Antiquity of Jain Thought.

Antiquity of Jain Thought.
India is a land of manifold religions. A peep into the past history of her religions reveals the fact that in the ancient period three prominent religions were followed by the people of the country i. e. Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism. In former times Hinduism was termed as Brahmanical religion and Jainism was called the religion of the Nigganthas. It is unfortunate that the history of Jainism has been often misrepresented; therefore the common intelligentia could not properly estimate the value of Jain thought although according to some judicious scholars Jainism is being enumerated* amongst the major religions of the world. The cause of this awkward and unhappy state of affair is not far to seek.

The unparalleled persecution, merciless torturing and the harrowing impalement of the Jains by fanatic followers of other faiths resulted in the indescribable loss to researches, for the intimidated Jains tried to protect and preserve their sacred literature in safe custody Prof. R. Tatacharya of Rajmahendry college speaking about Kannada Jain literature observed : “Thousands of Bastis (Jain temples ) have been destroyed and libraries set on fire. Several thousand of Palmyra manuscripts have been thrown into Kavery or Tungabhadra.” ( Jain Gazette).

Due to these reasons the tortured Jains did not open the doors of their libraries; hence the selfless scholars could not avail themselves of the priceless information contained in Jain books, therefore the meagre material at their disposal made them commit ridiculous errors and draw fantastic inferences, which now appear utterly uni rue in the light of modern advanced researches.

Regarding the antiquity of Jainism, Dr. Heinrich Zimmer noted: "There is truth in the Jaina idea that their religion goes back to a remote antiquity, the antiquity in question being that of the pre-Aryan so called Dravidian period, which has recently been dramatically illuminated by the discovery of a series of great Late stone Age cities in the Indus Valley, dating from the third and perhaps even fourth millennium B.C.(Philosophies of India, Heinrich Zimmer, 1952, p=59)

Historical findings
According to some scholars Asoka’s ordinances were much influenced by Jain thought. Prof. Kern in ‘Indian Antiquary Vol. V., P. 205 says “His (Asoka’s ) ordinances concerning the sparing of animal life agree much more closely with the ideas of the heretical Jains than those of the Buddhists”.

The Hathigumpha inscription of Udaigiri hill ( about three miles from Bhuwneshwar ) written in Apabhransa Prakrit throws valuable light on the antiquity of Jainism. It begins with an invocation to Arhant and Siddhas in the traditional Jain style (fwt fret). This shows that Kalinga Chakravartin Kharvela was a Jain king. In the Age of Imperial unity, D. C. Sircar M.A., Ph.D. throws valuable light upon Kharavela in these words,“Maharaja Kharvela is one of the most remarkable figures of Indian history. The events of his life are recorded in considerable detail in the Hathigumpha prasasti. The first fifteen years of Kharvela’s life were spent in games befitting a young prince and in the study of matters relating to writing and coinage, accounting, administration and legal procedure. In his sixteenth year, the prince was installed as Yuvraja. When he completed his twenty-fourth year, he was apointed Maharaja of Kalinga. Kharavela assumed the title of Kalingadhi- pathi or Kalinga-chakravartin and no doubt claimed „ the status of a Chakravartin or universal ruler. He was possibly also styled Mahavijaya. Kharavela was a devout Jain and was even called Bhikshuraja, i. e. the monk-king. But he was not a bigot, as he is said to have honoured like Maurya Asoka, all religious sects ( pasamda from Sanskrit parshada ) dwelling in his realm In the fourth year of his region, Kharavela seems to have occupied the capital of a prince named Vidyadhara; in the same year he also subdued the Rashtrikas and Bhojakas, probably of the Berar region. In the eighth year Kharavela destroyed Gorathagiri, a hill fortress in the Baraber hills and attacked the city of Rajagriha ( modern Rajgir in the Gaya District, Bihar ). The news of these exploits of Kharavela caused so much terror in the heart of a Yavan king that he fled away to Mathura. The Yavan ruler, whose name is sometimes doubtfully read as Dimita or Dimata ( Demetrius ) was probably a later Indo-Greek ruler of the Eastern Punjab. To avenge the humiliation of Kalinga during the time of Nandas and Mauryas,Kharavela carried away much booty from Anga and Magadha together with certain Jain images origi-nally taken away by a Nanda king from Kalinga. In the same year Kharavela also defeated the Pandya king of the Far South.

