Gaina Sûtras, Part II: The Uttarâdhyayana and Sûtrakritânga — SBE Vol. 45 (trans. Hermann Jacobi, 1895)
English·1879–1910·trans. Hermann Jacobi·304 passages
The text · part 14 of 15
(20)
Do not maintain that deceit and greed do not exist, but that they exist. (21)
Do not maintain that love and hate do not exist, but that they exist. (22)
Do not maintain that the fourfold Circle of Births does not exist, but that it exists. (23)
Do not maintain that there are no gods and goddesses, but that there are. (24)
Do not maintain that there is no such thing as perfection and non-perfection, but that there is such a thing. (25)
Do not maintain that there is no place exclusively reserved for those who attain to perfection, but that there is such', (26)
Do not maintain that there are no pious and wicked men, but that there are. (27)
Do not maintain that there is no such thing as good and bad, but that there is good and bad. (28)
The theory will not work that (a man is always) good, or (always) bad. The wrongly instructed Sramazas do not comprehend the (soul’s) bondage? (through Karman). (29)
(Do not assert) that everything is imperishable, or full of pains, nor that criminals should be put to death or not be put to death; one should not speak in this way. (30)
Do not assert that those men are well-behaved monks who lead a pure life, and that those others lead an impure life. (31)
? See Uttaradhyayana XXXVI, 62, 63, p. 212. ? Véra=vaira, explained karmabandha.
ON
BOOK 2, LECTURE 411
p. 410
A wise monk should not say: this householder) or we do not improve his chances for final libera
A monk should conform himself taught by the Ginas, and wander abo final liberation. (33) \
Thus I say. \
SIXTH LECTURE,
CALLED
ARDRAKA?.
Gés4la.
‘Listen, Ardraka’, to what (Mah4vtra) has done. At first he wandered about as a single monk ; but now he has surrounded himself by many monks, and teaches every one of them the Law at length. (1)
* Santimaggam ka vihaé=sAntimargam ka vrimhayét.
* The commentators relate a romantic story about prince Ardraka, which need not be repeated here. Suffice it to say that he became monk, and after many adventures held the disputation which forms the subject of our lecture. After having vanquished his opponents, he was about to join Mahavira, when a newly-tamed elephant broke his chain, rushed on him, but just in front of him went down on his knees and paid him reverence. King Srénika witnessed this scene, and wondered how the elephant could have broken his chains. Ardraka replied that it was still more strange that a man could break the fetters which worldliness had fastened upon him. The whole story must be very old, for it is epitomised in ten gath4s by the author of the Niryukti—The names of the opponents not stated in the text of the verses are supplied from the commentaries. ,
* This name is spelt either Ardra or Ardraka, Adda in Prakrit.
p. 408
er
SOTRAKRITANGA.
‘ The inconstant man has decided upon this mode of life’: to stand up in a crowd of men, surrounded by monks, and to teach his doctrines for the benefit of many people. Therefore his former and his present life are not of a piece. (2)
p. 408
er
SOTRAKRITANGA.
‘ The inconstant man has decided upon this mode of life’: to stand up in a crowd of men, surrounded by monks, and to teach his doctrines for the benefit of many people. Therefore his former and his present life are not of a piece. (2)
‘Either to live as a single mendicant (was right conduct) or his present life; therefore both do not agree with each other.’
Ardraka.
“ His past, present, and future lives agree with each other; for he is really always single and alone (though he be now surrounded by many followers). (3)
“For if a Sramaza or Brahmaza who causes peace and security, comprehends the nature of movable and immovable living beings and explains it in a crowd numbering thousands, he realises singleness, remaining in the same mental condition as before *. (4)
“It is no sin to teach the Law, if (he who teaches it) is patient and resigned, subdues his senses, avoids bad speech, and uses virtuous speech. (5)
“He who (teaches) the great vows (of monks) and the five small vows (of the laity’), the five Asravas and the stoppage of the Asravas, and control, who avoids Karman in this blessed life of Sramavas, him I call a Sramaza.” (6)
1 According to the commentators, Gésdla intimates that Mah4vira had found it very inconvenient to live alone, because he was then exposed to many injuries; so he set up as a Tirthakara.
* Tahakke=tatharka. Aré&é is here explained as equal to lésya,
* Anuvrata. They are a modification of the great vows, intended for the laity. See Bhandarkar’s Report, p. 114.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 6. 411
GésAla.
(‘As your Law makes it no sin for MahAvira to surround himself by a crowd of disciples), so according to our Law an ascetic, who lives alone and single, commits no sin if he uses cold water, eats seeds, accepts things prepared for him, and has intercourse with women.’ (7)
Ardraka.
“ Know this : those who use cold water, eat seeds, accept things especially prepared for them, and have intercourse with women, are (no better than) householders, but they are no Sramamas. (8)
“If those who eat seeds, use (cold) water, and have intercourse with women, are admitted to be Sramanas, then householders too are Sramavzas; for they do the same things’. (9)
“Monks who eat seeds and use cold water, who beg alms as a means of living, will, though they leave their relations, be born again and again, and will not put an end to mundane existence.” (10)
GésA4la.
