Ana səhifə

Book Jainism in Buddhist Literature Author Dr. Hiralal Jain


Yüklə 0.74 Mb.
səhifə4/27
tarix24.06.2016
ölçüsü0.74 Mb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   27


Mahavira or the Nigantha Nataputta of Pali literature was born in Kundagrama45 (Kotiggama) of the Mahavagga, a suburb of Vaisali46, and an important seat of the Jantri Ksatriyas. He was the son of Siddhartha and Trisala, who belonged to the clan of Jnatris or Naha47. He renounced worldly enjoyment at the age of thirty without getting married48 and became a Nigantha ascetic. He then underwent a course of severe bodily mortification for the next twelve years and attained omniscience.

The Pali Canon does not mention anything of the early life of Mahavira, but refers to the period of his mission as a religious teacher. He was called Nigantha in the sense that he is free from all bonds, and was called Nataputta because Nata or Naya was the name of his clan.49 As Gotama is generally referred to as the Buddha, Jina came to be used as the popular name of Rsabha and other Tirthankaras, and their adherents began to be called `Jainas'. The Pali Nikayas mention Nigantha in place of Jinas (Amhakam ganthanakileso palibujjhanakileso natthi, kilesaganthirahita mayam ti evam vaditaya Laddhanamavasena Nigantho50). The term `Nigantha' for a Jaina came to be used perhaps along with the origin of Jainism itself.

Teachings of Nigantha Nataputta have been already mentioned in the course of our discussion on the six heretical teachers. It is remarkable here that both Jainism and Buddhism arose and grew up in the same province of India. The leaders of both sects were sometimes living in the same city, but they never met perhaps personally51. Their followers, however, used to indulge in discussions, conversations and debates.

The date of Nigntha Nataputta :

The date of Nigantha Nataputta, like the date of the Buddha, has been a subject of much controversy among the scholars52. The Pali Canon has two main references which give an idea of the age and death of Nataputta. Ajatasattu is reported to have spoken of Nigantha Nataputta to the Buddha in Samannaphala Sutta as "One who has long been recluse, old and well-stricken in years (cirapabbjjito, addhagato, vayonupatto53). Another reference recorded is that when the Buddha was at the Ambavana of the Sakyas, Nigantha Nataputta had just died at pava (ekam samayam bhagava sakkesu viharati vedhanna nama sakya tesam ambavane pasade, tena kho pana samayena Nigantho Nataputta Pavayam adhuna Kalankato hoti.54 Ananda is supposed to have conveyed this news to the Buddha in a very pleasant mood.

The Chief landmark in Jaina chronology is the year of Nigantha Nataputta's death, which is generally placed somewhere between 468 and 482 or 527 and 546 B.C. Jacobi is perhaps the first savant who tried to determine the date of Mahavira. In the introduction to the Acarangasutra, showing the differences between the Buddha and Mahavira, he says : `Mahavira died in Pava, avowedly before the former (Buddha 55). Hence, in the introduction to the Kalpasutra56 he Suggests that his death might have taken place round about 468-467 B.C. This opinion was based on Hemachandra's Parisistaparvan57 which tells us that Chandragupta, the Sandrokottos of the Greeks, ascended throne 155 years after the death of Mahavira. The Chandragupta's ascension, according to Jacobi, took place in 313 B.C. Therefore the death of Mahavira must have occured in 468 V. C. (313+155=468 B.C.) Charpentier58 also supported his view. If Hemachandra's chronology is accepted, the tradition of the Pali Canon has to be rejected. Both Jacobi and Charpentier were of the view that the statement in the Pali Canon to the effect that Mahavira died when the Buddha was at Pava was spurious. But this gives rise to a further problem in view of the fact that the death of the Buddha is now widely accepted as having occured in 543 B. C. Therefore this question needs further investigation as the interval between the death of Buddha and Mahavira could not have been as long as 75 years. Basham, too, is inclined to accept Jacobi's view. But he based his arguments on the Bhagawati Sutra and a less favoured theory about the date of the Buddha's Parinirvana in 483 B. C. He says : "If we accept 483 B. C. as the date of the Buddha's nirvana, on the basis of Mahavamsa synchronism, the accession of Ajatasattu must have occured in the year 481-480 B.C. The first campaign, soon after which the death of Gosala occurred, must have taken place at some time between the date of Ajatasattu's accession and the year preceding the Buddha's death." He then suggests that' "the first campaign occurred in 484 B.C., and the death of Gosala in the year, or in 484 B. C. On the strength of the Bhagavati statement that Mahavira survived Gosala for sixteen and a half years, this date would place Mahavira's death in 468-467 B. C 59."