As a ruler, Kharavela always thought of the welfare of his subjects and spent large sums of money on their account. Himself a great master of music, the king often entertained the people by arranging dancing and musical performances as well as festivities and merry gatherings He enlarged an irrigation canal originally excavated by a Nanda king three centuries ago. Kharavela was also a great builder. On one occasion the capital city of Kalinga was devastated by a terrible cyclone and the king had to rebuild numerous gates, walls and houses that had been damaged and to restore all the gardens He built a magnificent palace called the Mahavijaya-prasada As a devout Jain he exacavaled a number of caves in the Kumari- parvata (Khandagiri hill). Kharavela probably also built a monastery at a place called Pabhara not far from these caves.” ( pp. 313-315. ) Dr K. P. Jayaswal, who had made deep study in this matter observes :—

“Jainism had already entered Orissa as early as the time of king Nanda, who as I have shown was Nada Vardhan of the Sesunga dynasty. Before the time of Kharavela there were temples of the Arhants on the Udaigiri Hills, as they are men¬tioned in the inscriptions as institutions, which had been in existence before Kharavela’s time. It seems that Jainism had been the national religion of Orissa for some centuries” ( J. B O. Q. S. Vol. Ill P. 448 ). He further remarks, “This inscription occupies a unique position amongst the materials of Indian History for the centuries preceding the Christian era. From the point of view of the history of Jainism, it is the most important inscrip-tion yet discovered in the country. It confirms Puranic record and carries the dynastic chronology to C. 450 B. C. Further it proves that Jainism entered Orissa and probably became the state reli¬gion within hundred years of its founder (?) Mahavira.”

The antiquities of Mathura are of great importance from Jain point of view, since they brought to light in existence of a famous Jain esta-blishment at Kankali Tila from the second century B. C. This site has provided a veritable information of Jain sculptures most of which are now deposited in the Lucknow Museum. The idol of Tirthankara Arahnath bears an inscription that this idol was installed within the enclosure of this stupa cons-tructed by Devas in Samvat 78.

The museum report of 1890-91 tells us : “The stupa was so ancient that at the time when the inscription was incised its origin had been forgotten. On the evidence of its character the date of the inscription may be referred with certainty to the Indo-scythian era and is equivalent to A. D. 150. The stupa must therefore have been built several centuries before the beginning of the Christian era, for the name of its builders would assuredly have been known, if it had been erected during the period, when the Jains of Muttra carefully kept record of their donations.” Those who think that Jainism does not recog-nise any stupa are not correct. Jain scriptures point out that the assemblage of Arhat called Samavsaran has several stupas. In his Mabapuran poet Jinasena says :—

In this connection these remarks of Vincent Smith are significant:—“In some cases monuments, which are really Jains have been erroneously described as as Buddhists.” The observations of Dr. Fleet are also worthy of note:—“The prejudice that all stupas and stone railings must necessarily be Buddhist has probably prevented the recognition of Jain struc¬tures as such and upto the present only two un¬doubted Jain stupas have been recorded.” ( Imp. Gaz. Vol. II P. III.) In view of the above remarks it is the sacred duty of the seekers after truth to be more vigilant and cautious while dealing with materials related to Buddhist antiquities and see that they do not injure the Jain cause out of inadvertence or pre¬dilection.*

Rai Bahadur Gaurishanker Hirashanker Jha deciphered remarkable inscription of Badli Village near Ajmer. The inscription reads thus :—According to The Di rector General of Archaeology Dr. N. P. Ghakravarty had made a tour of South Eastern Countries and had informed me that in hi* sojourn he did not come across any Jain monument.; hut I was surprised when I had been to Singapore on may way back from World Religions Congress of Japan as I happened to see Jain idols of Lord Parsvanath in the famour museum of Singapore. I had requested the Archaeo¬logical Department New Delhi for photographs but the desire has not yet been fulfilled. This shows that our scholars should be more careful in their researches of Buddhist or Hindu monuments. A proper probe into the sacred Buddhist literature of foregin countries will reveal priceless information about Jainism and this effort may enable the scholars to change their opinions on several points. Dr. Guiseppe Tucci’s efforts in this respect reveal these new points. He observes, “You will be interested to hear that in the Sakya monastery at Tibet I found a Jain image of the 14th century with inscription, but upto now no Jain book has been found though occasional references of Jainism can be found in Tibetan books.” He adds, “In many of the texts preserved in the Chinese Tripitakas the references to Jainism and to particular points of Jain dogmatics are very numerous. The Jains are called there Nirgranthas or sometimes Acclakas” This information is valuable in establishing the antiquity of the Digamber Jain sect for Acclakas’ meant “without clothing’. The ancient Vedic literature also supports the above contention.

