Ājīvika -asceticism

See our article on the Barabar Caves in academia.edu.scribd & researchgate.net

Dr Uday Dokras Ph D SWEDEN

An Ājīvika ascetic in a Gandhara sculpture of the Mahaparinirvana, circa 2nd-3rd century CE.
On the left: Mahākāśyapa meets an Ājīvika and learns of the parinirvana

The views of six śramaṇa in the Pāli Canon

(based on the Buddhist text Sāmaññaphala Sutta1)

Śramaṇa view (diṭṭhi) 1

Pūraṇa Amoralism: denies any reward or

Kassapa punishment for either good or bad deeds.

Makkhali
Niyativāda (Fatalism): we are powerless;
Gośāla
suffering is pre-destined.
(Ājīvika)

Materialism: live happily;

Ajita
with death, all is annihilated.
Kesakambalī

Journal of the Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

 (Lokāyata)

Sassatavada (Eternalism):
Pakudha
Matter, pleasure, pain and the soul are eternal and
Kaccāyana
do not interact.

Nigaṇṭha
Restraint: be endowed with, cleansed by
Nātaputta
and suffused with the avoidance of all evil. 2
(Jainism)

Sañjaya Agnosticism: "I don't think so. I don't think in that

Belaṭṭhiputta way or otherwise. I don't think not or not not."
(Ajñana) Suspension of judgement.

Notes: 1. DN 2 (Thanissaro, 1997; Walshe, 1995, pp. 91-109).

2. DN-a (Ñāṇamoli & Bodhi, 1995, pp. 1258-59, n. 585).

Ajivika School of philosophy

The only non-Hindu,Non-Jain,Non-Buddhist and Atheist sect to which caves were dedicated by
King Ashoka -The Barabar caves were carved out of granite, has a highly polished internal cave
surfaces, and each consists of two chambers, the first is a large rectangular hall, the second is a
small, circular, domed chamber. These were probably used for meditation.

Synopsis: Ajivika Philosophy-Heterodox philosophies in India

Around the 6th century BC, at the time of the Buddha, there was an explosion all across India of different
schools of thought and philosophy.One of the most popular was the Ajivika sect. Though it had been
around for ages, its most important leader Makkhali Goshala was a contemporary of both the Buddha and
Mahavira.

Ajivika Philosophy

The Ajivikas’ central belief was that absolutely everything is predetermined by fate, or niyati, and hence
human action has no consequence one way or the other.According to them, each soul’s course was like a
ball of thread that is unravelling.It will go as it has to go, and similarly each cycle of life and death will
have to be experienced, as will joy and sorrow.Once the ball of thread is fully unwound, its journey will
end, and so the soul will be liberated through nirvana.

Asceticism

Like Jains, Ajiviks wore no clothes, and lived as ascetic monks in organised groups.They were known to
practice extremely severe austerities, such as lying on nails, going through fire, exposing themselves to
extreme weather, and even spending time in large earthen pots for penance! There was no caste
discrimination and people from all walks of life joined them.

Journal of the Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

Patrons of Ajivika

Ajiviks were quite influential, and had many powerful followers. The sect reached its peak during the
Mauryan Emperor Ashoka’s father’s (Bindusara’s) time. Ashoka himself, best known for his spreading of
Buddhism all over India and Southeast Asia, was an Ajivik for most of his life.Interestingly, the oldest
rock-cut caves in India, the Barabar Caves in Bihar dating from the Mauryan Empire, were made for
Ajiviks and Jains to retreat and meditate. Their reputation for such fearsome penance spread far and wide,
and appeared in later Chinese and Japanese literature.

Rivalry with Jainism and Buddhism: Buddhist and Jain texts are very critical of the Ajiviks and
Makkhali Goshala, which shows us that the Ajiviks must have been considered fairly important rivals of
both. For instance, Ajivik monks were known to eat very little food, but Buddhists accused them of eating
secretly! Jain texts describe a violent quarrel between Mahavira and Makkhali Goshal, which naturally,
was won by their leader!

