Book Title: Lord Mahavira Vol 03
Author(s): S C Rampuria
Publisher: Jain Vishva Bharati Institute

View full book text
Previous | Next

Page 137
________________ 128 Lord Mahavira vows upon his followers. From this Charpentier concluded that Mahâvîra did not finally fix his doctrine of the five vows before a somewhat later date, when the Buddha was already out of any connection with him. 7. Bimbisarala is the main ruler in the Buddhist canonical texts, and Ajatasatru does not appear so very much there. In the Jain canon Kunika plays a far more important role in the life of Mahâvîra. This may point to a later period of Ajatasatru's reign. Although the date 467 B.C. (suggested long ago by Jacobi and strongly supported by Charpentier) has good points in it, it presents two very serious difficulties 1. First, this "date does not accord with the explicit statement in some of the earliest Buddhist texts that Mahâvîra predeceased the Buddha” (H.C. Raychaudhari). Charpentier also knows that this date is "contradicted by a passage in the Buddhist Digha-Nikayal3 which tells us that Nigantha Nataputta—the name by which the Buddhists denote Mahâvîra-died before Buddha. This assertion is, however, in contradiction with other contemporaneous statements, and forms” for him “no real obstacle to the assumption of the date 468 B.C.” (CHI, I, p. 156). He adds that he considers “this evidence too strong to be thrown over on account of this passage in the Pali canon" (IA, 1914, p. 177). For several reasons it is very difficult to agree with Charpentier (a) The Jain tradition was collected and reduced to writing much later and hence it is not as reliable as the Buddhist tradition. (b) Even the Jain tradition is not unanimous about the date of Mahâvîra's death. There are several traditions14 about this, which rather shake our belief in them. (c) The insertion of Vikrama and the Sakas in the Jain tradition strengthens our suspicion. (d) The Buddhist tradition is more reliable as it was reduced to writing very early. Moreover, due to its comparatively more reliability, it has been used in the reconstruction of ancient Indian history. Hence, there should be no valid objection to its use in determining the date of Mahâvîra.

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232