Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Doctrine of the Jainas, Described after the Old Sources c6: II An Historical Sketch of Jainism

The Doctrine of the Jainas, Described after the Old Sources c6

Language
English

Contents

II An Historical Sketch of Jainism

c6.2

§12. Any historical sketch of the Jain religion has to deal not only with the objective results of research but also with the facts maintained by this religion. We shall consider the latter first. They are based on the assumption of the world having neither beginning nor end, i.e. being everlasting. Incessantly, though only within a small part of the universe, the wheel of time revolves with its spokes (samā), the gradations ranging from the paradisical to the catastrophical period (§ 120) and back to the former, ceaselessly passing through the point denoting the present. The descending half-circle, and it is this where we find ourselves, is called osappiṇī, the ascending ussappiṇī. Either produces a number of prophets of salvation (titthagara) as Mahāvīra is, and just as his teaching (tittha) is destined to last not longer than 21,000 years (Viy. 792a, comp. also § 120), so the teachings of all his precursors were doomed to degenerate and so will be those of all that come after him. But from every degeneration a new prophet will save the teaching, if only but after an immeasurably long intermediate period (antara). Since all this occurs periodically, the Jains can afford to be quite easy in stating the inevitable impendency of degeneration.¹

c6.3

¹ Comp. AUTHOR, OLZ 1926, col. 910 ff.

c6.4

§13. Next to the spiritual supermen, to whom we shall return in due course, we have the temporal heroes. It is in them, in their social standing as well as in their personal names and those connected with them, that we first and most distinctly behold the influence of non-Jain conceptions and, mainly, of such pertaining to the Kṛṣṇa mythology. There are grand sovereigns or world-emperors (cakkavaṭṭi) who are the immediate counterparts of the common-Indian cakravartin. In the baladeva and vāsudeva, comprised as dasāra-maṇḍala by Samav. 152b, the two homonymous heroic figures have been generalized into types, and Samav. 153a is consequent in calling these half-brothers duve rāmakesavā by then adding their names. The kulagara, finally, reflect the Brahman manu and the law-constituting ancestral fathers. During every half-circle covered by the ever revolving time-wheel¹ there arise 24 prophets, 12 grand sovereigns, 9 baladeva and as many vasudeva, and either 7, 10 or 15 legislators. It is these latter only that are traced back (Samav. 150 b) over the present half-course to the one immediately preceding, whereas for the one to succeed all different classes are noted (comp. also Thāṇ. 455b, 457b ff.). And, what is more, from the uniformity regarding the cosmographic structure (§ 119) it follows that the appearance of all these men in our southernmost continent of Bharaha has its counterpart in the northernmost of Eravaya. So that, then, we hear (Thāṇ. 76a ; Samav. 72b, 153b) of the corresponding men also in this continent, if only by their names, and, indeed, they make their appearance even in the nearest continents (§ 122), as Thāṇ. 123b, if only by way of indication, shows (see also below). In this respect the continent of Mahāvideha is but rarely mentioned (Viy. 791a and, accordingly, Thāṇ. 201a).

c6.5

¹ ega-samae ega-juge Thāṇ. 76a ; Nāyādh. 223a.

c6.6

For discussing the individual classes we have to start from the fact that every half-course contains 6 periods (§ 120) within which the condition of the world either deteriorates—as is the case in the osappiṇī—or improves—as in the ussappiṇī. In the third of these periods, illustrated by the wheel-spoke of 'good-bad' (susama-dūsamā), that is to say in its last third, the legislators and founders of civilisation (kulagara) made their appearance, 15 in number acc. to Jambudd. 132b, and 7 acc. to Thāṇ. 398a ; Samav. 150b ; Āv. 148. Their names are: Sumai, Paḍissui, Sīmaṃkara, Sīmaṃdhara, Khemaṃkara, Khemaṃdhara (thus far in Jambudd. only), Vimalavāhaṇa, Cakkhumam, Jasamam, Abhicaṇḍa, Caṇḍābha (in Jambudd. only), Paseṇai, Marudeva, Nābhi, Usabha (in Jambudd. only). The last of these names is due only to unnecessarily adding the 1st Titthagara. Without it we have 14 names after the example of the 14 Manu¹, though the 7 first names are for the most part rather poorly invented, and most certainly the second row of 7 is the original one. Now the kulagaras introduced punishments (daṇḍa-nīti) which, however, consisted in not more than in admonition, warning and reprimand (hakkāra, ma-kkāra, dhikkāra). Every new kind³ came to be of common usage with the 6th and 11th kulagara (Āv. 165 f. : 1.3.5.).

c6.7

¹ This is the number in the Dig., comp. v. GLASENAPP, Festgabe für Jacobi p. 337.

c6.8

³ In Vedhas interspersed with prose.

c6.9

The following period "bad-good" (dūsama-susamā) contains all Baladeva and Vāsudeva (Jambudd. 164b) or dasāra (Thāṇ. 76a ; 123a f. ; Samav. 72b). The former, dressed in dark, is characterised by the palmtree, the latter, dressed in yellow, by the Garuḍa in the banner; other attributes of the baladeva are the ploughshare, the club and the arrow, whereas of the vāsudeva they are the shell, the discus, the club, the spear, and the sword, so that the description (Samav. 152b f. )² closely follows the epic pattern. They both are masters of half the Bharaha. We come to know (also Thāṇ. 447a) their names in their pre-existence, their fathers and mothers, their teachers, the towns where they first came to wish for a certain form of existence (niyāṇa-bhūmi), the cause for this wish (n.-kāraṇa), and their 9 opponents, padisattu, later called prativāsudeva. Since these informations are for the most part given in the way of popular verses we may well suggest the general knowledge of certain legends marked with regard to content. In the Canon, however, the individual baladeva and vāsudeva scarcely appear at all (Samav. 63a). It is only Kaṇha Vāsudeva who in Antag. 5⁴ plays an actual part, and in the Jain version of the epic Draupadī legend in the Nāya 16 of the 6th Anga¹. Here in Kavila (Kapila) we come to know a vāsudeva contemporary with Kaṇha, though pertaining to a different continent (see above).

c6.10

² Thāṇ. 398a renders the daṇḍa-nīti as seven-fold : the above mentioned plus paribhāsa, maṇḍala-bandha, cāraṇa, chavi-ccheya. Acc. to Āv. 166f. the last 4 constitute the daṇḍa-nīti coming in with Bharaha.—To the common nīti it has to be added that its means are sāma, bheda and daṇḍa (Thāṇ. 151a). These three attha-jem are lacking daṇa.

c6.11

⁴ Comp. KENNEDY JRAS 1908, 505-521.