‘In making this statement you blame all philosophers alike!’ . Ardraka. “ Every philosopher praises his own doctrines and makes them known. (11) “ Sramavzas and Brahmamas blame one another when they teach (their doctrines). (The truth, they
1 Le. if the characteristic mark of a Sramana is to wander about without a companion, and to bear all sorts of hardship, then householders are included in this definition; for some of them also wander about without a companion and bear the same hardships.
412 sOTRAKRITANGA.
(The truth, they
1 Le. if the characteristic mark of a Sramana is to wander about without a companion, and to bear all sorts of hardship, then householders are included in this definition; for some of them also wander about without a companion and bear the same hardships.
412 sOTRAKRITANGA.
say,) is all on their side; there is none on that of the opponents. But we blame only the (wrong) doctrines and not at all (those who entertain them). (12)
“We do not detract from anybody because of his personal qualities; but we make known the path pointed out in our creed. I have been taught the supreme, right path by worthy, good men. (13)
“Tf a well-controlled man, afraid of injuring any movable or immovable living beings, above, below, or on earth, condemns (evil deeds), he does not at all blame (anybody) in this world.” (14)
GésAla.
‘Out of fear your Sramaza will not stay in houses for travellers or in public garden-houses; for in such places he would meet with many clever people, with lower or nobler men, with talkative or silent ones. (15)
‘He will not stay there because he fears lest some monks, wise, well instructed, learned men, who are well versed in the sacred texts and their meaning, should put questions to him.’ (16)
Ardraka.
“Doing nothing without a purpose, nor without consideration, neither on the behest of the king nor from fear of anybody, he answers questions or not (according to the circumstances); but he
(answers) worthy people with a definite purpose (in his mind)". (17)
1 As the commentators explain: he is actuated by the Karman, by virtue of which he has become a prophet (tirthakaranimakarman); and this Karman must take effect and so be annihilated.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 6. 413
“ He, the wise man, impartially teaches (the Law) whether he goes (to his pupils) or not; because unworthy men have fallen from the true faith, he does not go to places (frequented by them).” (18)
GésA4la.
‘As a merchant desirous of gain (shows) his wares and attracts a crowd to do business, in a similar way (acts) the Sramaza G7iatvzputra. This is what I think and calculate about it.’ (19)
Ardraka.
“ (Mahavira) acquires no new (Karman), he annihilates the old, avoiding wrong opinions; and thus the saviour said to others: Herein is contained the vow (leading to) Brahman (i.e. Méksha); this is the gain which a Sramavza is desirous of.. Thus I say. (20)
“A merchant kills living beings and desires property; not leaving his kinsmen, he attracts a crowd in order to do business. (21)
“ Desiring riches and addicted to sensuality, merchants wander about to earn their living. But we (say) that they are passionately fond of pleasures, unworthy, and desiring the enjoyment of love. (22)
“They do not abstain from slaughter and the acquirement of property, they are in bondage and full of wickedness; and their gain of which you spoke, will be the endless Circle of Births and pains manifold ?. (23)
“ They do not always make profit, nor does it last
(22)
“They do not abstain from slaughter and the acquirement of property, they are in bondage and full of wickedness; and their gain of which you spoke, will be the endless Circle of Births and pains manifold ?. (23)
“ They do not always make profit, nor does it last
1 Neha or nédha. According to Silanka it is=na iha: ‘not even here (do they find the profit they seek).’ I think it may be the Prikrzt of anékadh&. It may, however, stand for snéh44, in which case the meaning would be: love’s (reward will be) pain.
p. 414
for ever; they meet with both results (success and failure) in their quest of gain'. The profit (of the teacher), however, has a beginning, but noend; the saviour and sage shares his profit (with others). (24)
“ Him who kills no (living beings), who has compassion on all creatures, who is well grounded in the Law, and causes the truth of the Law to be known, him you would equal to those wicked men! This is the outcome of your folly.” (25)
A Buddhist?
‘If (a savage) thrusts a spit through the side of a granary*, mistaking it for a man; or through a gourd, mistaking it for a baby, and roasts it, he will be guilty of murder according to our views. (26)
‘If a savage* puts a man on a spit and roasts him, mistaking him for a fragment of the granary ; ora
1 Vayanti te dé vi gunésdayammi=vraganti té dvavapi gumav udayé, The usual reading adopted by the commentators is gund for guné. They translate: vadanti té dvau vigataguz6dayau bhavata iti: (the experts) say that both (kinds of profit) are without value and duration. It is obvious that this interpretation is wrong.
* Ardraka after having put down Gésila is met, on his way to Mahfvira, by Buddhists who engage him in the following discussion. ;
5 Pinnagapindi. The commentators explain pizn4ga (=pinyaka) by khala, and pizdi by bhinnaka (?) or sakala. Silanka gives the following explanation. During a struggle with savage men (mlé#4ha) some one runs away and throws his cloak off ona granary. An enemy in pursuit of that man mistakes it for him and takes hold of it, together with the part of the granary. — This interpretation looks absurd; but it will appear not so if we remember that granaries are beehive-shaped reservoirs made of sun-baked mud or wattle and mud; compare Grierson, Bihar Peasant Life, p. 17.
