Jain Itihas Series 01

Author(s): B Benarsidass
Publisher: B Benarsidass
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/007759/1

Page #1
ASIA PY EI RIVEASETY

Page #2
CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY MOTORTO UNTY MARETYG HERMOR

Page #3
Cornell University Library BL 1350.D23 A lecture on Jainism, delivered before t 3 1924 022 953 438 sasa

Page #4
CORNELL UNIVERSITY BO 4.D. 1865 Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924022953438

Page #5

Page #6
Jain Etihas Society. JAIN ITIHAS SERIES NO. 1. A Lecture on Jainism, delivered before the Dharma Maha-Mahotsava or Great Religious Assemblage at Muttra, by Lala Benarsi Dass, M. A., Head Master, Victoria College, Lashkar, Gwalior, on 29th December, 1901. . K M. A. Jainism was ably represented by B. Benarsi Dass, -The Pioneer. Agra: KKKKKKKKKKBBBBB PRINTED AT THE MOON PRESS. 1902. BBBBBBB5555656S

Page #7
BL 1350 23 Aq12311 244

Page #8
CONTENTS. PAGE. Introduction ... ... ... ... ... 1 Jainism misunderstood ... ... Causes of misunderstanding Antiquity of the Jains ... Jainism never originated after Shankar Acharya Jainism is not an off-shoot of Buddhism ... 8 Hindu Scriptures....... Buddhist Works ... ... Jain Shastras ... ... ... .. ... 19 Buddha not a disciple of Mahavira .. Buddha an older contemporary of Mahavira ... ib Antiquity of the Jains further ... bon *** .. Jainism not a product of Brahmanism. Both pro duct of the common atmosphere of ancient India ... ... ... ... ... 24 Ancient India much misunderstood Ancient India in Jain Shastras ... Max Muller's opinion ... ... No borrowing in ancient India ... Max Muller's opinion. ... ... Hinduism and Brahmanisni misnomers Jainism was not founded by Parshva Nath but Rishabha Deva Buddhist Works ... Jain Shastras ... Hindu Scriptures... Inscriptions at Muttra ...

Page #9
Ancient India once more Yoga Darshana ... Samkhya Darshana Mahabharata ... Charvaka Darshana Tenets of the Jains Ratna Trayi ... ... - Eleven Pratimas ... Dasha Lakshani Dharma Twelve Anuprekshas ... Charitra of a Muni ... Why the Jain monks are naked and why the Jains worship naked images ... ... 69 Winding up ... ... ... ... ... 73 Letters ... ... ... ... ... ... 77 Office-holders and other workers of the Jain Itihas Society... ... ... ... ... 83

Page #10
(1) A LECTURE ON JAINISM, GENTLEMEN, I stand before you this noon to speak on a religion which was preached in this Bharat Introduction varsha in time out of mind by the Kshatriyas, a religion that was preached neither by the Brahmans, nor by the Vaishyas, nor by the Sudras, but I say, by the Kshatriyas. I stand before you to speak on a religion that was preached not by such Kshatriyas as hunt life, sacrifice life, and eat life, but by Kshatriyas who made a universal proclamation "Ahimsa Paramo Dharmah!" "Destroy no living creature! Injure no living creature! This is the highest religion;" who have said thus, spoken thus, declared thus, and explained thus: "As is my pain when I am knocked, struck, menaced, beaten, burned, tormented, or deprived of life; and as I feel every pain and agony from death down to the pulling out of a hair; in the same way, be sure of this, all kinds of living beings feel the same pain and agony as I, when they are illtreated in the same way. For this reason, all sorts of living beings should not be beaten, nor treated with violence, nor abused, nor tormented, nor deprived of life. ' Gentlemen, I stand before you this noon to speak on a religion whose glory the dumb creatures, the cows, the goats, the sheep, the lambs, the hens, the pigeons, and all other living creatures, the beasts and the birds

Page #11
( 2 ) sing with their mute tongues; the only religion which has for thousands of years past advocated the cause of the silent-tongued animals; the only religion which has denounced slaughter of animals for sacrifice, food, hunting, or any other purpose whatsoever; the only religion which has fully acted up to the principle of Ahimsa Paramo Dharmah! and carried it out faithfully and loyally; and making hundreds of people its converts, has saved myriads of lives that should have been otherwise massacred for providing them with food, if they were life-eaters, and for the purpose of their sacrifices and hunting, if they were addicted to these evils also. Gentlemen, I stand before you to speak on the Daya-Maya Dharma, Jainism, which saved lives not only by making thousands of people its converts from the moment when the Rishi Rishabha first preached it, down to the present date, but which also moved the heart of even non-Jain Rajas and kings who issued Firmans and proclamations to save the slaughter of animals wherever Jains lived. We not only read that such Jain Rajas as the celebrated Asoka (and he was a Jain according to Raja Tarangini, Ain-iAkbari, Asoka Avadhana, the inscriptions at Girnar, and Jain traditions, before he became a Bauddha) proclaimed from the icy Himalaya down to Cape Comorin, from Gujerat to Behar, that no animal should be killed for any purpose whatsoever, but we also read that such Mahomedan kings as the mighty and tolerant Akbar issued Firmans that no animal should be

Page #12
( 3) slaughtered during Paggusan days in places where Jains dwelt. Hindu Rajas like the Maharana Shri Raj Singh of the ten thousand villages of Mewar issued commandments to their nobles, Ministers, Patels and Patwaris : "(1) That from time immemorial the temples and dwellings of the Jains have been authorised ; let none, therefore, within their boundary, carry animals to slaughter-This is their ancient privilege. (2) Whatever life, whether male or female, passes their abode for the purpose of being killed is amarak (is saved.)" Even now we find in many places privileges granted to the Jains that on Panchami, Ashtami and Chaturdashi, no animal should be slaughtered where Jains live. Nay, even the Bharbhooja cannot burn his Bhar on these sacred days. In my native place the butcher cannot cross the Jain lane with baskets containing flesh. And this Daya-maya Dharma, Jainism, was preached by Kshatriyas, and neither by the Brahmans, nor by the Vaishyas, nor by the Sudras. Some persons who are groping in the dark in this respect say that Jainism is a religion of the Banias, or that it is a religion of the Shravagis, or that it is a religion of the Vaishyas. But no! They are ignorant, they are wrong, they are misinformed ! who say thus, who speak thus, who talk thus. Jainism is a religion of the Kshatriyas. All Jain Tirthankaras from the Digambara Rishi Rishabha down to the Digambara Rishi Vardhaman were Kshatriyas, born in noble families, such as those of the Hkshvaku Vansa, Hari Vansa, &c.

Page #13
Gentlemen, Jainism is also a religion whose glory the dumb creatures sing with their mute tongues, for, tell me, gentlemen, what other religion has praclaimed the total prohibition of animal slaughter for any purpose whatsoever, and what other religion is practically so very punctilious about animal life. Then, gentlemen, I stand before you this noon to speak on Jainism, a religion, which was founded and continued by Kshatriyas, and a religion which can properly claim to head the list of religions that have for their motto Ahimsa Paramo Dharmah ! * Jainism mis-underatood. This Jainism has been most pitiably mis-under stood. Its origin has been misere understood, its tenets have been mis-understood, its philosophy has been mis-understood, and its antiquity has been mis. understood. And in short it has been mis-understood wholesale. It has not only been mis-understood, but spitefully found fault with. People not only misunderstand it, but also cast slurs upon it out of spite, out of enmity, and out of faction. Some have called it a Nastika religion. Some have called it a religion of the Banias and Shravagis. Some have regarded it as an offshoot of Buddhism. Some have looked upon it as a religion that took its rise upon the revi. val of Brahmanism under Shankaracharya. Some have regarded it as a product of Brahmanism. Some have called Mahavira its founder. Some have called Parshya Nath its originator. Some

Page #14
bave looked upon it as a bundle of uncleanly habits. Some say that the Jains never bathe, that they never clean the teeth. Some blame the Jains for worshipping naked images. Nay, some mis-chiefmongers have gone to extremes. They have said " If an elephant comes in your face, no matter that it crushes you to death, but do not enter a Jain temple to save yourself." Some say that there is no such thing as Jain philosophy. All this is due to trifling with, mildness, and faction; Causes of mig-ander. trifling with of the western scholars, standing. mildness of the Jains, and faction between the Hindus and the Jains. Western scholars have done us much good. They have brought to light much of the Vedic and Buddhistic literature. They have made other wonderful discoveries. For all this we are grateful to them. But this should not prevent me from expressing my idea that they trifle with religions. They play with religions. This you can easily see, at least, in the case of Jainism. While one scholar holds that Jainism is a religion only twelve centuries old, a second says that it is a branch of Buddhism, and a third asserts that it is a product of Brahmanism. Some regard Mahavira its founder, others call Parshva Nath its author. Religions are not things to be thus trifled with. They have a halo of sanctity around them. They are, as it were, under a spell, and conflicting opinions thus pronounced break that spell, and de

Page #15
(6 ) prive ancient religions of their antiquity and sanctity; We ought to approach religions with reverence. Gentlemen, perhaps you know the story of the boys and the frogs. Some boys were pelting the frogs with stones. An old frog raised its head and said: "O boys, what is play to you is death to us." Similarly, old Jainism may say: "O scholars, what is play to you is death to us." It is a trifle, no doubt, for a scholar to pronounce a certain opinion, but it may result in the death of the sanctity and the anti. quity of a certain religion. The Jains also have been acting too mildly, They have been seeing their religion cruelly dealt with. They have been seeing themselves confounded with the Buddhists and the Charvakas. They have been seeing all sorts of obnoxious opinions pronounced with regard to themselves. But they have been tolerating all this patiently, never caring to say a word in their defence. The jealousy between the Hindus on the one hand and the Jains and the Buddhists on the other, is also much to blame. But I should ignore it here. I ought rather to rejoice that under the benign rule of the British Government we have now offered to us an opportunity to meet in this Maha-Mandal, the Hindus, the Jains, and the Buddhists all together under one canopy, and a chance to defend our religions, and to make a true representation as to what those religions are. Indeed, I regard this moment a lucky, and this

Page #16
ed after Shankaracharya, place a blessed one, because we have now and here an opportunity to exchange thoughts on our respective faiths. Gentlemen, I have said above that a great misunderstanding has arisen as to our religion, and that many blemishes and slurs have been cast upon it. Now I shall briefly try to remove some of these misunderstandings and to wash away these blemishes and slurs. First as to our'antiquity. Jainism never originated after Shankaracharya. Those wriAn tiquity of the Jains. ters like Lethbridge and Mountstuart Jainism never driginat- Elphinstone, who say that on the decline of Buddhism, Jainism originated in the 6th century and died in the 12th, though some of the Jains are still found, greatly err. They show their ignorance not only of Jain Shastras, but also of the sacred Texts of the Hindus and the Buddhists. These writers ought to know that Shankaracharya himself held debate with the Jains at a place near Ujjain, as is recorded by Madhava and Ananda Giri in their Shankar-Dig-Vijaya, and by Sadananda in his Shanka-Vijaya-Sara. Nay, Shankar has himself recorded that Jainism existed at a very early date, for in his Bhashya on the Vedanta Sutras of Badarayana, he says that Sutras 33-36 of 2nd Pada of 2nd Adhyaya apply to the Jains. Ramanuja, another Bhashyakara of the Shariraka Mimamsa of Badarayana, is also of the same opinion in his Shri-bhashya. Now when Shankaracharya thus 'speaks of the Jains, how could they come into existence after him?

Page #17
( 8 ) I hope writers like Lethbridge and Mountstuart Elphinstone shall never in future regard Jainism as coming into existence in the 6th century A. D. It will be the great delight of the Jains if the misleading passages in the works of such writers shall be struck off, for they are creating a great misunderstanding. Lethbridge's history is taught in schools and young generations derive false notions regarding Jainism from that book. Now let us see if Profs. Wilson, Lassen, Barth, Jainism is not an offshoot Weber and others are right in speak. of Budilhism. ing of the Jains as a branch of the Buddhists. But before so doing we should note that although they speak of Jainism as branching off from Buddhism in the early centuries of its origin, they do not say, How? When? Under what circumstances ? What led to this branching off? What was the cause of this branching oft? Nay, some of them have the candidness to confess that at the time when they were writing their opinions they knew very little of Jainism. For instance, Barth in his Religions of India, 1892, speaks of Jainism as "one of the least known among those which have performed an important part in the past of India," but "which is as yet known to us only in a sort of abstract way, and in regard to the historical development of which we are absolutely in the dark." Again he candidly confesses that to answer the question "At what period did the sect attain a really

Page #18
independent existence?" "We must first be able to determine the character of primitive Jainism, and that is a problem which we will be able to face only after we attain access to the canonical books of the sect. Up to the present time our sources of information on the matter are limited to external testimonies." Weber also says in his History of Indian Literature, "Our knowledge of the Jains is otherwise derived from Brahmanical sources only." Under these circumstances can the opionin of these scholars be expected to be of much weight to us ? Certainly not. The opinion of scholars who know almost nothing of Jainism cannot but be unsound, the more so when there is no evidence to support their conclusions except the weak argument of resemblance. These scholars were so much struck with the similarity between Jainism and Buddhism that they regarded the one as a copy of the other and since they knew little of the former they considered it as an offshoot of the latter, till they came to know more of it. This is in itself a very unsound argument. One sect may copy whole sale from the other, yet that is no ground for saying that the former took its rise from the latter or vice versa. This, however, should not detain us. Let us see if there is any mention of the Jains as a branch of the Buddhists in the sacred books of the Hindus, the Buddhists, or the Jains. The Hindu Acharyas never speak of the Jains as a branch of the Buddhists. They Hinda soriptura, always speak of them as two inde

