Jainism in North India

Author(s): Chimanlal J Shah
Publisher: Longmans Green and Compny London

Page 65

JAINISM IN NORTH INDIA 32 years; this makes it even more impossible to believe in the dates mentioned above." 1
Coming to Hemacandra's statement in his Parisushtaparvan, Dr Charpentier says. “We may assume with Jacobi that he (IIcmacandra) took as correct the tradition of 255 years elapsing between the accession of Candragupta and the Vikrama era.
This would then make the time between the death of Mahāvīra and the accession of Vikrama till 255+155=410 years, and involve the conclusion that Mahavira died in 467 B C., which in my opinion is the date best fitted for all circumstances connected with it, and may be deemed the right one." 2
Over and above these there are also other considerations, which in one way or the other help us to come to this date of Mahāvira's death We need no more discuss them here, but just lo cnumcrate. the traditional date of Bhadrabāhu's death and his connection with Candragupta 3, the date of the third schism in the Jaina church and its relation with the Maurya king, Balabhadra 4; the connection between the date put in the Kalna-Sütra of Bliadrabāhu as finally settled by Devardbiganın and the date of the great council held at Vallabhi in the year of Dhruvasena's succession, and finally the date of Suhastin, the disciplc of Sthūlabhadra and his connection with Samprati, grandson and successor of Asoka?
With such historical data before us one thing is clear, that the conclusion wluch we have arrived at is quite in harmony with the
Chnrpentier, op at, up 131-132 " To return to our discussions of the date of the Aimana, it is obtlous that the year 407 1 c, which we inferred from Hemacandra's reron, cannot be far wrong, because it agrees so well with the adjusted date of Buddha's Min dna, 4771C, a Rytichronism which by our previous research has been established as Helery cobi, on al, po
(herpentier, op cit, p 173
· Tlus date of Bhadmbihu's death is 170 A , which is equal to 357 B C according to the traditionnl date, nnd 207 according to the date of Jacobi and Charpentier, and consulering Bhadrbalu's connection with Candragupta the year 357 DC is to be totally excludert
i Tus schism originated in 211 , and according to Mcrutunga the Maurya rule citesinim 2131, and hence Ilcmicindra's calculations, nccording to wluch thc Maurya dynt Bregine 135 jerrs after the Mariana, Seem more reasonable
ullint dnte is cither 090 or 093 ., which. Inhinc 4G7 C as tlic date of MOVIEVINA'S Vrient Arqurl to 52G AP, which clactly corresponds to the year of Dhruvasena's tin plan to the throne of Inbht
'the date 11 13 11 Accordin' to Meruttina, and this more or lese ngrecs Win tlyn het, of Ilmarinda, amording to luch Candragupla begnin his rule in 1971, caure, as A udied ninety-four years after Candragupta, the date of Samprati 'n ste !
ty (nipornlırs np ait. pp 175-176, Jacobs, op.al, PT 0-10