________________
( 18 ) birth of Christ. Max Müller in his Six Systems of Philo: sophy and Natural Religion and Oldenberg in his mar: vellous: The Buddha also speak of Natta Putta as identical with Mahavira, who was one of the six Tirthaika Teachers and a contemporary of Buddha, though they mention him as founder of Jainism or the Nigantha séct which is by no means the case. But why should I cite their authority? From Mahavagga and MahaParinibhana Sutta, and the translations of other passages quoted by Jacobi from other Buddhist works which I have read, I can safely hold on behalf of the Jains whom I represent here that the Natta Putta, the Niganthas, their creed, the Shravakas (in some passages) mentioned in Buddhist works are Jain. Nay in Buddhist works even the Chaturyama Dharma or the four Great vows of Parshva Nath is also referred to and wrongly put into the mouth of Mahavira, the Natta Putta, The Gotra of Sudharma Acharya and the place of Nirvana of Mahavira are also mentioned by the Buddhists.
I must not omit to mention the important fact that the term Nirgrantha is exclusively applied to a Jain monk. The words Shramana and Brahmaria are used both by the Buddhists, and the Jains for their monks, but the word Nirgrantha is used only by the Jains. It is also noteworthy that Barth who regards Jainism as a branch of Buddhism speaks of the Nirgranthas that are referred to in the Edicts of Asoka as the ancestors of the Jains. He is also struck with the discovery of Jacobi and Bühler, though, he says, that he should wait till further proof is forth-coming. He wrote in
