History of Jaina Monachism

SR No.: 001727
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: S B Deo
Publisher: Deccan College Research Institute
Publication Year: 1956
Total Pages: 616
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Principle, & History
File Size: 12 MB

Page 56

HISTORY OF JAINA MONACHISM
51 Inspite of the antiquity of the Brahmacãrin and his similarity with that of the Sramaņa, the theory may be said to contain the following drawbacks.
Two dissimilarities may be detected between the Brahmacārin and the Sramana:
(i) Firstly, the brahmacārin was a young person who went in search of a good teacher for the sake of obtaining new knowledge. He had to do all sorts of service to his guru and had to stay with the latter till his studies were completed. In some cases, the students settled permanently in the house of the guru. This element was totally absent with the śramaņas.
(ii) Secondly, in many cases the Brahmacārin entered married life after completing his studies. The Sramaņas, on the other hand, were expected to be celibate throughout their wandering life.
Thus, this theory does not seem to be plausible. 4. “Brahmacárin + Brahmavādin = śramana" :
The view which says that the śramana originated out of the blending of the qualities of the Brahmacărin and the Brahmavādin seems to be an extension of the previous theory.
In support of this theory, Durga BĦAGVAT says that, "The truth probably lies midway. The Gramana held the Brahmacārin as a model as far as practical life with all its moral aspects (such as aversion to luxury, observance of chastity) and the daily routine were concerned. For the intellectual pursuits and the means thereof, he was indebted to the Brahmavādin. The Sramaņa, therefore, is a combination of the student and the wandering master of the Brahman knowledge. He behaves like the one and thinks like the other. Many of the rules of the Śramaņas, therefore, can be traced back to the rules and habits of both the types of men."35
In reply to this view, it may be said that Brāhmanism, Jainism and Buddhism contain more or less common fundamental rules of ascetic morality, and it is very difficult to know the exact magnitude of mutual exchange or borrowing of rules that took place between these three monachisms.
As a matter of fact, Dr. DUTT pushes the idea still further when he remarks that "The Brahmanical sannyāsī, the Buddhist Bhikkhus and the Jaina Samanas all belonged to the same ancient society of wandering religious mendicants, and it is obvious that among all these sects there should subsist a certain community of ideas and practices."36
Many of the knowledge. nation of the stu
35. Early Buddhist Jurisprudence, p. 17. 36. Op. cit., p. 51,