The deplorable lack of a solid reference to early Indian parallels

I have started reading the Acaranga Sutra of the Jains.
The english is at WisdomLib
The prakrit is at GRETIL

In literally the first paragraph we have:

no nāyaṃ bhavai: `atthi me āyā uvavāie, n’ atthi me āyā uvavāie?
Ayaranga1

‘Atthi me attā’ti vā assa saccato thetato diṭṭhi uppajjati;
The view: ‘My self survives.’
‘natthi me attā’ti vā assa saccato thetato diṭṭhi uppajjati;
The view: ‘My self does not survive.’
MN2

and

ke ahaṃ āsī ke vā io cuo iha peccā bhavissāmi? se jjaṃ puṇa
Ayaranga1

‘ahosiṁ nu kho ahaṁ atītamaddhānaṁ? Na nu kho ahosiṁ atītamaddhānaṁ? Kiṁ nu kho ahosiṁ atītamaddhānaṁ? Kathaṁ nu kho ahosiṁ atītamaddhānaṁ? Kiṁ hutvā kiṁ ahosiṁ nu kho ahaṁ atītamaddhānaṁ?
‘Did I exist in the past? Did I not exist in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? After being what, what did I become in the past?
MN2

I guess what I want to say is that this is an obvious and significant connection between the Jain literature and the Buddhist. I have seen other connections in passing here on Discuss, but I have not seen any credible and straightforward synoptic overview of these passages for the buddhist, jain and early upanishadic literatures.

Is there a thread, or an online site, or even, groan, an expensive, almost certainly out of print, academic book I can pay through the nose for that actually systematically compares the stock phrases of, for a start, the 4 prose nikayas, the Ayaranga, the Bṛhadāraṇyaka and the Chandogya?

This appears to me now to be a more or less minimal requirement to claim that one has “familiarity” with the milieu of indian philosophical literature at the time of the buddha.

Why is this knowlege so obscure? so scattered through other conversations?

Who is the Lamotte of early indian parallels?

(p.s Jacobi thinks that there are plenty of verses embedded in the Jain prose, is there a parser that could at least identify syllable counts and strip out possibilities for an analysis of this? I am trying to orient myself to the EBT poetry and it is frankly absurd how hard it is to even find romanised prakrit files for a given non-buddhist text)

6 Likes

Yumi Osaka appears to be the answer to this question at least.

Here’s another fascinating passage from the Acaranga;

**citta- ** mind
**mantayaṃ … ** controlled
**chinnaṃ milāi … ** broken, decaying
**āhāragaṃ … ** dependent on food
**aniccayaṃ … ** impermanent
**asāsayaṃ … ** insecure
**cayāvacaiyaṃ … ** arising and ceasing
vipariṇāma-dhammayaṃ. of the nature to change

obvious connections are āhāragaṃ with Sabbe sattā āhāraṭṭhitikā. at DN33 and **aniccayaṃ … ** with sabbasaṅkhāre aniccato for eg at AN6.98 but the whole passage is intensely “buddhdisty”.

or again;

vimuttā hu te jaṇā, je jaṇā pāra-gāmiṇo. ||*7.20||
lobhaṃ alobheṇa duguñchamāṇe ||*7.21||
laddhe kāme no 'bhigāhai. ||*7.22||
viṇaittu lobhaṃ nikkhamma ||*7.23||
esa akamme jāṇai pāsai, paḍilehāe nāvakaṅkhai, esa ||*7.24||
aṇagāre tti pavuccai. ||*7.25||

Sans some sort of hair splitty later scholastic distinctions involving the finer points of akamme this reads as basically indistinguishable from early buddhism.

also those in the know about such things does this look like a “4 line poem”?;

laddhe kāme no 'bhigāhai.
viṇaittu lobhaṃ nikkhamma
esa akamme jāṇai pāsai,
paḍilehāe nāvakaṅkhai

obtaining their desires they do not cling to them
abandoning greed, gone beyond it
knowing and seeing the end of actions
they don’t desire attachments

1 Like

or again;

paṇḍie – the wise
no harise – do not rejoice
no kujjhe – do not get angry
bhūehiṃ – through knowledge
jāṇa – understand
paḍileha – attachment
sāyaṃ – as suffering
samie – they observe
eyāṇupassī – calmly, with insight

is their anything about this that could distinguish it form Buddhism other than the prakrit it is recorded in?

