The Buddha and his contemporaries
1) His contemporaries
1. At the time when Gautama took initiation, there was great mental upheaval in the country. Apart from Brahminical philosophy, there were some sixty-two other philosophical schools. All of them were against Brahmin philosophy. At least six of them were noticeable.
2. The name of the head of one of these philosophical-traditions was Purna-Kashyapa. His opinion was called Akriya-vaad. It was established that 'karma' has no effect on 'soul' in any way. Whether someone does any work or gets it done. Whether someone kills someone himself or gets them killed. Either one himself steals and commits robbery, or he can get someone else to do it. Whether one himself tells a lie, or he calls someone. Nothing has any effect on the 'soul'. No matter how heinous an act may be, it does not indulge the 'soul' with sin. No matter how good a work is, it does not enrich the soul with virtue. There is no 'action' on the soul. When a man dies, all the elements of his body merge with the original elements from which his body is made. Nothing remains after death, neither the body nor the soul.
3. The name of another school of thought was fatalism. The name of its main preacher was Makkhali Gosal. His opinion was a kind of 'pre-determinism'. He was of the opinion that neither one can do anything nor can stop it from happening. Incidents happen. One cannot voluntarily reduce those events. No one can remove sorrow and no one can increase or decrease it. Whatever is about to happen in the world on man, it keeps on happening.
4. The third school was called Uchchhadvad. Its main preacher was Ajit Kes Kambal. His creed was a kind of total-nihilism. His teaching was that all Yagya and Homa are useless. There are no fruits of Karma which the soul can enjoy or it has to suffer. There is neither a 'heaven' nor a 'hell'. Man is made of some elements of suffering. The 'soul' cannot escape from it. No matter how much pain there is in the world, no matter how much sorrow there is, there is no relief for the 'soul' in any other way than that. This pain or sorrow will automatically end. 8400000 species of 'soul' will have to be adopted. Only then will the sufferings and sorrows of the 'soul' end, not before that.
5. The fourth opinion was called Anyonya-Baad. The name of the head of this opinion was Pakudh Kachhayan. His teaching was that the creature is created from seven elements - earth, water, fire, air, happiness, sorrow and soul. Each element is independent of each other. One doesn't affect the other. They are complete in themselves and they are all eternal. They cannot be destroyed in any way. If a man cuts off someone's head, it is not 'killing'. It is just that the scriptures have entered the seven elements.
6. Sanjaybeltathiputra had a personal philosophical opinion of his own. This was called 'distraction'. This was skepticism of the ultimate order. His logic was, if someone asks me if there is a heaven, and if I believe that there is, I will say yes. If I feel that there is no heaven, then I will say that there is no. If someone asks me whether men are made, whether a man has to suffer the fruits of good and bad deeds, whether there is a 'soul' after death, I will answer in the negative, because I do not think it is. Sanjay's logic used to be something like this.
7. The sixth philosophical school was called Chaturyamansvar-vada. The founder or chief teacher of this school was alive when Gautam was engaged in the search for light. The name of the Acharya was Mahavira, the one who was called Niganthanatha Putta. Mahavir's teaching was that the 'soul' has to take 'rebirth' only as a result of the deeds of its previous births and the deeds of this birth. That's why he said that past deeds should be destroyed by penance. In order to prevent the occurrence of bad deeds, Mahavir preached Chaturyaam Dharma, that is, to follow the four principles-
1) not to commit violence, 2) not to steal,
3) Not telling lies, 4) Keeping abstinence and observing celibacy vow.
2. His view of his contemporaries
1. Buddha did not accept the views of these new philosophers.
2. The Buddha's rejection of his teachings was justified.
3. If the principles of Purna Kashyap or Pakudh Kachayan are accepted as true, then man can do any evil, can harm anyone; One man can kill another without accepting any social responsibility or without considering any social consequences.
4. If Makkhali Gosal's principle is accepted, then man becomes a toy in the hands of fate. Man cannot cut his bonds in any way.
5. If the theory of Ajit Kes Kambal is considered correct, then there is nothing left for a man to do except eat, drink and have fun.
6. If Sanjaya Beltathiputta's theory is correct, then man's life will become aimless, just like floating on water.
7. If Niganthanathaputta's theory is correct, then man's life will be subject to suffering and austerity - the complete eradication of man's desires and natural instincts.
