Jainism

i
 BLOOMSBURY GUIDES FOR THE PERPLEXED

Bloomsburys Guides for the Perplexed are clear, concise and

accessible introductions to thinkers, writers and subjects that
students and readers can find especially challenging or indeed
downright bewildering. Concentrating specifically on what it is that
makes the subject difficult to grasp, these books explain and explore
key themes and ideas, guiding the reader towards a thorough
understanding of demanding material.

Guides for the Perplexed available from Bloomsbury:

Spirituality: A Guide for the Perplexed, Philip Sheldrake
Daoism: A Guide for the Perplexed, Louis Komjathy
Sikhism: A Guide for the Perplexed, Arvind-Pal Singh Mandair
Western Esotericism: A Guide for the Perplexed, Wouter J. Hanegraaff
Confucius: A Guide for the Perplexed, Yong Huang
The Bahai Faith: A Guide for the Perplexed, Robert H. Stockman
Kabbalah: A Guide for the Perplexed, Pinchas Giller
New Religious Movements: A Guide for the Perplexed, Paul Oliver
Zoroastrianism: A Guide for the Perplexed, Jenny Rose

ii
A GUIDE FOR THE PERPLEXED

Jainism
SHERRY FOHR

Bloomsbury Academic
An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc

iii
 Bloomsbury Academic
An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc

50 Bedford Square 1385 Broadway

London New York
WC1B 3DP NY 10018
UK USA

www.bloomsbury.com

Bloomsbury and the Diana logo are trademarks of

Bloomsbury Publishing Plc

First published 2015

Sherry Fohr, 2015

Sherry Fohr has asserted her right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act,
1988, to be identified as Author of this work.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted

in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior
permission in writing from the publishers.

No responsibility for loss caused to any individual or organization acting on or

refraining from action as a result of the material in this publication can be
accepted by Bloomsbury or the author.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

ISBN: HB: 978-1-4411-5116-2

PB: 978-1-4411-6594-7
ePDF: 978-1-4742-2756-8
ePub: 978-1-4742-2755-1

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

Series: Bloomsburys Guides for the Perplexed

Typeset by RefineCatch Limited, Bungay, Suffolk, UK

iv
 CHAPTER ONE

The religious, historical,

and cultural contexts of Jain
narratives

Jainism is arguably the most non-violent and austere religion in the

world. While lay Jains attempt never to harm humans or animals,
the strict non-violence followed by the highly revered monks and
nuns also proscribes harm to any living being, even a microscopic
organism. And while laywomen (and a few laymen) undergo long
and difficult fasts, the longest being for one month, renouncers
austerities also include pulling their hair out by the roots two to five
times a year, walking bare foot throughout India most of the year,
and, in the case of some monks, not wearing any clothing at all.
However, only the very small percentage of Jains who become
monks and nuns actually endeavor to embody the full measure of
non-violence, austerity, and poverty prescribed by the scriptures.
The vast majority of Jains are laypeople who opt to postpone this
difficult renunciation to a future lifetime. They are therefore free
to enjoy worldly wellbeing, happiness, and wealth now while they
also practice Jain ethics and traditions suitable to laypeople,
including religious festivals and celebrations. Although Jainism has
a significant following in India of around four million adherents,
there has been relatively little published in English about Jains, and
even less published about the sacred stories of Jainism, the subject
of this book.1

1
2 JAINISM

Understanding Jainism through narratives

This book is not a complete survey of Jainism that extensively
details the varieties of beliefs and practices in each sect and sub-sect
in highly specialized or technical language. This book also does not
extensively detail historical developments, regional variations,
sectarian differences, and visual culture or art history. Instead, this
book is designed to complement the books that already do all this,
to be useful in undergraduate survey courses that introduce students
to Jainism, and to explain Jainism to anyone curious about this
tradition. It does all this by explicating some basic Jain values,
beliefs, and practices through its narrative tradition. These
narratives, many of which are ancient or medieval, are mainly
examined through the lens of contemporary ethnography to help
the reader understand Jainism as it is today.
There are several reasons why narratives are important for
understanding Jainism. First, narratives are important in general for
understanding individual religions and cultures because they
communicate (a) beliefs about the nature of the world, its structure,
and how it functions, (b) beliefs about the nature(s) of people in
general as well as categories of people in various grouping (such as
gender), and (c) beliefs about what one should do (or not do) and
about what one should value, considering (a) and (b). Narratives
about those who are considered heroic and/or spiritually
accomplished often provide models for culturally and religiously
successful action in the world.
Second, religious narratives are the primary means through
which Jains learn about Jainism. In order to explain Jainism
(including values, beliefs, and practices), renouncers tell narratives
to laypeople, and mothers and grandmothers tell them to children.
Narratives are so central to the Jain tradition in this way that it
could be argued that Jainism would not exist, and that one cannot
understand Jainism, without them. This book explains Jainism to
readers in the same way it is taught to Jains themselves, through the
medium of sacred narratives.
Third, Jain narratives offer a more complete picture of this religion
because they include mytho-historical exemplars of the entire four-
fold community (of monks, nuns, laymen, and laywomen), whereas
non-narrative texts concern mostly monks and laymen. In the latter
case this produces an important discrepancy for understanding
 RELIGIOUS, HISTORICAL, AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS 3

Jainism as a living tradition because there are currently four to five

times more nuns than monks, and laywomen tend to be in charge of
the religiosity in their homes. A focus on non-narrative texts also
emphasizes some complex subject matter that, although important
for understanding Jainism, is less influential than narrative exemplars
on how Jains practice their tradition in everyday life.
Fourth, John Cort (2001a, 12, 200) has demonstrated that the goal
of enlightenment (moksa) beyond this world is not always central in
the lived experience of Jains. While non-narrative Jain texts tend to
emphasize the path to moksa, narratives include this as the ultimate
but also include Jainism as a path to
soteriological goal of Jainism,
2
wellbeing in the world as well. Thus, Jain stories advocate the
practice of Jainism to achieve moksa, but they also explicate how Jain
practices result in worldly benefits. For example, there are many
narratives in which practicing Jainism results in such worldly benefits
as wealth, power, good fortune, rebirth as a god, virtuous sons and
daughters, and even sometimes the enjoyment of sensual pleasures.3
Worldly results are acknowledged as acceptable reasons to practice
Jainism in these narratives, even while emphasizing that there will
always be suffering in the world of rebirth (samsara) and that achieving
moksa is the best reason to practice Jainism. However, Jain narratives
describe a conflict between these worldly and other-worldly
do not
goals, but rather often describe how mytho-historical exemplars
eventually shift their focus from worldly benefits to moksa later in
their lifetimes or in one of their next lifetimes, and this is the way that
many Jain laypeople currently approach their religion.4
Fifth, narrative texts are also important in understanding Jain
ethics, and the consequences of violating ethical principles, because
they describe and evaluate specific ethical (or unethical) actions in
the context of narrative characters lives and circumstances. The
more abstract exposition of Jain ethics in non-narrative texts
sometimes overemphasizes the differences between Jains and non-
Jains, whereas narrative texts help us understand the similarities as
well. For example, there are narratives about lying, verbal and
emotional abuse, slander, sex scandals, hypocrisy, and murder. The
unethical nature of all of these is arguably easily understandable to
non-Jains (such as myself), and narratives concerning them help the
non-Jain student of this tradition understand Jain approaches to
ethical problems commonly experienced by people in many religions
and cultures.
4 JAINISM

Religious, historical, and cultural

contexts
In order to understand Jainism and its narratives, it is necessary to
understand the religious, historical, and cultural contexts in India
where Jainism was founded and continued to develop. Jains assert
that their religion has been re-founded repeatedly, and that there
have been twenty-four different re-founders in the current age who
are the Jinas Victors (also called Trthankaras Ford-makers),
the last of which was Mahavra. Jainism, as it is practiced today in
India, is traced back to Jina Mahavra, who lived from 599 BCE to
either 527 BCE (according to the Svetambara Jains) or 510 BCE
(according to the Digambara Jains). However, there is debate among
scholars about the dates of Mahavras birth and death, with some
putting his death as late as 425 BCE.5 As Jainism developed, it
interacted with other religious communities in India and eventually
divided into two main sects (Svetambara and Digambara), which
further divided into smaller sub-sects and communities.6
The majority of Indians today are Hindu, although there are also
Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists, and Jains, as well as members of other
minority religions. However, at the time Jainism developed there
was mainly a diverse, and sometimes contradictory, body of beliefs
and practices that would later develop into what is known today as
Hinduism. Hinduism developed gradually over time in several
historical stages during which new practices and beliefs emerged
while older ones were preserved or modified. Arguably the three
most important historical developments of Hinduism and the
reason for this traditions internal, and sometimes contradictory,
diversity in practice were later categorized into three paths or
trimarga: the karmamarga (the path of works), the janamarga
(the path of knowledge), and the bhaktimarga (the path of
devotion).7 There also was a fourth influential pan-Indian religious
development in Indias history not included in this trimarga:
tantrism.
Jainism and Buddhism have been influenced by, and also
influenced, these four religio-historical developments, as can be seen
in Jain narratives. Both Jainism and Buddhism were founded after
the path of works was already well established (but still changing),
and while the path of knowledge was developing. While the path
 RELIGIOUS, HISTORICAL, AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS 5

