________________
Shri Mahavir Jain Aradhana Kendra
www.kobatirth.org
Acharya Shri Kailassagarsuri Gyanmandir
Kalpasutra.
settled to what Era the dates of the inscriptions found at Mathurâ refer, the occurrence of Huvishka's and Kanishka's names proves that they belong to the beginning of our era. Secondly, in Buddhist writings the founder of the Jaina faith is mentioned, though not under one of his common names, but as Niganthanatha or Nigantha Nâtaputta. Nigantha we know already as a term for Jaina monks. Nataputta I identify with Nayaputta, a biruda of Mahavira, used in the Kalpasûtra and the Uttarâdhyayanasûtra. The Buddhist books of Nepal call Niganthanatha the son of Djñâti (Burnouf. Lotus de lit bonne loi p. 450) and the Jainas call him Jõâtaputra (see Petersburgh Dictionary s. v. jñâtaputra), cf. also the following cloka from Hemacandra's Pariçishtaparvan I, 3.
Kalyanapâdapârâmam crutagañgâhimâcalam |
viçvâmbhojaravim devain vande çri-Jõâtanandanam ||
That name is given to Mahâvîra because of his father's being a jňátakshattriya cf. Kalpasûtra § 110. --- Nigantha Nâtaputta is, in the Sâmaññaphalasutta, called an Agnivaiçyâyana. That must be a mistake of the Bauddha tradition, for Mahâvîra was a Gautama. But we can account for this mistake by supposing that the Bauddhas confounded the founder of the sect with his chief disciple Sudharman, who is so very often' mentioned in the sûtras as the propounder of Mahâvîra's doctrines to Jambusvâmin, and who was an Agnivaiçyâyana. Unfortunately the passage of the Sâmaññaphalasutta which gives the doctrines of Nigantha Nâtaputta, is not explicit and clear; but the conjectural translation of it, I may state, contains nothing to preclude the identification of Nigantha Nataputta with Mahavira. That is born out to full evidence by a legend which first led Dr. Bühler to identify the Niganthanatha with Mahâvîra. It is told in the Atmâvatâra (Hardy. Manual of Buddhism p. 271), the Vaičyantara, and other Buddhist books, that the Niganthanatha died in Pâvâ, after having had a dispute with his former disciple Upali, who had embraced the doctrines of Buddha. As the death of Mahâvîra did take place in Pâvâ (Kalpasůtra § 122), and as the Jaina inonks were called Niganthas, it is beyond doubt that by Niyanthanatha the same person as Mahâvîra is intended.
The result of the preceding inquiry, that Buddha and Mahâvîra were two distinct persons but contemporaries, furnishes us with a clue to the Jaina chronology. It is obvious that the Nirvâņas of both teachers can be separated by a few years only. Therefore the Nirvâņa of Mahâvîra must fall somewhere within 490 and 460 B.C., because the adjusted date of Buddha's Nirvânal, 477 B.C., has, since the discovery of the three new edicts of Acoka by General Cunningham, and their historical and philological interpretation by Dr. Bühler, been proved to be correct between very narrow limits.
The traditional date of Mahâvîra’s Nirvâņa is 470 years before Vikrama according to the Cvetâmbaras, and 605 according to the Digambaras. The interval of 135 years between the dates of the
For Private and Personal Use Only
