The Doctrine of the Jainas, Described after the Old Sources c6.75

Language: English

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.