C. Modi with the help of the commentary written by Abhayadeva. The Āgamodaya Samiti of Bombay has edited it along with two other texts with Abhayadeva’s commentary. P. L Vaidya’s introduction, notes and appendix are useful.

c14.3

There is enough of ingenuity and looseness in the invention or narration of the legendary tales, though it is not without a method or purpose. The succession of the divisions follows apparently a mechanical plan, the logical sequence of thought being not easily understandable, and the beauty of the narratives is often marred by textual abridgements or cross references. As Mr. Modi points out, the first five divisions contain semi-legendary stories of the heroes related to Kanha Vāsudeva with Aritthanemi as the living Tirthankara, the vaggas six and seven narrate the stories of Mahāvīra's disciples, the eighth vagga contains the theological details of ten penances, while the vaggas seven and eight are concerned with the narratives of the queens of king Seniya.

c14.4

The first division contains the stories of ten princes, Gotama, Samudra, Sāgara, Gambhīra, Stimita, Acala, Kāmpilya, Aksobhya, Prasenajit (Pasenai, Pāli Pasenadi), and Visnu, all born in the royal house of the king Andhakavrsni of Dvāravatī (Dvārakā) and the queen Dhārinī It is fittingly introduced with a description of the city of Dvāravatī, 12 yojanas in length and 9 yojanas in breadth, built by the genius of Kuvera, the lord of wealth With its gold ramparts, five-coloured cornices of various jewels, and beauty and glory, grandeur and happiness, it resembled Alakā, the capital city of Kuvera. The Mt. Revata or Raivata stood at its north-eastern gate, bearing on its summit a garden called Nandanavana, the grove of Nandana. There was an old abode (shrine) of the Yaksa Surapriya in a fine Aśoka tree in the midst of a woodland In this very city dwelt king Krsna Vāsudeva (Kanha Vāsudeva) holding lordship over ten princely nobles headed by Samudravijaya, over five great warriors headed by Baladeva, over three and a half crores of princes headed by Pradyumna (Pajjunna), over sixty thousand fighters headed by Sāmba, over fifty-six thousand mighty men headed by Mahāsena, over twenty-one thousand warriors headed by Virasena, over sixty thousand monarchs headed by Ugrasena, over sixteen thousand queens headed by Rukminī (Ruppinī), over many thousands of courtezans headed by Anangasenā, and the like Thus Dvāravatī was both the seat of the imperial power of Krsna Vāsudeva as well as the capital of the kingdom of Dvāravatī with Andhakavrsni as its king and Dhārinī as its queen.

c14.5

The model story is that of Prince Gotama who renounced the world and placed himself as a Jaina recluse under the guidance of Aritthanemi when the latter visited Dvāravatī, attended by the four grades of gods His life of effort lasted for a period of twelve years, during which he studied the sāmāyika and other yogic postures and practices¹ along with the eleven aṅgas (to the exclusion of the twelfth called Dṛṣṭivāda). He fulfilled the twelve avowed ways of a mendicant, *bhikkhupadimāo*, miscalled ‘monastic standards’¹ along with the *guṇaratna* austerity for sixteen months. He took at last farewell, and climbed up Mt. Śatruñjaya (Settuñja), on the summit of which he bravely met his end by a month’s starvation, obtaining *siddhi*.

c14.6

¹ Sāmāyika, cauvisattha, vamdanaka, pratikramana, kāyotsarga and pratyākhyāna—these six practices constituted a Jaina sadangayoga which is a substitute for the astāngayoga connected with hathayoga Barnett's interpretation of sāmāyika is quoted by Modi, op cit, pp 99ff

c14.7

¹ Modi, *op cit*, pp. 100ff

c14.8

There are inter-allusions to the story of Meghakumāra which is fully narrated in the Nāyādhammakahā, and to that of Mahadbala in the *Bhagavatī Sūtra* or *Vyākhyā-prajñapti*.

c14.9

The remaining nine stories and lessons are of the same type.

c14.10

The second division contains the stories of eight Yādava princes, Aksobhya, Sāgara, Samudra, Himavat, Acala, Dhārana, Pūrana, and Abhicandra, to the exclusion of Stimita and Visnu. These narratives agree substantially with those in the first division. As for the two points of difference, the text wants us to understand that here *guṇaratna* is the single form of austerity, and that the period of effort is sixteen years instead of twelve. This second list of the princes born in the family of Andhakavrsni and Dhārinī differs in respect of three names from the first. As known to the commentator Abhayadeva, Kuntī and Mādrī were the two younger sisters to Prince Visnu.

c14.11

The third division consists of the stories and examples of thirteen persons, Anita, Anantasena, Ajitasena, Anighacarita, Devasena, Satrusena, Sārana, Gaja, Sumukha, Dummukha, Kupana, Dāruka, and Anādrsti.