Page #19
( 10 ) pendent sects. In. Madhava's Shankar-Dig-Vijaya it is said that Shankar held debate not only with the Jains near Ujjain, but also with the. Buddhists at Benares. So it is also recorded in Ananda Giri's Shankar-Dig-Vijaya, and in Sadananda's ShankarVijaya Sara, Madhava in his Sarva-Darshana Sangraha, enumerates Jain Darshana as one of the sixteen Darshanas or philosophies current in the Deccan in the 34th century, as also Buddhism. Sadananda of Kashmere, in his Advaita-Brahma-Siddhi speaks of both the Jain and the Buddhist systems. It is worthy of notice that he enumerates, the four sub-divisions of the Buddhists as (1) Vaibhashika, (2) Sautrantika, (3) Yogachara and (4) Madhyamika, but he does not include the Jains among them. Madhava in his Sarva-Darshana Sangrah does the same. These four sub-divisions of the Buddhists are frequently spoken of and widely known but the Jains are never included among them. in Siddhanta Shiromani, the author separately speaks of and criticises the Jain and the Buddhist view of astronomy. Varaha-Mihira, who according to Dr. Kern and others, lived in the 6th century. A. D., makes very important references both to the Jains and the Buddhists in his Brihat-Samhita.. He tells us that the Nagna or Jain. worship Jin while. the Sakya or the Buddhists worship Buddha. zAkyAna sarva hitasya zAntamanaso nagnAna jinAnAM viduH He adio qol) Gentlemen, note here what Varaha-Mihira said in the 6th century that the objects of worship of the

Page #20
( 11 ) two sects, were altogether different. Similar is the reference made in Hanuman-Nataka: There Rama is spoken of as one whom the Jains call Arhat and whom the Buddhists call Buddha, aterar sfa gaetu qZA: e fantegantua tatii (e it. ) Varaha-Mihira further tells us that the images of Buddha and of the Deva of the Arhatas, i. e., the Jains should be differently constructed. par ats: Cars: qua aferi feratet starUNIrUpavAMzcakAryo'haMtA devH|| (45 zloka 58 pa.) padmAnita kara caraNaH, prasanna mUrtismunI cakezava // padmAsano ofae:, faaa gaat acak(88 19.45). In Bhagavata Buddha is spoken of as the founder of Buddhism and the Digambara Rishi Rishabha as the author of Jainism. But the most important testimony that the Jains and the Buddhists were different is recorded by the Rishi Vyasa or. Badarayana, the author of the Shariraka Mimamsa and the Mahabharata. That sage, as I have said before, criticises the Jains in Sutras 33-36 of 2nd Pada: of 2nd Adhyaya. He also criticises the. Budo dhists in Sutras 18--32. In: Mahabharata the Jains and the Buddhists are spoken of as distinct. There is a reference in this ancient monument to many religions in Anugita of the Ashvamedha Parva, and the Jains and the Buddhists are two of them. See Anugita Adhyaya 49, Shlokas 2-12. I quote here

Page #21
( 12 ) Max Muller's translation of the passage, "We observe, the various forms of piety to be as it were contradictory.' Some say piety remains after the body is destroyed. Some say that it is not so. Some say that everything is doubtful, and others that there is no doubt. Some say the permanent principle is impermanent, and others too that it exists, and others that exists and does not exist," and so on. Upon this Nilakantha remarks, "some hold that the self exists after the body is lost; others, that is, the Lokayatas or Charvakas, hold the contrary. Everything is doubtful is the view of the Syadvadins ; nothing is doubtful that of the Tairthakas, the great teachers. Everything is impermanent, thus say the Tarkikas; it is permanent, say the Mimanisakas; nothing exists, say the Syadvadins. Something exists, but only momentarily, say the Saugatas or Buddhists," and so on. The word "Syadvadins" in Max Muller's. Translation applies to the Jains. Nilkantha's full Tika upon the text referring to the Jains runs thus : sarva saMzayita mitisyAhAdinaH A HSTUST: ( t. 82 a.) " Everything is doubtful, this is the religion of the Syadvadins who know the Sapta-Bhanginaya." This applies to the Jains. The Syadvadins are the Jains as is admitted by Barth in his Religions of India, p. 148, and as is mentioned in Amarakosha in a Kshepaka Shloka. Garfumemura: B7 Erf# gif#: (p #. between 6---7).

Page #22
( 13 ) The Sapta-Bhanginayajnas are the Jains. The Sapta-Bhanginaya is an object of frequent attack by the Brahmans. If they find anything in Jainism which they think they should attack, it is this SaptaBhanginaya. It is this Sapta-Bhanginaya which is criticised by Badarayana in Sutra 33. " naika smina saMmbhavAt ' " It is this Sapta-Bhanginaya upon which Shankar bases his victory over the Jains near Ujjain as it recorded by Madhava in his Shankar-Dig-Vijaya. It is this Sapta-Bhanginaya which is criticised in Svarajya Siddhi, as a Pandit has recently told me. Now I ask you, gentlemen, if the Jains and the Buddhists were spoken of as different sects, as early as the time when the Mahabharata and the Vedanta Sutras were composed,, how could the Jains be regarded as an offshoot of the Buddhists? As for other references to Jainism in Brahmanical writings I may refer you to Mahabharata, Adi Parva, Adhyaya 3, Shlokas 26-27, where the Shesha Naga steals away the Kundala of Utanka in the disguise. of a Nagna Kshapanaka. so'pazya datha pathinagnaM capaNakam 26 etasminvantaresa capaNaka ztvaramANa upasRtyate kuNDale gRhItvA prAdravat 26. Nilakantha explains Kshapanaka as Pakhanda Bhikshuka. A Nagna Pakhanda Bhikshuka must mean a Digambara Jain monk. It is a pity that the Brahmans introduce Jain monks on occasions when some bad duty is to be performed. For instance, see. also Mudra-Rakshasa-Nataka, where a Jain monk has

Page #23
( 14 ) to perform the unpleasant duty of secretly acting as a messenger. The author of the Advaita-Brahma-Siddhi explains Kshapanaka as a Jain monk. "kSapaNakA" jainamArga siddhAnta pravartakA itikecit (pR. 144 {Calcutta Edition.) In Shanti Parva, Moksha Dharma, Adhyaya 239, Shloka 6, we find reference to the Sapta-Bhanginaya of the Jains. The Shloka runs thus: etadevaMcanai vaMcanacobhe nAnubhetathA / karmasthAviSayaM brUyuH satvasyAH gazfan: 11 4 10 In Shanti Parva, Moksha Dharma, Adhyaya 264, Shloka 3. Jajali calls Tuladhara a Nastika, "nAstikyamapi jalpasi" which is explained by Nilakantha as one against slaughter in Vedic sacrifices. nAstikyaM hiMsAtmaka tvena yajJanindA This shows that even as early as when the Mahabharata was composed, or even earlier, there were Nastikas who were against slaughter in Vedic sacrifices. They cannot be the Samkhyas, for they are not Nastikas. They must be sects similar to the Jains. i In Yoga-Vasishtha in the Vairagya-Prakarna Rama desires to be as calm as Jin. The Shloka runs as follows: nAhaMrAmo namevAJchA bhAveSunaca me manaH / zAnta bhAsitumicchA mikhAramanIvajino yathA // (0 15, lo08) In Ramayana we read in Bala-kanda, Sarga 14, Shloka 22 that Dasharatha fed the Shramanas. arqaiyona aifa zaP1 yead aur ?

Page #24
( 15 ) This word is explained by Bhushana Tika, as Digambara. "FauifaT: ATI ata a far:" xfa faag: In the Tilaka Tika Shramana is explained as a Bauddha Sannyasin. It is, however, more frequently used for a Bauddha than for a Jain monk, and we should not attach much importance to it. It may be that Dasharatha fed both the Jain and the Bauddha monks In Shakatayana's Unadi Sutra the word Jin occurs. "iN siJ jidIkuthavibhyo nak" (sU. 285 pAda 3) This is explained by the author of the Siddhanta Kaumadi as Arhan (fsatska) which is a term used for the founder of Jainism. It is true that Amara Kosha gives the words, Jin and Buddha, as synonyms, and that in Medini Kosha Jin means (1) Buddha, the founder of Buddhism, and (2) Arhan, the founder of Jainism, but wherever the word Jin occurs it ought to be taken as a name of the founder of a religion which derives its name from it rather than for the founder of a religion which owes its name to Buddha. This should specially be the case where the Vrittikara explains the term Jin as Arhan as in the case of the Unadi Sutra above referred to. From this it would follow that the word Jin in the Unadi Sutra is used for the founder of Jainism. And when did Shakatayana. live? He is cited by Yaska in his Nirukta. Yaska lived many centuries before Panini, who lived before: Patanjali, the author

Page #25
( 16 ) of the Mahabhashya. Patanjali, they say, lived in the second century B. C. I must not omit to mention that in Brahmanical writings both the words Jin and Arhan are used for the founder of Jainism, though the latter is used more frequently than the former. For instance, in Brihat Samhita of Varaha-Mihira the Nagna are called the followers of Jin. In Raja Tarangini Asoka is said to have adopted Jin-shasana : : ta afaat Taqat fara atgaA ! zuSkanle travitastAtrau tastArastUpa maNDale / (179 atffit, qyACITAT:) It is from this word that we are called Jains. The word Arhan occurs in Hanuman-Nataka, Ganesha-Purana, Bhagavata-Purana, &c. It is from Arhat that the Jains are called Arhatas. Let us now turn to Buddhist works. Therein Mahavira, the 24th Jain Tirthankara, is spoken of as a contemporary of Buddha, and as one of his six opponent teachers. In Svetambara Jain works like the Kalpa Sutra, Acharanga-Sutra, Uttradhyayana; Sutra-Kritanga and others, Mahavira is spoken of as a Gnatriputra. : The Gnatrikas were the clan of Kshatriyas to which Mahavira belonged. The Gnatrikas are frequently mentioned in the above-mentioned Jain works as also in others. Mahavira is also called a Vaisalika or Buddhist Works.

Page #26
( 17 ) a native of Vaisali, a Vaideha or a prince of Videha, a Kashyapa, or one of that Gotra. But he is frequently called Nattaputta, i. e., Prakrit Natta=Sanskrit Gnatrika and Prakrita Putta = Sanskrit Putra. The Gnatrikas are also mentioned as Nadikas or Natikas in Buddhist works.' The Jain Nirgranthas or Prakrita Niganthas are also frequently met with in Buddhist works, and they are there mentioned as the followers of Nigantha Nattaputta, our Mahavira. Some very important points of our creed are also referred to in Buddhist works, for instance, the Dig Vrita, the disuse of cold water by the monks, the doctrine of Action, and the doctrine of Kriyavada, &c. These are put into the mouth of Natta Putta, our Mahavira, or Nirgranthas, our Jain Gurus. Even the word Savaka or Shravaka meaning a lay Jain occurs in some passages. This wonderful discovery, is due to Buhler and Jacobi. I have myself read Mahavagga and MahaParinibhana Sutta in the Sacred Books of the East. I have also read translations of passages in which our Gnatriputra or the Nirgranthas, or their creed, or the word Shravaka occurs. They are cited by Jacobi in Vol. XLV. of the Sacred Books of the East. The Buddhist works from which the passages have been cited are, besides Mahavagga and Mahaparinibhana Sutta, Anuguttara Nikaya, Samanaphala Sutta of the Dighnikaya, Sumangala Vilasani, a commentary by Buddhagosha on Brahmagala Sutta of the Digh Nikaya and Magghim Nikaya. The Oriental also mentions Lalita-Vastra. All these works were composed before the

Page #27
( 18 ) birth of Christ. Max Muller in his Six Systems of Philo: sophy and Natural Religion and Oldenberg in his mar: vellous: The Buddha also speak of Natta Putta as identical with Mahavira, who was one of the six Tirthaika Teachers and a contemporary of Buddha, though they mention him as founder of Jainism or the Nigantha sect which is by no means the case. But why should I cite their authority? From Mahavagga and MahaParinibhana Sutta, and the translations of other passages quoted by Jacobi from other Buddhist works which I have read, I can safely hold on behalf of the Jains whom I represent here that the Natta Putta, the Niganthas, their creed, the Shravakas (in some passages) mentioned in Buddhist works are Jain. Nay in Buddhist works even the Chaturyama Dharma or the four Great vows of Parshva Nath is also referred to and wrongly put into the mouth of Mahavira, the Natta Putta, The Gotra of Sudharma Acharya and the place of Nirvana of Mahavira are also mentioned by the Buddhists. I must not omit to mention the important fact that the term Nirgrantha is exclusively applied to a Jain monk. The words Shramana and Brahmaria are used both by the Buddhists, and the Jains for their monks, but the word Nirgrantha is used only by the Jains. It is also noteworthy that Barth who regards Jainism as a branch of Buddhism speaks of the Nirgranthas that are referred to in the Edicts of Asoka as the ancestors of the Jains. He is also struck with the discovery of Jacobi and Buhler, though, he says, that he should wait till further proof is forth-coming. He wrote in

Page #28
( 19 ) r892 and the further proof was furnished by Jacobi in 1895 in S. B. E., Vol. XIV. Now, Gentlemen, when the Jains are thus spoken of in the Buddhist works of the 4th or 3rd century before Christ, how could they be regarded as a branch of the Buddhists? Let us now turn to Jain Shastras. In Darshana Sara, written by Deva-Nanda Acharya Jain Shastras. in Samvat 99o at Ujjain, it is said that in the Tirtha of Parshva Nath (that is during the period between the Arhatship of Parshva Nath and Mahavira) Buddha Kirti, a monk learned in the Shastras, a disciple of Pihitashrava, was doing Tapa on the bank of the Saryu in Palash Nagara. He saw some dead fish floating by him. He thought there was no harm in eating the flesh of dead fish because there was no soul therein. He left his Tapa, assumed red garments, and preached Bauddha religion. siri pAsaNAmitthe / sara utIrepalAsaNatharatye // pihi pAsavAsIhe / mahAluddo buddhakittimupI // 6 // nimi pUraNA sakhyA / giyapavvajjAva meM paramabhaTTe // rataM varaM dharitA / paba TTiyaM teSa eyataM // 7 // maMsasmanAtthi jIvo / jahAphele dahiyaduGa sakkarAe // tamhAtaM muNittA / bhakhaMtoSArtha pAvi // 8 // majjaMNavajjaNijjaM davva davaM / nahajalantaDa edaM // itiloe ghosittA / pavvattiyaM saMgha sAvajjaM // 1 // bhokaredi kammaM / aeNotaMbhuMja dodi sivaMtaM // parikathiUpaNaNaM / vasikiJcANisya bhukvaeNo // 10 //

Page #29
( 20 ) : This Gatha of the Darshana Sara is cited as an authority by Swami Atma Ram, a Svetambara Sadhoo, in his. Ajnana Timira Bhashkara and other works and by Pandit Shiva Chandra, a Digambara, in his PrashnaUttara Dipika, and by almost all other living Pandits of the day as an authority for the view that Buddha was originally a Jain monk, who being corrupt in thought, recommended the use of flesh, and having assumed red garments, started a religion of his own. Thus you will see, gentlemen, that in Brahmanical writings the Jains are nowhere spoken of as a branch of the Buddhists even as early as when Badarayana wrote, and that was the time when Buddha himself lived; that in Buddhist scriptures the Jains are spoken of as contemporary of Buddha or as a sect older than the newly arisen Bauddhas; and that according to Jain Shastras Buddha was a Jain monk, a disciple of. Pihitashrava. How are the Jains to be regarded as an offshoot of the Buddhists then ? Have not Weber, Wilson, and others done us great injustice in calling us an offshoot of the Buddhists? Certainly they have. We, Jains, can, however, respectfully make allowance for them, for their conclusions were due to haste. They are, after all, great scholars, and we should forget what they have said, though by their innocent but hasty opinions we have generally come to be regarded as a branch of the Buddhists. They never studied the antiquity of Jainism in the light of Jain, Buddhist and Brahmanical Texts.

