Origin And Development Of Jainism

Author(s): Sagarmal Jain
Publisher: Z_Jaina_Literature_and_Philosophy_a_Critical_Approach_001936_HR.pdf
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/269737/1

Page #1
Origin and Development of Jainism Jainism is one of the oldest living religions of supremacy of human being over gods, equality of all the world. It has a rich spiritual, cultural and literary beings, opposition to the supremacy of Brahmins and heritage to its credit. Indian religious quest has two to animal sacrifices and emphasis on moral values main streams -- Vedic (Brahmanic ) and sramanic. were some of the fundamental tendencies of Among the living world religions Jainism, as well as Sramanic tradition. We also find that some of the Buddhism, belong to the Sramanic trend of Indian above mentioned tendencies such as renunciation and culture. There were some other Sramanic religions emancipation were totally absent from the earlier also but they either like Ajivikas, disappeared in the form of Vedic religion. These concepts were course of time or like Sankhya-Yoga and other contributed by the sramanas to Indian culture in ascetic systems of Hindu religions, became part and general and Hinduism in particular. parcel of great Hindu religion by adopting some Antiquity of Jaina Tradition tenets of Vedic religion. The antiquity of Jainism goes back to the preSramanic tradition is spiritualistic and historic period of Indian culture. In support of this soteriological in its very nature. It lays special view Prof. H. Zimmer observes, "there is truth in the emphasis on renunciation of worldly belongings and Jaina idea that their religion goes back to remote enjoyments and on emancipation from worldly exist- antiquity, the antiquity in question being that of the ence, i.e., the cycle of birth and death. It may be Pre-Aryan" (Philosophies of India, p. 60 ). We find accepted without any contradiction that these very references to Vratyas and Arhatas in Rgveda and ideas of emancipation (moksa/mukti/nirvana Atharvaveda, the oldest texts of the Indian literature. kaivalya ) and renunciation ( tyaga/samyama/ These Vratyas and Arhatas of Vedic period are the vairagya ) have been cultivated by the Sramanas. ancestors of Jainas. They are also known as Asceticism is the fundamental concept of Sramanic sramanas in Upanisadic period. Alongwith the tradition. It is on this ground that the religions of references of Vratyas, Arhatas and sramanas in Sramanic tradition such as Jainism and Buddhism Vedas and Upanisadas, we find mention there of differ from the early Vedic religion. The early Vedic some Jaina Tirtharkaras such as Rsabha, Ajita and religion was against asceticism and emphasized the Aristanemi. It conclusively prooves that Jainism, in material welfare of the individual and the society. its oldest form as Vratya or Arhata tradition, was The Vedic seers in their hymns were praising the prevalent at the time of the composition of Vedas worldly existence and praying for their own health hence its antiquity goes back to pre-Vedic period, and wealth as well as of their fellow beings, while the i.e., at least three to five thousand years before Sramanas were condemning this worldly existence Christian era. Secondly, in Mohen-jo-daro and and propounding the theory that this worldly Harappa some seals of meditating Yogis have been existence is full of suffering and the ultimate end of found, which show that the tradition of performing human life is to get rid of the cycle of birth and death. meditation and Yoga-sadhana was present much Austerity, renunciation, emancipation, atheism, the prior in Indian Culture to the arrival of Aryans and

Page #2
16 Aspects of Jainology: Volume VI their Yajna rituals because no Yajna-vedi is found in these excavations.* At that time present Jainism was known as a Vratya-dharma or Arhat-dharma. Later on, in the Upanisadic period (c. 800 B. C.) the Vratyas, Arhatas and Sramanas were divided into various religious schools. At that time (c. 800 B. C. to 500 A. D. ). Jainism was known as Nirgrathadharma. In Buddhist Pali Tripitaka and the ancient Jaina canons as well as in the pillar-edicts of Asoka the religion of Lord Parsva and the Mahavira is mentioned in the name of Nirgrantha Dharma. Historicity of Lord Parsva, the 23rd Tirthankara, is now well established and accepted by all the scholars. According to Jaina tradition the predecessor of Lord Parsva is Aristanemi. He is supposed to be the real cousin of Lord Krsna. Thus, the historicity of Aristanemi can also be established on the basis of the historicity of Lord Krsna. If we hold Lord Krsna to be a historic person, then Aristanemi is also historical. We find his name not only in Vedas but in Upanisadas and Hindu Puranas also. Some scholars furnish an inscriptional evidence to prove the historicity of Aristanemi (Neminatha ). There is found a Copper deed of gift of a Babilonian King Nebuchandrazar ( 1140 B. C.) at Prabhaspattan in Gujrat. It, as per reading of