c14.12

The story of Anita is introduced with a description of the city of Bhaddilapura which was the capital of king Jitaśatru. There was a beautiful garden by the name of Śrīvana on its south-east side. In that city Anita was born to Nāga, a rich banker, by his wife Sulasā. He was brought up in the midst of enormous wealth. He was placed in his eighth year under a tutor for training in sciences and arts. When he had passed his boyhood, his parents made him take the hands of thirty-two daughters of wealthy bankers within a day. This is followed by an exaggerated account of the wedding presents received by him. It was at the garden of Śrīvana that he happened to meet Aritthanemi. The sequel of the story is similar to the story of Prince Gotama. The two points of difference to be noted are. (1) that he studied the fourteen *pūrvas* instead of the eleven *aṅgas*, and (2) that his period was twenty years.

c14.13

The five stories that follow are of the same pattern. The seventh story concerning Sārana, a son of Vasudeva and Dhāriṇī, reads almost like that of Prince Gotama. Here Sārana studies the fourteen pūrvas that are traditionally known to have been incorporated into the twelfth anga called Dṛṣṭivāda. In the same category we are to place all the remaining stories but that of Gaja Sukumāra. Strangely enough, Prince Sumukha is described as a son of king Baladeva of Dvāravatī by his queen Dhāriṇī, whereas in the case of the remaining princes the parents are Vasudeva and Dhāriṇī. Dāruka who is mentioned in the Great Epic as the charioteer of Kṛṣṇa Vāsudeva is counted here among the sons of Vasudeva and Dhāriṇī.

c14.14

Turning at last to the story of Prince Gaja, we notice that he is introduced as the eighth or last son of Devakī, mother of Kṛṣṇa Vāsudeva, who was born in her womb. According to the Pāli Ghata Jātaka (No. 355), Devagabhā gave birth to ten sons including Kaṇha Vāsudeva and Baladeva. The Jaina legend gives an altogether different account of the circumstances under which Devakī’s earlier-born seven sons were stealthily taken away from her by the god Hariṇaigameṣī and brought up in the house of Nāga and Sulasā. She gave birth to six or seven sons, exactly resembling Nalakubera, in fulfilment of a prediction made to this effect by the Jaina recluse Atimukta. All but Kṛṣṇa Vāsudeva renounced the world and moved about in the country as disciples of Ariṭṭhanemi. Devakī, too, is represented as a queen of Vasudeva, king of Dvāravatī. Kṛṣṇa Vāsudeva tried in vain to keep his brother Gaja in the world, and his mistake was that he had brought in Somā, a handsome daughter of the Brahmin Saumila, to be his brother’s wife. The Brahmin was so awfully angry with Gaja that he had renounced the world to pass as a recluse abandoning his daughter. On seeing the latter passing one evening by the burning ground of Mahākāla, the Brahmin took a piece of a broken pot from a burning pyre and threw it on his head. The princely recluse bore calmly the pain without any wrathful feeling towards the oppressor. In that blissful mood of soul he obtained the supreme knowledge and vision and passed away. The great teacher Ariṭṭhanemi exhorted Kṛṣṇa Vāsudeva not to bear wrath against Saumila who even by spiteful action lent indirectly an aid to his younger brother Gaja.

c14.15

The fourth division sets forth ten glaring examples of the Jaina virtue based on the personal stories of Jāli, Māṭali, Upatāli, Purusasena, Vārisena, Pradyumna, Sāmba, Aniruddha, Satyanemi, and Dṛdhanemi. These stories are in many respects similar to that of Prince Gotama; the two main points of difference lie in the study of the twelve aṅgas and the period of sixteen years. Here Jāli, Mātali, Upatāli, Purusasena, and Vārisena are described as the sons of Vāsudeva and Dhāriṇī, Pradyumna as the son of Kṛṣṇa Vāsudeva and Rukmiṇī, Sāmba as the son of Kṛṣṇa Vāsudeva and Jāmbavatī, Aniruddha as the son of Pradyumna and Vaidarbhī, and Satyanemi and Dṛdhanemi as the sons of Samudravijaya and Śivā.

c14.16

In the fifth division we have ten lessons imparted through the personal stories and examples of the eight wives of Kṛṣṇa Vāsudeva: Padmāvatī, Gaurī, Gāndhārī, Laksmanā, Suṣamā, Jāmbavatī, Satyabhāmā, and Rukmiṇī, and the two wives of Prince Sāmba.