Page #30
( 21 ) Gentlemen, I should not omit to tell you that Buddha was never a disciple of Mahavira according to Jain Shastras as is said by Hunter and others. The Jains call him a disciple of Pihitashrava. Colebrooke, Stevenson, Major Delamaine, Dr. Hamilton and others confounded Gautama Buddha with Gautama Indrabhuti of the Jains, the chief Ganadhara of Mahavira, and since Gautama Ganadhara was a disciple of Mahavira, it was said that Gautama Buddha was also a disciple of Mahavira. This, however, was never said by the Jains, but by those who confounded: Buddha with Indrabhuti, though this mistaken view was attributed to the Jains. According to the Jains Buddha was a disciple of Pihitashrava. Buddha not a disciple of Mahavira, Gentlemen, I should not also omit to tell you what I may call the discovery of a strange coincidence between Jain and Buddhist Scriptures in one respect. I have told you above that in Buddhist works Mahavira is spoken of as one of the six opponent teachers of Buddha, that is, the Buddhists call him a con temporary of Buddha. The Jain Shastras tell a similar story. It has been said above that Buddha Kirti was a disciple of Pihitashrava who lived in the Tirtha of Parshva Nath. Swami Atma Ram traces the Pattavali of the Kavala-gachha from Swami Parshva Nath thus:Shree Parshava Nath Shubha Datta Ganadhara Buddha an older contemporary of Mahavira. 33

Page #31
( 22 ) Shree Hari Dattaji .. , , Aryasamudra , Swami Prabha Surya , Keshi Swami. He further tells as that Pihitashrava was one of the Sadhus of Swami Parabha Surya. We know from Uttara Dhayana Sutra and other Jain works that Keshi was of the party of Parshva Nath and that he lived in the days of Mahavira. Buddha-Kirti being a disciple of Pihitasbrava must have also been a contemporary of Mahavira, though it seems an older contemporary Again we learn from Dharma Pariksha of Swami Amita-gata Acharya written in Samvat 1070 that Mogglayana a disciple of Parshva Nath started Bauddha religion out of enmity with Mahavira. He regarded Buddha, the son of Shuddhodhana, as Paramatman. This was owing to Kala Dosha. rg: itacarepagat atfsaria: 1 fuer: ita earur face.ar piaa 1450 zuddhodana sutaM buddhaM paramAtmAnama bravIt // atfua: paa fani a fita aft atifear: 1920 ( NET WTC 25) The word Shishya in this Shloka must mean Shishya-para Shishya. In Mahavagga (pp. 141-150 S. B. E., Vol. XIII.) we read that Mogglayana and Sari Putta, were two

Page #32
( 23 ) Brahmans, the followers of Sangaya, the Paribbagaka (wandering ascetic). They went to Buddha in spite of the remonstrances of Sangaya and became his disciples. Thus Mogglayana being a disciple of a disciple of Parshva Nath according to Dharma Pariksha, this Sangaya the preceptor of Mogglayana, must have been a Jain, and must have belonged to the party of Parshva Nath like Keshi. And since Mogglayana was an enemical contemporary of Mahavira and he was also a disciple of Buddha himself, Mahavira and Buddha must have been contemporaries. It would, however, seem that according to the above two Jain Shastras and Shrenika Charitra, Buddha had already commenced to preach his new doctrines before Mahavira's Arhatship began. As we know that Mogglayana was never the founder of Buddhism, the Shloka in Dharma Pariksha must be taken to mean that Mogglayana helped Buddha more than others in scattering his doctrines, a view which is comfirmed by Buddhistic works, Mogglayana and Sari Putta being the two leading disciples of Buddha. Let us now trace the antiquity of the Jains fur-. Antiquity of the ther. Let us now see if Jainism is a product of Brahmanism, and if it was started by the Swami Parshva Nath. This is the opinion of some scholars like Colebrooke, Buhler, and Jacobi. We are grateful to some of these scholars. We are specially grateful to Buhler and Jacobi. We are thankful to them for the wonderful discovery they have recently made, but at the same time we are. Jains further.

Page #33
forced to proclaim with extreme pain that they do us great injustice if they regard Jainism as a product of Brahmanism, or if they look upon Parshva Nath as its founder. In so doing they would be simply illustrating the proverb "From the frying pan into the fire." They would be saving us from one difficulty but involving us into another. They would be playing Lassen, Weber, Barth, and Wilson as far as Jainism is concerned. These latter scholars were struck with the similarity between Jainism and Buddhisni, and since they knew very litle of the former, they regarded it as an offshoot of the latter. Buhler and Jacobi too are struck with the similarity between Jainism and Brahmanism and since they knew not all about the former they looked upon it as a branch of the latter. But may we not again point out here that this opinion is hasty and ought to have been reserved till further study we mean the study of the Hindu Shastras. These two excellent scholars know that to disprove Jainism as an outcome of Buddhism, they discovered material in the Buddhist Texts themselves. They found that Jainism was not spoken of in Bud. dhist Scriptures as a religion posterior to Buddhism, but as a faith of the Nirgranthas who existed before Buddha. Let them now study Jainism in Hindu Scriptures. Let them now see what evidence the Hindu Shastras afford as to the antiquity of Jainism. Let Jainism not a product them now see whether Jainism is of Brghmanism. Both pro- a product of Brahmanism, or whemosphere of ancient ther both are not a product of the common atmosphere of ancient India. . duct of the common at India,

Page #34
Gentlemen, allow me to say here that ancient . India has been much mis-understood. Ancient India mach mis-understood. a much Of course, you should not think that I-am speaking like a haughty scholar I am neither a scholar nor a shadow of a scholar. I am a common student. My study of this question 'has been very brief. It was sometime ago that I received several questions through my patron, J. W. D.' Johnstone, Esq., F. R. G. S., Inspector-General of Education, Gwalior State, in charge of Census Ope, rations, from Captain C. E. Luard, Census Superinten. dent, Central India. Through the help of my friends I answered the questions but at the same time I was inspired to study the antiquity of Jainisin. Since then we have been studying this question, and from what we have read as yet, I say that ancient India has been much mis-undetstood. This is an idea that has occurred to my mind, and I do not want to hide it. People have commonly supposed that there was. nothing else in ancient India but Brahmanism. What this Brahmanism was they never explain. If they mean by Brahmanism each and everything that exista ed in ancient times in India, they are right in their supposition. But if they mean by Brahmanism. the Vedic religion or the religion of Vedie sacrifices, I do not see how they can be justified in supposing that there, was nothing else in ancient India but Brahmanism. These Vedic sacrifices were not all that existed in anci. ent India. There were, no doubt, people who said : " gaat statt os freta" .

Page #35
( 26 ) ."One should slaughter such animals as have Agni and Soma for their Devas." But at the same time there were people who proclaimed : "AIFFE pawara" "One should not slaughter any animal." There were also people who preached :There is no heaven, no final liberation, nor any soul in another world. Nor do the actions of four castes, orders, &c., produce any real effect. The Agnihotra, the three vedas, the ascetic's three staves, and smearing one's self with ashes, Were made by nature as the livelihood of those des titute of knowledge and manliness. If a beast slain in the Jyotishtoma rite will itself go to heaven, Why then does not the sacrificer forthwith offer his father? If the Sraddha produces gratification to beings who are dead, Then here, too, in the case of travellers when they start, it is needless to give provisions for the journey. If beings in heaven are gratified by our offering the Sraddha here, Then why not give the food down below to those who are standing on the house top?

Page #36
( 27 ) While life remains let a man live happily, let him feed on ghee even though he runs in debt; When once the body becomes ashes, how can it ever return again? If he who departs from the body, goes to another world, How is it that he comes not back again, restless for love of his kindred? Hence it is only as a means of livelihood that Brah mans have established here All these ceremonies for the dead,-there is no other fruit anywhere. The three authors of the Vedas were buffoons, knaves and demons. All the well-known family of the Pandits, Jarphari, Turphari, &c. And all the obscene rites for the Queen commanded in the Asvamedha, These were invented by buffoons, and so all the various kinds of presents to the priests, While the eating of flesh was similarly commanded by night-prowling demons (Sarva-Darshana-Samgraha, Cowell and Gouph, pp. 10 and 11.) These pleasure-seeking revilers of the Vedas were the Charvakas. Dr. Rajendralal Mitra says in his preface to the Yoga-Sutras that in the Sama-Veda there is a reference to a Yati who condemned sacrifices, and whose wealth was transferred to Bhrigu. According to Aitareya-Brahmana some such Yatis were punished by being thrown before jackals.

Page #37
(28) 1. . ln Rig Veda, Ashtaka 3, Adhyaya 3, Varga 21, Rik 14, people are mentioned who lived in Kikata or Magadha, and who condemned Yajna, Dana, &c. Again, gentlemen, our forefathers in ancient India were not all the advocates of the philosophy of Badarayana. They were not all believers in one neuter Brahman. There were many of them who said like Kapila "satur;" " Isvara has not been proved." la Rig Veda Mandala 8, Adhyaya 10, Sukta 89. Rik 3, Bhargava Nami Rishi says that there is no such thing as Indra. No one has seen him. Whom should we praise when there is no Indra ? It is simply Lokavada that they say that there is such a thing as Indra. In reality there is none. In Rik 4, Indra tries to prove his existence and says that he brings destruction upon his enemies. In Mandala 2, Adhyaya 2, Sukta 12, Rik 5, Grit: Samada Rishi says that there are people who say there is no Indra, but that in fact there is one. There were again people in ancient India who be. lieved like the Jains in a future life, but there were others who denied it. In the Brahmans, says Barth, the question is, sometimes asked if there is really another life. In Rig Veda, Ashtaka 6; Adhyaya 42 Varga 32, Rik 10, these is mention of Ahardrish Venkpata, i. e., usurers who see the sun in this world, but who in the next go to a Loka where there is

Page #38
( 99 ) pitch darkness. They were the Nastikas who de nied such a thing as the next world, because they had not seen it, Shastras. The true state of ancient India is represented Ancient India in Jain in Jain Shastras. It is said therein that when the Digambara Rishi Rishabha was proclaiming to the world, Ahimsa Paramo Dharmah!" and was doing good to man, kind, Devas and animals by his Nirakshari Vani, there were also 363 Pakanda teachers who were preaching religions of their own, and one of them was Shukra or Brihaspati, the founder of the Charvaka religion. Certainly this seems to me the true state of affairs in ancient India. In time out of mind by the end of the 3rd Kala there was not only one teacher of one view of life, but there were 363, nay more, who preached their different doctrines and who explained this life and this world as they appeared to them. (C This opinion bears the sanction of Prof. Max Muller and almost all other scholars. Max Muller's opinion. Writing in 1899 when seventy-six years old and when he had neither the eyes nor the memory which he had at twenty-six and when he could expect younger men to help him as he gladly used to do in his youth to his preceptors and Gurus, that noble philosopher says: 44 'It would be a mistake to imagine that there was a continuing development into the various meanings assumed by or assigned to such pregnant terms as

Page #39
( 30 ) Prajapati, Brahman, or even Atman. It is much more in accordance with what we learn from the Brahmans and Upanishads of the intellectual life of India to admit an infinite number of intellectual centres of thought scattered all over the country, in which either the one or the other view found influencial advocates." "The Sutras or aphorisms which we possess of six systems of philosophy, each distinct from the other, cannot possibly claim to represent the very first attempts at a systematic treatment, they are rather the last summing up of what had been growing up during many generations of isolated thinkers." "As far back as we can trace the history of thought in India, from the time of King Harsha and the Buddhist pilgrims back to the descriptions found in the Mahabharata, the testimonies of the Greek invaders, the minute accounts of the Buddhists in their Tripitaka ; and in the end the Upanishads themselves and the hymns of the Vedas, we are met everywhere by the same picture, a society in which spiritual interests predominate and throw all material interests into the shade, a world of thinkers, a nation of philosophers." "To the present days these six different systems of philosophy have held their own in the midst of a great multitude of philosophical theories propounded by the thinkers of India." "Nor could the fact that some of the Sutras quote and refute the opinions of other Sutras, be accounted

Page #40
( 31 ) for without admitting a growing up of different philosophical schools side by side during a period which preceded their last arrangement." .."In the Upanishads and Brahmans, though there is a common note running through them all, there is yet great latitude and want of system, and a variety of opinions supported by different teachers and different schools. Even in the hymns we meet with great independence and individuality of thought, which occasionally seems to amount to downright scepticism and atheism. We must keep all this in mind if we wish to gain a correct idea of the historical origin and growth of what we are accustomed to call six philosophical systems of India." "That such opinions (Charvaka) existed at an earlier time, we can see in some of the hymns in which many years ago I pointed out these curious traces of an incipient sceptecism... ... ... ... There are some tenets of the followers of Brihaspati which seem to indicate the existence of other schools of philosophy by their side. The Brihaspatyas speak as if being inter pares they differ from others as others differ from them. Traces of an opposition against the religion of the Vedas (Kautsa) appear in the hymns, the Brahmans, and the Sutras, and to ignore them would give us an entirely false idea of the religious and philosophical battles and battle-fields of ancient India..

