Eighty-four Lakh Yonis: The Jaina Doctrine of 8.4 Million Embodiments Himal Trikha, Vienna* Introduction The paper examines an aspect of the Jaina doctrine of yonis (“place of birth/origin”), namely, that their number would, in total, comprise eighty-four “hundred-thousand” (Hindi: lākh, English: lakh). The doctrine enumerates all classes of life forms recognized in the Jaina cosmos and thus summarizes the totality of possible objects for a/hiṃsā. Knowledge about varieties of life that can be potentially harmed is one of the prerequisites for the resolution to abstain from injury to these life forms, and in various stages of the Jaina literature reflections on a/hiṃsā are accompanied by classifications of living beings. In the Dasaveyāliyasutta, for example, the vow of ahiṃsā is prescribed after the description of six groups of souls (chajjīvaṇiyā), in the Triṣaṣṭiśalākāpuruṣacarita the avoidance of injury to living things is explicated with regard to various divisions of immovable (sthāvara) and movable (trasa) beings, and in the Sāt Lākh Sūtra any harm done to 8.4 million forms of existence (cauraśī lākh jīvayoni°) is pledged to be of no consequence for the recitator of the Sūtra.1 *Research for this article was carried out in the context of the project “Perspectivism and intertextuality in Vidyānandin’s works,” funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF Schrödinger project J 3880-G24). I am grateful to Prof. Johannes Bronkhorst, Lausanne, and Dr. Yasutaka Muroya, Vienna, for their insightful remarks on an earlier versions of this article; and to Mag. Arturo Silva, Vienna, for the proofreading of my English. 1 See Das. 4, translated Schubring 1977: 83f. and TŚPC 1.1.158ff., translated Johnson 1931:19f. For the Sāt Lākh Sūtra see below p. 10. 4 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art The first part of the paper assembles (1.1) attestations for the doctrine of eighty-four lakh yonis in literatures of the Digambaras; (1.2) the Śvetāmbaras; and (1.3) other South Asian ascetic traditions. The second part consists of (2.1) a timeline for the Jaina attestations; (2.2) the discussion of alternatives for the age of the doctrine; (2.3) hypotheses on the history of its development; and (2.4) an analysis of the discussion of the doctrine in early Digambara commentaries on the Tattvārthasūtra. I will argue that the doctrine evolved from independent investigations into the nature of yoni on the one hand, and into the nature of living beings on the other (see 2.3.2), and that results of these two divergent hermeneutic contexts were merged in the intellectual tradition, which is represented by Devanandin’s Sarvārthasiddhi (see 2.4.1). 1. Attestations for the Doctrine 1.1. Digambara 1.1.1. A stanza with an unwieldy variant Various Digambara works explicate the teaching of eighty-four lakh yonis by a Prakrit stanza, which reads, according to its oldest identified attestation in the Mūlācāra (Mūl. 5.29), as follows: ṇiccidaradhādu sattaya taru dasa vigalliṃdiesu chacc eva | suraṇirayatiriya cauro coddasa maṇue sadasahassā | | “nitya-nigodas, itara-nigodas, element-bodies (i.e., earth-, water-, fire-, airbodies), are of seven lakh yonis. Plants are of ten lakh yonis. Those with two or three of four senses are of six lakh yonis. Gods, hell-beings and animals are of four lakh yonis. Human beings are of fourteen lakh yonis.” 2 This stanza has been identified in eight further works: the BārasaAṇuvekkhā (Bār. 35), Devanandin’s Sarvārthasiddhi (SAS 138,5f.), the Tattvārtharājavārttikavyākhyānālaṅkāra (RVV 143,25f.), Nemicandra’s Gommaṭasāra (Gom. 89), Vidyānandin’s Tattvārthaślokavārttikālaṅkāra (ŚVA 335,31f.), Ajitabrahman’s Kallāṇāloyaṇā (Kal. 14), Bhāskaranandin’s 2 Translation in Fujinaga 2015: 38. Cf. Okuda 1975: 101: “Von nitya- und itara(-nigodas) sowie Elementarwesen (gibt es je) 700.000 Entstehungsorte, von Pflanzen 1.000.000, von Wesen mit unvollzähligen Sinnen 600.000 von Göttern, Höllenwesen und Tieren je 400.000 und von Menschen 1.400.000 (Entstehungsorte).” The diverging purport of the numbers in Fujinaga’s and Okuda’s translations is discussed below in section 1.1.2. Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 5 Tattvārthasukhabodhavṛtti (TASV 39,14f.) and Śrutasāgarasūri’s Tattvārthavṛtti (TAV 103,16f.). Cent. CE Prakrit Sanskrit 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... Mūl. Gom. ... Bār. ... Kal. ... 11 ŚVA SAS 12 TASV ... 16 TAV RVV ... Figure 1: Timeline for works with attestations of the stanza These works can roughly be dated to the following centuries of the common era (see Figure 1): Mūl., in or before the fifth century CE; Bār., between the second and eighth centuries; SAS, to the fifth or sixth centuries; RVV, in or after the eighth century; Gom. and ŚVA to the latter half of the tenth century; Kal. in or after the tenth century; TASV to the eleventh or twelfth centuries; and TAV to the sixteenth century. Recent secondary literature for these dates is referred to in a separate study (Trikha, forthcoming 2022, part 2.2), where textual variants for the stanza and historical dependencies of its attestations are examined. The present article rests on two hypotheses from that study: the Mūl. is older than the Bār., and the ŚVA depends on the SAS, not on the RVV. The possibility that (parts of) the RVV could be later than the eighth century is further explored also below (section 2.4.2). The present article grew out of my research into the background of a rather unwieldy variant for the text of the stanza. In general, the variants convey the picture of a transmission that has been very stable in terms of concept for one millennium. The variants are as many as to be expected over such a long period of time, but only the three following groups pertain to variations that go beyond phonetic and/or orthographic phenomena: 1. vigalliṃdiesu (Mūl.); viyaliṃdiesu (Bār., SAS, RVV, Gom., Kal., TASV, TAV); viyaliṃdie (ŚVA) 2. chacc eva (Mūl., Bār., SAS, RVV, Gom., Kal., TASV, TAV); do do a (ŚVA) 3. maṇue (Mūl., SAS, Gom., ŚVA, Kal., TASV); maṇuve (Bār.); maṇuesu (RVV); maṇuye (TVA) Groups 1 and 3 pertain to variations in numerus, i.e., the respective classes of living beings are alternatively addressed in the plural or in the 6 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art generic singular. In group 2 one and the same quantity is indicated with two alternative phrases: The number of three collectively addressed classes is stated to be either “precisely six” (chacc eva), or “respectively two [for each of the three]” (do do). In the context of the transmission of the stanza, the latter phrase is suspect to be secondary, for two reasons: a. do do is part of an idiosyncratic reading in the ŚVA, viyaliṃdie do do a, which distorts the āryā-meter of the stanza. b. An analysis of the context of the stanza indicates, that the ŚVA depends on the SAS, which manifests the mainstream reading vi[g/y] a[ll/l]iṃdiesu chacc eva (see Trikha forthcoming, 2020). The reading of ŚVA could thus be interpreted as an error that occurred, e.g., during the transmission of that particular work. The motivation for such an error can indeed be made transparent against the backdrop of the doctrinal framework in which the stanza has been transmitted. 1.1.2. The doctrinal framework for the stanza Three doctrinal points are attached to the stanza and its interpretation: 1. Cosmology: The stanza mentions classes of beings and their quantity. 2. Soteriology: In the context of eight of the nine identified works transmitting the stanza it is used to illustrate a specific element in the doctrine of the soul, namely, a typology for possible embodiments subsumed under the terms Pkt. joṇi, Skt. yoni, i.e., “conceivable birth situations” (Jaini 1980: 228).3 The exception is the Bār., where the stanza illustrates an aspect of the saṃsāra. 3. Taxonomy: In seven out of nine contexts the sum total of yonis addressed in the stanza is declared to be 8.4 million. 4 The exception is again the Bār. and, notably, the Mūl., where a total is not specified. Mūl. 5.23: kula-joṇi-maggaṇā … savva-jīvāṇaṃ. SAS, RVV, ŚVA, TASV and TAV adduce the stanza in the commentaries of the Sūtra sacittaśītasaṃvṛtāh … tadyonayaḥ (TA 2.32 in Digambara, 2.33 in Śvetāmbara enumeration). In Gom. 88 and Kal. 15 the term joṇi is used in the immediate context of the stanza. 4 tadbhedāḥ … caturaśītiśatasahasrasaṅkhyāḥ (SAS 138,3; ŚVA 335,30f.), tāny etāni … caturaśītiśatasahasrāṇi ākhyāyante (RVV 143,24); lakkhāṇa cadurasīdī joṇīo (Gom. 88c), caurāśīlakhajoṇi° (Kal. 15b), caturaśītiyonilakṣāṇām (TASV 39,13), tadantarbhedāś caturaśītilakṣā bhavanti (TAV 103,15). 3 Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 7 Five sources that transmit the stanza in the context of the teaching of the 8.4 million yonis (SAS, Gom., ŚVA, Kal., and TASV), refer to this framework just by name. One wonders how the amount of 8.4 million could be arrived at: The numbers mentioned in the mainstream reading of the stanza are seven (satta), ten (dasa), six (cha), four (cauro), fourteen (codasa) and one hundred-thousand (sadasahassā). It is not immediately evident how these numbers should amount to 8.4 million. For example, the result of the addition of the first numbers (7+10+6+4+14) multiplied by the last is only 4.1 million. Two sources that transmit the stanza in the framework of the 8.4 million yonis (RVV and TAV) offer an explication of how to arrive at that number. These two sources expound a model of classes and subclasses for the yonis that corresponds exactly to the model laid out in Vasunandin’s Mūlācāravṛtti on Mūl. 5.29, and in the Jīvatattvapradīpikā on Gom. 89. In the light of further attestations for the teaching of the 8.4 million yonis discussed below (sections 1.2 and 1.3), the version expounded in these four sources (i.e., RVV, MĀV, JTP, TAV) can be regarded as the “expository form of the classic Digambara doctrine.” This version is presented here according to what is possibly the oldest source for it, namely, according to the RVV:5 teṣāṃ navānāṃ yonīnāṃ bhedāḥ karmabhedajanitaviviktavṛttayaḥ [,] pratyakṣajñānibhir divyena cakṣuṣā dṛṣṭāḥ, itareṣāṃ chadmasthānām āgamena śrutākhyena gamyāḥ [,] caturaśītiśatasahasrasaṅkhyā ākhyāyante. tadyathā: 1nityanigotānāṃ1 sapta śatasahasrāṇi, anityanigotānāṃ ca sapta śatasahasrāṇi. ke punar nityanigotāḥ, ke cānityanigotāḥ? triṣv api kāleṣu trasabhāvayogyā ye na bhavanti, te nityanigotāḥ. trasabhāvam avāptā avāsyanti ca ye, te anityanigotāḥ. pṛthivyaptejovāyūnāṃ sapta sapta śatasahasrāṇi. vanaspatikāyikānāṃ daśa śatasahasrāṇi. 2vikalendriyāṇāṃ2 ṣaṭ śatasahasrāṇi. deva3nārakapañcendriyatiraścāṃ3 pratyekaṃ catvāri śatasahasrāṇi. manuṣyāṇāṃ caturdaśa śatasahasrāṇi. tāny etāny samuditāni caturaśītiśatasahasrāṇi ākhyāyante. uktaṃ ca: ṇiccidaradhādu sattaya … (RVV 143,17-25) 1 nigota (RAV) : nikota (MĀV) : nigoda (JTP, TAV) 2vikalendriyarūpadvitricaturindriyeṣu (JTP) 3nārakatiraścām (MĀV) nārakeṣu tiryakpañcendriyeṣu (JTP), nārakās tiryañcaś ca (TAV) The distinctions of these nine birth places [mentioned in TA 2.32] are of separate kinds [which are] effected by different karmans; [they] are [directly] The passage in RVV would be the oldest source if its ascription to Akalaṅka is correct (for doubts on this see here, p. 30). Vasunandin is dated to 1100 by J. Deleu (1981: 183). The commentator of Gom. is after Nemicandra of the tenth century. For the noted variants see MĀV 188,12-189,10, JTP 159,15-20 and TAV 103,19-21. 5 8 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art perceived by [persons with] direct cognition due to [their] divine vision; for other [persons, who] stand in the shadow, [the distinctions] are to be known from the scripture [which is] called ‘heard’; [the distinctions] are declared to be eighty-four hundred-thousand in number. [This is] as follows: The permanent nigodas have seven hundred-thousand [distinctions], also the impermanent nigodas have seven hundred-thousand. Which are the permanent nigodas, and which the impermanent nigodas? Those which do not become fit for the state of moving [beings] in any of the three times [past, present, future] are permanent nigodas.6 Those which have attained the state of moving [beings in the past] or will attain [it in the future] are impermanent nigodas. Earth, water, fire and air [beings] have respectively seven hundred-thousand [distinctions]. 7 Those who have trees (i.e., plants) as their bodies have ten hundred-thousand. Those with deficient senses have six hundred-thousand. Heavenly and infernal beings, animals with five senses have four hundred-thousand each. 8 Humans have fourteen hundred-thousand. Exactly these are declared to be in sum eightyfour hundred-thousand. And it has been said: The permanent, the others and the elements have seven … 1.1.3. Purport of the numbers mentioned in the stanza According to this explication the desired total of 8.4 million is accomplished with the specification that the numbers seven and four in the stanza pertain to the individual members of the collectively addressed classes ṇiccidaradhādu and suraṇirayatiriya (cf. Figure 2). Within this taxonomy the numerals satta and caduro in the stanza are declared to have a different purport than the numeral cha of the mainstream reading: satta and caduro give the multiplicand for the members of the collectively addressed classes, which result, in total, in forty-two and twelve respectively. cha, however, gives the total result of six right away. The commentaries make the different purport explicit as shown in Table 1. MĀV 188,12: yais trasatvaṃ na prāptaṃ kadācid api, te jīvā nityanikotaśabdenocyante. (“Those souls, which never ever attain the state of a moving [being], are designated by the word ‘nityanikota’.”) 