The Later Fortunes of Jamali

2 THE LATER FORTUNES OF JAMALI Paul Dundas Those of us in the English-speaking world who commenced serious research into the history and practice of the Jain religion twenty or so years ago were of neces- sity autodidacts to a large extent. The reason for this was that there were virtually no academic specialists in the subject at whose feet one could sit and little by way of available instruction which went beyond that already provided by what in one’s darker and more frustrated moods often seemed to be, with a few exceptions, an uninspiring and repetitive secondary literature primarily concerned with the metaphysical basics of Jainism. The gaining of some sort of foothold and orientation within a huge, diverse and largely unexplored primary literature was by no means straightforward and methods had to be devised to get beyond the existing textbooks. I for one decided that a possible strategy might be to investigate the various sectarian controversies which had preoccupied the Jain community in its early period, on the assumption that it is generally in the area of internal dispute that religions expose both their cherished preoccupations and also possible inconsistencies in their structure. To this end, it seemed an obvious course of action to consider the early Jain heretics, know in Prakrit as the pavayaja-nihjaga, ‘concealers of the doctrine’, seven of which are listed at Sthanakga Sutra 587 and who according to tradition arose in Mahavira’s lifetime and the immediate centuries after his death, in the expectation that here would be fruitful and extensive ancient source material on Jain disputes and, in the nature of heresies such as Arianism in Christianity (cf. Wiles 1994), a continuing vein of dissent and contention which would inevitably resurface at various times in Jainism’s history. It was with some sur- prise, then, that I quickly realised that with the exception of Jamali, the first of these so-called heretics, the ancient scriptural texts had very little to say on the subject of the nihnava (‘concealments’, heresies; for the original sense, see Brough 1996: 77–78) and that Leumann’s paper of 1885, which amplified the exiguous canonical material with some of the early commentarial and postcanonical literature, had been virtually the first and last serious scholarly word on the subject (Leumann 1885 and cf. Balbir 1993: 146). In the light of this, I decided to pay no further attention to the subject of the nihnava. 33 PAUL DUNDAS However, my interest in this subject was revived in 1998 by two papers delivered at a conference held in Lund to honour Professor P. S. Jaini. One of these papers (for the second by Professor Johannes Bronkhorst, see Bronkhorst 2003) presented by Professor Georg von Simson drew attention to what he styled the principle of ‘characterizing by contrast’, a form of narrative parallelism which could throw light on the structures of the biographies of the Buddha and the Mahabharata hero Bhisma by reference to a rival, antipathetic character. So, as in the Mahabharata the impetuosity of the young and ambitious Karja, who demands the generalship of the Pajdava army, highlights and contrasts with the qualities of the older and more temperate Bhisma, in similar manner the Buddha’s evil and jealous cousin Devadatta, who led a breakaway from the monastic community (one which, if the Chinese pilgrims are to be believed, was still in existence well into the common era; see Deeg 1999) to restore what he saw as the exclusively ascetic orientation of the path, points through contrast to the imperturbable nature of the great teacher and the correctness of the ‘middle way’ preached by him which viewed asceticism as an objectionable extreme (Simson 2003). In the light of this intriguing structural possibility identified by von Simson and the fact that there are certain similarities, if only at a superficial level, between the lives of the Buddha and the twenty fourth Jina Mahavira, it seemed legitimate to consider whether there might be any Jain equivalent of Devadatta. An obvious candidate would appear to be the first ‘con- cealer of the doctrine’, Jamali, according to tradition Mahavira’s nephew (in some versions also son-in-law; see below) who as described in the Bhagavati Sutra attempted to reformulate a principle of Jain teaching and then led some monks away from the main ascetic community. Yet an examination of traditional biographies of Mahavira demonstrates that Jamali plays little part in the overall trajectory of the narrative and contemporary understanding by Jains today does not assign him any marked role as some sort of stock villain in a well-known story. All textual accounts concur that Jamali’s misconception of the teaching was easily demonstrated to be false by Mahavira and his chief disciple, that the community of monks briefly under his influence melted away and abandoned its leader and