* Milakkhu=mlékkha,
BOOK 2, LECTURE 6. 415
baby, mistaking him for a gourd, he will not be guilty of murder according to our views. (27)
‘If anybody thrusts a spit through a man ora baby, mistaking him fora fragment of the granary, puts him on the fire, and roasts him, that will be a meal fit for Buddhas to break fast upon. (28)
‘Those who always feed two thousand worthy monks, acquire great merit! and become powerful gods in Ardpa (dhatu)2.’ (29)
Ardraka.
“Well-controlled men cannot accept (your denial of) guilt incurred by (unintentionally) doing harm to living beings. It will cause error and no good to both who teach such doctrines and who believe them. (30)
and become powerful gods in Ardpa (dhatu)2.’ (29)
Ardraka.
“Well-controlled men cannot accept (your denial of) guilt incurred by (unintentionally) doing harm to living beings. It will cause error and no good to both who teach such doctrines and who believe them. (30)
“A man who knows the nature of movable and immovable living beings, above, below, and on earth, who is afraid of injuring them and abstains from wicked deeds, may speak and act (in accordance with our Law); he will not be guilty of any (sin). (31)
“It is impossible to mistake (a fragment of the granary) for a man; only an unworthy man can say it. How can (the idea of a man) be produced by a fragment of the granary? Even to utter this is an untruth. (32)
“Do not use such speech by means of which you do evil; for such speech is incompatible with virtues. No ordained (monk) should speak empty words *. (33)
* Pumnmakhandha=puayaskandha.
* Aroppa. This is apparently derived from Arfpa as rendered in the text. Arfpadhftu is the highest heaven of the Buddhists ; compare Burnouf, Le Lotus de la Bonne Loi, p. 807.
® Ur&la=udéra, here explained nissdra, void of sense.
p. 416
“Oh! you have explored this subject; you have thoroughly examined the consequences of acts! of living beings ; your (fame) reaches the Eastern and Western oceans; you view (the universe as if) it stood on the palm of your hands! (34)
“ Thoroughly examining the consequences of acts of living beings, (our monks) have found out a pure way of sustaining life. It is a maxim? of the monks of our creed’, that nobody who lives by secret sins‘, should lay down the Law. (35)
“A man who always feeds two thousand worthy monks, does not control himself, and will be blamed in this world like a man with bloody hands. (36)
“ They kill a fattened sheep, and prepare food for the sake of a particular person; they season the meat with salt and oil, and dress it with pepper. (37)
“You are irreligious, unworthy men, devoted to foolish pleasures, who say that partaking heartily of this meat you are not soiled by sin. (38)
“All who partake of such food, commit sins in their ignorance; but the wise do nothing of the kind. Even to utter it is an untruth. (39)
“In compassion to all beings, the seers, the G#aétrzputras®, avoid what is sinful ; afraid of it, they abstain from food especially prepared for them. (40)
“ They abstain from wicked deeds, afraid of injuring living beings, and do no harm to any creature; therefore they do not partake of such food. This is a maxim of the monks of our creed. (41)
1 Anubhae=anubhaga4, explained karmavipaka.
* Anudharma.
* Iha samyat4n4m, who control themselves in this (creed of the Gainas).
‘ Khannapadépagivin. 5 Le. the Gainas.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 6. 417
“(Having reached) this perfection! in the Law of the Nirgranthas and standing firm in it, one should live without deceit?. The awakened sage who is endowed with all virtues thereby obtained very great fame.” (42)
A Védic Priest.
‘ Khannapadépagivin. 5 Le. the Gainas.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 6. 417
“(Having reached) this perfection! in the Law of the Nirgranthas and standing firm in it, one should live without deceit?. The awakened sage who is endowed with all virtues thereby obtained very great fame.” (42)
A Védic Priest.
‘Those who always feed two thousand holy® mendicants, acquire great merit and become gods. This is the teaching of the Véda.’ (43)
Ardraka.
“He who always feeds two thousand holy cats +4 (i.e. Brahmazas), will have to endure great pains in hell, being surrounded by hungry (beasts). (44)
“ He who despises the Law that enjoins compassion, and praises the Law that permits slaughter, and who feeds but a single unprincipled man, even if he be a king, will go to darkness’, and not to the gods.” (45)
A Védantin®.
‘Both of us follow (very much the same) Law; we stood firm in it, and shall do so in the time to come; (we believe that) virtue consists in good conduct, and that knowledge (is necessary for liberation) ; and with regard to the Circle of Births there is no difference between us. (46)
1 Samadhi. 2 Anihé. 3 SnAtaka, cf. Manu XI, 1.
* Kulalaya=kulaéa, explained m4rg4ra. Another explanation is: who live (Alaya) in houses.
5 Nisam, literally, night.
® $ilanka calls this opponent an Ekadandin, and ascribes to him the views of the Sankhya philosophy. But it is evident from the sequel that he is a Védantin, as the commentators admit in their comment on the next verse.
[45] Ee
p. 418
‘(But we assume) an invisible, great, eternal, imperishable, and indestructible Soul, who excels all other beings in every respect, as the moon excels the stars.’ (47)
Ardraka.