7 MĀV 189,6f.: pṛthivīkāyikāṇāṃ saptalakṣāṇi, apkāyikāṇāṃ saptalakṣāṇi, tejaḥkāyikāṇāṃ saptalakṣāṇi, vāyukāyikāṇāṃ saptalakṣāṇi yonīnām iti sambandhaḥ. 8 MĀV 189,8: tiraścāṃ pañcendriyāṇāṃ saṃjñikānāṃ asaṃjñikānāṃ ca catvāri lakṣāṇi. (“Animals with five senses, those that are able to understand and those that are not able to understand, have four hundred-thousand (distinctions).” 6 Eighty-four Lakh Yonis ṇiccidaradhādu nityanigoda itaranigoda dhātu pṛthivīkāyika apkāyika tejokāyika vāyukāyika Sum 9 7 7 7 7 7 7 42 10 taru vigalliṃdiesu dvīndriya trīndriya caturindriya Sum 2 2 2 suraṇirayatiriya sura nāraka tiryañc Sum 4 4 4 6 12 maṇue 14 Total 84 Figure 2: Number of yonis (in hundred-thousands) according to the classic Digambara doctrine 10 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art ṇiccidaradhādu vigalliṃdiesu suraṇirayatiriya RVV sapta sapta ṣaṭ pratyekaṃ catvāri TAV pratyekaṃ saptalakṣa° pratyekaṃ dvilakṣa° pṛthak caturlakṣa° JTP on Gom. pratyekaṃ sapta sapta pratyekaṃ dve dve pratyekaṃ catuś catuḥ KV on Gom. sapta sapta pratyekaṃ eraḍ’eraḍu pratyekaṃ nālku nālku Hindī anuvāda on Gom. pratyekameṃ sāt sāt pratyekameṃ do do pratyekameṃ cār cār Table 1: Variegated expression of numbers for collectively addressed classes in commentaries 1.1.4. The idiosyncratic reading of ŚVA Against this backdrop, the deviation of the ŚVA from the mainstream transmission in pāda b of the stanza in question (do do a : chacc eva), could be interpreted to be a secondary reading motivated by the framework in which the stanza was transmitted. According to the exposition of subclasses we have seen, it can be assumed that the agent responsible for the idiosyncratic reading of the ŚVA chose to express – instead of the sum 6: chacc eva – the multiplicand 2: do do, “respectively two [for each subclass of the vigaliṃdia].” The use of this phrase represents a case of indicating the distributive function of a numeral by reduplication (see Gil 2013), which is also manifest in the form sapta sapta (“respectively seven”) of the commentaries RV and KV (see Table 1). With this interpretation, we can assume that the textual problem posed by the variant is confined to the ŚVA. The distorted āryā-meter of the stanza in this attestation could be explained as a transmission error and then rectified by a small emendation: By the restoration of the preceding plural locative ending – as read by all other attestations – the āryā-meter would also be restored (see Table 2). Examination of the manuscript tradition of the work could provide further information on the question, including who the responsible agent(s) for the reading might have been: Was it an informed reader, who supplemented do do a in the place of a torn bit of paper? A scholar, Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 11 who provided an explanation in the margin that was later incorporated in the text by a scribe instead of illegible or incomprehensible akṣaras? Or taru dasa viyaliṃdie do do a taru dasa viyaliṃdiesu do do a9 Table 2: Possible emendation for pāda b of the stanza in the ŚVA was it the author of the ŚVA himself, who was educated in an intellectual milieu in which the doctrinal framework was popular? Had he thus quoted the different version from memory? Or did he trust another source more than the Sarvārthasiddhi with regard to the wording of the stanza? Had he taken it from another recension of the āgama? Or did the recension of the Sarvārthasiddhi available to the author contain precisely this reading – which only today appears to be idiosyncratic? The latter alternatives point to the fact that although the interpretation suggested above (table 2) is quite plausible, it is equally possible that the ŚVA contains a lectio difficilior for the stanza, the original reading, which was superseded by a more effective adaption. This question cannot be answered, but will be taken up again after a review of other versions for the teaching of the 8.4 million embodiments. 1.2. Śvetāmbara The sources identified for the detailed explication of how the classes of embodiment mentioned in the stanza from the Mūlācāra amount to 8.4 million are commentaries that date from the eighth century onwards at The word a in viyaliṃdie do do a remains problematic. In the commentaries the indication of a distributive numeral by reduplication is an alternative for marking it by a preceding word, e.g., pratyekam catvāri (“four each”) in RVV. A third alternative is to mark the distributive numeral by both, by a preceding word, and by reduplication, e.g., pratyekaṃ sapta sapta (“respectively seven for each”). Is the latter emphasis also intended in do do a with the word a? Do we thus have to understand a as a particle that emphasizes the distributive function of the numeral (“exactly two per [class]”)? Or was the word a understood as a conjunction that served to indicate a caesura between the statements on taru and vigaliṃdia? In this case, the sequence “taru dasa viyaliṃdie a do do” would be syntactically preferable, but a metrical unit (mātra), would still be missing. A restoration of the plural and a shift of the potential conjunction (viyaliṃdiesu a do do) resulted again in a distortion of the meter (see schema of the āryā in Ollet 2012: 246). See also here note 60, p. 40. 9 12 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art the earliest. The earlier author Devanandin, as well as Akalaṅka in the RV, and also the later authors Nemicandra and Vidyānandin, all refer to the teaching by name only. These authors might have had the explicated model of subclasses in mind, but one also could well ask whether the application of precise numbers to the classes mentioned in the stanza was in fact of any importance to them, or whether they merely wanted to highlight a connection of the teaching of the yonis with the number 8.4 million. The establishing of such a connection is, at first, very much in place, because according to the presently identified sources there is only one explicit reference to a doctrine of 8.4 million yonis that could predate Devanandin. 1.2.1. Tattvārthādhigamasūtrabhāṣyaṭīkā Commentaries on the Tattvārthasūtra on the types of yoni – TA 2.32 in the Digambara, TA 2.33 in the Śvetāmbara recension – agree that nine yonis are enumerated in the Sūtra.10 The teaching of the 8.4 million distinctions (bheda) comes at first as an addition in the Digambara commentaries only.11 Two of the three early Śvetāmbara commentaries, the fifth century Tattvārthādhigamabhāṣya (TABh)12 and the possibly quite old Tattvārthaṭīkā (TAṬ),13 are silent on such additional distinctions. It is only in the ninth century Tattvārthādhigamasūtrabhāṣyaṭīkā (TABhṬ) of Siddhasenagaṇi14 that 8.4 million yonis are first discussed in a Śvetāmbara commentary on the TA: atha kathaṃ yonilakṣāṇām aśītiś caturuttarā pratijāti pratipāditā pravacane? tad yathā: pṛthivyaptejovāyūnāṃ pratyekaṃ sapta sapta yonilakṣāḥ, pratyekavanaspatīnāṃ daśa, sādhāraṇānāṃ caturdaśa, dvitricaturindriyāṇāṃ pratyekaṃ dve dve lakṣe, śeṣa10 TABh 190, 23-25 only enumerates nine; other commentaries spell this out: ta ete nava yonayo veditavyāḥ (SAS 137,6), … navānām yonīnāṃ … (RVV 143,17), … iti navayonibhedāḥ (ŚVA 335,23), evam etā nava yonayaḥ (TAṬ 135,10), ... nava yonayaḥ pratibaddhāḥ sūtre ... (TABhṬ 192,27), etā mūlabhūtā nava yonayo bhavanti (TAV 103,14). 11 For the references see here, n. 4, p. 6. 12 For dates assigned to the TABh see Balcerowicz 2008: 35, n. 23. 13 According to the colophons, the work was begun by Haribhadra and completed by Yaśobhadrasūri. Balcerowicz 2008: 39, n. 31 distinguishes three Haribhadras from the sixth, eighth, and twelfth centuries. Jambuvijaya (apud Sanghavi 1974/2000: 57) has maintained that Haribhadra’s TAṬ followed Siddhasena’s TABhṬ. However, this is not case in the context of TA 2.33 discussed here. 14 For the date of the author see Bronkhorst 1985: 157. Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 13 tiryaṅnārakadevānāṃ pratyekaṃ catasraś catasro lakṣāḥ, manuṣyāṇāṃ caturdaśa. (TABhṬ 192,23-28) Now, how are eighty-four (aśītiś caturuttarā) lakh places of origin explained with regard to class (pratijāti) in the doctrine (pravacana)? It is as follows: Earth, water, fire and air have each respectively seven lakh places of origin. Individual plants have ten, [plants with a] common [body] (sādhāraṇa) fourteen, [beings with] two, three or four senses have each respectively two lakh. The remaining animals, infernal and heavenly beings have each respectively four lakh, humans fourteen. Siddhasenagaṇi does not refer to the stanza which the Digambaras use. The teaching also has a taxonomic variation from what we have seen in the Digambara sources: Two classes from the beginning of the Digambara list, i.e., the nitya- and the itaranigodas, are not mentioned in the Śvetāmbara list. Instead, there appears later in the list a class called sādhāraṇa, which round up to the sum of 84 lakṣa (see Table 3). However, the conceptual change implied with this variation is only a slight one: in the Digambara conception the nigodas are obviously paralleled to the Digambara list Śvetāmbara list ṇiccidara° 14 – °dhādu / pṛthivyaptejovāyu 28 28 taru / pratyekavanaspati 10 10 sādhāraṇa[vanaspati] – 14 vigalliṃdia / dvitricaturindriya 6 6 suraṇirayatiriya / śeṣatiryaṅnārakadeva 12 12 maṇua / manuṣya 14 14 Total 84 84 Groups of yonis Table 3: Variegated groups of yonis and their number (in hundred-thousand) dhātus, whereas in the Śvetāmbara conception they are addressed by the term sādhāraṇa and subsumed under the category of plants.15 Cf. Schubring 1935, §106: “Die konkreten Pflanzen zerfallen nach Pannav. 30aff. (in der Hauptsache 105 gāhā) in Einzelgewächse (patteya-sarīra) und Gruppengewächse (sāhāraṇa- see Viy. 762a) …” This terminological distinction is reflected in the TABhṬ by pratyeka-vanaspati and sādhāraṇa. Jaini (1980: 224) uses sādhāraṇa and nigoda as equivalents. 15 14 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art This first reference to the teaching of eighty-four lakh yonis in a Śvetāmbara commentary on the Tattvārthasūtra comes with a hint of hesitation. Immediately after the text quoted above (TABhṬ 192,23-28), Siddhasenagaṇi continues: iha tu nava yonayaḥ pratibaddhāḥ sūtre [.] tad etad ativiprakṛṣtam antarālam upakṣipati cetaḥ saṃśayadolāyām asmākam [.] ato atrābhidhīyatāṃ samādhiḥ. (TABhṬ 192,29f.) But here in the Sūtra nine yonis are fixed. Exactly this extensive [/far-fetched?] (ativiprakṛṣta) intermediate [classification] (antarāla) throws our mind in a swing of doubt. Therefore one should in this respect (atra) denote the combination [of the classifications]. It is unclear whether antarāla refers to the teaching of the eighty-four lakh yonis or to the teaching of the nine yonis, but it is clear that the different classifications of sūtra and pravacana leads to a doubt that Siddhasenagaṇi attempts to resolve; also in the succeeding statement (see TABhṬ 192,30ff.). From this we can assume that the teaching was only gaining prominence in the Śvetāmbara circles of Siddhasenagaṇi’s time. But at some point the doubt was resolved and the teaching became firmly accepted. 1.2.2. Sāt Lākh Sūtra The exact sequence of the enumeration of the yonis in the TABhṬ is reflected in a text that is relevant for Jaina practice even today, the Sāt Lākh Sūtra. This text is used, according to Cort (2006: 75) “in the rite of pratikramaṇa, performed twice daily by Śvetāmbara mendicants and, ideally, at last once a year by laity.” I came across several slightly variegated recensions of the Sūtra; the edition translated by Cort reads: 16 sāt lākh pṛthvīkāy, sāt lākh apkāy, sāt lākh teukāy, sāt lākh vāukāy, das lākh pratyekvanaspatikāy, cauda lākh sādhāraṇ-vanaspatikāy, be lākh be-iṃdriya, be lākh teiṃdriya, be lākh caur-iṃdriya, cār lākh devatā, cār lākh nārakī, cār lākh tiryaṃcpañcendriya, cauda lākh manuṣya. evaṃkāre cauraśī lākh jīvayonimāṃhe māhare jīve je koi jīv haṇyo hoy, haṇāvyo hoy, haṇatāṃ pratye anumodyo hoy, te sarve vacane kāyāe karī micchā mi dukkaḍaṃ. (Prat., Sūtra 31, vol. 2., p. 120) The transliteration is tentative, as I cannot identify the language; Cort (2006: 75) addresses it as “vernacular.” I transliterate words ending in -a as they are lemmatized in McGregor’s (1993) Hindi Dictionary. 