Or again compare

adattaṇhāro vā se avaharai, rāyāṇo vā se vilumpanti; ||*9.5||
nassai vā se, vinassai vā se, agāraṇḍāheṇa

with

Aggisādhāraṇā bhogā, udakasādhāraṇā bhogā, rājasādhāraṇā bhogā, corasādhāraṇā bhogā, appiyehi dāyādehi sādhāraṇā bhogā.
AN5.227

I’ll just leave this one here:

etthaṃ pi jāṇa: seyaṃ ti n’ atthi:

1 Like

One more;

se mehāvī abhinivvattejjā kohaṃ ca māṇaṃ ||*17.11||
ca māyaṃ ca lobhaṃ ca pejjaṃ ca dosaṃ ca mohaṃ ca gabbhaṃ||*17.12||
ca jammaṃ ca māraṃ ca narayaṃ ca tiriyaṃ ca dukkhaṃ ca. ||*17.13||
eyaṃ … āyāṇaṃ nisiddhā sagaḍa-bbhi. kim ||*17.14||
atthi uvāhī pāsagassa? na vijjai, n’ atthi Ō tti bemi. ||*17.15||

“Anatthajanano lobho,
“Greed creates harm;
lobho cittappakopano;
greed upsets the mind.
Bhayamantarato jātaṁ,
That person doesn’t recognize
taṁ jano nāvabujjhati.
the danger that arises within.

Luddho atthaṁ na jānāti,
A greedy person doesn’t know the good.
luddho dhammaṁ na passati;
A greedy person doesn’t see the truth.
Andhatamaṁ tadā hoti,
When a person is beset by greed,
yaṁ lobho sahate naraṁ.
only blind darkness is left.

Yo ca lobhaṁ pahantvāna,
Those who have given up greed,
lobhaneyye na lubbhati;
don’t get greedy even when provoked.
Lobho pahīyate tamhā,
Greed falls off them
udabindūva pokkharā.
like a drop from a lotus-leaf.

Anatthajanano doso,
Hate creates harm;
doso cittappakopano;
hate upsets the mind.
Bhayamantarato jātaṁ,
That person doesn’t recognize
taṁ jano nāvabujjhati.
the danger that arises within.

Duṭṭho atthaṁ na jānāti,
A hateful person doesn’t know the good.
duṭṭho dhammaṁ na passati;
A hateful person doesn’t see the truth.
Andhatamaṁ tadā hoti,
When a person is beset by hate,
yaṁ doso sahate naraṁ.
only blind darkness is left.

Yo ca dosaṁ pahantvāna,
Those who have given up hate,
dosaneyye na dussati;
don’t get angry even when provoked.
Doso pahīyate tamhā,
Hate falls off them
tālapakkaṁva bandhanā.
like a palm-leaf from its stem.

Anatthajanano moho,
Delusion creates harm;
moho cittappakopano;
delusion upsets the mind.
Bhayamantarato jātaṁ,
That person doesn’t recognize
taṁ jano nāvabujjhati.
the danger that arises within.

Mūḷho atthaṁ na jānāti,
A deluded person doesn’t know the good.
mūḷho dhammaṁ na passati;
A deluded person doesn’t see the truth.
Andhatamaṁ tadā hoti,
When a person is beset by delusion,
yaṁ moho sahate naraṁ.
only blind darkness is left.

Yo ca mohaṁ pahantvāna,
Those who have given up delusion,
mohaneyye na muyhati;
don’t get deluded even when provoked.
Mohaṁ vihanti so sabbaṁ,
They banish all delusion,
ādiccovudayaṁ taman”ti.
as the rising sun the dark.”
Iti88

2 Likes

Have you read this? I found it interesting:

4 Likes

These are really interesting parallels, keep them coming. I’ve been looking out for research in this area, it’s not easy!

2 Likes

My overall impression of the Acaranga is that there is nothing in it doctrinally that would place it as later than the EBT, if anything it appears more archaic than the bulk of Buddhist texts.

The text itself appears corrupt by Buddhist standards, the phrases are very difficult to parse, even with ChatGPT as one’s “research assistant” and Oldenberg as ones guide the prakrit is often close to indecipherable to me at least.

This may be in part because it appears to be in prose but to have it’s original “seeds” in verse.

I have given myself a headache going through it, I feel there is much more to say re parallels, but I am going to take a break and move on to the Suyagada, the second “agama” of the Jains, first up,

vittaṃ soyariyā ceva
savvam eyaṃ na tāṇai
saṃkhāe jīviyaṃ cevaṃ
kammuṇā u tiuai

“wealth and family
these are no protection
life is short
one is known by their actions.”

Once again, this is indistinguishable from EBT Buddhism, I can’t put my finger on the poem right now but for a comparison see AN5.57:

‘Sabbehi me piyehi manāpehi nānābhāvo vinābhāvo’ti abhiṇhaṁ paccavekkhitabbaṁ itthiyā vā purisena vā gahaṭṭhena vā pabbajitena vā.
‘I must be parted and separated from all I hold dear and beloved.’ …

‘Kammassakomhi, kammadāyādo kammayoni kammabandhu kammapaṭisaraṇo.
‘I am the owner of my deeds and heir to my deeds. Deeds are my womb, my relative, and my refuge.

