Schools and Sects in Jaina Literature

Author(s): Amulyachandra Sen
Publisher: Vishwa Bharati Calcutta

Page 32

SCHOOLS AND SECTS IN JAINA LITERATURE
23
of nothing but these five elements. They are the primary cause of the world even down to a blade of the grass. A man buys or causes to buy, kills or causes to kill, cooks and causes to cook, he may even sell and kill a man--and even then he does not do any wrong."
In the Samaññaphala Sutta of the Buddhists the doctrines said to belong to Ajita Kesakambali are an echo of Nästika-vāda. Ajita taught that there is no such thing as alms or sacrifice or offering. There is neither fruit nor result of good or evil deeds. There is no such thing as this world or the next. After death the elements constituting the body return to the elements. On the dissolution of the body everyone is cut off, annihilated and after death there is nothing."
This doctrine is also called Lokāyata-vāda. Tajjīvataccharira-vāda held practically the same view with Nāstika-vāda only with this difference that while the latter deny altogether the existence of the soul the former admit it, but the logical end of both the views would be exactly the same.
(VI) BUDDHISM.
A heretic says in connection with the use of water for various purposes that it is justified on the ground of his having permission to drink it or take it for toilet purposes." Silāņka takes these heretics to be Buddhists. This can be accepted without objection for we know that Buddha declared that no sin was committed by drinking water and he permitted bath and washing to his ascetic disciples. 80
The Nirgranthas looked upon the Ajiviyas as their worst opponents but if facts are considered they suffered most at the hands of the Buddhists in later times. Buddha was a junior contemporary of Mahāvīra, and had therefore greater need and occasion for counteracting and criticising the creed of the latter than Mahāvira had of fighting with the doctrines of a junior. The rivalry of the two sects grew stronger after Mahāvīra's death. These facts account to some extent for the comparatively scantier mention and criticism of Buddhistic doctrines in the literature of the Jainas than what would normally be expected of the two chief sects of the time.
" Süt.S. 11.1.21-24.
78 Barua : A History of Pre-Buddhistic Indian Philosophy, p. 293, points out that Ajita's views were not materialistic in the gross sense in which they were understood by Mahāvīra and Buddha, but what he really meant was a protest against the view that soul and body were entirely separated.
"Acār.S. 1..3.7. 4 Cf. Mahāvagga 1.25.12 5.13.7