16 Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 15 “700,000 earth bodies, 700,000 water bodies, 700,000 fire bodies, 700,000 air bodies, 1,000,000 separate plant bodies, 1,400,000 aggregated plant bodies, 200,000 two-sensed beings, 200,000 three-sensed beings, 200,000 four-sensed beings, 400,000 divine five-sensed beings, 400,000 infernal five-sensed beings, 400,000 plant-and-animal five-sensed beings, 1,400,000 humans: in this way there are 8,400,000 forms of existence [jīvayoni]. Whatever harm I have done, caused to be done, or approved of, by mind, speech, or body, against all of them, may that harm be without consequence.” (Cort 2006: 75) The Sāt Lākh Sūtra can be dated to the fifteenth century or before, as it is part of a compilation of pratikramaṇa texts of the Tapā Gaccha, called Bharahesara nī Sajjhāy, which Kelting (2006: 188) ascribes to that time. One wonders, of course, whether this specific sequence in the enumeration of embodiments is also preserved in earlier Śvetāmbara sources. 1.2.3. Samavāyaṃgasutta In the canon, the concept of yoni is present from early on, e.g., in the Āyāraṃgasutta, (aṇegarūvāo joṇīo; Āyār. 1.1.9). Most of the classes of embodiment in question are frequently mentioned, e.g., in the Dasaveyāliyasutta in the context of the explication of the six groups of souls (chajjīvaṇiyā).17 In the Uttarajjhāyāsutta, partial matches for the sequence of enumeration18 and for the typology of subclasses19 are found. But an exact match for the 84-lakh-yoni classification, which we have seen in the Digambara sources or in the Śvetāmbara Tattvārthādhigamasūtrabhāṣyaṭīkā and the Sāt Lākh Sūtra, has not yet See Das. 4 (p. 123), translation Schubring 1977: 83f: “What then are these six Groups of Souls? They are as follows: [souls] incorporated in earth-bodies, water-bodies, fire-bodies, wind-bodies, plant-bodies, and [spontaneously] moving bodies.” The description of the moving bodies closes with “… all beings with two, three, four, and five senses, [the last-named group embracing] all [higher] animals, all hell-beings, all men [and] all gods.” 18 See Uttarajjhāyā 10.5-16, translation Jacobi 1895/1995: 42f. 19 See Uttarajjhāyā 36.69-247, where according to Jacobi’s translation (1895/1995: 213229), “living beings which still belong to the saṃsāra” are depicted. When ignoring the superclasses “movable/immovable” and “beings with an organic body”, the sequence of the enumeration of the classes (with their basic types) in Jacobi’s words is this: earth lifes (2), water lifes (2), plants (2), fire lifes (2), wind lifes (2), beings with two sense organs (2), three sense organs (2), four sense organs (2), five sense organs: denizens of hell (7), animals (2), men (2), gods (4). 17 16 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art been identified in the canon.20 Until now, the only early identified reference to such a classification in the canon is a short statement in the Samavāyaṃgasutta. This statement appears within a section that is dedicated to classifications that operate with the number eighty-four: caurāsītiṃ joṇippamuha satasahassā paṇṇāttā. (Sam. 84 [p. 178, 16]) The main (pramukha) places of birth are explained to be eighty-four hundredthousand. There is no explication in Sam. how this number should be arrived at. The statement could be late and could only have been introduced in the very last stage of the formation of the Śvetāmbara canon. S. Ohira (1994), in her proposition regarding five canonical stages, focuses on and gives detailed information concerning jīva-related classifications, but does not refer to the teaching in question.21 It can thus be assumed with some The teaching of eighty-four lakh yonis is not referred to where one would expect it, e.g., in the section of the Paṇṇavaṇāsutta on yonis (see Paṇ., part 2, pp. 310-312); nor is it immediately evident from screening Haribhadra’ commentaries on Das. 4, Das. 8.2, or – due to the utilization of the Sāt Lākh Sūtra in today’s pratikramaṇa ritual – on the paḍikkamaṇa-nijjutti (see the portions listed in Balbir 1993: 71f.). Also, in Schubring’s survey of the old sources I find no reference to this teaching. A next step for the systematic search in early Śvetāmbara sources could be – beside an investigation of the upāṅga called Jīvājīvābhigama – a close investigation of the sources mentioned by Schubring in the context of embodiment (Schubring 1935, §§62ff.) and classes of beings (ibid., §§104ff. and p. 128). In this respect see also the references in Okuda 1975: 99-101. Sukhlal Sanghvi (1974/2000: 107) mentions the teaching of eighty-four lakh yonis only in passing. Tatia (1994: 53) explicates it without specifying the source; he explicates the classes in the sequence of the Digambaras, not in the sequence of the TABhṬ and the Sāt Lākh Sūtra. Glasenapp (1925, p. 224 and p. 470, n. 32) knows of both sequences and of later Hindu sources, but refers for the Jaina doctrine only to J.L. Jaini’s Jaina Gem Dictionary, which yields no sources in the edition available to me (Arrah 1918). 21 Ohira (1994: 1f.) attributes the doctrine of six jīvaṇiyā (see above n. 17) to Mahāvīra himself (ibid., p. 5). The second stage would have seen further classifications of plants and five-sensed animals (p. 21, §64) and the fourfold gatis “H.A.M.G. (Hellish beings, Animals, Men and Gods)” (p. 21., §66). The third stage and the contributions of Viy. is the focus of Ohira’s book. I could not find a reference to eighty-four lakh yonis, neither in Ohira’s study (pp. 110-140) nor in Deleu’s (1970) study on Viy. The fourth stage would have seen various types of classification of jīvas ranging from classifications of two types to classifications of ten types (Ohira, p. 23), and the introduction of the nigodas (p. 24). The stage would culminate in the Prajñāpanā 20 Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 17 degree of probability, that the short statement on eighty-four lakh yonis was only added to the section on the “eighty-fours” in Sam., at or shortly before the third Valabhī council, i.e., in the middle of the fifth century (Ohira 1994: 3, Dundas 2002: 49). 1.2.4. Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī, Ācārāṅgasūtravivṛtti, Samavāyāṅgaṭīkā In his commentary on the passage from the Samavāyaṃga, Abhayadeva of the eleventh century (Dundas 2002: 50) explicates the statement with the quotation of two stanzas which are cited below. Beside this Samavāyāṅgaṭīkā, these stanzas also appear in the Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī, a Prakrit work by Jinabhadra (Leumann 1934: 54) of the sixth or seventh centuries (Balbir 1993: 75), and in the Ācārāṅgasūtravivṛtti by Śīlāṅka of the ninth century (Wiles 2013: 20f.). The two stanzas are thus attested with minor variations in three works, i.e., in Bṛh. 351f., ĀSV 23b,9ff. and SAṬ 180,1-5: puḍhavi-daga-agaṇi-māruya1 2ikkikke2 satta 3joṇi3-lakkhāo | vaṇapatteya aṇaṃte dasa 4caudasa4 joṇilakkhāo | | vigaliṃdiesu do do cauro cauro 5a5 6nāraya-suresu6 | tiriesu 7huṃti7 cauro 4caudasa4 lakkhā 5u5 maṇuesu | | 1 Bṛh, SAṬ = Das. 8.2a : ĀSV puḍhavījalajalaṇamāruya 2 ekkekke ĀSV, SAṬ 3 satta ĀSV 4 coddasa ĀSV, SAṬ 5 ya ĀSV, SAṬ 6 ṇāraya-suresuṃ ĀSV 7 hoṃti SAṬ Earth, water, fire and air [beings have] seven lakh places of origin each. Plants [, single and] endless [ones] (aṇaṃta),22 have ten [and] fourteen lakh places of origin. For [beings with] deficient senses there are (huṃti) respectively two lakh, and (a) for infernal and heavenly [beings] respectively four, four for animals, for humans, however (u), fourteen. 1 This description of classes of embodiment complies to the descriptions in the TABhṬ and the Sāt Lākh Sūtra, firstly, with regard to the segmentation of the classes, and secondly, with regard to the sequence (p. 24), which would have developed early forms of the fourteen jīvasamāsas, fourteen guṇasthānas and fourteen margasthānas (p. 24), various classifications of jīvas, among them “a population census of beings in each class” (p. 26, §85), and the characteristic features of living beings (pp. 26f., §86). 22 Sheth (1963: 28) glosses aṇaṃta-kāy[ik]a with ananta jīvavālī vanaspati, kanda-mūl ādi. 18 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art of enumeration.23 With this description we can now safely distinguish two types of sequences for the enumeration of the classes of embodiment: a Digambara-sequence, with the stanza in the Mūlācāra as the oldest identified attestation; and a Śvetāmbara-sequence, with the stanzas in the Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī as the oldest identified attestation. Both attestations do not specify a total for the classes of embodiment, but the later Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī is better suited to illustrate an 84-lakh-yoni doctrine. There, an extended purport of a numeral is indicated by its reduplication or with the adverb ikkikke, whereas in the older Mūlācāra some conceptual overload has to be considered in order to carry out the calculation successfully. It thus seems that at the time of the composition of the stanzas in the Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī, the 84-lakh-yoni doctrine had become more concrete than it had been at the time of the composition of the stanza preserved in the Mūlācāra. 1.2.5. Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇīvṛtti The doctrine appears even more concrete, and without any need for interpretation and calculation, in two strophes preserved in Malayagiri’s twelfth century Sanskrit commentary24 on Jinendrabhadra’s Bṛh., the Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇīvṛtti: nabhasvataḥ sapta jalasya cāgneḥ kṣites tathā tāś ca nigodayor dve | smṛtāś catasraḥ kila nārakāṇāṃ tathā tiraścāṃ tridivaukasāṃ ca | | trir īrite dve vikalendriyāṇāṃ caturdaśa syur manujanmanāṃ ca | vanaspatīnāṃ daśa yonilakṣā aśītir evaṃ caturuttarā syāt | | (BSV 136,10-12) There are seven lakh places of origin (yonilakṣāḥ) for air [beings] and for water, fire, earth; and such (tāḥ) [seven lakh places of origin] are two (i.e., seven lakh are given twice) for the nigodas. Four indeed are remembered for hellish beings, likewise [four] for animals and for those who abide in the three heavens. Three [times] two are mentioned (īrita-) for [beings with] deficient senses. And there would be fourteen for births of humans, ten for plants. In this way there would be eighty-four. These two upendravajrā-strophes in triṣṭubh meter are introduced with uktaṃ ca and conclude with iti. The sequence of the enumeration of A minor variation pertains to the sequence of the gatis “gods” (G), “hell-beings” (H) and five-sensed “animals” (A): Bṛh. has HGA, TABhṬ has GAH, the Sāt Lākh Sūtra has the Digambara sequence GHA. 24 For the dating see Balbir 1993: 85. On the commentary see Fujinaga 2012: 213-221. 23 Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 19 classes must be called chaotic if compared to the sequences we have looked at so far. In Mūl. and Bṛh. the enumeration increases from onesensed beings to beings with more and more senses, mentions the gatis, and concludes with humans as the crown of life (because liberation can only be achieved from this form of embodiment25). Such a hierarchical sequence had no relevance for the composer of the strophes preserved in BSV and, moreover – heretically one might say – the standard sequence of the elements in natural philosophy is broken. Instead of the normative sequence – earth, water, fire, air – the elements are enumerated here as air, water, fire and earth. By this third variety of the 84-lakh-yoni doctrine we are faced with the following historical questions: Are these strophes the product of a rather uninformed epigone who cobbled the classes of Digambara segmentation together? Or, to the contrary, do these strophes echo a time when the proper order that we find in the other varieties of the 84-lakh-yoni doctrine had not yet been agreed upon? 1.3. Parallels in other South Asian literatures 1.3.1. Eighty-four and its decimal multiples The person/s, who developed the teaching of eighty-four lakh yonis was/were clearly under the spell of “ ‘the number 84 and its multiples’ a special group of numbers associated with cosmological phenomena and entities of importance” (Satinsky 2015: 3). Satinsky has collected various passages from early Jaina sources, in which multiples of eightyfour are used to measure, for example, the lifespans of the Tīrthaṅkara Ṛṣabha and other illustrious persons (ibid., pp. 4f.); time spans of great magnitude within Jaina cosmic time (pp. 5f.); the height of mount Meru (p. 7); or the number of places in hell (pp. 8f.). The collected material convincingly shows that the Jainas favored26 and, at some point, frequently used eighty-four and its multiples as an established matrix for the classification of phenomena that were thought to be temporospatial. From this it is not at all surprising that the embodiments of living beings were also subjected to this classification schema. See, e.g., Tieken 2015: 6. Schubring (1935: 55, n. 1) refers to 84,000 merely as a favored indeterminate number. Cf. also op.cit., p. 24: “84 aber oder ein Vielfaches davon [tritt] bei den Jainas oft dort ein…, wo zu etwas Tatsächlichem genaue Angaben nicht gemacht werden können.” 