Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Some Jaina Canonical Sutras c16: Chapter XI: Praśna-Vyākaraṇāni (Paṇhāvāgaraṇāiṃ)

Some Jaina Canonical Sūtras c16

Language
English

Chapter XI: Praśna-Vyākaraṇāni (Paṇhāvāgaraṇāiṃ)

c16.2

The Paṇhā-Vāgarana Sūya¹ (Praśna-vyākarana sūtra) is counted as the tenth aṅga of the Śvetāmbara āgama. It is otherwise known as Praśna-vyākarana-daśā for the simple reason that it consists of ten lectures or chapters (ajjhayanas), the five of which are devoted to the topic of anhaa and the remaining five to that of samvara. Abhayadeva Sūri wrote an authoritative commentary on it. It has been edited along with the text. Winternitz points out that it is a purely dogmatic presentation, which does not correspond either to the title of the work or to the table of contents in the Thānamga 10 and in the Nandī. Schubring (Worte Mahāvīras, p. 13) says that a later work took the place of the old aṅga which is lost. The title of the sūtra, Praśna-vyākarana, implies at the first sight that the text is the catechism or book of questions and answers. But the text, as we now have it, is not of this nature. The contents of a Paṇhā-Vāgarana as given in the Sthānāṅga and Nandīsūtra presuppose a canonical work consisting of 108 praśnas, 108 apraśnas, 108 praśnapraśnas, vidyātisayas and discourses of saints with Nāgakumāras and other Bhavanapatis. The present text does not meet these requirements. On the other hand, it appears as a methodical and elaborate exposition of the two topics mentioned above. As such it may be judged as a learned dissertation on the subjects and as an important literary production of the scholastic age. Abhayadeva is compelled to explain the title of the present sūtra in a manner to suit its contents. He says, praśnānām vidyāviśesānām yāni vyākaranāni tesām pratipādanaparā daśā daśādhyāyana-pratibaddhāh granthapaddhataya iti Praśnavyākaranadaśāh. The Praśna-vyākaranadaśā is a treatise comprising ten lectures that establish the expositions of certain select topics. The methodical expositions are all ascribed to Sudharman the fifth gaṇadhara, who addressed them to his pupil Jambusvāmin. The two main topics dealt with in this treatise are anhaa and its anti-thesis samvara. The term anhaa is equated with Sanskrit āsnavah (āśravah)². Thus anhaa is taken to be the same as *āsrava* which goes to form an antithetical pair with *samvara*. The antithetical pair which occurs in the Pillar Edicts of Aśoka verbally corresponds with the *puṇya* and *pāpa* of Jainism. In these edicts *āsīnava* stands in contrast to *kayāna apāsīnave bahukayāne*¹ (Pillar Edict II). It would seem that the word *āsīnava* is employed there as a synonym of *pāpa* as opposed to *kalyāṇa* or *puṇya*. There is still a difference of opinion² as to whether the Asokan word *āsīnava* corresponds to the Ardhamāgadhī *aṇhaa* or to the Pāli and Sanskrit *ādīnava*. There is evidently no such Sanskrit word as *āsnava* used in the Brahmanical or Buddhist works. Here we have *ādīnava* in its place but the Asokan term *āsīnava* clearly presupposes a Sanskrit word like *āsnava* as suggested by the Jain scholiast. So far as the meaning of the two words *āsnava* and *ādīnava* is concerned, it is practically the same. Just as in Jain literature it has *āsrava* for its synonym, so in the *Amarakośa* the two synonyms suggested for *ādīnava* are *āsrava* and *kleśa*.³ It is important to note that *aṇhaa* is characterized in our text as *anādika* (*adivirahita*), 'beginningless', 'that of which the sinful action is the root cause', as explained by Abhayadeva. This suggests no doubt that our text is concerned not so much with the sins as 'with innate proneness to sin'.