of works was life- and world-affirming, the path of knowledge

rejected life in the world as the cause of inevitable suffering and as
something to be renounced. However, Hindu renouncers of the
path of knowledge did not reject as many beliefs and practices of
the path of works as Jain and Buddhist renouncers did, and so
only Jainism and Buddhism developed as separate religions during
this time period. These two separate religions then had different
responses to the later devotional and tantric developments. With the
emergence of the path of devotion in Hinduism, so too emerged a
new and more devotional form of Buddhism, Mahayana Buddhism,
which diverged significantly from previous forms of Buddhism and
which eventually spread to East Asia. Also, with the emergence of
Hindu tantra, so too developed a form of tantric Buddhism,
Vajrayana Buddhism, which also had significant differences from
the other previous forms of Buddhism and which eventually spread
to central Asia as well as Himalayan countries and regions. Jainism,
on the other hand, remained in India. It also remained more unified
in its beliefs and practices, despite the development of different Jain
sub-sects and the composition of copious amounts of narrative
literature, during this later period.

The context of Jain narratives: the path

of works
The Vedic and Brahmanic texts, associated with karmamarga (the

path of works), developed from c. 1600 to 1000 BCE and from c.
900 to 800 BCE respectively.8 The worldview and values of the Vedic
ritual tradition of the path of works concerned the creation and
maintenance of the universe, as well as attaining and enjoying
family and children (especially sons), sensual pleasures, prosperity,
success, power, and the other good things life can bring. The Rgveda,
the oldest and most important text in Vedic ritual, consists of
various hymns recited in sacrificial rituals to different Vedic gods
such as Indra, Varuna, Agni, Soma, Rudra, and Visnu.9 Indra, the
king of Vedic gods, is a frequent character in Jain narratives
as a
devotee of the Jinas. Also, according to the Rgveda (10.90) the
universe was created by the primordial sacrifi ce of the cosmic
being called Purusa (Man) or Prajapati (Lord of Creatures).

6 JAINISM

Therefore, married brahmin priests needed to maintain the existence

of the world by continuing to perform sacrificial rituals.10 For this
service they received a daksina (priestly gift) from the yajamana
(sponsor or sacrificer), who paid for the sacrifice and reaped the
rituals benefits if it was correctly performed, or reaped the harm if
it was incorrectly performed.11 Brahmin priests not only perpetuated
the world through continued sacrificial performances according to
this Vedic worldview,12 but also the yajamana sponsored brahmin
priests to perform sacrifices to obtain good standing with the gods,
good fortune (such as sons), temporal power (if the sponsor was
king), and a place in Vedic heaven after death.13
The primordial sacrifice of Purusa prescribed continued sacrifices
to preserve the world, but it also explained the hereditary and
occupational caste system that was already in place when Jainism
developed, and that continues to be a strong part of Hindu culture
to this day, with the following main castes (and their many sub-
castes that are too numerous to list). According to the Rgveda
(10.90), the four main varnas (castes or colors), which were born

from this primordial sacrifice and which correspond to Purusas
body parts were: the brahmin priests (who were identified with the
head and mouth), the ksatriya rulers/warriors (who were identified
with Purusas middle and arms), the vaisya producers/business
people (who were identified with Purusas legs), and the sudra
servants (who were identified with Purusas feet).14 Those who did

not fall within one of these categories were labeled candala
(outcasts) or untouchables.15 Not only did sacrifices maintain the
cosmic order, but performing the occupational duties of the caste
one was born into did so as well. The correct social order, and its
inherent duties, was traditionally considered objective reality instead
of a social construct, and was thereby equated with cosmic wellbeing
and universal harmony. Adherence to ones own duties or dharma
(according to ones caste, age, and gender) precluded the suffering of
social chaos, and ensured that life may be enjoyed. Characters in
Jain narratives are often Jains of the ruling caste (kings, queens, etc.)
or the producer caste; however most Jains today are business people
belonging to one of the producer sub-castes.16 Although brahmin
priests maintained their status at the top of the Hindu hierarchy
throughout Hinduisms historical developments, there are many
Jain narratives in which Jains come in conflict with haughty Hindu
brahmin priests and reject their authority.
 RELIGIOUS, HISTORICAL, AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS 7

The context of Jain narratives: the path of

knowledge and Buddhism
Between 900 and 500 bce a new genre of Hindu literature
was composed: the Upanisads of the janamarga (the path of
knowledge).17 The Upani sads advocated beliefs, values, and

practices that were very different from those of the path of works
even though the Upanisads were also considered Vedic literature.18

First, the path of knowledge helped to solidify the idea of
reincarnation in the world of rebirth and re-death (samsara) in
which souls are reborn as humans, animals, demons, hell- beings,
and heavenly-beings. Second, the concept of karma shifted from
meaning only the efficacious ritual action of priests during the
sacrificial rites of the path of works, to meaning all actions (and
their like-results) over many lifetimes. With the development of the
path of knowledge, all actions (karma) were believed to
determine where, and in what form, one is reborn and to determine
the happiness or suffering one experiences in each rebirth. It came
to mean justice worked into the fabric of the universe like a law of
nature, without any God administering punishments or rewards.
Third, instead of the goals of religion being the maintenance and
enjoyment of life as well as the enjoyment of heaven after death,
the path of knowledge emphasized that the world is full of
inevitable suffering and that the only true and permanent happiness
is beyond this world or heaven in an enlightened state called moksa
(liberation) or mukti (release) in which one is no longer reborn
in samsara (the world of reincarnation) again. Fourth, instead of
Vedic polytheism, the path of knowledge advocated monotheism
with the one God or Ultimate Reality called Brahman.19 Fifth, the
new belief that all living beings have a soul or Self (atman) that
is one with Brahman, although this oneness is normally not
experienced, was perhaps one of the most significant developments
during this period of Indian history. Sixth, instead of prioritizing the
knowledge of Vedic rites and hymns, the path of knowledge
emphasized working toward the experiential knowledge of the
souls (atman) identification with God (Brahman), knowledge that
results in moksa and therefore freedom from being reborn in the

world of inevitable suffering (samsara). Seventh, renunciation of
householder and family life was considered necessary to achieve
moksa because the components of householder life (marriage, sex,

8 JAINISM

home, family, work, and money) distracted one from this goal.
Therefore diverse orders of celibate renouncers emerged in India,
with brahmin priests eventually including the renunciation of the
path of knowledge within their re-organization of the path of
works so that later orthodox Hindu orders of renouncers eventually
limited initiation to twice-born men (men of the three upper castes).
Both Jainism and Buddhism arose around 500 to 400 BCE, after
the path of knowledge started to develop in Hinduism, and so
share many similarities with it. For example, Jains and Buddhists
also claimed all living beings karma determined both where, and in
what forms, they were repeatedly reborn. The world of reincarnation
(samsara) in which Jain narratives take place therefore includes

multiple heavens, multiple hells, and earth; and characters in Jain
narratives include humans, animals, demons (raksasa), and types of
semi-divine beings and minor gods (devas and yaksas).20 Furthermore,
Jains and Buddhists asserted that samsara is characterized by
inevitable suffering, because even rebirth in one of the heavens is
temporary, but also asserted that true happiness may be achieved by
escaping this cycle (to achieve moksa or nirvana) by becoming a
monk or a nun who renounces sex, marriage, family, and wealth.
Therefore, both Jains and Buddhists constituted their own four-fold
communities of monks, nuns, laymen, and laywomen. Although
most human characters in Jain narratives are members of the Jain
four-fold community, Hindu and Buddhist laypeople and renouncers
are also in some of these narratives.
Although Jainism and Buddhism were similar to the path of
knowledge of Hinduism in the above ways, they also differed from
it enough to develop into separate religions. Unlike the path of
knowledge, both Jainism and Buddhism rejected the early Vedic
texts; rejected the authority of brahmin priests; rejected the idea
that caste indicates inherent or hereditary virtue, purity, or religious
ability; and rejected the concept of the Ultimate Reality as Brahman.
Although Hindu renunciation of the path of knowledge is very
different from what came before in the path of works, Jainism
and Buddhism are even more divergent for the above reasons.
Jainisms doctrine of the seven (or nine) tattvas realities also
differs from Buddhism in a variety of ways. According to Jains the
universe is characterized by the tattvas, which include souls (jva),
matter (ajva), matter coming in contact with the souls (asrava),
binding of karma and the soul (bandha), inhibiting the influx of
 RELIGIOUS, HISTORICAL, AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS 9

