The Life and Teachings of Rishi Pūrṇa-Kashyapa
By
Cdr Alok Mohan
Sanskrit:
पूर्णः कश्यपः सत्यमार्गदर्शी धर्मप्रवक्ता यः। नास्तिकवादान् समीक्ष्य तत्त्वज्ञानस्य प्रमुदितः॥
English Translation:
“Pūrṇa Kashyapa, the guide to the path of truth and herald of dharma, who scrutinized atheistic doctrines and rejoiced in profound knowledge.”
1. Introduction
Rishi Purna Kashyap:
Purna Kashyapa Vardhamana was a contemporary sage of Mahabir. Among the six great men who went to meet King Ajatashatru, Mahabir was accompanied by Purna Kashyapa. This is also mentioned in Jain scriptures. In Jain literature he is named as “Puran-Kassap”. Vardhman Mahavir also belonged to Kashyap gotra. In Buddhism, Purna Kashyap has been considered as an atheist philosopher, Sangha Acharya, Tirthankar, experienced thinker, or founder of the new school etc. The ‘Samanjaphala Sutta’ refers to a dialogue between Ajatashatru and the Buddha, in which spiritualism is considered superior to materialistic ideology. According to Buddhism anyone who believed in atheism, was essentially an evolutionist. The atheists of that time were actually practitioners of living in balance with nature. who had no time to entangle themselves, in complicated customs and traditions of those days. Those who knew the skill of reducing the distance between dream and resolution.
Brahmins considered such people, unfit for religious education. Apart from Purna Kashap, Makkhali Gosala, Ajit Keshakambali, Pukud Katyayan, Sanjaya Welthi putta etc. were among the prominent atheist thinkers of that time. Apart from Buddhist and Brahmanical priests, he was also targeted by ideologues of Jainism. It can be called the irony of materialistic thinking of that time that despite being an important ideology of its time, there is no independent text of the traditions, provided by this sage.
The prefix ‘Purna’ associated with Kashyapa is indicative of the totality of his knowledge. According to the ‘Samanjaphal Sutta’ of ‘Dighnikaya’, the Magadha emperor Ajatashatru discussed the ideas of Purna Kashyapa with Gautama Buddha.
Buddhist monks of the Kashyapa sect are mentioned in an inscription on a stone urn made of Buddha, (made of stone) from the time of the Saka ruler Bhagmoya, near Bajaur (ancient Avajpur) in Afghanistan, named Apach or Avaj. It is clear that the founder of this monk sect was a Buddhist teacher of Kashyap dynasty. The number of gotrakars of Kashyap is 127. Prominent among them are Ashvalayanin, Agnisharmayagya, Ajihayan, Asurayan, Katyayan, Kartikeya, Kaashpeya, Kalasthaarin Devayan, Palamauli, Bhavanandan, Bhoj, Mathar, Matangin, Maricha Yodhayan, Vatsyayan, Shalhaleyan, Gomil, Nabha, Pappalad Shandilya, Sanyati Jalandhar, Danav, Deva. Caste, Hiranya Bahu etc. The main chanters of the Kashyapa gotriya are Kashyapa, Asit, Deval, Nighunva, Raibhya and Viksham.
Ashvalayanin, Katyayan, Kartikya, Kashyaya, Dakshayan, Devyan, Palamauli, Pracheya, Bhavanandan, Bhoja, Mathar, Matangin, Maricha, Yodhayan, Vatsyayan, Shalhaleya etc. have Kashyap, Vidhruv, Vatsar Pravar.
Agnisharsayan, Aghachhayamay, Agna Prasevya, Aajihayan, Ashrayani, Ashwalayanin, Ashwatayan, Asurayan, Udgraja Udvalayan, Kanyak, Katyayan, Kartikeya, Kashaypeya, Kasthaharin, Kauvarek (c) Kaurishtha (c) Gomayan (c). Knowledgeable Dakshayana, Devayana, Nikritagya, Palamauli, Pragayana, Praschepa, Barhi, Bhavanandin, Bhrigu, Bhoja, Mautpayan, (Bhimpayamg) Mahachakra, Mathar, Matangin, Maricha, Mrigaya, Meshkiritkaya Meshan Yogadayan, Yodhyan, Vatsyayan, Vaikarney, Vaivashay, Shakrayan, Shalhaleya, Shyakar, Shyamohar, Shrotan, Sasisaharitayan, Hastidaan, Hastika, all these belong to Kashyap, Nidhruv and Vatsar. Anasuya, Kadupigankshi, Divavasha, Nashkurya, Yanmuni, (Sasuki) Rajvartap (Rajballabh), Raupsevaki, Shaishrodvahi, Sajatambi, Saindarhi T, Graduates being Dwigotri, Kashyap, Vatsar and Vasistha belong to these three Pravaras.
