centuries. As with most Indian schools of thought, one starts with a funda-
mental cosmology: for the Jains, the world was composed of an infinite
number of jı ̄vas(“life-monads”) and ajı ̄vas(entities that have no life-
substance, and which are therefore heavy and “karmic”). These two sets of
entities were thought to intermingle in the universe in a process known as
bandha(connection, binding, etc.). The “life-monads” (jı ̄vas), being lighter,
tended to rise, while the ajı ̄vastended to sink. Hence, the universe was like
a gigantic hierarchy with those organisms which were most jı ̄vic being nearer
the top and those which were ajı ̄vic sinking to the bottom. The earth and
human beings have remained somewhere in the middle – the tı ̄rthan.karas
have risen to the top as they have burned off karmic entities. Liberation from
this intermingling was attainable by burning off ajı ̄vasand thereby rising
in the cosmic order. In addition, Jain mythology envisioned time as proceed-
ing in a series of six cycles. The first was thought to be one of perfection,
when human beings were giants and acted in accordance with jı ̄vasand the
truth. In subsequent cycles, the world became progressively bad, humans
became smaller, and there was a diminution of life span, knowledge, and
truthful activity. After the sixth cycle, it was believed, the progression would
reverse, moving back to the primordial age of perfection.
One attained liberation from this spatial-temporal matrix by following five
basic vows: These were: 1) Non-possession (aparigraha) – one was expected
to gain and keep only the basic necessities of life and give the rest away.
2) Celibacy (brahmacarya) – monks were to remain completely celibate,
while the laity was not to exploit anyone sexually. Not only was the loss of
sexual fluids thought to represent the loss of power, but the sex act itself was
also generally thought to be selfish and exploitative. 3) Non-stealing (asteya).
Taking or coveting anything which was not one’s own was the epitome
of self-aggrandizement, which only nurtured the ajı ̄vasin one’s nature.
4) Truthfulness (satyafromas– to be) had the implication of being true to
the fundamental character of the universe. 5) Non-violence (ahim.sa). The
best-known of all the Jain vows was that of non-violence. Monks were to
eschew the taking of any life altogether, while laymen were selective in the
observance of this vow. Non-violence, for the monk and the layman, entailed
the avoidance of: a) occupational violence – one should avoid occupations
that cause one to take life (i.e., butcher, fisherman, hunter); in some cases,
kings were exempted from this vow, insofar as war was understood to be
a last resort; b) protective violence – one should refrain from taking a life
even if attacked, again more carefully followed by monks than laymen;
c) intentional violence – any intentional harm to a living being was
considered detrimental to the pursuit of liberation; d) accidental violence
- monks, in particular, have been known to use a whisk broom to sweep the
path before they take a step or to wear gauze over the mouth lest an insect
The Early Urban Period 39