Page #41
Such, gentlemen, was the opinion of Prof. MaxMuller when he was seventy-six. I regret i have no time to dilate upon the subject further. But you will easily see from the little I have told you that ancient India has been much is-under stood. In ancient India there was not any ofie single religion or philosophy, but many religions and philosophies, three hundred and sixty-three or more. Who can tell the exact number? How can you say then that Jainism is a product of Brahmanism? How can No borrowing in an- you say that the Jains borrowed clent lndia. from Kapila or Kanada or Patanjali, Gautama or others ? Is it not possible that all borrowed from the common atmosphere of ancient India ? Is it not possible that the Vedantists, the Samkhyas, the Jains, the Charvakas and other sects, many of which have been buried into oblivion for ever, had all their advocates in ancient times? This idea of borrowing is very strange. Those who say that the Jains borrowed ought to prove when and how they borrowed. They ought to prove who borrowed. Why should they simply throw out guesses and create mis-understanding ? There is no such thing as borrowing in ancient India. This again bears the sanction of the noble Prof. Max Muller. He says : -- "If we are right in the description we have given of the unrestrained and abundant Mus Muller's opinion. We growth of philosophical ideas in an. cicor India, the idea of borrowing so natural to us, seems altogether out-of-place in ancient Iridia. A

Page #42
( 33 ) wild niass of guesses at truth was floating in the air, and there was no controlling authority whatever, not even, as far as we know, any binding public opinion to produce anything like order in it. Hence we have . as little right to maintain that Buddha borrowed from Kapila as that Kapila borrowed from Buddha. No one would say that the Hindus borrowed the idea of building ships from the Phaenicians or that of building the stupas from the Egyptians. In India we move in a world different from that which we are * accustomed to in Greece, Rome, or Modern Europe, an: we need not rush at once to the conclusion that because similar opinions prevail in Buddhism and in the Samkhya philosophy of Kapila, therefore, the former must have borrowed from the latter, or, as some hold, the latter from the former." . ." It cannot be urged too strongly that there existed in India, a large common fund of philosophical thought, which like language, belonged to no one in particular, but was like the air breathed by every 'living and thinking man. Thus_only can it be explained that-we find a number of ideas in all, nearly all, the systems of Indian philosophy which all philosophers seem to take simply for granted, and, which belong to no one in particular." . .. Besides this conviction that suffering can be removed by an insight into its nature and origin there are some other ideas which must be traced back, to that rich treasury of thought which was opened to every thinking man in India. These common ideas

Page #43
( 34 ) assumed, no doubt, different guises in different systems, but this ought not to deceive us, and a little reRection allows us to perceive their common source." " And the longer I have studied the various systems, the more have I become impressed with the. truth of the view taken by Vignana-Bhikshu and others that there is beyond the variety of the six systems a common fund of what may be called national or popular philosophy, a large Manasa lake of philosophical thought and language, far away in the distant North, and in the distant Past from which each thinker was allowed to draw for his own purposes." This is, gentlemen, the dictum of Prof. Max Maller when he was seventy-six years old. It is a pity that this noble scholar could not study Jainism. His whole life was passed in bringing to light the Vedic and Buddhistic literature, and he could not spare time to read poor Jainism. If he said that Jainism was started by the Nirgrantha Nattaputta, it was because, I presume, he found it to be the safest to adopt this opinion. This opinion is not the result of his study of the antiquity of Jainism. Let me, however, not digress. Let me simply tell you here that there is no borrowing in ancient India. Different Rishis held different views of life, and the Darshanas that you now find, embody the opinions of those. Rishis. Gentlemen, let me also submit here that the terms Blindolem and Brab Hinduism and Brahmanism as genemanism mis-nomers. rally used appear to me misnomers.

Page #44
( 35 ) What-is Hinduism ? Ihe religion of the Hindus. But who are the Hindus? They say those Aryas who lived on the banks of the Indus. But were all these Aryas the followers of the Vedic Dharma, the doers of sacrifices ? Were not also among them Aryas who objected to these sacrifices ?- Were not also among then the fore-fathers of the Jains, the Charvakas, and many other sects forgotten now ? Are we not Hindus in that sense ? Why should the Vedic religion, the religion of sacrifices, be called Hinduism then ? Again what is Brahmanism? The religion of the Brahmans. But what is meant by the religion of the Brahmans? A religion founded by the Brahmans or a religion to be observed by the Brahmans ? In the former case there is no such thing as a religion founded by the Brahmans. We know that the Kshatriyas were also great teachers, nay, in some cases greater than the Brahmans, and who can say what part the Kshatriyas played in founding a religion which is exclusively called the religion of the Brahmans? We know that the teaching of Krishna and the example of Rama might be made his solace in life by any personi breathing on earth. Who can say what other Kshatriyas like Rama and Krishna played a part in ancient India to found the religion now called Brahmanism. If you say Brahmanism means a religion to be observed by the Brahmans, it cannot represent the Vedic religion in that case too. The Vedic religion

Page #45
( 36 ) was not intended for the Brahmans alone but for the Dvijanma, the Brahmans, the Kshatriyas, and the Vaishyas. : If you say that Brahmanism is a religion that knows Brahman, how would you then apply this term to those sections of the Hindu philosophy, the Samkhya and the Purva Mimamsa, for instance, from which that Brahman is absent ? Jainism was not foun. Hinduism and Brahmanism appear to me misno-. mers then, if you apply the terms to the Vedic religion, the religion of sacrifices, or even to Hindu philosophy. There is no such thing as Hinduism or Brahmanism in ancient times. There is, of course, Vedic religion, and out of this Vedic religion Jainism never comes. Let us now see if Jainism was founded by Parshva Nath. Let us now see if dea by Parohva Nath but Parshva Nath is spoken of as the by Rishabba Deva. founder of Jainism in any of the Buddhist, the. Jain or the Hindu scriptures. The Buddhist Texts are silent on the point and this was to be expected because Bud- Buddhist works. dhisn was started only in the days of the last Tirthankara, Mahavira. In Buddhist scriptures there is mention only of Mahavira at the head of the Nirgranthas. Mahavira is not. mentioned: therein as the originator of the Nirgrantha creed but simply as the leader of the Nirgranthas so far as Dr. Jacobi has been able to ascertain.

Page #46
Jain Shastras. ( 37 ) In Jain Shastras it is said that when Rishabha Deva left the world, four thousand other Rajas followed him and became Digambara ; but they could not adhere to his strict Charitra, and three hundred and sixty-three of them became the founders of Pakhanda religions. One of these was Sukra or Brihaspati. This was at the end of the 3rd Kala. Thus according to Jain Shastras Rishabha Deva was the first preacher of Jainism. As I have said above the tradition, that three hundred and sixty-three Rajas being corrupt preached three hundred and sixty-three Pakhanda religions, should be understood to represent the intellectual state of ancient India at a very early date. There was at that time a great intellectual activity, an infinite number of intellectual centres of thought being scattered all over the country. Let us now see if there is any confirmation of this Hindu Scriptures. intura Jain Jain tradition in Brahmanical works. In Bhagavata Purana, Skandha 5, Adhyaya 3-6.we read of Rishabha. It is said in that sacred work that of the fourteen Manus Swayan-. bhu Manu was the first. When Brahma saw that the world did not multiply, he created Swayambhu Manu and Satya Rupa, the latter becoming the wife of the former. Swayambhu Manu begot Priyavarata, who begot Agnidhra, who begot Nabhi. Nabhi married Maru Devi and their issue was Rishabha Deva. This Rishabha in the Bhagavata is said to be a Digambara and the founder of Jainism. And see when Rishabha:

Page #47
( 38 ) . was born. In the beginning of the world when Brahma created Swayambhu Manu and Satya Rupa He was fifth in descent from them. He lived by the end of the first Kritayuga and twenty-eight Kritayugas are to pass in this Manvantara. This Rishabha preached Jainism, In Shlokas 9-11 of the Sixth Adhyaya, the author of the Bhagavata speaks of one Arhat, a Raja of Konka, Venka, and Nata, who, he says, hearing of the Charitra of Rishabha from his countrymen, would start in Kaliyuga a religion the followers of which would hate the Brahmanas and go to hell. yasya kilAnucaritamAzramAtIta mupAkarNya ko veGka kuTakAnA rAjInAmo pazikSya kalAvadharma utkRSya mANebhavitavyena vimohitaH svadharma pathamakutobhayamapa hAya kupathapA khaNDama samanjasaM nijamanISayAmandaH sampravartayiSyate // // ye naTavAvakalau manujApasadAdeva mAyA mohitAH svavidhi niyoga zauca cAritra vihInAdeva helanAnyapa bratAni nija nijeccha yA guNDAnA asnAnAnA camanAzauca ke zoluMcanAdIni kalinA'dharma bahuleno pahatadhi yo brahma brAhmaNa yajJa puruSa loka vidUSakAH prAyeNa bhaviSyanti // 10 // tecArvAkta nayAnijalokayAtrayAndha paramparayAzvastAstamasyandhe svayameva prapatiSyanti 11 paMcama skandha 0 6. No such Raja has ever lived, nor in any other Brahmanical writing where the word Arhat occurs is he spoken of as a Raja of Konka, Vanka, and Nata, so far as I have been able to ascertain. Arhat means praiseworthy if the word be derived from Arh to praise;

Page #48
( 39 ) or it means killer of the enemies, if the word be Arihanta. This word occurs in Shiva Purana. There was no such Raja as Arhat. Rishabha himself was Arhat or Arihanta. He was praiseworthy and killer of the enemies, the Karmans. If Arhat preached Jainism in Kaliyuga, why is Rishabha called a Jin Deva in Vachaspatya and Adi-Jin Deva in Shabdartha Chintamani. I am told in some Upanishads Rishabha is called Arhat. There was no such Raja as Arhat. Rishabha himself was Arhat. It is owing to mutual jealousy that the author of the Bhagavata makes Arhat copy the Charitra of Rishabha and start Jainism in Kaliyuga. Perhaps he did not like to give Jainism an earlier antiquity. But even if according to him the Charitra of Rishabha was copied, it was that Charitra upon which Jainism was built. In this sense too Rishabha sowed the seeds of Jainism. ! We have also the authority of Nilakantha, the celebrated commentator of the Mahabharata to support the above view. In Mahabharata, Shanti Parva, Moksha Dharma, Adhyaya 263, Nilakantha says in his commentary on Shloka 20 that the Arhatas or the Jains were taken in by the good Acharana of Rishabha geru ai "'aequretai asrdtfaararaje ggr ursar dayo mohitAH pAkhaNDa mArga manugatAH" / ityuktam. Gentlemen, this Adhyaya is worth reading. In this you will find a dialogue between Tula Dhara and Jajali, the former advocating the cause of Ahimsa and

Page #49
refuting all arguments for. Vedic sacrifices, the latter defending the slaughter of animals in Yajna. .. Thus according to Brahmanical works Rishabha was the founder of Jainism. It was he who for the first time preached those doctrines which became the foundation-stone of Jainism. In none of the Hindu Shastras, so far as I have been able to enquire, Parshva Nath is spoken of as the founder of that religion. I had a talk on this subject with many learned Shastris and they all told me that Rishabha was the founder of Jainism. Thus, gentlemen, you will see that according to Jain and Brahmanical writings Rishabha was the founder of Jainism. Is it not strange then, that writers like Colebrooke, Buhler and Jacobi should propound their own theories and call Parshya Nath the founder of our Dharma ? In matter of religion they ought to be guided by our own traditions and not invent their own hypotheses. You know religion is religion. It is dearer than life to a man, and, in my humble opinion, scholors ought not to trifle with religions. Their word is. law. Their opinion is authority. In matter of religion then, they ought not to be hasty in giving opinions. They ought to have regard for the traditions of others. They ought to have regard for the feelings of others. Gentlemen you should note that it is not only in accordance with our traditions handed Inscriptions at Muttra. down to us in Jain and Hindu Shastras, that we call Rishabha the founder of Jainism, but .. there is also material evidence discovered by Dr.