c6.12

¹ Comp. LEUMANN, VIH OC III, 2, p. 541 ff. In addition there is the "Legend of Dvāravatī's fall and Krishna's death" provided by Devendra in the comm. on Utt. (JACOBI ZDMG 42, 493-529 ; CHARPENTIER ibd. 66, 675-678).

c6.13

As to the world emperors we are informed in a similar way by Samav. 152a, though in Jambudd. 3 we have a detailed description concerning the career of the 1st cakkavaṭṭi Bharaha. This career consists in the obtaining of 14 imperial crown-treasures. In the armoury hall of his palace at Viṇiyā the wheel (1) settles first and then shows him the way to the succeeding ventures². Bh. proclaims his sovereignty at three points of the sea-shore, at the Sindhu and at a cave in the Veyaddha mountains. At the two latter places he gains a magic fleece (camma-rayaṇa) (2) and the rod (3) and by the former serving him as a ship he crosses the stream. The people of the Avāḍa-Cilāya are assisted by the Nāgakumāra causing a tempest to rage over the headquarters for seven days which Bh., however, is able to resist by means of his magic umbrella (4) and the crown-jewel (5), and the Av.-C. surrender. Further acquisitions made in this district are : the prototype of all measures of capacity (kāgiṇī)³ (6), a spouse (7), and a sword (8). On the Gaṅgā Bh. receives 9 objects of priceless value (nihi, Ṭhāṇ. 448b ; Jambudd. 256b). Then there follows the ceremonial entry into Viṇiyā. The imperial crown-treasures equally include the general (seṇāvai), the chamberlain (gāhāvai), the architect (vaḍḍhai), the domestic chaplain (purohiya), horse and elephant (9 to 14). After a long reign he performs the act of purging called apuvva-karaṇa (§ 183), obtains the Kevala-cognition (§ 81) and enters the Nirvāṇa on the Aṭṭhāvaya mountain. This career is typical of all grand-sovereigns, for Ṭhāṇ. 298a says that they all gain the 14 crown-jewels. They are all considered to be animate (§ 101) as we know from Indian dramatic plays a.o. Apart from being distinguished by their names (Samav. 152b) the 12 cakkavaṭṭi are also distinguished by their bodily size¹, but this they share with the baladeva and vāsudeva on the one hand and with the titthagara on the other. Their period, too, is the dūsama-susamā with the exception of Bharaha who already lived in the susama-dūsamā as did the 1st Titthagara. But there are still other relations existing between the two species. The 5th to the 7th grand-sovereigns came to be the 16th to the 18th titthagara, and of the latter the first was actually an emperor (Samav. 42b), even though he is not listed as such a one.

c6.14

² The AUTHOR also GGA 1932, p. 293f. ALSDORF ZDMG 92, 472 f.

c6.15

³ For a description see Ṭhāṇ. 434a ; Jambudd. 225a.

c6.16

¹ The size most certainly also determined the measures of the three giant figures representing Bharaha's younger brother Bāhubali. Acc. to the legend Bh. himself raised a statue to him with B. measuring 325 dhanu. He is often called Kāmadeva among other names, and acc. to M. GOVIND PAL IHQ 4, 270-286, the Kanarese name of Gommaṭa, by the mediation of the Konkani, stems from the synonymous word Manmatha. The most ancient, largest and most famous of the three statues (57 ft high) was raised about 980 A D. by Cāmuṇḍa Rāya—Gommaṭa Rāya near Sravana Belgola in Mysore, a second, dated Śaka 1353, near Karkala, and a third, dated 1525 by Śaka, near Yenur (Venur), both places in South-Kanara. Comp. PAL ibd. ; VENKATASUBBIAH IHQ 6, 290-309 ; early reports by MACKENZIE IA 2, 129-133; BURNELL ibd. 353-357.

c6.17

In the following we give the Śvet.-names of the series² in Bharata as have been discussed above. The kulagara temporarily precede the cakkavaṭṭi, Bharaha is the son of Usabha. The 5 first members of the series 2 to 4 lie between cakk. 2 and 3, the 6th and 8th fall in the time of cakk. 7 and 9, the 7th and 9th lie between cakk. 8 and 9, and between 11 and 12 resp.³

c6.18

² For the deviations of the Dig. see v. GLASENAPP, Festgabe f. Jacobi, p. 337f.

c6.19

³ Comp. the tables AV 242a and v. GLASENAPP, Jainismus, p. 261.

c6.20

1. cakkavaṭṭi : Bharaha, Sagara, Meghavam, Saṇamkumāra, Santi⁴, Kunthu⁴, Ara⁴, Subhūma, Mahāpauma Hariseṇa, Jayaṇāma or -seṇa, Bambhadatta.—2. baladeva : Ayala, Vijaya, Bhadda, Suppabha, Sudamsaṇa, Aṇanda, Nandaṇa, Pauma (=Rāma Dāśarathi), Rāma (=Balarāma).—3. vāsudeva : Tiviṭṭha (-ṭṭhū), Duviṭṭha, Sayambhū, Purisuttama, Purisa-siha, Purisapuṇḍarīya, Datta, Nārāyaṇa, Kaṇha.—4. paḍisattu : Assaggiva, Tāraga, Meraga, Mahukedhava, Nisumbha, Bali, Pahāraga, Rāvaṇa, Jarāsaṃdha. By adding the spiritual series of the 24 titthagara to these temporal series 2 to 5 later authors come to count 63 men “of mark” (Śvet. : śalākā-puruṣa, Dig, : lakṣaṇa-p.) leaving the mentioned identities out of consideration. 27 out of these 63 are related to the Kṛṣṇa legend. This has been led back by JACOBI to the spreading of the teaching towards the west¹. But we have seen already that Kaṇha had been playing a part at all times, and also Ariṭṭhaṇemi, a brother-in-law of Kṛṣṇa, is included in the system since the time we know it.

c6.21

⁴ titth. 16—18 (s.b.). JACOBI (SBE 45, 86) thinks it possible that this name developed from Kakutstha, but this derivation asks for a number of hypothetical links.

c6.22

¹ Reports of the VIIth OC (Vienna 1889), p. 75-77 ; IA 16, 163f.