Ojha this refers to 84 Vir Nirvana era i. e. 443 B. C. This speaks of the prevalence of Jainism in Rajputana 2400 years before. Reverend J. Stevenson, President of Royal Asiatic Society tells us that Mahavira was the last Tirthankar and he was preceded by 23 Tirthankaras. His remarks are thought-provoking :—“As a sect the Digambaras have continued to exist among them from the old down to the present day; the only conclusion that is left to us that the Gymno- sophist, whom the Greeks found in the Western India, where Digambarism still prevails, were Jains and neither Brahmans nor Buddhists and that it was a company of Digambaras of this sect that Alexander fell in with near Taxila. One of them Calanus followed him to Persia. The creed has been preached by 24 Tirthankaras in the present cycle, Lord Mahavira being the last”. The discoveries support the Jain tradition about their Tirthankaras. Vincent Smith appears to be very much impressed when he says: “The discoveries have to a very large extent supplied corroboration to the written Jain tradition and they offer tangible and incontrovertible proof of the antiquity of the Jain religion and of its early existence very much in its present form. The series of twentyfour pontiffs ( Tirthankaras) each in his distinctive emblem was evidently firmly believed in at the beginning of the Christian era.”

Jainism was espoused by great rulers like Chandra Gupta after whom one hill in the vicinity of wonderful Jain colossus of Gommateshvara at Sravan Belgula is renowned as Chandra Giri Hill. This grand-father of king Asoka had become a nude Jain Ascetic being impressed by the great Jain Shrutakevali ( preceptor) Bhadra Bahu Swami. Vincent Smith in his History of India writes, “l am disposed to believe that the tradition probably is true in its main out-line and that Chandra Gupta really abdicated and became a Jain ascetic”. (P. 146)

The remarks of Dr. Thomas are noteworthy “That Chandragupta was a member of the Jain community is taken by their writers as a matter of course and treated as a known fact, which needed neither argument nor demonstration. The docu-mentary evidence to this effect is of comparatively early date and apparently absolved from suspicion. The testimony of Magasthenes would likewise seem to imply that Chandra Gupta submitted to the devotional teachings of the Sramanas as opposed to the doctrines of the Brahmans.” (Jainism or Early Faith of Asoka” P. 23 ).

In this context the view of Dr. K. P. Jayaswal in pertinent. He is of opinion that “The Jain books ( 5lh Cen. A. C. ) and later Jain inscriptions claim Chandragupta as a Jain Imperial ascetic. My studies have compelled me to respect the historical data of the Jain writings and I see no reason why we should not accept the Jain claim that Chandra Gupta at the end of his reign accepted Jainism and abdicated and died as a Jain ascetic. I am not the first to accept the view. Mr. Rice who has studied the Jain inscriptions of Sravanbelgola thoroughly gave verdict in favour of it and Mr. V. Smith has also leaned towards it ultimately.” ( J. B. O. R. S. Vol. Ill).

Even in B. C. days Jainism had occupied a very eminent position. “We know from the frag¬ments of Magesthenes that so late as the 4th century B. C. the Sarmanas or the Jain ascetics, who lived in the woods were frequently consulted by the kings through their messengers regarding the cause of things.” ( Jain Gazette, Vol. XVI P. 216 ).

Jainism, not offshoot of Buddhism :
Some scholars accepted the antiquity of Jainism and its culture, but they held that it is the offshoot of Buddhism. This myth has been exploded by the testimony of Buddhist literature and by recent researches.

The Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics Vol. Ulp. 465 throws valuable light in this matter; “Notwithstanding the radical differences in their philosophical notion Jainism and Buddhism being originally both orders of monks outside the pale of Brahmanism, present some resemblance in outward appearance so that even Indian writers occasionally have confounded them. It is, therefore, not to be wondered at that some European scholars, who became acquainted with Jainism through inadequate samples of Jain literature easily persuaded them-selves that it was an off-shoot of Buddhism.

But it has been proved beyond doubt that their theory is wrong and that Jainism is at least as old as Buddhism. For the canonical books of the Buddhists frequently mention the Jains as a rival sect, under their old name Nigantha and their leader in Buddha’s time, Nataputta ( Nata or Nati- putta being an epithet of the last prophet of the Jains, Vardhamana Mahavira ) and they name the place of the latter’s death Pava in agreement with Jain tradition. On the other hand the canonical books of the Jains mention as contemporaries of Mahavira the same kings as reigned during Buddha’s career and one of the latter’s rivals. Thus it is estiblished that Mahavira was a contemporary of Buddha and probably some what older than the later, who out-lived his rival’s decease at Pava. Mahavira however unlike Buddha was most probably not the founder of the sect, which reveres him as their prophet nor the author of their religion. His predecessor Parsva, the last Tirthankara but one, seems to have better claims to the title of the founder of Jainism but in the absence of historical documents, we cannot venture to go beyond a conjecture.”

The observations of Dr. J. G. Buhler are remarkable; “The Buddhists themselves confirm the statements of the Jainas about their prophet. Old historical traditions and inscriptions prove the independent existence of the sect of the Jainas even during the first five centuries after Buddha’s death, and among the inscriptions are some which clear the .laina tradition not only from the suspicion of fraud but bear powerful witness to its honesty.” ( Practical Path pp. 176-77 ).

Dr. Jacobi’s remarks about karma philosophy are valuable for on the basis of Buddhist and Jain technical words found in the sacred literature of both religions he points out that Buddhists have borrowed from the Jains; therefore'Jainism must be earlier than the Buddhist thought.

In the Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics Vol. VII p 172 he thus clarifies his view point; “The question must now be answered, which will present itself to every critical reader viz. is the karma theory as explained above an original and integral part of the Jain system ? It seems so abstruse and highly artificial that one would readily believe it a later developed metaphysical doctrine, which was grafted on an original religious system based on animistic notions and intent on sparing all living beings But such a hypothesis would be in conflict with the fact that this karma theory if not in all details certainly in the main out-lines is acknowledged in the oldest parts of the canon and presupposed by many expressions and technical terms occurring in them. Nor can we assume that in this regard the canonical books represent a later dogmatic development for the following reason : the terms asrava, samvara, nirjara etc., can be understood only on the supposition that karma is a kind of subtle matter flowing or pouring into the soul ( as-rava ), that this influx can be stopped or its inlets covered ( samvara ) and that the karma- matter received into the soul is consumed or digested, as it were by it (nirjara ). The Jains understand these terms in their literal meaning and use them in explaining the way of salvation ( the Samvara of the Asravas and the Nirjara lead to Moksa ). Now these terms are as old as Jainism. For the Buddhists have borrowed them from it the most significant term asrava; they use it in very much the same sense as the Jains, but not in its literal meaning, since they do not regard the karma as subtle matter and deny the existence of the soul into which the karma could have an influx. Instead of samvara they say asava-kkhaya ( asravaksaya ), destruction of the asravas and identify it with ‘magga’ (marga ), path. It is obvious that with them asrava has lost its literal meaning and that therefore they must have borrowed this term from a sect where it had retained its original significance, or in otherwords, from the Jainas. The Buddhists also use the term samvara, e. g., sih-samvara, ‘restraint under the moral law’ and the participle samvuta ‘controlled’ words which are not used in this sense by Brahminical writers and therefore are most probably adopted from Jainism, where in their literal sense they adequately express the idea that they denote. Thus the same argument serves to prove at.the same time that the karma-theory of the Jains is an original and integral part of their system and that Jainism is considerably older than the origin of Buddhism.” (Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, p. 472 ).