Dr. Prananath (T.O.I., dt. March 19, 1935), indicates that the King must have come to Mount Revata to pay homage to Lord Neminatha. Though the reading is not accepted by all the scholars yet we cannot reject it as totally false. Lord Nami of Mithila, the 21st Tirthankara of Jainas, is also accepted as a Rsi in Upanisadic and Hindu Pauranic tradition. So far as the historicity of Lord Rsabha is concerned, it is a well established fact that not only his name but his life-story and teachings also occur in Bhagavat and some other Puranas. According to Prof. Dalasukh Malvania, who is well Yajna-Vedi has been identified in some Indus Valley sites such as Kalibangam. (Editor) read in Buddhist canons, the name of some Jaina Tirthankaras such as Rsabha, Padma, Candraprabha, Puspadanta, Vimala, Dharma, Nami, Aristanemi and Mahavira also occur in Buddhist literature in the form of previous Buddhas, Bodhisattvas or Pratyekabuddhas. Theragatha also mentions the Vaddhamana Thera. According to its earlier commentary, Attakatha, he was Licchaviputra. In my humble opinion, he was not else than Vardhamana Mahavira, the 24th Jaina Tirthankara. Thus, it can be said with a degree of certainty that all the Jaina Tirthankaras are not legendary characters. Though, it may be true that some legendary characteristics might have crept into the life-stories of Jaina Tirthankaras presented in Jaina Puranas, their very existence can not be challenged. Whether we accept the historicity of Jaina Tirthankara or not, it is beyond doubt that the Jaina ideas of renunciation, austerity, penance, self-mortification, non-violence, celebacy, meditation etc. were prevalent in the pre Vedic period. Sri Ramchandra observes that, "Upanisads represent the Brahmanical spiritual thought. As seen later, the Brahmanas did not accept spiritualism truthfully. They borrowed spiritual thoughts from their Pre-Aryan adversaries, now friends, in a perverted manner.... The Sramanic culture was ascetic, atheistic, pluralistic and 'realistic' in content.* This comes out clearest from a consideration of the earliest faith of the Jainas -- one of the oldest living surviving sects of the Munis. The pre-Upanisadic materialistic (Pravrtti-Dharmic) Vedic thought later evolved pseudo-spiritual thought (NivrttiDharmic) mainly through the influences of the MuniSramana culture, in pre-Buddhistic times, within its fold (Ramchandra Jain - The Most Ancient Aryan Society, pp. 48-49 ). It is this semi-materialistic and semi-spiritualistic thought which gave birth to a new form of religion, which is known as Hinduism. Cf. The editor's "Studies in the Origin of Buddhism." (Editor)

Page #3
Origin and Development of Jainism Hinduism is nothing but an assimilation of Vedic and Sramanic traditions. Jainism & Hinduism However, these two distinct trends ( Brahmanic) as well as Sramanic have been prevalent in Indian Culture from its earliest days. But But our culture, being a composite one, a water-tight compartment among its different shades is not feasi. ble at all. We cannot understand Indian Culture completely without understanding its these two e two different constituents, Viz., Sramanic and Vedic, developed later on in the form of Jainism, Buddhism and Hinduism. So one thing must be clear in our mind, that studies and researches in the field of Indology are not possible in isolation. In fact, Jainism, Buddhism and Hinduism are so inter- mingled and mutually influenced by each other that to have a proper understanding of one, the under- standing of other is essential. No doubt, these different trends are distinguishable but, at the same time, we must realize that they are not separable. Though on the basis of some peculiarities in theory and practice we can distinguish them yet it is very difficult to make a complete separation, because none of these trends remained uninfluenced by one another. The earlier Sramanic trend and its later shades such as Jainism and Buddhism had influenced the Vedic tradition, which later on developed in the form of Hinduism. The concepts of tapas or austerity, asceticism, liberation, meditation, equanimity and non-violence, which were earlier absent in Vedas, came into existence in Hinduism through sramanic influence. The Upanisadas and the Gita have evolved some new spiritualistic definitions of Vedic rituals and they are the representatives of the dialogue which had taken place in Sramanic and Vedic traditions. The Upanisadic trend of Hinduism is not a pure form of Vedic religion. It incorporates in itself the various Sramanic tenets and gives a new dimension to Vedic religion. Thus, we can say that Hinduism is an intermingled state of Vedic and Sramanic traditions. The voice, raised by our ancient Upanisadic Rsis and Munis as well as Sramanas against ritualistic emphasis of Vedic tradition and worldly outlook of caste-ridden caste-ridd Brahminism, became stronger in Jainism and Buddhism along with the other minor Sramanic sects. Thus, the Upanisadic trend as well as Jainism and Buddhism