As regards the reference to the Nigantha Nataputta in Pali scripture he suggests that "the Pali record may not in fact refer to the death of Mahavira at Pava, but of Gosala at Savatthi, which Bhagawati Sutra also mentions as having been accompanied by quarrelling and confusion. At a later date, when the chief rival of Buddhism was no longer Ajivikism but Jainism, the name may have been altered to add to the significance of the account60. The explanation of Basham that the Pali Canon recorded the death of Gosala and not that of Mahavira appears to be farfetched.

Majumdar and Raychaudhuri are of the view that Mahavira's death should have taken place in 478 B.C. In support of this theory they suggest that Mahavira died about sixteen years after the accession of Ajatasatru, and the commencement of his war with his hostile neighbours. This would place the Nirvana of the Jain teacher after the Buddha's death, as according to the Ceylonese chronicles, the Buddha died eight years after the enthronement of Ajatasatru. This is supported by the Hemachandra's account that places the Chandragupta's accession a hundred and fifteen years after the Nirvana of Mahavira. We know that Chandragupta'S enthronement took place in 323. B. C. (323+155=478 61 B.C.).

Another attempt to date the death of Nigantha Nataputta has been made by Hoernle. According to him, 482 B. C. is "practically certain" date of Buddha's parinirvana. Bimbisara was murdered by his son Ajatasatru eight years before the nirvana, or in 490 B. C. Hoernle believes that for some year before this Ajatasatru was de facto ruler, and the war took place not in the year of his legal, but of his de facto accession, which could not have been long before the murder of Bimbisara. He accepts the Bhagavati tradition of the sixteen years interval between the deaths of Mahavira and Gosala. He therefore suggests 484 B. C. for the death of Mahavira and 500 B.C. for that of Gosala, and for the was and de facto accession of Ajatasatru62. The theory of Hoernle is more comprehensive, as he tries to establish the chronology of all events connected with the issue. In the aforesaid Pali record, Cunda expressed the hope that on the death of the Buddha a similar question would not arise in his order. This fact indicates that the Nigantha Nataputta's death was thought of as having taken place at a time when the Buddha himself was very old, when the Buddhist monks were concerned about the future of the order after the death of its leader. Hoernle's theory which places Nigantha Nataputta's death two years prior to that of the Buddha tallies with the statement of Cunda in the Pali Canon.

The orthodox Jaina tradition which dates the death of Nigantha Nataputta in 527 B.C. is not unanimously accepted by the scholars. The main problem with regard to this traditional date is that its accuracy depends on the correct calculation of the commencement of the Vikrama Era. According to one view, Vikrama was born 470 years after the death of Mahavira while his accession and death took place 488 and 568 years respectively after Mahavira's death63. Another view holds that the Vikrama Era began 410 years after Mahavira's death64 According to these data, the date of Mahavira's death mainly depends on the event in Vikrama's life which marked the commencement of the Vikrama Era. If the Vikrama Era commenced with Vikrama's birth, the date of Mahavira's death is 527 B. C. (i.e 57+470=527 B.C65). If it began with Vikrama's accession, the date has to be 545 B. C. (57+488=545 B. C.).66 If the Vikrama Era began with Vikrama's death, Mahavira's death has to be dated as 622 B. C. (470+80+72=622 B. C.67) If date of Mahavira's death will be 467 B.C. (527-60=467 B. C.)68. Thus the dates of Mahavira's death will be 527 B.C., 545 B.C., 622 B. C. or 467 B. C. This makes the entire problem rather confusing and intricate.

