Penance’s:
Mahavira performed a very prolonged course of severe penance for twelve
years for the destruction of the karma. This course of penance’s
comprehended ‘uninterrupted meditation, unbroken chastity, and the most
scrupulous observance of the rules concerning eating and drinking.’ The
account of his sadhana given in the Acaranga is literally soul
-stirring.
He mediated day and night, undisturbed and non-perturbed. Avoiding women
and giving up the company of householders, he realized singleness. He
lodged in workshops, assembling places, manufactories, shed of straw,
towns, garden-houses, in cemeteries and burial grounds, or at the foot of
a tree, wherever shelter was available. He did not care for sleep for the
sake of pleasure and slept only for short hours. In winter when cold winds
blew, he did not seek sheltered places or kindle wood or seek to cover
himself with clothes. In the cold season he mediated in the shade, in
summer he exposed himself to the heat. He would mediate with his eyes
fixed on a square space before him of the length of a man or in some of
the posture without the smallest motion. While mediating he would
concentrate on the things above, below, or beside. He meditated free from
sin and desire, not attached to sounds or colors, and never acted
carelessly. Being averse from the impressions of the senses, he spoke very
little and was always calm.
‘Thoroughly knowing the earth-bodies and water-bodies and fire-bodies and
wind-bodies, the lichens, seeds and sprouts’ and comprehending ‘that they
are, if narrowly inspected, imbued with life’, he avoided all kinds of sin
and abstained from all sinful activities. He did not use another’s robe,
nor did he eat out of another’s vessel. He did not rub his eyes or scratch
his body. Knowing measure in eating and drinking he was not desirous of
delicious food, nor had he a longing for it.’ For more than a couple of
years he led a religious life without using cold water. He completely
abstained from indulgence of the flesh; whether wounded or not, he took no
medical treatment. He lived on rough food-rice, pounded jujube and beans.
Sometimes he ate stale food. He accepted moist or dry or cold food, old
beans, old pap, or bad grain, whatever was available. But where there were
hungry crows or thirsty beings or other beggars standing in his way, he
would go past that place without begging alms. He kept fasts; sometimes he
ate only the sixth meal, or the eighth, or the tenth, or the twelfth;
sometimes he did not drink for half a month or even for a month or for
more than two months or even six months.
In accordance with the rules of the order he wandered about unceasingly,
except for the four months of the rainy season. During the rest of the
year, he lived in villages only a single night and in towns only five
nights. He was indifferent alike to the smell of ordure and the sweet
scent of sandal, to straw and jewel, dirt and gold, pleasure and pain, his
world and the world beyond, to life and death. His mind was completely
free from attachment. Circumspect in his thought, words and acts, he moved
without wrath, pride, deceit and greed. Like water in a vessel, he was
unattached in the midst of sin. During the course of his travels, he
visited the pathless country of the Ladhas, in Vajjabhumi and in
Subbhabhumi; and here his troubles were endless. The rude natives of the
place attacked him and set dogs to bite him, but he did not use as much as
a stick to keep off the dogs. He endured the abusive language of the
rustics and bore pain, free from desire. “When he approached the village
the inhabitants met him on the outside and attacked him, saying ‘Get away
from here’. He was struck with a stick, the fist, a lance, hit with a
fruit, a clod a potsherd. Beating him again and again many cried. When he
once sat without moving his body they cut his flesh, tore his hair under
pains, or covered him with dust. Throwing him up they let him fall, or
disturbed him in his religious postures”. But like a hero at the head of a
battle, bearing all hardships he proceeded on his path wholly undisturbed.
His Wanderings:
The Jaina books give a precise description of Mahavira’s wanderings during
this period of over twelve years, the various places he visited and the
several contacts he formed. The Kalpasutra and the Bhagavati
supplement, and do not as certain scholars are inclined to think,
contradict, each other; together help to frame a complete picture of his
travels from place to place.