Page #50
( 41 ) Fuhrer at Muttra, an evidence nearly two thousand years old, to support those traditions. You know Prof. Buhler has edited many iriscriptions of the Jains in Epigraphia Indica, vols. I and II. These inscriptions are two thousand years old. They bear the Samvat of the Indo-Scythian Kings, Kanishka, Huvashka, and Vasudeva. In these inscriptions we read that images were dedicated by lay Jains to Rishabha. For instance, see the following inscriptions : No. VIII. "Success! In the year 40 (60) of the great king (and) suprenie king of kings, Deva Putra Huvashka, in the fourth month of winter on the tenth day,--on that (date specified as) above, (this) meritorious gift (was made) for the sake of great happiness by Datta, the wife of Ka Pasaka, an inhabitant of...vata, (at the request) of... ... ... ......ganin, the venerable Kharnna, pupil of the preacher, the venerable. Vriddhahasti out of the Kottiyagana, the Sthanikiya Kula fand) the Sakha of the Aryya-Veriyas (the followers of Arya:. Vajra). May the Divine (and) glorious Rishabha be pleased." .: P. 386, vol. I. ... No. XIV. "Success! The pupil of the venerable J.eshtahasti (Jyeshthahastin) out of the Kottiyagana, the Brahmadasika Kula, the Uchche-nagari Sakha and the arina sumbhaga (was) the venerable Mahala; the pupil of the venerable Jeshtahasti (Jyeshthahastin)

Page #51
( 42 ) (was) the venerable Gadhaka; at the request of his female pupil, the venerable Sama, (was dedicated) an image of Usabha (Rishabha), the gift of Gulha, the daughter of Varma (and) the wife of Jayadasa." P. 389, vol. I. No. XXVIII. "(Adoration) to divine Usabha (Rishabha)! At the request of Sadita, female pupil of.........dhuka, a preacher in the Varanagana, Nandika Kula and......... Sakha." 3.2. P. 206-207, vol. II. Now just see that nearly two thousand years ago Rishabha had come to be regarded as the first Jain Tirthankara. And when did Mahavira and Parshva live? The date of Mahavira's Moksha is 526 B. C. and Parshva attained Nirvana 250 years earlier. Thus inscriptions cut a few centuries after these two Tirthankaras, bear testimony to Rishabha's being a Jain Tirthankara. Had Mahavira or Parshva been the founder of Jainism, how could people living two thousand years ago dedicate images to Rishabha ? Gentlemen, it is my sad duty to tell you this noon that our holy religion has been much trifled with. Some writers have regarded it as originating in the 6th century. Some have called it a branch of Buddhism, others have confounded it with the Charvaka religion. Some have called Mahavira its founder, others have called Parshva Nath its author. We never expected such ill-treatment at the hands of -------

Page #52
( 43 ) scholars. We never thought that scholars would harm a religion that is kind to all. But ah! In this naughty world virtue is often in misery. Gentlemen, before winding up this part of my lecture, let me once more return to Ancient India once more. ancient India. Let me once more assure you that in ancient times in this noble country there were not only those who said, "auth FTATUIA," "whoever desires paradise should sacrifice." But there were also many sects which attached no importance whatever to them, or rather who denounced them wholesale. It is a pity that all such sects have not come down to us, that most of them have become extinct for ever. But still there are a few whose philosophy has reached us, and, I think, these sects are quite sufficient for our purposes, to prove that in India in ancient times Vedic sacrifices and slaughter of living creatures in Yajna were not the only means of heaven and salvation ; but that people resorted also to the contrary means for the very purposes, that while one sect asserted that they could cross over the ocean of the world by Himsa, others urged that Ahimsa was the only way to Nirvana. Let us first look to the philosophy of the ancient Yogis. This has been systematised Yoga Darshana. use for us by the Rishi Patanjali in the Yoga-Sutras. We also possess Yoga Shastra by the Jain Acharya, Hema Chandra, the celebrated author of the Hema Chandra Kosha, but as the Yoga

Page #53
. ( 44 ) Sutras of Patanjali are better known, let us examine them, and let us see if any importance is paid therein to Vedic sacrifices as a source of obtaining eternal bliss. Gentlemen, in the Yoga-Sutras of Patanjali there is no reference to Vedic sacrifices as being helpful. On the contrary you find in Pada 2, Sutra 30, mention of Yama as including ahimsa, satya, asteya, brahmacharya, and aparigraha. pahiMsA satyAsteya brahmacaryA parigrahAyamAH // 1 // *This Yama is reckoned as accessory to Yoga. In Sutra 31, these five restraints that form Yama are called Mahavratas if they are observed in all conditions of.the Chitta. ya arfa egaie watafa: 18 HH AFTAE 11 380 " These are the great austerities of all stages, irrespective of jati, desha, kala, and samaya.", "They are imperative in all conditions or stages of the thinking principle, irrespective (anavachchhinna) of these four conditions of kind, &c., i. e., it does not mean that I shall not kill a Brahman,' ........... .................................................. but that I shall not for any purpose whatsoever, kill any one, at any place, at any time. The others should be explained in the same way. Thus when the practices are universal without any qualification, they are called great austerities' (Mahavratas.) Their interrupted observance is not so." (Translation of Yoga Sutras, Dr. Rajendra Lal Mitra, p. 93).

Page #54
( 45 ) A Yogi is to vow that he will not kill any one, for any purpose whatever, at any time, and at any place. And so far satya, asteya, &c, Such vows of his are called Mahavratas. In Sutra 35 it is said. ahiMsA pratiSThAyAM tat savidhauvera tyAgaH // 35 // "In the neighbourhood of him who is confirmed in (Ahimsa) non-slaughter, there is abandonment of enmity, or harmless abidence even on the part of the naturally cruel, such as of serpents and mungooses. The meaning is those that are addicted to injury give up their injurious nature." Thus, gentlemen, you will see what a great importance is attached to Ahimsa in Yoga Darshana. A Yogi to gain his object must abandon Himsa of all kinds, at all times, at all places, and for all purposes whatsoever. By so doing he becomes so influencial that if animals hostile to each other approach him, they give up their enmity at once. * Throughout the Yoga-Sutras it is no-where said that sacrifices will help a Yogi. It is Ahimsa, Satya, Asteya, Brahmacharya, and Aparigraha that are to assist him. In Satra .36 it is said :-ART OFagfari fiat 169 1 "In the confirmed in veracity (there is) asylum of the fruit of works." "Works (kriyah) are the sacrifices which, when performed, yield the fruits, heaven, &c. The Yogi who practises veracity rises to such greatness thathe attains

Page #55
( 46 ) the fruits without performing those works, and at his bidding they may be attained by any one so-ever, without performing those works." (tavacanAd yasya kasya cit kriyAmakurvato'pi. kriyA phalaM bhAti) "Veracity or abstinence from falsehood is here described to be as meritorious as the sacrificial rites enjoined in the Vedas, i. e., by practising veracity with unswerving faith one acquires the same merit which the sacrifices yield, and that without its being tainted by the cruelty which attends sacrifices." Gentlemen, this Sutra is very significant. It is a direct denial of the efficacy of the Vedic sacrifices by the followers of Yoga. It is rather a retort by a Yogi to one who vindicates the claims of Vedic sacrifices. "In the confirmed in veracity (there is) asylum of the fruit of works." "Let us not practise sacrifices," says a Yogi, "for they are tainted by cruelty. Let us in their place practise Satya. Let us be truthful. Our veracity will help us to obtain all that sacrifices are supposed to give. Nay, if we practise truth, we shall acquire such great merit that at our bidding the so-called fruits of sacrifices may be acquired by any one soever." Perhaps you might say, gentlemen, that the above Sutra does not deny the efficacy of the Vedic sacrifices, If so, why does the Yoga-Darshana altogether prohibit the slaughter of animals, and why does it recommend *Ahimsa in all conditions of the Chitta, at all times, at

Page #56
( 47 ) all places? If sacrifices were efficacious, they should also have been reckoned as accessory to Yoga. But strange to say, this is not so. Gentlemen, certainly the sects practising Yoga in ancient times must have been against Vedic sacrifices and slaughter of animals for any purpose whatsoever. You see the confirmation of this view at least in the case of one sect of the Yogis, the Jains. You must remember that the Jains are the great Yogis. All Jain Tirthankaras were great Yogis. All Jain monks were great Yogis. A Jain cannot obtain Moksha without practising Yoga. Yoga is a necessary condition for killing the Karmans and attaining Nirvana. Just see our images in our temples. They are practising Yoga. Look to their Asana and Dhyana. Just see how they are absorbed in meditation. This is the characteristic of Jain images. If you find any images practising Yoga, it is the Jain. The Hindu-images are not so. It is a pity that most people have failed to understand Jainism. People blame the Jains for worshipping naked images, but they never look to the Asana and Dhyana of those images. They never think that the Rishis being altogether absorbed in meditation, could not think or care to wear clothes. Then, gentlemen, the Jain Rishis were great Yogis and you know that their faith is Ahimsa Paramo Dharmah! Here, gentlemen, I am struck with one circumstance. A Yogi is to practise the five Mahayratas or

Page #57
( 48 ) great vows. Are these not the five great vows of the Jains? And do we not know that the five great vows were first enjoined by Mahavira ? Before him there were only four great vows of Parshva Nath, viz., ahimsa, satya, asteya, and aparigraha, and the last included Brahmacharya. Mahavira, because the saints in his day's were prevaricating and slow of understanding enjoined Brahmacharya as a separate fifth vow. Thus "The law taught by the great Parshva Nath recognises but four vows, while that of Vardhamana enjoins five" (Uttaradhayayana, Lecture XXIII. 23) Dr. Jacobi tells us that in Samanaphala Sutta, a Buddhist work, these four great vows of Parshva Nath are wrongly put into the mouth of Mahavira. Did Patanjali borrow from Mahavira ? The four as well as the five great vows must have been the conimon property of all Yogis in ancient India. Let us now turn to the Samkhya Darshana The Samkhya Dar- of Kapila. In the Sutra 6 it is said. . <Page #58
(49) He does not accept the view that the Sruti that "One should kill those animals which have Agni and Soma for their Devas," "grat aATU VYAIT Ha" is an exception to the Sruti, "One should not kill any animal," "Affeia nafwarfa " He does not believe that all Himsa is Himsa except the Himsa in a Yajna. On the contrary he holds the universal proposition that all Himsa is Himsa, and Vedic sacrifices being tainted by Himsa cannot free the Purusha from pain. If Hinisa recommended in the Vedas were not Himsa, he says, there should have been no necessity for Yudhishthira to perform Prayash; chitta for slaughter in battle, for that was enjoined in the Vedas as a Dharma of the Kshatriyas. .. Again in Samkhya Karika 2, we read .. dRSTa vadAmutravikaH sahya vizuddhi kSayAtizaya yuktaH / : The Anushravika means of removing Duhkha is like the visible means, because it is tainted by Avishuddhi or Himsa -not enjoined by the Shastras. Here too we again meet with the same objection on the part of a follower of Kapila that the Sruti <Page #59
( 50 ) Mahabharata also. He cites a Shloka from a dialogue between a father and his son in which the latter says ardagpalagi nimioara i payodharmamadharmAdayaM na samyak prtibhaatime|| * O father, I have studied Vedic Dharma in this life and the past. I do not like this Vedic Dharma, full of Adharma." Vignana-Bhikshu in his Bhashya of KapilaSutras cites the authority of the Markandeya Purana to the same effect / tasmAdyAsyAmyahaMtAta dRSTra maM duHkha sbidhim| .. payodharmamadharmAdayaM kiM pAka phala sabibham / "O deer, seeing that the Vedic Dharma is full of misery, why should I follow this Vedic Dharma, full of Adharma? This Vedic Dharma is like Pakaphala which is full of poison, though outwardly it looks very handsome." Gentlemen, you know the well-known story in which Kapila is made to hold a debate with the Vedas. It is said that a certain student returned to his house after his study of the Vedas was complete. As was customary, a cow was to be sacrificed in his honqur. Kapila objected to this. Then the Vedas entered the belly of the cow and held discussion with Kapila. This is certainly a valuable tradition to show that Kapila was one of those ancient Rishis who objected to the slaughter of animals in sacrifice for any other purpose whatsoever, and who recommended Ahimsa to be an essential element of a true Dharma.

Page #60
( 51 ) In Samkhya Karika it is not only the slaughter of animals in Yajna which is forbidden, but also the throwing of seeds in the fire. It seems the Samkhyas too like the Jains prohibited the destruction of seeds. In Mahabharata too in many places ancient Ri shis are said to have been of opinion Mahabharata. that Ahimsa Dharma was the true Dharma. One of the most pathetic of the references to the Ahimsa Dharma in this holy work is the dialogue between Tula Dhara, a Vanikputra, and Jajali, a Brahman, in the Moksha Dharma of the Shanti Parva. Jajali had done tapa for a long time, and had grown too proud. The Rakshasas and the Pishachas informed him that even Tula Dhara who was a greater tapasvi was not so proud as he. Jajali went to Benares to hold debate with Tula Dhara and the latter said "O Jajali, you have done tapa for a long time, still you do not know what true Dharma is." He then explained Ahimsa to be the essence of a true Dharma. If Jajali doubted it, he might ask the birds in his pig-tail as to what the truth was. Jajali having put the question, the birds with one voice exclaimed that. Ahimsa was the essence of a true Dharma and bore good fruits in this and in the next world. "Ahimsa withholds all faith from the man who practises it and brings destruction upon him. A person who causes fear to no creature is fearless of all. But one, who produces fear like a serpent in a house, does not find Dharma in this and in the next Loka." Tula Dhara further said that Raja Nahusha had killed a bullock

Page #61
( 52 ) and the result was that all the Rishis in his dominions had to suffer. These Rishis averted the hundred and one evils that befel them in consequence of the slaughter, and spread them in the world. Horrible is the consequence of the slaughter of living creatures? ; Gentlemen, it is in his commentary upon this dialogue that Nilakantha mentions that the Arhatas were taken in by the good Acharana of Rishabha who . preached the Daya Maya Dharma in contrast to VainaDeva who recommended that in affliction one might eat. the flesh of a dog. yadhA-pavAzuna pAtrANi pe ce, yaH pUjayituM pitR deva manuthAna ye ca pAtrANi zunaH, iti zrutismRtibhyAM vAmadevasya zreSTatama sthApi bIbhatsa prAcAra prApadikha mAMsa bhakSaNa rUpaH pradarzitaH // purANe vA-RSabhAdInAM mahAyominA mAcAraM dRSTvA pAhatAdayo mohitAH pAkhaNDa mArga manugatA ityuktam // It is also here that Nilakantha quotes a Smriti saying, .. mokSa vAmahAjaM vAzrotriyAyopa kalpayet // "We should sacrifice a fat bullock or a fat hegoat in honour of a Vedic," and a Sruti appealing . "mAgA manAgAmaditiM vadhiSTAH" "Don't kill the guiltless cow." Nilakantha observes that the Sruti is stronger. than the Smriti, because the word "guiltless" occurs. therein. The Charvakas were also against the slaughter Charvaka Darshana. of animals, for they preached,