c16.3

¹ The Āgamodaya Samiti has published an edition with Abhayadeva's commentary (1919)

c16.4

² Āsnava is from ā+root snu. Āśrava is from root śru, to flow, whence 'a flowing of the soul from the senses towards their external objects' In Āpastamba *Dh. S.* (II, 25, 19) the word *āsrava* is taken to mean 'external objects by which a person is attracted outwards' (*Yaḥ puruṣaḥ āśrāvyate, vahiḥ ākṛṣyate*) (R. K. Mookerjee, *Asoka*, 1928, p. 174)

c16.5

¹ B. M. Barua, *Asoka and his Inscriptions*, 1946, p. 274

c16.6

² D. R. Bhandarkar, *Asoka*, 1932, pp. 107-109

c16.7

³ *Amarakośa*, 3. 2. 29—*Ādīnavāsravau kleśe*

c16.8

The five sinful deeds that one commits due to the innate proneness to sin stand as opposed to five great vows (*mahāvratas*) that follow from the principle of *samvara* or self-restraint. The five sinful deeds are enumerated as *hiṃsā* (harming life), *mosa* (lying), *adatta* (thieving), *abambha* (incontinence), and *pariggaha* (hankering after worldly possession). Each of them is taken up as a subject for separate treatment. The harming of life is deprecated by the Jinas as a sinful deed which is fierce, terrible, mean, rash, undignified, shameless, inhuman, fearful, dreadful in reaction, greatly fearful, horrible, frightful, unlawful, causing anxiety, reckless, unrighteous, uncompassionate, pitiless, leading to a hellish life and destructive in effect. This sinful deed serves to generate delusion and great fear and it brings about mental distress in fear of death. This is the first door to impiety. It is defined as violence done to life, driving soul out of the body, arousing suspicion in the mind of other beings, harming those who can be harmed, and that which should not be done. It consists in hurting, killing, doing violence, oppressing, killing in three ways of thought, word, and deed, emulating, ending the lease of life, and the like. Harming life is an iniquity of which the consequences are bitter. It is of various kinds and it has various modes. It causes pain and brings misery to others. It is an outcome of unrestraint. In this connection our text furnishes a long but interesting list of the fauna and flora, classified according to the number of senses possessed by them. Many are the root causes that lead beings to commit this sin. The main causes are, however, anger, pride, conceit, and greed, all of which are ultimately rooted in delusion. It stands to destroy all good things in men. In the same connection our text discusses the position of the professional boar-killers, fish-catchers, fowlers, hunters and the like. It also discusses the position of several cruel tribes and peoples such as the Śakas, Yavanas, Śabaras, Barbaras, Kāyas, Murundas, Udas, Bhadakas, Tittikas, Pakkanikas, Kulākṣas, Gaudas, Simhalas, Pārasas, Kroñcas, Andhras, Drāvidas, Bilvalas, Pulindras, Arosos, Dumbas, Pokkanas, Gandhahārakas, Vālhikas, Jallas, Romas, Māsas, Bakusas, Malayas, Cuñcukas, Cūlikas, Konkanakas, Medas, Pahlavas, Mālavas, Mahuras, Ābhāsikas, Anakkas, Cinas, Lāhsikas, Khasas, Hāsikas, Neharas, Mahārāṣtras (Maustikas), Ārabas, Davilakas, Kuhanas, Kekayas, Hūnas, Romakas, Roravas, Marukas and Cirātas (Kirātas).¹ The list of tribes and peoples notorious for their cruel habit and nature is sufficient to indicate that our text is a compilation of a post-Christian period.

c16.9

¹ For details of some of these tribes vide B C Law, ‘Tribes in Ancient India’ (Bhandarkar Oriental Series No 4)

c16.10

The second door to impiety is lying which is defined and characterized as telling an untruth which makes a person light and fickle, which is fearful, which causes enmity and brings ill-fame and the like. It is an immoral act in which the low-born persons indulge. It is cruel in its effect and it makes a liar untrustworthy. It is deprecated by the best of saints. It is linked up with the blackest of soul colourings and it only serves to increase a man's state of woe and degradation, and to bring about the cycle of re-births. It carries with it the idea of indulgence in falsehood, cheating, deceiving, crookedness, false deposition and useless talks and the like. Anger, greed, fear and envy are the various mental factors that are behind lying. This door to impiety also includes the preaching and promulgation of false doctrines and misleading philosophical views of life Some typical instances of false doctrines and misleading views are given. The first of them is typically the philosophical view attributed in the Pāli Nikāyas to Ajita Kesakambala represented as an avowed nāstika. The Buddhist doctrine of the five aggregates¹ is also put in the category of nāstikya. The nāstikavāda is taken to mean the denial of manly energy, the existence of heaven and hell, and the possibility of reward and retribution and the like The instances of astikavāda cited are shown to be equally misleading The Jain teacher repudiates the idea of God as the creator and ordainer of all things and of all beings He discards the theory of soul as a passive principle Both the Sānkhya and the Vedānta doctrines stand self-condemned in his opinion. That there is a sectarian note in the statement and criticism of the views of other schools of thought is undeniable. The details of the modes of lying practised and committed with reference to persons and things are important as throwing light on the social condition and moral standard of the age.

