Śramaṇa

Murtipujaka Jain ascetic Jain monk meets an Ājīvika ascetic and learns of the Buddha's parinirvana (seen on right). at Bodh Gaya , Parshwanatha re-organized the shraman sangha in 9th century BCE According to Olivelle and Crangle, the earliest known explicit use of the term "śramaṇa" is found in section 2.7 of the Taittiriya Aranyaka, a layer within the Yajurveda (Vedic scripture, c. 1000 BCE). It mentions śramaṇa Rishis and celibate Rishis. The word "śramaṇa" is postulated to be derived from the verbal root '''', meaning "to exert effort, labor or to perform austerity". The Śramaṇa tradition refers collectively to a variety of renunciate ascetic traditions from the middle of the 1st millennium BCE. Buddhist commentaries associate the word's etymology with the quieting (') of evil (') as in the following phrase from the 3rd century BCE Dhammapada, verse 265: ' ("someone who has pacified evil is called '"). The first usage of the term śramaṇa in Jain literature is found in the earliest Jain texts, the Sutrakritanga, composed after the 2nd century BCE, and the Ācārāṅga Sūtra, which may have originated as an oral tradition after Mahavira's death but was principally compiled and heavily edited in its current form by Acharya Devardhigani Kshamashraman, c. 454 CE. According to Johannes Bronkhorst:Mainly on linguistic grounds, it has been argued that the Ācārāṅga Sūtra, the Sūtrakṛtāṅga Sūtra, and the Uttarādhyayana Sūtra are among the oldest texts in the canon. This does not guarantee that they actually date from the time of Mahāvīra, nor even from the centuries immediately following his death, nor does it guarantee that all parts of these texts were composed simultaneously. The term śramaṇa is also found in the earliest Digambara Jain text, Mulachara, composed around 150 CE. Digambaras maintain that the original Ācārāṅga Sūtra is lost, and Mulachara is the closest to the original teachings of Mahavira. Pali samaṇa has been suggested as the ultimate origin of the word Evenki сама̄н (samān) "shaman", possibly via Middle Chinese or Tocharian B; however, the etymology of this word, which is also found in other Tungusic languages, is controversial (see ). ==History==