Page #62
( 53 ) "If a beast slain in the Jyotishtoma rite will itself go to heaven, Why then not the sacrificer forthwith offer his own father." Again, "While the eating of flesh was similarly commanded by night-prowling demons." Gentlemen, it is a pity that scholars have written the history of Vedic religion in ancient India. But. none of them has yet collected facts to build up the history of nonn-Vedic religions, especially, of religions that said " mAhiMsyAt sarvAbhUtAni " "One should not slaughter any animal". No one has yet ascertained what schools belonged to the Vedic religion and what to the non- n-Vedic, and what was the number of the adherents of each. It is altogether an absurd argument to say that only Vedic religion prevailed in ancient India. It is altogether unsafe to throw out such guesses. It might be that both Vedic and non-Vedic religions prevailed to an equal extent. Or who can say but that the number of the adherents of the latter exceeded that of the former. From the absence of material evidence we are not entitled to draw any conclusions. You know Buddhism is nearly extinct in India now. But can you infer from this that Buddhism has never been the prevailing religion of India? Can you say that Buddhism never prevailed from one corner of India to another? Certainly that a certain religion is absent from India in these

Page #63
( 54 ) days is no safe argument for the supposition that it never for certain prevailed in former times. We know that the Brahaspatyas are called Lokayatas. It may be that their religion being pleasant found a worldwide acceptance in ancient India though it is altogether extinct now. Gentlemen, it is a well-known fact that the literature in ancient India was mnemonic. Much of this literature has been lost. The Brahaspatya Sutras existed once. They have been lost. The Sutras of many other schools of philosophy have been lost, and it is therefore, that we know nothing about them. It is only the Vedic literature of ancient India much of which has been preserved by the careful Brahmans. But if the literature of other schools of philosophy has not reached us, and if we know nothing about them except from occasional references to them in Brahmanical writings, we are not entitled to propound our own theories about the extent to which they prevailed in ancient times. We know in our own case that our Shastras were reduced to writing after the time of Asoka, but that our verbal literature existed. before him admits of no doubt. The Jains were not / so careful as the Brahmans in preserving their traditions. Thus, much of our ancient lore is lost. Or it may be we may be able to discover Shastras hitherto unknown throwing light upon our ancient history. But that Our Shastras were reduced to writing after Asoka is no argument to suppose - that the Jains had no literature upon which these

Page #64
( 55 ) Shastras were based, or that they had no ancient history. It may be, and it is a fact according to Jain Shastras, that in the 4th Kala, which ended by the time of the Moksha of Mahavira, Jainism was in much greater force than it is now. I would now pass a few remarks on the philosophy and tenets of the Jains. Tenets of the Jains. The Jains say that this world exists from eternity. It has no creator. It consists of Loka and Aloka. "The Loka is divided into Urdhiva Loka or the heavens, the Madhya Loka or the Earth, and Patala Loka or the hells. There are two things in this world, Jiva and Ajiva. Jivas are of six kinds, Earth Jivas, Fire Jivas, Wind Jivas, Water Jivas, Vinashapati and moving living beings or tris. The tris are dwi-indriya, tri-indriya, chatur-indriya, and panch-indriya, The panch-indriyas are divided into Shayani or those having Mana, and Ashayani or those having no Mana. Of all the panch-indriyas man is the most important, for it is only man who can obtain Nirvana. An inhabitant even of the highest heaven cannot obtain Moksha. For being a Jin or Arhat he must be born as man. Ajivas are of five kinds, pudgala, dharma, adharma, kala and akasha, Living beings are a combination of Jiva or soul and pudgala or matter. This union of the soul with matter is eternal. The Karmans are also matter. The soul under the bondage of the Karmans is moving in a circle of births. The coming of the new Karmans is called Ashrava. Their binding of the soul is called Bandha. To prevent the coming of the

Page #65
( 56 ) fresh Karmans is called Sambara. To get rid of the past Karmans is called Nirjara. The next stage is Mokshai These are the seven Tattvas of the Jains to which Punya and Papa being added we get the nava Padarathas. This jiva or soul is omniscient; almighty; eternal, and has innumerable other qualities. The Karmans are also matter. They bind the soul and hide all its gunas or qualities. Under the bondage of the Karmans the soul has forgotten itself, and often thinks itself different from what it is. Such a soul is called Bahir-Atma. These karmans are of eight kinds. The Jnana-Varnya Karman hides the Jnana. The Darshana-Varnya, the Darshana, and so on. One of these Karmans is Ayu Karman. Life and death are nothing but the ending of one Ayu Karman and beginning of another. When one Ayu Karman of a certain living being is over its soul leaves the body, and the living being is said to be dead. The soul enters another body and this is called birth. Thus the soul under the bondage of the Karmans goes on moving from body to body, till the moment comes when it shakes off all its Karmans, and recovering all its gunas becomes a Jin, an Arhat, obtains Moksha, and finds eternal bliss in its own self. Gentlemen, the whole above-mentioned philosophy of Jainism depends upon the solution of the mysterious puzzle, the mysterious enigma, what is I ? What is this world? Whence have I come? Where shall i go? What is the end of all these things? This problem has been solved by different Great Men in different

Page #66
( 57 ) countries, in different times, in different ways. No two solutions seem to be the same. This leads to the variety of beliefs and religions. The Jain Tirthankaras, the Kshatriya Rishis of ancient times, have also solved this question in the manner above-mentioned. They too have made an answer to the question. "What is I?" "What is this world?" They too have told us that the soul is eternal, the Karmans are eternal, the world is eternal. There is no creator. There is no destroyer. As the soul sows so does it reap. Our fate depends upon ourselves. And, gentlemen, this solution of the Tirthankaras appears to me one of the noblest. This seems to me to be full of the highest moral virtue. For why should we make our heaven depend upon the worship of God or His sons and deputies? Why should we not make it depend upon our own actions ? That God must be a peculiar God who is pleased only with our worshipping Him. We also do not accept God as a judge of our actions, for this gives rise to many objections, and places God in a very awkward position. We, Jains, entertain the highest ideal of God as Sarvajna, eternal, all-blissful, &c. We do not regard him as acceptor of flattery, a being killing one and saving another, a being administering justice despoti. cally in proportion to the amount of flattery and worship. We do not regard him as a judge of our actions. Our God is the highest being, the highest standard for our copy, the highest ideal for our imitation. And that God is our own soul after it has attained Nirvana. We recognise man's soul God in

Page #67
( 88 ) man. Those men greatly.err who call us Nastikas. Certainly they are wrong, totally wrong. We are not Nastikas. We believe in God. Only our notion of God is different from that of others. Gentlemen, I have said before that the mysterious puzzle, What is I? What is this world ? has been differently solved by different Great men, in different ages, in different climates. The notions of God are also different. Some represent Him as a creator, destroyer and preserver, some say that He judges us only by our faith in His sons and deputies, some say that He judges us in proportion to our worship of Him. Some give one definition of Him and some another. We have our own definition. We say that He is neither a creator, destroyer, and preserver, nor has He sons and deputies. He is almighty, eternal, omniscient, and has infinite gunas. He is the divine soul. We press upon each man his own importance. If every one of us were to realize what he really is and to act up to it; just see what should have his actions. been Thus we believe in God. Only our notion of Him is different. We give the lie to those men who call us Nastikas. We believe in God. Gentlemen, may I not also ask you in one word if those men do not err who say that the Jains have no philosophy. Have we no philosophy? Is the above one no philosophy ? However, read Madhava's Sarva-Darshana-Samgraha, and he will tell you if the Jains have no philosophy.

Page #68
( 59 Gentlemen, the belief of a Jain in this solution of the puzzle of life is called Samyak Ratna Trayi, Darshana. His knowledge of it is called Samyak Jnana. His conduct according to it is called Samyak Charitra. Samyak Darshana, Samyak Jnana and Samyak Charitra are called Ratna Trayi or Three Jewels Sanyak Darshana and Sanyak Jnana do not call for any remark. There remains Samyak Charitra, or what ought to be the conduct of a Jain to obtain heaven. This Charitra is of two sorts, viz., the Charitra of a Shravaka and the Charitra of a Muni. Gentlemen, here note that there is no such thing as Shravagi. The word is Shravaka, and ignorant people have corrupted it into Shravagi. Shravakas are of two kinds, viz., Avrati Shrayakas or those who cannot observe their Charitra by making vows, and Vrati Shravakas or those who can observe their Charitra by making vows. The Charitra of a Vrati Shravaka consists of eleven Pratimas. These are eleven classes like those in a school. A Shravaka from the first to the sixth Pratima is called a Jaghanya Shravaka. A Shravaka from the sixth to the ninth Pratima is called Madhyama Shravaka, and a Shravaka from the ninth to the eleventh Pratima is called an Utkrishta Shravaka. . ist. P. -A Shravaka of the first Pratima has to * Eleven Pratimas. make the following vows. (a) I shall have faith in the true Deva, Guru, and Dharma.

Page #69
i 60 ) (b) I shall observe the Ashta-Moola-Guna, i. e., I shall abstain from taking flesh, wine, and honey, which are called three makars, and peple, bara, umar, kathumar, and pakarphala, which are called five udambaras, .... -- (c) I shall keep aloof from seven Vishayas :(1) Gambling, (2) Taking flesh, (3) Taking wine, (4) Sexual intercourse with a prostitute, (5) Theft, (6) Hunting, and (7) Sexual intercourse with another's wife. (d) I shall daily visit the temple. This Pratima is called Darshana Pratima ( pratimA). 2ND P.-A Shravaka of the 2nd Pratima has to make the following vows: (a) I shall observe the following twelve vratas:-- (1) I shall abstain from ahimsa or doing injury to any tris jiva. (2) I shall abstain from sexual intercourse with another's wife. (3) I shall not commit theft. (4) I shall fix the amount of property I keep. (5) I shall not tell a lie. (6) I shall fix the directions in which I go. (7) I shall keep aloof from Anartha Danda, or from doing those acts which serve no purpose, but for which one has to be punished. (8) I shall fix the number of daily enjoyments.

Page #70
( 61 ) (9) I shall fix daily what countries to visit and how far to go in each direction. (10) I shall do Samayaka. (1) I shall keep fast on Ashtami and Chaturdashi. (12) I shall give four kinds of Dana or charity. (6) I shall die with Samadhi Marana, i. e., at the time of death I shall forsake love with the world and its concerns. This Pratima is called Vrata Pratima (aa afaat). 3RD P.-A Shravaka of the 3rd Pratima has to make the following vow.:-. . I shall do Samayaka thrice a day.for fixed periods. This Pratima is called Samayaka Pratima (HTAJIH afaat). 4TH P.-A shravaka of the fourth Pratima has to make the following vow: I shall keep fast for sixteen pahars on each Ashtami and Chaturdashi. This Pratima is called Proshadhopavasa-Pratima (aquinare afrat) 5TH P.-A Shravaka of the fifth Pratima has to make this vow: I shall abstain from eating green vegetables. This is called Sachita Tyaga Pratima (afga 2011 gfaat). 6TH P.-A Shravaka of the sixth Pratima has to make this vow:

Page #71
I shall not take four kinds of ahara or food at night, nor provide others with food at night, nor praise those who take food at night. Also I shall not have sexual intercourse with my wife in day-time. This Pratima is called Nisha Bhojana Tyaga Pratima (fauntata pana afant). 7TH.P.-A Shravaka of the seventh Pratima has to make this vow: I shall keep aloof from sexual intercourse altogether. I shall also abandon the use of ointments and adornments. This is called Brahmacharya Pratima (and af AT). 8th P.-A Shravaka of the eighth Pratima makes this vow: I shall abandon all sorts of engagements and Occupations. This is called Aranibha Tyaga Pratima (PITTU ata afaat). 9TH P.-A Shravaka of the ninth Pratima makes this vow: I shall abandon all sorts of internal and external Parigrahas. This Pratima is called Parigraha Tyaga Pratima (after an afaat)

Page #72
( 63 ) . 10TH P.-A Shravaka of the tenth. Pratima has to make this vow : I shall not take part in any worldly or household I shall not take food uninvited. concern. This is called Anumodana Vrata Pratima (Pg vrata pratimA) > 11TH P.-A Shravaka of the eleventh Pratima is nearly like a Sadhu. He is either an Ailaka Shravaka or a Kshullakaka Shravaka. If an Ailaka Shravaka he keeps only a Langoti and a Kamandalu, and lives in the jungle in the company of the Sadhus. If a Kshullaka Shravaka he keeps only a Dhoti or Chadara with a Kamandalu, and lives in a Matha or Mandapa or Mandir. This Pratima is called Uddhishta Vrata Pratima. (sriSTa vrata pratimA) Dasha Lakshani Dharma. Besides the above division of the Charitra of a Shravaka into eleven Pratimas, every lay Jain is joined to observe the Dasha-Lakshani Dharma. (1) He should control anger, and should patiently bear all insults and injuries even at the hands of his inferiors and should forgive them. This is called Uttama Kshama, Dharma ( ai vA). (2) He should not give vent to pride. called Mardava Dharma ( mArdava dharma). This is

Page #73
( 64 ) (3) He should keep aloof from hypocricy and cheating. This is called Arjava Dharma (1). : (4) He should speak the truth. This is called Satya Dharma (satya dharma ). (5) He should keep the soul pure and should not allow dark thoughts to corrupt it. He should also keep the body pure and clean by washing it. This is called Shaucha Dharma ( wH). (6) He should observe the five Anuvratas or minor vows, the five Samatis, and the three Guptis. He should also control the five Indriyas. This is called Sanyama Dharma (maMyama dharma ). (7) He should do twelve sorts of Tapa. This is called Tapa Dharma ( tapa dharma ). (8) He should abandon wicked thoughts. He should also abandon love of money and should spend it upon giving four kinds of Dana. This is called Tyaga Dharma ( tyAga dharma ). (9) He should remember that in this world there is nothing his but self. This is called Akinchana Dharma (AkiMcana dharma ). (10) He should remain absorbed in self. He should not also have sexual intercourse with any woman other than his own wife. This is called Brahmacharya Dharma (7PP vIa). Every Jain is also enjoined to meditate upon the following twelve subjects. These are called the twelve Bhavanas or Anu Twelve Anuprekshas. prekshas.