Jacobi refers to the traditional date of the death of Nigantha Nataputta as follows. "The reduction of the Jain's Canon or the Siddhanta took place, according to unanimously accepted tradition, at the Council of Valabhi, under the presidency of Devardhi. The date of this event (980 or 993 A. V), corresponding to 454 or 467 A. D., is incorporated in the Kalpasutra69. Here the view of Hemachandra's Parisistaparavan appears to be wrong as compared to the Titthogali Painnaya which is an ancient and more reliable book. It is stated that the date of Chandragupta Maurya's accession falls 215 years after the death of Mahavira. Moreover, on the same day, Palaka began to rule in Ujjaini. He ruled over the country for sixty years. Afterwards Nanda's dominion is listed for 155 years. Then commences the enthronement of Chandragupta Maurya70. But these sixty years have been omitted in the chronology of the Parisistaparvan of Hemachandra. Puranachandra and Krishnachandra Ghosa write "Hemachandra must have omitted, by oversight, the period of 60 years of king Palaka after Mahavira71. Hemachandra himself appears to have accepted 527 B.C. as the date of Mahavira's death. He says that Kumarapala of Calukyakula was born 1669 years after the Nirvana of Mahavira72. It is now certain that Calukya Kumarapala was born in 1142 A. D.73 Accordingly, the date of Mahavira's death falls in 527 B. C. He has also made an attempt to prove 527 B. C. Muni Nagaraj has also made an attempt to prove 527 B. C. as the most likely date of Mahavira's (Nataputta's) pari-nirvana74.

Muni Kalyanavijaya,75 Kailash Chandra Shastri76, and Shantilala Shaha77, accept this date but reject the evidence of Pali Tripitka. Vijayendra Suri78 agrees with them as far as this date is concerned, but thinks like Basham, that the death of Gosalaka, and not of Nigantha Nataputta, is recorded in Pali Tripitaka. The date of the Buddha's death is accepted by them as 544 B. C. But other references made in Pali Nikayas are ignored by them.

On the other hand, K. P. Jayasaval79, Radhakumuda Mokerji80 and Kamata Prasada81 favour the view that Mahavira's Nirvana took place in 545 B. C. (i.e. 57+488=545 B. C.) Their main argument is that the Vikrama era commenced from the accession which took place 488 years after Mahavira's death.

But their views are not correct as the evidence to prove 527 B. C. as the date of Nigantha Nataputta's parinirvana are rather more substential and reliable. J. K. Mukhtar proved successfully this view82. The Jambusuamicarin and other granthas also support the same opinion. The Pali records also protest its genuineness. Without going into prolonged disccussion, we may now conclude that 527 B. C. seems to be more dependable as the date of Nigantha Nataputta's death.

The place of Nigantha Nataputta's death

According to the Pali Canon, which has already been referred to in the earlier section, the Buddha was informed while he was at a Samagama among the Sakyas, that Nigantha Nataputta had died at Pava. In the Vividhatirtha-kalpa, Pava is called Apapapuri, perhaps on account of its religious importance. In the course of his peregrinations Mahavira came from Jrmbhaka to the forest of Mahavamsa. Eleven Ganadharas, Gautama and the rest, were initiated here. Vardhamana (Mahavira) went on a fast for two days, then preached his last teachings and attained Nirvana83.