c14.17

The queen Padmāvatī became interested, like her mother-in-law the queen Devakī, in the worship of Aritthanemi when the great teacher came to Dvāravatī and preached his noble doctrine before her husband Kṛṣṇa Vāsudeva. Kṛṣṇa was anxious to know the factors by which the delightful and prosperous city of Dvāravatī would be destroyed. The saint mentioned wine, fire, and Dvaipāyana as the three destroying factors. Kṛṣṇa at this moment thought that blessed were those princes of the blood, Jāli, Mātali, and the rest who betook themselves to religious life. The great teacher clearly perceived the trend of the sad thought which arose in the mind of Kṛṣṇa. Thereafter Kṛṣṇa became curious to know how his own death would come about and where he would be reborn. Aritthanemi's reply was that after the destruction of the city of Dvāravatī by the wrath of Dvaipāyana, the action of fire, and the drunkenness of the Vāsudevas (i.e. Yādavas), Kṛṣṇa would be sent forth with Rāma Baladeva (Balarāma) to Pāndu-Mathurā on the south, where he would meet the sons of King Pāndu, Yudhisthira and others, and there in the presence of the Pāndava brothers, in the Kuśāmba forest, and under an excellent banyan tree, he would remain on a slab of stone with his body covered with a yellow robe, when he would be pierced in his left foot by a sharp arrow released from the bow of Jarākumāra. Thus he would come to death and would be reborn in hell. Thereafter he would be reborn in the continent of Jambudvīpa, in the country of Bhāratavarsa, in the land of Pundra, in the city of Śatadvāra, where he would be the twelfth Jina in the next era of progress, finding himself for many years in the status of a Kevalin. It is said that this prophecy made Kṛṣṇa glad.

c14.18

In view of the impending calamity of the city of Dvāravatī Kṛṣṇa asked all persons to renounce the world and lead the mendicant life in the religious order of Ariṭṭhanemi. Under this persuasion his queens headed by Padmāvatī, and the two wives of Prince Sāmba became nuns, studied the eleven angas, observed religious practices, and then passed away obtaining the final liberation.

c14.19

Here we have a very curious Jaina version of the Kṛṣṇa legend, having a few points of similarity with the Brahmanical and Buddhist versions. The obvious purpose of the Jaina narratives was to gain popularity for the Jaina faith in Western India by making the local people believe that the whole of the Yādava race attained salvation under the benign influence and guidance of Ariṭṭhanemi, the twenty-second Tirthankara The Jaina inventor of the legends would purposely ignore the fact that Kṛṣṇa Vāsudeva’s teacher was Ghora Aṅgirasa. According to the Upaniṣad tradition Kṛṣṇa following the instruction of Ghora Aṅgirasa became free from all worldly attachments. According to the Jaina legend he could aspire to become a Jina. These were the current legends accounting for the destruction of the Andhakavṛṣṇis.

c14.20

It is no less important to note that the Jaina legends connect the sons of Pāṇḍu with the Pāṇḍya country of the south with Mathurā (modern Madoura) as its capital. Dr. Barnett rightly observes. ‘The Pāṇḍiyans, however, were not Pāṇḍavas, and the Jaina identification of the two dynasties is probably based on popular etymology. A like attempt to connect the two families occurs in the Tamil chronicle given in Taylor’s *Oriental Historical MSS.* (Vol. I, pp. 195ff.), which states that Madurā at the time of the Bhārata war was ruled by Babhruvāhana, the son of Arjuna, by the daughter of the Pāṇḍiyan king of Madurā. The *Mahābhārata*, on the other hand, makes Babhruvāhana the son of Arjuna, by Citrāṅgadā, daughter of Citravāhana, the king of Maṇipura ’

c14.21

The association of the Pāṇḍyas of the south with the Śūrasenas of Mathurā and the Pāṇḍus of Northern India is probably alluded to in the confused statement of Megasthenes regarding Heracles and Pandaia.¹ In the Pāli chronicles of Ceylon the Pāṇḍyas are invariably represented as Pāṇḍus.² In the Jātakas the five sons of Pāṇḍu are nowhere connected with the Kuru country Arjuna of the Yudhiṣṭhira line, who is represented in the Kurudhamma Jātaka (No. 276) as the ideal king of the Kurus is evidently different from Arjuna the third son of Pāṇḍu. Thus there still lies a mystery about the relationship of the Pāṇḍavas with Kṛṣṇa Vāsudeva.

