Refuting Piotr Balcerowicz for his conclusions on Ajivikas
The speaker, Piotr Balcerowicz, provides a historical analysis of the origins of Jaina logic and epistemology, emphasizing the significant influence of the Ajivika tradition. Though I completely disagree with his analysis as a cheap attempt to smear Mahavira just to make his own research relevant, I appreciate his attempt to study history deeply.
I'd like to refute his key assertions including:
Early Jaina texts demonstrate a surprising lack of interest in formal logic and epistemology compared to later periods.
→ Prof. Balcerowicz's conclusions seem to be based on only a few ancient texts and he appears to have excluded others.
The Ajivika tradition, particularly its founder Makkhali Gosala, played a crucial role in shaping early Jaina practices and doctrines.
→ Prof. Balcerowicz contradicts himself by overstating Gosala's influence on Jain practices. While it is true that Gosala was part of Mahavira's Sangha and was defended by Mahavira on several occasions, it is a questionable claim to suggest that Gosala shaped Jaina practices and doctrines. All scholars contribute to the literature, but the assertion of Gosala's profound influence is not supported by evidence.
Historical accounts suggest that Makkhali Gosala was likely Mahavira's teacher for several years, rather than just a wayward disciple.
→ This is pure speculation by Prof. Balcerowicz. Mahavira was omniscient (whereas Gosala and Buddha were not). Mahavira delivered the Sammosaran (a key teaching), which further refutes the claim that Gosala had such a formative role.
Mahavira renounced the world at age 30, practiced intense asceticism for 12.5 years, attained omniscience (Kevala Jnana) around age 42, preached for 30 years, and attained Nirvana (liberation) at age 72, becoming a Siddha and ending the cycle of rebirth. He guided many toward liberation through his teachings on non-violence (Ahimsa) and self-control.
Mahavira's Sangha included 14,000 ascetics (Muni/Sadhus), 36,000 Aryika/Sadhvis, and over 477,000 lay followers (including 159,000 laymen [Sravakas] and 318,000 laywomen [Sravikas]). Mahavira followed the Fourfold Order (Sadhu, Sadhvi, Shravak, Shravika). His Ganadharas, who could understand Mahavira's sermons and spread his teachings to the lay followers, were:
Indrabhuti Gautama
Agnibhuti
Vayubhuti
Akampita
Arya Vyakta
Sudharman
Manditaputra (or Mandita)
Mauryaputra (or Mauryaputta)
Acalabhraataa (or Achalbhrata)
Metraya (or Metreya Kaundinya)
Prabhasa (or Prabhava)
Jaina texts make no reference to Makkhali Gosala, and only one Buddhist text mentions him. Yet, Prof. Balcerowicz seems to be speculating his own theories here.
Core Jaina ascetic practices, such as total nudity and eating directly from the palms, were likely adopted from the Ajivikas.
The Jaina concept of leshya (soul colorings) appears to be derived from the Ajivika doctrine of six abhijati.
→ Prof. Balcerowicz is mistaken here. Leshya has a karmic interpretation and is not related to abhijati, which is assigned at birth. Leshya refers to the subtle "coloring" or mental state of the soul, determined by a person's thoughts, intentions, and actions. It reflects the individual's karmic condition, ranging from inauspicious (darker) to auspicious (lighter). There are six types of Leshyas, from dark (Krishna/Black, Neel/Blue, Kapot/Grey) to light (Tejo/Red, Padma/Yellow, Shukla/White), representing a spiritual gradient that influences one's karma and future rebirths (whether in the mundane world, heavens, or hell). Prof. Balcerowicz loosely links Leshya to abhijati without proper research.
Despite Mahavira's initial rejection, divination and fortune-telling practices from the Ajivika tradition eventually integrated into Jaina literature.
Mahavira himself was omniscient, with complete knowledge. Astrology had been part of Indian Vedic scriptures long before Mahavira. Prof. Balcerowicz did not do enough research before making these unfounded assertions.
The early canons of both Jainism and the Ajivikas shared a common structural origin and were both referred to as Purvas.
Perspectivism in Jainism originated from a tripartite logical scheme known as Trairashika, which was characteristic of the Ajivikas.
→ Prof. Balcerowicz's claim here seems fabricated.
The Jaina categorization of souls as either capable (bhavya) or incapable (abhavya) of liberation is a legacy of Ajivika determinism.
→ This is another baseless assertion. I will address this in future discussions.
The Jaina practice of Sallekhana (fasting to death) may have evolved from Ajivika rituals involving death by dehydration.
Jaina logic was not born from abstract philosophy but from ethical inquiries into the correct application of non-harming (ahimsa).
Prof. Balcerowicz should study the teachings of the first Tirthankara, Adinath, and his follower, Marichi, who had distinct views on various subjects. Adinath is also known as Shiva in Hindu tradition, and his teachings successfully initiated a new variation of philosophy called Hinduism.
Similarly, Gautama Buddha, unable to follow Parshva's path of enlightenment, founded Buddhism, which gained wider adaptation largely due to Ashoka's patronage. Gosala also attempted to establish his own sect, but Ashoka's actions—specifically the impalement of 18,000 Nirgranthas (Ajivikas)—led to the birth of the Svetambara sect in Jainism, where followers wore clothes.