“(If there were but one Soul common to all beings) they could not be known (from one another), nor could they experience different lots; there would not be Brahmazas, Kshattriyas, Vaisyas, and Sfdras?, insects, birds, and snakes; all would be men and gods. (48)
“Those who do not know all things by Kévala (knowledge), but who being ignorant teach a Law (of their own), are lost themselves, and work the ruin of others in this dreadful, boundless Circle of Births. (49)
“Those who know all things by the full Kévala knowledge, and who practising meditation teach the whole Law, are themselves saved and save others. (50)
“You have, in your mind, made equal both those who lead a blameable life, and those who in this world practise right conduct. Friend, you are deluded.” (51)
A Hastitapasa®
‘Every year we kill one big elephant with an arrow, and live upon it in order to spare the life of other animals.’ (52)
1 Pessa = préshya, literally, servants or slaves.
* The Hastitapasas are thus named from the fact that they kill an elephant and live upon its flesh for a whole year or for six months, as Silahka adds, explaining thus the words avi ya (api 4a) aftersamvakkharéna, The Hastitapasas are mentioned in a list of the different Tapasas in the Aupapatika Sftra, ed. Leumann, § 74.
Leumann, § 74.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 419
Ardraka.
“If every year you kill but one animal without abstaining from sin, though you are not guilty of the slaughter of other creatures, there is little difference between you and a householder. (53)
“If a man kills every year but one animal, and lives (in other respects) as a Sramama, he is unworthy, and works his perdition. Such men will not become Kévalins.” (54)
A (monk) who has achieved his religious perfection through the instruction of the Awakened One}, and stands firm in it, who guards himself in the threefold way (i.e. with regard to thoughts, words, and acts), and who possesses the things requisite for crossing the immense ocean of existence, may preach the
Law. (55) Thus I say.
SEVENTH LECTURE,
CALLED NALANDA. At that time, at that period, there was a town of
the name R4agagvzha: it was rich, happy, thriving, &c.2 Outside of Ragagyvzha, in a north-eastern
' Buddhassa 4n4i.
® This ‘&c.’ refers to the typical description of towns. Our text contains only the first words of the description, but the Aupapatika Sfitra, § 1, gives it at length.
Ee2
p. 420
direction, there was the suburb Nalanda ; it contained many hundreds of buildings, &c.' (1)
In that suburb Nalanda there was a householder called Lépa; he was prosperous, famous; rich in high and large houses, beds, seats, vehicles, and chariots; abounding in riches, gold, and silver; possessed of useful and necessary things; wasting plenty of food and drink; owning many male and female slaves, cows, buffaloes, and sheep; and inferior to nobody. (2)
This householder Lépa, a follower of the Sramazas, comprehended (the doctrine of) living beings and things without life, (&c., all as in II, 2, 76, p. 382, down to the end of the paragraph). (3)
This householder Lépa possessed, in a northeastern direction from the suburb NaAlandA, a bathing-hall, called Séshadravy4?; it contained many hundreds of pillars, was beautiful, &c. In a northeastern direction from this bathing-hall Séshadravy4, there was a park called Hastiyama. (Description of the park *.) (4)
And there in some house the Venerable Gautama was staying. The venerable (man) was in the garden, and so was Udaka, the son of Pédhala, a Nirgrantha and follower of Parsva ‘, of the Médarya Gétra. He went there where the Venerable Gautama was, and said: ‘O long-lived Gautama, I want to ask you about a point (of faith); O long-lived one,
» I cannot tell where the full description occurs.
* The name denotes: the rest of materials, i.e. the hall which was built with the materials not used (in building the house), the well-known ‘few remaining bricks.’
* The text is given in the Aupapatika Sftra, § 3.
* Compare the Twenty-second Lecture of the Uttaradhyayana.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 421
the hall which was built with the materials not used (in building the house), the well-known ‘few remaining bricks.’
* The text is given in the Aupapatika Sftra, § 3.
* Compare the Twenty-second Lecture of the Uttaradhyayana.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 421
please explain it to me so as it has been taught (by the Tirthakara).’ And the Venerable Gautama spoke thus to Udaka, the son of Pédsdla : “Well, long-lived one, I shall see about it, when I have heard and understood (your question).” And Udaka, the son of Pédhla, spoke thus to the Venerable Gautama: (5)
‘O long-lived Gautama, there are Nirgrantha Sramamas, called Kumfraputras, who profess your creed ; they make a zealous! householder, a follower of the Sramamas, renounce injury to movable beings except on the order (from an established authority), as the householder caused one of the captured thieves to be set free*%. Those who make this renunciation, make a bad renunciation; those who cause this renunciation to be made, cause a bad renunciation to be made; in causing another to make this renunciation, they annul their own allegation®. Why dol say this? Beings belong to the Circle of Births; though they be (now) immovable beings, they will (some time) become movable ones, or though they be (now) movable beings, they will become immovable ones ; when they leave the bodies
’ Uvasampanna.
* These words seem to refer to an apologue told by the commentator: King Ratnasékhara of Ratnapura, once making a pleasure trip, issued an order that nobody should remain in the town. Six brothers disobeyed, were brought before the king, and sentenced to death. Their father in vain implored the king to spare them, or to spare five, four, three, two of his sons. At last the king consented to pardon the eldest son, at which the old father rejoiced.—The six sons are likened to the six classes of living beings. As a householder cannot altogether abstain from injuring them, as monks do, he is content to abstain from injuring movable beings or animals.
