The preceding description of Indian society in 6th century B.C. has been
given in such detail, for it is only with a full knowledge of that
background that a correct evaluation of the noble work and achievements of
Mahavira is really possible. Mahavira was born in the year 599 B.C. at
Kundagrama, which was a suburb of the flourishing town of Vaisali, about
twenty-seven miles north of Patna. His father Siddhartha was apparently
the chieftain of the place and his mother, Trisala, was the sister of the
Vaisali ruler, whose name has been given in the Jaina texts as Cetaka.
According to the Jaina belief, Mahavira�s parents were worshippers of
Parsva and followers of the Sramanas.
Tirthankara Parsva:
There is a Jaina tradition that Jainism is as old as the human race, that
the religion shall remain in existence till eternity, and that it has been
and will be revealed again and again in the endless succeeding periods of
the world by innumerable Tirthankaras. In each of these periods there are
twenty-four Tirthankaras, the first Tirthankara of present age being
Rsabha and the last two being Parsva and Mahavira. Historical research in
India was so crude and unorganized at one time that all these Tirthankaras,
including Mahavira, were looked upon by the historians of ancient India as
just mythical personages. The credit of recognizing the historical
existence of Mahavira goes surprisingly enough, to a German scholar in the
field of Indology, Professor Herman Jacobi, who made an English
translation of the first Jaina Anga: Acaranga, and published
it with a masterly introduction in the series called the �Sacred Books of
the East� in 1884. Ancient historical research has made some progress
since then, and today Indian historians are prepared to freely recognize
not only that Mahavira was a historic personage but also that the
twenty-third Tirthankara, Parsva, and some at least of his predecessors
had historical existence.
Parsva was the son of King Asvasena of Benares, who belonged to the
Iksvaku race of the Ksatriya. In his marital relations he was
connected with the royal family of King Prasenajit, whose father
Naravarman designated himself as the lord of the universe. It has not been
possible so far to historically identify Asvasena of Benares or Prasenajit
and his father Naravarman of Kusasthala; but in spite of that limitation
historians have been willing to accept the historicity of Parsva because
of certain other historical and geographical coincidences. The existence
of the great tirtha, the hill of Samet-Sikhara (which is locally
known as the Parsvanatha Hill), on the spot at which the twenty-third
Tirthankara attained his final liberation (Nirvana) affords a
monumental proof of his historicity. Jaina literature, of course, contains
numerous references to Parsva and records the facts of his life, but even
contemporary Buddhist and other literature affords striking evidence about
the existence of Nirgranthas before the time of Mahavira.
These Nirgranthas or followers of Parsva were undoubtedly Jaina
monks; Mahavira himself was referred to as such, and he insisted on
calling his followers by the same name. This system preached by Parsva
must have been philosophically founded upon the same presuppositions that
mark the present-day Jaina Siddhanta, but it is presumable that it
did not quite offer the same pattern of ethical conduct or moral
discipline. First, the religion of Parsva laid down only four vows (chaturiam)
for the observance of his followers: ahinsa (non-killing);
sunirij (truthful speech), astay (non-stealing), and
aprigreh (renouncing of all illusory objects) ; while Mahavira
specified, and present day Jainism recognizes, five great vows, the vow of
chastity being given the same status as the vow of ahimsa. Jacobi
is of the opinion that �the augmentation in the text presupposes a decay
of the morals of the monastic order to have occurred between Parsva and
Mahavira.� It was possibly a reflection in the domain of social ethics of
the newly growing ideas of sanctity of property which marked the rise of
economic capitalism in Indian society. Secondly, although it is clear that
Parsva�s sanha as well as Mahavira�s comprehended the monk and the
nun, and the layman and the laywoman, the type of distinction between an
ordinary layman (shravak) and a layman who took a special type of
diksha and undertook to observe the twelve lay vows (shramano
pasak), which undoubtedly formed a peculiar feature of Mahavira�s
sangha, did not seem to characterize Parsva�s sangha at all.
The difference between a sravak and sramano pasek in
Mahavira, sangha consisted presumably in this, that a Sravaka
took no definite vows but merely expressed sympathy and his faith as a
Jaina while a Sramanopasaka took definite vows: Mahavira drew a
distinction between the five great vows which laid down the practice of
right conduct for the ascetic, and the five lesser vows which indicated
the rules of discipline for the layman and were reinforced by seven more
lay vows under which the layman imposed on himself voluntary limitations
regarding the areas of his desires, his travel, the things of his daily
use, the performance of meditation every day and every month, and the
giving of alms to the ascetic. There is an occasional mention of the
twelve vows of the sravaka in Parsva�s sangha also, but that
appears to be no more than a conventional way of writing for it is obvious
that there could not be twelve-there could be at best only eleven-vows of
Parsva�s sravakas. What is significant is that Parsva�s sravakas.
