________________
88
S. B. DEO
SMITH179 accept the tradition of Bhadrabāhu's migration to the south with Candragupta, while FLEET180 and others doubt it. We have already referred to the epigraph of c. 600 A.D., which refers to the migration of Bhadrabāhu to the south.181 Apart from this, the mention of 'sarmanes' by Megasthenes182 who visited the court of Candragupta sometime between 305-297 B.C.,183 may be taken as a sufficient proof of the ascendancy of Jaina monks under Candragupta. Unless, therefore, any contradictory evidence comes to light we may not challenge the Jaina affinities of Candragupta.
Moreover, the silence of Brahmanical sources may mean three things. First that he inay not have patronized Brāhmanism or that he was an orthodox Brahmin himself, or that they did not know much about his end as he is said to have died far away from his capital, i.e., at Śravana Belgola. RAYCHAUDHARI184 and SHAH185 maintain that "the epithet Vșshala applied to him in the Mudrārākshasa suggests that in regard to certain matters he did deviate from strict orthodoxy."
If, therefore, we accept the view that Candragupta was a Jaina, then it may be said that he not only made Jainism firm in north India, but also had a hand in spreading it to the Southern parts of his empire as he was one of the pioneers to go there along with Bhadrabāhu and others. Bindusāra :
Bindusāra was the successor of Candragupta. It is difficult to say anything about his affinities or otherwise towards Jainism as the Jaina sources are silent about him. SHAH,186 however, says that "he must have extended his dominions so as to cover at least some portions of Mysore. .... It may not be unlikely that, in addition to the Kshatriya ambitions of mere conquest, Bindusāra might have been actuated by filial motive in acquiring Mysore, a place rendered sacred by the last days of his father Chandragupta". But in the light of the reference from Buddhist Mahā. varsa which he quotes in the next paragraph and which says that Bindusāra was of Brahmanical faith, it is very difficult to maintain the view about his possibility of being not at least antagonistic to Jainism.
179. OHI., pp. 75-76; JAYASWAL, JBORS., iii, p. 452. 180. 1.A., XXI, p. 156. 181. E. C., II, No. 1. 182. McCRINDLE, Invasions of Alexander, p. 358. 183. BANERJI, Prehistoric, Ancient and Hindu India, p. 84 184. Op. cit., p. 295, f. n. 2. 185. Op. cit., pp. 135-38. 186. Op. cit., p. 139.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