c16.11

¹ Keith, Buddhist Philosophy, pp 85ff, B C Law, Buddhaghosa (BBRAS, 1946), p 136

c16.12

The third door to impiety is taking away what is not given (adattādānam). It is defined as an act of stealing, oppressing, bringing death and fear, an iniquity which is terrifying, a sinful deed which is rooted in covetousness and greed It is undignified in its nature and it produces a bad name It is equally deprecated by good men By it one incurs the displeasure of persons, near and dear It is full of passion and delusion It goes by the name of theft, stealing other people's property, seeking gain from the belongings of others, greed for the wealth of others, cupidity, thieving, spoiling the hand with the ugliness of the act and the like Robbery, dacoity and such other daring acts all come within the definition of taking away what is not given. Plundering, looting, carrying spoils and booties in the name of war are also included in this act of impiety. In this connection our text furnishes some details about warfare, weapons, and armaments. It also supplies some interesting information regarding different punishments meted out to the thieves and robbers Their miserable life here and hereafter is described in detail.

c16.13

The fourth door to impiety is known as incontinence (abambham) It is defined as a sexual dalliance coveted in the worlds of gods, men and demons, which is a net and noose of amour, which is a hindrance to the practice of austerities, self-restraint, and chaste life, which brings about death, bondage, and coercion, and which is a cause of infatuation and delusion. It bears the name of sexual congress, sex-indulgence, delight in vulgar life, sexual passions and overt act. Even the *Vaimānika* gods have sexual enjoyments with the goddesses and family maidens. They too are not free from this kind of infatuation. The demons, *nāgas*, *garuḍas* and *supannas* too are no exceptions to the rule. Among men, the monarchs, kings, overlords, chaplains, high officers of the state, all run after this. The same passion is equally perceptible among the lower creatures. In this connection our text gives us the details about the physical forms, dresses, beautification, wiles and guiles, and various pleasing artifices, by which women entice men. Incidentally the modes of generation are discussed, according to which, living beings are to be classified as viviparous, oviparous and the like. This classification is the same as that met with in Pāli and other Indian texts.

c16.14

The fifth door to impiety is known as *pariggaha* or hankering after worldly possessions such as varieties of gems, gold, jewels, perfumes, scents, unguents, conveyances, utensils, household furniture, landed properties, wealth and opulence. It is rooted in greed and it is an expression of craving and thirst for worldly things. So it does by the name of craving (*taṇhā*), worldly attachment (*āsatti*) and it is characterized by the great longing for earning, acquisition, accumulation, hoarding, insatiety and the like. Even the gods are not free from this hankering after worldly possessions. The emperors, *Vāsudevas*, *Baladevas*, *Māṇḍalikas*, chieftains, *Tālavaras*, commanders-in-chief, millionaires, bankers, *rāṣṭrikas*, *purohitas*, and the like are guided by it. Worldly possessions comprise all secular sciences and arts, worldly enjoyments, agriculture, industry and commerce by which men are implicated in various conflicts and clashes of interests. In this connection our text speaks of sixty-four sciences and arts (*catusaṭṭhi*).

c16.15

After dealing with the five doors to impiety the *sūtra* takes up for consideration the five doors to *saṃvara* or self-restraint, one by one. They are spoken of as virtues that stand for deliverance from all kinds of suffering. The first is called *ahiṃsā* (non-harming), the second, the truthful speech (*saccavayaṇaṃ*), the third, taking only what is given (*dattam-anuṇṇā*), the fourth, continence (*bambhaceram*) and the fifth, non-hankering after worldly possessions (*apariggahattam*), which constitute the five great vows that are conducive to the good and welfare of the world.