monks from Gujarat monks led by Ajahn Maha Bua out for the morning alms round Several śramaṇa movements are known to have existed in India before the 6th century BCE (pre-Buddha, pre-Mahavira), and these influenced both the āstika and nāstika traditions of Indian philosophy. Martin Wiltshire states that the Śramaṇa tradition evolved in India over two phases, namely Paccekabuddha and Savaka phases, the former being the tradition of individual ascetic and latter of disciples, and that Buddhism and Jainism ultimately emerged from these as sectarian manifestations. These traditions drew upon already established Brahmanical concepts, states Wiltshire, to communicate their own distinct doctrines. Reginald Ray concurs that śramaṇa movements already existed and were established traditions in pre-6th century BCE India, but disagrees with Wiltshire that they were nonsectarian before the arrival of Buddha. Some scholars have interpreted this to mean "sky-clad, naked monk" and therefore a synonym for Digambara (a Jainism sect). However, other scholars state that this could not be the correct interpretation because it is inconsistent with the words that immediately follow, "wearing soil-hued garments". The context likely means that the poet is describing the "munis" as moving like the wind, their garments pressed by the wind. According to Olivelle, it is unlikely that the vātaraśana implies a class within the Vedic context. The Vedic society, states Olivelle, contained many people whose roots were non-Aryan who must have influenced the Aryan classes. However, it is difficult to identify and isolate these influences, in part because the Vedic culture not only developed from influences but also from its inner dynamism and socio-economic developments. According to Indian anthropologist Ramaprasad Chanda the origins of Sramanism back to pre-Vedic and pre-Aryan cultures, particularly those practicing magic. He posited that the practice of asceticism could be linked to the initiatory phases of seclusion and abstinence observed by shamans. According to Bronkhorst, the śramaṇa culture arose in "Greater Magadha," which was Indo-Aryan, but not Vedic. In this culture, Kshatriyas were placed higher than Brahmins, and it rejected Vedic authority and rituals. Pre-Buddhist śrāmana schools in Buddhist texts Pande attributes the origin of Buddhism, not entirely to the Buddha, but to a "great religious ferment" towards the end of the Vedic period when the Brahmanic and Shramanic traditions intermingled. The Buddhist text of the Samaññaphala Sutta identifies six pre-Buddhist śrāmana schools, identifying them by their leader. These six schools are represented in the text to have diverse philosophies, which according to Padmanabh Jaini, may be "a biased picture and does not give a true picture" of the shramanic schools rivaling with Buddhism, • The Purana Kassapa (Amoralism) śrāmana school: believed in antinomian ethics. This ancient school asserted that there are no moral laws, nothing is moral or immoral, there is neither virtue nor sin. • The Makkhali Gosala (Ajivika) śrāmana school: believed in fatalism and determinism that everything is the consequence of nature and its laws. This school denied that there is free will, but believed that soul exists. Everything has its own individual nature, based on how one is constituted from elements. Karma and consequences are not due to free will, cannot be altered, everything is pre-determined, because of and including one's composition. Some scholars posit that the Indus Valley civilisation symbols may be related to later Jain statues, and the bull icon may have a connection to Rishabhanatha. According to Dundas, outside of the Jain tradition, historians date the Mahavira as about contemporaneous with the Buddha in the 5th-century BCE, and accordingly the historical Parshvanatha, based on the c. 250-year gap, is placed in 8th or 7th century BCE. Buddhism It was as a śramaṇa that the Buddha left his father's palace and practised austerities. Gautama Buddha, after fasting nearly to death by starvation, regarded extreme austerities and self-mortification as useless or unnecessary in attaining enlightenment, recommending instead a "Middle Way" between the extremes of hedonism and self-mortification. Devadatta, a cousin of Gautama, caused a split in the Buddhist sangha by demanding more rigorous practices. The Buddhist movement chose a moderate ascetic lifestyle. Ājīvika Ājīvika was founded in the 5th century BCE by Makkhali Gosala, as a śramaṇa movement and a major rival of early Buddhism and Jainism. Ājīvikas were organised renunciates who formed discrete communities. The Ājīvikas reached the height of their prominence in the late 1st millennium BCE, then declined, yet continued to exist in south India until the 14th century CE, as evidenced by inscriptions found in southern India. Ancient texts of Buddhism and Jainism mention a city in the first millennium BCE named Savatthi (Sanskrit Śravasti) as the hub of the Ājīvikas; it was located in what is now the North Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. In later part of the common era, inscriptions suggests that the Ājīvikas had a significant presence in the South Indian state of Karnataka and the Kolar district of Tamil Nadu. Conflict between śramaṇa movements According to the 2nd century CE text Ashokavadana, the Mauryan emperor Bindusara was a patron of the Ajivikas, and it reached its peak of popularity during this time. Ashokavadana also mentions that Bindusara's son Ashoka converted to Buddhism, became enraged at a picture that depicted Buddha in negative light, and issued an order to kill all the Ajivikas in Pundravardhana. Around 18,000 followers of the Ajivika sect were executed as a result of this order. Jaina texts mention separation and conflict between Mahavira and Gosala, accusation of contemptuous comments, and an occasion where the Jaina and Ajivika monastic orders "came to blows". However, given the texts alleging conflict and portraying Ajivikas and Gosala in negative light were written centuries after the incident by their śramaṇa opponents, and given the versions in Buddhist and Jaina texts are different, the reliability of these stories, states Basham, is questionable. ==Philosophy==