c14.22

¹ B C Law, *Tribes in Ancient India*, p 190, H C Raychaudhuri, *Political History of Ancient India*, 4th Ed, p 272, McCrindle, *Ancient India (Megasthenes and Arrian)*, pp 163-164

c14.23

² *Cf Mahāvamsa*, Chap 7, v 50, *Dīpavamsa*, Chap. 4, verse 41

c14.24

From the sixth division begins the second stage of the main dialogue. This division is important for the short stories of Makāti, Kinkama, Mudgarapāṇi, Kāśyapa, Ksemaka, Dhṛtihara, Kailāsa, Haricandana, Dvāratraya, Sudarśana, Pūrubhadra, Sumanabhadra, Supratiṣtha, Megha, Atimukta and others. Makāti was a rich householder of Rājagṛha who renounced the world after he had met and waited upon Mahāvīra at the shrine of Guṇaśila. He studied the eleven angas, the sāmāyika, and other religious practices. He practised the gunaratna form of self-mortification. He died on Mt. Śatruñjaya, obtaining liberation. Kinkama whose personal story is similar to that of Makāti attained siddhi on Mt. Vipula which guarded the city of Rājagṛha on one side. Among the remaining persons, all of whom passed away on the same Mt. Vipula. Mudgarapāṇi was a garland-maker in Rājagṛha. The rich householders Dvāratraya and Megha, too, belonged to the same city, while Ksemaka and Dhṛtihara were citizens of Kākaṇdī, Kailāsa and Haricandana of Sāketa, Sudarśana and Pūrṇabhadra of Vaṇijagrāma (Panyagrāma ?), and Sumanabhadra and Supratiṣtha of Śrāvastī. Atimukta was a prince born in the royal house of king Vijaya who reigned in the city of Palāsapura, and Anaksya was a king of Benares who renounced the world like king Udayana (of Vatsa). The two model stories and examples are those of Mudgarapāṇi and Prince Atimukta.

c14.25

During the reign of king Śreṇika, Arjunaka was a rich garland-maker in the city of Rājagṛha and Bandhumatī was his wife. He had a big flower garden outside the city, and far from it was his family shrine built and dedicated to the Yaksa Mudgarapāṇi. In it the statue of the Yaksa stood. Arjunaka became a devotee of this demi-god from his very childhood. When a festival was announced in the city of Rājagṛha, Arjunaka went out with his wife to his flower garden. After gathering the flowers the husband and wife walked towards their family shrine when they were entrapped by some wicked men. He afterwards killed them with an iron mace.

c14.26

A pious Jaina householder named Sudarśanā was going to pay his homage to Mahāvīra; he was attacked on the road by Arjunaka Mudgarapāṇi, but no harm was done to him on account of his virtue and spiritual strength. Arjunaka took the vow of a Jaina mendicant under the guidance of Mahāvīra and proved himself to be a completely reformed man. When he wandered about in the city of Rājagṛha for alms the angry crowd of men and women harshly treated him, but he patiently endured suffering with equanimity. With the kind permission of Mahāvīra he passed away by starving for a half-month.

c14.27

There is nothing striking in the story of Prince Aṭimukta save and except that he became a Jaina mendicant in his early life, when he was a mere boy. ‘You are a child, my son’, said his father, ‘and have no understanding. What do you know of the doctrine?’ The reply is given in the form of a riddle, ‘What I know, I do not know, and what I do not know, I know’. By this he meant that he knew that one who is born must die, but he did not know how death would take place and exactly when. The riddle does not exhibit much of a literary art, nor does its explanation go to prove a great philosophic insight. We have better examples of such riddles in Pāli Aṅgulimāla Sutta¹ and Mahā-ummagga Jātaka (No. 546).

c14.28

¹ Majjhima Nikāya, II, pp 97-105

c14.29

In the seventh division we have the personal stories of the thirteen wives of king Śreṇika of Rājagṛha, all of whom renounced the world and fared well at death as the Jaina nuns. They were known as Nandā, Nandavatī, Nanduttarā, Nandīśreṇikā, Mārutā, Sumārutā, Mahāmārutā, Marudevā, Bhadrā, Subhadrā, Sujātā and Bhūtadattā.

c14.30

The eighth or concluding division is devoted to the stories of ten Jaina nuns who studied the eleven aṅgas, the sāmāyika and other religious practices, and led a rigorous religious life under the guidance of the Āryā Candanā, the leading Jaina Therī of the age. Kālī, Sukālī, Mahākālī, Kṛṣṇā, Sukṛṣṇā, Mahākṛṣṇā, Vīrakṛṣṇā, Rāmakṛṣṇā, Pitṛsenakṛṣṇā, and Mahāsenakṛṣṇā are suggested as their names.

c14.31

Here we have a description of the ten kinds of penances (tavokammā) observed by the ten nuns who were previously the wives of king Śreṇika. These are known as ratnāvalī, kanakāvalī, muktāvalī, kṣudraka (lesser) simhanīkrīḍita, mahallaka (greater) simhanīkrīḍita, sapta-saptaniya to daśa-daśamya, kṣudraka sarvatobhadra, mahallaka sarvatobhadra, bhadrottara-pratima, and ācambit-vardhamāna (āyambilavaddhamāna). The technical explanation of each involves a mathematical arrangement of numbers expressive of the number of meals and fast days in different permutations and combinations, for all of which the reader may be referred to Abhayadeva’s commentary on the text of the Amtagadadaśāo.

Cites (12)