Shraman Bhagvana Mahavira Part 4

Author(s): Ratnaprabhvijay, D P Thaker
Publisher: Parimal Publication

Page 10

Jamuli was the first Nihnava. He was the son-in-law of Śramuoa Bhagavān Mahāvira on the one hand and his nephew on the other. He was conversant with eleven Angas. 1 [e was the heard of a retinue of 500 monks while luis wife was the chef of 1000 nuns. Once, after having separatoil from Śramaņa Bhaguvän Malāvira withont his consent, as he was laul own with high fever, he crdered his followers to preparo a bed for him. While the monks were spreading the bed for him, he questiones them as to whether the band was really. The monks said 'yes'. But, in the heat of fever, Jamali assorted that what was being spread could not be said tv have been actually spreard. Eventually le retised to accept the welkroun «loctrine of Kriyamanam Kritau', 'caliyamāņam calitam etc, found in the Bhagavati Sutra. Accoriling to him, actual prorluction of an object is achieved after (lirghakāla or long time. The sthaviras trical to refute his theory of 'bahurata' which advanced the faults of nityakritatva, mithyākriyā etc. by puttig forth various sound counter-arguments. But Jamāli did not listen to them. Consequently, some of the sthaviras left his side and returned to Sramaņa Bhagavan Mahāvīra, while a few stuck to him and followed the theory of Bahuratas'. Jamali boasted about his Kèvalitva even before the Tirthaikara. Sramaņa Bhagavān Mahăvīra explained to him the transitoriness of Jiva like loka and asked him to mnounce his theory. But Jamali dil not even put faith in him. Thereafter le led the life of a staunch śramaņa and met death without repenting for his wisbelief. His wife, however, renounced the Bahuruta theory after having graspel the truth on experiencing the burn of a 'charcoal thrown on her by a potter named Dhanka.
Tişyagupta was the second Nihnava. He happened to be the student of Acārya Vasu who was a Sruta-Kèvalin. In course of his study of Parva, Tisyagupta came across a conversation between the Tirthankara and his pupil (discussing the definition of Jiva, where-in the Tirthankara asserts that not a portion or two but all the portions combineil together, form Jiva. Tisyagıpta misinterpretes this ālāpaka and propounds a new theory that the last portion of a living being by which it becomes complete in