________________
Introduction to Jainism
in the Jaina and Buddhist records of which only a small part had reached Europe at that time.36 But thanks to the researches of Hermann Jacobi, J.G. Buhler, Guerinot and some others the view that Jainism is an off-shoot of Buddhism stands discredited. Between 1879 and 1884, Jacobi undertook the refutation of the negative thesis that Jainism arose out of Buddhism.37 In his introductions to volumes XXII and XLV of the Sacred Books of the East, Jacobi thoroughly exploded the myth that Jainism is an off-shoot of Buddhism. Jacobi wrote,
Notwithstanding the radical difference in their philosophical notions, Jainism and Buddhism, being originally both orders of monks outside the pale of Brāhmanism, present some resemblance in outward appearance, so that even Indian writers occasionally have confounded them. It is, therefore, not to be wondered at that some European scholars who became acquainted with Jainism through inadequate samples of Jain literature easily persuaded them that it was an offshoot of Buddhism. But it has since been proved beyond doubt that this theory is wrong, and that Jainism is at least as old as Buddhism.38
On the strength of references in Pāli literature, Jacobi proved that the Jainas existed before the time of Mahāvīra, who was a contemporary of Gautama Buddha, and that Mahāvīra was a reformer of the order of ascetics founded by Pārsvanātha rather than being the founder of Jainism.39 Jacobi succeeded and his role is largely remembered because of this accomplishment.40 After his study of inscriptions excavated from Kankālī Tilā, Mathurā, J.G. Buhler, another eminent German scholar, also reached the conclusion that Jainism is not an off-shoot of Buddhism. Buhler wrote,
36. CHI, I, p. 152. 37. MCH. p. 104. 38. ERE, VII, p. 465.
Sacred Books of the East, vols. XXII and XLV, Introductions; also see ERE, VII, pp. 465
39.
ff.
40. MCH, p. 104; LDJC, p. 21; RI, p. 283 fn. 2