Ajivika is one of the nāstika or "heterodox" schools of Indian philosophy. Purportedly founded
in the 5th century BCE by Makkhali Gosala, it was a śramaṇa movement and a major rival
of Vedic religion, early Buddhism and Jainism. Ājīvikas were organised renunciates who formed
discrete communities. The precise identity of the Ajivikas is not well known, and it is even
unclear if they were a divergent sect of the Buddhists or the Jains. Ājīvika) is derived from Ajiva
which literally means "livelihood, lifelong, mode of life".The term Ajivika means "those
following special rules with regard to Iivelihood", sometimes connoting "religious mendicants"
in ancient Sanskrit and Pali texts.

The Ajivikas, 'Followers of the way of Life,' are an ascetic order that started at the time of
Buddha and Mahavira and lasted until the fourteenth century.
The exact nature of Ajivika doctrine is unclear because the sect's own texts have not survived.
It is believed the original Ajivika texts were written in an eastern Prakrit, perhaps similar to the
Jain Prakrit Ardhamagadhi. Quotations and adaptations from these texts appear to have been
inserted into Jain and Buddhist accounts of the Ajivikas. Makkhali Gosala is regarded as the
founder leader of the Ajivikas and one source of his teachings is the Buddhist Digha Nikaya.
Three Tamil texts, the Manimakalai of the Buddhists, the Nilakesi of the Jains, and the
Sivajnanasiddhiyar of the Shaivites, all contain outlines of Ajivika doctrine. The Nilakesi of
the ninth century CE tells us most and is about a heroine Nilakesi visiting teachers in search of
the truth, including Buddha and Puranan, leader of the Ajivikas, a dignified figure living in a
flowery hermitage.
The basic principle of the doctrine according to Gosala was niyati, fate or destiny. The
Ajivikas were rigid fatalists and determinists, seeing niyati as the sole determinant of every
happening. No human effort could have any effect against niyati and therefore karma is a
fallacy. Nirvana was only reached after living through an immense number of lives, which
proceeded automatically like the unwinding of a ball of thread, the last life being as an Ajivika
monk. After twenty-four years of asceticism, Gosala enumerated the six inevitable factors of
life: gain and loss, joy and sorrow, and life and death, together with the two 'paths' of song and
dance.
Ajivika cosmology was very complex with a vast universe passing through an immense
number of time cycles. Each jiva, soul, transmigrates through eighty-four lakhs (1 lakh =
100,000) of cycles before release. The southern Ajivikas saw only a few jivas remaining in

Journal of the Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

nirvana while most jivas achieved only mandala-moksa, cyclic release, having to return to the
worldly cycles.
Purana Kassapa (the Puranan of the Nilakesi), perhaps an older contemporary of Gosala, added
the view that a murderer or robber commits no sin and likewise there was no merit in
becoming an ascetic, for with niyati there was only one course left open to them. Pakudha
Kaccayana, a contemporary of the Buddha, held an atomic theory with seven substances, earth,
water, fire, air, joy, sorrow, and life, that are uncreated and unchanging. This was absorbed
into the Ajivika doctrine of the negation of free will and moral responsibility. It was argued
that since future events are already determined then in some way they already exist. The
Ajivika teacher Puranan in the Nilakesi says "Though we may speak of moments, there is
really no time at all." This was the theory of avicalita-nityatvam, unmoving permanence. And
to the Ajivikas the soul was also atomic and could not be divided. In its natural state outside
the body it is immense in size, five hundred leagues (yogana) in extent.
There are close links with Jainism. Gosala claimed to be the twenty-fourth tirthankara, and as a
disciple of Mahavira for six years until a split, there are doctrinal similarities between
Ajivikism and Jainism. In fact, Gosala may have influenced Mahavira over nudity and he
rejected the alms-bowl, a view adopted by the Digambara Jains. There are inconsistencies in
Jain karma theory inexplicable without referring to Ajivika doctrine. Mahavira disagreed with
Gosala's antinomian doctrine and way of life, and the Buddha strongly condemned the Ajivika
doctrine of niyati.

