________________
Sec. 3. SOME PROBLEMS IN THE T. S.
topic of five vratas independently along with their bhāvanās, and likewise the Dasavaikālika 4.5-10 offer an independent treatment of it along with rātri-bhojanavirati
This evinces that the category of five vows, among which ahimsā and aparigiaba (which is used in the sense of a synonym of ahimā in the Ācāränga I and Sūtrakyta I) must have evolved first (as these constitute the integral part of the Jaina doctrine), 2 3 had occupied an independent position apart from the other ethical principles, which came to be later recognized as one of the anäsravadvāras or samvaradvāras when these ontological categories became prevalent. Umāsvēti includes mahāvrata in the category of samvara in IX : 7Bh. which pertains to samvarānupreksā ,samvaräms-ca miartādi-gupty-ādi paripälanād-gunatas-cintayet ...'. However he discusses the topic of manavrata in ihe context of asrava in Ch. VII, possibly because he found it more convenient to haudle it together with anvrata for he was likely coastrained by th: conpact form of compostion in Sūtra style. Vrata seems to have thus occupied no clear-cut position in the context of samyama in the canonical period even though the aforementioned Surakyta 1.3.4..32 talks about samyama in reference to five vows. The post-canonical author like Kundakunda expressly places vrata in the category of samyama, for instance, in the Caritrapāhuda 27, ‘pamc-imdiya-samvaruņam pamc.l-vayā pamcavim sa-kiriyāsu/pamca-samidi taja-zu'li samjama-caraṇam nirājāram', and in the Bür.isāņuvekkhả 76, 'vadi-samidi-pålaņāe damdaccäena in liya-jaenal parinamanāņussa puno samiami-dhammo have niyama'. Likewise the Mulācāra V counts vrata, sam ti and gupti as constituting of the content of cāsitramārga.
The Sthana 5.2.524 absve enumerates another list of fivefold samyamas, i. e., sāmāyika, chedopasthäpanā, piribāravśuddhi, sūksinasamparāya and yatbākhyāna, which are ca led samyamas as well as caritras in Bhagavati 8. 2. 319, 25.6 and 25. 7.785. They should be compared with six kalpas expressed in the Byhatkalpa 6, i. e., sā nāk1-519/ati, ci dopastna janiyā -sim,ita, nirv.śamāna, nirvişțakāyika, jina and stbavira. It is evident that the content of caritra was formulated after the composition of the Chrdasūtras. These five stages of cār:tra were later absorbed in the 8th mārgaņā. sthāna, however they were likely in full swing in the capacity of gunasthāna in the monastic practice, under the authority of the Chedasūtras. Cāritra is therefore clearly discerned from the concept-couple of samyama-tapas in the Bhagavati 1. 1. 17, "goyama ! iha-bhavie câritte no para-bhavie cariste no tad-ubha yacarittel eram tave samiame'. Likewise when the Sthina 2. 3. 120, etc., distinguish caritra from tapas, cāritra must have denoted samyama in five stages in as much as it denotes so in the Uttarādhyayana 28, for the term samyama used in a concept-couple of samyam 1-tapas seems to have never been called by the name of cāritra. The term caritra was likely preferred to samyama in this context by the later Agam.c authors in order to avoid ambiguity.
108
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
