________________
1
445
historical value to the meeting between the two, on a deeper consideration, there does not appear much basis for it. 'City of Kausambi', 'Sresthi Prabuta-dhana-sancaya', 'eye-sore', etc., are some important items in the account which would support that the monk referred to was some other than Mahavira.
Coming to differences in the two accounts, as per the Buddhist account, King Srenika merely requests the Buddha to look him up in his own city Rajagṛha after he became a Buddha; in the Jaina account, in contrast; the meeting with Monk Anathi induced King Srenika to accept nirgrantha religion with the members of his family.
In his description of the second type of helplessness, Monk Anathi administered severe lashes at the monks who relished in wordly pleasures. One explanation of this may be that thereby he tried to remove the king's patronage to these monks with lax habits. But the account is insufficient to indicate to which sect his reference was made, or to which sect Srenika himself belonged. As per the account, the exposure related to the lax nirgrantha monks, but the account does not indicate which particular sect of the nirgranthas had become so very lax at that time. If thes é were some monks of the order of Pārsva, then the event must be placed somewhere before Mahavira attained omniscience and came to Rajagṛha when the lax monks of the order of Parsva dominated over the society.
In the Tripitakas
In the Tripitakas, we have a few clear records of King Bimbisara having embraced Buddhism. The early mention is in the Vinaya Pitaka which states, in part, as follows:
"Having initiated into monkhood a thousand Jatilas headed by Uruvela Kasyapa, the Buddha came to Rajagṛha. King Bimbisāra heard this news. He waited on him in the company of 12 lakh Brahmins and householders, all residents of Magadha. At that time, the Buddha was at the Latthivana. He delivered a sermon for the benefit of King Bimbisara and his party of 12 lakhs. On hearing the pious words of