Uttar, Kardam, Kashyap, Kulah, Kerala, Kairat, Gardabhmukh Gomil, Jalandhar, Demon, Devjati, Nabha, Nidagh, Pippalaya Purya. Pappaladi, Bhatagra, Bhujatpur, Masrin, Mrigketu, Vrishkanda, Shandilya, Sanyati, Hiranyabahu. These are Asit, Kashyap, Deval, of the three Pravaras.
Rishi Pūrṇa Kashyapa (also rendered Puran Kassap in Jain sources) occupies a unique place in the intellectual and spiritual history of 6th century BCE India. A contemporary of Vardhamāna Mahāvīra and Śākyamuni Buddha, he is remembered as one of the six prominent non-Vedic teachers who engaged with King Ajātaśatru of Magadha, as recorded in Buddhist and Jain traditions. Jain texts note his association with Mahāvīra, while Buddhist sources preserve his radical doctrines in the Samaññaphala Sutta of the Dīgha Nikāya.
Although his own writings or independent treatises have not survived, Pūrṇa Kashyapa is consistently depicted as a heterodox philosopher who denied the moral efficacy of human action. His doctrine, known as akiriyāvāda (non-action), directly challenged the centrality of karma, which was foundational not only to Brahmanical orthodoxy but also to Buddhist and Jain ethical systems. For this reason, his teachings attracted both attention and critique from contemporaries, leaving a legacy that is both fragmentary and significant.
2. Historical and Religious Context
Pūrṇa Kashyapa emerged in an era often described as India’s śramaṇa renaissance—a period of intense philosophical experimentation and spiritual exploration beyond the orthodox Vedic fold. Jain traditions refer to him as “Puran Kassap,” and highlight his meeting with King Ajātaśatru alongside Mahāvīra. His epithet Pūrṇa (meaning “complete” or “whole”) is interpreted as reflecting the fullness of his knowledge.
Buddhist texts, however, portray him primarily as a heterodox teacher and philosophical skeptic. The Samaññaphala Sutta records Ajātaśatru’s inquiries into his views, where Kashyapa expounded his radical denial of karmic consequences. For the Buddhists, this doctrine exemplified a dangerous deviation from moral law and was juxtaposed with the Buddha’s teaching that spiritual liberation depends upon moral causality and right action.
Thus, both Jain and Buddhist perspectives situate Kashyapa as a figure of importance, if not agreement—one whose ideas were substantial enough to be preserved in polemical accounts.
3. Philosophical Teachings: The Doctrine of Non-Action
The central doctrine attributed to Pūrṇa Kashyapa is akiriyāvāda, the view that actions—whether virtuous or sinful—carry no moral consequences. He is said to have taught that even acts such as murder, theft, or generosity bear neither merit (puṇya) nor demerit (pāpa). According to this perspective, the soul remains aloof, passive, and unaffected by the outcomes of human behavior.
Buddhist texts present this as a denial of causality itself (ahetuvāda), making Kashyapa’s teaching a radical alternative to the dominant karmic doctrines of the age. Rather than viewing ethical action as central to liberation, his philosophy suggests a form of spiritual indifference, in which the ultimate self is untouched by worldly deeds.
This position, though criticized by rival traditions, represents a distinct and provocative voice in early Indian thought—one that directly questioned the metaphysical assumptions underlying ritual, morality, and cosmic justice.
4. Legacy and Sectarian Associations
The legacy of Rishi Pūrṇa Kashyapa, though fragmented, remains embedded within textual references and archaeological evidence. His influence is not confined to philosophical debates recorded in Buddhist and Jain scriptures, but also extends into sectarian traditions. One striking discovery comes from the region of Bajaur in ancient Avajpur (present-day Afghanistan). Inscriptions carved on a stone reliquary associated with the Saka ruler Bhagmoya refer to Buddhist monks belonging to the Kashyapa sect. This evidence indicates the probable existence of a monastic order or doctrinal lineage linked to a Kashyapa master, suggesting that his name and influence reverberated across Gandhāra and its intellectual milieu.