The remarkable fact that Lord Buddha him¬self had accepted Jainism for his spiritual eleva¬tion, when he had relinquished royal splendour and pleasures goes to prove that Jainism was already prevalent before the birth of Buddhism. The follow¬ing excerpt is illuminating :— “When Gautama renounced the world and went out in search of truth, he proceeded to Vaisali, which was then known for its abundance of spiritual teachers. There he found his teacher Alara Kalama, a native of Vaisali. According to the Mahavastu Alara was so much advanced spiritually that while in medita¬tion sitting on the road, he did not hear or see even 500 carts rattling past him.”

Mrs. Rhys Davids also records that “Buddha found his first two teachers Alara and Uddaka at Vaisali and started his religious life as a Jaina. At any rate Gautama gave himself up to a cause of austerities under the influence of his Jain teachers.” ( ‘Buddhism and Vaisali’-p. 9; The Public Relations Department, Bihar. ).

In the Buddhist book Majjima Nikaya Buddha himself throws light upon his ascetic life and its ordinances, which are in conformity with Jain monk’s morals. He says;- “Thus far, Sariputta, did I go in my penance. I went without clothes. I licked my food from my hands. I was no complier with invitations of “Come in, your reverence, stay, your reverence” I look no food that was brought or meant specially for me. I accepted no invitation to a meal. 1 took no alms from pot or dish. I took no food from within a threshold or through window-bars or within the pounding place, nor from two people eating together, nor from a preg¬nant woman nor from a woman sucking a child nor from one in intercourse, nor from food collected here and there; nor food where a dog stood by, nor from places where flies were swarming, nor fish nor flesh, nor drink fermented, nor drink dis-tilled nor yet sour gruel did I drink.”

The following few lines will show that the aforesaid description is similar to the code of con¬duct enjoined upon a nude Jain saint. Barrister C. R. Jain in his Sannyasa Dharma says; “The saint must obsesve complete nudity ( P. 45 ). In the chapter on ‘Esana Samiti’ which deals at length with the rules of taking food it is observed, “The saint should not take any food which has been prepared at his instance or of which he has expressed his approval after its preparation—. The sadhu is not allowed to keep a plate, cup, saucer or any other kind of utensil with him. He should only eat from his hand. He does not ask for food from any one. At the time of the morning meal he merely passed through the house-holder’s quarters. As he approaches the house-holder’s door, the latter salutes him reverently and invites him to stay, informing him that pure and wholesome food is ready at his place and hoping all the time that good luck will incline the saint to accept the offer—. A w. man ... more advanced in pregnancy and also the one that is giving a suck to her child ... is disqualified for offering food to saints. The saint takes his food standing. He will not indulge in conversa-tion, while eating” ( Pp. 103, 115 ). This matter is at length dealt with in Mulachara by saint Vatta- kera, Bhagwati Aradhana of Shivkoti, Charitrasar of Chamundrai and Anagar Dharma Mrita of Asadhar. Proper comparison with Majjaminikaya will show that Buddha in the beginning of his spiritual awakening had embraced Jainism. It is ordinarily said that the rules of conduct enjoined upon in Jain books are very hard, harsh and rigorous, therefore Buddha had later on aban¬doned the Jain vows; but this conjecture is far from truth. A proper perusal and study of Jain sacred literature reveals the fact that the votary has been enjoined upon to observe vows according to his capacity and vitality. He need not transgress his limit. Jinasena in his Mahapurana tells us that Bhagwan Rishbhadeo during his monkhood had himself followed the middle path. His view was; “One who desires liberation need not emaciate his body or fatten it with delicious and invigorating dishes. He had shown the path whereby the senses may be subdued and may not go astray.”1 The fact that Buddha as a novice had due to over-enthusiasm transgressed the legitimate limit with the unhappy result, that he soon got disgusted and disappointed and thus he was forced to change the course of his life. At any rate the reference shows that Buddha for some time was a Jain dis¬ciple. therefore it is quite clear that Jainism can never be the branch or off-shoot of Buddhism, which was taught by Buddha. On the other hand this shows why several Jain terms are used in Buddhist literature ? Dr. Jacobi on the basis of Buddhist literature establishes the antiquity of Jain thought. Justice J. L. Jainai summarises Jacobi’s.

points in these words :—
“1. References in old Buddhist books to well-known acknowledged doctrines of Jain theo-logy, meta-physics and ethics are noteworthy, e. g - ( a ) a reference to cold water possessing a soul is mentioned in the commentary of Brahmjal Sutta of Dighanikaya.

