________________
SRAMANA OR NON-BRAHMANICAL SECTS
THE philosophical schools of India, speaking broadly, I may be grouped as Brāhmaṇic and non-Brāhmaṇic, the former being referred to as astika and the latter nästika. Astika denotes the systems which recognize the Vedas and their branches as supreme authority. It does not, as in the West, denote 'theism'. Samkhya, for instance, is an atheistic philosophy, yet it is regarded as a Brāhmaṇic system, since it has accepted the authority of the Vedas. Buddhism and Jainism are considered to be non-Brahmanic, because they do not recognize the authority of the Vedas. According to another interpretation, astika is one who believes in the existence of the future world etc. According to this interpretation, the Buddhists and the Jains cannot be called năstikas. Nāgārjuna implies it when he says, 'A nastika is doomed to hell'. ? Manu, on the other hand, defines nästika as a person who challenges the authority of the Vedas (nastiko Vedanindakah).
As already stated, it will be a misnomer to dub the Buddhists and the Jains as năstikas. It will be much more fitting and appropriate, if we call them avaidikas (non-Vedic sects). Buddhist literature appears to speak of all the non-Brāhmaṇic systems as Sramaņas in the frequent expression samaņā vā brāhmanā vā'. Here 'Brāhmaṇa' appears to refer to orthodox schools. According to the tradition preserved in the Tamil literature, Śramaņa represents three sects, viz. Anuvādins (Pakudha Kaccāyana's sect), Ajivikas (Ajivakas), and Jains. The Buddhists are spoken of separately as Säkyas.
Of these Śramana sects, Buddhism and Jainism occupy the foremost rank. There are materials in abundance, both literary and otherwise, to understand the real attitude taken up by them in the matter of religion and philosophy.
1. A verse from his Ratnavali cited in the Madhyamaka-vrtti (Bib. Bud.
IV), p.135. 2. Manu Smrti, II. 11.