provided a resort to those fed up with up with Vedic ritualism and the worldly outlook towards life. to Not only Jainism and Buddhism but some other sects and schools of Indian thought such as Ajivikas and Sankhyas also adopted more or less a similar attitude towards Vedic ritualism. However, Jainism and Buddhism are more candid and forthcoming in their opposition towards Vedic ritualism. They reject outrightly the animal-sacrifice in Yajnas, birth-based caste-system and the infallibility of the Vedas. In the form of Mahavira and Buddha, the most prominent rationalist preachers, we find the real crusaders, whose tirade against caste-ridden and ritualistic Brahminism, crippled with its inner inadequacies, gave a severe jolt to it. Jainism and Buddhism have come forward to sweep away the long accumulated excrescences grown on Indian culture in the form of rituals, casteism and superstitions. But we shall be mistaken if we presume that in their attempt to clear off the dirt of Vedic ritualism, Jainism and Buddhism remained intact. They were also influenced by Vedic rituals considerably. Afterc. 3rd or 4th A.D., ritualism in the new form of Tantrika rituals crept into Jainism and Buddhism and became part and parcel of their religious practices and mode of worship. With the impact of Hindu Tantrism, Jainas adopted various Hindu deities and their mode of worship with some variations, suited to their religious temperament but were alien to it ( Jainism ) in its pure form. Jaina

Page #4
Aspects of Jainology : Volume VI concept of Sasanadevatas or Yaksa-Yaksis is nothing and laid the foundation of enmity and disintegration but a Jaina version of Hindu deities. As I have pointed in this great Indian culture. But, in reality, it was not a out earlier, the influence has been reciprocal. This revolt but a reformer's crusade. In fact, Vedic and can be discerned from the fact that on the one side sramanic traditions are not rival traditions as some of Hinduism, accepted Rsabha and Buddha as incarna- the Western and Indian scholars wrongly constitute, tion of God, while, on the other, Jainism included they are complementary to each other. These two Rama and Krsna in its list of Salakapurusas, great represent the two aspects of human existence - personalities. A number of Hindu gods and goddesses physical as well as spiritual. There has been a are accepted as consorts of Tirthankaras such as Kali, deliberate effort to creat a gulf between Jainism and Mahakali, Cakresvari, Ambika, Padmavati, Siddhika Buddhism on the one hand and Hinduism on the and some others as independent deities such as other, by Western Scholars. Unfortunately, some Sarasvati and Laksmi. It is to be noted that the Jainas Indian scholars, even Jaina scholars have supported have included Rama and Krsna in their list of sixty- their point of view, but in my humble opinion this is a three great personalities before c. 3rd A.D. because a false step taken in a wrong direction. It is true that mention of Krsna in the early canonical text is found. sramanic and Vedic traditions have divergent views Not only this, an epic on the story of Rama was on certain religious and philosophical issues, their composed in Jaina tradition by Vimalasuri in between ideals of living also differ considerably, but this does c. Ist-5th A. D. Similarly the image of Jaina Sarasvati not mean that they are rivals or enemies of each other. (c. 2nd A. D.) is also found at Kankali Tila, Mathura. As reason and passion, sreya and preya, inspite of Thus, evidently various Hindu dieties were included being different in their very nature, are the compoin Jainism before c. 3rd A. D. nents of the same human personality, so is the case The moot point, I intend to come to, is that with Sramanic and Vedic traditions. Though different religious traditions of our great Indian inheriting distinct features, they are the components culture have exchanged various concepts from one of one whole Indian culture. Jainism and Buddhism another. It is the duty of the scholars to study and are not rivals to Hinduism, but what they preach to highlight this mutual impact which is the need of the the Indian society may be termed as an advanced hour and thus, to bridge the gulf that exists between stage in the field of spirituality as compared to Vedic different religious systems due to the ignorance of ritualism. If the Upanisadic trend, inspite of taking a their interactions and that of history of mutual divergent stand from Vedic ritualism, is considered impacts. Though it is true that Sramanic tradition in as part and parcel of Hinduism and an advance togeneral and Jainism and Buddhism in particular have wards spirituality, what is difficulty in measuring some distinct features, discriminating them from the Jainism and Buddhism with the same yardstick ? If early Vedic or Brahmanic tradition yet they are not Upanisadic tradition is considered as an advancement alien faiths. They are the children of the same soil and from Vedic ritualism to spiritualism, then we have to they come forward with a bold reformative spirit. It accept that Buddhism and Jainism have also followed would be a great mistake if we consider that Jainism same path with a more enthusiastic spirit. They stand and Buddhism, are a mere revolt against Brahminism for the upliftment of the weaker section of Indian or faiths alien to Hinduism. The Western scholars society and redemption from priesthood and ritualism. have committed a blunder in high-lighting this view They preach the religion of common man, based on