( b ) Santanna Phala Sutta of the same Nikaya lias a reference of 4 vows of Parshavanath. This indicates that Buddhists were aware of the older traditions of the Jains with regard to the time and teachings of Parshavanatha.

( c ) In Majjhima Nikaya there is a reference of the conversion of Upali, a lay-disciple of Mahavira after a dispute with the Buddha as to the comparative inequity of the sins of the body and the mind.

( d ) The same book mentions three sorts of Dandas, ‘hurtful acts’ viz. of body, speech and mind believed by Jains.

( e ) In the Anguttara Nikaya, Abhaya a prince of the Lichchivis of Vaisali refers to the Jain affirmation of ability to attain full knowledge and to annihilate karmas, old and new by means of austerity.

( f) The same Nikaya mentions Jain vow Digvrata and (Jposath day.

( g ) Mahavagga tells about Siha, the gene¬ral of the Lichchhavis and a lay-disciple of Maha¬vira, goes against his master’s prohibition to see the Buddha and is converted by him on being taught the Akriyavada doctrine of Buddhism, which made him relinquish the Jain doctrine of Kriyavada incul¬cating a belief in soul, in the world and in action.

2.The Buddhist records indirectly attest the importance and probable high antiquity of Jainism.

( a ) They mention the Jainas (Nirgranthas) as opponents and converts of Buddha and never imply, much less assert that they are a newly founded sect.

( b ) Makkhaligosala divides man-kind into six classes of which the third is the Nirgranthas. A new sect could not have held such an important place in a division of man-kind.

(c) The Buddha had a dispute with Sachchaka, who was a Non-Nirgrantha son of a father. This also proves decisively that the Jains were not an off-shoot of Buddhism.

3.The Jain books themselves point out its independent existence.

4.The last line of evidence is the ancient character of Jain philosophy e. g. ( a ) The animis¬tic beliefs of the Jains.

( b ) The absence of the category of quality in their enumeration of the principle constituent elements of the universe.

(c ) The inclusion of Dharma and Adharma, the principles of motions and stationariness in the class of substances.

From the above points Dr. Jacobi concludes that Jainism was evolved at a very early period of Indo-Aryan history. ( Outlines of Jainism, p. xxxi—xxxiii).

In ‘Bihar through the Ages’ the following portion is worthy of note—“It is now universally accepted that the followers of Jainism were already in existence when Buddha started his quest for truth, for, according to the ‘ATTHAKATHA’of Anguttara Nikaya, an uncle of Buddha himself named Boppa Sakya, a resident of Kapilvastu, was the follower of the Nigganthas (without a knot), which was another name for the Jainas. When, immediately after his Enlightenment at Bodh-Gaya, Buddha was on his way to Varanasi to deliver his first sermon, an ascetic named Upaka, on being told about the Enlightenment, characterized him as a Jina. Buddha accepted the compliment. According to the Maha- vnmsn, when Mahciulra and Samgha Mitra, son and daughter of the Mourya Emperor Asoka came to Lanka ( C eylon ) in order to introduce Buddhism in the island they found the Niggantha monks already there. Numerous references occur in the earliest Pali books to ‘Chatujjma’, i. e., the four Vows of the Nigganthas. ( Page 130 ).

It is now beyond doubt that Jain thought docs not owe its existence to Buddhism, on the otherhand Buddhism itself was deeply influenced by Jain ideology, hence the seeds of similarity are seen scattered all over Buddhism. It is said that Buddha brought about his middle path ‘Madhyam Marga Principle’ to avoid the extreme view, but proper scrutiny and deep investigation establish the fact that this middle-path ideology was originated by the founder of Jainism. In fact the philosophy of Syadavada is the middle path in the domain of intellectualism. In practical life also it urges to adopt harmonious attitude avoiding extremes. There¬fore the baseless imputation that Jainism exhorted to resort to the extreme path should be modified. Jain thought stands for a balanced and harmonious path.

