Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Parisishta Parvan IX, §5 seqq. ? Geschiedenis van het Buddhisme in Indie, ii, p. 266 note. xliv GAINA SUTRAS. the origin of the sect. But we are not from this fact obliged to assume that the Gainas in the time intermediate between their last prophet and the composition of their canon had to rely on nothing more solid than a religious and legendary tradition, never brought into a fixed form. In that case, Mr. Barth’s objections to the trustworthiness of the Gaina tradition would, it is true, not be without ground. However, we are told by the Svetambaras, as well as the Digambaras, that besides the Angas, there existed other and probably older works, called Parvas, of which there were originally fourteen. The knowledge of these Purvas was gradually lost, till at last it became totally extinct. The tradition of the Svetambaras about the fourteen Pirvas is this: the fourteen Pdrvas had been incorporated in the twelfth Anga, the Dréshtivada, which was lost before 1000 A.V. But a detailed table of contents of it, and consequently of the Pfrvas, has survived in the fourth Anga, the Samavay4nga, and in the Nandi Sfitra', Whether the Pirvas, contained in the Drishiivada, were the original ones, or, as I am inclined to believe, only abstracts of them, we cannot decide; at all events there has been a more detailed tradition about what they contained. ; Now we should as a rule be careful in crediting any tradition about some lost book or books of great antiquity, because such a tradition is frequently invented by an author to furnish his doctrines with an authority from which they may be derived. But in our case, there are no grounds for suspecting the correctness of so general and old a tradition as that about the Parvas. For the Angas do not derive their authority from the Parvas, but are believed to be coeval with the creation of the world. As a fraud, the tradition about the Parvas would therefore be unintelligible ; but accepted as truth, it well falls in with our views about the development of the Gaina literature. The name itself testifies to the fact that the Parvas were superseded by a new canon, for pirva means former, * See Weber, Indische Studien, XVI, p. 341 seqq. INTRODUCTION. xiv earlier); and it is assuredly not by accident that the knowledge of the Parvas is said to have commenced to fade away at the same time when the Angas were collected by the Sangha of P4zaliputra. For after Bhadrabahu, only ten out of the fourteen Parvas were known.
2341 seqq. INTRODUCTION. xiv earlier); and it is assuredly not by accident that the knowledge of the Parvas is said to have commenced to fade away at the same time when the Angas were collected by the Sangha of P4zaliputra. For after Bhadrabahu, only ten out of the fourteen Parvas were known. This then is the most natural interpretation we can place on the tradition about the fourteen Pirvas, that they were the oldest sacred books, which however were superseded by anew canon. But as regards the cause of the abolition of the old canon and the composition of a new one, we are left to conjecture, and only as such I shall give my opinion. We know that the Drésh¢ivada, which included the fourteen Parvas, dealt chiefly with the dvzshéis or philosophical opinions of the Gainas and other sects. It may be thence inferred that the Parvas related controversies held between Mahavira and rival teachers. The title prav4da, which is added to the name of each Parva, seems to affirm this view. Besides, if MahAvira was not the founder of a new sect, but as I have tried to prove, the reformer of an old one, it is very likely that he should vigorously have combated the opinions of his opponents, and defended those he had accepted or improved. The founder of a religion has to establish his own system, he is not so much in danger to become a mere controversialist as a reformer. Now if the discourses of MahAvira, remembered and handed down by his disciples, were chiefly controversies, they must have lost their interest when the opponents of Mahavira had died and the sects headed by them had become extinct. Could such contentions about philosophical questions which were no more of any practical importance, and bickerings of divines all but forgotten, though these things were of paramount interest to the contemporary world, serve as a canon for later generations who lived in thoroughly changed circumstances? The want of a canon suiting the condition of the 1 The Gainas explain the meaning of the word pirva in the following way. The Tirthakara himself taught the Pfrvas to his disciples, the Ganadharas. The Ganadharas then composed the Angas. There is evidently some truth in this tradition, as it does not agree with the dogma of the Afgas, being taught already by the first Tirthakara. See Weber, Indische Studien, XVI, p. 353. xlvi GAINA SOTRAS. community must have made itself felt, and it led, in my opinion, to the composition of a new canon and the neglect of the old one.