* Viz. that by abstaining from slaughter of living beings they kil! no living beings.
p. 422
of immovable beings, they will be born in bodies of movable ones, and when they leave the bodies of movable beings, they will be born in bodies of immovable ones. When they are born in bodies of immovable beings, it is no sin to kill them. (6)
no living beings.
p. 422
of immovable beings, they will be born in bodies of movable ones, and when they leave the bodies of movable beings, they will be born in bodies of immovable ones. When they are born in bodies of immovable beings, it is no sin to kill them. (6)
‘(But if they make him renounce) injury to creatures which are, for the time being, movable beings, except on the order (from an established authority)—as the householder caused one of the captured thieves to be set free—(if they take this vow), those who make this renunciation, make a good renunciation; those who cause this renunciation to be made, cause a good renunciation to be made; in causing another to make this renunciation, they do not annul their own allegation. ‘Though in this way! a correct expression is found, some (monks) from anger or greed cause the householder to make the renunciation (without the necessary restriction). Is not this our interpretation right ? O long-lived Gautama, do you approve of it?’ (7)
And Gautama spoke thus to Udaka, the son of Pédhala: “O long-lived Udaka, we certainly do not approve of it. The Sramazas or Brahmazas who say thus, speak thus, declare thus, and explain thus, do not speak as Sramazas or Nirgranthas, they speak noxious speech. They mislead laymen. They make void all vows undertaken for sparing particular living beings*. Why do I say this? Beings belong
1 I.e. by specifying the movable beings as beings which are movable ones for the time being.
? E.g. if a man vows to kill no Brahmaaa (and does not add the restriction ‘for the time being’), he may kill no man or animal whatever ; for the soul of that man or animal may, in the past, have been embodied in a Brahmaaa.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 423
to the Circle of Births; though they be (now) immovable beings, they will (some time) become movable ones, (&c., all as in § 6, down to) when they leave the bodies of movable beings, they will be born in the bodies of immovable ones. When they are born in the bodies of movable beings, it is a sin to kill them.” (8)
And Udaka, the son of Péddla, spoke thus: ‘Which beings do you call movable beings ? movable ones or others ?’
And Gautama spoke thus to Udaka, the son of Pédhéla: “O long-lived Udaka, what you call beings which are, for the time being, movable ones, we call movable beings; and what we call movable beings, you call beings which are, for the time being, movable ones. Both expressions are equal, and mean the same thing. O long-lived one, why do you think it more correct to say: beings which are, for the time being, movable ones; and why do you think it incorrect to say: movable beings, that you censure the one expression, and applaud the other? This your interpretation is not right. (9)
O long-lived one, why do you think it more correct to say: beings which are, for the time being, movable ones; and why do you think it incorrect to say: movable beings, that you censure the one expression, and applaud the other? This your interpretation is not right. (9)
“And the Venerable One has spoken thus: Some men there are who say: we cannot, submitting to the tonsure, renounce the life of a householder and enter the monastic state, but we shall gradually conform to the Gétra (i.e. community of the monks). Accordingly they make known the limits’, fix the limits, determine the limits (beyond which they will not go in the enjoyment of worldly goods); and
1 Literally, the number. A sample of such vows is given in the beginning of the Uvasaga Das4o, see Hoernle’s edition, § 16 ff.
p. 424
renounce injury to movable beings, except on the order? (of an established authority)—as the householder caused one of the captured thieves to be set free. And this turns out to their benefit. (10)
“ Movable beings are called so, when they get this character ? through the taking effect of the Karman relating to movable beings. But when their duration of life as movable beings comes to its close, the (soul), embodied in a movable being, leaves its life as such and becomes embodied in an immovable being. Immovable beings are called so, when they get this character through the taking effect of the Karman relating to immovable beings. But when their duration of life as an immovable being comes to its close, the (soul), embodied in an immovable being, leaves its life as such and takes again a new form of existence; they are (then) called * animated beings, (animals) of large bodies, or of long life.” (11)
And Udaka, the son of Pédh4la, spoke thus to the Venerable Gautama: ‘Is there not a chance, that a follower of the Sramazas, though he has renounced slaughter of but one class of living beings, ceases altogether to injure any*? Why do
1 Abhiyéga. Sflanka enumerates four kinds of abhiydga: gaza-, bala-, devaté-abhiy6éga, and gurunigraha.
* N4ma, literally, name.
5 They are called (vuééanti=ufyanté) is apparently equivalent with: they get the name (néma); ‘name,’ however, means in Gaina and Bauddha terminology as much as ‘the nature of the thing.’ The words of the text, therefore, come to mean: ‘they become or are animated beings,’ &c.