c6.23

§14. In now turning to the spiritual heroes we have to distinguish between such who *find* and such who *preach* salvation, and as to the former we may denote them as the *patteya-buddha*. Viy. 895a places them next to the latter though fails to give any particulars for doing so, nor do we find any in the two only remaining and, by the way, later passages of Samav. 123a and Nandi 203a. The appertaining persons first appear in the narrative tradition of the Āvassaya². The preachers of salvation (titthagara, arahaṃ, jiṇa; Viy. 583a and Ṭhāṇ. 302a : devādhideva) of the current osappiṇī are called : 1. Usabha, 2. Ajiya, 3. Sambhava, 4. Abhinandaṇa, 5. Sumai, 6. Paumappabha, 7. Supāsa, 8. Candappabha, 9. Suvihi Pupphadanta, 10. Siyala, 11. Sejjamsa, 12. Vāsupujja, 13. Vimala, 14. Aṇanta, 15. Dhamma, 16. Santi, 17. Kunthu, 18. Ara, 19. Malli, 20. Muṇisuvvaya, 21. Nami, 22. Ariṭṭhaṇemi, 23. Pāsa, 24. Vaddhamāṇa or Mahāvīra. For Paumappabha and Candappabha Viy. 792a has Suppabha and Sasi ; in an isolated inscription (§ 25) Ara is called Nāṇdyāvarta ; Ariṭṭhaṇemi is frequently shortened into Nemi. The entire series is closely dealt with by Samav. 150a and Āv. 230 ff. though this is being done in comprising gāhās only. They record the names of each in their pre-existence, those of their parents, of their first alms-givers, pupils both male and female, and other items. What else we find in the Samav. and in the Ṭhāṇ. as well rests in correspondence to the purpose of these works, on figures which, faithful to the system, are mostly very large. Thus we learn, though but incompletely and frequently without any recognizable principle, at what age a Titthagara devoted himself to monastic life, how many groups of disciples and group-leaders he had, how many among his followers owned a certain amount of spiritual knowledge and were endowed with certain kinds of cognition, how old he came to be, how tall he was, etc. Jinac. 184-203 in dealing with those from 2 up to 21 confines himself to giving the distances of the one from the other, from Mahāvīra or from the present of that time. A number of them is attributed certain colours of the body (Thāṇ. 98b)¹, and, what is more, in pairs : 6 and 12 are *pauma-gora* red, 8 and 9 *candagora*, white, 19 and 23 *piyangu-sāma* dark, and 20 and 22 *nīl'uppala*, blue. The remaining are golden. For a smaller part these colours are due to the names of their bearers, and this, too, goes back to legends. Such is equally the case with reports stating, for instance (Samav. 42b), that 23 preachers of salvation (2-24) were minor princes (*maṇḍali-rāya*) prior to their monastic life, or, as Thāṇ. 351b gives it, that five (12. 19. 22-24) were *kumāra* when becoming monks. By the earliest plastic image of a Titthagara handed down to us (§ 25, comp. also § 24) it is proved that their representation showing merely their typical features was given personal traits by adding a symbol. The Canon does not refer to such symbols. For the most part they consist in animals (for 1-4 : bull, elephant, horse, monkey : for 23 and 24 : snake and lion), but also in the red and blue lotus (6 and 21), in patterns (7, 10, 15, 18), in the water-jug (19) and in the shell (22)². A direct reference to the name of the Titthagara is made merely by the bull of the Ṛṣabha ; Mahāvīra's lion may be connected with the words : *sīh'ubbhava*³.

c6.24

² The part they play with the later commentators Devendra and Bhāvavijaya has been dealt with by CHARPENTIER in the light of the Jātaka and epic texts (Paccekabuddhageschichten. Uppsala 1908 ; JAS. 1911, 201-255).

c6.25

¹ For minor deviations with the Digambaras see JAINI, Outlines of Jainism.

c6.26

² For a specification see v. GLASENAPP, Jainismus p. 491.

c6.27

³ So instead of *sīhabbhava* (the AUTHOR ZDMG 104, p. 262). Comp. the *sīhāvalokita* and other lion-like behaviour of the new-born Bodhisattva in Lalitavistara VII.

c6.28

bhāṇam appāṇeṇam kucchimsi gabbham vakkante Āyār. II p. 121, line 22 (to supply gabbham).

c6.29

No more than the Canon refers to the symbols does it refer to the two deities of male and female sex associated with every Titthagara. They are called yakṣa and yakṣiṇī or yakṣī or sāsana- (śruta) devatā. The latter may well have inaugurated the conception in so far as it was the commandment of Jina that first took on human shape, i.e. female shape in correspondence with basic Indian conceptions. Moreover, there was the demand for establishing granting powers for laymen since the preachers of salvation were beyond reach of their supplications¹. Their names, again, disclose obvious suggestions of the Brahman sphere of ideas². For these as well as for other persons and objects pertaining to the later cult comp. v. GLASENAPP, Jainismus p. 362ff., 492³.

c6.30

¹ About the importance of the yakṣī cult in South India see DESAI Jainism in South India, 1957.

c6.31

² For the picture-teaching of the Dig. comp BURGESS IA 32, 459-464; XIII. OC, 74; in The Indian Sect of the Jainas (§ 4); J. L. JAINI IA 33, 330-332. For the Śvet. see Helen M. JOHNSON, IA 56, 29-28.

c6.32

³ A movement against the Śruta-d. see § 33.

c6.33

§15. At the beginning of her pregnancy the mother of a Titthagara has experienced 14 visions by dreaming as has such of a cakkavaṭṭi, whereas the mother of a vāsudeva has visioned 7, such of a baladeva 4, and such of a maṇḍaliya 1 out of those 14. The germ for these figures is in the 14 dreams of Mahāvīra's mother (Jiṇac. § 32 ff.)⁴. Acc. to Viy. 709a we have (to refer to this here) 42 normal and 30 major dreams (mahā-suviṇa) of the kind of dreams in pregnancy mentioned above. Ten dreams were visioned by Mv. when still a chaumattha (§ 81, also Ṭhāṇ. 499a). 14 dreams immediately lead to true cognition and in most cases to salvation within the same existence. The dream belongs to the 8 possible omens (nimitta, Ṭhāṇ. 427a) and is considered rather incongruently⁵ as a special kind of visionary power (Thāṇ. 430b) together with sammad-damsaṇa etc. up to kevala-d. (§ 82) to which Sthān. 430b remarks that, properly speaking, the svapna-darśana pertains to the akṣur-d. (§82). It comes in during the state of semi-trance (sutta-jāgara) and it is either true (ahātacca), of temporal extension (payāṇa), goes back to some day-event (cintā-suviṇa) or not (tavvivarīya), or, finally, it is vague (avvatta-damsaṇa). The dream of a samvuḍa, i.e. of one who exercises samvara (§169), is necessarily true, however, while this is not positive with the samvuḍa and the samvaḍāsamvuḍa. All this is taught by Viy. 16, 6 (709a ff.) perhaps in identity with the Sumiṇabhavana referred to by Vav. 10, 28, or with the Mahāsumiṇabhāvaṇā quoted at other places.