karma (samvara), purifying the soul of karma (nirjara), and

liberation (moksa or nirvana).21 Some lists also add two more
karma (pu
tattvas: beneficial nya) and harmful karma (papa).22
While the early Buddhist doctrine of anatman (no-Self) meant that
no living being has an unchanging and independent Self or soul
(atman) that is one with God (Brahman), according to Jainism all
living beings have innately perfect souls (jvas, atmans) endowed
with the divine qualities of infinite bliss, infinite knowledge, infinite
perception, and infinite energy or power. While awakening to the
true nature of reality became the key to extinguishing the suffering
of rebirth, and therefore also to achieving nirvana in Buddhism,
Jains asserted that purifying the soul of all karma, and therefore
finally experiencing the four infinite qualities of the soul, was the
key to achieving freedom from rebirth (moksa or nirvana).
Also unlike Hindus and Buddhists, Jains conceived of karma as
microscopic particles or matter (ajva) that float around the universe.
Whenever a living being performs a good or bad action, these
particles stick to the soul to produce a similar result later on in this
life or the next, and then fall away from the soul again.23 The
passions (kasaya) including hatred, greed, deception, anger, etc.
act as the glue binding (bandha) these karmic particles to the soul,
and determining both the longevity and potency of the karmic
result.24 Jain soteriology developed around this conception of
karma, and is designed both to stop the influx of new harmful
karma (samvara) and also to eliminate karmic particles already

collected (nirjara). So while Buddhism was called the middle way
because the Buddha rejected the extremes of luxury and austerity,
Jainism advocated difficult austerities (tapas) in order to purify the
soul of karma. While both Jainism and Buddhism advocated non-
violence toward all living beings, and so both Buddhists and Jains
criticized brahmin priests for sacrificing animals in Vedic rituals (a
subject of some Jain narratives),25 Jains were even more strict about
non-violence (ahimsa) in order to avoid acquiring more karma that

stops one from experiencing the soul.
Finally, both Buddhists and Jains developed different ideas of
what they both called The Three Jewels: their respective tripartite
organizations of religious fundamentals. In Buddhism The Three
Jewels came to include (1) the Buddha, (2) the dharma or the
Buddhas teachings, and (3) the samgha or the Buddhist community
of monks, nuns, laymen, and laywomen. In Jainism, however, The
10 JAINISM

Three Jewels came to consist of (1) right faith, (2) right knowledge,
and (3) right conduct.26 Right faith involves faith in the truth of the
Jain teachings, such as tattvas, listed above.27 Jain narratives often
involve characters experiencing right faith by hearing someone
preach about Jainism or by remembering their own past lives, after
which they are destined to master right conduct and to attain right
knowledge (and therefore moksa) later in their current lives or in a
later rebirth.
While in Buddhism and Hinduism enlightenment (moksa or
nirvana) is not characterized by going to a particular place in the

universe, Jains also included a realm of enlightened souls at the top
of the universe above the heavenly realms. Jain cosmology divided
the world into five parts: the middle world (of humans and animals),
several heavenly realms, several hellish realms, the realm of beings
with only one sense, and the realm of enlightened souls.28 Jain
narratives frequently follow characters through their various
travails and reincarnations in this five-part world, during which
they continue to experience the karmic consequences of their own
actions until they succeed in halting the inflow of karmic particles
(samvara) through non-violence and the elimination of the passions,
and in annihilating all accumulated karmic particles (nirjara)
through austerities and meditation. Once they have done this, they
attain omniscience (kevala) while still alive, and after death float to
the top of the universe to join all other enlightened souls in freedom
from further rebirth (moksa or nirvana).

The context of Jain narratives: the path of

devotion and tantra
The Epics and Puranas, associated with the Hindu bhaktimarga

(the path of devotion) developed from c. 400 BCE to 400 CE and
from c. 200 CE to 1600 CE respectively.29 The path of devotion
started to emerge soon after the path of knowledge, Jainism, and
Buddhism were established. It then developed over the centuries
into arguably the most popular and influential of the three paths of
Hinduism. Although there is some evidence of devotion to the Vedic
gods and goddesses in the path of works,30 devotion was more
emphasized as soteriology in the path of devotion. The Epics and
Puranas are largely narrative texts about the many bhaktimarga

 RELIGIOUS, HISTORICAL, AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS 11

gods and goddesses, and their incarnations in human form. These

divinities were much more powerful than the older Vedic deities,
and were later often considered the manifestations of the one God
(Brahman), the supreme Ultimate Reality of the path of knowledge.
The goals of the path of devotion were both to acquire and enjoy
the good things in life (like the path of works) and also to achieve
moksa (like the path of knowledge), both of which were to be

achieved through the grace of gods and goddesses in response to the
devotees love and worship. While collective or individual human
effort was more emphasized in the path of works and the path
of knowledge, reliance on the gods and goddesses was more
emphasized in the path of devotion.
Both Jains and Buddhists dealt similarly with the Vedic, Epic,
and Puranic gods and goddesses in that they were deemed inferior
to Mahav ra and the Buddha because they had not achieved
enlightenment and were therefore still trapped in samsara. According
to Jainism, anyone with enough merit (punya) from good acts done

in this life (by following the Jain religion) could be reborn as a god
or goddess in one of the heavens in their next life, and this is what
happens in many Jain narratives. However, a more devotional form
of Buddhism developed during this period (100 BCE to 200 CE)
called Mahayana Buddhism. The compassionate and supernaturally
powerful Celestial Bodhisattvas of Mahayana Buddhism not only
helped their devotees achieve nirvana, but also helped them with
more worldly needs and concerns. Although prayer and worship
were also present in Jainism, those most worthy of worship and
devotion were, and continue to be, the Jinas and the religious men
and women who followed in their footsteps by becoming monks
and nuns in order to achieve moksa. Although Jainism continued to
emphasize individual effort in its soteriology, devotionalism was
nonetheless also present. Indeed, Jain narratives describe how both
individual effort and devotion may lead to prosperity and happiness
in samsara as well as to achieving moksa.
The Jain concept of God is very unique,
31 which also makes Jain
worship and devotion distinct. Buddhists largely rejected ideas
about a creator God or Brahman, and the Celestial Bodhisattvas (of
Mahayana Buddhism) came to function like Gods in responding to
human concerns and prayers. However, God is more complicated in
Jainism. All the enlightened souls (including the Jinas) separated
from the world of reincarnation at the top of the universe are
12 JAINISM

worshipped both collectively and individually as God by Jains.

However, this God did not create the universe because the universe
has always existed and will always exist. In theory, this God also
does not act, and therefore does not respond to prayers, because
enlightened souls are beyond all desires that produced any actions.
Nonetheless, Jains still testify to the efficacy of worshipping this
God, and also claim to experience Gods grace in their lives.
There is also another way Jainism came to differ from Buddhism
during this period. Not only did Jains compose many narratives
unique to Jainism,32 but unlike Buddhists they also composed their
own versions of the Hindu Epics, the Ramayana and the Mahabharata.
The Hindu Ramayana is the story of Rama (an incarnation of the
Hindu God Visnu) who must rescue his wife Sta (the human
incarnation of the goddess Laksm) after she is kidnapped, and kill
the demon Ravana (who kidnapped her) in order to preserve the

world. The Hindu Mahabharata relates Krsnas (another incarnation

of Visnu) assistance of the five Pandava brothers in their conflict with

their cousins (the hundred Kauravas) over the central kingdom.33
The various Jain versions of the Ramayana and the Mahabharata
differ from the Hindu versions in a variety of ways. For example,
Rama and Krsna are not incarnations of Hindu Gods, and the Jinas
of those times are the objects of veneration by humans, animals,
gods, and goddesses. Furthermore, these Jain stories also often
narrate events through many lifetimes, demonstrating the effects of
karma in determining future rebirths. Also, the royal heroes and
heroines of these narratives often renounce after their adventures or
travails to become Jain monks and nuns. Then they either achieve
moksa or are reborn as gods and goddesses in their next life, destined
in the future to achieve moksa when they are again reborn as human.
On the other hand, other heroes and villains in these Jain narratives
are reborn in one of the hells because of the violence they committed,
but are also destined to achieve moksa in a future lifetime.
After the path of devotion started to develop (and while it was
still developing) a fourth genre of Hindu texts was composed from
c. 500 CE to 1800 CE called the tantras.34 Diverse tantric sects and
developments (starting from the fifth or sixth centuries CE)35 emerged
in Hinduism, Jainism, and Buddhism; many of which included the
goals of enlightenment (moksa or nirvana) and the acquisition of
supernatural powers. However, tantra proved to be much more
influential in Buddhism than in Jainism. An entire third branch of
 RELIGIOUS, HISTORICAL, AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS 13

Buddhism developed at this time called Vajrayana, or Tantric

Buddhism, which still exists today, mostly in Tibetan and Himalayan
regions. Although Jainism developed its own form of tantrism
(mantravada), tantra eventually became largely unacceptable among
the majority of Jains and is therefore not a focus of this book.
However, tantric influence can still be seen in the acquisition and use
of supernatural powers in some Jain narrative literature, and in
narrative characters who have these powers called vidyadharas.