But there has been some controversy with regard to the location of Pava. The traditional Pava is near Rajagaha (Bihar) and is now called Pavapuri. Jacobi84 thinks that Mahavira's Nirvana took place at this Pavapuri, while Mahapandita Rahula Sankrityana is85 of the opinion that Pava is the modern Papaura village twelve miles away from Kusinara or Kasiya, situated on the little Gandaka river, to the east of the district of Gorakhapur. Nathuram Premi86 agrees with Rahul Sankratyana. It is most probable that Pava was included in the territory of the Mallas since a Santhagara was built by them in Pava. It is also said that at this place the Buddha ate his last meal at the house of Cunda, and as a result he had an attack of dysentery. He then left the place and proceeded to Kusinara where he ultimately attained Parinirvana87.

The Mallas, a republican tribe of the same type as the Licchavis, were divided at that time into two groups. One having their capital at Pava and the other at Kusinara. The Kalpasutra says that on the eve of Nigantha Nataputta's death nine Mallas and nine Licchavis, the chiefs of their respective tribes, were among those who went on Prosadhopavasa to mark the passing away of the great Jina. It is further stated that they ordered illuminations on the day of the new moon saying, "Since the light of intelligence is gone, let us make an illumination of material matter88. Since Mahavira's nirvana occured early in the morning, the Jainas worship Mahavira at that time and illuminate the earthern pots. The whole day is now called Dipavali. This evidence confirms our view that Pava, the place of Nigantha Nataputta's parinirvana, is no other than Papaura of the Gorakhapura district.

Schism in the Jaina Order:

Signs of schism in the Jaina order might have appeared at the death of Nigantha Nataputta as stated in Pali Nikayas. The Samagama Sutta describes the state of the Jaina order after the Nirvana of Nigantha Nataputta. Ananda conveys the message of Cunda to the Buddha with elation. He says :-

Nigantha Nataputta had just died at Pava. At his death the Niganthas became disunited into two parts which took to mutual strife and conflict, quarelling and wounding each other with wordy weapons (tassa kalankiriyaya bhinna Nigantha dvedhikajata bhandanajata kalahajata vivadapanna annamannam mukhasattihi vitudanta viharanti), thou does not understand this doctrine and discipline; but I do understand it. How should thou understand it? Thou art in the wrong. I am in the right. I am speaking to the point; thou art not. Thou sayest last what should be said first and what ought to come last. What thou hast so long excogitated is quite upset. The challenge is taken up; thou art proved to be wrong. Begone to get rid of thy opinion, or disentangle thyself if thou canst. Truly, the Niganthas, followers of Nataputta, were out methinks to kill89."

The Buddha gives the reasons of this disunity among the Niganthas, "Their teacher was not supremely enlightened and a doctrine badly set-forth, badly imparted, ineffectual to guide, not conducive to peace90." The Commentaries state that Nataputta realising on his death-bed the folly and futility of his teaching, wished his followers to accept the Buddha's teachings. In order to bring this about, he taught his doctrine in two different ways to two different pupils, just before his death. To the one he said that his teaching was Nihilism (Uccheda), and to the other that it was Eternalism (Sassata). Asa result they quarelled violently among themselves, and the order broke up91.

What we are concerned with is not so much reasons mentioned above for disunity, as the existence of disunity itself. The rift took place actually in the Jaina order after the Nigantha Nataputta's parinibbana, though it might not have been to the extent described92. No evidence has yet been discovered to indicate that the final schism took place immediately after his death. Therefore the passage quoted should be examined from two angles. Either it is said in hyperbolical language or it is a later addition. The first is more likely as a rival order will naturally exaggerate any differences or disunity in the opponent's group. But the germs of schism could not have been altogather absent. However, judging from the fact that Jainism, like Buddhism, continuied to be favoured by Kuniya or Ajatasattu, Asoka, Cetaka, Seniya, pradyota, Udayana etc93., it can be concluded that the culmination of these schismatic tendencies did not take place untill the famine of Magadha which lasted for 12 years during the period of Chandragupta Maurya.

