Jain Journal 1983 04

Author(s): Jain Bhawan Publication
Publisher: Jain Bhawan Publication

Page 33

Doctrines of An Obsolete Sect
PRANABANANDA JASH
The contribution of the Ajivikas to the heterodox Indian religious systems in general and Jainism in particular, is unique as well as significant in many respects. While writing on the relationship between the Ajivikas and the Jainas, Jacobi points out that "the greatest influence on the development of Mahavira's doctrines, I believe, must be ascribed to Gosala, the son of Makkhali". It is well known that Gosala spent first six years of his career as a wonderer together with Mahavira. the twenty fourth Tirthankara of the Jainas; but he parted company with the latter on account of doctrinal differences.
It is true that a bitter hostility developed between the leaders of these two philosophical schools; but in some cases of their doctrines and tenets they have many points in common. And there is no denying the fact that Jainism owed in many respects to the doctrines propounded by the Ajivika leader, Gosala. To prove our contention we may mention that the Jainas borrowed the idea of lesya from the Ajivika conception of abhijāti, or six classes of mankind, and "altered it so as to bring it into harmony with the rest of their own doctrines,2 The concept of abhijāti3 preached by the Ajivikas has evidently noticeable bearing on the Jaina classification of being and the Jaina conception of lesya. Again, an analytical study reveals that the logic and epistemology of the Ajivikas had much in consonance with that of the trairasikas of the Jainas.4 The distinctive characteristic of the system was the division of propositions into three categories in contrast with the orthodox Jaina system, which allowed seven (saptabhangi).5
1 Sacred Books of the East (SBE), XLV., Introduction, XXIX-XXX. 2Ibid.
3 Anguttara-nikaya, III, p. 383.
4The Ajivika heretics founded by Gosala are likewise called Trairasikas, since they declare everything to be of triple character, viz.: living, not living, and both living and not living; world, not world, and both world and not world; real, unreal, and both real and unreal. In considering standpoints (naya) they postulate that an entity may be of the nature of substance, of mode, or of both. Thus, since they maintain three heaps (rasi), they are called Trairasikas. SBE, XLV, pp. XXIX-XXX.