________________
46
Mahāvīra and Buddha
tance to this necessity. He has tried to reconstruct the whole chronology from Ajātsatru to Kanișka, only on the basis of these two traditional beliefs, without having attested their authenticity.
Also, he has accepted some beliefs of the later Buddhist works, without having considered their veracity. Consequently, many a unanimous historical facts have been contradicted in his new chronology. As for example, it is now almost undisputable that Candragupta's accession took place in 322 B.C. and also this date serves as a 'lighthouse in that dark period of Indian history. But, according to Dr. Shah's chronology the date of Candragupta's accession is 316 B.C. Regarding the date of Mahāvīra's Nirvāṇa, it should be noted that 527 B.C. is traditionally as well as historically accepted date. But, the date of Buddha's Nirvāṇa 543 B.C. is only based on the Ceylonese tradition and is found to be unauthentic in the historical investigations.
Shri Shrichand Rampuria
Shri Shrichand Rampuria, a well-known literateur, has collected a good deal of data on the present problem, in his article titled 'A Discussion on the age of Mahāvīra and Buddha. He has elucidated both the sides of the controversy and criticized the prevalent views on the issue, but he has not reached a definite conclusion. However he seems to be more inclined to the view that Mahāvīra was older than Buddha. He has successfully refuted the arguments
1. Op. cit. p. 68. 2. See, 'Date of Buddha's Nirvāṇa in Traditions' in Chapter VII of
this Book. 3. Jain Bhārti (Weekly), year 12, No. 1, Jan. 1951 ; pp. 5—21.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