Chapter outlines
Chapter Two outlines the development of different Jain sects and
sub-sects in connection with this religions endurance in India as a
minority tradition. Jainisms survival in India was secured by the
persistence of this traditions orders of renouncers. The survival of
Jain monks and nuns (and therefore also Jainism) in India is puzzling
when contrasted with the history of the disappearance of Buddhist
monks and nuns (and therefore also Buddhism) in most of India.
Whereas Buddhist monks eventually relaxed (or completely changed)
previously strict practices and rules, Jains instead formed different
sects and sub-sects based on disagreements about strict adherence
to the rules of renunciation, or in order to reform types of laxity
that eventually became acceptable in Buddhism. Maintaining the
strictness of Jain renouncers practices is so central to this tradition
that there is an entire genre of narratives about this topic. Many of
these narratives pertain to the formation of the Svetambara and the
Digambara sects, of the Murtipujak, Sthanakavas, and Terapanth
sub-sects of the Svetambara sect, and of the Murtipujak Gacchs.
Chapter Three includes a summary of Jina Mahavras various
hagiographies to demonstrate how narratives about the Jinas
provide paradigms of ethical behavior and religiosity for monks
and nuns to follow today. Jain renouncers are expected to abide by
The Five Great Vows (mahavratas), the five forms of carefulness
(samitis), and the three restraints (guptis) that directly reflect
Mahavras behavior as described by these narratives. Furthermore,
they endeavor to follow Mahavras example of austerity (tapas)
and instruction to the Jain community. Laypeople follow the ethical
principles of The Five Great Vows to a lesser extent than is expected
of renouncers.
14 JAINISM

Chapter Four explicates the connection between Jain womens

religiosity and popular narrative paradigms of virtuous women.
Jain laywomen tend to be more religious than laymen in ways that
more closely resemble renouncers. Furthermore, the majority of
Jain renouncers are currently women, with four to five times more
nuns than monks. There are far fewer Hindu and Buddhist female
renouncers than male renouncers in South Asia. Unlike these two
traditions, Jain literature includes an entire genre of popular
narratives that provide exemplars of ideal religiosity for both
laywomen and nuns. These narratives are about sats (virtuous
women) also called mahasats (great virtuous women).
Chapter Five focuses on narrative paradigms for laymen in
stories about kings and gods. Both narrative and non-narrative Jain
texts emphasize renunciation of worldly enjoyments and fortune in
order to achieve moksa. Unlike most non-narrative texts, however,
narratives describe how practicing Jainism results in the beneficial
karma that leads to worldly benefits (such as good fortune and
wealth) that are also important to lay Jains today. Narratives of
kings and gods concerning dana (religious giving) and protecting
Jain renouncers two main religious duties of Jain laymen today
include both the worldly and spiritual rewards for these religious
acts.
The above chapters include narratives specific to different models
of religiosity suitable for monks, nuns, laywomen, or laymen.
Chapter Six, the conclusion, concerns narratives about types of
religiosity shared by both renouncers and laypeople, or by both
laymen and laywomen. Religious festivals, prayers and mantras,
and the veneration of renouncers are prominent forms of such
religiosity in all Jain sects and sub-sects; and devotional worship
using images is also important among Digambara and Svetambara-
Murtipujak laypeople. Just as there are narrative models of
religiosity specific to the different members of Jain communities,
there are narratives describing the origin, practice, and benefits of
these shared religious practices as well.
 CHAPTER TWO

Why Jainism survives:

Jain sects and sub-sects

Jainisms survival in India was secured by the persistence of this

traditions orders of monks and nuns. It would have been very
difficult for Jainism to endure as a separate religion in India if those
considered the most venerable and central to Jainism, monks and
nuns, had not maintained lineages to the present day. Scriptural
narratives describe lay Jains worshipping renouncers as the living
embodiments of the Jain ideal because they actively follow in the
footsteps of the Jinas by renouncing the world to achieve moksa. As

Babb (1996, 23) states, this is still the case: This is a fundamental
matter: Jains worship ascetics, and this is the most important fact
about Jain ritual culture.
The survival of Jain monks and nuns, and therefore also Jainism,
is a puzzling mystery when compared with the history of Buddhism
in India. Orders of Indian Buddhist nuns ceased to exist around the
eighth or ninth centuries CE,1 when the position of Hindu women in
India had also significantly declined.2 Orders of Buddhist monks
also disappeared in most of India around the thirteenth to fourteenth
centuries CE during Turkish invasions.3 Buddhism survived only in
the Himalayan regions of India (which were difficult for foreign
invaders to enter) largely because orders of monks and nuns
persisted there.4 In contrast, there is textual and epigraphic evidence
of Jain renouncers in India throughout this traditions history.5 I
argue that Buddhism died out in most of India because Buddhist

15
16 JAINISM

monks eventually changed certain rules and practices that had

previously maintained renouncers poverty and itinerancy, while
Jainism survived because Jains instead repeatedly reformed similar
trends in their own tradition.
Maintaining the strictness of renouncers practices and the
reformation of laxity are so central to Jainism that they are
connected to the formation of most Jain sects, sub-sects, and many
other sub-groupings. Their centrality is also indicated by an entire
genre of Jain narratives about reforming laxity, a few of which are
included in this chapter. One reason that preserving the strictness of
renouncers practice is considered so important in Jainism is that
laypeople earn punya (good karma or merit) by giving only to those
renouncers who are worthy of veneration through their strict
adherence to the Jain rules of renunciation. Therefore, this genre of
narratives sometimes also includes laypeople, as well as monks, as
the protagonists of reform. This unique emphasis in Jainism helps
to explain the two key stages of Buddhism and Jainisms differing
histories and fates: (1) the demise of Buddhist nuns and the survival
of Jain nuns in the eighth to ninth centuries CE, and (2) the demise
of Buddhist monks and the survival of Jain monks and nuns in the
thirteenth century CE.

The history of Buddhist and Jain nuns

and monks
The first stage of history, concerning orders of Jain nuns continuing
beyond the ninth century CE, is important because Jain nuns do not
just substantially outnumber monks today, but they also may have
done so in the past as well. According to scriptural descriptions of
each of the twenty-four Jinas communities of renouncers, there
were more nuns than monks. Although there is no way to verify this
due to the lack of any further demographic records, there are many
more nuns than monks today, and this lends some support to these
scriptural descriptions of nuns preponderance in the past. If this
was indeed the case, then nuns would have been of greater
importance in maintaining Jainism as a separate tradition in India,
while Buddhist nuns would have been less important in this regard
because there were more monks.
 WHY JAINISM SURVIVES: JAIN SECTS AND SUB-SECTS 17

Nancy Falk (1989[1980], 15860), in her article The Case of

the Vanishing Nuns, argues that the institutional subordination of
Buddhist nuns to monks is one of the reasons that nuns orders did
not survive in India.6 According to Falk, subordination meant lower
status for Buddhist nuns, which resulted in less support from the
laity, which in turn led to the disappearance of orders of Buddhist
nuns in India during less prosperous times around the eighth or
ninth centuries CE.
However, this decrease in the support of Indian Buddhist nuns
might not have happened if the rules of renunciation had not been
changed in this tradition. Buddhist nuns in India fared better in
early Buddhism,7 when there was the prescription of itinerancy for
monks and nuns (except during the rainy season) and a mandatory
minimum of possessions.8 In both early Buddhism and Jainism,
renouncers were not allowed to reside in one place indefinitely, but
instead traveled from place to place most of the year, teaching the
laity in each locale as they went. Furthermore, both Buddhist and
Jain renouncers were allowed only a few possessions and forbidden
from handling money. The preservation of these practices helped to
maintain orders of nuns and monks in Jainism, while the opposite
took place in Buddhism.
Scholars such as Schopen (2004) and Gutschow (2004) describe
how Buddhist renouncers gradually adopted permanent residences,
which in turn allowed them to accept larger donations and accumulate
more possessions. New rules that allowed these changes were
attributed to the Buddhas concern that the laity should be able to
earn punya (good karma or merit) by giving as much as they wanted

