________________
THE HOUSEHOLDER'S DHARMA IN JAINISM 75
their mention in the Buddhist literature as well, where they are ascribed to Jainas.1 These are:
(1) Ahinsa (non-injury). A man observing it, should not kill or injure any moving (Trasa) living being intentionally. But he is free to pursue the profession of a soldier, professor, banker, agriculturist, merchant, servant etc. He is only not allowed to injure any living being uselessly and that is through the activities of mind, speech and body equally. As a citizen and a member of society, he cannot avoid the Hinsa (Injury) totally; yet he should be careful to avoid it as
night time) vow along with the above. So the "Sagaradharmamratatika" of St. Asadhara (13th century A D.) reveals in its followidg sloka :
Asya (Anuvratasya) pancadhatvam bahumatadisyate | Kvacita ratry abhojanamapi aluvrata mucyate ||
Acarya Viranandi of 12th century A.D. too, names a sixth anuvrata in his Caritrasara :
Vratatranaya kartvyam ratribhojaca varjanam | Sarvathannannivrattestat proktam sastamanu vratam | 5-70.
We find the mention of this vow in the Darsanasara of Sri Devasena (10th century A D.) as well; where writing about the origin of the Kasthasangha in the Digambara sect by one Kumarsena in 753 Vikrama era, the author points that the sixth anuvrata was counted in by this innovator. But we could not be justified in concluding from this the very origin of the sixth vow; for, the earlier authorities than Kumarsena do, also, refer to this sixth vow. For instance Sri Pujyapada svami of sixth century clearly names a sixth vow in his Sarvarthasiddhi commentary on the Tattwarthasutra. (Namuca sastama nuvratamasti ratribhojanaviramanam etc.) Bhattakalanka svami has also done likewise in his Rajavartika; which is another commentary on the above work of Sri Umasvati; though Umasvati himself has enumerated five vratas only and really all the earlier Jaina acary as has done so. Accordingly the above commentators has tried to show that this vow. was understood originally by Umasvati in the A lokita-pana-bhojana Bhavana of the first Ahinsa vow. But they seems not to have established its accuracy clearly; because the bhavana is not meant as a vow. It is simply a corroborative support, by which the observance of vows becomes facilitated Consequently a latter commentator on the Tattwarthasutra-Sri Vidyanandisvami has endeavoured to make the meaning of the above comments of the aforesaid acary as elear, in the following way
—
"Nanu pancasu vratesvanantar bhavadiha ratribhojana viratyupa. sank by amitucenna, bhavanantarbhavata | Tatranira desadayuktoantarbhava iti cenna, alokita pana bhojanasya vacanat | "
But this, as well, does not justify to count a vrata under a bhavana and so rightly did Pandit Jugalk isore Mukhtar has discussed this subject to the above effect in the Jaina Hitaisi (Vol. 14); to which the readers are referred to for further particulars. Thanks of the present
1. Majjhima Nikaya, Vol. II, pp. 35-36 and Samyuta Nikaya Vol. IV. p 317.
Shree Sudharmaswami Gyanbhandar-Umara, Surat
www.umaragyanbhandar.com