Later on, the Jaina order divided itself into two divisions, viz. the Digambaras who accepted the complete nakedness as the essential requirement to attain salvation, and the Svetam-baras who did not recognize this theory in toto. The first is the original sect. All the Tirthankaras including Parsvanatha and Mahavira were Digambaras. All along in Pali literature Mahavira is called Nigantha Nataputta and his followers Niganthas. The reason for this is that they claimed to be free from all bonds (amhakam ganthanakileso palibujjanakileso natthi, kilesaganthirahitamayam ti evam vaditaya laddhanamavasena Nigantho)94. The rift, which began immediately after the demise of Nigantha Nataputta, finally took shape in the second or third century B. C., when the Digambara and Svetambara came to be differentiated. The Dhammapadatthakatha95 refers to and criticizes both the Digambara and Svetambara sects96.

Philosophical Literature of Jainas

A proper evaluation of Jainism as found in Buddhist literature necessitates some familiarity with Jaina literature. The Jaina contribution to Indian philosophical and religious knowledge is so profound that only a bare outline of the Jaina literature can be attempted here.

We are concerned here with the Jaina philosophical literature which can be divided into four schools97:

(i) Canonical School (upto sixth century A.D.)

(ii) Anekanta School (from third century A.D. to eighth century A.D.).

(iii) Pramana School (from 8th A.D. to 17th A.D.), and

(iv) Navya-nyaya School (from 17th A.D.).

The Canonical School

Both the Digambara and Svetambara sects of Jainas accept unanimously that Mahavira or the Nigantha Nataputta is the main source of their scriptures, which are said to have been collected by his disciple called Indrabhuti or Gautama98. He died at Rajagrha at the age of ninety-two, 12 years after Mahaviras nirvana. Afterwards, according to the Digambaras, the successors of these teachers could not gain proficiency in all the Angas. As time passed on gradually they decreased and were completely lost 683 years after Mahavira's nirbana99.

But the Svetambara tradition claims to have preserved the Angas and Upangas. It appears to me that upto certain time Canonical literature would have been preserved by both sects through the recitation method, but to prove its own antiquity as the original sect, the Svetambara tradition added some elements like the dialogues between Kesin and Gautam or Jamali episode, and eliminated some portions of the original literature. Seeing this the Digambara tradition would have completely denied their validity and announced it to have been lost.

The Svetambara Canonical Literature

The Svetambaras preserved a wide and profound Canonical literature, though mixed up with some elements. It consists of the following texts100:

The twelve Angas : (i) Ayaranga, (ii) Suyagadanga, (iii) Thananga, (iv) Samavayanga, (v) Viyahapannatti or Bhagavati, (vi) Nayadhammakahao, (vii)Uvasagadasao, (viii) Antagadadasao, (ix) Anuttarovavaiyadasao, (x) Panhavagaranaim, (xi) Vivagasuya, and (xii) Ditthivaya.

The twelve Upangas: (i) Ovavaiya, (ii) Rayapasenijja, (iii) Jivabhigama, (iv) Pannavana, (v) Suriyapannatti, (vi) Jambuddivapannatti, (vii) Candapannatti, (viii) Niryavalio, (ix) Kappavadamsiao, (x) Pupphiao, (xi) Pupphaculiao, (xii) Vanhidasao.

The Ten Painnas: (i) Causarana, (ii) Aurapaccakkhana, (iii) Bhattaparinnaya, (iv) Samtharaga, (v) Tandulaveyaliya, (vi) Candavijjhaya, (vii) Devindatthava, (viii) Ganivijja, (ix) Mahapaccakkhana (x) Viratthava.

The Six Cheyasuttas: (i) Nisiha, (ii) Mahanisiha, (iii) Vavahara, (iv) Ayaradasao or Dasasuyakkhandha, (v) Kappa or Brhatkalpa (vi) Pancakappa, or Jiyakappa.

The four Mulasuttas: (i) Uttarajjhaya, or Uttarajjhayana, (ii) Avassaya, (iii) Dasaveyaliya, (iv) Pindanijjuti.