Kummaragrama may be supposed to be the starting point of Mahavira’s
travels. The Acaranga mentions that renunciation implied the
quitting of “the northern Ksatriya part of the place Kundapura’ and
arrival in the village Kummara,- which was presumably a suburb of
Kundagrama. From Kummara he moved on to the settlement of Kollaga
(situated close to Nalanda), where he was hospitably received by the
Brahman Bahula. After roaming about in that area for some six months,
Mahavira ultimately came to Asthigrama to spend his first rainy season
there. The commentary on the Kalpasutra refers to Vardhamana as the former
name of Asthigrama; Dr. B.C. Law is inclined to identify it with modern
Burdwan. On the way to Asthigrama Mahavira had the first taste of those
bitter experiences, which were going to be such a common feature of his
Sadhaka life, (1) of hostility towards him of the parivrajaka sects
living in north India at time, and (ii) of his persecution at the hands of
various tempter gods in a similar way to the temptation of the Buddha by
the traditional Mara. On both these a few words may be
parenthetically added.
In the 6th century B.C. north India generally and the north-eastern
provinces in particular were buzzing with ascetic life. A whole legion of
ascetic orders was flourishing in these regions. Scholars are of the
opinion that asceticism has its roots in the Vedas; the center of Vedic
religion is the Rsi (seer) who is capable of a direct realization
of Truth by practice of Tapasaya or asceticism. There is no doubt
that asceticism received great encouragement in the age of the Aranyakas
and the Upanisads when, dissatisfied with growing rituals and
superstition under the aegis of the priestly class, serious-minded people
openly questioned the prevailing intellectualism of religion and retired
to the forests in their search for the highest knowledge and for a new
world of experience. The Sruti practice of asceticism was
accordingly regularized into a system in the Smrtis, which made it
obligatory upon every Hindu to devote the latter part of his life
to the two ashrams of Vanaprastha and Samnyasa. It
may be mentioned that the Brahmanical system did not confine asceticism
only to elderly people or advanced householders; even youths could be
permitted to take up the ascetic career, if they wanted to shun the world
in their quest for the Ideal, such youths being known as the naishthik
brahamchari. Thus in the normal brahmanic system quite about
half of society would be wandering about as mendicants and ascetic in
pursuit of Truth under the guidance of chosen teachers. This floating mass
of houseless population was organized into different orders or sects in
accordance with the different systems of doctrines and discipline they
followed. The Buddhist text Udana bears testimony to the fact that
the characteristic feature of the religious life of India during this
period was a multiplicity of ascetic groups, secretaries of Sramanas
and Brahmanas, all parivrajakas, followers of different
dittis (viewpoints), darshan system, gyanti (beliefs), ruchi
(aims), and ashray (organizations)”, the Jaina texts also mention
numerous sects and schools, with their own beliefs and practices, existing
in the country at the time. In his introduction to the Acaranga,
Jacobi has elaborately compared the rules and religious practices of
Brahmanic and Sramanic ascetics, and stated his conclusion that
certain rules were commonly observed by most of the ascetic orders, for
instance, (1) the injunction that the Bhiksu must station himself
in a fixed retreat during the rains, (2) the injunction that the Bhiksu
must not store up articles of consumption, nor kill life, and (3) various
rules regarding beggings etc. Tapas (or austerities), in some form
or other, it appears, was common to particularly all orders. But Mahavira
was now giving a new meaning to the term, which conflicted with all its
prevailing notions and which raised the practice of tapsaya to a
spiritual height, unattained and not even intended to be attained, by any
of the existing parivrajaka orders.
Mahavira’s idea of tapas was that of self-restraint with regard to
the body, speech and mind; in his view, austerities had to be inward as
well as outward, and fasting, absolute chastity and unmitigated meditation
were its several forms. The practice of austerities or penance’s was to be
restored to as a means of wearing out and ultimately destroying the effect
of sinful deeds committed in former existence’s, and the practice of the
threefold self-restraint, of the body, speech and mind, as a means of
stopping the production of new karmas. As justified forms of
penance’s, Mahavira was prepared to recognize only anshan
(fasting), unrodaree (limiting the food that one eats),
bhikshacharya (eating only begged food), rasparityag
(abstaining from special items of food which one most enjoys,
kaeyklaish (bodily austerity), Pratisanleenta (avoidance of
temptation by control of senses and mind), Prayishchit (confession
and penance), vinay (reverence), veyivritay (service
rendered to the aged and the helpless), swadhyai (the study of the
scriptures), dhyan (meditation), Kayotsarga (feeling and
showing absolute indifference to the body and its needs). He gave no
honored place to practices like the tending of a fire the exorcising of
evil spirits; the performance of agnihotras; the taking of regular
bath; the living under water, or in caves, or on trees; the eating of
roots, leaves, moss, flowers or bark of trees, or of grass; the besmearing
of body with ashes, etc., just the practices in which the other
parivrajaka orders had gloried. It appears that Parsva’s monks had
been fairly lax in their morals and discipline, but they were far more
regulated in their conduct than the other parivrajakas, for there
is an occasional mention in the Jaina texts of the weaker spirits in
Parsva’s order finding it hard to observe the rules and consequently
joining the other parivrajaka sects with less rigorous rules of
discipline. But it is certain that the austerities prescribed by Mahavira
for himself, and later on for the members of his Order, presented an
infinitely harder code of penance’s and were combined with a far more
rigorous discipline of ethical and spiritual conduct than was prevalent in
any parivrajaka sect at that time; and there is no doubt that
Mahavira earned the hostility of the other sects for doing so.