to renouncers, 9
but these new rules also allowed for the possibility
that Buddhist monks and nuns could become rich, despite the precept
forbidding them from handling money. Schopen (2004, 7881) reports
that included among these new rules are those in the Mu lasarvastivada
Vinaya (redacted in the fifth and sixth centuries CE), which is still used
today by Tibetan/Himalayan Buddhist monastics. These rules address
monastic endowments, wealth, and personal property, as well as
monks giving interest-bearing loans to laypeople.
From the fifth and sixth centuries CE these new, previously
forbidden, practices were institutionalized in Buddhism rather than
reformed, so that it became normal for many renouncers to be
sedentary and live in richly funded monasteries or universities. The
laity responded by giving as much as they could to monks, because
18 JAINISM

there were no limits anymore to how much they could give, while
they neglected nuns who were considered inferior fields of merit
because of their subordination. In short, because monks were
considered superior to nuns, laypeople believed they earned more
merit by giving to the monks. According to Falk (1989[1980], 158)
and other scholars, nuns lesser support from the laity during times
of scarcity was inadvertent. However, Schopen (2004, 349) argues
that monks felt competition from nuns for donations, and therefore
deliberately strove to deprive them of this revenue. One way
they did so was to create new rules subordinating nuns to monks
around the fourth and fifth centuries CE. According to Schopen this
indicates that nuns were not already subordinated in these ways
because otherwise there would have been no need to create these
new rules.10
If there had been successful reforms of medieval Buddhist laxity,
then Buddhism might have continued to thrive in India. For
example, if reforms had preserved the itinerancy of Buddhist monks
and nuns, so that they could not accumulate property and wealth,
perhaps Buddhist laypeople would have continued to support nuns.
After giving what they could to Buddhist monks (which would have
been considerably less), it would have been necessary for the laity to
also give to nuns in order to keep accumulating merit. Instead, I
Ching (the Chinese pilgrim who traveled to India in the seventh
century CE) recorded that Buddhist nuns at that time were poor and
begged for food, while monks lived in richly endowed monasteries,
but did not assist these unfortunate nuns.11 Whereas Indian Buddhist
nuns eventually went from poverty to almost complete
disappearance, Jain nuns survived this period of Indian history and
are still thriving today. Sedentary monasticism was not permanently
institutionalized in Jainism, as it was (and still is) in Buddhism. Jain
monks did not have monasteries in which to store larger donations
so that laypeople might have responded by giving only to monks
while neglecting nuns.
Orders of Buddhist monks, and therefore Buddhism as a whole,
succumbed to the later Turkish invasions in the thirteenth to
fourteenth centuries CE, while Jain orders of renouncers survived
these invasions as well. Mitra (1954, 147160), Jaini (1980), and
Long (2009, 7071) assert that one of the reasons for these differing
fates was that Buddhist renouncers did not maintain strong ties
with the laity, while Jain renouncers did. Indeed, as Indian Buddhist
 WHY JAINISM SURVIVES: JAIN SECTS AND SUB-SECTS 19

monasteries became independently wealthy so that ties with

Buddhist laypeople became unnecessary for support, this lack of
ties to the laity could have led to the disappearance of Buddhist
monks in most of India when foreign invasions eliminated their
financial independence. During Jainisms history similar laxity
started to develop from time to time, but instead of being
permanently institutionalized, as it was in Indian Buddhism, it was
repeatedly reformed so that most Jain renouncers continue to have
few possessions and remain itinerant today. Jain renouncers have
historically depended on the laity for daily needs and so they
continued to maintain strong ties to the laity. Furthermore,
itinerancy also allowed, and still allows, Jain renouncers to maintain
relationships with much larger numbers of laypeople in different
locations.
It is difficult to destroy a religion in which the pillars of that
religion (i.e. renouncers) have no fixed abode, while it is much easier
to destroy one if those pillars depend on great Buddhist monasteries
and universities that can be looted and/or demolished.12 Since
Indian Buddhist monasteries and universities were repositories for
wealth and land, foreign invaders were more likely to target them
for appropriation. Buddhist monks would then have been faced
with living a less comfortable lifestyle because the revenue on which
they had grown to depend would have been eliminated. Furthermore,
their independence from the laity for their daily existence, as well as
lack of connections with the laity of different and safer locations,
would have worked against them. Even if fleeing and evicted
Buddhist monks had asked laypeople in safer locations to support
them, these laypeople might have balked at accepting the
responsibility of donating enough wealth to support them. This
would have been a much larger burden than the very little needed
to support fleeing Jain renouncers.
Therefore, two of the most important reasons for Buddhist and
Jain renouncers differing fates involve poverty and wandering.
Whereas Buddhist renouncers eventually became sedentary,
accumulated possessions, and accepted large-scale gifts from laity,
these three practices remained unacceptable and proscribed in
Jainism by the renouncers vow of aparigraha (non-possession/non-
attachment). The result of changes in Buddhist rules probably
created situations similar to those in contemporary Tibetan/
Himalayan Buddhism. In both Tibetan/Himalayan Buddhism and
20 JAINISM

Jainism one of the main religious practices of laymen is giving

donations, and for the same reasons: merit and prestige.13 However,
while Buddhist laymen give a great deal directly to monks and
monasteries, Jain laymen cannot do the same.
Jain laymen give away a tremendous amount of wealth. However
Jain renouncers cannot receive it themselves, but instead give
directions, suggestions, or blessings about where to direct this
charity.14 Although this means that some senior monks (and a few
respected nuns) have indirect control of great resources, the wealth
donated by Jain laymen does not go directly to renouncers. Instead,
it is spent on temples, health clinics, schools, libraries, a sramas,
animal shelters, and temporary residences for renouncers. Since
Jain laypeople are wealthy compared with other demographic
groups in India, such giving is not burdensome for them. However,
even if they were poor, they would still have enough to be able to
support both nuns and monks, who can accept and rely on very
little for themselves. Therefore, Jain renouncers continued existence
did not, and still does not, depend on the continued prosperity of
the laity as it probably did for renouncers in Indian Buddhism.

Jain sects and sub-sects

The charity of laymen as well as the poverty and wandering of most
renouncers remain central in Jainism today, regardless of sect
or sub-sect. The two main sects or branches of Jainism are the
Svetambara/Svetambar, who now live largely in the northwest of
India, and the Digambara/Digambar, who live throughout western
and central India. The Svetambara and Digambara sects also divided
into sub-sects and sub-groups.15 The Digambaras are divided into
the Bsapanth, Terapanth, and Taranpanth sub-sects. Bsapanth and
Terapanth worship includes the use of statues in temples, while
Taranpanth worship is done in front of scriptures. The Svetambaras

are divided into the Murtipujak, Sthanakavas, and Terapanth sub-
sects. The Svetambara-Murtipujaks are also sub-divided into groups
called gacchs, three of which are the Kharatar, Tapa, and Acal
Gacchs. One of the principal differences between the two main
Murtipujak Gacchs (the Kharatar and Tapa Gacchs) concerns nuns.
Tapa Gacch nuns have traditionally been restricted from preaching
to audiences that include men and also have not been allowed
 WHY JAINISM SURVIVES: JAIN SECTS AND SUB-SECTS 21

to study all the Jain scriptures (although this is slowly changing

now),16 while Kharatar Gacch nuns have no such restrictions.
Finally, the Sthanakavas divided into several sampradays, the
largest of which are the Jangacch I and Sadhumarg.17 Among
Svetambaras, Jains belonging to the Sthanakavas and Terapanth
sub-sects do not engage in image worship, unlike the Murtipujak
sub-sect and the majority of the Digambara sect. While many
image-worshipping Jains wear a cloth over their mouths on ritual
occasions, the Sthanakavas and Terapanth renouncers wear a
muhpatt (mouth guard) most of the time in order to not harm
living beings in the air.
The above divisions were caused by differences in orthopraxy,
with stricter Jain practices being asserted by emerging divisions and
then sometimes counter reformations by the allegedly lax group.
From the earliest division between the Svetambara and Digambara
sects there has been a long-standing tension about what practices
are deemed austere enough. The Jain laity is still very proud of the
strict conduct of renouncers and is very watchful to ensure it
continues. This austerity is necessary so that lay Jains may earn
punya by providing Jain renouncers with necessities. If renouncers
are not sincere or are lax, it is believed that laypeople will not
karmically benefit in this way.