It is very possible that the Jains and Buddhists distorted Ajivika doctrine. Lucas thinks that "it
seems doubtful whether a doctrine which genuinely advocated the lack of efficacy of
individual effort could have formed the basis of a renunciatory path to spiritual liberation"
(Dundas 1992, 26).

The name Ajivika for an entire philosophy resonates with its core belief in "no free will" and
complete niyati, literally "inner order of things, self-command, predeterminism", leading to the
premise that good simple living is not a means to salvation or moksha, just a means to true
livelihood, predetermined profession and way of life. The name came to imply that school of
Indian philosophy which lived a good simple mendicant-like livelihood for its own sake and as
part of its predeterministic beliefs, rather than for the sake of after-life or motivated by
any soteriological reasons. Some scholars spell Ajivika as Ajivaka.
As mentioned earlier, original scriptures of the Ājīvika school of philosophy may once have
existed, but these are currently unavailable and probably lost. Their theories are extracted from
mentions of Ajivikas in the secondary sources of ancient Indian literature. Scholars question
whether Ājīvika philosophy has been fairly and completely summarized in these secondary
sources, as they were written by groups (such as the Buddhists and Jains) competing with and
adversarial to the philosophy and religious practices of the Ajivikas. It is therefore likely that
much of the information available about the Ājīvikas is inaccurate to some degree, and
characterisations of them should be regarded carefully and critically.
The Ājīvika school is known for its Niyati ("Fate") 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. Ājīvikas considered the karma doctrine
as a fallacy. Ajivika metaphysics included a theory of atoms which was later adapted

Journal of the Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

in Vaisheshika school, where everything was composed of atoms, qualities emerged from
aggregates of atoms, but the aggregation and nature of these atoms was predetermined by cosmic
forces. Ājīvikas were mostly considered as atheists. They believed that in every living being is
an ātman – a central premise of Hinduism and Jainism.
Ājīvika philosophy reached the height of its popularity during the rule of
the Mauryan emperor Bindusara, around the 4th century BCE. This school of thought thereafter
declined, but survived for nearly 2,000 years through the 14th century CE in the southern Indian
states of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. The Ājīvika philosophy, along with
the Cārvāka philosophy, appealed most to the warrior, industrial and mercantile classes
of ancient Indian society.

Origins
The views of six śramaṇa in the Pāli Canon
(based on the Buddhist text Sāmaññaphala Sutta1)

Śramaṇa view (diṭṭhi) 1

Pūraṇa Amoralism: denies any reward or

Kassapa punishment for either good or bad deeds.

Makkhali
Niyativāda (Fatalism): we are powerless;
Gośāla
suffering is pre-destined.
(Ājīvika)

Ajita
Materialism: live happily;
Kesakambalī
with death, all is annihilated.
(Lokāyata)

Sassatavada (Eternalism):
Pakudha
Matter, pleasure, pain and the soul are eternal and
Kaccāyana
do not interact.

Nigaṇṭha
Restraint: be endowed with, cleansed by
Nātaputta
and suffused with the avoidance of all evil. 2
(Jainism)

Sañjaya Agnosticism: "I don't think so. I don't think in that

Belaṭṭhiputta way or otherwise. I don't think not or not not."
(Ajñana) Suspension of judgement.

Notes:
1. DN 2 (Thanissaro, 1997; Walshe, 1995, pp. 91-109).
2. DN-a (Ñāṇamoli & Bodhi, 1995, pp. 1258-59, n. 585).