Page #74
( 65 ) (1) There is nothing unchangeable in this world. Everything is subject to alteration. I should not, therefore, pay much importance to it, and should regard it transitory, This is called Anitya Anupreksha (ali glaaghaa (2) There is none in this world to help me in affliction or at the time of death. I must reap as I have sown. This is called Asharana Anupreksha (4 gallat). (3) I have in past lives suffered troubles as a man, a deva, a narki, or a triyancha. I must now make attempt to free myself from them. This is called Sansara Anupreksha ( HET qqaar): (4) I am alone in this world. This is called Ekatva Anupreksha (ekatla panaprecA). (5) All these things of the world are separate from me. This is called Anyatva Anupreksha (qaca ohar). (6) What pride should I take in this body which is full of dirty things. This is called Ashuchi Anupreksha (qara q ut). (7) I should think of those thoughts, words, and actions that give rise to fresh karmans. This is called Ashrava Anupreksha (17a qauat): (8) I should adopt such measures as may prevent fresh karmans from binding my soul in future. This is called Sambara Anupreksha (#*7 qadar). (9) I should adopt such measures as may help'me to shake off my past karmans. This is called Nirjara Anupreksha (facut t at).

Page #75
( 66 ) - (10) I should think over this world. What does it consist of? What are the Dravyas ? What are the Tattvas, &c. ? This is called Loka Anupreksha ( gaat). (11) In this world all things are easy of acquisition except the Ratna Trayi Dharma. This is called Bodha Durlabha Anupreksha (atu ga ). (12) Ratna Trayi Dharma is the true source of happiness in this world. This is called Dharma Anupreksha (Pa gaa91). Now, gentlemen, I ask you if in the above sketch of a Shravaka's Dharma there appears to you anything which can make you say that Jainism is nothing but an aggregate of uncleanly habits, and if the rules laid down to govern the life of lay a Jain are not truly noble ones. I regret I have no time to explain to you the scope and the spirit of these rules. I would simply ask you if from even a mere sight of them you can say that there is anything therein which can be called uncleanly. Rather do you not find them based upon the noble principle of Ahimsa Paramo Dharmah? Do you not find embodied therein rules of the best morality? Do you not find, I ask you, these rules crying to you again and again, "This world will not serve your purpose.' Don't pay much importance to it. Care only for your soul. Keep your connection as little with the world as possible. Even in the midst of the hottest engage. ments do not forget what you are." Do you not find these rules advising you to be a Yogi, a Muni?

Page #76
(67) Gentlemen, Jainism is a peculiar religion. It is a religion of the Yogis. It is a religion of those who pay no importance to the world and its concerns, who keep as litte relation with the world as possible, and who rising from Pratima to Pratima at last renounce the world and become Nirgrantha. Jainism is of no use to those who are born for the world, who care for eating and drinking. It is only meant for those who believe in a next world and in Moksha, and who pushing away everything that would obstruct their way to Nirvana, become Nagna, Digambar, suffer all kinds of Parisahas or troubles, and regard this world, this life and birth, as a mine of sorrows." Gentlemen, I would again ask you if there is anything among the duties laid down for a Shravaka which says, "Don't bathe! Don't use the tooth-pick! Remain unclean l" Rather it is an enjoined duty of every Shravaka to bathe and to keep the body pure and clean by washing it. This is one of the commandments of the Dasha Lakshani Dharma. Orthodox Jains always bathe. They not only bathe but bathe each time that they ease nature. Certainly they mis-judge the Jains, who call them unclean. They do them great injustice. It is true that among the Jains there is a class called the Dhoondias who carry the principle of Ahimsa Paramo Dharmah too far. They put pattis on lips so that no insects should be killed when they speak or breathe. They also put on dirty clothes and perhaps abstain from bathing. But they form a microscopic minority. They are a branch of the Swetambara

Page #77
( 68 ) Jains. The leading two sects of the Jains, the Digambaras and the Swetambara Sambagis, should not be confounded with the Dhoondias. They should be judged from their own tenets in which it is strictly enjoined that we should keep the body pure and healthy. Now a word about the Charitra of a Muni or Charitra of a Munt. monk, and I will close this lecture. A Digambara Jain monk should live naked in the jungle, should sleep on the ground, should walk carefully casting his eyes four cubits before him on the ground, should take food once a day after avoiding forty-six Doshas and thirty-two Antaralas, should snatch away his hair as they grow, should bear twentytwo Parisahas or troubles, should give up fourteen internal and ten external Parigrahas and be a Nirgrantha, and should pass his whole time in Dharma Dhyana and Shukla Dhyana. A Swetambara Jain monk puts on white clothes. He lives in the city and sleeps on a bed. Shukla Dhyana is Dhyana of self. Dharma Dhyana consists of Dasha Lakshani Dharma, twelve kinds of Tapa, thirteen kinds of Charitra, six Avashaktas, and twelve Bhavanas or Anuprekshas. In fact a Jain monk passes his whole time in killing the past and in preventing the coming of the fresh karmans, and in making'his soul karmanless. I wish I had time to explain the position of a Jain monk. I wish I had time to explain the scope and the spirit of the Charitra of a Jain monk. Here I content myself with the explanation of only one circumstance. Why

Page #78
( 69 ) do the Nirgranthas remain naked? Why do the Jains worship naked images? the Jain monks ages. Jain monks are naked because Jainism says are naked and why the that as long as one entertains the Jains worship naked im- same idea of nakedness as we do, he cannot obtain salvation. One cannot, according to Jain principles, obtain Moksha, as long as he remembers that he is naked. He can only cross over the ocean of the world after he has forgotten that he is naked. It is this our thought of nakedness that is depriving us of heaven and Moksha. It is only when we have banished this thought from our mind that we can obtain Nirvana. Jainism attaches a great weight to thought and knowledge. The salvation of Jainism depends upon knowledge and thought. A certain man saw his mother washing Dal of Masha or Urad. He thought his soul was also covered with karmans as the Dal of Masha was covered with its husk. He absorbed himself in meditation to remove this husk. He repeated Masha Tusha Masha Tusha! . e., that his soul was like Dal of Masha and his karmans were like husk of Masha. He became a Kevaline and obtained Moksha. Thus it would be seen that in Jainism thought is the chief thing. Thought is the source of our salvation. Thought is the cause of our damnation. As long as a man thinks and knows that he is naked, that there is something like good and evil, he cannot obtain Moksha. He must forget it to obtain Nirvana. This is very well illustrated by the well-known story of the expul

Page #79
( 70 ) sion of Adam and Eve from heaven. Adam and Eve were naked and pure. They enjoyed perfect happiness in the garden of Eden. They had no knowledge of good and evil. The devil, their enemy, desired to deprive thein of their happiness. He made them eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. They at once saw their nakedness. They fell. They were expelled from heaven. It is this knowledge of good and evil, it is this knowledge of nakedness, that deprived them of Eden. The Jains hold the same belief. Our knowledge of good and evil, our knowledge of nakedness, keeps us away from salvation. To obtain it we must forget nakedness. The Jain Nirgranthas have forgot all knowledge of good and evil. Why should they require clothes to hide their nakedness? Why should they not be naked and pure like Adam and Eve, enjoying happiness in the garden of self, and why should they by the knowledge of good and evil, by the knowledge of nakedness, deprive themselves of that everlasting bliss, and suffer a fall in the world? In Hindu Shastras too nakedness is not less highly spoken of. Shukacharya on whose arrival at the court of Parikshit all the many thousands of Rishis including his father and grandfather got up, was a Digambara. Shiva is a Digambara. Dattatreya is a Digambara. The sect of Avadhoots is Digambara or Jat Rup Dhara. Rishabha, one of the 24 Avatars of Vishnu, the founder of Jainism, is a Digambara. In the Vairagya Shataka of the Bhartrihari Shataka, Bhartrihari prays to Shiva or Mahadeva "O Shambhoo when will.

Page #80
( 71 ) that day come that I shall be able to shake off the karmans by being alone, by giving up hypocricy, by being calm, by using my hands as a vessel, and by being Digambara?" Nakedness is no nakedness to those who have forgot to be naked. We also read that in a certain pool of water some ladies were bathing naked. Shukacharya passed by and they did not hide their nakedness. When Vyasa passed by they at once hid their nakedness. Why was this, enquired Vyasa of the ladies? Because Vyasa saw and knew nakedness, while Shuka did not, was the reply, because Vyasa's eyes fell on their nakedness, but Shuka's didnot, and because Vyasa was observing things around him, while Shuka did not. We also read that when Hanuman went to Lanka as a spy, he saw at night some ladies sleeeping naked in the palace of Ravana. He had incurred a great sin, thought he. But no, he was innocent, again thought he, because he was pure, and nakedness and nakedlessness were identical to him. Peculiar are those men whose eyes fall on the nakedness of the monks, and who find fault with them for not wearing clothes and for not having the same knowledge of good and evil as they do. Our eyes should fall on the qualities of the monks. What have we to do with their nakedness? Do you know, gentlemen, the reply the Prime-minister of Raja Ranjita Singh made to a man who had asked him if the Raja was a one-eyed man. He replied he did not know. Why not, asked the other? The minister replied, at the face of the Raja? All eyes 66 Who dare look fall on his feet.

Page #81
( 72 ) How could then one know if the Raja was a one-eyed man?" Our eyes too always fall on the qualities of the monks. What have we to do with their body ?: This will also explain why we worship naked images, Because the images were of those who were naked. When we go to the temple, we never look to the body of the images. We look totheir Dhyana. We contemplate that we ought to be like those Tirthankaras whose images they are, and we ought to absorb ourselves in self as those images are suggesting. We look to the Dhyana of the image and not to the body. One who understands our images will find them absorbed in meditation as it were. We worship this meditation. We worship the image to be reminded of. this meditation. There is no idol-worship among us. We have ideal-worship. These images are only a means to remind us of our ideals just as lovers. have rings to look at them to be reminded of their sweethearts. We never worship stony idols. We worship ideals. We pay reverence to these stony images simply because they are representatives of our ideals. And why should we not pay respect to the images of our beloved ideals who forgot good and evil, who forgetting nakedness obtained salvation, and who leaving behind them for our guidance their example that we might make our lives as sublime as theirs, verified the truth of what Longfellow says: Lives of great men all remind us We can make our lives sublime, And, departing, leave behind us Footprints on the sands of time?

Page #82
( 73 ) What harm is there in worshipping the naked images of our saviours, the Tirthankaras, for our spiritual good, when we find in them represented the Dhyana of our ideals, and when they serve every morning to remind us of our ideals ? Gentlemen, I hope this will serve as a sufficient answer to those who ask, why the Jains worship.naked intages ? Gentlemen, remember, that our images are naked, that our monks are naked, is another proof of: our antiquity. Jainism took rise in days when men were children, when they could be naked like pure and innocent children, and when for their nakedness they were loved as we love our children now. There was not yet such a thing as "idea of nakedness." Gentlemen, now I wind up. Now I have done with my lecture on Jainism which appears Winding ap. to me one of the noblest religions in the world, Gentlemen, I am proud that I was born a Jain. Jainism is my pride in life and it will be my salvation in death. I wish there were at least half a. dozen Jainisms in this world... I wish every religion might save the slaughter of poor animals, the goats, the sheep, the lamb, the cows, the bullocks, &c., whose necks are daily cut to provide flesh-eaters with food. I wish every religion might stop the hunting of the poor deer, the poor peacocks, and other beasts and birds. I wish every religion might save animals from being killed on the oc

Page #83
casion of Dashehra and other festivals. Ah! how many buffaloes and sheep are killed for sacrifices? Gentlemen, I am convinced that if this slaughter goeson, if this cutting the throat continues, we, Hindus, who totally abstain from flesh; whose strength mainly depends upon ghee and milk, will be rendered powerless and helpless. Just see how dear ghee and milk are now! and how cheap they once were! We should save this slaughter then. We should take up the cause of the poor animals, who, if saved, will certainly be grateful to us, if not for our own interest at least for pity's sake. Gentlemen, have pity over the poor creatures. Just see how innocence is killed for nothing. To-day there is a goat, a sheep, or a cow. To-morrow it is no more. Where have they gone? They are reduced to nothing for the sake of the flesheaters. Life ceases to exist for the sake of the flesheaters. Gentlemen, kindly tell me for my sake if the poor animals dream that they are to be cut the next day. Do the animals that live at this moment know that their time has come, and that they are to be no more to-morrow morning ? Gentlemen, also tell me if the cruel animal-killers do not know that life is dear to all, that agony is felt by all. Pity! Pity! Pity! I appeal to nothing but pity. If we have pity let us side with the poor creatures. See in England A. F. Hills, Esqr., D. L., and other gentlemen like Prof. Mayor and Dr. Josiah Oldfield have been leading on a movement whose sole object is to save slaughter and to spread vegeterianism. Let us have a branch of

Page #84
( 75 ) this movement in India. Let us have an Indian Vegeterian Federal Union and let us save The lamb thy riot dooms to bleed to-day, Had he thy reason, would he skip and play? Pleased to the last, he crops the flow'ry food And licks the hand just raised to shed his blood." We are Gentlemen, remember we are Hindus. the descendants of those who were Hindus or from whom him or himsa was du or dur, i. e., away; (him himsa and du-dur, i. e., away.) Hindus were not those who originally lived on the banks of the river Indus. Hindus were those from whom himsa was away. Let us not mis-understand words. Let us interpret them correctly. It is those men who are the slaves of taste who say that Hindus were those who lived on the banks of the Indus. We, Jains, call Hindus those from whom him or himsa is du or dur, i. e., away. And gentlemen, are we not correct? Certainly we are. Pity says we are correct. Animals cry we are correct. Let us then be what we are. Let us not be pretenders. Let us be true Hindus or Jains. The two mean the same thing. Let us advocate the cause of the noble principle of the Daya Maya Dharma, and let us proclaim from the Himalaya to Cape Comorin and from Gujerat to Behar, nay, even in foreign countries, as did the Jain Asoka, Ahimsa Paramo Dharmah! Destroy no life, injure no life, this is the supreme religion! Let us engrave in ""

Page #85
( 76 ) golden letters on rocks and pillars that no animals should be slaughtered for food, sacrifice, or hunting, or any other purpose whatsoever. Gentlemen, before I resume my seat, I thank you very much for the kind patience with which you have heard me.