that after a period of preaching he died alone. Jamali’s personality only momentarily contrasts with that of Mahavira and the episode of his heresy and its overturning does not play any major structural role in the biography of the Jina. Although one later source asserts, albeit on no obvious authority, that Jamali was the leader of the Ajivika sect,1 there is no record of any sectarian movement claiming descent from him. Furthermore, no memory even of the name of Jamali is preserved amongst the Digambara Jains, with only the Fvetambaras recording a narrative version of his life (Leumann 1998: 306). In fact, as we shall see, the Fvetambaras eventually came to be interested more in the moral deviation which Jamali came to represent and the karmic destiny which ensued from it rather than the details and implications of the heretical teaching which he advocated. In this short study I propose to consider the fortunes of Jamali in respect to the manner in which he is portrayed in the canonical and 34 THE LATER FORTUNES OF JAMALI commentarial sources and his transformation into a flawed ethical type and exemplar of hostility towards one’s teacher. I will then draw attention to the dispute which developed during the sixteenth and seventeeth centuries concern- ing the karmic consequences set up by Jamali’s actions and the nature of the rebirths which he experienced after his solitary and unrepentant death. Jamali’s portrayal in Bhagavati Sutra 9.33 The only extended source for Jamali in the scriptural canon is provided by Bhagavati Sutra (henceforth Bhagavati) 9.33, although there is evidence that a narrative relating to him occurred elsewhere within a now lost version.2 This sec- tion of what is the largest of the scriptural texts, which may in its earliest part date from the first century BCE but in its totality is no doubt several centuries later (Ohira 1994: 5–39), I will now proceed to summarise, following the text given on pp. 455–482 of the Jaina Agama Series edition of Dofi. Jamali is a mighty and rich ksatriya, or member of the warrior class, from the city of Ksatriyakujda, living a life of luxury and with eight beautiful wives, who is intrigued by the excitement aroused prior to what he learns will be a sermon preached by Mahavira at the Bahufala shrine (ceiya) outside the city of Brahmajakujda. He goes to the shrine in a regal fashion, riding a chariot with parasol and martial retinue and pays homage to Mahavira. Moved by the Jina’s sermon, he resolves to renounce, a course of action for which he is described as being suited in every way. However, his mother is deeply dismayed at his decision and a debate ensues in which the pleasures of the householder’s life and the dif- ficulties of the ascetic path are made clear to Jamali by his parents. However, eventually they acquiesce and give their permission. A lavish preparation for renunciation ensues, with begging bowl and ascetic’s whisk being bought at great expense and a barber hired at high price to crop Jamali’s hair so that only four tufts are left and what has been cut off being anointed, perfumed and worshipped (accitta) by his mother who then places it in a jewelled casket as a future devo- tional focus (darisaje) on holidays and festivals. Thereupon, finely dressed, anointed and attended by glamorous young men and women, Jamali is taken in a palanquin through streets thronged with onlookers and is formally presented to Mahavira by his parents. Then, ‘as in the case of the brahman Rsabhadatta’ (see below), Jamali pays homage to Mahavira, abandons his fine accoutrements, pulls out his remaining hair and renounces with 500 men to begin the career of an ascetic. Subsequently, after much fasting and scriptural study, ‘developing himself through various acts of austerity’ (vicittehiÅ tavokammehiÅ appajaÅ bhavemaje), Jamali petitions Mahavira to allow him to separate from the larger community to wander with the 500 monks who had renounced with him. The Jina makes no reply even when asked three times and so leaving his master Jamali goes forth from the vicinity of the Bahufala shrine to wander through the countryside with the 500 monks. One day, while outside Fravasti, Jamali falls ill of a fever brought 35 PAUL DUNDAS on by of the poor quality of the food he has consumed during his austerities and asks his monastic followers for a bed to be spread for him. On enquiring as to whether the bed was made (kade) or being made (kajjai), they reply that ‘the bed was not made (but) being made’ (jo khalu...jaÅ sejjasaÅtharae kade kajjai). Recalling Mahavira’s teaching (stated at the very beginning of the Bhagavati) that something which is in the process of moving has actually moved, Jamali sees directly (paccakkhaÅ) that the bed which was in the process of being made has not actually been made and judges this to be a decisive counter-example under- mining the Jina’s teaching and subverting his authority.

Load more