________________
JAINA MONASTIC JURISPRUDENCE
55
with under a particular prayaścitta. Of course the cunnis and the bhāsas provide the necessary information which seems to robe the skeleton of rules. As SCHUBRING rightly points out in his introduction to the Kappasutta, "there is nothing of legendary embellishing in the Jainistic ordinances".
VII
Comparison with Buddhist Jurisprudence
The classification of the Vinaya laws is also arbitrary. No systematic grouping is to be found in any of the texts of the Vinaya literature. However, even such a heterogenous formulation dons the human touch as every rule is endowed with an episode that led to its formulation. This helps one a lot in understanding the background and the adjustment of monastic discipline to that background. The laws of Jaina monastic jurisprudence do not by themselves explain such background for which we have to depend on later commentaries.
Moreover, the association of the Buddha in such a setting and the pronouncement of the rule through his mouth tended to give a sort of grand solemnity to the utterance and formulation. No such pronouncements are attributed to anybody in the Jaina texts.
As against the ten main prayaścittas of the Jainas, the two hundred and odd offences are grouped under seven categories in the Buddhist literature. The lightest offence, was 'sekhiya' and the highest 'pārājika'.
Yet the nature of acts on the part of the monks and nuns which could be termed as an offence is more or less alike in both the Buddhist and the Jaina texts in a very broad way. For instance, offences which involved behaviour against celibacy and showing of disrespect to the Buddha or the Tirthankara etc. are alike in both these religions. Similarities can be quoted in a number of cases which it is needless here to list.
There is yet a difference. In the Buddhist Church, the promulgation of a rule could be done either by the
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