c16.16

The first principle of non-harming is praised as the island, the refuge, the destination, the basis, and nirvāṇa to the worlds of men, gods and demons. It is just another name for pity (dayā), forbearance, purity, goodness, welfare, protection, morality, self-control, self-restraint, self-guarding and the virtue which is the abode of the perfected ones (siddhas)

c16.17

The truthful speech is the second door to self-restraint. This is the accepted principle of all noblemen, teachers and saints. It implies one’s moral purity and uprightness, and it is a virtue which inspires confidence. It requires a person to abstain from praising himself and condemning others. In this connection the sūtra speaks of twelve kinds of language, namely, Prākṛta, Samskṛta, Māgadhī, Paiśācī and Apabhraṃśa, each distinguished according to prose and verse. Some grammatical details are also given which are too well-known to need any comment here.

c16.18

The third door to self-restraint is accepting what is given It implies an abstinence from taking away what is not one’s own, from stealing and committing theft. This too is a virtue well-praised and a noble principle of self-control and self-restraint.

c16.19

The fourth door to self-restraint is continence or chaste life. It is the root principle of the best of austerities, regulated life, knowledge, faith, conduct and perfect discipline. It implies moral rectitude which is cultivated as a path to deliverance. In its magnitude it is mighty like the Himalaya and it is extolled as something in the heart of the deep ocean. This is indeed the very fundamental principle of religious life.

c16.20

The fifth door to self-restraint is non-hankering after worldly possessions The non-hankering may be both internal and external The external hankering is an obstacle to religious practices and the internal hankering leads a person to the incorrectness of method, recklessness, thoughtlessness, and moral contaminations. This is the principle of non-attachment which is conducive to the practice of samitis and guptis This stands on the very top of the path which leads to deliverance and emancipation.

c16.21

Of the five great moral vows (pañcamahāvratas) enforced by Mahāvīra the first four represented the four principles of self-restraint (cātuyāmasamvara)¹ as prescribed by Pārśvanātha for his followers. It is the fifth principle of non-hankering after worldly possessions that was added to the earlier list of four by way of an improvement. The five moral precepts as enjoined by the Buddha for the guidance of the laity are somewhat different from the Jaina five great vows. The three principles of *ahiṃsā* (non-harming), non-stealing, and truthful speech, are common to both. The fourth Jaina vow of chastity (*brahmacarya*) is deeper in its significance than the Buddhist principle of non-excess in sexual indulgence. The Jain vow corresponds more with the Buddhist principle of *brahmacarya* which is prescribed for the recluses. The fifth Jain vow is implied in the Buddhist principle of non-participation in any worldly transaction by the recluses. Although the enumerations of the principles are somewhat different, they are all important to both the systems. We have a systematic exposition of the moral precepts in the Pāli commentaries, particularly in Buddhaghosa's encyclopædic work known as the *Visuddhimagga* or the *Path of Purity*.¹ It will be seen that the Buddhist method of exposition is more lucid, direct, and clearly psycho-ethical. There is an important point of difference between the Jain and Buddhist presentations of the vows and precepts. In the Jain presentation a greater emphasis is laid on the side of abstinence from impious acts, while in Buddha's presentation much stress is laid on the positive aspect of virtues It is not enough that a person abstains from doing a wrong thing inasmuch as a progressive man is expected to cultivate and develop friendliness, honest life, truthfulness, etc. But the difference is one of degree and not of kind.

c16.22

¹ Cātuyāmasamvara was undoubtedly a phraseology of the religion of Pārśva But as presented in Buddhist literature it acquired altogether a new connotation with Mahāvīra’s followers Some are of opinion that it means the four characteristics of a Jaina recluse as understood by the Buddhist author (B C Law, Mahāvīra His Life and Teachings, pp 13ff, I H Q , II, 705, Majjhima, II, pp 35-36)

c16.23

¹ *Visuddhimagga* (PTS), Vol I, pp 6ff, P Maung Tin, *The Path of Purity*, Pt I, pp 8ff, B C Law, *A History of Pāli Literature*, Vol I, pp 400ff, B C Law, *Aśvaghoṣa*, p 85, Cf *Vinaya*, II, 162, *Samyutta*, IV, 342, II, 68, *Milinda*, 333 and *Anguttara*, IV, 248ff etc

Cites (11)