Jain philosophy Jainism derives its philosophy from the teachings and lives of the twenty-four Tirthankaras, of whom Mahavira was the last. Acharyas Umaswati, Kundakunda, Haribhadra, and others further developed and reorganized Jain philosophy in its present form. The distinguishing features of Jain philosophy are its belief in the independent existence of soul and matter, predominance of karma, the denial of a creative and omnipotent God, belief in an eternal and uncreated universe, a strong emphasis on nonviolence, an accent on anekantavada and morality and ethics based on liberation of the soul. The Jain philosophy of anekantavada and syādvāda, which posits that the truth or reality is perceived differently from different points of view, and that no single point of view is the complete truth, have made very important contributions to ancient Indian philosophy, especially in the areas of skepticism and relativity. Usage in Jain texts Jain monastics are known as śramaṇas while lay practitioners are called śrāvakas. The religion or code of conduct of the monks is known as the śramaṇa dharma. Jain canons like Ācārāṅga Sūtra and other later texts contain many references to śramaṇas. Ācāranga Sūtra One verse of the Ācāranga Sūtra defines a good śramaṇa: The chapter on renunciation contains a śramaṇa vow of non-possession: The Ācāranga Sūtra gives three names of Mahavira, the twenty-fourth Tirthankara, one of which was Śramaṇa: Sūtrakrtanga Another Jain canon, Sūtrakrtanga describes the śramaṇa as an ascetic who has taken Mahavrata, the five great vows: The Sūtrakrtanga records that prince, Ardraka, who became disciple to Mahavira, arguing with other heretical teachers, told Makkhali Gosala the qualities of śramaṇas: Buddhist philosophy Buddha initially practiced severe austerities, fasting himself nearly to death of starvation. However, he later considered extreme austerities and self-mortification as unnecessary and recommended a "Middle Way" between the extremes of hedonism and self-mortification. The Brahmajāla Sutta mentions many śramaṇas with whom Buddha disagreed. For example, in contrast to shramanic Jains whose philosophical premise includes the existence of an Atman (self, soul) in every being, Buddhist philosophy denies that there is any self or soul. Ajivika philosophy The Ājīvika school is known for its Niyati doctrine of absolute determinism, the premise that there is no free will, that everything that has happened, is happening and will happen is entirely preordained and a function of cosmic principles. and rejected the epistemic authority of the Vedas, but they believed that in every living being there is an ātman – a central premise of Hinduism and Jainism as well. Comparison of philosophies The śramaṇa traditions subscribed to diverse Indian philosophies, significantly disagreeing with each other as well as with the six schools of orthodox Hindu philosophy. The differences ranged from a belief that every individual has a soul (self, atman) to asserting that there is no soul, A denial of the epistemic authority of the Vedas and Upanishads was one of the several differences between shramanic philosophies and orthodox Hinduism. Jaini states that while authority of vedas, belief in a creator, path of ritualism and social system of heredity ranks, made up the cornerstones of Brahminical schools, the path of ascetic self-mortification was the main characteristic of all the shramanic schools. In some cases when the shramanic movements shared the same philosophical concepts, the details varied. In Jainism, for example, Karma is based on materialist element philosophy, where Karma is the fruit of one's action conceived as material particles which stick to a soul and keep it away from natural omniscience. The Buddha conceived Karma as a chain of causality leading to attachment to the material world and hence to rebirth. The Ajivikas were fatalists and elevated Karma as inescapable fate, where a person's life goes through a chain of consequences and rebirths until it reaches its end. Other śramaṇa movements such as those led by Pakkudha Kaccayana and Purana Kashyapa, denied the existence of Karma. ==Influences on Indian culture==

The śramaṇa traditions influenced and were influenced by Hinduism and by each other. According to some scholars, the concept of the cycle of birth and death, the concept of samsara and the concept of liberation may quite possibly be from śramaṇa or other ascetic traditions. Obeyesekere suggests that tribal sages in the Ganges valley may instead have inspired the ideas of samsara and liberation, just like rebirth ideas that emerged in Africa and Greece. O'Flaherty states that there isn't enough objective evidence to support any of these theories. It is in the Upanishadic period that shramanic theories influence the Brahmanical theories. While the concepts of Brahman and Atman (Soul, Self) can be consistently traced back to pre-Upanishadic layers of Vedic literature, the heterogeneous nature of the Upanishads show infusions of both social and philosophical ideas, pointing to evolution of new doctrines, likely from the shramanic movements. Śramaṇa traditions brought concepts of Karma and Samsara as central themes of debate. Concepts, such as karma and reincarnation may have originated in the śramaṇa or the renunciant traditions, and then become mainstream. There are multiple theories of possible origins of concepts such as Ahimsa, or non-violence. Theories on who influenced whom, in ancient India, remains a matter of scholarly debate, and it is likely that the different philosophies contributed to each other's development. Doniger summarizes the historic interaction between scholars of Vedic Hinduism and shramanic Buddhism: {{Quote| There was such constant interaction between Vedism and Buddhism in the early period that it is fruitless to attempt to sort out the earlier source of many doctrines, they lived in one another's pockets, like Picasso and Braque (who, in later years, were unable to say which of them had painted certain paintings from their earlier, shared period). Hinduism Randall Collins states that "the basic cultural framework for lay society which eventually became Hinduism" was laid down by Buddhism. This system gave complete freedom to adults to choose what they want to do, whether they want to be householders or sannyasins (ascetics), the monastic tradition was a voluntary institution. This voluntary principle, states Olivelle, was the same principle found in Buddhist and Jain monastic orders at that time. ==In Western literature==

Various possible references to "śramaṇas", with the name more or less distorted, have appeared in ancient Western literature. Clement of Alexandria (150–211) Clement of Alexandria makes several mentions of the śramaṇas, both in the context of the Bactrians and the Indians: Porphyry (233–305) Porphyry extensively describes the habits of the śramaṇas, whom he calls "Samanaeans", in his On Abstinence from Animal Food Book IV . He says his information was obtained from "the Babylonian Bardesanes, who lived in the times of our fathers, and was familiar with those Indians who, together with Damadamis, were sent to Caesar." ;On entering the order: ;On food and living habits: ;On life and death: ==In contemporary Western culture==

German novelist Hermann Hesse, long interested in Eastern, especially Indian, spirituality, wrote Siddhartha, in which the main character becomes a Samana upon leaving his home. ==See also==