________________
50
Rishibhashit : A Study
pre-ordained. But on getting knowledge he becomes the maker of his destiny and so his future depends on his endeavour or is undecided or not pre-ordained. Or in other words, past is the maker of our present but we ourselves are also the makers of our future. As such the past is Bhavya (pre-ordained) and future is Abhavya (not preordained). Infact, his preaching is that the present is dependent on the past and pre-ordained but the future can be made through endeavour and knowledge. As such the future of a proficient mendicant is not preordained or is Abhavya. in fact this matter of pre-ordained and not preordained is connected with the Karma principle. According to the Karma principle our present is result of our Karma in the past, but we can become the mouiders of our future. This capacity of being or not the moulder of the future has been discussed in this chapter.
The Karma principle and its importance has been detailed in this chapter. Which is similar to other chapters. After detailing the Karma principle, attachment or ignorance have been discussed as the root causes of bondage of karma. It has been explained that how under the influence of attachment a person enters the bondage of Karma. In this context it has also been explained that an individual enters the bondage and can come out of it on his own. As such an ascetic should properly understand the complex nature of cycle of Karma and transcend through meditation in order to be free from the bondage of Karma.
Thus we see that the thoughts of Harigiri compiled in Rishibhashit deal elaborately with the consequences of attachment with reference to proper and organised human endeavour and Karma principle. But all these facts have been explained in the preachings of other Rishis in a similar fashion. As such, it is difficult to say that Harigiri had some original line of thinking. We can only state that he presented the Karma principle as an assimilation of Niyativad and Purusharthvad.
There is a mention of Harit-ther in the Buddhist tradition.192 But it is difficult to conclude that this Harit-ther and Harigiri of Rishibhashit are same. Although he has been said to be an Arhat and a proficient ascetic, in absence of details, nothing can be said conclusively. Besides Buddhist tradition, the lineage of Acharyas given in Brihadaranyakupanishad 193 mentions one Harit Kashyap, a disciple of Kashyap. I feel that there is a probability of Harit Rishi of Brihadaranyak-Upanishad being Harigiri of Rishibhashit. But in absence of conclusive proof it is difficult to accept this statement also.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