Journal of the Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

Ājīvika philosophy is cited in ancient texts of Buddhism and Jainism to Makkhali Gosala, a
contemporary of the Buddha and Mahavira. In Sandaka Sutta the Ājīvikas are said to recognize
three emancipators: Nanda Vaccha, Kisa Saṅkicca, and Makkhali Gosāla. Exact origins of
Ājīvika is unknown, but generally accepted to be the 5th century BCE.
Primary sources and literature of the Ājīvikas is lost, or yet to be found. Everything that is
known about Ājīvika history and its philosophy is from secondary sources, such as the ancient
and medieval texts of India. Inconsistent fragments of Ājīvika history is found mostly in Jain
texts such as the Bhagvati Sutra and Buddhist texts such as the Samaññaphala Sutta and Sandaka
Sutta, and Buddhaghosa's commentary on Sammannaphala Sutta, with a few mentions in Hindu
texts such as Vayu Purana.
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
1st millennium BCE named Savatthi (Sanskrit Śravasti) as the hub of the Ājīvikas; it was located
near Ayodhya 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, prominently in Kolar district and some places of Tamil Nadu.
The Ājīvika philosophy spread rapidly in ancient South Asia, with a Sangha Geham (community
center) for Ājīvikas on the island now known as Sri Lanka and also extending into the western
state of Gujarat by the 4th century BCE, the era of the Maurya Empire.
Classification in Hindu philosophy
Riepe refers to Ājīvikas as a distinct heterodox school of Indian tradition. Raju states that
"Ājīvikas and Cārvākas can be called Hindus", and adds that "the word Hinduism has no definite
meaning." Epigraphical evidence suggests that emperor Ashoka, in the 3rd century BCE,
considered Ājīvikas to be more closely related to the schools of Hinduism than to Buddhists,
Jainas or other Indian schools of thought.
Biography of Makkhali Gosala

Journal of the Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

Ashoka's Seventh Pillar Edict mentions Ajivikas: "Some Mahamatras were ordered by me to
busy themselves with the affairs of the Samgha. Likewise others were ordered by me to busy
themselves also with the Brahmanas (and) Ajivikas" (Line 25). Photograph of the portion of the
7th Edict, in the Brahmi script on the Ashoka pillar of Feroz Shah Kotla, New Delhi (3rd century
BCE), with "Ājīvikesu” inscription.
Makkhali Gosala (Pali; Sanskrit Gośala Maskariputra, c. 484 BCE) is generally considered as
the founder of the Ājīvika movement. Some sources state that Gosala was only a leader of a large
Ājīvika congregation of ascetics, but not the founder of the movement himself. [ The Swiss
Indologist Jarl Charpentier and others suggest the Ājīvika tradition existed in India well before
the birth of Makkhali Gosala, citing a variety of ancient Indian texts. Gosala is described in
ancient texts as a contemporary of Mahavira, the 24th Tirthankara of Jainism, and of Gautama
Buddha. The Jain Bhagavati Sutra refers to him as Gosala Mankhaliputta ("son of Mankhali").
The text depicts Gosala as having been a disciple of Mahavira's for a period of six years, after
which the two had a falling out and parted ways. [25] According to the Bhagvati Sutra, Makkhali
Gosala met with Mahāvīra again later in life, but Gosala asserted to Mahavira that he was not the
same person. Makkhali Gosala referred to the example of a sesame plant which "had been pulled
up, and had temporarily died, but it had been replanted and thus reanimated, becoming once
more living, while the seven pods had developed".Gosāla declared that the original Gosāla who
was Mahavira's companion once was dead, and that the soul now inhabiting the apparent Gosāla
in front of him was a reanimated, completely different Gosala. This argument was declared a
form of sophistry by Mahavira, and this led to a significant break in the relations between the
two.
Gosala was believed to be born in Tiruppatur of Tiruchirappalli district in Tamil Naduand was
the son of Mankha, a professional mendicant. His mother was Bhaddā. His name Gosala
"cowshed" refers to his humble birthplace.While Bhaddā was pregnant, she and her husband
Mankhali, the mankha, came to the village ... of Saravaṇa, where dwelt a wealthy householder
Gobahula. Mankhali left his wife and his luggage ... in Gobahula’s cowshed (gosālā) ... Since he
could find no shelter elsewhere the couple continued to live in a corner of the cowshed, and it
was there that Bhaddā gave birth to her child."
Inscriptions and caves