As regards the persecution of Mahavira by the tempter-gods, it is a
reminder of the story of Mara in Buddha’s life. Mara is looked upon in
Buddhist literature as the supreme lord of all evil, the chief seducer to
evil thought, word and deed. He is supposed to have followed the Buddha
step by step and watched for a moment of weakness to over-power his soul
and deflect him from the pursuit of knowledge. As a god of evil he is not
associated with that gloomy tragedy with which we are accustomed to fancy
the diabolical, deadly foe of good surrounded; and as seducer his methods
of work are fairly commonplace, ‘appearing at one time as a Brahmin, at
another as a husband man, at another as an elephant king, and in many
other different forms’ in order to shake Buddha’s life. Instead of the
traditional Mara, however, Jaina books speak of different gods appearing
at different times and the methods of their attack are not always
non-violent as in the case of Mara, but comprehend elaborate bodily pain
and torture. The first encounter with the temper-god in Mahavira’s life
took place on the ever of his firs chaturmus. While on the way to
Asthigrama, he came across a small temple dedicated to the God
Sulapani, which used to be left completely untenanted at night but
where Mahavira decided to stay and meditate. He suffered frightful
tortures at the hands of the god in the course of his meditation at night.
But the real battle with temptations took place in the eleventh year of
his sadhaka life, when Sangamaka, another temper-god, set
about his task with a view to confuse Mahavira and, if possible, to shake
him from his search for Truth, followed him step by step for a period of
six months giving him all sorts of torture and creating all conceivable
difficulties in his way in order to overpower his soul in a moment of
weakness. Adopting the garb of a disciple of Mahavira, he started
committing theft in a house, got caught, put the blame upon his guru and
had him severely beaten. He had Mahavira arrested on suspicion of being a
spy. Several times he made Mahavira’s excursions for alms fruitless by
various devices he had him ridiculed by people with derisive gestures; and
gave him troubles in a hundred other ways. But Mahavira remained
steadfast, bore all his trials with fortitude, and therefore the god was
ultimately obliged to depart.
Gosala
Mankhaliputra:
Mahavira’s second chaturmus was spent in Nalanda, a suburb of
Rajagrha. While here he was met by Gosala Mankhaliputra (or Maskariputra),
the Ajivakas teacher. Gosala was then wandering about in the country
showing pictures to the people, and was attracted by Mahavira owing to his
extra-ordinary self-restraint and impressive habits of medication and by
the fact that a rich householder of Rajagrha, by name Vijaya had shown
respect and hospitality towards Mahavira. Possibly another factor,
Mahavira’s capacity to prophesy things correctly, also helped to increase
Gosala’s keenness, as it certainly helped towards the diffusion of
Mahavira’s influence and following in the later part of his career. The
Jaina books mention that Gosala approached Mahavira with a request that he
may be adopted as his disciple, but that Mahavira declined his request,
presumably because he at once sensed the great difference between their
temperaments. Gosala’s request was repeated on two later occasions and on
each successive occasion with greater earnestness, and was ultimately
granted by Mahavira. It appears that from this time onwards, Mahavira and
Gosala lived and traveled together for period of six years. The third and
the fourth chaturmas were spent at Campa, at different quarters of
the same town. After the fourth chaturmas for a short period, they seem to
have trekked into the Ladha country, which they visited again in the ninth
year. The fifth and the sixth chaturmas were spent at Bhaddila, the
capital town of the Mallas; the seventh at a place in the kingdom of
Magadha; and the eighth at Rajagrha. In the ninth year Mahavira traveled
again into the Ladha-desa and stayed there for over six months; in the
absence of any settled retreat to spend the rainy season he had to wander
about during the period. Presumably Gosala was with him this time also,
although the fact that no incidents are mentioned of his use of his
undeniably harsh tongue during the sojourn in Ladha- desa is
somewhat remarkable. On return from Ladha country, while they were
traveling from Kumaragrama to Siddharthagrama, they met the
ascetic Vesayana, who was seated with upraised arms and upturned face in
the glare of the Sun while his body was swarming with lice. Gosala jesting
and indiscreetly asked whether this man was a sage or a bed of lice.
