________________
Vardhamâna and the Foundations of Jainism
231
moksa-producing activities.47 Even some of their own books, such as Mulacara, seem to support such modified practices in certain unusual cases.48 But to suggest that these practices are legitimate for all monks, as well as for a Tirthankara, is of course unacceptable to them.
Modern scholars tend to favor the Svetâmbara contention that followers of Pârsva did wear clothes while those of Mahâvîra did not.49 Some have suggested that Mahâvîra instituted the practices of nudity as a result of meeting with and being influenced by the naked ascetic Makkhali Gosala, eventually leader of the Âjivika school. There is an apparent correspondence in time between their meeting and Mahâvîra's "loss" of his garment. It has been held that this is too great a coincidence to ignore;50 but this contention is somewhat weakened by the fact that the Âjivikas were far from being the only mendicant sect of that period given to nudity. Furthermore, the canonical description of the first encounter between the two men shows Gosala as a clothed householder who threw away his garments and begged Mahâvîra to take him as a disciple.51 The whole problem of this and other contacts between these teachers is of great interest to the study of both doctrine and practice in Jainism; we shall have reason to return to it shortly// In the final analysis, Digambaras have shown very little interest in such academic discussions. Svetâmbaras have traditionally recognized two sorts of monks, the jinakalpin (who follows Mahâvîra's example and lives alone, naked, in the forest) and the sthavirakalpin (who lives clothed and in an ecclesiastical community), and have considered both practices equally valid paths to salvation; but all such distinctions are heretical and even blasphemous to the Digambaras. 52 For them, nudity remains the necessary condition for moksa; hence they denounce Svetâmbara mendicants as false Jainas (Jainâbhâsa).
On this level, the level of faith and practice, matters of textual criticism and scholarly research have had negligible impact. Thus the two sects have remained generally indifferent to one another through the ages; there have been no joint councils and few cordial meetings of monks. Encounters between the two laities have been purely for the purpose of disputation; indeed, it is only recently that leaders of the long-estranged communities have begun to suggest that, in light of the Jainas' extreme minority position in