8. That's why Buddha did not like even a single opinion of those philosophers. It seemed to him that these were the thoughts of men who were either pessimistic, or helpless, or downright indifferent to any outcome, good or bad. That's why they kept the hope of getting light from somewhere else. The Buddha and his contemporaries
1. At the time when Gautama took initiation, there was great mental upheaval in the country. Apart from Brahminical philosophy, there were some sixty-two other philosophical schools. All of them were against Brahmin philosophy. At least six of them were noticeable.
2. The name of the head of one of these philosophical-traditions was Purna-Kashyapa. His opinion was called Akriya-vaad. It was established that 'karma' has no effect on 'soul' in any way. Whether someone does any work or gets it done. Whether someone kills someone himself or gets them killed. Either one himself steals and commits robbery, or he can get someone else to do it. Whether one himself tells a lie, or he calls someone. Nothing has any effect on the 'soul'. No matter how heinous an act may be, it does not indulge the 'soul' with sin. No matter how good a work is, it does not enrich the soul with virtue. There is no 'action' on the soul. When a man dies, all the elements of his body merge with the original elements from which his body is made. Nothing remains after death, neither the body nor the soul.
3. The name of another school of thought was fatalism. The name of its main preacher was Makkhali Gosal. His opinion was a kind of 'pre-determinism'. He was of the opinion that neither one can do anything nor can stop it from happening. Incidents happen. One cannot voluntarily reduce those events. No one can remove sorrow and no one can increase or decrease it. Whatever is about to happen in the world on man, it keeps on happening.
4. The third school was called Uchchhadvad. Its main preacher was Ajit Kes Kambal. His creed was a kind of total-nihilism. His teaching was that all Yagya and Homa are useless. There are no fruits of Karma which the soul can enjoy or it has to suffer. There is neither a 'heaven' nor a 'hell'. Man is made of some elements of suffering. The 'soul' cannot escape from it. No matter how much pain there is in the world, no matter how much sorrow there is, there is no relief for the 'soul' in any other way than that. This pain or sorrow will automatically end. 8400000 species of 'soul' will have to be adopted. Only then will the sufferings and sorrows of the 'soul' end, not before that.
5. The fourth opinion was called Anyonya-Baad. The name of the head of this opinion was Pakudh Kachhayan. His teaching was that the creature is created from seven elements - earth, water, fire, air, happiness, sorrow and soul. Each element is independent of each other. One doesn't affect the other. They are complete in themselves and they are all eternal. They cannot be destroyed in any way. If a man cuts off someone's head, it is not 'killing'. It is just that the scriptures have entered the seven elements.
6. Sanjaybeltathiputra had a personal philosophical opinion of his own. This was called 'distraction'. This was skepticism of the ultimate order. His logic was, if someone asks me if there is a heaven, and if I believe that there is, I will say yes. If I feel that there is no heaven, then I will say that there is no. If someone asks me whether men are made, whether a man has to suffer the fruits of good and bad deeds, whether there is a 'soul' after death, I will answer in the negative, because I do not think it is. Sanjay's logic used to be something like this.
7. The sixth philosophical school was called Chaturyamansvar-vada. The founder or chief teacher of this school was alive when Gautam was engaged in the search for light. The name of the Acharya was Mahavira, the one who was called Niganthanatha Putta. Mahavir's teaching was that the 'soul' has to take 'rebirth' only as a result of the deeds of its previous births and the deeds of this birth. That's why he said that past deeds should be destroyed by penance. In order to prevent the occurrence of bad deeds, Mahavir preached Chaturyaam Dharma, that is, to follow the four principles-
1) not to commit violence, 2) not to steal,
3) Not telling lies, 4) Keeping abstinence and observing celibacy vow.
2. His view of his contemporaries
1. Buddha did not accept the views of these new philosophers.
2. The Buddha's rejection of his teachings was justified.
3. If the principles of Purna Kashyap or Pakudh Kachayan are accepted as true, then man can do any evil, can harm anyone; One man can kill another without accepting any social responsibility or without considering any social consequences.
4. If Makkhali Gosal's principle is accepted, then man becomes a toy in the hands of fate. Man cannot cut his bonds in any way.
5. If the theory of Ajit Kes Kambal is considered correct, then there is nothing left for a man to do except eat, drink and have fun.
6. If Sanjaya Beltathiputta's theory is correct, then man's life will become aimless, just like floating on water.
7. If Niganthanathaputta's theory is correct, then man's life will be subject to suffering and austerity - the complete eradication of man's desires and natural instincts.
8. That's why Buddha did not like even a single opinion of those philosophers. It seemed to him that these were the thoughts of men who were either pessimistic, or helpless, or downright indifferent to any outcome, good or bad. That's why they kept the hope of getting light from somewhere else. The Buddha and his contemporaries