25 26 20 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art Eighty-four and its decimal multiples also serve as a pattern of classification in other South Asian traditions. Occurrences of this pattern have been collected by S. Dasgupta (1946:234-236), Th. McEvilley (2002: 139f.) and G. Bühnemann (2007/2012: 26f.). The following examples illustrate the wide range of phenomena to which the pattern was applied: – Eighty-four: number of Siddhas in the Nātha literature of Bengal, and the Santa and Sufi literature of Western and Northern India (Dasgupta, p. 234.); number of Buddhist Mahāsiddhas according to an eleventh century work of Abhayadattaśrī (Lopez 2019: 7); honored number of postures (āsana) in various Yoga texts; 27 number of postures in Kāmaśāstra (?);28 number of phallic representations of Śiva according to the Skandhapurāṇa (Bühnemann, p. 26); number of Tantras in some lists (ibid.); number of “beads in the rosary of a Kānphaṭ yogin” (Dasgupta, p. 236); and the number of vessels (kuṇḍa) in the underworld where “convicted are doomed” to dwell according to the Śūnyapurāṇa (Dasgupta, p. 235). – Eighty-four thousand: number of yojanas Mount Meru is said to tower above the ground according to various Brahmanic and Buddhist sources (Kirfel 1920: 15*); number of divisions of the scripture (dhammakhanda) according to the late Buddhist work Gandhavaṃsa (Dasgupta, p. 235); number of persons in the company of which the future Buddha Maitreya will renounce the world according to the Anāgatavaṃsa (ibid.); number of “atoms in the human body … the age apex of life in each human world … stūpas erected by Āśoka … relics of Buddha’s body … forms of illumination shed by Amitābha … excellent physical signs of a Buddha … mortal distresses … ”29 With regard to the significance of the pattern, M. Eliade, based on Dasgupta’s findings, suggests: “The number 84 corresponds to no historical reality; it is a mystical number … [and] probably expresses Bühnemann 2007/2012: 26. J. Birch (2018) gives tables for the numbers of āsanas, which are actually described in early Haṭha texts from the twelfth to the fourteenth centuries (p. 106), and for texts from the fifteenth to the eighteenth centuries (p. 110). 28 Bühnemann 2007/2012: 26. Birch (2018: 108, n. 19) could not verify Bühnemann’s reference to the Saṅkhyāsaṅketakośa, but suggests potential other sources. 29 Soothill/Hodus 1937: 39 referred to in part by Bühnemann 2007/2012: 27 and Reck 1997: 548. 27 Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 21 completeness, totality” (1958: 304). Also Bühnemann thinks that “the number eighty-four traditionally signifies completeness, and in some cases sacredness. … The number 84,000 … stands for an extraordinary large and complete number” (2007/2012: 27). It can be assumed that the pattern was applied as a “rhetorical device” (Birch 2018: 108) during the creation of the respective doctrinal content, in order to present this content within a framework which was already familiar to an audience (Reck 1997: 548).30 It is unknown, how the notion of completeness became to be associated with the pattern. McEvilley suggests that this notion ultimately goes back to Sumerian astronomy.31 The suggestion provides a very good background for the interpretations Kloetzli and Brockington offered for the significance of the pattern (see Satinsky 2015: 3, n. 11), but it needed to be shown how the notion entered the Indian scene. Astrological lore could be a candidate for such a transmission, but the sole identified instance of the pattern in astrological sources seems to be an Indian addition in or before the 3rd century CE.32 J. Bronkhorst and R. Satinsky provide a hypothesis on the culture, in which the pattern became prominent. Their argument goes as follows: (a) the number eighty-four and its multiples are not particularly significant in Vedic literature, (b) these numbers represent a frequent classification pattern in the literature of Jainism, Buddhism and Ajīvikism, (c) in various Brahmanic/Hindu movements the pattern would occur only later, (d) “the popularity of this number” is therefore to be associated “with the culture of Greater Magadha, from where it spread into post-Vedic Brahmanism On a possible occurrence of the pattern in a Manichean fragment describing the rewards of a liberated soul, Reck (1997: 548) remarks: “Die symbolhaften Zahlen werden übernommen, um den Gläubigen in ihnen vertrauter Sprache anschaulich die zukünftigen Freuden darzustellen.” 31 “In terms of the astronomy-based numerology of Sumer, 84 represents the product of 7 (the number of known planets) and 12 (the number of lunations in a year). Thus it comprehends time and space in an intimate totality with a distinctive cultural signature.” (McEvilley 2002: 140). 32 I could only spot one application of the pattern, the concept of eighty-four saptāṃśas (see Pingree 1978, vol. 2, p. 210). This concept “cannot be traced in the surviving remnants of Hellenistic astrology … [and] was not followed by any Indian astrologer” (ibid.). M. Gansten (2018: 182) mark the eighty-four saptāṃśas to be “sexagesimally akward” and discusses the saptāṃśas in the context of additions of the classical Indian astrological system to the hellenistic tradition. 30 22 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art / Hinduism, from the Mahābhārata onward.”33 Satinsky (2015) expounds the hypothesis by arguing that the attestations of the concept of Mount Meru in Brahmanical literature are later than the corresponding Jaina and Buddhist sources (ibid., pp. 2-3, 12-13). For this Satinsky states as main reasons, that, firstly, the concept of Meru is mentioned in the Jaina and Buddhist canons (pp. 10f.) and is absent in Vedic literature (p. 14), and, secondly, that the concept of the height of Meru, i.e., 84,000 yojanas, complies to the classification pattern, which is frequent in Jaina sources (pp. 7f.) and absent in Vedic literature (p. 13). This theory is not further examined here. However, to some extent congruent with it is the fact that the concept of 8.4 million embodiments was shared by ascetics of various religious denominations. 1.3.2. 8.4 million embodiments in other South Asian literatures Attestations of the pattern in the form of “84 ´ 100,000”, i.e., 8.4 million, provide significant parallels for the Jaina 84-lakh-yoni doctrine. 1.3.2.1. Śaiva Early works on Haṭha Yoga such as the Dattātreyayogaśāstra state the total of yogic postures to be eighty-four lakh and some Haṭha Yoga works such as the Vivekamārtaṇḍa, the Gorakṣaśataka and the Gherandasaṃhitā parallel this number to the “species of living beings” (jīvajāti, jivajantu). 34 This teaching of “eighty-four lakh species of living beings” occurs in a Śivaitic context as the teacher of all āsanas is said to be lord Śiva. The works date from the twelfth/thirteenth centuries onwards (Birch 2018: 106, 110) and are affiliated to the “Nāth Sampradāya” that “emerged out of the Kulamārga” (Sanderson 2012/2013: 79). Within the greater Kulamārga tradition, which has “dateable evidence … from the early ninth century” onwards (Sanderson, p. 6), the teaching in question has an equivalent in the Kaulajñānanirṇaya with the expression “afflicted by 84,000 ties by birth” (caturaśītisahasreṣu yoniyantreṣu pīḍitāḥ; KJN 9.14ab). Furthermore, the teaching is clearly instantiated in a stanza transmitted in the Kulārṇavatantra and the Kaulāvalīnirṇaya: caturaśītilakṣeṣu śarīreṣu śarīriṇām | na mānuṣyaṃ vinānyatra tattvajñānaṃ tu labhyate | | (KAT 1.14, KĀN p. 2, l. 27) Quoted from a communication by email with J. Bronkhorst, December 14, 2019. See Birch 2018: 107, Bühnemann 2007/2012: 25, Mallinson 2004: 16 and Dasgupta 1946: 236. 33 34 Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 23 Among the eighty-four lakh bodies of embodied [beings] correct knowledge is, however, not achieved elsewhere without a human [body]. KAT and KĀN are to be dated respectively “after the 12th century” and before ca. “AD 1400” (Sanderson, pp. 78, 81). This teaching of “eightyfour lakh bodies” is also attested around roughly the same time in works affiliated to another Śivaitic tradition, the “neo-Saiddhāntika theological writing in Tamil” (Sanderson, p. 86), where bodies are said to “fall into seven groups … totaling in … 8,400,000 distinct sorts.”35 The seven groups of bodies described by Schomerus (2000: 128) according to Tamil sources plants 19 water creatures 10 creeping creatures 15 birds 10 4-footed beasts 10 humans 9 gods and demons 11 Total 84 Table 4: Classes of bodies and their numbers (in hundred-thousands) according to neo-Saiddhāntika theological writing in Tamil (cf. Table 4) differ from the distinctions of yonis according to the Jaina sources, but there can be no doubt that both traditions expound a common notion of “eighty-four lakh embodiments” before the backdrop of divergent conceptions of the classes of living beings. 1.3.2.2. Maitrāyaṇīyopaniṣad Such a common notion also occurs in a southern recension of the Maitrāyaṇīyopaniṣad (MU). In van Buitenen’s edition and translation, a passage in section 3.3 reads: Schomerus 2000: 128. Schomerus (p. 127) ascribes the classification to “Aruḷnanti’s Śiva-jñānasiddhiār” and “Umāpati Śivācārya’s Śivaprakāśa.” He dates these Tamil works to the fourteenth century, but points out that they are rooted in the earlier Śivāgamas (p. 24). Sanderson (2012/2013: 86) refers to the two works as “Civañāṉacittiyār of Aruṇanti” and “Umāpatiśivācārya’s Civappirakācam,” with the latter author “securely dated in AD 1313.” 35 24 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art atha triguṇaṃ caturaśītilakṣayonipariṇatam bhūtagaṇam etad vāva nānatvasya rūpam.36 “The totality of beings which, determined by the three guṇas, evolve from eighty-four lacs of wombs, constitute the variety of its forms.” (van Buitenen 1962: 129) According to van Buitenen’s study of the work, the section belongs to the latest stage in the formation of the Upaniṣad.37 However, even in the latest stratum, °lakṣayoni° is a doubtful element in the text. 38 In Cowell’s edition and translation the passage reads: caturjālaṃ caturdaśavidhaṃ caturaśītidhā pariṇataṃ bhūtagaṇam. etad vai nānātvasya rūpam. (MU2, pp. 46f.) “The aggregation of the elements, as developed into the four tribes, the fourteen worlds, and the eighty-four varieties – this is its becoming manifold.” (Cowell 1862: 250) This is an altogether different cosmos we are said to live in. 39 Van Buitenen abstains from suggesting absolute dates for the composition stages of this Upaniṣad. However, this mention of eighty-four lakh yonis is confined to its Southern recension (Van Buitenen, pp. 94f.). The detail can serve as an indication that the 84-lakh-yoni doctrine gained momentum somewhere south. There, in modern Karnataka, the Digambaras Devanandin, Akalaṅka, Vidyānandin, Nemicandra and Bhāskaranandin flourished, and modern Tamil Nadu is the region where the earlier referred to Śaivasiddhānta sources stem from. Thus, if the doctrine of eighty-four lakh embodiments did not actually originate MU1, p. 102. I take the reading nānatvasya in this edition, which is not commented on by van Buitenen, to be a misspelling of nānātvasya. 37 Van Buitenen distinguishes a composite vulgate with several titles (1962: 13) from a southern Maitrāyaṇī (p. 14) and proposes that the composite vulgate is the result of the incorporation of recension of the southern text into another (p. 17), the original Maitrāyaṇīya (pp. 63-67). The section in question is not a part of the original Maitrāyaṇīya, but belongs to the last of the three stages of composition of the southern text (pp. 94f.). 38 Van Buitenen (1962:103) remarks: “The readings are uncertain; R[āmatīrtha] must have found a lakṣa in his text.” 39 Cowell 1862: 250 comments: “ ‘the eighty-four varieties’ seem to allude to some early speculations in natural history, the Scholiast (with a truer insight) suggests eighty-four laks or even more.” 36 Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 25 somewhere south, the least that can be said is that there lay the/an epicenter of its popularization. 1.3.2.3. Ājīvikas South India is also the region where a tradition relevant to our question faded, the Ājīvikas, who are said to have had origins in common with the Jainas and a decisive impact on their doctrine.40 With regard to the 84-lakh-yoni doctrine, P.S. Jaini has remarked that it could be a “fragmentary holdover from an earlier doctrine,” rooted in a “common background with the Ājīvika tradition,” which consisted in “a welldeveloped theoretical framework describing the operation of the universe.”41 In this respect, H. Zimmer claimed to have given a report on the “Doctrine of Maskarin Gosāla,”42 which is virtually identical with the Jaina 84-lakh-yoni doctrine;43 but this alleged report is not grounded in the known fragments of the Ājīvikas.44 From the known fragments of “In the Dravidian South … [the Ājīvikas] maintained themselves against discriminatory taxation until the fourteenth century” (Basham 1951: 185). For a recent overview on publications on the Ājīvikas, see Balcerowicz 2016: 7. 41 Jaini 1980: 228. See also Jaini 1977: 107-111. 