Page #5
Origin and Development of Jainism the firm footing of moral virtues, instead of on some evidence that the stream of Indian spiritualism is one external rituals. at its source. We may not have a proper understanding Today, scholars working in the field of of the various trends if we treat them in isolation. Jainology need a new approach to reinterpret the Acaranga, Sutrakitanga and Rsibhasita may be relationship of Jainism with Hinduism, particularly understood in a better way only in the light of its Upanisadic trend, in the light of ancient Jaina texts Upanisadas and vice-a-versa. Similarly the Suttaof c. 4th and 3rd B. C. such as Acaranga, Sutra nipata, Dhammapada, Theragatha and other works of krtanga and Isibhasiyaim. I am sure that an impartial Pali canon may only be studied properly in the light and careful study of these texts will remove the of Prakta Jaina canons and the Upanisadas. misconception that Jainism and Hinduism are rival Jainism and Buddhism religions. In Acararga, a number of passages bearing As already mentioned Jainism and Buddhism, affinity with Upanisadas, in their words and style as both belong to the same Sramanic tradition of Indian well as in essence are found. Acaranga mentions culture. Mahavira, the 24th Tirthankara of Jainas and Sramana and Brahmana simultaneously, not as rivals, Gautama, the Buddha, are contemporaries, flourished as considered later on. In Sutrakrtanga (c. 4th B.C.), in the c. 6th and 5th B. C., at a time when the simple we find a mention of some Upanisadic Rsis such as natured worshipper of early Vedic religion became Videhanami, Bahuka, Asitadevala, Dvaipayana, caste-ridden and ritualistic. Western thinkers regard Parasara and others. They are accepted by Jainas as both of them as the rebel children of Hinduism but the Rsis of their own tradition though they followed they are really, the reformers. They provide a spiritual different codes of conduct. Sutrakitanga, addresses meaning to the Vedic rituals and challenge the them as great ascetics and great men, who attained infallibility of the Vedas and undercut the indisputhe ultimate goal of life, i.e., liberation. Isibhasiyaim table superiority of the Brahmanas. Both, being (Rsibhasita ), considered formerly as the part of Jaina atheistic in nature hence, do not accept the concept of canon, also mentions the teachings of Narada, God as a creator and controller of the world. They Asitadevala, Angirasa, Parasara, Aruns, Narayana, establish the supre-macy of man instead of the God Yajnavalkya, Uddalaka, Vidura and many other and other deities and declare that man himself is the Upanisadic Rsis, depiced as Arhat Rsis. These referen- maker of his own destiny. It is the man alone and ces of the Jaina canonical works not only prove the none else who can attain even Godhood through his open-mindedness of Jainism, but also that the stream moral life and spiritual practices. For both of them of Indian spiritualism is one at its source, irrespective every living being is capable of attaining Nirvana, of divisions later on into Upanisadic, Buddhist, Jaina, i.e., Godhood or Buddhahood. Both of them rejected Ajivika and other rivulets. The work Rsibhasita is a the concept of grace of God. For them, solely our clear testimony to the assimilative and tolerant nature own self, is responsible for misfortune as well as of Indian thought in general and Jaina thought in sufferings. Thus, they both accept the supremacy of particular. Today, the society, deeply bogged into self and law of karma. Moral code, preached by communal separatism and strife, such great works are Buddha and Mahavira, in general sense is also similar. our torch bearers. To get rid of the cycle of birth and death, i.e., from Thus, the position accorded to the Upanisadic worldly sufferings, is the common end of Buddhism, Rsis in early ascred texts of Jainism is a clear Jainism and the Upanisadic thinkers. Both, Buddhism

Page #6