3See Weber, Indische Studien, XVI, p. 353. xlvi GAINA SOTRAS. community must have made itself felt, and it led, in my opinion, to the composition of a new canon and the neglect of the old one. Professor A. Weber! assigns as the probable cause of the Drishfivada being lost, that the development of the Svetambara sect had arrived at a point where the diversity of its tenets from those embodied in that book became too visible to be passed over. Therefore the Drishfivada, which contained the Parvas, fell into neglect. I cannot concur in Professor Weber's opinion, seeing that the Digambaras also have lost the Parvas, and the Angas to boot. It is not probable that the development of Gainism during the two first centuries after the Nirviza should have gone on at so rapid a pace that its two principal sects should have been brought to the necessity of discarding their old canon. For, as stated above, after the splitting of the church in these two sects the philosophical system of the Gainas remained stationary, since it is nearly the same with both sects. As regards ethics, both sects, it is true, differ more. But as the extant canon of the Svetambaras is not falling into neglect, though many practices enjoined in it have long since been abandoned, it is not more probable that they should have been more sensible on the same score at the time when the Pirvas formed their canon. Besides, some of the Pfrvas are said to have continued to be extant long after the time which we have assigned for the formation of the new canon. At last they disappeared, not by an intentional neglect, I presume, but because the new canon set into clearer light the Gaina doctrines, and put them forward more systematically than had been done in the controversial literature of the Parvas. Our discussion, which we here close, has, I hope, proved that the development of the Gaina church has not been, at any time, violently interrupted by some very extraordinary events; that we can follow this development from its true beginning through its different stages, and that Gainism is as much independent from other sects, especially from 1 Indische Studien, XVI, p. 248. INTRODUCTION. x] vii Buddhism, as can be expected from any sect. We must leave to future researches to work out the details, but I hope to have removed the doubts, entertained by some scholars, about the independence of the Gaina religion and the value of its sacred books as trustworthy documents for the elucidation of its early history. It remains for me to add a few remarks about the two works which have been translated in this book.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Parisishta Parvan IX, §5 seqq. ? Geschiedenis van het Buddhisme in Indie, ii, p. 266 note. xliv GAINA SUTRAS. the origin of the sect. But we are not from this fact obliged to assume that the Gainas in the time intermediate between their last prophet and the composition of their canon had to rely on nothing more solid than a religious and legendary tradition, never brought into a fixed form. In that case, Mr. Barth’s objections to the trustworthiness of the Gaina tradition would, it is true, not be without ground. However, we are told by the Svetambaras, as well as the Digambaras, that besides the Angas, there existed other and probably older works, called Parvas, of which there were originally fourteen. The knowledge of these Purvas was gradually lost, till at last it became totally extinct. The tradition of the Svetambaras about the fourteen Pirvas is this: the fourteen Pdrvas had been incorporated in the twelfth Anga, the Dréshtivada, which was lost before 1000 A.V. But a detailed table of contents of it, and consequently of the Pfrvas, has survived in the fourth Anga, the Samavay4nga, and in the Nandi Sfitra', Whether the Pirvas, contained in the Drishiivada, were the original ones, or, as I am inclined to believe, only abstracts of them, we cannot decide; at all events there has been a more detailed tradition about what they contained. ; Now we should as a rule be careful in crediting any tradition about some lost book or books of great antiquity, because such a tradition is frequently invented by an author to furnish his doctrines with an authority from which they may be derived. But in our case, there are no grounds for suspecting the correctness of so general and old a tradition as that about the Parvas. For the Angas do not derive their authority from the Parvas, but are believed to be coeval with the creation of the world. As a fraud, the tradition about the Parvas would therefore be unintelligible ; but accepted as truth, it well falls in with our views about the development of the Gaina literature. The name itself testifies to the fact that the Parvas were superseded by a new canon, for pirva means former, * See Weber, Indische Studien, XVI, p. 341 seqq. INTRODUCTION. xiv earlier); and it is assuredly not by accident that the knowledge of the Parvas is said to have commenced to fade away at the same time when the Angas were collected by the Sangha of P4zaliputra. For after Bhadrabahu, only ten out of the fourteen Parvas were known.