42 “… a vast and comprehensive review of all the kingdoms and departments of nature let it appear that each life-monad was to pass, in a series of precisely eightyfour thousand births, through the whole gamut of varieties of being, starting among the elemental atoms of ether, air, fire, water, and earth, progressing through the graduated spheres of the various geological, botanical, and zoological forms of existence, and coming finally into the kingdom of man, each birth being linked to the others in conformity to a precise and minutely graduated order of evolution. All the life monads in the universe were passing laboriously along this one inevitable way”. (Zimmer 1953: 265). 43 The main differences pertain to the number of births (8.4 million : 84,000), the sequence of the enumeration of the elements (gross to subtle : subtle to gross) and their number (4 : 5 elements). 44 Zimmer did not quote his source. The basis for his report could neither be traced in the most comprehensive evaluation of the Ājīvika fragments by Basham (1951, especially “Doctrines of the Ājīvikas”, pp. 213-277), nor in the relevant sections of the works of Balcerowicz (2016, especially “Common Cosmology,” pp. 79-84), Hoernle (1926) or Barua (1920). It can be speculated that in his report Zimmer rested on Hoernle’s hypothesis that “the followers of Gosāla ... and the Digambaras were the same class of mendicants” (citation and refutation in Basham 1951: 174) and gave a report based on a Digambara source. 40 26 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art Gośala, two passages in the Buddhist Sāmaññaphalasutta (Sām.) and the Viyāhapannatti (Viy.2) independently attest what must have been some core ideas of Ājīvika cosmology. These two fragments have received ample attention by modern scholars,45 but not in the context of the doctrine of the eighty-four lakh embodiments. Only P.S. Jaini (1980: 228) noted the first of the following obvious parallels: – 8,400,000: the sum total of yonis in Jaina sources is equal to the number of eons each being has to pass before reaching salvation according to Gośala (Sām. cullāsīti mahākappuno satasahassāni / Viy.2 caurāsītiṃ mahākappasayasahassāim)46 – 1,400,000: the number attributed to human yonis in Jaina sources is equal to (one of) the number of primary embodiments according to the Buddhist report of Gośala’s doctrine (Sām. yonipamukhasatasahassāni)47 – Seven: the number attributed to nigodas and element-beings in the Mūlācāra – which only later sources explicitly construe with and multiply by 100,000 – is equal to the number of several classes of beings according to Gośala, among them birth as an unconscious being (Sām. asaññigabbha), birth from grass-like nodes (Sām. nigaṇṭhigabbha), birth as a conscious being (Sām. saññigabbha), divine beings (Sām. deva), humans (Sām. mānusa) or malignant spirits (Sām. pesāca) The latter parallels could point to a “prehistoric” stage of the doctrine of eighty-four lakh embodiments, i.e., a time when the recognition of classes of beings and the specification of their numbers had not yet solidified. The numbers can be understood to represent types, and multiplications by 100,000 can be interpreted, for the sake of the argument, to represent nothing other than a wish to extend the number of types to the limits of imagination. Under these conditions, the numbers assigned to some mutually addressed classes in the account of Gośala’s doctrine (G.) and in See especially Leumann 1884: 253, Hoernle 1888 (Appendix II: The Doctrines of Gosāla Mankhaliputta, pp. 17-21), Basham 1951: 14, Bronkhorst 2003 and Balcerowicz 2016 (Chapter on “Common Cosmology,” pp. 79-84). 46 The text from the fragments is cited here from their edition with critical notes in Balcerowicz 2016, p. 45, n. 75 (Sām.) and p. 47, n. 81 (Viy.2). 47 Note the lexical correspondence with the expression joṇippamuha satasahassā in Sam. 84 [p. 178, 16f.] cited above section 1.2.3, p. 16. 45 Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 27 the accounts preserved in the Uttarajjhāyā (U.)48 and in the Mūlācāra (M.) are summarized in Table 5. G. U. M. earth, etc., beings 2 7 two sensed, etc., beings 2 2 hell-beings 7 7 4 gods 7 4 4 humans 7 2 14 Table 5: Numbers assigned to some classes of beings within three ascetic groups These partly overlapping classifications point to variegated developments of beliefs that were shared in common by three traditions. Against this background it is also understandable that the three traditions should not only agree in using the number 8,400,000, but also in applying it to pivotal doctrinal tenets. The common denominator for both applications is that the number measures a framework which encompasses “every phenomenal existence there is.” In Gośala’s tradition this framework is instantiated as the time in which an individual experiences phenomenal existence and after which this existence ends. For the Digambaras and the Śvetāmbaras, on the other hand, the framework points to all the possible forms of embodiments – a quintessentially animated phenomenal world, about which we have to be very careful if we want our individual embodiments ever to end. 2. The Development of the Jaina Doctrine 2.1. Timeline and Landmarks In reviewing the identified attestations in the Jaina context we can sketch a timeline for landmarks in the development of the doctrine (see Table 6). Within this timeline two broad stages of development can be assumed, i.e., formation and proliferation. The first stage is characterized by a combination of three structural elements: 1), the concept of yoni; 2), the classification of beings; and 3), the eighty-four lakh classification 48 See above n. 19. 28 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art pattern. This stage is concluded by the time of the Sarvārthasiddhi and the Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī, which both attest to the distinctive features of the Century before the 5 Works and Landmarks th in or before the 5th various works: concept of yoni, classification of living beings, application of the eighty-four lakh classification pattern to temporospatial phenomena Mūlācāra: Digambara-sequence of enumeration Samavāyaṃga: application of the 84-lakh pattern to yonis in general 5th/6th Sarvārthasiddhi: explicit application of 84-lakh pattern to the classification of the Mūlācāra 6th/7th Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī: Śvetāmbara-sequence with reference to sub-classes 8th Rājavārttika, Rājavārttikavyākhyā: exposition of subclasses 9th Ācārāṅgasūtravivṛtti, Tattvārthādhigamasūtrabhāṣyaṭīkā: first attestation in a Śvetāmbara commentary on TA 2.33 10th Gommaṭasāra, Tattvārthaślokavārttikālaṅkāra 11 Samavāyāṅgaṭīkā th Stage 11th/12th Tattvārthasukhabodhavṛtti 12th Mūlācāravṛtti, Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇīvṛtti: unique attestation of a third sequence of enumeration in or before the 15th Bharahesara nī Sajjhāy: early attestation of the Sāt Lākh Sūtra 16th Tattvārthavṛtti 1 2 Table 6: Timeline and Landmarks for Jaina attestations doctrine, in the Digambara and the Śvetāmbara versions respectively. The second stage is characterized by gradual acceptance, solidification and explication of the doctrine. Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 29 2.2. Implicit attestation in the Mūlācāra? The classification of yonis in the Mūlācāra may indicate an implicit attestation of the doctrine, as the pattern of eighty-four could have been the guiding principle for the grouping and numbering of classes. 2.2.1. Proportions of the classes If one accepts the explications of later Jaina authors on the purport of the numbers mentioned in the Mūlācāra, the number eighty-four figures not only as the base for the sum total of yonis, but can also be taken as the multiple of most numbers assigned to the individual groups in the Jaina classification. This is obvious in the case of the first group of the Digambara segmentation, i.e., ṇiccidaradhādu, where the assigned number forty-two represents exactly one half of the presumed total of eighty-four (see Figure 3). In this case the whole is divided by the factor 2 (42/84 = 1/2). Such even divisions pertain also to numbers of other groups: maṇua, suraṇirayatiriya and vigaliṃdia respectively represent exactly the sixth, the seventh and the fourteenth part of the whole. 14 o ṇiccidaradhādu (42/84 = 1/2) o taru (10/84) o vigaliṃdia (6/84 = 1/14) 12 42 o suraṇirayatiriya (12/84 = 1/7) o maṇua (14/84 = 1/6) 6 10 Figure 3: Proportions of groups according to the Digambara segmentation Also, in the alternative segmentation of the Śvetāmbaras, the numbers assigned to the group of the four elements and to the sādhāraṇa comply to this pattern.49 The sole exception is the number assigned to taru/ pratyekavanaspati: ten does not belong to the set of divisors for eightyfour; i.e., it does not divide eighty-four without leaving a remainder (10/84 = 1/8.4). 49 See above section 1.2.1, p. 13, where 28/84 = 1/3. 30 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art Still, in a context where a number is said to represent the whole in an eminent sense, it seems to be significant that all but one of the depicted parts divide this number evenly. This distinct mark of the pattern of eighty-four in the narrower sense is further illustrated by a comparison of the Jaina classification with that of Śaivasiddhānta: in the latter, none of the assigned group numbers is reducible to a factor of eighty-four. 50 It can be assumed that many of the Jaina scholars with their notorious taste for calculation perceived the proportions of the numbers involved in their doctrine. The unique sequence of groups in the Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇīvṛtti could thus be explained as a mnemonic arrangement by factors of eightyfour.51 2.2.2. Implicit structure or extrinsic framework? It is important for the history of the doctrine whether the division by factors of eighty-four was there in the first place, i.e., whether the pattern was a guiding principle at the time of the creation of this particular classification of yonis. It is very tempting to assume that this was the case and that the classification pattern of eighty-four was already prominent when the classes were grouped and the numbers distributed in a manner that divides the fixed total most evenly. Consequently, the pattern of eighty-four would also have been present at the time of the composition of the oldest identified attestation for such a grouping of classes, the stanza in the Mūlācāra. Its composer would thus either have drawn on an earlier expression of these groups or he would have been its very creator. Later authors would then have exposed the intrinsic structure of the classification, and merely explicated what the intended purport of the stated numbers was and how those numbers indicated a total of eighty-four lakh, although the total is not explicitly mentioned in the stanza. Such a theory of the history of the classification based on the proportions of the groups of classes is tempting, but not conclusive. If See above section 1.3.2.1, p. 23. There the reduced fractions are 19/84, 5/42, 5/28, 3/28 and 11/84. 51 See above section 1.2.5, p. 18. There the enumeration commences with classes that amount to respectively twenty-eight, fourteen, twelve and six lakh yonis. This could represent a mnemonic arrangement (‘first factors 3 and 6, then factors 7 and 14’) with the concluding emphasis on manujanman, the soteriologically important type of birth, and finally on vanaspati, the sole class whose number cannot be reduced to a factor of 84. 50 Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 31 whoever designed the classification attested in the Mūlācāra was already under the spell of eighty-four, why would he not have sketched perfectly proportioned groups? Why not, for instance, highlight a distinction of the taru, that resulted in subclasses of four and six, which are even divisors of eighty-four (where 4/84 = 1/21)? There is a straightforward answer: The designers of this classification were not at liberty. Their classification of yonis was restrained first and foremost not by the dictate of a number, but by scriptural authority concerning the classes of living beings. In the earlier recognition of these classes the pattern of eighty-four played no role, and it is only by a comparative study of those earlier classifications – and not by playing with numbers – that we may determine in which scriptural stratum the classes were ready to be summarized under the heading of eighty-four lakh. 52 It is very well possible that the stanza from the Mūlācāra already reflects this stage of development and thus represents an implicit attestation of the pattern of eighty-four lakh. It is equally possible that the numbers stated in the Mūlācāra had a different purport and it was only discovered later that the numbers could be bent towards a total of eighty-four. Later authors would then have imposed an extrinsic framework on a classification that initally had a different intent. These two alternatives regarding the age of the application of the 84lakh pattern to the concept of yonis lead to two alternative hypotheses on the origin of the doctrine. 