Provoked at this, Vesayana attempted to strike Gosala with his
super-normal powers, but was shielded by Mahavira. Gosala, however, was so
impressed with the fact of the possession of supernormal powers that he
felt inclined to give up Mahavira’s company and to devote all his energies
to the practice of the severest penance’s with a view to acquire these
powers, and after that he proclaimed himself a Jina and founded the order
of the Ajivakas.
On the Gosala episode, the opinions of the scholars are very
different and highly conflicting. Gosala figures in the early tradition of
Buddhism as an independent leader of thought, the head of an order, of a
following, the teacher of a school, well known and of repute as a
sophist......a man of experience who has long been a recluse”; there is no
suggestion made of his personal relation with Mahavira. From the point of
view of thought and belief, the Jaina and the Ajivakas sects are undoubted
allied, having many points in common between them. In the immediate
background of both were the teachings of Parsva, Parsva being honored by
both as the last but one Tirthankara, while Mahavira and Gosala were
sharply divided in their claim to the position of the last Tirthankara.
The eight Mahanimittas of the Ajivakas canon were in fact extracts
made from the Ten Purvas, which are recognized as the literary
authority of the sect of Parsva. The commonness of their tradition and the
fact that Gosala proclaimed himself a Jain and was recognized as a teacher
for at least two years before Mahavira, were considered by Jacobi and
Barua as adequate reasons for advancing the somewhat fanciful opinion that
contrary to the Jaina account Mahavira was a disciple of Gosala for
sometime. Such an opinion is clearly unfounded for if Gosala had ever been
Mahavira’s teacher, it is presumable that the Buddhist texts would have at
least recorded something to that effect, and anyhow Gosala would have put
forward that claim when he visited Mahavira to upbraid him for calling him
his own disciple. Thus, even if the Bhagavati version of the relationship
between Mahavira and Gosala is not accepted a reversal of that
relationship cannot surely be accepted at all. That the Bhagavati account
may be somewhat exaggerated is warranted by the fact that neither in the
Acaranga nor in the Kalpasutra is there any mention of
Gosala. It may also be mentioned that the Digambara accounts of
Mahavira’s life also do not refer to his contact with Gosala. What appears
on the basis of available materials to be well- founded is that Mahavira
and Gosala did not have a teacher and disciple relationship at all. It is
highly doubtful that Mahavira had started taking disciples before his
attainment of Enlightenment. Mahavira and Gosala were just two associates
in a common concern, two sadhakas who lived together for six years
in asceticism. Later on there sprang up acute differences of opinion
between the two. They separated from each other and became irreconcilable
opponents, fighting out their differences generally through their
followers.
REFERENCE:
1. It seems necessary to
point out in this connection that the same interpretation has been
accepted in a passage in the Samavayanga, a sutra in the Svetambara
canon. As this is a solitary instance of such construction in the whole
Svetambara literature, it points to the influence of the prevailing
Digambara tradition and should help us to determine the date of the
present text of this particular Sutra. The passage reads-
Aigunrveesam titthyera agarvasmajay vasita mundai bhavita nran agarao
anrgarian pviya - Samvayang-16
On the other hand, a Digambara text ‘Harivanspuran’ admits
that Mahavira was engaged to Yashodhara, but says he was obstinate in his
refusal and that therefore the proposal had to be dropped.
Philosophy