The two Culika suttas: (i) Nandi, (ii) Anuyogadara.

Development of Agama Literature

Srutakevali Bhadrabahu predicted during the reign of Chandragupta Maurya that there would be a terrible famine in Magadha for twelve years. To ensure the purity of Jaina asceticism, the Sangha decided to leave Magadha. A group of monks under the leadership of Visakhacharya went to South India. But Sthulabhadra remained in Magadha with some monks. After the famine was over, Visakhacharya with his disciples came back to Magadha and found that the pupils of Sthulabhadra had developed an attachment to clothes.101

Visakhacary tried to convince them for observing Digambaratva but he could not succeed in his achievement as the Sthulabhadra and his followers were not ready to live without clothes. Hence the schism was stated in the Jaina Sangha. On the other hand, Bhadrabahu, the teacher of Visakhacarya, with his prominent pupil Chandragupta Maurya (Muni Prabhacandra)102 left Magadha and went to South India. According to Digambar tradition, he observed there Samadhimarana on the Kalvpra mountain (Sramana Velagola Inscriptions, of Saka sam. 522).103

After some time, according to the Svetambara tradition, there were held four Councils in Pataliputra, Mathura and Valabhi where the Acaryas tried to gather the Agamas to the best of their ability. The present form of the Svetambara Jaina Canon is said to be the result of the Second Valabhi Council held under the presidency of Devardhiganin Ksamasramana in the beginning of the sixth century A. D. (980 or 993 years after Mahavira attained nirvana.

This indicates clearly that the Svetambara Agama was not the product of one period. It developed gradually during the course of several generations. It is not, therefore, unnatural if certain things have been changed104, However, a good portion of very important and valuable material compiled in ancient times remains intact. Winternitz rightly says, "The works of the Siddhanta cannot have originated during one period. The canon which Devardhi compiled, and which has come down to us, is the final result of a literary activity that must have begun as soon as the organisation of the order and the monastic life were firmly established. This was in probability the case not long after the death of Mahavira. The earliest portions of the Canon may, therefore, quite possibly belong to the period of the first disciples of Mahavira himself, or at the latest to the second century after Mahavira's death--the period of the Maurya Chandragupta, in which tradition places the Council of Patliputra--whilst the latest portions should probably be dated nearer to the time of Devardhi"105. In support of this statement other evidences are collected by Deo.106

Resemblance to Pali literature

The Svetambara Jaina Canon which is the result of several centuries appears to have a close resemblance to Pali scripture which was complied in the first or second century after the Buddha's demise. In other words, the Jaina Canon has been influenced by Pali literature. The language and style are good enough evidences in this connection. For instance, a stanza of the Uttaradhyana (9.44), viz.

Mase mase tu jo balo kusaggenam tu bhunjae

Na so sukkha adhammasa kalam agghai solasim.

has a very close resemblance to the stanza of the Dhammapada (70), viz.

Mase mase kusaggena balo bhunjetha bhojanam.

Na so sankhatadhammanam kalam agghati solasim.

The stanzas of the Dhammapada (103, 405, 409) can be compared with the stanzas of the Uttaradhyana 9.34; 25.22;25.24. Some other stanzas like 49, 66, 362 are similar to the stanzas 1.2, 4.1, 10. 12, of the Dasavaikalika. In the same way Pundarika Addhyana of the Sutrakrtanga and the Saddharma-Pundarika, Vipakasutra and Avadanasataka, and Karmasataka, Thananga and Anguttara, Uttaradhyana and Dhammapada and Jataka Patimokkha and Nisitha are very closely related to each others in subject matter. The Svetambara Agamas are called Ganipitaka107 as the Buddhist scripture are called the Tipitaka108 Thus the Sveta mbara Agamas are undoubtedly influenced by the Buddhist scripture.109

1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   27


Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©atelim.com 2016
rəhbərliyinə müraciət