2341 seqq. INTRODUCTION. xiv earlier); and it is assuredly not by accident that the knowledge of the Parvas is said to have commenced to fade away at the same time when the Angas were collected by the Sangha of P4zaliputra. For after Bhadrabahu, only ten out of the fourteen Parvas were known. This then is the most natural interpretation we can place on the tradition about the fourteen Pirvas, that they were the oldest sacred books, which however were superseded by anew canon. But as regards the cause of the abolition of the old canon and the composition of a new one, we are left to conjecture, and only as such I shall give my opinion. We know that the Drésh¢ivada, which included the fourteen Parvas, dealt chiefly with the dvzshéis or philosophical opinions of the Gainas and other sects. It may be thence inferred that the Parvas related controversies held between Mahavira and rival teachers. The title prav4da, which is added to the name of each Parva, seems to affirm this view. Besides, if MahAvira was not the founder of a new sect, but as I have tried to prove, the reformer of an old one, it is very likely that he should vigorously have combated the opinions of his opponents, and defended those he had accepted or improved. The founder of a religion has to establish his own system, he is not so much in danger to become a mere controversialist as a reformer. Now if the discourses of MahAvira, remembered and handed down by his disciples, were chiefly controversies, they must have lost their interest when the opponents of Mahavira had died and the sects headed by them had become extinct. Could such contentions about philosophical questions which were no more of any practical importance, and bickerings of divines all but forgotten, though these things were of paramount interest to the contemporary world, serve as a canon for later generations who lived in thoroughly changed circumstances? The want of a canon suiting the condition of the 1 The Gainas explain the meaning of the word pirva in the following way. The Tirthakara himself taught the Pfrvas to his disciples, the Ganadharas. The Ganadharas then composed the Angas. There is evidently some truth in this tradition, as it does not agree with the dogma of the Afgas, being taught already by the first Tirthakara. See Weber, Indische Studien, XVI, p. 353. xlvi GAINA SOTRAS. community must have made itself felt, and it led, in my opinion, to the composition of a new canon and the neglect of the old one.
3See Weber, Indische Studien, XVI, p. 353. xlvi GAINA SOTRAS. community must have made itself felt, and it led, in my opinion, to the composition of a new canon and the neglect of the old one. Professor A. Weber! assigns as the probable cause of the Drishfivada being lost, that the development of the Svetambara sect had arrived at a point where the diversity of its tenets from those embodied in that book became too visible to be passed over. Therefore the Drishfivada, which contained the Parvas, fell into neglect. I cannot concur in Professor Weber's opinion, seeing that the Digambaras also have lost the Parvas, and the Angas to boot. It is not probable that the development of Gainism during the two first centuries after the Nirviza should have gone on at so rapid a pace that its two principal sects should have been brought to the necessity of discarding their old canon. For, as stated above, after the splitting of the church in these two sects the philosophical system of the Gainas remained stationary, since it is nearly the same with both sects. As regards ethics, both sects, it is true, differ more. But as the extant canon of the Svetambaras is not falling into neglect, though many practices enjoined in it have long since been abandoned, it is not more probable that they should have been more sensible on the same score at the time when the Pirvas formed their canon. Besides, some of the Pfrvas are said to have continued to be extant long after the time which we have assigned for the formation of the new canon. At last they disappeared, not by an intentional neglect, I presume, but because the new canon set into clearer light the Gaina doctrines, and put them forward more systematically than had been done in the controversial literature of the Parvas. Our discussion, which we here close, has, I hope, proved that the development of the Gaina church has not been, at any time, violently interrupted by some very extraordinary events; that we can follow this development from its true beginning through its different stages, and that Gainism is as much independent from other sects, especially from 1 Indische Studien, XVI, p. 248. INTRODUCTION. x] vii Buddhism, as can be expected from any sect. We must leave to future researches to work out the details, but I hope to have removed the doubts, entertained by some scholars, about the independence of the Gaina religion and the value of its sacred books as trustworthy documents for the elucidation of its early history. It remains for me to add a few remarks about the two works which have been translated in this book.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.