c6.34

⁴ A representation in colours was reviewed by HÜTTEMANN, Baessler-Archiv IV, H. 2. The Dig. know of 16 dreams.

c6.35

⁵ nimitta as well as uppāya a. o. pertain to the region of the pāva-suya-pasanga (Ṭhāṇ, 45/a).

c6.36

The schematic structure of the life as lived by a preacher of salvation equally becomes clear by Jambudd.5 describing the ceremonies conferred by the gods on every new-born Titthagara. The disākumarī perform the preparations. Sakka and his gods, the latter being summoned by Hari Negamesi (§17), betake themselves to the birth-place. After the mother has been sunk into deep sleep a copy of the child is being created along with 5 Sakka who themselves take the Titthagara to the sacred place in the Paṇḍaga grove of the Mandara. Here it is Accuya who, with the assistance of the other gods, performs the act of consecration by anointing and adorning. Isāṇa creates 5 of his like who wash the Titthagara, Sakka 4 white bulls whose horns join above in the shape of water streams so that a vast flood pours down upon the head of the consecrated. 5 other Sakka then take him back to his mother's side removing the copy. By order of Sakka and Vesamaṇa the Jambhaga gods finally bring in all sorts of treasures, and in the end they all return to their abodes.

c6.37

The end of the Titthagara career is discussed by Jambudd. 156b, though the text fails to mention any fixed locality. Acc. to the legends it is invariably the mountain of Sammeta or Pārasnāth, a name referring to Pārśva (Pāsa). It was only Usabha who found the Nirvāṇa on the Kailāsa, Vāsupujja in Campā, Ariṭṭhanemi on Girnār, and Mahāvīra (s.b.) in Pāvā. The cremation of the corpse is performed by all godly princes under Sakka's leadership. As we read in Viy. 502b the relics enjoy adoration in the heavenly sphere. This description holds good in any case even though the author here but refers to Usabha whose biography which for the most part coincides closely with Jinac. 204-228 is related in the preceding passages. Ranging first in the sequence and, for that reason, frequently called Ādinātha in later times Usabha (Ṛṣabha) enjoys the advantage of a more detailed representation which in Āv.2 is explicitly proclaimed to be universally accepted; anything the like does not occur until the end of the sequence (s. b.). Ṛṣabha who, acc. to Viṣṇu-Purāṇa 2, 1 was a world emperor to become a naked ascetic and to die the fasting-death¹ is sure to have come to the Jains most opportunely as ranging first in their sequence.² The extended description of the late Bhāgavata-P. (5, 6, 8-11) is connected with a vengeful allusion to Jainism flourishing in "Konka, Venka and Kuṭaka" thanks to Ṛ.'s travels in those regions. As is mentioned ibd. 5, 15, 1, but not in Viṣṇu-P., the same has happened with Sumati, Bharata's son. The person of Malli is (Thāṇ. 400b) identical with that of the king's daughter referred to by Nāya. 8. There she is called by the name of Malli arahā and incidentally so from the moment (Nāyādh. 148a) when, on account of her report in front of her six suitors, she comes to remember earlier adventures. Her naming as Arhat always remains masculine, and the gods hail her (Nāyādh. 151a none else than Mahāvīra, Jinac. 111) as Bhagavamloka-nāha. Nor does the latter figurative representation distinguish her in any way from the others. All this is a matter of course since sexual qualities are not inherent in a Siddha any longer. The Digambaras do not know of Malli having been a girl (comp. § 30).

c6.38

¹ The first allusion made to the above mentioned passage was by WILSON (Works, Vol. 7, 104). Comp. also JACOBI IA 9, 163.

c6.39

² No trace in the Yajurveda of "the Tirthankaras Ṛṣabha, Ajitanātha and Ariṣṭanemi", as Radhakrishnan (Indian Philosophy I, 28f.) will have it.

c6.40.1

§ 16. JACOBI expressed the idea¹ that among the Titthagara such men were admitted who were dear to those communities that had attached themselves to Mahāvīra. This would have its counterpart on a larger scale in the structure of the Hindu pantheon. Provided that Mahāvīra’s community really gained in strength by the incorporation of whole bodies of sects, we must, however, bear in mind that the Titthagara are separated from each other by “astronomical figures”, whereas those persons must have lived more or less distinctly in the memory of the contemporaries. As is the case with so many characters of the Brahman legends we can neither prove nor can we definitely dispute the assertion that the preachers of salvation relic on individual persons. The lowest rungs of the Titthagara ladder leading from primeval times up to the present are more or less clearly visible in the light of history.² Yet we would be more correct in saying that the ladder reaching from an historically attested experience on dogmatic grounds far up into the past is still hit by this light at a point not far from its foot. The question to be asked is how far up this is the case. We meet Ariṭṭhanemi in Nāya 5; Antag. 1-5; Vaṇhid.; Utt. 22. He is placed within the Kṛṣṇa circle as the brother-in-law of Kaṃsa; the scene is Dvāravatī (Bāravai).

c6.40.2

In spite of his being more frequently referred to than his precursors, yet Ariṭṭhanemi—he lived to the age of a thousand years—is by no means historically more tangible than they are. The only thing to be advanced might be that in the year of Mahāvīra’s Nirvāṇa he had been dead for 84,000 years (Jinac. 182f.), because it should be remembered that the figure of 84 or either of its plurals frequently appear with the Jains and elsewhere where they only fail to give precise details for something founded on fact. Acc. to Jinac. 184 Ariṭṭhanemi’s precursor, Nami, died half a million years back, and as is the case with all other figures in the lives of the Jinas, so these intervals, too, increase into the gigantic by retrogradation. Pāsa, however, acc. to Jinac. 168 f. died 250 years before Mv. (1230 minus 980) at an age of one hundred years. Ever since STEVENSON came to point out this moderation in quoting figures¹ these two dates have served as an argument for Pāsa's being an historic person, though what else we are told of him in Jiṇac. 149f. is merely a copy of Mahāvīra's biography with the exception that Pāsa is said to have been born in Benares and to have died on the Sammeya mountain in Bihar. Nor do we learn anything of importance² from Pāsa's role Nāyādh. II 1 and Pupph. 1, 3. But he is attested as a historic personality by other passages in rendering his teaching and reporting on his followers.