2.3. Hypotheses on the origin of the Jaina doctrine 2.3.1. First hypothesis: Explication of an ancient ascetic belief In a first hypothesis concerning the origin of the doctrine, one could assume that the Sarvārthasiddhi and the Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī both expound an earlier Jaina teaching that was already in the background of the classification of the Mūlācāra. In an extension of this hypothesis, one could assume the doctrine to be a reflection of a longstanding and wide52 Beside the publications mentioned here p. 16, n. 20, the book by J.F. Kohl (1959), currently not available to me, could also be of relevance. As the Digambara and Śvetāmbara sequences of life forms primarily differ with regard to the placement of the nigodas, it can be assumed that the application of the 84-lakh pattern occurred during, or shortly after, an intensified discussion of these life forms. Ohira (1994: 24) notes that the concept of nigoda appears in the fourth canonical stage. 32 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art spread belief within ascetic groups. The identified attestations in South Asian literature can be understood as the outcome of how members of a highly educated elite expressed notions that the majority is likely to have shared only in terminologically less refined forms. 53 The parallels of the Jaina doctrine with the reports on the cosmology of the Ājīvikas on one hand, and the probably mnemonic combination of the classes of embodiments in the Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇīvṛtti on the other, constitute a bracket for a period, where the notion of embodiment, the recognition of classes of living beings and the 84-lakh pattern are likely to have inspired various combinations. Some of these combinations might still be preserved in the narrative literatures, particularly in those of the vernaculars, i.e., in languages that – unlike Sanskrit and Ardhamāgadhī – not only the selected few were able to understand. Śaiva sources are of particular interest in this respect for three reasons: 1) The most distinct identified alternative for the dogmatized Jaina version is that of Śaivasiddhānta; 2) the sources that expound this alternative are also important sources for the doctrine of the southern Ājīvikas (Basham 1951: 187ff.); and 3), other Śaiva schools had also shared common notions with the Jainas.54 From this it seems a worthwhile task for the future to explore whether Ājīvika, Jaina and Śaiva ascetics had more in common with regard to the question of the classes of embodiment than what we have already seen. 2.3.2. Second hypothesis: Innovative integration of earlier concepts The claims of the first hypothesis need to be substantiated by further textual evidence from earlier strata of Jaina literature, and from Śaiva literature in general. As such evidence is pending, a slightly alternative hypothesis is proposed here, according to which the concrete form of the Jaina doctrine was only created in the middle of the first millennium CE. Cf. Eliade’s (1958: 302) position on the age of mythological narratives about Gorakhnāth: “These mythologies and folklores, though comparatively ‘recent’ from a strictly chronological point of view, actually represent extremely archaic contents: they are the emergence of spiritualities long unknown, and hence unrecorded, by the ‘official’ cultural circles, that is by circles more or less dependent upon a learned tradition, whether Brahmamc, Buddhist, Jaina, or ‘sectarian’.” 54 See Sanderson 2014: 10, n. 38: “That plants are sentient beings and that therefore ascetics should avoid harming them is one of a number of notions that the Pāñcārthikas shared with and probably adopted from the Jainas.” 53 Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 33 Individual attestations of the doctrine differ with regard to the number of structural elements that are actually mentioned by them or in their context. Table 7 summarizes these elements as follows: concept Y C x 84 x E Work containing the attestation type Samavāyaṃga, Rājavārttika 1 Mūlācāra, Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī 2 x x x x x Sarvārthasiddhi, Ācārāṅgasūtravivṛtti, Tattvārthādhigamasūtrabhāṣyaṭīkā, Gommaṭasāra, Tattvārthaślokavārttikālaṅkāra, Samavāyāṅgaṭīkā, Tattvārthasukhabodhavṛtti, Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇīvṛtti, 3 x x x x Rājavārttikavyākhyā, Mūlācāravṛtti, Bharahesara nī Sajjhāy, Tattvārthavṛtti 4 Table 7: Structural elements of the doctrine in individual Jaina attestations of yoni (Y), classification of living beings (C), 84-lakh pattern (84), and explication of the classification (E). From such a structural analysis, we can assume two early forms (types 1 and 2), a fully developed, classic form (type 3), and an extended form (type 4) of the doctrine. These forms suggest the following narrative of the history of the doctrine. The doctrine rests on the belief that living beings are essentially souls (jīva), which are embodied due to their attraction to a specific place of birth (yoni). The doctrine consists in the tenet that there are 8.4 million birth places. The earlier forms address two of the three main structural elements individually. They result from explications of the concept of yoni and classifications of living beings in different hermeneutic contexts. In these precursors of the classic doctrine the numbers expressing the quantity of yonis had different functions. 2.3.2.1. Different functions of attributed numbers The Samavāyaṃga attests a tenet in Jainism to quantify all conceivable birth situations with the number 8,400,000. The tenet existed by the fifth century CE at the latest. Because of parallels with the reports on the cosmology of the Ājīvikas and the possibly implicit attestation of the tenet in the Mūlācāra, the tenet could be an earlier and long-standing one, but there is no precise evidence yet for its antiquity. In any case, the statement on the quantity of birth situations did not intend to offer 34 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art the results of an exact census. The number does not represent a total of individually evaluated classes, because it represents a pattern that was frequently applied to phenomena that were thought to be temporspatial. In the context of the explication of the concept of yoni, this pattern is applied to emphasize that the number of embodiments is of enormous magnitude, sheerly unimaginable. Such emphasis is a complement to the central intention of Jainism to provide a path for individuals to end one’s bondage to myriads of births. This hermeneutic background is different from that of another prominent theme in Jainism, that is, to offer a precise classification of living beings. Early typologies were extended and subclasses designed and refined in order to adjust them to a gradually accumulating body of scriptural knowledge. The increasing complexity of such expert knowledge called, at some point, for a simplifying of overviews and plain answers to the question “How many life forms are there?” The stanza from the Mūlācāra presents one such overview among others. The numbers stated in this account (7, 10, 2/6, 4, 14 [lakh]) were hardly understood to represent accurate quantities of the respective classes. They rather provided approximate estimations, rounded figures that pointed to more complex theories and discourses on classification.55 Two diverging functions of the numbers attributed to the yonis are thus “emphasis of multitude” and “approximate estimation.” These functions continued for a while to be distinctly expressed within their respective hermeneutic contexts, even after the precursory forms had been combined in the classic doctrine. In the Rājavārttika, the philosopher Akalaṅka accentuates only the multitude of yonis, without going into the topic of classification, which he had right before him in the Sarvārthasiddhi. The Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī, on the other hand, is a work on cosmology and only contributes to classification, without explicitly mentioning the total, which is, however, stated in the context of every other attestation of this particular classification. With this interpretation, I am not insinuating that the Jainas gave up the quest for accurate numbers in favor of imprecise ones. Approximate estimation is also a feature in modern biology: Mora et al. (“How Many Species Are There on Earth and in the Ocean?” PLoS Biol 9 [8] [2011] : e1001127 [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pbio.1001127, accessed October 29, 2019]) estimate the number of species for “all kingdoms of life on Earth” to be “~8.7 million”. 55 Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 35 2.3.2.2. Combination The Sarvārthasiddhi is, as of yet, the oldest identified source in which the two functions attributed to the numbers of yonis are explicitly merged. Here, 8,400,000 expresses not only the multitude of yonis, but also figures as the sum total of individual classes. On the basis of the currently available evidence, it can be assumed that Devanandin (or one of his not too remote teachers) was responsible for this combination of teachings from two different backgrounds. This creator of what was to become a classic doctrine for both denominations of Jainism, also made a choice with regard to the classification of living beings, a choice that became authoritative for later Digambaras: the stanza of the Mūlācāra is a permanent feature of the doctrine in at least six further works. Thousands upon thousands of people must have believed in the classes and their numbers depicted there. With the Śvetāmbaras, the doctrine gained momentum only later. It can be assumed that it was accepted only under the impression of an already stabilized Digambara conviction. The Śvetāmbaras chose an alternative classification of living beings, for which the two stanzas in the Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī are the yet oldest identified source. The assumption that the classic doctrine would have already been implicitly addressed in the Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī, could be taken as the basis for a theory as to how the doctrine was integrated into the daily pratikramaṇa ritual (where it occurs today as Sāt Lākh Sūtra) at a relatively early stage, as the author of the Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī, Jinabhadra, also composed the Viśeṣāvaśyakabhāṣya, which was influential in this respect. However, firstly, the doctrine is not explicitly addressed in the Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī; secondly, these stanzas could be interpolations, of which this work is said to have many; 56 and, thirdly, the date of the work is a bit early to already contain the classic doctrine in a Śvetāmbara context: Under the presumption that Devanandin (or one of his teachers) has created the classic doctrine, the community needed time to accept it; furthermore, the contexts of the attestations in the Tattvārthādhigamasūtrabhāṣyaṭīkā (see above section 1.2.1) and in the Rājavārttika (see below section 2.4.2) indicate that the acceptance was accompanied by further clarification. The doctrine was, at any rate, established for the Śvetāmbaras by the time of the Ācārāṅgasūtravivṛtti at the latest. The numerous attestations See Leumann 1934: 56. In addition, the stanza appears very close to the end of the work. 56 36 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art in the tenth, eleventh and twelfth centuries indicate that it must have been at its peak during that time. It can be considered that the popularity in both Jaina denominations was one of the reasons for the appropriation by other schools of thought, and that it instigated the reading “caturaśītilakṣayoni” in the Maitrāyaṇīyopaniṣad and the conception of a distinct alternative classification of living beings under the head of the notion of eighty-four lakh embodiments in the neo-Saiddhāntika theological writing in Tamil. 