The 3rd century BCE mendicant caves of the Ājīvikas (Barabar, near Gaya, Bihar).Dedicatory inscription of
Ashoka in Visvakarma/Viswamitra cave, Barabar.

Journal of the Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

The word "Ājīvikas" , Ādīvikehi) was later attacked with the burin, at a time when the Brahmi script was still
understood, i.e. before the 5th century, but remains decipherable.Several rock-cut caves belonging to
Ājīvikas are dated to the times of the Mauryan emperor Ashoka (r. 273 BC to 232 BC). These
are the oldest surviving cave temples of ancient India, and are called the Barabar Caves in
Jehanabad district of Bihar. The Barabar caves were carved out of granite, has a highly polished
internal cave surfaces, and each consists of two chambers, the first is a large rectangular hall, the
second is a small, circular, domed chamber. These were probably used for meditation.
The Ashokan dedications of several Barabar Caves to the Ajivikas were engraved during the
12th year and the 19th year of his reign (about 258 BCE and 251 BCE respectively, based on a
coronation date of 269 BCE). In several instances, the word "Ājīvikas" was later attacked by the
chisel, probably by religious rivals, at a time when the Brahmi script was still understood
(probably before the 5th century CE). However, the original inscriptions being deep, they remain
easily decipherable.

Cave of Sudama, dedicated to the Ajivikas by Ashoka. Barabar Caves, 3rd century BC.Cave of Visvakarma,
dedicated to the Ajivikas by Ashoka. Barabar Caves, 3rd century BC.Cave of Gopita, dedicated to the Ajivikas
by Dasharatha Maurya. Barabar Caves, 3rd century BC.Caves of Vadathika and Vapiyaka, dedicated to the
Ajivikas by Dasharatha Maurya. Barabar Caves, 3rd century BC.

Reliability of sources
Ājīvikas competed with and debated the scholars of Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism. The
Ājīvika movement is primarily from historical references left behind in Jain and Buddhist
sources, that may therefore be hostile to it. [14] It is unknown to what degree the available non-
Ājīvika sources reflect the actual beliefs and practices of the Ājīvikas. Most of what is known
about them was recorded in the literature of rival groups, modern scholars question the reliability
of the secondary sources, and whether intentional distortions for dehumanization and criticism
was introduced into the records.
More recent work by scholars suggests that the Ājīvika were perhaps misrepresented by Jain and
Buddhist sources.
[Johannes Bronkhorst's] claim is that, whereas the Jains teach that one can both stop the influx of
new karma and rid oneself of old karma through ascetic practice, Gosāla taught that one could
only stop the influx of new karma. [...] Ascetic practice can be effective in preventing further
karmic influx, which helps to explain the otherwise inexplicable fact that the Ājīvikas did
practice asceticism. [...] [T]he popularity of the Ājīvika doctrine in ancient times, such that it
could rival that of both Jainism and Buddhism, also make sense if this doctrine was really not so
radically different from these traditions as its presentation in Jain and Buddhist sources suggests.

Journal of the Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

Paul Dundas states that the Jain and Buddhist texts cannot be considered reliable source of
Ājīvika history and philosophy, because "it seems doubtful whether a doctrine [of Ajivikas]
which genuinely advocated the lack of efficacy of individual effort could have formed the basis
of a renunciatory path to spiritual liberation", and that "the suspicion must be that the Jains and
Buddhists deliberately distorted Ajivika doctrine for their own polemical purposes". In contrast,
other scholars[25] suggest that at least the common elements found about Ājīvikas in Jain and
Buddhist literature may be considered, because Jainism and Buddhism were two different,
competing and conflicting philosophies in ancient India.

