Some Jaina Canonical Sutras c9.3

c9.3

The *Thānamga* enumerates eight *mahānimittas* or great omens or signs helping divination or prognostication of what is to happen. The Jaina commentators take them to be the names of the eight separate treatises of the lost Ājīvika scripture to which they add two other names, namely the *Gītamārga* and *Nṛtyamārga*. But no suggestion like this is made in our text. The commentator of this text explains the first name *Bhauma* as a treatise dealing with subjects like earthquake, the second as one dealing with prognostics of dreams and the like. The Pāli *Jātakas* speak of the four *mahānimittas* or great omens planned by the gods as means of making Prince Siddhārtha to face the stern realities of life and to renounce the world. The *Mahāparinibbāna suttanta*¹ speaks of eight causes of earthquake, while the *Mahāsupina Jātaka*² contains an interpretation of certain dreams. The prognostics of dreams are also suggested in the *Jātaka* account of the dream of Queen Māyā. Our *sūtra* mentions the eight branches of *Āyurveda* or the science of medicine. The list includes the four, namely, jaṅgoli, bhūtavijjā, khāratanta and rasāṭaṇa (rasāyana) which are somewhat different from those included in the usual Āyurveda and Pāli lists (Cf. Brahmajāla Sutta, Dīgha, I; Cf. also the Chāndogya list—Chāndogya Upaniṣad, VII Prapāṭhaka, 1st Khaṇḍa, 2nd Khaṇḍa and 7th Khaṇḍa). The list of eight types of philosophers is very interesting. This may be reduced to the list of eight types of philosophy. The first is ekavāda or monistic doctrine. The commentator refers to the old Upaniṣadic idea of soul as the sole abiding and ultimate reality which is the same in essence as the Brahman. Evidently the Ekavāda corresponds to the Pāli Ekaccassatavāda mentioned in the Brahmajāla Sutta. The second is Anekavāda or the pluralistic doctrine. This may be taken to correspond to the Pāli Sassatavāda in the Brahmajāla Sutta, having behind it the philosophy of Pakudha Kaccāyana, which might be construed both as dualism and pluralism. The Sāṅkhya and the Vaiśeṣika doctrines may be cited as examples of dualism and pluralism respectively. The third is Mitavāda which seems to correspond to the Pāli Antānantavāda in the Brahmajāla Sutta. The Jaina commentator, however, draws our attention to the Upaniṣadic conception of the length and size of the embodied soul—aṅguṣṭhaparimātram. The fourth is Nirmitavāda or theistic-deistic doctrine which corresponds to the Pāli Issaranimmānavāda or the theory of creation of the world of men and things by the will of God. This is elaborately dealt with in the Brahmajāla Sutta under the monistic type. The fifth is Sātavāda or the doctrine of happiness, which corresponds to the Pāli Diṭṭhadhammanibbānavāda of the Brahmajāla Sutta. The motto for this doctrine probably was Sukhenasukhamadhigantabbam, the way to happiness should be through happiness. The sixth is Samucchedavāda or the doctrine of the annihilation of individuality after death which corresponds to Pāli Ucchedavāda of the Brahmajāla Sutta. The seventh is niyata or nityavāda. If it stands for niyatavāda, it means the doctrine of necessity, determinism or fatality, of which the typical example at the time of Mahāvīra and Buddha, was the philosophy of Gosāla. But it really stands for Nityavāda or the doctrine of eternity and as such it corresponds to the Pāli Sassatavāda of the Brahmajāla Sutta with the following as its axiom: ‘something comes out of something’. It is in this light that the Jaina commentator explains this type. The eighth is a descriptive name, Nasanti-paralokavāda, for the doctrine of denial of future existence, reward and retribution. This is typically the philosophy of Ajita Kesakambala and Pāyāsi (Jaina Paesī) as described and criticized in the Pāli and Jaina canon. The *Diṭṭhivādins* or dogmatists hold ‘Nothing save the doctrine we uphold, nothing save the dogma we preach is true’. (*Thānamga*, IV, 4.)