Yaṁ kammaṁ karissāmi—kalyāṇaṁ vā pāpakaṁ vā—
I shall be the heir of whatever deeds I do, whether good or bad.’

I would suggest that there is some indication here in Suyagada tho that we are dealing with a slightly later phase of development, for a start there are 5 elements in verse 8 earht, air, water, fire and space. This seems likely later than the beginnings of EBT.

Maybe a shot across the bow of the buddhists? the avijikas? here;

pañca khandhe vayantege | bālā u khaṇajoiṇo /
anno aṇanno nevāhu | heuyaṃ ca aheuyaṃ ||17||

"five aggregates passing away,
fools, dwelling on/in “momentariness”
saying ‘neither same nor other
neither cause nor uncaused’

The Jains dealt with similar questions but their answer was different. Their middle way was “both exists and does not exist” due to their acknowledgment of changing characteristics but acceptance of substance metaphysics. This is worth a read: Jaina Philosophy (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

For the early Buddhists there were simply changing characteristics, hence the criticism you posted above.

1 Like

That very much looks like it, it must be an anti-Abhidhamma polemic, the “momentariness” doctrine was one of the most distinctive ideas of that phase.

That sounds like a rebuttal of Mil 3.2.1:1.4.

Now that sounds anti-Nagarjuna/Prajnaparamita. In fact the whole phrase could be a direct response to the first line of the Mulamadhyamakakarika:

na svato nāpi parato na dvābhyāṃ nāpy ahetutaḥ
Not from self nor from other, nor from both, nor uncaused

The same line is, IIRC, criticized in the tika to Visuddhimagga; there’s a note by Nyanamoli on that.

2 Likes

are they tho?

clearly by the beginning of the common era this is true, but for the texts I am looking at now it is so far not at all clear that this is the case.

At least as far as the Acaranga goes I can discern nothing to disambiguate it from the bulk of the poetry in the EBT at this stage.

I have only just started reading the Suyagada and it appears to be very obviously a much later document, reflecting a significantly more sophisticated doctrinal background, but I am still only just getting into it so I couldn 't say where exactly in relation to the EBT I would place it. “pance khande” certainly rings alarm bells to me, as does “5 elements”.

The SEP article appears not to acknowledge any evolution in Jainism at all.

Here’s Suyagada 19:

andho andhaṃ pahaṃ nento
dūram addhāṇa gacchai
āvajje uppahaṃ jantū
adu vā panthāṇugāmie

compare with Katha Upanishad 1.2.5:

avidyāyāmantare vartamānāḥ
svayaṃ dhīrāḥ paṇḍitaṃmanyamānāḥ
dandramyamāṇāḥ pariyanti mūḍhā
andhenaiva nīyamānā yathāndhāḥ

1 Like

amaṇunnasamuppāyaṃ | dukkham eva viyāṇiyā /
samuppāyam ayāṇantā | kahaṃ nāyanti saṃvaraṃ ||10||

the arising of the unpleasant
suffering indeed should be understood
ignorant of the arising
how can they attain restraint?

1 Like

aṇukkasse appalīṇe | majjheṇa muṇi jāvae ||2||

unattached to even the smallest thing,
the sage progresses by the middle path

!?!

1 Like

I mean, not even two buddhist schools have the same answer to same questions, so there’s bound to be some difference between Jain views and Buddhist views (Whatever brand of buddhism you may choose!) :slight_smile:

I think by and large, as sramanic traditions they both share the renunciate life and agree on a general sense of morality and such. Like with between different Buddhist schools, the differences are usually more academic than strictly speaking practical, arguing on metaphysical points and such.

But indeed, it’s better to focus on the common patterns and see what “common sense dhamma” looks like. :slight_smile:

1 Like

I agree with this, but what I am interested in at the moment is the buddhism one can infer from the early poetry.

The bulk of this poetry, imv, shows no awareness of the finer points of the later meditative hierarchy, no awareness of the aggregates or not self, and so on.

I am interested to see if I can discern a genuine difference between the earlist “jain” texts and the earliest “buddhist” texts.

I think it is entirely possible that both movements emanate form the same historical literature and split into distinct ideologies only later.

I think we have a tendency to project back onto this material what later developed from it.

So far I am only just beginning this journey, and I have4 no firm opinions other than that the Acaranga appears to be fixed before the Suyagada, and that the bulk of the simple four line poems in the buddhist texts by and larger pre-date the bulk of the prose.

Both these opinions are contentious, but I think they are also both pretty widely held by non-religious scholars and are a fairly simple and straightforward hypothesis that fits a lot of the known evidence.

2 Likes