Tile possibly representing Ajivika ascetics.

Absolute determinism and no free will
The problems of time and change was one of the main interests of the Ajivikas. Their views on
this subject may have been influenced by Vedic sources, such as the hymn to Kala (Time)
in Atharvaveda. Both Jaina and Buddhist texts state that Ājīvikas believed in absolute
determinism, absence of free will, and called this niyati. Everything in human life and universe,
according to Ajivikas, was pre-determined, operating out of cosmic principles, and true choice
did not exist. The Buddhist and Jaina sources describe them as strict fatalists, who did not
believe in karma. The Ajivikas philosophy held that all things are preordained, and therefore
religious or ethical practice has no effect on one's future, and people do things because cosmic
principles make them do so, and all that will happen or will exist in future is already
predetermined to be that way. No human effort could change this niyati and the karma ethical
theory was a fallacy.[14] James Lochtefeld summarizes this aspect of Ajivika belief as, "life and
the universe is like a ball of pre-wrapped up string, which unrolls until it was done and then goes
no further"
Riepe states that the Ajivikas belief in predeterminism does not mean that they were pessimistic.
Rather, just like Calvinists belief in predeterminism in Europe, the Ajivikas were optimists. The
Ajivikas simply did not believe in the moral force of action, or in merits or demerits, or in after-

Journal of the Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

life to be affected because of what one does or does not do. Actions had immediate effects in
one's current life but without any moral traces, and both the action and the effect was
predetermined, according to the Ajivikas.
Makkali Gosala seems to have combined the ideas of older schools of thought into an eclectic
doctrine. He appears to have believed in niyati (destiny), svabhava (nature),
and sangati (change), and possibly parinama, which may have prompted other philosophical
schools to label him variously as ahetuvadin, vainayikavadin, ajnanavadin,
and issarakaranavadin. According to him all beings undergo development (parinama). This
culminates in the course of time (samsarasuddhi) in final salvation to which all beings are
destined under the impact of the factors of niyati (destiny), bhava (nature), and sangati (change).
As such destiny does not appear as the only player, but rather chance or indeterminism plays
equal part in his doctrine. He thus subscribed to niyativada (fatalism) only in the sense that he
thought that some future events like salvation for all were strictly determined.
Ajivikas and theism
Ajivika's was an atheistic philosophy. They did not presume any deity as the creator of the
universe, or as prime mover, or that some unseen mystical end was the final resting place of the
cosmos.
In later texts, the Tamil Nīlakēci, a story of two divinities, Okkali and Ōkali, relates the Ājīvikas
instructed men in the scriptures.
Ajivikas believed that in every being there is a soul (Atman). However, unlike Jains and various
orthodox schools of Hinduism that held that soul is formless, Ajivikas asserted that soul has a
material form, one that helps meditation. They also believed that the soul passes through many
births and ultimately progresses unto its pre-destined nirvana (salvation). Basham states, that
some texts suggest evidence of Vaishnavism-type devotional practices among some Ajivikas.
Atomism
Ajivikas developed a theory of elements and atoms similar to the Vaisheshika school of
Hinduism. Everything was composed of minuscule atoms, according to Ajivikas, and qualities of
things are derived from aggregates of atoms, but the aggregation and nature of these atoms was
predetermined by cosmic forces. A number of important theorists in ancient Greek natural
philosophy also held that the universe is composed of physical ‘atoms’, literally ‘uncuttables’.
Some of these figures are treated in more depth in other articles in this encyclopedia: the reader
is encouraged to consult individual entries on Leucippus, Democritus, Epicurus and Lucretius.
These philosophers developed a systematic and comprehensive natural philosophy accounting
for the origins of everything from the interaction of indivisible bodies, as these atoms—which
have only a few intrinsic properties like size and shape—strike against one another, rebound and
interlock in an infinite void. This atomist natural philosophy eschewed teleological explanation
and denied divine intervention or design, regarding every composite of atoms as produced purely
by material interactions of bodies, and accounting for the perceived properties of macroscopic
bodies as produced by these same atomic interactions. Atomists formulated views on ethics,
theology, political philosophy and epistemology consistent with this physical system. This
powerful and consistent materialism, somewhat modified from its original form by Epicurus, was
regarded by Aristotle as a chief competitor to teleological natural philosophy.

