________________
[ 43 ]
ragarding the choice of words to explain and to make intelligible to young boys such a complicated technical and scientific view of soul as is taken by the Jains. The Jain belief of 'souls in water, air and mineral substances, like stones in a quarry or coal in a mine, etc., can only be explained in simple, plain language and made intelligible to young children, as we have d!one. Children of the age for whom these lessons aro meant are not capable of understanding such minute scientific principles and to them a piece of stone or a particle of earth is no better than a lifeless object and to tell them, according to Jain belief of soul, that these objects possess soul it will not be farfrom right.
We make bold to say that ihere is nothing damaging to Jain religion in our remarks ( Nos. IV and V above ) and they do not in any way mislead a student as is alleged by our critic, or even lead him to form a wrong idea about Jainism. What we have said is that this belief that lifeless objects possess soul makes the Jain more careful about life than the Buddhists. This is rather creditable to a sect whose main doctrine is that of Ahinsa or harmlessnoss-non-injury tɔ life.
VI. The sixth objection against our remarks is “Both the sects have their own sacred books and they are on very bad terms with each other.”