Page #86
(77) SANGAMASHRAM POONA, 29th September, 1901. SIR, The later commentators on Amara Kosa explain Gautama as "pupil of Gotama" but Rayamukuta as "pupil of Kapila who was a descendant of Gotama" and Kshira as "born in the Gotra of Gotama." The last appears to be the correct Etymology and if so, Gotama must be the name of an old Rishi. Rayamukuta was probably guided by a tradition which made Buddha or Sakyasiniha a pupil of Kapila, and the explanation of later commentators who had no specific information on the point is conjectural. Vamanacharya makes Amara a Jaina as in common with most of the uncritical Pandits or Satris of the day he confounded the Jainas and Buddhists. Yours truly, R. G. BHANDARKAR. SANSKRIT COLLEGE, CALCUTTA, 19th October 1901. DEAR SIR, In reply to your letter of the 25th ultimo I have to state as follows: I. In Amarakosh Buddha is represented as being the son of Suddhodana, relative of Arka (the sun). born of Maya Devi, and belonging to the clan of

Page #87
( 78 ) Gautama. It is nowhere stated that Buddha was pu pil of Gotama. He was born in Gautama gotra, so belonged to the clan of Goutama. 2. There are frequent references to Jainism in books of Tibet and China. Some Jaina Sastras are to be found in Chinese translations made in the early Centuries of Christ. 3. I have published several papers on Buddha's life in Bengali. Professor Oldenberg or Rockhilt's life of Buddha is admirable. As regards the life of Buddha, spread and fall of Buddhism, several Buddhist sects, &c., I have collected immense materials. I shall publish a book in English soon on the subject. Yours sincerely, SATIS CHANDRA, ACHARYYA. Vidyabhusan, M. A., Professor, Sanskrit College, and Secretary, Buddhist Text Society, Calcutta. P. S.-The Mahaparinibhana Sutta, one of the earliest books of the Buddhists composed in the Pali language before 543 B. C., mentions Nirgrantha Natha Putra as being one of the six religious teachers of the time. This Nirgrantha Natha Putra is believed to have been the founder of Jainism. Sankaracharyya, the Reformer of the 8th century A. D., criticises at length the doctrine of Jainism in his Vedanta Sutra.

Page #88
( 79 ) There is a celebrated Jaina temple in Calcutta called Parsva Natha temple. . The word Jaina is derived from Jina. The term * Jina means one who conquered his passions ; a subduer, victor or conqueror. Vishnu Sarma, the author of Panchatantra, in the 4th B. C., speaks highly of Jina and his followers. Many of the Jainas entered into the Vaishnava and Saiva sects of the Hindus and lost their independence. I am at present very busy. I shall be able to give you more information in December next. Yours truly, SATIS CHANDRA, ACHARYYA. LHASA VILLA, DARJEELING, 19th November 1901. Dear Sir, - I must apologise for allowing your first letter to remain unreplied so long. I have read in a Tibetan work the mention of Jain School of Philosophy. A few years ago late Professor Buhler, Ph. D., C, 1. E., of Vienna wrote to me to say that the Jains had a profound Scholar in Acharya Kamalasila in the 8th century A. D., and if it was not this eminent Philo sopher who was invited to Tibet by King Thisrong. de-hu-tsan to hold a controversy with a Chinese Buddhist Philosopher named Hoshang Mahayana ? This Tibetan King ruled in Tibet about the middle of the

Page #89
( 80 ) 8th century and found Kamalasila's Logic to be more powerful than that of the Chinese Philosopher. He accordingly placed the garland of victory in the Indian Philosopher's neck. From that time the Tibetans became the followers of Kamalasila. Kindly inquire what works Kamalasila wrote so that I may verify the same. I do not know if Jainism flourished in China and if it was taken there. Acharya Kamalasila's are said to exist in the Jeypore Library and the Bhoswals know of it. Yours sincerely, SARAT CHANDRA DAS. DARJEELING, 8th January 1902. MY DEAR SIR, I beg to acknowledge your favour of the 12th December with your printed Circular. Very few people can and will answer the queries which you have drawn from one and single Journal, the Oriental. The books. of the Northern Buddhists are replete with references to the six Tirthika Teachers. I am glad to notice from the Circular that the Oriental has also noticed the same from the Southern Buddhist works. The attention of the Jain Itihas Society of which you seem to be the prime-mover should be drawn to the investigation of the historical developments of Jain Dharma. What was it in Buddha's time? Why do the Brahmans speak so adversely of Jainism?

Page #90
( 81 ) What were the grounds on which . Jainism was condemned by Brahmanical Teachers ? What are the points of differences in the tenets of Buddhism and Jainism ? ! I should like to know if you have got in your Library all the published works on Jainism and also the researches made by European Scholars. You should during your College holidays visit Calcutta and study Jain researches contained in its Library. I am quite willing to join your Society as you propose but should like to know that its organization is good and that it will not varnish like a bubble after a few years' existence. You must have co-operators in the great work and also funds. Let me know the constitution and the resources of your Society. Believe me, Very sincerely yours, SARAT CHANDRA DASS. DARJEELING, 3rd March 1902. My Dear Sir, . Ti simply rejoice that you have been able to organize a Society which will endure and bring to light, the wisdom of the sages of old belonging to Jaina persyation. This will benefit more the members of that creed than the outsiders who will only wonder how persistently life has been valued by the Jainas. The most characteristic difference between the members

Page #91
( 82 ) of Mahavira and Goutama Buddha creed will be found in not taking life. The Jain will not kill and will not eat animal food in any shape. A Buddhist be he of the Southern School or of the Northern School while holding the doctrine of not-killing will not scruple to eat meat when it has been offered to him by a householder. I shall not go further in the comparison of. these two ancient creeds of India, but only wish every success to your noble endeavours in matters Jain. I only wish I were free and not a Government servant otherwise I should have run to your meeting. With best regards, I remain, yours sincerely, SARAT CHANDRA DASS.. (B. Sarat Chandra Dass, C. 1. E., in the Secretary of the Buddhist Text Society of India.) SHANTI KUNJA, BENARES CITY, February 14th, 1908. DEAR SIR, It will give me great pleasure to be an Hon. Member of the Jain Itihasa. I see you take the same view of the antiquity of your noble religion as I put forward in a recent lecture. Sincerely yours, ANNIE BESANT. * I am not well enough to attend your conference, I am sorry to say.

Page #92
( 83 ) Office-holders and other workers of the Jain Itihas Society. PATRONS-To be elected. PRESIDENT-Elective. Vice-Presidents: 1. Babu Deva Kumar, Rais, Arrah. 2. 3. BENGAL U. P. OF AGRA AND OUDH. PUNJAB RAJPUTANA DECCAN GWALIOR STATE... PUNJAB 44 "" (4. Shrimant Seth Mohan Lal, Khurai, District Saugor. 5. Shrimant Seth Pooran Sah, Rais, Seoni, Chapra. 6. Rai Bahadur Seth Lakshmi Chand, Svetambara Jain, Katangi, District Balaghat. d. (7. Lala Hulas Rai, Rais, Saharanpore. 8. Salekha Chand Kirori Mal, Rais, Najeebabad, District Bijnor. 9. Babu Dharma Chand, Rais, Lucknow. dw 14. 15. 10. Lala Ishvari Prasad, Treasurer, Rais, Delhi. 11. Banvari Lal, President, Provincial Jain Sabha, Rawal Pindi. 12. Seth Chand Mal, Jeypore. (13. ". Gulab Chand, Hony. Magistrate, Chapra Pooran Chand Nahar, B. A., Svetambara Jain, Ain Mahal, Azimgunj, District Murshidabad. >> "3 39 Hira Chand Nemi Chand, Hony. Magistrate, Sholapur. Manik Chand Pana Chand, Johary, Bombay. Natha Rangji, Aklooj. Secretaries: [1. Babu Benarsi Dass, M. A., Head Master, Victoria College, Lashkar. 2. Pandit Lakshmi Chand, Lashkar, Gwalior. Joint-Secretary : 1. Babu Devi Sahai, Nahan.

Page #93
BENGAL C. P. PUNJAB RAJPUTANA DECCAN C. I. AJMERE ... *** ... U. P. OF AGRA & OUDH. ( 84 ) Prantika Secretaries :-- 1. Babu M. Shri Mal Svetambara Manik Chand, Khandva. 2. 3. 37 33 27 13. t 5. Mr. Jain Vaidya, Jeypore. 6. Babu Chiranji Lal, B. A,, Alwar. Kishore Chand, Secretary, Jain Sabha, Rawal Pindi 7. Annapa P. Chogley, B. A., L. L. B., Belgaum, 8. L. Munna Lal, Chhawara, Indore. 9. Pandit Javahar Lal Shastri. 22. Munshi Ram, Secy., Atmanandi Jain Sabha, Umbala. 10. Babu Bisheshwar Dayal Munsarim, Judge's Court, Sitapore. 11. Govind Prasad, Secretary, Jain Sabha, Lucknow, Chetan Dass, Science Teacher, High School, Mozaffarnagar. 33

Page #94
( 85 ) TREASURER-To be elected. At the first Meeting of the Itihas Society held at Seoni, Chapara, C. P., the work of the Itihas was distributed as follows: No. 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 23 1 2 1234 3 Names of Workers. 12 Seth Hira Chand Nemi Chand, Rs. Hony. Magistrate, Sholapur. To collect ancient Jain 1,000 Lala Hulas Rai, Rais, Saliaran Shastras. pore. Pandit Lakshmi Chand, Lashkar To collect references to the Jains in Hindu Shastras. Mewa Ram, Khurja Babu M. Shri Mal, Calcutta ...) To collect references Pooran Chand, Nalar, B.A., to the Jains in Azimgunj, Bengal. Buddhist Texts. dr ... Nature of work entrusted. Rai Bahadur Sethi Lakshmi Chand, Katangi, Dist. Balaghat Babu Munshi Ram, Umbala Seth Bridhi Chand Oswal, Seoni, Chapara. To collect and study Svetambara Jain Shastras. Pandit Rishabha Dass, Chhind-To collect references to the Jains in Mahomedan works. wara. Babu Behari Lal, Bulandshahar. " Babu Khushal Chand, Seoni ... Mitra Sen, Hoshagabad...To Mr. Jain Vaidya, Jeypore Babu Bisheshwar Dayal Munsarim, Sitapore. collect coins of ancient Jain Rajas. 1 Babu Pooran Chand, Nahar 2 Mr. Annapa P. Chogley, Belgaum To collect ancient Jain Inscriptions. Babu Deva Kumar, Rais, Arrah. Amount of money sanctioned for the workers. 1,000 300 300 200 150 30

Page #95
( 86 ) Names of Workers. Nature of work entrusted, Amount of pponey sanc tiqnod for the work ers. RS 200 500 Seth Hazari Lal, Chhingwara... To collect Samvats op 2 Babu Chiranji Lal, Alwar ... ancient Jaiu images. 1 Babu Chetan Dass, Muzzafar-) To collect references nagar. I to the Jains in works 2 Babu Devi Sahai ... ... of European Scholars. | Babu Jugal Kishore, Sirsawa, District Saharanpore. 2 Babu Panna Lal" Bakliwal, Bombay. 3 Pandit Shiva Chandra Sharma, To collect Pattawalis. Vaidyaraj, Delhi. 4 Mittlan Lal Chaudhari, Kivalau, District Seoni. i Pandit Balmukand, Kamathi, Central Provinces. 2 Babu Kishore Chand, Rawal. ||To collect information pindi. I regarding Jain sects. Babu Hukam Cland, Sconi, Chapara. 200 100 N 100 3 Seth Lal Chand, Chhindwara .. Babu Govind Prasad, Lucknow. :: To collect information Babu Kishore Chand, Rawal || 'I regarding Jain Tirthsthans. Pindi. 50 200 1 Pt. Javahar Lal, Shastri, Ajmere) To prepare abstracts 2 | Babu Jugal Kishore, Sirsawa ...l of Digambara Jain 3 Pt. Rishabha Dass, Chhindwara. Shastras. Babu Munna Lal Chhawara, h) To collect Jain ShastIndore. ras which are regard2 | Pandit Panjab Rai, Adhyapaka, od, as an authority Muttra. by the Hindus.. 1 B. Benarsi Dass, M. A., Lashkar|| 2 Lala Nihal Chand, Rais, Nakur, In charge of Upde- Saharanpore. V shakas. 1,000

Page #96
( 87 ) No. Names of Workers. Nature of work entrusted. Amount of money 8anctioned for the workers 11 Babu Manik Chand, Khandwa.hr Hakim Kalyan Rai, Updeshak. * hi To collect information Babu Hukam Chand, Seoni... regarding Jain castes. 200 100 (To collect traditions regarding the hosti lity shown by the i Babu Sudarshan Dayal, Nakur. Hindus & the Bhud dhists towards the 2 | Babu Sumer Chand, Sherkot ... Jains. To prove how the British Government has been a great boon to the Jains. 3 | Babu Ajit Prasad, m. A., L L. B.,) Lucknow

Page #97
MY WISH. I wish that on this occasion when under the benign rule of the British Government we have every facility to prepare a Jain Itihas, I had the hearty co-operation and support of both the Digambaras and the Svetambaras. I wish my Digambara and Svetambara brethren might unite for the time being to help me in preparing 'a History of the Jains. I can promise that if my wish be realized we shall soon have a Jain Itihas. I hope my brethren will listen to my prayer and help me in the work. B. D.

Page #98
LUR