Journal of the Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

Since the Greek adjective atomos means, literally, ‘uncuttable,’ the history of ancient atomism is
not only the history of a theory about the nature of matter, but also the history of the idea that
there are indivisible parts in any kind of magnitude—geometrical extension, time, etc. Although
the term ‘atomism’ is most often identified with the systems of natural philosophy mentioned
above, scholars have also identified commitments to indivisibles in a number of lesser known
figures. Often these are formulated in response to paradoxes like those of Zeno of Elea (early
5th c. BCE) about infinite divisibility of magnitudes. Some of these identifications of other kinds
of atomism outside the main tradition are controversial and based on slight evidence .
The description of Ajivikas atomism is inconsistent between those described in Buddhist
and Hindu texts. According to three Tamil texts, the Ajivikas held there exists
seven kayas (Sanskrit: काय, assemblage, collection, elemental categories):
1.pruthvi-kaya (earth),
2.apo-kaya (water),
3. tejo-kaya (fire),
4.vayo-kaya (air),
5.sukha (joy),
6.dukkha (sorrow) and
7.jiva (life).
The first four relate to matter, the last three non-matter. These elements are akata (that which is
neither created nor destroyed), vanjha (barren, that which never multiplies or reproduces) and
have an existence independent of the other. The elements, asserts Ajivika theory in the Tamil
text Manimekalai, are made of paramanu (atoms), where atoms were defined as that which
cannot be further subdivided, that which cannot penetrate another atom, that which is neither
created nor destroyed, that which retains its identity by never growing nor expanding nor
splitting nor changing, yet that which moves, assembles and combines to form the perceived.
The Tamil text of Ajivikas asserts that this "coming together of atoms can take diversity of
forms, such as the dense form of a diamond, or a loose form of a hollow bamboo". Everything
one perceives, states the atomism theory of Ajivikas, was mere juxtapositions of atoms of
various types, and the combinations occur always in fixed ratios governed by certain cosmic
rules, forming skandha (molecules, building blocks).[15][48] Atoms, asserted the Ajivikas, cannot
be seen by themselves in their pure state, but only when they aggregate and
form bhutas (objects). They further argued that properties and tendencies are characteristics of
the objects. The Ajivikas then proceeded to justify their belief in determinism and "no free will"
by stating that everything experienced – sukha (joy), dukkha (sorrow) and jiva (life) – is mere
function of atoms operating under cosmic rules.
Riepe states that the details of the Ajivikas theory of atomism provided the foundations of later
modified atomism theories found in Jain, Buddhist and Hindu traditions.

