Prolegomena to Prakritica et Jainica

SR No.: 011088
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Satyaranjan Banerjee
Publisher: Asiatic Society
Total Pages: 248
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 17 MB

Page 119

102
PROLEGOMENA TO PRAKRITICA et JAINICA
Buddhists. The doctrine that everything has but a momentary existence and that there is no continuous identity of existence between a thing as it is now and as it will be in the next moment is one of the Buddhist theories. The Buddhists are included among Akriyāvādins by the Nirgranthas because by not admitting the existence ofjiva they were considered to deny karman as well. Jacobi takes this to refer to Sāṁkhya, because according to it the puruşa does not act.86 We shall have to treat of Akriyāvāda at greater length later on, but in connection with the present verse it has to be pointed out that although this verse and the one following have been commented upon by Silānka at great length as applying to the Buddhists, yet we must widen the limits of Akriyāvāda beyond Buddhist doctrine.
In the discussions of Adda one man appears and says87 that if one pierces a lump of oil-cake with a spit mistaking it for a man, or a gourd mistaking it for a baby, and roasts it one will be guilty of murder according to his views. If a savage puts a man on a spit and roasts him mistaking him for a lump of oil-cake, or a baby mistaking it for a gourd, he will not be guilty of murder. If anybody thrusts a spit through a man or a baby mistaking him or it for a lump of oil-cake, puts him or it on the fire and roasts, that will be a meal fit for the Buddhas to break fast upon.88 Those who always feed two thousand worthy monks, says this man to Adda, acquire great merit and become powerful gods in Arūpadhātu. This is an account, although exaggerated, of the Buddhist view that motive determines
86. SBE. xlv., p. 316, n. 3. 87. Sat. S. II.6.26-29. 88. Buddhāna tam kappati päraņāya Harşakula explains
buddhānam as sākyanām, while Śılānka says Buddhānām api bhojanāya yogyam bhavati, which shows he took it to mean 'for the Buddhas.' 'Buddha' was used by Jains and Buddhists alike to denote their master and in itself is not sufficient to indicate its applicability to the latter.