Sambodhi 2012 Vol 35

Author(s): J B Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 34

24
Bansidhar Bhatt
SAMBODHI
to Weber (Bhag.pp.213-214; fn.6), pandar'angas are heretics (pāşandas). It appears that on the basis of Charpentier's explanation, Sandesara in his article on Sveta Bhiksu (in Hindi), described the whole problem in detail, that śveta (white) bhikṣus (monks) are not Jainas but Saivas. Sveta-bhiksu in Pancatantra 3.76 (somewhat similar to Pancākhyāna 3.76; (ed. J. Hertel) are the pāndara-bhikkhu in Haribhadra's Samarāiccakahā. In Ni.Cū, pandara-bhikkhus are considered disciples of Gosāla (p. 865). The word occurs also in Anuyoga 228 (pandar'angae bhikkhu), and Ogha Nir. Bh. (vss. 83, 107), etc. Bollèe (Kunālajātaka p.137) and Balbir (Jaina Buddhist Dialogues) have referred to Sandesara.
Some Jaina monks in the time of Mahāvīra are called pásatthas, (pārsvasthas, on the fringe of Jainism), kusīlas (kuśīlas; with bad character; in Buddhism śīla appears in the sense of vrata; as such, kuśīlas are those having bad vratas), pulāe (pulāka, "chaff”), bausa, (bakuša, spotted), nissārae (nissārakas : worthless), and avasanna (languid, outcast). Many of them are considered niyamthas (nirgranthas). These monks' behaviour is considered not-praiseworthy (appasattha, apraśasta) and criticized almost in all Jaina texts. Among them, behaviour of the Jaina monks like pāsatthas and kusīlas is much more connected with five bad types (appasattha) of bhāvanā. Because of such a behaviour of the said monks, Sīlānka at places where a description of these monks occurs in Sü; tries to connect them with non-Jaina sects; for instance, the term samanā ege, (Sū.I. 1.3.4), he says: they are Sākyas (the Buddhists), and Pāśupatas, etc. Similarly, according to Sū.Nir. 29 such monks are engaged in the Vāmamārga, of bad ascetic character. Vāma-mārga, an off-shoot of the Saivism is known for Tantrism. The pāsatthas (Sū. I. 3.4.12) are interpreted by Sīlānka as Nātha-vādi-ka-mandala-pravistāh or Saiva-visesah - particular types of Saivas ! I think, after his six years initial ascetic career, when Mv. decided to be away from the Ājīvaka sect, or not to remain further in contact with Gosāla, some of Mv.'s colleagues from Ājīvaka circles or elsewhere would also have joined him together. Such fellow colleagues of Mv. might be later called pāsạtthas, etc. due to their loose ascetic career differing from the strict Jaina asceticism (cp. $2.11).
Caillat (1975, pp.41 ff.) considers pāsatthas, etc. as Jaina monks, but not behaving as per Jaina ascetic rules and regulations. Āv.Nir. 1107 instructs not to respect monks like păsatthas, avasannas (languid or outcaste), kusilas, samsattas (with attachment), and ahacchandas (free-willed ones) ! Bhag. 10.4 (Deleu.Bhag.p.170) considers pāsatthas etc. not as Jaina monks but as laypersons in Jainism. It is an attempt to save Jainism from blameful references to pāsatthas, etc. as Jaina monks !