Nirgrantha Sampradaya - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Nirgrantha Sampradaya" by Sukhlal Sanghavi, focusing on the core arguments and information presented in these pages:

Introduction to the Shramana Nirgrantha Tradition

The text begins by defining the Shramana tradition as a counter-tradition to the Brahmanical or Vedic religion, suggesting its existence in India prior to the widespread influence of the Vedic system. The Shramana tradition encompassed various branches, including Samkhya, Jainism, Buddhism, and Ajivika. While many of these branches initially opposed the Vedic system, some, like Vaishnavism and Shaivism, eventually integrated into it. Jainism and Buddhism, however, have remained distinct, surviving alongside other ancient religions like Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and Christianity.

The author's primary objective is to shed historical light on the ancient form of the Jain tradition, specifically from the time of Bhagavan Parshvanath (circa 800 BCE) up to the era of Emperor Ashoka. The focus is on aspects of the Nirgrantha tradition that are mentioned in Buddhist Pitakas and supported by ancient Jain Agamas.

Core Tenets of the Shramana Tradition:

A general identification of the Shramana tradition is provided:

Rejection of Vedic Authority: They do not accept the Vedas as inherently authoritative, either as unauthored and eternal or as divinely created.
Rejection of Brahmanical Priesthood: They do not accept the caste-based or priestly authority of Brahmins as spiritual guides.
Emphasis on Individual Merit: All Shramana traditions recognize a supreme male figure (an enlightened one) as their ultimate authority and prioritize merit over birth.
Focus on Ascetics: They accept ascetics or renunciates as spiritual leaders.

Common terms used for ascetics in ancient Shramana traditions include Shramana, Bhikshu, Angara, Yati, Sadhu, Tapasvi, Parivrajaka, Arhat, Jina, and Tirthankara. The text highlights that "Nirgrantha" (Niggantha in Pali) is a term uniquely and consistently used by the Jain tradition to refer to its ascetics throughout its history. The Jain scriptures are thus referred to as "Niggantha Pavayana" (Nirgrantha Pravachana).

Self-Perception and Historical Perspective:

The author emphasizes the importance of historical inquiry in understanding and validating beliefs. He notes that while communities hold deeply ingrained beliefs, presenting these to others requires empirical and verifiable evidence. Historical investigation, he argues, can bridge divides created by ignorance, confusion, and misconceptions between different communities. The text aims to examine aspects of the Nirgrantha tradition from a historical viewpoint to reveal their historical value.

The Impact of Western Scholarship and the Need for Historical Validation:

The author discusses how the opinions of foreign scholars, particularly their rigorous research methods, influenced even traditional Jain adherents. Initially, scholars like Professor Lassen proposed that Buddha and Mahavira were the same person due to similarities between Jain and Buddhist traditions. Later, scholars like Professor Weber suggested Jainism was a branch of Buddhism. However, Professor Jacobi, through more thorough research and a comparative analysis of Jain and Buddhist texts, established that both traditions are independent, with Jainism predating Buddhism, and Jñātaputra Mahāvīra being the final proponent of Jainism.

This evolution in Western scholarship highlights a crucial point: while Jain tradition possessed its own historical evidence, it lacked the skill to effectively utilize it. Western scholars, though initially lacking complete evidence, were adept at its interpretation. The text argues that the public values verified truth more than unverified tradition. Therefore, a historical examination of the Nirgrantha tradition is necessary to establish the accuracy and historical basis of its beliefs.

The Historical Standing of Agamic Literature:

The text addresses the question of why it's necessary to scrutinize Jain Agamic literature when it already contains the answers. The author posits that this is due to the existence of two types of adherents:

Those who accept the Agamas and subsequent commentaries literally and as the highest authority.
Those who accept them partially or not at all.

For presenting undisputed facts to everyone, the truthfulness of Agamic content must be verified through external sources. If external evidence supports the Agamas, then the Agamic portions must be considered authoritative. Historical examination, therefore, compels those who reject Agamas entirely to acknowledge their relative authority, while it guides those who accept them uncritically towards a more discerning acceptance. The text aims to identify external sources that strongly support the ancient form of the Nirgrantha tradition as described in the Agamas.

The Relationship Between Jain and Buddhist Agamas:

The author identifies ancient Buddhist Pitakas as crucial for verifying the historical claims of the Nirgrantha tradition, more so than Vedic or Puranic literature. The reasons for this are:

Shared Shramana Origin: Both Jainism and Buddhism belong to the Shramana tradition, fostering a fraternal relationship.
Contemporary Figures: Gautama Buddha and Jñātaputra Mahāvīra were contemporaries who lived and worked in similar regions, even within the same cities and neighborhoods. Their followers interacted, discussed, and sometimes even followed both figures. The text likens their relationship to that of close family members with differing beliefs.
Detailed Descriptions: Buddhist Pitakas often describe the practices and doctrines of the Nirgrantha tradition, even if from a critical or incidental perspective.

The text acknowledges that not all parts of the Buddhist Pitakas are direct words of the Buddha, but many sections reflect the views of his contemporaries or disciples. The criticisms of Nirgrantha practices by Buddhist monks are seen as extensions of the Buddha's original views. The compilation and stabilization of the Buddhist Pitakas occurred up to the time of Ashoka, over approximately 250 years, a period during which earlier layers of Buddhist thought, including those reflecting the Nirgrantha tradition, were preserved. Therefore, the references to Nirgrantha practices in the Buddhist Pitakas are historically valuable.

Comparison of Mahāvīra and Buddha:

The text outlines key differences between Mahāvīra and Buddha:

Path of Establishment: Buddha embarked on a new path after renouncing existing ascetic and yogic traditions, establishing a completely new doctrine based on his own experience. Mahāvīra, conversely, accepted the existing tradition and reformed it according to his insight and strength. Buddha's path was about establishing a new religion after renouncing old ones, while Mahāvīra's was about reforming an inherited family tradition.
Criticism of Other Sects: Buddha frequently criticized other sects and their doctrines. He stated that his path was the fruit of his own discovery.
Relationship to Predecessors: Mahāvīra, in contrast, did not claim his teachings were solely his own discovery. When questioned by Pārvātyāyikas, he cited the words of Pārśvanātha to support his positions. Mahāvīra's approach involved harmonizing his reforms with the existing Pārśvanātha tradition, indicating a conciliatory attitude.

Influence of the Nirgrantha Tradition on Buddha:

The text suggests that Buddha had a prior connection with the Nirgrantha tradition. Based on his accounts of his past life and their comparison with practices described in Jain Agamas, it's evident that Buddha, in his early years of spiritual seeking, spent time within the Nirgrantha fold, even if for a short period. This is why Buddha's critiques of the Nirgrantha tradition often intensely attack ascetic practices and precisely describe their doctrines.

The text notes that Buddha and Mahāvīra's teaching periods overlapped, and they often traversed the same regions. This is why Mahāvīra is referenced in the Pitakas as "Nātputta Niggaththa."

Key Issues of Ancient Practices:

The author concludes by identifying several key areas of ancient practice and doctrine that will be examined from a historical perspective, based on discussions in the Buddhist Pitakas and their comparison with Nirgrantha Agamas:

Diet (pure vs. impure food)
Nudity vs. wearing clothes
Asceticism (Tapas)
Conduct and thought (Ācāra-vicāra)
Four vows (Catur-yāma)
Observance days (Upavasatha-Pauṣadha)
Language and thought (Bhāṣā-vicāra)
Triple staff (Tri-daṇḍa)
Disposition (Leśyā)
Omniscience (Sarvajña)