In addition to this archaeological testimony, genealogical traditions also demonstrate the cultural reach of the Kashyapa name. Classical records identify no fewer than 127 gotrakaras (lineages) associated with the Kashyapa gotra, with numerous prominent sub-branches such as Ashvalāyanin, Kaṭyāyana, Devayān, Bhoja, Vātsyāyana, Marīca, Shāṇḍilya, and others. These extensive lineages testify to the enduring cultural resonance of Kashyapa affiliation, and though it is difficult to establish a direct link between Pūrṇa Kashyapa and every branch, his association with the Kashyapa gotra undeniably contributed to the prestige and recognition of this intellectual and ritual heritage.
Thus, even in the absence of a personal corpus of writings, the legacy of Pūrṇa Kashyapa is traceable both through institutional affiliations in the northwestern regions of the subcontinent and through the genealogical continuities of his lineage. Together, these aspects suggest that while his philosophical doctrines may not have flourished as an independent school with a sustained textual tradition, his name and identity carried significant weight in shaping sectarian, cultural, and intellectual currents of early Indian thought.
5. Comparative Study: Pūrṇa Kashyapa Among Śramaṇa Teachers
To appreciate Pūrṇa Kashyapa’s uniqueness, it is essential to situate him among his contemporaries in the diverse Śramaṇa landscape. Ajita Keśakambalin advanced a strictly materialist worldview, denying any afterlife and describing death as the complete disintegration of the body. Makkhali Gośāla, leader of the Ājīvika sect, advocated determinism (niyati), arguing that human effort is futile because all events are predestined. Sañjaya Belaṭṭhiputta embraced skepticism, refusing to affirm or deny metaphysical questions, while Pakudha Kaccāyana described reality as composed of eternal, unchanging substances.
Against this background, Pūrṇa Kashyapa’s doctrine of akiriyāvāda stands out. He rejected not only ritual and afterlife speculation but also the very idea that ethical actions produce consequences. Unlike Ajita’s materialism, which denied the soul, or Gośāla’s determinism, which affirmed destiny, Kashyapa’s teaching presupposed a passive self unaffected by deeds. In doing so, he created a unique philosophical niche: a theory of absolute moral non-causality.
6. Ethical Non-Causality and its Philosophical Significance
The doctrine of akiriyāvāda represents one of the boldest challenges to Indian ethical and religious thought. By denying that actions yield results, Kashyapa undermined the metaphysical foundations of both Vedic ritualism and karmic asceticism. For Buddhists and Jains, this was a deeply unsettling proposition, since their spiritual frameworks depended upon the moral efficacy of deeds in determining rebirth and liberation.
Philosophically, Kashyapa’s stance raises enduring questions about human agency and responsibility. If the self is truly unaffected by action, what motivates ethical behavior? Critics accused his teaching of promoting moral irresponsibility, yet it may also be read as an early articulation of radical detachment: a vision of the self as transcendent, free from constructed norms, and in harmony with natural existence. In this light, his rejection of karma appears not as nihilism but as a profound questioning of metaphysical determinism and a call to rethink the basis of morality itself.
7. Conclusion
Rishi Pūrṇa Kashyapa emerges as one of the most enigmatic figures of ancient Indian philosophy. Remembered as a contemporary of the Buddha and Mahāvīra, he contributed a doctrine that directly contradicted the prevailing karmic consensus. His teaching of akiriyāvāda, though condemned by later traditions, represents an essential strand of the heterodox intellectual ferment that shaped the spiritual landscape of his time.
Though no texts authored by him survive, his ideas lived on in dialogues, polemics, inscriptions, and the genealogical memory of the Kashyapa lineage. His thought, radical in its rejection of karmic morality, forced contemporaries and successors alike to refine their doctrines of ethics, causality, and liberation. In this sense, Pūrṇa Kashyapa’s legacy endures as both a challenge and a stimulus—a reminder of the diversity of voices that contributed to the rich tapestry of Indian philosophy.
References:
Hamare Poorvaj By Dr L D Mohan