I'd like to refute his key assertions including:
Early Jaina texts demonstrate a surprising lack of interest in formal logic and epistemology compared to later periods.
→ Prof. Balcerowicz's conclusions seem to be based on only a few ancient texts and he appears to have excluded others.
The Ajivika tradition, particularly its founder Makkhali Gosala, played a crucial role in shaping early Jaina practices and doctrines.
→ Prof. Balcerowicz contradicts himself by overstating Gosala's influence on Jain practices. While it is true that Gosala was part of Mahavira's Sangha and was defended by Mahavira on several occasions, it is a questionable claim to suggest that Gosala shaped Jaina practices and doctrines. All scholars contribute to the literature, but the assertion of Gosala's profound influence is not supported by evidence.
Historical accounts suggest that Makkhali Gosala was likely Mahavira's teacher for several years, rather than just a wayward disciple.
→ This is pure speculation by Prof. Balcerowicz. Mahavira was omniscient (whereas Gosala and Buddha were not). Mahavira delivered the Sammosaran (a key teaching), which further refutes the claim that Gosala had such a formative role.
Mahavira renounced the world at age 30, practiced intense asceticism for 12.5 years, attained omniscience (Kevala Jnana) around age 42, preached for 30 years, and attained Nirvana (liberation) at age 72, becoming a Siddha and ending the cycle of rebirth. He guided many toward liberation through his teachings on non-violence (Ahimsa) and self-control.
Mahavira's Sangha included 14,000 ascetics (Muni/Sadhus), 36,000 Aryika/Sadhvis, and over 477,000 lay followers (including 159,000 laymen [Sravakas] and 318,000 laywomen [Sravikas]). Mahavira followed the Fourfold Order (Sadhu, Sadhvi, Shravak, Shravika). His Ganadharas, who could understand Mahavira's sermons and spread his teachings to the lay followers, were:
Indrabhuti Gautama
Agnibhuti
Vayubhuti
Akampita
Arya Vyakta
Sudharman
Manditaputra (or Mandita)
Mauryaputra (or Mauryaputta)
Acalabhraataa (or Achalbhrata)
Metraya (or Metreya Kaundinya)
Prabhasa (or Prabhava)
Jaina texts make no reference to Makkhali Gosala, and only one Buddhist text mentions him. Yet, Prof. Balcerowicz seems to be speculating his own theories here.
Core Jaina ascetic practices, such as total nudity and eating directly from the palms, were likely adopted from the Ajivikas.
The Jaina concept of leshya (soul colorings) appears to be derived from the Ajivika doctrine of six abhijati.
→ Prof. Balcerowicz is mistaken here. Leshya has a karmic interpretation and is not related to abhijati, which is assigned at birth. Leshya refers to the subtle "coloring" or mental state of the soul, determined by a person's thoughts, intentions, and actions. It reflects the individual's karmic condition, ranging from inauspicious (darker) to auspicious (lighter). There are six types of Leshyas, from dark (Krishna/Black, Neel/Blue, Kapot/Grey) to light (Tejo/Red, Padma/Yellow, Shukla/White), representing a spiritual gradient that influences one's karma and future rebirths (whether in the mundane world, heavens, or hell). Prof. Balcerowicz loosely links Leshya to abhijati without proper research.
Despite Mahavira's initial rejection, divination and fortune-telling practices from the Ajivika tradition eventually integrated into Jaina literature.
Mahavira himself was omniscient, with complete knowledge. Astrology had been part of Indian Vedic scriptures long before Mahavira. Prof. Balcerowicz did not do enough research before making these unfounded assertions.
The early canons of both Jainism and the Ajivikas shared a common structural origin and were both referred to as Purvas.
Perspectivism in Jainism originated from a tripartite logical scheme known as Trairashika, which was characteristic of the Ajivikas.
→ Prof. Balcerowicz's claim here seems fabricated.
The Jaina categorization of souls as either capable (bhavya) or incapable (abhavya) of liberation is a legacy of Ajivika determinism.
→ This is another baseless assertion. I will address this in future discussions.
The Jaina practice of Sallekhana (fasting to death) may have evolved from Ajivika rituals involving death by dehydration.
Jaina logic was not born from abstract philosophy but from ethical inquiries into the correct application of non-harming (ahimsa).
Prof. Balcerowicz should study the teachings of the first Tirthankara, Adinath, and his follower, Marichi, who had distinct views on various subjects. Adinath is also known as Shiva in Hindu tradition, and his teachings successfully initiated a new variation of philosophy called Hinduism.
Similarly, Gautama Buddha, unable to follow Parshva's path of enlightenment, founded Buddhism, which gained wider adaptation largely due to Ashoka's patronage. Gosala also attempted to establish his own sect, but Ashoka's actions—specifically the impalement of 18,000 Nirgranthas (Ajivikas)—led to the birth of the Svetambara sect in Jainism, where followers wore clothes.
Comments
Post a Comment