2.4. The contribution of the early Digambara commentaries 2.4.1. Sarvārthasiddhi If the outlines of the second hypothesis are correct, we are witnessing in the works of Devanandin and Akalaṅka the emergence of a doctrine that was formed by the combination of two diverse teachings on the concept of yoni. It is not clear when exactly these teachings were merged, but there is no doubt that Devanandin introduced the combined understanding into the extant commentary tradition of the Tattvārthasūtra. He says: tadbhedāś caturaśītiśatasahasrasaṅkhyā āgamato veditavyāḥ. uktaṃ ca: ṇiccidaradhādu sattaya … (SAS 138,3f.) The distinctions of the [places of birth], eighty-four hundred-thousand in number, are to be known from the scripture[s]. And [there] it is said: the permanent and the other [nigodas] and [the four kinds of] the element[being]s have seven [hundred-thousand distinctions each] (i.e., 42 hundred-thousand distinctions) ... Understanding of works from the eighth century at the earliest is projected into the translation. It is of relevance here, not whether Devanandin had calculated likewise, but that he suggested to his audience that 8.4 million would be an arithmetical figure brought about by the calculation of numbers stated for the classes of yonis. With this statement – rooted in the knowledge of old that the yonis have many forms (aṇegarūvāo joṇīo; Āyār. 1.1.9) – two traditions occur here as a unity: One that had stated that the main types amount to 8.4 million (caurāsītiṃ joṇippamuha satasahassā Sam. 84), and another that was dedicated to the examination of the classes in detail. The tenet in the Sarvārthasiddhi represents a progression of the first tradition. It is consistent to explicate “many” (aṇega) with a number signifying “enormous magnitude” (caurāsītiṃ … satasahassā), and then charge this number with information on how it Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 37 was to be calculated in detail.57 In this innovation, classification has a role which has been described as a “means of (conceptual) colonisation”: [T]he development from the simple categorization of jīva and ajīva to an elaborate taxonomy both reflects and accompanies the way in which the Jaina community developed from a loose association of ascetic groups to a tradition with a lay following. (Johnson 2014: 142) In this process, Devanandin enriched a rather obscure concept concerning the quantities of yonis with systematized knowledge of living beings that had been formalized in the stanza, which is also attested in the Mūlācāra. This formalized knowledge gained prominence due to its being quoted in the Sarvārthasiddhi, and due to the impact of that work on the later commentaries on the Tattvārthasūtra. The attribution of this knowledge to “scripture” (āgama) demonstrates that it already had prestige in Devanandin’s time. āgama is understood here in the following sense: [T]he term can be taken as denoting not just a canonical corpus of scriptural texts … but, in addition, any text of a degree of antiquity which is accepted as having being written by an illustrious teacher. (Dundas 2002: 62) With this it can be recorded unambiguously that the particular classification of living beings and its formulaic expression in the stanza (was part of a text that) already had a degree of antiquity at the time of the composition of the Sarvārthasiddhi. Devanandin used that nimbus of antiquity to drive home his point. The question as to what extent this point was Devanandin’s own innovation or whether he had also relied on an (oral) exegetical tradition cannot be answered here. The alternatives depend on what is regarded as the source of the stanza quoted in the Sarvārthasiddhi. It is well possible that Devanandin took the formulaic expression from the compilation of texts that had been transmitted as Chapter Five of the Mūlācāra. In this case, the expression caturaśītiśatasahasrasaṅkhyāḥ in the introductory sentence of the Sarvārthasiddhi had to be interpreted as referring to a framework adduced by Devanandin, as it was not referred to in the Mūlācāra. However, the stanza is also part of another For the second tradition the doctrine of the Sarvārthasiddhi rather represents a disadvantageous dogma. Its examination of the classes of beings is constrained to a result that is fixed in advance. 57 38 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art compilation: In the Bārasa-Aṇuvekkhā, the stanza and its classification of living beings is not even considered in the context of yonis. Devanandin could have come across the stanza in a further, not yet identified or no longer extant compilation, or in an oral presentation, in which precisely the framework of eighty-four lakh yonis was already considered. In this case, Devanandin’s sole contribution to the history of the doctrine would have been to have transferred this earlier idea to his commentary on the Tattvārthasūtra, and thus to have preserved it for centuries to come. 2.4.2. Rājavārttika and Rājavārttikavyākhyā It was thus the relatively small group of scholars represented by Devanandin, his colleagues and teachers58 that started to intertwine the teaching of the eighty-four lakh yonis with a classification of living beings. The novelty of this combination seems to be still tangible in the first extant Digambara commentary that postdates the earliest attestation of the doctrine. Akalaṅka’s short remark reads: tadbhedāś caśabdasamuccitāḥ pratyakṣajñānidṛṣṭā itareṣām āgamagamyāś caturaśītiśatasahasrasaṅkhyāḥ. (RV 143,16f.) The distinctions of the [places of birth] are summarized by the word ‘and’ [in the Sūtra TA 2.32], are [directly] perceived by [persons with] direct cognition, are to be known from the scriptures for other [persons], are eighty-four hundredthousand in number. Against the background of the rather scarce evidence for the doctrine in the eighth century, Akalaṅka’s remark can be interpreted as providing support for it. He first confirms that the distinctions are, in fact, a relevant topic in the context of the examination of the term yoni, by suggesting that they would be implied in the mūla-text (→ caśabdasamuccita). This is reminiscent of a widely observed strategy of commentators to introduce tenets which are precisely not implied in the mūla-text. Akalaṅka then renders the teaching on the number of distinctions to be plausible by For profiling this group it could be worthwhile to pursue a not yet fully transparent “Yāpanīya-hypothesis”: Fujinaga notes on the stanza under consideration that Devanandin Pūjyapāda “knew some of the Yāpanīya writings” (2015: 38), and refers to what Wiley calls the “speculation that … certain Digambara works, such as the Mūlācāra of Vaṭṭakera … may have been written by Yāpanīyas” (2004: 239). Bronkhorst suggests that Devanandin’s base text, the Tattvārthasūtra, “seems to be a Yāpanīya work in origin” (1985: 178). 58 Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 39 stating that they would be immediately cognizable under exceptional conditions (→ pratyakṣajñānidṛṣṭa), and would in general be accessible through the scriptures (→ āgamagamya).59 With this consent by one of the most credited authorities of Jaina thought the teaching was fit to become an integral part of the doctrine. For future studies it is worth noting that Akalaṅka only refers to what is the basic framework of the classic doctrine in the Rājavārttika. The concrete classification of beings is only depicted in the Rājavārttikavyākhyā. One reason for this could be that the establishing of the framework was of primary importance for Akalaṅka and that he added the details later. But the absence of the classification in the RV could also indicate that Akalaṅka was not interested in this aspect of the doctrine at all, and that the (respective passages in the) RVV do not stem from his own pen. The basis for such a hypothesis is, firstly, that Vidyānandin’s Ślokavārttika depends on the RV to a very high degree, but does not consider the RVV at all in this context (see Trikha forthcoming 2022); and, secondly, that the RV and the RVV differ greatly with regard to the structural elements of the 84-lakh-yoni doctrine, which they actually address. The RV only refers to the very basic form, which has been considered above (section 2.3.2) to be a precursor of the classic doctrine. The RVV, on the other hand, refers to the fully developed form with the exposition of subclasses (see section 1.1.2 above). It is of course possible that Akalaṅka himself designed the exposition of subclasses in the RVV. Conversely, it also seems possible that Akalaṅka was skeptical of the Sarvārthasiddhi’s innovative combination of the teaching of eighty-four lakh yonis with the classification of living beings. He might have been aware of the alternative classification of the Śvetāmbaras, and refrained from going into a discussion of the details of the segmentation of yonis, and preferred instead to make plausible what was still a not too widely attested notion in the eighth century, that is, that the yonis are eighty-four lakh in number. In this case, the Digambara’s exposition of the doctrine in the RVV would have been supplemented by another person. 2.4.3. Tattvārthaślokavārttikālaṅkāra The ŚVA has nothing but a small detail to add to the history of the doctrine. Firstly, the doctrine here occurs in its classic form, which is widely attested in several works from the ninth century onwards (see 59 Akalaṅka’s notion of a scriptural canon is referred to in Dundas 2012: 80. 40 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art section 2.3.2 above). Secondly, the doctrine is expressed by a text that corresponds exactly to texts from the Rājavārttika and the Sarvārthasiddhi, and thus indicates that Vidyānandin composed the respective portion by combining texts from these two works (see Trikha forthcoming 2022). Above (section 1.1.4), it has been argued that the transmission status of the only notable textual variant in pāda b of the stanza, i.e., do do a, is unclear – it could be either a later secondary reading motivated by the explanatory framework of the stanza, or an earlier original reading. Although a decision in favor of one of these alternatives is not yet possible, the latter alternative can be supported by textual material that has been reviewed in the course of the examination of parallels for the doctrine in the Śvetāmbara literature: The expression of the number for the birthplaces of beings with deficient senses (vigaliṃdia) is idiosyncratic only in the context of the transmission of the stanza, but not in the context of the classification of beings (see Table 8). The vigalliṃdiesu chacc eva Mūl. 5.29 with slight phonetic variation in seven later works (see section 1.1.1 above) vigaliṃdiesu do do Bṛh. 351f. and two later works (see section 1.2.4 above) viyaliṃdie do do a ŚVA 335,31f.60 Table 8: Expression of the number of yonis for beings with deficient senses variant reading in the ŚVA could thus reflect an established wording in addressing the vigaliṃdia, a formulaic phrase that was already in use at the time of the Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī in the sixth or seventh centuries, and that might even have been the very base of the versification, which is first attested in the Mūlācāra. In accordance with the editorial rule recentiores non deteriores, 61 an emendation of the classification of the vigaliṃdia in the TattvārthaThe parallels in Bṛh., ĀSV and SAṬ also provide material for the difficult interpretation of the word a in ŚVA do do a (see here, n. 8, p. 9): In pāda b of the second stanza Bṛh., ĀSV and SAṬ (see here, p. 17) clearly read a conjunction with cauro cauro (y)a. This increases the probability that in ŚVA the word a is also a conjunction that was shifted to the end metri causa. 61 I am grateful to Y. Muroya for referring me to this dictum by G. Pasqualis. It is mentioned, e.g., by R. Browning (“Recentiores non deteriores.” Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies, No. 7 [1960], p. 11): “It has by now become a commonplace that readings first appearing in later Byzantine manuscripts may be not the interpolations of pedants but genuine tradition, derived from early manuscripts … ” 60 Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 41 ślokavārttikālaṅkāra on the basis of the convergent classification in the Mūlācāra and the Sarvārthasiddhi is therefore not advisable. This would conceal the possibilities that Vidyānandin had other attestations of the Sarvārthasiddhi, or of Mūlācāra, Chapter Five, at his disposal than we have today. It would also conceal the possibility that Vidyānandin verified the classification of yonis in an altogether different source – perhaps that alternative source, from which Devanandin had drawn his inspiration in the first place (see section 2.4.1 above). Moreover, the fact that we can consistently retrace a stable Digambara classification of yonis from the latest considered source in the sixteenth century back to the Mūlācāra is only a particular in the history of the Jaina classification of living beings. The creator of the stanza preserved in the Mūlācāra did not invent the classification presented, but had used sources for it. The variant reading in the ŚVA could well echo one of these sources – and provides a specimen for future research on ancient classifications of living beings. Abbreviations and Bibliography Abbreviations for Series, Journals, Institutions ANIS IJJS JIP JMJGP/S MDJG WZKS Alt- und Neuindische Studien International Journal of Jaina Studies Journal of Indian Philosophy Jñānapīṭha Mūrtidevī Jaina Granthamālā: Prakrit/Saṃskṛta Grantha Māṇikacandra Digambara Jaina Granthamālā Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens Primary sources Āyar. Āyāraṃgasutta, included in ĀSV ĀSV Ācārāṅgasūtravivṛtti, Śīlāṅka: Śīlāṅkācāryavihitavivṛtiyutam … Ācārāṅgasūtram. Bombay: Agamodayasamiti 1916. KAT Kulārṇavatantra. Sanskrit Text [by] Tārānātha Vidyāratna. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass 1965, Reprint 2007. Kal. Kallāṇāloyaṇā, Ajitabrahman: Siddhāntasārādisaṃgrahaḥ (pañcaviṃśatisaṃskṛtaprākṛta-granthānām gucchaḥ). sampādakaḥ saṃśodhakaś ca Pannālāl Soni. (MDJG 21). Bombay [1979 Vikrama era ~] 1922, pp. 75-84. 