________________
Lord Mahâvîra
178
against animal sacrifices of the Vaidic Brâhmanas. According to the Âchârânga Mahâvîra's parents, who were worshippers of Parsva, 'repented confessed and did penance according to their sins, and of bed of Kusa grass rejected all food their bodies drying up by the last mortification of the flesh which ends in death.' This shows Pârsva's leanings towards repentance and self-mortification. He apparently taught that self-control (samyama) results in the cessation of karman and penance leads to its annihilation. From the Kalpasûtras we learn that Pârsva had organised his Church by bringing all his disciples under four classes (monks, nuns, laymen and laywomen) each headed by a Ganadhara. Pushpachûlâ was the chief controller (ganini) of the nunnery. The mention of nuns and laywomen suggests that he did not neglect women. The belief in the historicity of Pârsva is confirmed by the Jaina canon which not only gives us some idea of his doctrines but preserves anecdotes about his followers. The account of Kesi, one of his disciples, in the canonical books is quite realistic. He is said to have converted King Paesi to the faith of Pârsva. He also held a disputation with Goyama (Gautama Indrabhûti), the chief disciple of Mahâvîra. Several other disciples of Pârsva' are said to have expressed a desire to exchange the religion of the four vows of Pârsva for the one with five vows of Mahâvîra. As noted above, even the parents of Mahâvîra are said to have belonged to the lay following of Pârsva. Moreover, Jacobi has conclusively shown that a Buddhist Sutra (Samannaphalasutta) mistakenly attributes to Mahâvîra the religion of the four vows, which really belonged to Pârsva. Such a mistake could only have occurred if Pârsva actually had some followers at that time. The conversation between Kesi and Goyama (Gautama) in the Uttaradhayayan testifies to the friendly relations between the followers of Pârsva and Mahâvîra and points out that, in spite of some minor differences, the two were essentially the same. By the very nature of the case, tradition has preserved only those points of Pârsva's teachings which differed from the religion of Mahâvîra, while all the common points are ignored. The main outward difference between the two sects was that Pârsva allowed the use of a white garment by the monks, while Mahâvîra forbade even this. Hence the two Jaina sects are entitled Svetâmbara (white-clad) and Digambara (sky-clad or naked). But such differences that are few in number make
