Question map
With reference to the religious history of India, consider the following statements : 1. Sautrantika and Sammitiya were the sects of Jainism. 2. Sarvastivadin held that the constituents of phenomena were not wholly momentary, but existed forever in a latent form. Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?
Explanation
The correct answer is option B (Statement 2 only).
**Statement 1 is incorrect.** The Sautrāntika were the second of the four Buddhist philosophical schools, who were dissenters from the Vaibhāṣika[1], not a sect of Jainism. Similarly, the Sammatiyas were the most populous non-Mahayanist sect in India[2], indicating they were a Buddhist sect, not Jain.
**Statement 2 is correct.** The Sarvastivadins (also known as Sarvāstivāda) held a distinctive philosophical position about the nature of phenomena. For the Sarvastivadins, dharmas are substantial realities (dravya), existing in their own right, which for a moment operate in the present[3]. Their very name derives from their belief that 'all things [past, present, and future] exist' (sarviisti-viidin)[4]. This means they believed that the constituents of phenomena were not wholly momentary but existed forever in past, present, and future forms, which aligns with the statement that they existed "in a latent form."
Sources- [1] https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/essay/buddhism-and-nyaya-study/d/doc1239549.html
PROVENANCE & STUDY PATTERN
Guest previewThis is a classic 'Philosophy over Fact' question. While basic NCERTs list Sarvastivadins as a Buddhist sect, they rarely explain the 'Sarvam Asti' (Everything Exists) doctrine in detail. The key was not rote memorization of 50 sects, but understanding the Sanskrit etymology of the major ones to decode their core philosophy.
This question can be broken into the following sub-statements. Tap a statement sentence to jump into its detailed analysis.
- Statement 1: In the religious history of India, were the Sautrāntika a sect of Jainism or a Buddhist school?
- Statement 2: In the religious history of India, were the Sammitiya a sect of Jainism?
- Statement 3: In the religious history of India, did the Sarvāstivāda (Sarvastivadin) school teach that the constituents of phenomena (dharmas) were not wholly momentary but persisted in a latent form across past, present, and future?
- Explicitly identifies Sautrāntika as one of the Buddhist philosophical schools.
- States they were dissenters from another Buddhist school (Vaibhāṣika), placing them within Buddhist doctrinal debate.
- Discusses the Sautrāntika in direct comparison with Vaibhāṣika on the doctrine of the two truths, showing they are Buddhist philosophical positions.
- Uses Sautrāntika as a named school within Buddhist theoretical discourse (representationalist theory).
- Refers to a specific Madhyamaka sub-school as 'Sautrāntika Svātantrika', indicating Sautrāntika's role within Buddhist schools of thought.
- Treats Sautrāntika as a doctrinal grouping relevant to Buddhist theories of the two truths.
Lists several named Buddhist sects (Mahasanghikas, Sthaviravadins, Sarvastivadins) showing Buddhism historically split into distinct schools with characteristic names.
A student could compare the form and suffix of 'Sautrāntika' with these Buddhist school names to judge whether it fits the naming pattern of Buddhist schools.
Notes that Buddhism divided into many splinter groups (Hinayana, Mahayana, Vajrayana, etc.), indicating a precedent for many internal Buddhist schools emerging over time.
Using a basic list of known Buddhist schools, a student could check whether Sautrāntika is cited among such Buddhist splits in other standard references or maps of doctrinal lineages.
Records traveler Hiuen-Tsang observing numerous Buddhist monasteries and explicitly refers to the Mahayana school, illustrating the historical prominence and variety of Buddhist schools in India.
A student could use Hiuen-Tsang's accounts (or maps of his travels) to see whether he or similar sources mention Sautrāntika among Buddhist communities encountered.
Distinguishes 'sramanic sects of Buddhism and Jainism' as two separate categories in historical conflicts, indicating that Sramanic traditions produced distinct Buddhist and Jain groups rather than a single shared sect.
A student could use this separation to eliminate the possibility that a named sramanic group belongs to both traditions and instead look for Sautrāntika in Buddhist-specific lists.
Describes internal organization and lineage terminology for Jainism (Tirthankaras, sect leadership), implying Jain groups are treated with their own naming and founder patterns.
A student could compare these Jain naming/lineage patterns with the form 'Sautrāntika' to see whether it aligns more with Jain or Buddhist nomenclature.
This statement analysis shows book citations, web sources and indirect clues. The first statement (S1) is open for preview.
Login with Google to unlock all statements.
This statement analysis shows book citations, web sources and indirect clues. The first statement (S1) is open for preview.
Login with Google to unlock all statements.
This tab shows concrete study steps: what to underline in books, how to map current affairs, and how to prepare for similar questions.
Login with Google to unlock study guidance.
Discover the small, exam-centric ideas hidden in this question and where they appear in your books and notes.
Login with Google to unlock micro-concepts.
Access hidden traps, elimination shortcuts, and Mains connections that give you an edge on every question.
Login with Google to unlock The Vault.