________________
VIEWS OF BARTH. Kern in his History of Buddhism have stated a similar opinion. It has, however, been attacked by M. Barth who doubts the authenticity of Jain records and literature which were not reduced to writing till the fifth century A.D. The Jains had not, for many centuries, Barth says, become distinct from the numerous groups of ascetics who had only a sort of floating existence. Therefore they must have been careless in handing down their sacred lore. Jacobi refuted this as. sumption. by saying that the small sect of the Jains, like the Jews and Parsis, carefully preserved their original tenets : that, far from having only vague recollectians of their traditions and beliefs, they denounced, as founders of schisms, those who differed from the bulk of the faithful even in the minutest detail. The division of the Jains, into two sects, the Digambaras and the Svētāmbaras, about which mention will be made later on, is a point in illustration.
Not only Jacobi ? but other scholars also believed that Jainism, far from being an offshoot of Buddhism, might have been the earliest of home religions of India. The simplicity of devotion •and the homely prayer of the Jain without the intervention of a Brahmin would certainly add, to the strength of the theory so rightly upheld by Jacobi. Another important testimony is that of the eminent oriental scholar Mr. Thomas who, in his article Jainism or The
1 Introduction to Acharanga Sutras, p. 36.
· See Note I, p. 154.
The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Scciety, Vol. XV, pp. 376 and 377.