Journal of the Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

On Left Ashoka and his queen at the deer ark. Lomas Rishi cave entrance. These were dedicated by Emperor
Ashoka for the Ajivika agnostics
Antinomian ethics
Another doctrine of Ajivikas philosophy, according to Buddhist texts, was their antinomian
ethics, that is there exist "no objective moral laws". Buddhaghosa summarizes this view as,
"There is neither cause nor basis for the sins of living beings and they become sinful without
cause or basis. There is neither cause nor basis for the purity of living beings and they become
pure without cause or basis. All beings, all that have breath, all that are born, all that have life,
are without power, or strength, or virtue, but are the result of destiny, chance and nature, and
they experience joy and sorrow in six classes".
Despite this ascribed premise of antinomian ethics, both Jain and Buddhist records note that
Ājīvikas lived a simple ascetic life, without clothes and any material possessions.
Tamil literature on Ajivikas suggests that they practiced Ahimsa (non-violence) and a vegetarian
lifestyle.[57] Arthur Basham notes that Buddhist and Jaina texts variously accuse Ajivikas of
immorality, unchastity and worldliness, but they also acknowledge the confusion among
Buddhists and Jainas when they observed the simple, ascetic lifestyle of Ajivikas.
The Ajivikas had a fully elaborate philosophy, produced by its scholars and logicians, but those
texts are lost. Their literature evolved over the centuries, like other traditions of Indian
philosophy, through the medieval era. The Pali and Prakrit texts of Buddhism and Jainism
suggest that Ajivika theories were codified, some of which were quoted in commentaries
produced by Buddhist and Jaina scholars. The main texts of the Ajivikas included the
ten Purvas (eight Mahanimittas, two Maggas) and the Onpatu Katir. The Mahanimittas of
Ajivikas, claims Bhagavati Sutra, was extracted from the teachings Gosala received from
Mahavira, when he was a disciple.
The belief of Ajivikas in absolute determinism and influence of cosmic forces led them to
develop extensive sections in their Mahanimittas texts on mapping the sun, moon, planets, stars
and their role in astrology and fortune telling.

Journal of the Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

 Isaeva states that the ideas of Ajivika influenced Buddhism and various schools of Hinduism.
Riepe states an example of an influential Ajivika theory was its theory on atomism. Basham
suggests Ajivikas may have possibly influenced the medieval era doctrines of Dvaita Vedanta
sub-school of Hinduism. According to the 2nd century CE text Ashokavadana, the Mauryan
emperor Bindusara and his chief queen Shubhadrangi were believers of this philosophy, that
reached its peak of popularity during this time. Ashokavadana also mentions that after his
conversion to Buddhism, Bindusara's son Ashoka issued an order to kill all the Ajivikas
in Pundravardhana, enraged at a picture that depicted Gautama Buddha in a negative light.
Around 18,000 followers of the Ajivika sect were supposedly executed as a result of this order.
The entire story may be apocryphal.
An earlier Jaina text, the Bhagavati Sutra, similarly mentions a debate, disagreement and then
"coming to blows" between factions led by Mahavira and by Gosala.

A Note of Caution

Now here I should insert a note of caution. As mentioned previously everything that we know about the
Ajivikas is through the critique of their philosophy by other traditions and therefore we should be very
cautious in judging them. If we were to take Ajivika philosophy, as others mention it, then we can see that
an Ajivika must be nihilistic. Since an Ajivika does not believe in the karmic law, he will seek as much
pleasure as he could and will see no point in living an ascetic life. Historical records mention that on the
contrary Ajivikas lived a simple ascetic life. This is a clear indication that we do not have a full picture of
Ajivika philosophy. Historical records mention that Ajivikas did have their own scriptures at some time
but all of those have now been lost. We will only be able to learn the true nature of their philosophy if by
chance we are able to rediscover their scriptures.

I think the true nature of Ajivika philosophy can be deciphered from its name, which literally means
livelihood. Considering that Ajivikas lived a simple life and believed in absolute fate, it seems that
Ajivikas proposed to live a simple life just for the sake of living and accepting one’s fate without any
qualms, instead of worrying about some vague goals such as moksha or nirvana. In the modern times
when Jainism and Buddhism are well established religions with Mahavira and Buddha now being given
the status of Gods, it seems rather difficult for us to humanize them and see them as struggling leaders

Journal of the Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

.fighting for supremacy of their own sects. Thinking about lost sects such as Ajivika to a certain extent
helps us in developing that perspective and therefore makes us more open minded.

Journal of the Indo Nordic Author’s Collective