Techings Of Arhat Parsva And Distinctness Of His Sect - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided text, "The Teachings of Arhat Pārśva And The Distinctness of His Sect" by Sagarmal Jain:

This academic text delves into the historical existence and specific teachings of Arhat Pārśva, distinguishing his sect from that of Jina Vardhamāna Mahāvīra within the broader Jain tradition.

Historical Evidence for Pārśva:

Established Historicity: The author asserts that the historicity of both Arhat Pārśva and Mahāvīra is fully established through both inscriptional and literary evidence.
Early Inscriptions: The earliest inscription related to Pārśva dates back to the 2nd or 3rd century AD, found at Kankāli Tilā, Mathura. It mentions a disciple of a specific lineage (Sthaniya-kula of the Kottiya-gana), which is also found in later hagiological texts.
Artistic Evidence: Uninscribed sculptures of Pārśva, stylistically datable to the Saka king Sodās's period (early 2nd century AD), further support his veneration during or even before that time. A metal image of Pārśva, dated between the 2nd-1st century BC and 2nd century AD, is also cited as early evidence.
Nirgrantha References: Inscriptional and literary references to the "Nigganthas" (a term for Jain ascetics) appear from around the 3rd century BC. While the Maurya emperor Ashoka's inscriptions mention "Niggantha," and the Pali Tripitaka refers to them (often in a negative light), these early references can include both Pārśva's and Mahāvīra's followers, as the Pali canon often conflates their teachings.

Pārśva's Teachings and the Challenge of Textual Preservation:

Conflation in Pali Canon: The Pali canon, for instance, attributes cāturyāma-samvara (a fourfold vow) to Mahāvīra (Niggantha Nātaputta), whereas the Jain Ardhamāgadhi canon credits Pārśva as its preacher. Mahāvīra's core teaching was the pañca-mahāvratas (five great vows).
Loss of Pārśva's Original Texts: The author highlights that our current understanding of Pārśva's teachings and the distinctiveness of his sect relies primarily on the Ardhamāgadhi canon preserved within Mahāvīra's tradition. This is because Pārśva's ancient church was gradually absorbed into Mahāvīra's, leading to the loss of its specific records and texts.
The Role of Pūrva Literature: Scholars like Pt. Sukhlal Sanghvi believe that the ancient Pūrva literature, often mentioned in later canonical works, belonged to Pārśva's tradition, though no such texts currently exist.
Sources of Knowledge: Our knowledge is thus dependent on Mahāvīra's canonical literature and, to a lesser extent, the Buddhist Pali canon.

Key Texts Containing Pārśva's Teachings:

The text identifies several canonical works that offer significant references to Pārśva, his teachings, and traditions:

Isibhāsiyāiñ (Rşibhāşităni): Considered the earliest and most authentic source for Pārśva's philosophy, compiled around the 1st century BC but containing material potentially from the 4th century BC or earlier. The author suggests it might have originated as an independent text in Pārśva's tradition before being assimilated into Mahāvīra's Praśnavyākarana.
- Authenticity of Isibhāsiyāiñ: Its authenticity is supported by its inclusion of teachings from various other traditions (Buddhism, Ājīvika, Vedic), showing general agreement with their own texts. Furthermore, Pārśva's views presented here align with those attributed to his church in other canonical works like the Sūtrakrtānga. The chapter on Pārśva in Isibhāsiyāiñ also exists in two versions, further attesting to its antiquity.
- Pārśva's Philosophical and Ethical Views in Isibhāsiyāiñ:
  - Nature of the World: Pārśva described the world as composed of animate and inanimate objects, eternal, dynamic, and existing by itself without a creator. He identified four planes of existence: material, spatial, temporal, and existential.
  - Nature of Motion (gati): Motion is any change in animate or inanimate beings. It's perennial and caused by inherent nature or external factors. Animate beings have an upward motion, while matter has a downward motion due to inertia.
  - Karma and Morality: Animate beings reap the fruits of their karmas. Evil and unrestrained activities lead to pain and the cycle of rebirth. Achieving bliss requires abandoning violence and wrong viewpoints.
  - Liberation: Liberation is achieved by adhering to the cāturyāma (fourfold ethical code), which leads to freedom from karmic bondage and rebirth.
Other Canonical Works (Sūtrakrtānga, Uttaradhyayana, Vyakhyāprajñapti): These texts provide further details, often through dialogues or discussions between followers of Pārśva and Mahāvīra, or through Mahāvīra's own pronouncements. These discussions highlight subtle differences in the interpretation of vows, rituals, and monastic discipline.

Distinctness of Pārśva's Sect:

While both Pārśva and Mahāvīra belonged to the Nirgrantha tradition with many shared philosophical tenets (eternal and dynamic world, self-existence, five astikāyas, eightfold karmas), their sects differed significantly in their code of conduct and monastic discipline:

Fourfold vs. Fivefold Vows: Pārśva propounded the cāturyāma-dharma (four vows), while Mahāvīra added celibacy as an independent fifth vow (pañcayama-dharma).
Celibacy and Possession: In Pārśva's time, the prohibition of possession was understood to implicitly include sexual abstinence. However, during Mahāvīra's era, some ascetics interpreted "non-possession" as not prohibiting sexual indulgence if the woman was not "possessed." Mahāvīra clarified this by making celibacy an explicit and essential vow.
Nudity vs. Apparels: Pārśva's monks were permitted one or two apparels (sacelaka), while Mahāvīra's tradition strictly emphasized nudity (acelaka-dharma).
Repentance: Mahāvīra made daily repentance an obligatory duty for monks, regardless of whether they had committed transgressions. In Pārśva's tradition, repentance was only required upon committing a sin.
Monastic Movement and Residence: Mahāvīra's discipline mandated frequent movement and limited residence at one place (usually not more than a month, except during the rainy season). Pārśva's tradition allowed monks to stay in one place as long as they wished, making wandering optional.
Acceptance of Food and Invitations: Mahāvīra forbade accepting food prepared for kings or even food already prepared by others, whereas Pārśva's monks had more leniency in accepting invitations for food and prepared meals.
Initiation: Mahāvīra instituted a probationary period for aspirants to friarhood, with a second ordination to establish seniority.

Conclusion:

The text concludes that the distinctiveness of Pārśva's sect lies primarily in its monastic code of conduct rather than in its fundamental dogma or philosophy. The notion that Pārśva's ascetics had become "wayward" by Mahāvīra's time is not supported by the early canonical evidence. Instead, the differences reflect distinct disciplinary approaches within the broader Nirgrantha framework.