c6.40.3

Mahāvīra's parents are said to have belonged to Pāsa's lay-followers (*Pāsavaccijjā samaṇovasagā*, Āyār. II, 15, 16), and in his lifetime—as is confirmed by the Sāmaññaphala-Sutta of the Dīgha-Nikāya)³—there have been teachers (*P. jjā therā bhagavanto*, Viy. 134b, 247b) and monks (*aṇagāra*, Viy. 99a, 439a) in accordance with Pāsa's intentions. The word *avaccijja* (also Therāv. 2) indicates the spiritual filiation⁴. Pāsa was obviously of a winsome nature, for he bears the constant title of *puris' ādāṇiya* which seems to be the oldest precursor of the modern occasional titles of Lokamānya, Deśabandhu, Mahātman, etc. *ādāṇiya* means as much as *ādejja* which in the Karman theory stands for "suggestive"⁵. Both sects were on absolutely friendly terms, and for this we are given some valuable proof by the conversation of two of their leading representatives Rāyap.⁶ and Utt. 23⁷. We are assured (Viy. 247b, 454a) that already Pāsa had conceived both the shape and the eternity of the world (§ 103) in a way as taught by Mahāvīra, though (in the second passage) the latter insists that he came to discover it independently. Yet we are not able to draw any immediate inferences on Pāsa's system from this conception of his since the idea of a lower, an intermediate, and an upper world is in itself not singular. Mahāvīra's laymen are instructed (Viy.

c6.40.4

138a) by Pāsa teachers that self-discipline (*samjama*) leads to the suppression of the "influence" (*aṇaṇhaya*, § 168) and asceticism (*tava*) to purification (*vodāṇa*, also 140b), and to this Mahāvīra agrees. And yet, perhaps, he himself went beyond it, provided it was he who placed those two pairs into the causal association known, acc. to Ṭhāṇ. 156b, as: *savaṇa, nāṇa, vinnāṇa, paccakkhāṇa, a., t., v., akiriyā, nivvāṇa, siddhi-gai-gamaṇa-pajjava-sāṇa*. But it cannot be disputed that in practical ethics we see a development beyond Pāsa's ideas where the four-fold morality, the *cāujjāma dhamma*, is replaced by the *paṇca-mahavvaiya sapaḍikkamaṇa dh*. Pāsa's postulation (Rāyap. 118a; Ṭhāṇ. 201 a) was: not to damage anything living, not to commit anything untrue, and neither to take what has not ben given (*adinn'ādāṇāo veramaṇa*) nor to give away (*bahiddhādāṇāo v.*). The last word by Sthān. 202 a is taken as *bahirdhādāna* and commented as "accepting (*ādāna*) from outside", i.e. the accepting of things not belonging to the monk's standard outfit. This prohibition is said to include the "possession" of a female individual. Thus, as Abhayadeva adds, Pāsa's fourth commandment would correspond with Mahāvīra's both fourth and fifth (sexual abstention and non-possession (§ 171). The former of these two LEUMANN sees expressed in *bahiddhā-dāṇa* (sic), "a decent term for copulation¹ (the delivery of sperm)".

c6.40.5

Thus it is Pāsa's *third* vow that corresponds with both the third and fifth of Mahāvīra's including prohibition of any appropriation other than by gift as well as by acquisition. At any rate, it is a merit of Mahāvīra that he did away with a certain vagueness in the terms of his predecessor and made his fifth commandment applicable for both sexes. Utt. 23, 26f. and probably also 87 indicate that this act of extension was at the same time a process of revival, and this, to be sure, is the case, since it was in the nature of the two founders. Moreover, this is indicated by the above-mentioned view according to which the teaching experiences a decline until a new preacher of salvation comes to make his appearance. And it was also the difference existing between the teachings of Pāsa and Mahāvīra that had to be perpetuated within this view. This was done in a way (Viy. 791 b; Thāṇ. 201a) that all Titthagara prior to Pāsa are considered preachers of the cāujjāma dhamma with the exception of Usabha¹, and in the timeless continent of Mahāvideha (§ 113) it is even all 24. Likewise there is a difference being construed (Thāṇ. 296a) in that the same preachers of salvation including Pāsa had no difficult career as teachers whereas Usabha and Mahāvīra had (purima-pacchimāṇaṃ jiṇāṇaṃ duggamaṃ bhavai, tam-jahā: duāikkhaṃ duvibhajjaṃ dupassaṃ dutitikkhaṃ duraṇucaraṃ).

c6.40.6

It is possible, to be true, that the system handed down to us was complete already with Pāsa, though it fails to be probable, and certainly it cannot be proved. What is said by Āyār. II 15, 16 about the religious life and death of Mahāvīra’s parents is out of the question with regard to Pāsa’s teaching, particularly since it includes the confession (āloettā. . . paḍikkamittā). For it was by this confession that Mahāvīra’s rules differed from those of Pāsa, or else one would not have spoken of the panca-mahavvaiya sapaḍikkamaṇa dhamma in contrast with his cāujjāma dh. Mahāvīra appears as much too original a thinker than that he should have but repeated what had been in existence since long without adding something of his own.² Otherwise the system would show junctures. But this is not the case.

c6.41

¹ SBE 45. XXXII.

c6.42

² By discussing this problem Chimanlal J. SHAH starts his book on Jainism in North India 800 B.C.—526 A.D. Lo. 1932. Review by the AUTHOR in OLZ 1934, col. 126-128.

c6.43

¹ Kalpa Sūtra S. XII. Comp. JACOBI IA 9, 162f. COLEBROOKE (Misc. Ess. II, 212) does not make any use of this argument when calling P. "perhaps the real founder of the sect".

c6.44

² What Isibhās. 31 is given as his utterances has no individual character.

c6.45

³ Comp. JACOBI, SBE 45, XX.

c6.46

⁴ Since *dhamm'antevāsī* is one of the 10 terms for "son" (Thāṇ. 516a).

c6.47

⁵ *puruṣāṇaṃ madhya ādāṇiya ādeya* Vy. 248b.

c6.48

⁶ Comp. LEUMANN, VI. OC III, ² (Leiden 1883), p. 509-524.

c6.49

⁷ Comp. JACOBI, SBE 45 XXII.

c6.50

¹ Buddha und Mahāvīra p. 33.

c6.51

¹ This proportion of 2 to 22 also applies to the future.

c6.52

² The way how he came to gain his ideas is expressed by the word Thāṇ. 173a. acc. to which for him the dhamma was suadhijjiya, sujjhāiya, sutavassiya.