“ The question discussed in the following paragraphs is whether, at some future time, all movable beings in the Samsfra might not die out, and none but immovable beings be left. This idea is combated at great length by Gautama.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 425
“ The question discussed in the following paragraphs is whether, at some future time, all movable beings in the Samsfra might not die out, and none but immovable beings be left. This idea is combated at great length by Gautama.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 425
I say this? Beings belong to the Circle of Births, though they be (now) immovable beings, they will (some time) become movable ones, and though they be movable beings, they will become immovable ones. When they leave the bodies of immovable beings, all are born in bodies of movable ones, and when they leave the bodies of movable beings, all will be born in bodies of immovable ones. When they are born in bodies of immovable beings, they may be killed }.’ (12)
And the Venerable Gautama spoke thus to Udaka, the son of Péddla: “O long-lived one, we? do not admit what you say; viz. that there is a chance that a follower of the Sramazas should cease to do injury to any kind of living beings. Why do we say this? Beings belong to the Circle of Births, (&c., all as above, down to) when they are born in bodies of movable beings, it is a sin to kill them. They are called animated beings, (animals) of large bodies, or of long life. There are always a great many animate beings, (the slaughter of) which a follower of the Sramazas must renounce, there are none, (the slaughter of) which he need not renounce. If he ceases, or has done with, or has given up (injuring) the large class of movable beings, his renunciation is
1 The meaning is, that at some future time movable beings may have ceased to exist, since they are all born as immovable beings, and vice vers&. If the latter is the case, a layman, who abstains from killing animals, practically does injury to no being whatever ; if the former is the case, he cannot transgress his vow even if he would.
? The text has the Sanskrit word asm&kam, of which the commentator alleges that it was thus pronounced by all people in Magadha, compare note 2, p. 358.
p. 426
good. What you or somebody else says, that there is a chance of a layman’s ceasing to do an injury altogether, by renouncing slaughter of one kind of beings; this interpretation of yours is not right.” (13)
358.
p. 426
good. What you or somebody else says, that there is a chance of a layman’s ceasing to do an injury altogether, by renouncing slaughter of one kind of beings; this interpretation of yours is not right.” (13)
' The Venerable One! gave an illustration: “I put a question to the Nirgranthas: O long-lived ones, (suppose) there be some men who have made the following declaration: ‘I shall not inflict punishment on those who, submitting to the tonsure, renounce the life of a householder and enter the monastic state; but I shall inflict punishment on those who lead a domestic life.’ Some Sramaza, who for four or five years, or for six or ten years—the period may be shorter or longer—has wandered about in the land, returns to domestic life. Now answer me: does the man break his word when he puts to death this (renegade) householder ?” ‘Certainly not!’ “It is just the same with a follower of the Sramamas, who has renounced injury to movable beings, but not to immovable ones. If he kills immovable beings, he does not transgress his vow. This you acknowledge, O Nirgranthas, this you must acknowledge!” (14)
The Venerable One gave another illustration: “T put a question to the Nirgranthas. O long-lived Nirgranthas, (suppose) there be householders or sons of householders, born in respectable families, who come to you for instruction in the Law. Ought they to be instructed in the Law?” ‘Yes, they should. ‘When they have learned and understood this Law, will they say: this creed of the
1 Gautama.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 427
Ought they to be instructed in the Law?” ‘Yes, they should. ‘When they have learned and understood this Law, will they say: this creed of the
1 Gautama.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 427
Nirgranthas is true, supreme, excellent, full of virtues, right, pure, it removes doubts, it is the road to perfection, liberation, Nirvaza; it is free from error and doubts, it is the road of those who are free from all misery; those who adopt it will reach perfection, (&c., all down to) put an end to all misery ; exerting ourselves we shall control ourselves with regard to all kinds of living beings.— Will they speak thus?” ‘Yes.’ “Should such men be admitted to the order?” ‘Yes, they should’ “Should such men be instructed in the discipline and kept to attend to religious instruction?” ‘ Yes, they should.’ “Do they renounce injury to every living being?” ‘Yes, they do.’ “Now (suppose) one of these men who lead such a life, after wandering about in the land for four or five years, or for six or ten years—the period may be shorter or longer—returns to domestic life. Will this man (still) abstain from doing injury to every living being?” ‘No.’ “The same man? who at first (as a householder) had not renounced injury to every living being, who afterwards has renounced, and who now does not renounce injury to every living being, did at first not control himself, did so afterwards, and does not so now. As long as he does not control himself, he does not renounce injury to every living being®. This you acknowledge, O Nirgranthas, this you must acknowledge!” (15) _. The Venerable One gave (another) illustration: “] put a question to the Nirgranthas. O long-lived
+ $é é sé giv, literally, his soul.
* Here the last sentence but one of the preceding paragraph ought to be repeated. But there is no trace of it in my MSS. or the commentary.
p. 428
The Venerable One gave (another) illustration: “] put a question to the Nirgranthas. O long-lived
+ $é é sé giv, literally, his soul.
* Here the last sentence but one of the preceding paragraph ought to be repeated. But there is no trace of it in my MSS. or the commentary.
p. 428
Nirgranthas, (suppose) there be monks or nuns of other sects, who come to you for instruction in the Law, (all as before, down to) attend to religious instruction.” ‘Yes, they should.’ “Is it lawful to eat with such men ?” ‘Yes, it is.’ “Now (suppose) some of these people who lead such a life, (&c., all as before, down to) return to domestic life. Is it lawful to eat with them then?” ‘No, it isnot!” ‘The same man with whom to eat was not lawful at first, was lawful afterwards, and is not lawful now, was no Sramana at first, was a Sramama afterwards, and is no Sramana now. It is not lawful for Nirgrantha Sramazas to eat together with him. This you acknowledge, O Nirgranthas; this you must acknowledge!” (16) And the Venerable One spoke thus: “ There are some followers of the Sramazas, who have made this declaration: we cannot, submitting to the tonsure, renounce the life of a householder and enter the monastic state, but we shall strictly observe the Pésaha on the fourteenth and the eighth days of each fortnight, (on the new-moon, and) full-moon days, we renounce gross ill-usage of living beings, grossly lying speech, gross taking of things not given, (unlawful) sexual intercourse, (unlimited) appropriation of property ; we shall set limits to our desires in the two forms and in the three ways%. They will also make the following renunciation: ‘neither do nor cause anything (sinful) to be done for my sake.’