Aparigraha: Non-possession in the vetmbara

and Digambara sects
The first major schism of the Jain community, into the Svetambara
and Digambara sects, was partly the result of a disagreement about
how strictly the vow of non-possession/non-attachment (aparigraha)
should be followed by monks. Around the same time Buddhist rules
were being changed as described above, this Jain schism solidified
at the Council of Valabh (fifth century CE) when, despite the
absence of Digambaras, Svetambaras decided on canonical
scriptures.18 The debate about whether or not monks should wear
clothing was arguably the most important concern, which in turn
produced a dispute about whether women could attain moksa
because they could not renounce clothing.19
The Digambaras (sky-clad) argued that it is impossible to
reach moksa without renouncing all clothing as part of the vow of

22 JAINISM

aparigraha, which only men can do. Therefore, women must be

reborn as men to be able to renounce clothing and achieve moksa.
However, the Svetambaras (white-clad) argued that clothing is a
necessary possession for the spiritual path and that women can
achieve moksa. Accordingly, Svetambara renouncers and Digambara
nuns wear white clothing, while the highest Digambara monks
(munis) wear no clothing.20
Although there are other disagreements between Svetambaras
and Digambaras, the main issue is connected to the vow of non-
possession/non-attachment as it relates to whether or not monks
should renounce clothing, with Digambaras criticizing the wearing
of clothing as a form of laxity. According to the Digambara story of
this schism21 there was a famine in India during which it was
difficult for monks and nuns to obtain alms from laypeople, and so
Acarya Bhadrabahu led a migration of many Jain renouncers from
the north to the south of India, while others opted to remain in the
north. When the southern monks finally returned to the north, they
found that that the northern monks (headed by Acarya Sthulabhadra)
had decided upon a canon of texts with which the southern monks
disagreed, and also had succumbed to laxity by deciding to wear
white clothing.
There are many other rules concerning the vow of aparigraha in
Svetambara and Digambara texts. According to the Dasavaikalika
Sutra, a Svetambara text that is studied by candidates for initiation
and newly initiated renouncers, the vow states,

I hereby abstain completely from keeping any possession.

Wherever I am, in a village, city or forest; whether the object less
or more, minute or gross, living or non-living; I will not keep any
possession; neither will I induce others to do so, or approve of
others doing so. All my life I will observe this great vow through
three means and three methods. In other words, throughout my
life I will, through mind, speech and body, neither do, induce
others to do or approve of others doing such an act of keeping
any possession (4. 14).22

The Dasavaikalika also states,

It is under the influence of greed that even those who have

become ascetics indulge in a vice like hoarding, that is what I
 WHY JAINISM SURVIVES: JAIN SECTS AND SUB-SECTS 23

believe. An ascetic who has even a trace of a desire to collect

should be considered a householder not a renouncer (6. 19).23
One who is not attached to his clothing and other equipment,
who is free of all worldly ties, who collects alms from unknown
families, who does not allow his discipline to become worthless
by faults, who remains away from sale, purchase and storing,
and who is untouched by any indulgences, he alone is a bhikshu
[monk] (10. 16).24

According to the rules of aparigraha Jain monks and nuns are

only allowed a certain prescribed set of necessary possessions, they
should not feel any attachment to these possessions, they should
not accumulate anything beyond the prescribed possessions, and
the laity should give only food and other necessities directly to
renouncers. There are many rules from the earliest Jain texts about
the very few articles of clothing and other requisites monks and
nuns were allowed to use, which limited both the quantity and
quality of those articles. These rules are largely still followed today.25
For example, an earlier Svetambara text, the Acaranga Sutra (2),
contains a long list of rules concerning proper clothing for renouncers,
including lists of clothing that renouncers are proscribed from
accepting, such as beautifully designed or expensive cloth.26 The
Svetambara Nistha Sutra (18. 2164) states that renouncers should
not buy clothes themselves nor ask someone else to do so.27 The
Svetambara Dasavaikalika Sutra (6. 20) states that an alms-bowl
(patra), soft broom (rajoharana) to brush insects away unharmed,
and blanket are allowed to renouncers.28 Later Svetambara
commentaries (starting in the seventh century CE) add more allowable
articles so that renouncers could have between two and twelve or
fourteen. These requisites included such items as a cloth to cover and
clean bowls/pots, a sheet to cover the blanket, a stick to clean mud
from the feet during the rainy season, a cloth to cover the mouth
(muhpatt), and a tall stick (danda) for walking.29 Early Digambara
texts list the requisites for naked Digambara monks as only the
peacock feather broom (picchika) to brush insects to safety and a
pot/gourd (kamandalu) of water for cleansing.30 However, by the
Anagaracarmamrta in the thirteenth century,
time of Asadharas
texts also sometimes included seat (vrs) and religious books.31
Generally, Jain monks and nuns still only have the items
32
prescribed by the above texts. However, Svetambara renouncers
24 JAINISM

may also temporarily borrow other items they might need from the
laity such as books, clocks, and pens;33 and the Digambara laity
allows monks materials for writing books.34 So while the rules for
Buddhist renouncers were being changed to allow for property,
wealth, and business dealings around the fourth to sixth centuries
CE, rules for Jain renouncers during that same time and later
remained strict and were relaxed very little.
Another difference between Buddhist and Jain orders concerns
non-possession as it relates to food. While sedentary orders of
Buddhist monks in India had enough funds to feed themselves, Jain
renouncers have never been allowed to store food with which to
cook meals, nor been allowed to cook food themselves. Instead,
they were required to go on daily alms collections, and this is still
one of the main ways Jain renouncers maintain ties with the laity.
The earliest and later Svetambara sutras (such as the Acaranga,
Sutrakrtanga, Uttaradhyayana, Kalpa, Dasavaikalika, Brhatkalpa
bhasya) show a continuing inclusion of strict rules, which are still

adhered to today, for obtaining food from householders. These
include not being able to accept food specially prepared or purchased
for renouncers, not accepting food from a king, not accepting food
from a householder giving them lodging, taking only small amounts
of food from several (as opposed to one or two) houses in order not
to cause hardship to any household, and not storing food obtained
this way for later consumption.35 Digambara renouncers rite of
obtaining food is different. The laity invites them to their homes
where laywomen have already prepared a meal that they will feed
them should they accept their invitation,36 or renouncers go out to
search for a proper meal with the laity calling invitations to their
homes along the way.37 However, Digambara monks and nuns still
eat only once a day in the morning and are limited in how much
food they may eat.

The narrative of Mahgiri and Suhastin

Canto eleven of The Lives of the Jain Elders, written by the
Svetambara monk Hemacandra (10891172), contains a narrative
critique of laxity related to what Jain renouncers are allowed, and
not allowed, to accept from the laity. This story is about two monk
leaders and preachers, Mahagiri and Suhastin, as well as the King
 WHY JAINISM SURVIVES: JAIN SECTS AND SUB-SECTS 25

Samprati.38 As Mahagiri and Suhastin wandered from place to place

they eventually came to the city of Patalputra where there lived a
merchant named Vasubhuti. Suhastin had previously converted
Vasubhuti to Jainism and so Vasubhuti invited Suhastin to come to
his home in order to teach his kinsfolk Jainism as well. While
Suhastin was there, Mahagiri arrived and Suhastin bowed to him.

The merchant exclaimed, Who is this man who has come here
and is welcomed by you with such respect? Is he senior to you?
Suhastin said, Merchant, he is certainly senior to me. He only
accepts as alms leftover food and drink.
If such food is not offered to him, then he fasts. Even the dust
on his feet should be welcomed with honour and treated with
respect.
(Verses 1214)

When Mahagiri later went to Vasubhutis relatives for alms, he

discerned that the food they offered him had been saved specifically
for him and so he therefore could not accept it. Confronting
Suhastin he said,

You have acted contrary to the rules of monastic conduct and

have committed a great misdeed, for, acting on your instruction
they set aside food especially for me.
Grovelling at the honourable Mahagiris feet, Suhastin begged
forgiveness, repeatedly promising that he would not do it again.
(Verses 2122)

Not long afterward Mahagiri and Suhastin left for Avanti to

attend a religious ceremony. King Samprati was also in attendance,
and when he caught sight of Suhastin he fainted. When the king was
revived he remembered Suhastin from a previous life in which King
Samprati had been a starving beggar whom Suhastin had initiated as
a Jain monk. He realized that the karmic consequence of his previous
initiation was that he had been reborn as a king in his current life,
and so King Samprati thereafter became a devoted Jain layman
focused on acts of charity and the support of the Jain religion.
The king made arrangements to provide for monks by telling his
vassals to use their wealth to serve Jain monks, rather than to
continue offering it to him. He told those in barbarian countries
26 JAINISM

who paid him taxes to pay them instead to Jain monks by giving
them alms. He told the kitchen staff, who provided food to the
poor, to give any left-over food to monks. And he told merchants,
who sold food and clothes, that he would reimburse them if they
gave their merchandise to Jain ascetics. However, the rules of
aparigraha forbade Jain renouncers from accepting such largess.

