________________
... (luiel zal zynnit 241221 44ennaAglu ]
२४७ again recommended to his followers that Samvatsari should be observed on Thursday, 9th September 1937, which was the first day of vrddha Panchami, and Acharya Vijaya Ramachandra Suri recommended that the same should be observed on Wednesday, 8th September 1937, which was the day of Chaturthi in the same Panchanga.
These two occasions in recent years led to a very sharp difference of opinion and controversy, not only in the community of monks but also in the community of Shravakas or laymen. For, this day of Samvatsari is regarded as the most important holy day of the year by all the Jains, and its observance on two different days at the recommendation of these Acharyas created considerable dissatisfaction in the community. The followers of these two Acharyas seem to have made a public exhibition of their feelings in several ways cach side accusing the other as not observing the Samvatsari on the right day and thus becoming fallen or depraved as pious Jains.
In subsequent years several attempts were made to bring about an amicable settlement of the dispute, but they all failed. At last Shet Kasturbhai Lalbhai of Ahmedabad, a prominent member of the Svetambara Jain community, suggested to the parties that the dispute should be submitted to an Arbitrator whose award they should accept as final and binding on them. This they agreed to do, and this is how it has been submitted to me for Arbitration.
Shet Kasturbhai was good enough to ask the Acharyas to put their case in writing before the Arbitrator actually heard and examined them. This they did. Acharya Sagarananda Suri framed nine issues for consideration by the Arbitrator and argued his case at great length in writing. Acharya Vijaya Ramachandra Suri framed twentyfive issues for consideration and put forward his views, also in writing. These two documents were then exchanged and each side was allowed to put up counterstatements refuting the views of the other. This also they did. Both the Acharyas prepared their own lists of authorities or Shastras which supported their points of view. All these documents were then sent to the Arbitrator together with the authorities for preliminary study. After the study of these documents and authorities, the Arbitrator visited Palitana and examined both the Acharyas in their mutual presence on 6th, 7th and 9th March 1943 at great length. No party was allowed the aid of any professional pleader, and I must say that even in the absence of such aid, the Acharyas, on the whole, put their views with remarkable precision, barring, of course, occasional lapses. In the personal examination of the Acharyas it was agreed that no more authorities should be allowed to be put in or admitted, and that no pamphlets etc. that appeared in the Press on the
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