1 N6 insatthé sama#thé; 1 think the Sanskrit of this phrase, which is not explained by the commentator, is né6 ayam arthah samartha&,
3 Viz. ‘I will not do it, nor cause it to be done, either in thought or in word or in deed.’ Compare Uvasaga Dasdo, Hoernle’s edition,
§ 13 ff.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 429
Having (on Pésaha-days) abstained from eating, drinking, bathing, and using beds or chairs, may they, on their decease, be said to make a (righteous) end of their life?” ‘Certainly, they do make such an end of their life.’ ‘They are called animated beings, (&c., all as in § 13, down to) this interpretation of yours is not right.” (17)
The Venerable One spoke thus: “ There are some followers of the Sramazas, who have made this declaration: we cannot, submitting to the tonsure, renounce the life of a householder and enter the monastic state; we also cannot strictly observe the Pésaha on the fourteenth and the eighth days of each fortnight, (on the days of new-moon) and full-moon ; but while we are preparing ourselves for death by fasting, we shall abstain from food and drink without longing for the end; we shall renounce all ill-usage of living beings, all lying speech, all taking of things not given, all sexual intercourse, all property, (saying): ‘neither do nor cause anything (sinful) to be done for my sake.’ (All the rest as in the preceding paragraph.)” (18)
And the Venerable One spoke thus: “ There are some men of great desires, great undertakings, &c.?, who do not abstain from all ill-usage of living beings, (&c., down to) from all property. During the whole time, from their taking the vows of a follower of the Sramamas till their death, they abstain from injury to living beings. Then they die; in their next existence they experience their Karman, and receive an evil lot. (The rest as before.)” (19)
And the Venerable One spoke thus: “ There are
1 Samléhanaghisanaghisiya. * See II, 2, 61.
p. 430
some men of no desires, no undertakings, who abstain from all ill-usage of living beings, (&c., down to) from all property. During the whole time, from their taking the vows of a follower of the Sramaaas till their death, they abstain from injury to living beings. Then they die; in their next existence they experience their Karman, and receive a happy lot. (The rest as before.)” (20)
And the Venerable One spoke thus: “ There are some men of few desires, few undertakings, who abstain from ill-usage of one sort of living beings, (&c., down to) from one sort of property. During the whole time, (&c., the rest as in the last paragraph).” (21)
And the Venerable One spoke thus: ‘“ There are some men who live in woods, in huts, near villages, or practise some secret rites, who are not well controlled, do not well abstain (from slaying) all sorts of living beings. They employ speech that is true and untrue at the same time: do not beat me, beat others, (&c., all as in II, 2, 21, down to) having died at their allotted time, they are born in some places inhabited by Asuras! and evil-doers. And when they are released therefrom, they will be born deaf and dumb or blind. They are called animated beings, (&c., the rest as in § 13).” (22)
And the Venerable One spoke thus: “There are some beings of a long life, which a follower of the Sramazas abstains from injuring through life. They die after him. They are called animated beings, (&c., the rest as in § 13).” (23)
1 Asuriya. Stlanka here offers a second explanation of this word, viz. asQrya, where no sun ever shines.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 431
They die after him. They are called animated beings, (&c., the rest as in § 13).” (23)
1 Asuriya. Stlanka here offers a second explanation of this word, viz. asQrya, where no sun ever shines.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 431
(The two next paragraphs treat in exactly the same way of beings of an equally long life, which die simultaneously with him, and of beings of a short life, which die before him.) (24, 25)
And the Venerable One spoke thus: “There are some followers of the Sramazas, who have made this declaration: we are not able to strictly observe the Pésaha-days, but we are able, when preparing ourselves for death by fasting, to abstain from food and drink without longing for the end. The vow of such a man is the Samayika Désdvak4sika’: (he declares) in the morning: (I shall travel) only thus or thus far in an eastern, western, southern, northern direction. He renounces injury to all beings: I shall cause peace and security to all sorts of living beings.
“Within those (limits) the movable living beings, which the follower of the Sramazas abstains from injuring till his death, will leave their life, and will then be born, within the same limits, as movable living beings, which the follower of the Sramazas abstains from injuring till his death. With regard to them the follower of the Sramazas has made a good renunciation. They are called animated beings, (&c., the rest as before). (26)
“The movable beings within those limits, &c.*, will,
' The Désdvak4sika ‘consists in drawing closer or contracting every day the limits already laid down (in accordance with the Gumavratas) to the range of one’s travels,’ &c. The Gunavrata referred to is the Digvirati, i.e. ‘to lay down a limit beyond which one shall not travel in the different directions, or a limit as to the countries one shall visit for the acquisition of wealth.’ From Bhandarkar Report, p.114f. The explanation in the commentary materially agrees with the above.