But the honourable Suhastin, despite knowing that there was

fault in the kings action permitted it through affection for his
pupils, his intelligence polluted by power.
Then the honourable Mahagiri said to Suhastin, Why have
you accepted food from the king, although you knew that such
was not to be accepted.
Suhastin said, Reverend sir, the subjects do the same as the
king. For intent on obliging the king, the citizens also make gifts.
Honourable Mahagiri cried angrily, This is a deception! May
your sin be forgiven. Henceforth, we two will go our separate
ways.
It is good for monks who follow the path of right conduct to
associate together, but you have transgressed the path, since you
have broken the rules of right conduct.
Trembling with fear like a child, Suhastin bowed before
honourable Mahagiri in worship, his hands folded in respectful
supplication. He said:
I have done wrong. I have acted very badly through my lack
of insight. Forgive my offence. I shall not do the same thing
again.
Mahagiri said, Perhaps you are not at fault. For the reverend
Lord Mahavra previously prophesied:
After the passing of Sthulabhadra from the line of pupillary
succession begun by me, the previous excellent conduct of Jain
monks will begin to deteriorate.39
After Sthulabhadra, we two became the leaders of the monastic
order, so his prophecy has been fulfilled by you.
(Verses 113122)

Mahagiri and Suhastin then went their separate ways. Some time
after this they both eventually fasted to death and were reborn in
one of the heavens, and King Samprati faithfully followed the vows
of a layman so that he was reborn as god after he died.
 WHY JAINISM SURVIVES: JAIN SECTS AND SUB-SECTS 27

Aparigraha: Itinerancy in the vetmbara and

Digambara sects
The practices of poverty and alms collection are less likely to be
preserved if renouncers become sedentary, as was the case in Indian
Buddhism. In Jainism, itinerancy is part of the vow of aparigraha
(as non-attachment) so that renouncers do not become attached to
a particular place. The tradition of itinerancy, except during
caturmas (the four month rainy season retreat),40 originally
practiced by Jina Mahavra according to the Kalpa (1.5.119), is still
preserved today from earlier periods of Jainism. This is attested to
by passages in the earliest Svetambara texts such as the Vipaka
Sutra and Acaranga Sutra (200 bce);41 the somewhat later
Chedasutras such as the Brhatkalpa, Vyavahara, and Nistha;42 and
the medieval Brhatkalpa bh asya.43 It is also attested to in Digambara

texts such as Mulacara.44
Although the tradition of itinerancy was preserved, it was altered
somewhat. In Svetambara texts, the earlier Acaranga Sutra specifies
that renouncers should stay in a village for only one night and a
town for only five nights, while the later Dasavaikalika Sutra
(second Addendum: 11) allows renouncers to stay as long as one
month in one place, and the later Brhatkalpa allows monks to stay
two months (1. 67) and nuns to stay four months (1. 11) in certain
places under certain circumstances.45 Likewise, the Digambara
Mulacara (second century CE) also specifies one day in a village and
five days in a town generally, but also seems to allow for a one-
month stay as well.46 The later Digambara Anagaracarmamrta
(thirteenth century CE) indicates that the normal period to stay in
one place during itinerancy was one month,47 but also prescribes
harsh penance to renouncers who stay at a residence to which they
are attached.48 Various scholars report that renouncers of different
sects and sub-sects still follow the rules of itinerancy today, staying
between a few days and a month at one place.49 Although there was
a slight relaxing of itinerancy in the medieval period, in allowing
one-month stays, it was nonetheless preserved as an important
practice.50
However, if Jain renouncers had not remained itinerant I believe
the temptation for some lay Jains to give larger and larger donations,
out of devotion and for religious merit, would have been too great.
Giving to renouncers is perhaps the most desirable religious act to
28 JAINISM

the laity. Laidlaw (1995, 327) reports that renouncers are only
allowed to receive food from the laity when they stay in one place
during the four-month rainy season retreat, and so the possibility of
giving inappropriate gifts to renouncers while they are temporarily
sedentary is curtailed by this rule. However, the temptation to give
monks and nuns inappropriate gifts is still particularly strong at
this time. Although there are many pious lay Jains who insist on the
continued asceticism of monks and nuns, I have occasionally
witnessed the giving of inappropriate gifts. For example, in one
town a generous layperson had installed an air-conditioner in one
of the rooms of the nuns temporary residence. This was
understandable because it was the most sweltering hot season in
years and the nuns were becoming ill frequently from the heat, but
the giving, acceptance, and/or use of such a gift is prohibited in
Jainism. In the end it did not matter, however, because these nuns
could not take the air-conditioner with them when they left to
resume their itinerancy. If they had stayed there permanently, I
could imagine some laypeople attempting to make them more and
more comfortable, which could have eventually led to a more
luxurious residence.

Laxity and reform

Although itinerancy and non-possession have been preserved in
Jainism, there have also been sedentary renouncers for periods of
Jainisms history, indicating that Jainism could have gone the way
of Indian Buddhism. Dundas (19878, 190) argues that the Nistha
bhasya (third to fourth century CE) and its commentary or curni

(seventh century CE) opened the door for sedentary renunciation in
Jainism. The former gives some exceptions to wandering (such as a
famine, danger, or illness), and the latter states that renouncers may
remain sedentary for study. Indeed, the medieval period of Jainism
saw both laxity and reforms of this laxity.
For example, in the late medieval period until the mid-nineteenth
century there were a number51 of Svetambara-Murtipujak yatis
and srpujyas who displaced traditional Jain renouncers, engaged
in business, owned property, and were often wealthy.52 From
the thirteenth centuries onward there were also a number53
of Digambara bhattaraks who also displaced traditional monks,

 WHY JAINISM SURVIVES: JAIN SECTS AND SUB-SECTS 29

administered wealth and land, were the heads of monasteries,

and collected and preserved manuscripts.54 From the ninth through
eleventh centuries there were Digambara kuratti adigal s in Tamil
Nadu, who were learned and sedentary female teachers and who
had the funds and land to donate for images and to support
nunneries.55 Furthermore, inscriptions indicate that Jain monks
were sometimes given land by patrons.56 For example, there is
epigraphic evidence that a king granted some land for the purpose
of feeding Jain renouncers, and evidence that a particular monk
was granted an entire village for healing a prince.57
However, there have been repeated reforms of laxity in
Jainism from the medieval period through to more recent history.58
Reforms during the medieval period of Svetambara Jainism in
particular, while not completely eliminating laxity among all Jain
renouncers, were nonetheless significant in preserving traditional
austerity. So although there is historical evidence of laxity, there is
also much evidence of reform. First, Svetambara commentaries
indicate that the laity acted to correct lax monks during the
medieval period.59 Second, there is evidence in medieval epigraphs
of monks correcting the lax behavior of other monks, including
the dismissal of lax monks and the creation of new reformatory
rules.60 Third, there is a record from 1242 that the four-fold
community of Jain monks, nuns, laymen, and laywomen was
convened in the capital of Gujarat and issued edicts to stop the
sedentary renunciation of caityavasins (sedentary temple-dwelling
renouncers), although some sedentary renunciation continued
anyway.61 Fourth, during the supposed disappearance of Digambara
monks around three hundred years ago, some had actually
secretly retreated to the forest in order to preserve the strictness of
their practice.62 Fifth, a Digambara laymen in the seventeenth
century, Banarasidas, led the reform movement against the
bhattaraks.63 Sixth, in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries
Sveta mbara-Murtipujak itinerant renouncers and laity largely
eliminated yatis and srpujyas for their laxity and wealth.64 Seventh,
the Digambara tradition of naked monks experienced a revival
during the early twentieth century.65 Finally, various Svetambara-
Murtipujak gacchs and Svetambara sub-sects were created in part
to reform laxity.
30 JAINISM

The formation of vetmbar-Mrtipjak gacchs:

The legend of the Monk Jinevarasri
From the twelfth to sixteenth centuries Svetambara-Murtipujak
gacchs were formed to correct lax conduct.66 In particular the
founders of the Acal Gacch and the Kharatar Gacch criticized the
caityavasins for not being itinerant, and Kharatar Gacch monks
were able to virtually eliminate these caityavasins. Jagaccandrasuri,
the founder of the Tapa Gacch (the largest group of Jains today),
criticized the laxity of other Jain renouncers.67 Indeed the gacchs
name derives from the term tapa (austere practice) that
Jagaccandrasuri emphasized. And there were further reforms to
correct developing Tapa Gacch laxity up until the seventeenth
century.68
The hagiography of the monk Jines varasuri is one Jain narrative
concerning the formation of different Murtipujak gacchs in order
to reform laxity, and more specifically concerning the formation the
Kharatar Gacch. The word kharatar means formidable or fierce,
and the Kharatar Gacch was so named because of Jines varasuris
formidability in debate. Jines varasuri officially received this title of
formidable in 1024 CE from a king who hosted a debate between
Jines varasuri and caityavasi (temple-dwelling) renouncers who
argued that they should be able to own property and reside in
temples.
However, the narrative about this debate does not begin with
Jines varasuri, but instead with his teacher, the monk Vardhamana.69
Vardhamana was originally the student of a monk named
Jinacandra. As Vardhamana studied Jain doctrine he was disturbed
to learn that the act of renouncers living permanently in monasteries,
as was his teachers practice, was contrary to Jain scriptures. After
asking his teachers permission, he and a few other monks left in
order to start practicing itinerancy themselves.
Soon after this Vardhamana met the scholar and monk
Jines varasuri, who asked Vardhamana to accompany him to
Gujarat where the Jain monks resided in monasteries. When they
reached the city of Anahilapattana in Gujarat, they could not find a
Jain household to provide them
lodging, and so Jines varasuri
secured a place for them to stay in the mansion of the priest
employed by King Durlabh. Word spread in the city that these
visiting monks believed that Jain renouncers should not permanently
 WHY JAINISM SURVIVES: JAIN SECTS AND SUB-SECTS 31