42 KĀN (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art Kaulāvalīnirṇayaḥ. (Tantrik Texts ed. by A. Avalon Vol. 14). Calcutta: Āgamānusandhāna Samiti [Saṃ 1985 ~] 1928. KJN Kaulajñānanirṇaya. Ed. by Prabodh Chandra Bagchi. (Calcutta Sanskrit Series 3). Calcutta: Metropolitan Printing & Publishing House 1934. KV Karṇāṭavṛtti, included in Gom. Gom. Gommaṭasāra, Nemicandra: Gommaṭasāra (Jīvakāṇḍa) of Acharya Nemichandra Siddhanta Chakravarti with Karṇāṭavṛtti and Sanskrit Tīka Jīvatattvapradīpikā. Ed. by A.N. Upadhye and K.C Shastri. (JMJGP 14-15). 3rd ed. New Delhi 2000. JTP Jīvatattvapradīpikā, included in Gom. TA Tattvārthasūtra, included in ŚVA TAṬ Tattvārthaṭīkā. [...] saṃdṛbdha-svopajñabhāṣya-bhagavad-Haribhadrasūrīśvara-Śrī-Tattvārthasūtra. Surat: Jainand P. Press 1936. TABh Tattvārthādhigamabhāṣya, included in TABhṬ TABhṬ Tattvārthādhigmasūtrabhāṣyaṭīkā, Siddhasenagaṇi: (Shet Devchand Lalbai Jain Pustakoddhar Fund 67, 76). Ed. by H.R. Kapadia. Bombay: Jivanchand Sakerchand Javeri 1926, 1930. TAV Tattvārthavṛtti, Śrutasāgarasūri: Śrutasāgarasūri-viracitā Tattvārthavṛttiḥ. Ed. by Mahendrakumar Jain. (JMJGS 4). Kāśī: Bhāratīya Jñānapītha 1949. TASV Tattvārthasukhabodhavṛtti, Bhāskaranandin: The Tattvartha Sutra of Sri Umāsvāmi with the Sukhabodha of Sri Bhāskaranandi. Ed. by A. Shantiraja Shastri. (Oriental Library Publications, Sanskrit Series 44). Mysore: Oriental Library 1944. TŚPC Triṣaṣṭiśalākāpuruṣacarita, Hemacandra. Prathamaṃ Parva. sampādaka: Śrīcaraṇavijayajī. Ahmdābād: K.S Śrīhemacandrācārya navama janmaśatābdī smṛti śikṣaṇa–saṃskāranidhi 1990. Das. Dasaveyāliyasutta. The Dasaveyāliya Sutta ed. by E. Leumann and translated by W. Schubring. Ahmedabad: Sheth Anandji Kalianji 1932 [= Schubring 1977: 109-248]. Paṇ. Paṇṇavaṇāsutta. Ed. by Muni Puṇyavijaya, D. Mālvaṇiā, A.M. Bhojak. Introduction translated into English by N.J. Shah. (JainaĀgama Series 9.1-2). Bombay: Shri Mahāvīra Jaina Vidyālaya 1971. Prat. Pratikramaṇasūtra: Śraddhā-Pratikramaṇa Sūtra (Prabodha Ṭīkā). Three volumes. Ed. Paṅnyās Bhadraṅkarvijayagaṇi and Muni Kalyāṇprabhavijaya. Bombay: Jain Sāhitya Vikās Maṇḍal 1977. Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 43 Bārasa-Aṇuvekkhā: Kundakunda-viracitaḥ Ṣaṭprabhṛtādisaṃgrahaḥ. Ed. by Pt. Pannalal Soni. (MDJG 17). Bombay: Nathuram Premi 1920, pp. 427-442. Bṛh. Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī, Jinabhadra, included in BSV BSV Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇīvṛtti, Malayagiri: Jinabhadragaṇikṣamākṣamaṇavircacitā Malayagiriā[sic]sūri-viracitavṛttisahitā Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī. Saṃśodhaka: Dānasūrīśvara. Bombay: Jinaśāsana Ārādhana Trust [Vīra Saṃvat 2514] 1987. MĀV Mūlācāravṛtti, Vasunandin: Vattakerāchārya’s Mūlāchāra with Āchāravritti, a Sanskrit commentary of Acharya Vasunandi Siddhantachakravarti. 2 vols. Tranlated [into Hindi] by Aryikaratna Jnanmati. Ed. by K.Ch. Shastri, J.L. Shastri, P. Jain Sahityacharya. (JMJGP 19-20). 3rd ed. New Delhi: Bharatiya Jnanapith 1999. MU Maitrāyaṇīyopaniṣad. (1) The Maitrāyaṇīya Upaniṣad. A Critical Essay, with Text, Translation and Commentary by J.A.B. van Buitenen. (Disputationes Rheno-Trajectinae 6). ‘S-Gravenhage: Mouton & Co. 1962. (2) The Maitri or Maitráyaṇíya Upanishad by E.B. Cowell. (Bibliotheca Indica, New Series 35, 40, 208). Calcutta 1862. Mūl. Mūlācāra, 5th chapter. Edited in Okuda 1975: 33-87. RV Tattvārtharājavārttika, Akalaṅka. Akalaṅkadeva-viracitaṃ Tattvārthavārtikam (Rājavārtikam) hindīsārasahitam. 2 vols. sampādaka: Mahendrakumār Jain. (JMJGS 10, 20). [1953]. 6th ed. Delhi 2001. RVV Tattvārtharājavārttikavyākhyānālaṅkāra, included in RV Viy. Viyāhapannatti. (1) Viyāhapannatti (Bhagavaī). The Fifth Aṅga of the Jaina Canon. Ed. by J. Deleu. Brugge: De Tempel 1970. (2) Extract edited in Balcerowicz 2016: 47. n. 81. ŚVA Tattvārthaślokavārttikālaṅkāra, Vidyānandin: Vidyānandisvāmiviracitaṃ Tattvārthaślokavārtikaṃ Manoharlālnyāyaśāstriṇā sampāditaṃ saṃśodhitaṃ ca. (Saraswati Oriental Research Sanskrit Series 16). Bombay 1918, reprint Ahmedabad 2002. SAṬ Samavāyāṅgaṭīkā, Abhayadeva: Samavāyāṅgasūtram with the commentary of Abhayadeva. Ed. by Muni Jambūvijaya. (Jaina Āgama Series 20). Mumbai: Śrī Mahāvīra Jaina Vidyālaya 2005. Sam. Samavāyaṃgasutta, included in SAṬ SAS Sarvārthasiddhi, Devanandin: Pūjyapāda’s Sarvārthasiddhi. The commentary on Āchārya Griddhapiccha’s Tattvārthasūtra. Ed. Bār. 44 Sām. (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art and translated [into Hindi] by Phoolchandra Shastri. (JMJGS 13). Kāśī 1955, 12th ed. New Delhi 2003. Sāmaññaphalasutta. Extract edited in Balcerowicz 2016: 45, n. 75. Secondary sources Balbir, N. Āvaśyaka-Studien. Introduction générale et Traductions. (ANIS 45.1). Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner 1993. Balcerowicz, P. “Some Remarks on the Opening Sections in Jaina Epistemological Treatises. In: Śāstrārambha: Inquiries into the Preamble in Sanskrit. Ed. by W. Slaje. (Abhandlungen für die Kunde des Morgenlandes Band 67). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz 2008, pp. 25-81. Early Asceticism in India. Ājīvikism and Jainism. (Routledge Advances in Jaina Studies 6). London and New York: Routledge 2016. Barua, B. The Ajivikas. University of Calcutta 1920. Basham, A.L. History and Doctines of the Ājīvikas. A Vanished Indian Religion. London: Luzac & Company 1951. Birch, J. “The Proliferation of Āsanas in Late Medieval Yoga Texts.” In: Yoga in Transformation. Ed. by K. Baier, P. Maas, K. Preisendanz. Vienna: V&R Unipress 2018, pp. 103-179. Bronkhorst, J. “On the Chronology of the Tattvārtha Sūtra and Some Early Commentaries.” WZKS 29 (1985) 155-184. “Ājīvika doctrine reconsidered.” In: Essays in Jaina Philosophy and Religion. Ed. P. Balcerowicz. (Lala Sundarlal Jain Research Series 20). Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass 2003, pp. 153-178. Bühnemann, G. Eighty-four Āsanas in Yoga. A Survey of Traditions [with Illustrations]. New Delhi: DK Printworld 2007, Reprint 2012. Cort, J. “Green Jainism? Notes and Queries toward a Possible Jain Environment Ethic.” In: Jainism and Ecology: Nonviolence in the Web of Life. Ed. by Ch.K. Chapple. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass 2006, pp. 63-94. Cowell, E.B., 1862: see MU2 Dasgupta, S. Obscure Religous Cults as Background of Bengali Literature. University of Calcutta 1946. Deleu, J., 1970: see Viy.1 “Review Okuda 1975.” Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 76.2 (1981) 183. Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 45 Dundas, P. The Jains. (Library of Religious Beliefs and Practices). London / New York: Routledge, 2nd edition 2002. Eliade, M. Yoga. Immortality and Freedom. Translated from the French by W.R. Trask. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul 1958. Flügel, P. / Qvarnström, O. Jaina Scriptures and Philosophy. (Routledge Advances in Jains Studies.) London and New York: Routledge 2015. Fujinaga, S. “Jinabhadra’s Bṛhatsaṃgrahaṇī and Malayagiri’s Commentary on it.” In: Jaina Studies. Proceedings of the DOT 2010 Panel in Marburg, Germany. Ed. by J. Soni. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan 2012. “Śvetāmbara Āgamas in the Digambara tradition.” In Flügel/ Qvarnström 2015: 34-40. Gansten, M. “Origins of the Tājika System of Astrological Aspects and Dignities.” History of Science in South Asia 6 (2019) 162-199. Glasenapp, H.v. Der Jainismus. Eine indische Erlösungsreligion. Berlin: Verlag Alf Häger 1925. Gil, D. “Distributive Numerals.” In: Dryer, M. & Haspelmath, M. (eds.). The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology 2013. [see http://wals.info/ chapter/54, accessed October 19, 2019] Hoernle, A. Uvāsagadasāo. The Seventh Anga of the Jains. Vol. II. Translation. Calcutta: Baptist Mission 1888. “The Ājīvikas.” In: Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics. Ed. by J. Hastings. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons 1926, pp. 259-268. Jacobi, H. Gaina Sûtras. Translated from the Prâkrit by H. Jacobi. Part II. (Sacred Books of the East 45.) Oxford University Press 1895, Reprint New Delhi: Motial Banarsidass 1995. Jaini, P. “Bhavyatva and Abhavyava. A Jain doctrine of predestination.” In: Upadhye et al. 1977: 95-111. “Karma and the Problem of Rebirth in Jainism.” In: Karma and Rebirth in Classical Indian Traditions. Ed. by W. Doniger O’Flaherty. Berkeley: University of California Press 1980, pp. 217-238. Johnson, H.: Triṣaṣṭiśalākāpuruṣacaritra. Vol. I: Ādīśvaracaritra. Translated by H. Johnson. Baroda: Oriental Institute 1931. Johnson, W.J. “From Ontology to Taxonomy in the Jaina Colonisation of the Universe.” In: Categorisation in Indian Philosophy: Thinking Inside the Box. Ed. by J. Frazier. Farnham/Burlington: Ashgate Publishing 2014. 46 (Non-) Violence in Jaina Philosophy, Literature and Art Kelting, M.W. “Thinking collectively about Jain Satīs.” In: Studies in Jaina History and Culture: Disputes and Dialogues. Ed. by P. Flügel. (Advances in Jaina Studies). Oxon / New York: Routledge 2006, pp. 181-207. Kirfel, W. Die Kosmographie der Inder. Bonn/Leipzig: Kurt Schroeder 1920. Kohl, J.F. Das physikalische und biologische Weltbild der indischen Jainasekte. World Jain Mission 1959. Leumann, E. “Extracts from Bhagavatī XV. on the Intercourse between Mahāvīra and Gosāla Mankhaliputta.” Appendix to: W. Rockhill: The Life of the Buddha. London: Trübner & Co 1884, pp. 249-259. Übersicht über die Āvaśyaka-Literatur. (ANIS 4). Hamburg: Friederichsen, de Gruyter & Co 1934. Lopez, D. Seeing the Sacred in Samsara: An Illustrated Guide to the Eighty-Four Mahasiddhas. Boulder: Shambala Publications 2019. Mallinson, J. The Gherandasaṃhitā. Woodstock: YogaVidya.com 2004. McEvilley, T. The Shape of Ancient Thought. Comparative Studies in Greek and Indian Philosophies. New York: Allworth Press 2002. McGregor, R.S. The Oxford Hindi–English Dictionary. Delhi: Oxford University Press 1993. Ohira, S. Dhyānastava of Śrī Bhāskaranandin. (MDJG 54). Varanasi: Bhāratīya Jñānapīṭha 1973. A Study of the Bhagavatīsūtra. A Chronological Analysis. (Prakrit Text Series 28). Ahmedabad: Prakrit Text Society 1994. Okuda, K. Eine Digamara-Dogmatik. Das fünfte Kapitel von Vaṭṭakeras Mūlācāra herausgegeben, übersetzt und kommentiert. (ANIS 15). Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag 1975. Ollett, O. “Moraic Feet in Prakrit Metrics: A Constraint-Based Approach.” Transactions of the Philologic Society 110.2 (2012) 241-282. Pingree, D. The Yavanajātaka of Sphujidhvaja. Two vols. (Harvard Oriental Series 48). Cambridge: Harvard University Press 1978. Reck, C. “84 000 Mädchen in einem manichäischen Text aus Zentralasien.” In: Bauddhavidyā-sudhākaraḥ: Studies in Honour of Heinz Bechert On the Occasion of His 65th Birthday. Ed. by P. Kieffer-Pülz and J.-U. Hartmann. Swisttal-Odendorf: Indica et Tibetica Verlag 1997. Sanderson, A. “The Śaiva Literature.” Journal of Indological Studies 24 & 25 (2012/2013) 1-113. Sanghvi, S. Pt. Sukhlalji’s Commentary on Tattvārtha Sūtra of Vācaka Umāsvāti. Translated by K.K. Dixit. (L.D. Series 44). Ahmedabad: L.D. Institute of Indology, 1974, 2nd ed. 2000. Eighty-four Lakh Yonis 47 Satinsky, R. “What can the lifespans of Ṛṣabha, Bharata, Śreyāṃsa, and Ara tell us about the history of the concept of mount Meru?” IJJS 11.1 (2015) 1-24. Schomerus, H.W. Śaiva Siddhānta. An Indian School of Mystical Thought. Translated by M. Law. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass 2000. Schubring, W. Die Lehre der Jainas nach den alten Quellen dargestellt. (Grundriss der Indo-Arischen Philologie und Alterumskunde 3.7). Berlin und Leipzig: Walter De Gruyter & Co 1935. Kleine Schriften. Hrsg. v. K. Bruhn. (Glasenapp Stiftung 13). Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner 1977. Sheth, H.D. Pāiya-Sadda-Mahaṇṇavo. A comprehensive Prakrit-Hindi dictionary. (Prākrit Text Society Series 7). Varanasi: Prakrit Text Society 1963. Soothill, W.E., and Hodus, L. A Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms with Sanskrit and English equivalents and a Sanskrit-Pali index. London: Kegan Paul etc. 1937. Tatia, N. That Which Is. Tattvārtha Sūtra. (The Scared Literature Series). New York: HarperCollins 1994. Tieken, H. “On the composition of the Uttarajjhāyā.” In Flügel/ Qvarnström 2015: 5-20. Trikha, H. “Prakrit passages in Vidyānandin’s works.” Forthcoming 2022. [References in the present article pertain to section 2.2 of the forthcoming article and the subsection: “The early commentaries on the Tattvārthasūtra: SAS, RVV and ŚVA”.] Upadhye, A.N., et al. Māhavīra and his teachings. Ed by A.N. Upadhye, N. Tatia, D. Malvania, M. Mehta, N. Shastri, K. Shastri. Bombay: Bhāgavan Mahāvīra 2500th Nirvāṇa Mahotsava Samiti 1977. van Buitenen 1962: see MU1 Wiles, R. “Śvetāmbara Jain Canonical Commentators Writing in Sanskrit.” Asian Studies (2013) 17.1., pp. 17-44. Wiley, K.L. Historical Dictionary of Jainism. (Historical Dictionaries of Religions, Philosophies, and Movements 53). Lanham: Scarecrow Press 2004. Zimmer, H.: Philosophies of India. Ed. by J. Campbell. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul 1952, 2nd impression 1953.