Rishibhashit A Study

SR No.: 001742
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Sagarmal Jain
Publisher: Prakrit Bharti Academy
Publication Year: 1988
Total Pages: 106
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Agam, Canon, & Literature
File Size: 7 MB

Page 79

70
Rishibhashit : A Study
same. In my opinion Sanjay of 33rd chapter and the preacher of 39th chapter are different.
In Buddhist tradition seven persons having the name Sanjay are mentioned. 287 Besides the earlier teacher of Sariputra and the one well know by the name Sanjay Velatthiputta, no other Sanjay can in any way be connected with Sanjay of Rishibhashit. Buddhist scholars have little dispute in accepting Sanjay Velatthiputta and the earlier teacher of Sariputra as one. He is believed to be one of the six Teerthankar contemporaries of Buddha; so at least the period is same. His joining the Buddhist organisation with Sariputra, Moggalayan, and two hundred and fifty disciples also confirms that he was a prominent Acharya of his age. As such it is an undisputed fact that the earlier teacher of Sariputra and Sanjay Velatthiputta are the same person.
Now the question is that this Sanjay Velatthiptta and the Sanjay of Rishibhashit are also one or not. If we accept the traditional belief that Sanjay of Rishibhashit was a contemporary of Mahavir, then connecting him with Sanjay Velatthiputta, the earlier teacher of Sariputta, who was contemporary of Buddha, has no periodic hurdle. Because when Rishibhashit can compile the discourse of Mankhali Goshal, a contemporary of Mahavir, there can be no objection to compiling the thoughts of Sanjay Velatthiputta.
In the Buddhist tradition Sanjay has been termed as skeptic or indicisive, because he did not give final or conclusive answer to philosophical questions. In modern terms he must be visualising various possible alternatives to the solution of a philosophical problem, and consequently did not use a conclusive terminology. This view point of his is evident in the following words mentioned in Rishibhashit : 'To understand the evilKarma comprehensively is a matter of doubt.288 Because the decision about a Karma being good or evil is possible only on pondering properly from angles of matter, space, time, attitude, and effort'. The term 'Rahasse' used in Rishibhashit, is worth a special thought. Also, here "Sammam Janitta" would be more appropriate in place of "Samajjinitta" (refer to the prose part after the fourth couplet). In Rishibhashit the discourse of Sanjay is very brief. It states that evil deed should neither be done nor made to be done; if done by force of circumstances, it should not be repeated again but criticized instead.
In conclusion, it can be said that Sanjay Rishi mentioned in Rishibhashit and Uttaradhyayan are same. It is a strong possibility that he