reside in any one abode, and the local Jain monks (who lived
permanently in monasteries) became alarmed and challenged them
to a debate in front of the king.
The local temple-dwelling monks arrived at court first, took their
seats, and then accepted the betel (a mild stimulant) the king offered
them to chew. However, when Vardhamana, Jines varasuri, and their
fellow monks arrived next, Vardhamana declined the kings betel as
unsuitable for renouncers and announced that Jines varasuri would
be the one to debate Suracarya of the temple-dwelling monks.
Suracarya opened the debate by referring to a recently written
philosophical text and by stating that those who lodge temporarily
with laypeople are not those of the accepted religions, including
Jainism. Jines varasuri then asked the king if he ruled by the ancient
traditions of his ancestors, to which the king answered affirmatively.
He then asked the king if he would therefore send for the ancient
scriptures in Suracaryas monastery so that he could refer to them in
the debate.
After the kings men brought the texts into the assembly,
Jines varasuri spotted the Dasavaikalika and read from it, A monk
should live in a dwelling that has not been made exclusively for his
own use, that has a place for him to ease his bodily needs, and that
is not frequented by women, eunuchs and beasts (8.51). This verse,
Jines varasuri explained, proscribes living in a monastery or temple.
King Durlabh was impressed and so asked Jines varasuri to be his
teacher. However, when the king attempted to honor him by offering
him a throne of jewels, Jines varasuri replied,

If a monk adorns his body he will surely break his vows. O Best
of Kings! And he will be a laughing stock among the people. He
will get attached to such things and too much accustomed to
comfort. It is not right for someone who desires release to make
use of thrones and such things.

Jines varasuri and his fellow monks had now made enemies of
the temple-dwelling monks and their supporters, and so King
Durlabh offered them a safe place to stay and also food to eat. To
the latter offer Jines varasuri replied that it is forbidden for Jain
renouncers to accept food from a king, and so the king assigned a
soldier to protect them when they went out to collect alms. The
temple-dwelling monks then sent gifts to the queen (to whom King
32 JAINISM

Durlabh was devoted) to gain her support, but this plot failed. Next
they threatened to leave the city if the king did not withdraw his
support from Jines varasuri and his fellow monks, but the king
remained steadfast in his support. Thereafter, Vardhamana was held
in high honor by the king, and he and his monks wandered freely
from place to place in King Durlabhs kingdom. Eventually the time
finally came when Vardhamana handed over his disciples to
Jines varasuri, and fasted to death to be reborn as a god.

The formation of the vetmbara-Sthnakavs

and Terpanth sub-sects: The legend of
crya Bhiks

There are also similar narratives about reforming laxity connected to
the founding of the Svetambara-Sthanakavas and Terapanth sub-
sects of the Svetambara sects. These two sub-sects were formed in the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries respectively in part to encourage
stricter practices.70 The Sthanakavas sub-sect emerged out of the
Murtipujak Lonka Gacch, which was formed in 1471 by the Jain
layman Lonka Sah (ca. 14151489).71 Lonka Sah led a movement
against two practices he criticized as inappropriate innovations: (1)
the Murtipujak practice of using images in temple worship and (2)
sedentary monasticism. Lonka Sah was murdered by sectarian
adversaries, and eventually laxity and worship using temple images
reasserted themselves within the Lonka Gacch. Therefore, two Lonka
Gacch monks (Lav and Dharmasinha) created the Sthanakavas sub-
sect in 1644 in order to return to stricter practices.
The Terapanth sub-sect was founded by Acarya Bhiksu, who was
born in Marwar Rajasthan in 1726 and became a Sth anakavas
monk. He eventually criticized the laxity of his fellow monks, which
included living permanently in buildings constructed for them
(rather than remaining itinerant), going to the same households
repeatedly for food (rather than taking only a little from many
different households), and handling money (rather than adhering to
the vow of non-possession that forbade this).
The hagiography of Acarya Bhiksus eventual creation of his own
sub-sect starts when he is a Stha nakavas monk under Acarya
Raghunatha.72 At that time, the Jain laypeople in the town of
 WHY JAINISM SURVIVES: JAIN SECTS AND SUB-SECTS 33

Rajanagar decided they would refuse to give alms to Sthanakavas

monks until their lax conduct was corrected. Therefore, Acarya
Raghunatha told Bhiksu to spend the rainy season retreat there in
order to persuade them to once again support the monks. Once
there, Bhiksu learned that the monks these laypeople alleged were

lax were indeed so, but did not know what to do about this situation.
The conflict in his mind between Acarya Raghunathas instructions
and the laxity of these monks resulted in his falling seriously ill.
However, when he finally resolved to study the ancient texts in
order to understand proper practice, his illness went away. After
spending the rainy season retreat concentrating on this study, he
told the laypeople of Rajanagar that he would present his findings
to his guru Acarya Raghunatha who then might resolve the situation.
However, Raghunatha disagreed with Bhiksus findings. During
one debate between them, Raghunatha argued that because they
were in a degenerate world-age, enlightenment was possible even if
someone maintained correct practice as a renouncer for only as
little as an hour. Bhiksu rebuked that if that were all that was
necessary to achieve mok sa then he would hold his breath for an
hour. Even though Bhiksupassed two years attempting to convince

his guru to eliminate laxity, Raghunatha remained intransigent. So,
in 1759, Bhiksu and twelve other like-minded monks broke away

from Acarya Raghun athas order so that they would be able to
adhere to the rules prescribing poverty and wandering. Raghunatha
responded to this rebellion by spreading rumors that would dissuade
laypeople from supporting them. Despite the difficulties this caused,
this new Terapanth sub-sect soon grew and gained support.73

Conclusion: Innovations and laxity

Although there are important differences between Jain sects, sub-
sects, and other sub-groupings, these differences are not as
pronounced as those found between different schools of Buddhism
in various countries. This is partly because Jainism did not spread
beyond India (necessitating adaption to foreign cultures) as
Buddhism did, and also partly because Jain schisms were motivated
by the desire to reject practices that were criticized as lax innovations
in order to return to traditional ascetic practices such as poverty
and wandering.
34 JAINISM

However, all innovations have not always been rejected; the

creation of different sects, sub-sects, and other groups are innovations
that survive to this day. Furthermore, recent changes in different
Jain communities have also been accepted or rejected based on
whether or not they are considered lax. For example, some recent
innovations have been accepted in the Terapanth sub-sect. A unique
feature of this sub-sect is that there is only one acarya at a time who
is able to dictate the entire sub-sects development, including any
changes he sees fit.74 The ninth acarya, Acarya Tuls (19141997),
made changes to improve the lives of women, and this was accepted
by his community. Also, in 1980 Acarya Tuls introduced a lesser (or
intermediary) type of renouncer called samans (m) and samans (f)

who are allowed to travel in vehicles, handle money,
live permanently
in one place, and accept food specially prepared for them. This new
type of lesser renouncer was created specifically for missionary
reasons, because full renouncers cannot travel abroad to teach
Jainism to laypeople living outside of India. However, most
Terapanth monks and nuns are still full-fledged renouncers for
whom the above allowances are strictly prohibited, and so the
Terapanth community did not reject this innovation as laxity. And
although the samans and samans are not meant to be full renouncers,
they are nonetheless not allowed to accumulate possessions, so it is
difficult to equate them with the lax renouncers in Jainisms past.75
However, other modern innovations in the Sthanakvas-
Vrayatan sampraday have not been accepted by most Jains. The
first female acarya in Jain history, Acarya Candana, oversaw these
innovations.76 Vrayatan renouncers travel in vehicles and are
sedentary instead of itinerant. Furthermore, her community in Bihar
is purposed toward mitigating the effects of local poverty by
providing vitamins, food, free medical care and operations, and
other services. Most Jain laypeople expect renouncers to be itinerant
as well as to be detached from the world and the people in it; and
most Jain laypeople consider it only suitable for laity to be engaged
in charity at one locality. So although there are Jains who support
the Vrayatan community and these innovations, other Jains criticize
these practices as forms of laxity and violations of the rules of
renunciation. It is largely for this reason that Acarya Candanas
becoming the first female Jain acarya has not led the way for other
women to become acaryas in other communities of Jain renouncers.