________________
7. YASASTILAKA AS AN ANTHOLOGY OF SANSKRIT VERSE
147
the goddess of wealth, though possessed by someone, does not closely adhere to him unless he is a hero of uncommon courage (3. 59).
The next speaker is a minister named Kavikulasekhara who tries to effect a compromise between the views of the two previous speakers. He recognises both fate and effort as determining factors in the life of man, although he gives greater importance to effort, and his point of view is the same as that developed in the Mahābhārata (Anusasanaparva, chap. 6), which likewise admits the existence of fate, but lays by far the greater emphasis on personal endeavour.
Kavikulasekhara opines that when success comes without being deliberately aimed at, it is to be attributed to fate; in all personal exertion must be held to be the determining cause. When a serpent comes in contact with a man in his sleep and he remains unhurt, his safety is to be attributed to fate, but when the reptile is seen and avoided, the determining factor is one's personal effort. Fate and personal effort often help each other, and their mutual relation is like that of medici the vitality of a patient ( 3. 61-63):
अप्रेक्षापूर्विका यत्र कार्यसिद्धिः प्रजायते । तत्र दैवं नृपान्यत्र प्रधानं पौरुषं भवेत् ॥ सप्तस्य सर्पसंपर्के देवमायषि कारणम । दृष्टानवञ्चिते सपै पौरुषं तत्र कारणम् ॥
परस्परोपकारेण जीवितौषधयोरिव । दैवपौरुषयोवृत्तिः फलजन्मनि मन्यताम् ॥ Nerertheless the speaker recognises personal endeavour as the governing principle of human activity and dismisses fate as something outside the range of sense experience' (3. 64):
तथापि पौरुषायत्ताः सस्वानां सकलाः क्रियाः । अतस्तञ्चिन्त्यमन्यत्र का चिन्तातीन्द्रियात्मनि ॥ A youthful minister, Upāyasarvajña by name, protests against this theoretical discussion, declaring that the king's council-chamber is not a school nor is the time opportune for an academic controversy. He, therefore,
1 The Matsyapurīna (Chap. 221) admits a third factor, kāla, (tá gepare for yourHI
HHG fofugá RTIT 959E11) but gives the palm to puruşakaira. The Sütrakstānga 1. 1. 2. 4 givos equal importance to fate and human exertion. See alse Jacobi: Jaina Sūtras, II, p. 240. They are treated as mutually dependent in Haribhadra's Vinsa
tivirsikā, section 5. 2 Cf. Yogavāśistha, op. cit., 7. 6. The discussion of the ministers reminds one of the
tenets of the early Jewish sects about destiny and free will. The Essenes exempted nothing from the sway of destiny. The Sadducess denied destiny altogether. The Pharisees 'held the middle ground--some things, but not all, are the work of destiny; some are in man's own power to determine whether they shall come to pass or not. Moore: Julaism, Vol. I, p. 457. The Sadducees supposed that all our actions are in our own power.' The Pharisees ascribed everything to fate, and yet allowed that to do right or wrong is within the power of each individual, although fate does co-operate in his action, Poters: The Religion of the Hebrews, p. 421.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
