Ethical Doctrines in Jainism

Author(s): Kamalchand Sogani
Publisher: Jain Sanskruti Samrakshak Sangh Solapur

Page 24

2
ETHICAL DOCTRINES IN JAINISM
195
opinion about the nineteenth Tirthamkara, Malli, who, according to the Svetambaras, was a woman, to which the Digambaras do not agree.1 Besides, the name of 'Sumati,' the fifth Tirthamkara, has also been referred to in the Bhagavata Purana which tells us that he "will be irreligiously worshipped by some infidels as a divinity."" Another Tirthamkara called Aristanemi (Nemi) is connected with the Kṛṣṇa legend.8
HISTORICITY OF PARSVA: Leaving aside this traditional account, and taking into consideration the standpoint of history, we find that the historicity of the last two Tirthamkaras, namely, Parsva and Mahavira, has now been incontrovertibly recognised. Some of the arguments adduced for the historicity of Parsva are as follows. First, Dr. JACOBI has infallibly proved that Jainism existed even before the times of Mahavira under the leadership of Pārsva, the twenty-third Tirthamkara. It is the Buddhist references which obliged him to adopt this view. To mention one of them, the mistake of the Samañña-phala-sutta of the Dighanikaya that it attributed the fourfold religion, to be dealt with afterwards, preached by Parsva to Nataputta (Mahāvīra) goes to prove the pre-Mahavira existence of Jainism. In the words of Dr. JACOBI, "The Pāli 'Catuyama' is equivalent to the Prākṛta Catujjāma, a wellknown Jaina term which denotes the four vows of Pārsva in contradistinction to the five vows (pañca-mahavvaya) of Mahavira. Here, then, the Buddists, I suppose, have made a mistake in ascribing to Nātaputta Mahavira a doctrine which properly belonged to his predecessor Pārsva. This is a significant mistake, for the Buddhists could not have used the above term as descriptive of the Niggantha creed unless they had heard it from followers of Parśva, and they would not have used it if the reforms of Mahavira had already been generally adopted by the Nigganthas at the time of Buddha. I, therefore, look on this blunder of the Buddhist as a proof for the correctness of the Jaina tradition that followers of Parsva actually existed at the time of Mahavira.*" Secondly, the evidence for the historicity of Parsva is also supplied by the Jaina Agamas themselves. The conversation between Kesi and Goyama mentioned in the Uttaradhyayana is one of them. About which JACOBI remarks: "The followers of Parsva, especially Kesi who seems to have
1 History of Jaina Monachism, p. 59.
2 Wilson, Visnu Purana, p. 164 N. vide H. J. M., p. 59.
3 H. J. M., p. 59.
4 S. B. E., Vol. XLV. p. XXI.
5 Uttara. XXIII.