c6.53

§17. For our knowledge concerning Mahāvīra’s life and personality we have as ancient coherent sources³ the Uvahāṇasuya Āyār. I 9, then Āyār. II 15 (the Bhāvaṇā) and basing upon it Jiṇac. 1-148, finally Āv. 458ff. A number of detailed traits is rendered by Viy.⁴ The birthplace of Mahāvīra was the northern borough of Vaiśālī, the Besāṛh of our days, called Kuṇḍapura (Āyār.) or Kuṇḍagrāma (Jiṇac.), the Basukuṇḍ of to-day¹. It was here where the nobleman (khattiya) Nāya lived whose name is rendered in Pali by Ñātika and in Sanskrit texts rightly by Jñātṛ. The father belonging to this clan—and consequently also his children—were Kāśyapa acc. to the Gotra, while the mother was a Vāsiṣṭhī. Their names are Siddhattha and Tisalā with two more being added to each, the latter being but sporadically referred to and probably so as to serve merely the uniformity with the three names of the son to be mentioned presently. Tradition gave great importance to Mahāvīra's Kshatriya and not Brahman descent, and with the Śvetāmbaras at least it did so to the degree that it adopted the legend of Baladeva's embryonal transplantation from Rohiṇī into Devakī² and represented Mahāvīra as being the physical son of the Brahman couple of Usabhadatta and Devāṇandā in the Brahman borough of Kuṇḍapura. Acc. to Viy. 456a, however, Devāṇandā is acknowledged by Mahāvīra as being true mother. In Viy. 218a he refers to the role of transplanter played by Hari Negamesī³, but he does so without any relation to himself.

c6.54

³ Present day monographies are : Manak Chand JAINI, Life of Mahavira (Allahabad 1908) and Bimala Churn LAW, Mv. his Life and teaching, Lo. 1932).

c6.55

⁴ Comp. The AUTHOR’s Worte Mv. ’s p. 18ff.

c6.56

¹ Comp. JACOBI, SPAW 1930, p. 564f. See before HOERNLE, Uvās. II, p. 3ff. and Proceedings As. Soc. Beng. 1898, 40; JACOBI, SBE 22, XI. F.

c6.57

² Comp. JACOBI SBE 22, XXXI; ERE 7, 466b 6.

c6.58

³ About him see WINTERNITZ IRAS 1895, 149ff.

c6.59

The name of Mahāvīra is an attribute inspired by profound reverence and traced back to the gods. The curtailed form is Vīra. samaṇa, as he is said to have called himself, is as far from being a proper name as is, for instance, "the Son of Man." His civil name is Vaddhamāṇa, "the prospering one", which in the texts, however, is interpreted as "the promoter". The verb vaddhai does not occur,⁴ but only vaddhai leading up to the by far less frequent form of Vaḍḍhamāṇa (Āyār. II, 15, 12; Samav. 151a). As a member of the clan of the Nāya Mahāvīra is called Nāya (putta) (Viy. 323b), as a Kāśyapa Kāsava (a. o. Utt. 2;

c6.60

⁴ Only vaddhāvei "to congratulate", comp. PISCHEL, Gr. § 291. F. An historical mon. of Vaiśālī was compiled by VIJAYENDRA sūri (Bo. 1958; Guj.).

c6.61

Dasav. 4), after the town of Vaiśālī, in whose sphere of influence he was born¹, by the name Vesāliya (Sū. I 2, 3 end; Utt. 6 end)², and Videha-dinna after his native country (Āyār. II 15, 17; Jiṇac. 11 0). He is addressed as bhante.

c6.62

¹ JACOBI, SBE 22 X f.

c6.63

² In this connexion it may be assumed that he was spoken of as Vesāliya sāvaya as was the niyaṇṭha Piṅgalaga of Śrāvastī (Viy. 112b, in the comm. a fantastic explanation).

c6.64

Vaddhamāṇa married Jasoyā, a Kauṇḍinyī³, with whom he had a daughter bearing the name of Aṇojjā or Piyadamsaṇā. She later became the mother of a girl. Her husband is not referred to in the two biographies, but we know⁴, if not from Viy. 461a ff. so from the Āvassaya tradition, that his name was Jamāli. His name was suppressed since it was with his son-in-law (who is said to have been also his nephew from the side of sister) that Mahāvīra went through the trying experience of disobedience and heresy which came to be the "first heresy"⁵ in the history of the Jain church. Since his grand daughter is called a Kauśiki, the khattiya-kumāra Jamāli must have been a Kauśika as well.

c6.65

³ This doubtlessly underlies the Koḍinna of the texts. Comp. also Ajjava Koḍinna Samarāicc. with Ārjava Kauṇḍinya Samarādityasaṃkṣepa 1, 65.

c6.66

⁴ For the following see LEUMANN Ind. Stud. 17,97 ff.

c6.67

⁵ Out of 7 referred to by Ṭhāṇ. 410a and the Āvassaya tradition, comp. LEUMANN'S essay, Ind. Stud. 17, 91-135. These 7 heresies (pava-paṇa-ṇiphava) are more interesting in other respects (§ 38) that as to the history of dogmatics. For Jamāli's heresy see Viy. 461a ff. For the 8th ṇiphava of the Boḍiya Sivabhūi see § 26.

c6.68

§18. Vaddhamāṇa having kept his promise not to leave his parents as long as they lived⁶ and having obtained the consent probably to be given by his elder brother Nandivaddhaṇa, left his native country at the age of thirty after having arranged the distribution of his property and his heritage in the course of one year. It speaks for his inclination towards asceticism that he did so at the beginning of the cold season. Thirteen months later, i.e. in winter again, he decided to rid himself of his clothes as well⁷. This was to be the first great step out of Pāsaism which, as is demonstrated by Utt. 23, 19, knew of clothed adherents only. The ballad Āyār. I, 9, describing his early ascetic life and the austerity of his conduct further tells us of the *samaṇa bhagavam* devoting himself to meditation behind a wall of man’s height surrounding him on all sides (*porisi tiriya-bhitti*). This caused a great sensation, while, on the other hand, by his solitary and disobliging bearing he annoyed the people who did not fail to vent their anger on him. Festivities, though he took part in them, were indifferent to him. For more than two years he neither drank nor used cool water, and it was during this period that his ideas grew to maturity: it may be mentioned here that he came to cognize the animatedness of all physical substances, plants and animals, the up and down in the forms of existence, the Karman as being its cause, its influx by sensual perception and activity, and the woman as its mediator. The monastic basic laws equally took shape in that time. Perhaps we are correct in interpreting Āyār. I 9,1,22 by saying that after those two years and two months Mahāvīra resolved to take up that vagrant life which was to last for more than twelve years¹. Travelling towards the east he came as far as Lāḍha in West Bengal (Lāḍh, Rāḍh, Ṛāṛh) containing Vajjabhūmi and Subbhabhūmi, the land of the Suhmas. This period was characterized by utmost privations caused by inhospitable and and verminous quarters and many hardships owing to climate, stinging plants and insects, and wicked inhabitants who set dogs at him and ill-treated him. Mahāvīra himself made his life ascetic by the choice of his food, by fasting and by standing back behind animals and humans in need of help, while nothing is being said of self-castigations in bodily positions as incorporated into the system. The Uvahāṇa-suya closes by rendering that description. The two other texts have merely vague generalities ending up those twelve years by Mahāvīra’s entering into omni-cognition. In the Bhāvaṇā “both the possession and the acquisition of cognitions ... thread the preceding biographical sketch (p. 121 f., 130 f. of the edition)”¹. Here from the dogmatic view it is traced that even when still an embryo Mahāvīra was in possession of the first three kinds of cognition (*tinnāṇō-vagaya*)² and the way how at the beginning of his monastic career the fourth (*maṇapajjava-ṇāṇa*) made its appearance³. By the fifth kind, the *kevala-vara-ṇāṇa-damsaṇa*, coming in he started teaching. But, to be true, by all this we are not given the description of an intellectual development in our sense.