* The original repeats the phrases of the preceding paragraph.
p. 432
after their death, be born within the same limits as immovable beings, from injuring which without a purpose the follower of the Sramamas abstains till death, but not with a purpose’, (&c., the rest as before). (27)
“ The movable beings within those limits, &c., will, after their death, be born, beyond those limits, as movable or immovable beings, (&c., the rest as before). (28)
“ The immovable beings within those limits, &c., will, after their death, be born, within the same limits, as movable beings, (&c., the rest as before). (29)
“The immovable beings within those limits, &c., will, after their death, be born, within the same limits, as immovable beings, (&c., the rest as before). (30)
“The immovable beings within those limits, &c., will, after their death, be born, beyond those limits, as immovable beings, (&c., the rest as before). (31)
(30)
“The immovable beings within those limits, &c., will, after their death, be born, beyond those limits, as immovable beings, (&c., the rest as before). (31)
“The movable and immovable beings beyond those limits, &c., will, after their death, be born, within those limits, as movable beings, (&c., the rest as before). (32)
“The movable and immovable beings beyond those limits, &c., will, after their death, be born, within those limits, as immovable beings, (&c., the rest as before). (33)
“The movable and immovable beings beyond those limits, &c., will, after their death, be born, beyond
I abridge them as far as possible, and give the full text only where it differs from that of § 26.
1 This clause comes always after the words ‘immovable beings’ down to § 34.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 433
those limits, as movable and immovable beings, (&c. the rest as before).” (34)
The Venerable One spoke thus: “It has never happened, it does not happen, nor will it ever happen, that all movable beings will die out and become immovable ones, nor that all immovable beings die out and become movable ones. Since movable and immovable beings never die out, there is no chance, as you or somebody else say, that a layman ceases to do injury altogether by renouncing slaughter of one kind of beings; this interpretation of yours is not right.” (35)
And the Venerable One spoke thus: “If (a man) who has been instructed in right knowledge, faith, and conduct for the avoidance of sins, blames a (righteous) Sramaza or Braéhmama though he is well disposed towards them, he effects the loss of his merit for another world; but if he does not blame them, he heightens the purity of his merit for another world.”
On this Udaka, the son of Pédféla, took no further notice of the Venerable Gautama and was about to return in the direction in which he had come. (36)
And the Venerable One spoke thus: “O longlived Udaka, he who has learned from a Sramana or Brahmaza whomsoever even one noble religious truth, and considers himself thereby furthered with regard to his peace and happiness, will respect, acknowledge, praise, salute, honour, reverence, and worship him even as a blessed and holy deity or sacred shrine.” (37)
Then Udaka, the son of Pédhdla, spoke thus to the Venerable Gautama: ‘As I had not before
[45] Ffp. 434 known, heard, understood, and comprehended these words, I did not believe in the meaning (of your words), which I had never perceived nor heard nor understood nor appreciated, and which were never explained nor defined nor delivered nor made clear to me, nor pondered over by me. But now, Reverend Sir, as I do know, &c., these words which I have perceived, heard, &c., I believe, accept, and approve of their meaning. It is just as you say!’ (38)
But now, Reverend Sir, as I do know, &c., these words which I have perceived, heard, &c., I believe, accept, and approve of their meaning. It is just as you say!’ (38)
Then the Venerable Gautama spoke thus to Udaka, the son of Pédsdla: “ Believe it, sir; accept it, sir; approve of it, sir; it is just as we have said.” Then Udaka, the son of Péd#4la, spoke thus to the Venerable Gautama: ‘I desire, Reverend Sir, in your presence to pass from the creed which enjoins four vows!, to the creed which enjoins the five great vows and the Pratikramaza 2.’ (39)
Then the Venerable Gautama went with Udaka, the son of Péd#Ala, to the Venerable Ascetic Mah4vira. Then Udaka, the son of Pédséla, solemnly circumambulated the Venerable Ascetic Mahavira three times from the left to the right, and having done so he praised and worshipped him, and then he spoke thus: ‘I desire, Reverend Sir, in your presence to pass from the creed which enjoins four vows, to the creed which enjoins the five great vows and the Pratikramava. May it so please you, beloved of the
1 See above, p. 121, note 2. In this way the creed of PArsva is characterised in contradistinction to that of Mah4vira.
2 ‘Pratikramaza is the expiation of sins ... by means of Nindana Garhava, Alésan4, and other processes. Nindana is condemning the sinful act or repenting of it to oneself; Garhana is doing the same before a Guru; and Alééan& is making a confession of it to the Guru.’ Bhandarkar, Report, p. 9, note f.
BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 435
gods, do not deny me!’ Then, in the presence of the Venerable Ascetic Mahavira, Udaka, the son of Pédhala, passed from the creed which enjoins four vows, to the creed which enjoins the five great vows and the Pratikramaza. (40)
Thus I say.
Ff2
INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS.
Abhayadéva, page 346 note 1. Activity, kinds of, 356 f. Agita, 85 n2. Agivika, 267 n1. Agfanavada, 315. Agfanavadin, 83 n 2, 291. Agfanikavada, 385. Agnikumfra (Bhavanavisin), 225. Agnisikha, 87 n 4. Ahiraka body, 406, n 3. Ahuka, 113 n 2. Aikshvaka, 86. Airavana, Indra’s elephant, 290. Adarahga, 345, 351 12, 353 02, 354 N 2, 357 N, 358 n 2.