________________
E. Leumann, An outline of the Avaśyaka Literature
reached Rāyagiha. It was winter time and they had returned from their stroll for alms (in the city) during the third period of the day (pauruși) to Vebbhāra-hill (which they had chosen as their abode). During this stroll the first one was caught unexpectedly by night-fall at the entrance to his cave, the second one already in the park, the third one at the entrance to the park, and the fourth one, when he had hardly left the city. Each one remained where he was. Then the first one (during the night) had to endure terrible cold outside the cave and for this reason died during the first period of night, whereby (the second one died in the second, the third, in the third and) the fourth one, in the fourth period of night, because at the last place it was not so cold due to the city haze. Just as these four bravely suffered you should endure (discomforts of cold).
Although the anecdote is meant to present a model for monastic behaviour in conformity with the context where it has been placed, the original intention had apparently been another: We think it was to point out the absurdity of the rigorousness of Bhadrabāhu's party by a fictitious example of the consequences that arose. A confirmation of this opinion comes from the fact that also a pendant to this anecdote can be found that concerns Sthūlabhadra and that has been handed down doubly as section 33: in the story at Av.-niry. XVII 11 analysed earlier and in the previously described context as the end-piece of the story on 8. Briefly, the contents are the following:
Av.-kath. XVII 11,33 [= concluding piece of Utt. II 16 f. (niry. 107-112) kath.] Three monks have undertaken (during the rainy season) something particularly difficult. The first one stays in a lion's cave, the second one at the place of a very dangerous snake, and the third one on a well-cover. However, Thūlabhadda takes up his quarters in the garden house of the courtesan, Kosā (his former mistress). When she tries to seduce him one night he remains firm and wins her over to his faith. She then becomes a lay sister who vows to only follow her trade if the king should command it. At the end of the four months of the rainy season the four report back to their (common) teacher (Sambhūyavijaya). He rises just a little towards the first one and says: Welcome! You have accomplished something difficult. In the same manner he greets the second and third ones; with Thūlabhadda, however, he arises full of inner emotion and says: Welcome! You have accomplished the most difficult task. The other three think the teacher is biased and favours Thūlabhadda only because he is the son of a minister. During the following rainy season, in spite of a warning from the teacher, the first one lodges with the courtesan and immediately becomes infatuated with her. She demands 100,000 and for this he goes to Nepal, because the king there gives each arriving (monk) a piece of cloth worth that much. On the way back, he is stopped by robbers, but released, he brings the cloth to the courtesan. Then, when she just throws it into the toilet, he chides "don't spoil it”, to which she replies: This cloth can cause you harm, but you don't feel sorry for yourself, even though, in that way, you are about to tarnish yourself? He began to listen to reason. At confession-time, the teacher scolds: That is why Thūlabhadda has performed the most difficult (task); he resisted his former beloved even before she had become a lay sister, whereas you, although she had become a lay sister (and did not even display her full charms), even undertook a journey to an unknown country for her sake.
The preceding anecdote is obviously Sthūlabhadra's apologia vis-à-vis the stricter course that puts the hermit-like life much higher than the abode among people. At the same time, it shows for the second time that the weakness of the minister's son was his relationship with the female sex, to whom, as is well-known, the Digambara-s deny the possibility of salvation. Besides, it seems that the anecdote has been re-told uncomprehendingly by the
"Actually, the entire story could be from the anecdote, because only the anecdote is relevant. Also, only here has one gone back further, clearly depending on the Āvasyaka-story: firstly, (section) I is summarily reproduced, then, 32 (from the opening or from the middle) and 33 are narrated verbatim. Finally, 34 is disposed of by a simple reference to the Avaśyaka tradition (jahā Namokkāre (Āv.-kath. IX 58,11] Šānty., Avassae Dev.).
Here, the details are similar to Divyavad. XIX ed. p. 276,16-277.11
74
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