c6.69

⁶ This interpretation of samatta-painṇa implies that they were not willing to let him go. Gautama the Śākya paid less respect to his father's wish to keep him at home.- Another interpretation of s.-p. would be that he now was in a position of keeping his vow (?) to become a homeless monk.

c6.70

⁷ As SHAH, Jainism in Northern India, p. 25, supposes he did so in a state of trance.

c6.71

¹ Āyār. II, 15, 25; Jiṇac. 120. *pa-telasa* Āyār. I 9, 2, 4 means the same as is clearly stated by the Cuṇṇi.

c6.72

¹ The AUTHOR, Worte p. 11.

c6.73

² But the words immediately following: *caissāmi tti jāṇai, cue mi tti j.* up to *paṇṇatte* clearly have nothing to do with *mai-, suya-* and *ohiṇāṇa*. The same *Jiṇac.* 29 and 30.

c6.74

³ The *Jiṇac.* does not refer to them, but it speaks (112) of the *āhohiya* for which comp. § 81.

c6.75.1

In the sources hitherto considered there is not a single word being said concerning the rôle that is acted by Gosāla Maṃkhaliputta in Mahāvīra’s life. He was the head of the Ājīvikas⁴ and in this position, acc. to Pali reports, he was the successor to Kissa Saṃkicca and Nanda Vaccha. Thus it follows that the sect must have existed for some time yet. Viy. 15 gives a report regarding Mahāvīra’s relations to Gosāla⁵. According to them Gosāla came to be Mahāvīra’s pupil in the latter’s second year as a monk and remained to be so for six years. Then their relations came to a rupture, however, and Gosāla went his own ways. It was not until 16 years later that both met again though for a violent contest only. Gosāla died nearly immediately after, i.e. 16 years before his antagonist. This report of Viy. has long since been judged as biassed and hateful. Critics went to the length of making Mahāvīra a disciple or adherent of Gosāla to whom they say he was indebted for the biological system proclaimed by himself to be his own. For these and further questions the reader is referred to BASHAM who has exhaustively treated the matter offered by literature and inscriptions, including materials from the South⁶. Gosala is said to have introduced a division of humans into six different colours which has its parallel in the Jain *leśyā* theory¹.

c6.75.2

This theory appears to be strange in Mahāvīra's system (§ 97), but here, again, it is not certain that it were borrowed from Gosāla's teaching, and it may well be possible that here as well there the idea reflects primitive conceptions. On the other hand JACOBI has made it to appear probable² that some practices of ascetic nutrition as exercised by Jains originate from the Ājīvikas, and if Mahāvīra's as we have seen, put up with clothing thirteen months after having entered into monastic life, then it follows that this fell in the very second year which is reported to have brought about his relation to Gosāla. When, on a summer's night, the cognition of omniscience flashed upon him, Mahāvīra was on the field of the farmer Sāmāga near the town of Jambhiyagāma on the northern bank of the Ujjuvāliyā. Not far off that place there stood a Sāl tree which accordingly entered into the hagiology as Mahāvīra's *ceiya-rukkha*, thus reminding us of the Buddhists, and which served as an example for that of all preceding Titthagaras (Samav. 152a). This experience naturally did not put an end to his vagrant life, but with his fame increasing the vicissitudes he had to suffer from the side of humans ceased and changed into respect and reverence. As before (Jinac. 119) Mahāvīra continued to be on the way for two thirds of the year putting up in villages for one night and in towns for up to five; for four months he remained stationary owing to the rainy season. Jinac.

c6.75.3

122 gives as unverifiable list of the places where he did so, i.e. in the course of the time up to fourteen times. We here but mention as such also known elsewhere those of Campā, Vesālī, Rāyagiha, Nālandā, and Sāvatthī. None of these places is situated on the sea, though in the similes attributed to Mahāvīra (Nāya 8. 11) the sea plays an important part, to say nothing of the Jainist world view (§110. 121). Places related to Mahāvīra's activity as a teacher are frequently referred to by the Canon, and those mentioned in the Viy. are to a certain degree trustworthy thanks to its special position (§ 45). Rāyagiha, of all places the most frequently mentioned both in the Viy. and the Jiṇac.¹, was the capital of Prince Seṇiya, the Bimbisāra of the Buddhists. Mahāvīra was a relative of his by Cellaṇā, the daughter of his uncle Ceḍaga, Prince of Vesālī², and Seṇiya’s successor, Kūṇiya (called Ajātasattu in Pali texts)³, was also his protector. To the list of the cities mentioned above the Viy. adds further the name of Kosambī⁴. The various other places referred to in either text cannot, however, be mentioned here. Mahāvīra did not stay at these places themselves, nor even during the interval of the long rainy season but—as is shown in Jiṇac. 122 by the word *nīsāe* attached to the indication of place—following the examples of other preachers he dwelt at a nearby *ceiya* regularly mentioned by its name, while nothing is being reported concerning its outward appearance⁵.

c6.75.4

As is described in the Uvav. at great length in poetical language, the princes, their noble attendants and the crowd used to leave the town in order to listen to his preachings, and *samosaraṇa* is the word designating not only Mahāvīra’s going out to preach and the pouring out of those eager to listen, but also his setting up the fundamental teachings and both the place where the Kevalin teaches prepared by other religious-philosophical sects (Sūy. I 12) and later (Āv. 5) also by celestials, and the audience assembled around it.

c6.76

⁴ Comp. HOERNLE ERE 1, 259 ff.

c6.77

⁵ Detailed summary by HOERNLE, Uvas. II App. See also LEUMANN WZKM 3, 328-339.