What is significant is that Parsva�s system is invariably spoken of as
catuyram in the Buddhist and the Jaina texts, and such invariable use
of the term does not warrant the type of distinction which Mahavira felt
impelled to draw between the great and the lesser vows.
The Jaina Idea of
Biography:
It is amazing that historical scholars should have ever been inclined to
doubt the existence of Mahavira. Jaina literature, particularly Jaina
canonical literature, which is avowedly older than the classical Sanskrit
literature and which vies in its antiquity with the oldest books of the
northern Buddhists, is replete with the facts of Mahavira�s life. Jacobi
is of the view that European scholars were confounded by the similarities
between Buddhism and Jainism and between Buddha�s and Mahavira�s life and
that they came to this conclusion due to their lack of study on the
subject. The numerous names and appellations by which these two prophets
were called Jina, Arhat, Mahavira, Sugatta, Sarvajna, Tathagata, Siddha,
Buddha, Sambuddha, Parinivrtta, Mukta, etc., and the fact that both of
them were given the same titles and epithets further confused historical
scholars. But, Jacobi has stated, with the exception of Jina and perhaps
Sramana, which were quite commonly used by both the sects, the Buddhists
and the Jainas made a preferential selection of certain titles only. Thus,
Buddha, Tathagata, Sugata and Sambuddha are common titles of Sakyamuni and
are only occasionally used as epithets of Mahavira. On the other hand,
Mahavira is often referred to in the Jaina Agama as Vardhamana, Because of
the �increase that had taken place in the popularity of his parents ever
since the moment he had been begotten�, still more often as Jnatrputra.
The Buddhist texts refer to him as Nataputta, and it was not until quite
late that Jacobi identified the term Nataputta to be a variation of
Janatrputra. He is also called Vira, Ativira, Sanmati and by a host of
other names in the later literature of the Jainas.
These names are clearly qualitative
names, that is to say, they are meant to draw attention to certain
qualities possessed by Mahavira; and they are all indicative of a distinct
point of view which underlay the Jaina idea of biography. The Jaina
viewpoint while writing a biography is not that of the usual historical
biographer. The Jaina interest is not diffused over the whole range of the
subject�s activities; it is all centered at one point, and that point is
the attainment by his subject of salvation. The Jaina biographer writes
about other things only in so far as they have to do with the attainment
of his ultimate object. Interest would be spread over the whole wide field
of activity when a biography like that of Rama or Krishna, is written with
a view to help the codification of the principles of dharma. The
Brahmanic view, which was based on a desire for success in the world as
well as the next and which linked up, in the significant phrase of Sir S.
Radha-Krishna, �the realm of desires with the prospective of the eternal�,
thought in terms of the purusharth or human values- Dharma,
artha, kama, and moksa- and considered the acquisition of
wealth and the enjoyment of the present life as worthwhile as the ultimate
attainment of the moksa. But to the Jaina there is no such thing as a real
enjoyment of material things.
The Jaina siddhanta is based upon the presupposition that the whole
universe can be classified into one or other of the two everlasting,
uncreated, coexisting but independent categories, the jiva and the
ajiva; and the Jaina metaphysics proceeds on the assumption that
the Jiva (which corresponds in general to the atman of the
other schools of Indian thought) not only exists but that it also acts and
is acted upon. The intrinsic nature of the Jiva is one of
perfection and is characterized by infinite intelligence (anantgyan),
infinite perception (anantdarshan), infinite peace (anantsukh),
and infinite power (anantveeriya). During the period of the union,
however, of the Jiva with matter which constitutes samsara,
the characteristic features of the Jiva�s qualities are obscured, although
not destroyed, and �the exterior semblance of the Jiva belies its innate
glory�; and from this obscuration it becomes the duty of each individual
soul to free itself. Man�s personality in this view consists of two
elements, the spiritual and the material; and according to Jainism, the
object of life is so to subdue the latter as to completely sake off its
malignant influence and thereby enable the Jiva to all its inherent
excellencies in their fullness. A man�s action in life may be of two
kinds, that which maintains, or even strengthens, the bond of union
between Jiva and the matter, and thus-whether it brings pleasure or pain
to the doer-effectually keeps the Jiva in a state of bondage, and that
which tends to cut asunder the union between Jiva and matter and thus
helps the Jiva to attain its freedom and ultimately perfection. The first
kind of action, and its is just this action which is germane to what we
call worldly achievements, is from a spiritual point of view undeserving
of very much attention; and so the Jaina biographer, whose main interest
is centered on the attainment of the ultimate, has been on the whole
inclined to omit it from his analysis. It is only the spiritual activity
of the individual about which he has written.
