________________
APPENDIX III
characterization he means that in contrast to Alsdorf I do not set out to organize the material around a consistent theme or portray a pattern which [222] will account for the evolution of the ahimsā ideal or any aspect of its practice'. When he continues by stating that I rather submit to the judgement of Manu, this is a patent error, since I took Manu's list only as a convenient starting-point for the historical investigation. Accordingly it goes without saying that soon questions arise to which Manu has no answer. My conclusions are therefore not drawn from Manu's material, but from older sources. Proudfoot also objects to my inclination to attribute to ethical motives less influence on the spread of ahimsā than to the fear of revenge or punishment in the hereafter or a future birth. He tries to marginalize the retribution mentioned in M 5.55 – the eater is eaten by the food in the hereafter – but since it is also mentioned in 5.33, it will have played a role which cannot be neglected all the more since it goes back to old models. The fact that Manu prefers the ethical motivation does not speak against this: it is not surprising that the learned brahmin makes use of the more sublime interpretation.
Proudfoot suggests that the idea of rebirth ‘arose as a new social philosophy rationalizing disparities of wealth or a crystallizing social structure since transmigration has ethical implications. This would turn my conclusions on its head. By letting Manu's guiding hand slip I am supposed to lack the basis for refuting it. I do not understand how anyone can get the idea that I intended to refute Manu. My concern was historical and accordingly different from Manu's summary of views existing at his time. Proudfoot does not make any suggestion how the new social philosophy is supposed to have looked. Just as in the criticism of Alsdorf he leaves it at pseudo-theoretical remarks. The lack of substantiation makes a discussion impossible.
In his summary (151) Proudfoot states that in Mbh 12.255:
ahimsā is identified with a fundamental conception of the life-process and of the relationship between life in this world and the next, which controverted the view that life is dynamically sustained through a circulatory exchange between this world and the hereafter in which sacrifice was an essential link.
He maintains that this 'puts a new complexion upon the reaction' I proposed between transmigration and the devaluation of the
147 For Personal & Private Use Only
Jain Education International
www.jainelibrary.org