20 Aspects of Jainology : Volume VI and Jainism preach five silas or mahavratas, with only one difference, that is, in place of non-possession of Mahavira, Buddha preaches non-consumption of intoxicative drugs. The major differences between these two sister religions from the view-point of metaphysics and ethical code are following: (a) First, while the Upanisadic thinkers contemplate one eternal and immutable reality behind the world of phenomena and plurality, the Buddha found everything impermanent and changing and thus substanceless Nihsvabhava and sorrowful. Mahavira synthesised both the above extreme views, he saw no contradiction between permanence and change. For him being and becoming - both are the aspects of the same reality. He defined reality as origination, decay and permanence. Lord Mahavira never believed in absolute permanence or total cessation. (b) Secondly, the philosophical approach of Buddhism towards other philosophical doctrines was negative, while that of Jainism was positive. Lord Buddha preached that one should not fall in or accept any of the drstis, i. e., philosophical view-point, whether it is of eternalism or of nihilism, because being one-sided, none of them represent a right viewpoint. But Mahavira said that both the doctrines are partially true, if they are viewed from different angles; so one should not discard one's opponent's view, as totally false. For Jainas different opposite views may be acceptable from different angles. To Mahavira nothing was absolutely true or false, hence, he remained positive in his approach all the time. Again, while Buddhism laid stress only on the changing aspect of reality, Jainism gave due consideration to the changing as well as the eternal aspect of reality. ( Regarding moral and religious practices. Jainism advocates rigorous and strict austerities, while Buddha condemns this rigorous outlook and recommends a middle path. Inspite of similarity in their mission, Buddhism flourished more on others' soils than on its native land and established itself as a world religion, while Jainism could never had a firm-footing on the foreign soil. It remained firmly rooted in India through all the periods of Indian history, while Buddhism, after c. 9th-10th A. D. was totally uprooted from its own land of origin. Why did these two religions meet the diametrically opposite fates ? There were many reasons behind it. To name a few, Buddhism in its early days found such royal patrons as emperor Asoka and Kaniska, fired with the missionary zeal of spreading it outside India and had the territory of their empire across the Indian borders. Though Jainism also in its early days found some royal patrons as Candragupta Maurya, Samprati and Kharavela, yet they did not try for the expansion of Jainism on foreign soil. Moreover, the Jaina monks did not choose to go outside India, because it was very difficult for them to observe their strict code of conduct outside the country and they did not like to be flexible in their code of conduct. Another most important reason was that the Buddha had recommended the middle-path and remained flexible throughout his life, in prescribing the moral code for his monks and nuns. This middle-path and flexibility, made Buddhism more adaptable to the foreign soil. But due to the same reasons Buddhism was so adapted by Hinduism that it could not retain its independent entity in India. First of all the middlepath of Buddha was not very far from the teachings of the Gita. Not only this, Mahayana an offshoot of Buddhism had very little to mark it out from the original stock of Hinduism. Secondly, the Buddha himself was accepted as the ninth incarnation of Visnu. Thirdly, flexibility in moral code made the life of Buddhist monks so luxurious and even corrupt that in India they could not retain the respect of common men. Jainism, on the other hand, throughout, had a

Page #7
Origin and Development of Jainism 21 leaning towards extremism and remained strict and mostly inflexible in its moral code. That is why, Jaina monks could not go and propagate Jainism across the boundaries of India. Fourthly, owing to its strict code of conduct even for a house-holder it was not easily adaptable in foreign countries. However, it helped in retaining the faith of the common men and its own entity in India. Thus, the extremism of Jaina religion while on the one hand prevented its expansion in India and abroad, but on the other hand, it proved to be the sole cause of its survival in India. It was because of the strict austerities associated with Jain- ism that it remained a closed set, little understood beyond its adherents. Even the unusual absorbing power of Hinduism could not absorb it. This speaks of its originality, capable of withstanding the chall- enge of Hinduism. Last but not least among the causes of the extinction of Buddhism from the Indian soil was that Buddhism never tried to develop the order of laymen and lay-women. By the word 'order' they mean the order of monks and nuns. But Jainism always laid stress on the four-fold order of monks, nuns, laymen and lay-women and that was why it did not lose its identity. Thus, the two parallel religions, having their origin against the same socio-religious back-ground and beginning their journeys together, drifted wide apart and had altogether a different history. Buddhism almost vanished in India, but prospered in China, Japan, Srilanka and many other countries; Jainism remained in India, neither expanding nor suffering from further shrinking.