c6.78

⁶ History and Religion of the Ājīvikas. Lo. 1951 (rev. by the AUTHOR ZDMG 104, p. 256-263).

c6.79

¹ LEUMANN, loc. cit. 330 f.

c6.80

² SBE 45, XXX f.

c6.81

¹ A monography on Rāyagiha in ancient Literature was published by B. C. LAW (Delhi 1938).

c6.82

² Comp. the summary SBE 22, XV.

c6.83

³ For his militant policy comp. JACOBI SPAW 1930, 557 ff. (review by the AUTHOR OLZ 1932, 143 ff.) and the original reports in Niray. and Viy.

c6.84

⁴ At one time the believers in Vesālī were cared for by Jayantī who belonged to the laity (*Vesāliya-sāvayāṇaṃ arihaṃtāṇaṃ puvva-sejjayari*). She was the sister of Sayāṇiya, Prince of Kosambī, who consequently took Migāvai, another daughter of Ceḍaga, for his wife from Vesālī. Her son was Udāyaṇa (Viy. 556b).

c6.85

⁵ Differently with the Buddhists, comp. B. C. LAW, Studia indo-iranica p. 42 ff.

c6.86

§19. Acc. to the Pali texts Mahāvīra was a contemporary of Gautama Buddha, but although for decades they both wandered about one and the same area by no means very extensive preaching and teaching, there is no word being said as to their having met. Buddha is said to have survived Mahāvīra. This information, however, is due to the Buddhists confusing the city of Pāvā, where Mahāvīra died, with the Pāvā, where Buddha stayed shortly before his end, thus concluding that he survived Mahāvīra¹. The latter's Pāvā is referred to as majjhima. This may indicate that for once (perhaps owing to illness) he dwelt in the city proper, and he may well have done so since his quarters were in the residence of a high official in Prince Hatthipāla's service. At any rate he died there in his 72nd year, forty-two years after he had become a monk. Acc. to modern belief Pāvā is the village of Pāvapurī in the district of Patna². Thus Mahāvīra's life passed within a narrow frame of space. All his days he, the aristocrat, had enjoyed the sympathy and the support of the nobles of the country. We have already mentioned his princely relations³, and in Viy. 792b we read that the notables and the noble families of his time adhered to him and his teaching which they helped to spread. Now the collegial princes (gaṇarāyaṇo) of the Mallaki and Licchavi families gave a lamp-ceremony in commemoration of him. Mahāvīra's death or, rather, in terms of spiritual language, his entry into Nirvāṇa represents to the Jains the point from where their chronology starts. The Śvetāmbaras (§ 26) place it 470 years before the beginning of the Vikrama era (57-56 B.C.), the Digambaras (§ 26) 605 years before the Śaka era (78 A.D.), the latter being also erroneously taken for the Vikrama era⁴. By critically dealing with these statements which both lead back to 527-526 B. C., JACOBI⁵ (1879) calculated the year of 467 B.C., and CHARPENTIER⁶ tried to support this date by a new line of argument. In 1891

c6.87

¹ CHARPENTIER in the essay to be presently mentioned; JACOBI SPAW 1930, 557ff. where ref. are made to: Journal of Francis BUCHANAN etc. see § 1 f.—Comp. also Puran Chand NAHAR, Pāvapurī and its Temple Prashasti (1698) IHQ 1, 116-119.

c6.88

² Imp. Gaz. of I. 20, 81.

c6.89

³ Without himself having shut his eyes to the abusive reigning of major and minor princes (Thāṇ. 125b).—The author of the Angacūliyā considers Mahāvīra's teaching aristocratic to a degree that he refers to the transition of the dhamma to the Vaiśyas (cattāri vaṇṇāṇa majjhe vaissa-hatthe dhammo bhavissai) as a bad omen.

c6.90

⁴ For passages comp. the writings presently mentioned and Satis Chandra VIDYABHUSHANA, Logic, p. 11; PATHAK IA 12, 21f.

c6.91

⁵ Kalpasūtra p. 8.

c6.92

⁶ IA 43 (1914), 115 ff.

c6.93

JACOBI¹ himself decided in favour of 477 or 476 basing his deductions SPAW 1930, 557 ff. on the year 477.

c6.94

¹ Pariśiṣṭaparvan p. 6: corr. 2nd ed. (1932) p. XX f.

c6.95

§20. As to Mahāvīra's success as a teacher Jiṇac. 134 provides us with monumental figures which we can leave as they are. The only point worth mentioning is that women are by far in the majority. The nuns were headed by Ajja-Candaṇā also referred to by Viy. 458b where it tells us of Mahāvīra introducing his mother Devāṇandā to her. The monk very rightly mentioned as the first was Indabhūi, better known by his Gotra name as Goyama, though sporadically we hear of a "second" and a "third" Gautama, Aggibhūi and Vāubhūi². Since, acc. to Viy. 153 a, they all appear simultaneously it is likely that Therāv. 1 by denoting all three as oldest, second and youngest monk of Mahāvīra was lead by a desire for classification. As one putting questions to his master Goyama as compared with a number of other persons is by far the most important, and as such he appears even where, as is the case in the Viy., there is no longer any real dialogue thinkable or probable, but where question and answer have come to congeal into mere forms of style³. In Viy. 755a, however, Goyama appears as a living person where we are told of his having wiped the floor with an antagonist and of his being commended for his ready wit by Mahāvīra who, acc. to Viy. 646b, also informs him that they both had been friends already for a number of existences. These two passages are probably the only ones in the Canon reflecting something like the note of a personal feeling on Mahāvīra's side. For as well as always he remains impersonal, and even where he rejects contradicting—often rather foolish—teachings of other preachers (annautthiya), he does so by speaking in naked antithesis. It was probably in his nature to be non-committal and stern⁴. Though it were wrong to judge Mahāvīra merely by how he appears to us in the dialogues of the Canon. He would never have been able to succeed without giving his words a touch of originality and power, and his oratorical gift is certain to have excelled the high measure customary in India by far. He is said to have spoken Ardhamāgadhī¹, that is to say Old AMg., an idiom prior to the language of our texts². Traces of the diction characteristic of him can clearly be demonstrated.³ In this connexion we have to mention the similes. We have a large quantity of them in the Thāṇ., esp. in Thāṇa 4, and we shall refer to them later in § 116. In them Mahāvīra renders proof of his extensive practical experience and of both his profound knowledge of the world and of human nature, and had they been handed down to us in an oratorical form, the Canon of the Jains would certainly not be inferior to that of the Buddhists aesthetically⁴.

First 102 of 298 passages. Read on

Linked texts (48)