The Founder of Jainism :
There is mention of the first tirthankara, Rishabha in Rig Veda. Rig Veda, X. 12. 166 states - "0 Rudra-like Divinity ! do thou produce amongst us, of high descent, a Great God, like Rishabha Deva, by becoming Arhan, which is the epithet of the first World Teacher; let Him become the destroyer of the enemies !"

It is very strange to note that many modem writers have been holding even to this day that Mahavira was not the reviver of Jainism, and that he was rather the founder of that creed. In the Columbia Encyclopaedia we read, “A religious system of India which arose like Buddhism is a dissent from Hinduism, in North-Central India in the sixth century B. C. The Jains emphasise the preservation of life more than the Buddhist. The acknowledged founder of Jainism was Vardhaman, called Mahavira. (P.912).” This view is entirely baseless and unfounded. In this respect the great savant Jacobi’s observations are very illuminating : “There is nothing to prove that Parsva was the founder of Jainism. Jain tradition is unanimous in making Rishabha, the first Tirthankara as its founder. There may be some-thing historical in the tradition which makes him the first Tirthankara”. There is epigraphical evidence which according to Dr. Furhrer, speaks about Rishabha Deo in the B. C. days, “The Mathura inscriptions deciphered by Dr. Furhrer, show that there are dedications and offerings of a very ancient day made to Rishabha”. ( Outlines of Jainism P. xxxiii).

Prof. Chakravarty makes a new approach to establish the antiquity of Jainism. In the ‘Cultural Heritage of India’, he observes. “We may make bold to say that Jainism, the religion of Ahimsa, is probably as old as the Vedic religion, if not older. In the Rigvedic Mantras we have clear references to Rishabha and Arishta Nemi The story of Rishabha also occurs in the Vishnu Purana and Bhagvata Parana, where he figures as an Avatara (incarnation) of Narayana in an age prior to that of the ten Avataras of Vishnu. The story is identical with the life history of Rishabha as given in Jain sacred literature. In the two Puranas referred to above he is mentioned as Yogeshvara, as the founder of Yoga or Tapas. The description given there of Mahayogin Rishabha exactly corresponds to the Yogic discipline prescribed for a Jaina Tapasvin contained in Jain literature....

Throughout the Vedic literature consisting of the Samhitas, the Brahmanas and the Upanishads, we find two currents of thought opposed to each other running parallel, one enjoining animal sacri¬fice and the other condemning it. Hence it is obvious that from the very earliest period of Hindu thought Ahimsa Dharma and its opposite have been struggl¬ing for domination.... “Ma Himsyat Sarva Bhutani” side by side occurs with “Sarva Medhe Sarvam 1 lanyat”. The story ofSunahsepa in Rigveda indi¬cates the rivalry between one thought sanctioning and the other opposing it. Sacrifice of animals was supported by Brahmins and it was opposed by Kshatriyas. In the Brahmin period the animal sacri¬fice view is associated with priests of Karupanchal country, whereas the party opposed to it is associa¬ted with Eastern countries of the Gangetic Valley dominated by the Kshatriyas. In Satapatha Brahmana the priests of Kuru- I’anchala arc advised not to travel in the Eastern countries of Kashi, Koshala, Videha and Magadha since the Kshlriyas of Eastern countries have started preaching a new form of dharma opposed to animal sacrifice. Vajaseniya-Sarohita mentions the fact that the Aryans in the Eastern countries could not speak pure Sanskrit. They were unable to pro¬nounce ‘R’ and they substituted ‘L’ for ‘R\ It gives a clue that the language must have been some form of Prakrit.

In the Upanishidic age we find the priests of Kuru Panchala country rushing to the Eastern countries to learn ‘Atma Vidya’ from king Janak. They now approve of the Ahimsa dharma, which formerly they ridiculed and called as Ku-dharma ( erroneous dharma ). The school of Atma-vidya must be considered to be forefathers of latter-day Jains, who are opposed to animal sacrifice”. In his another book ‘Yesterday and Today’ the renowned scholar holds that the people of this country resisted the Aryan invaders from cominging, therefore in the Rjgveda Aryan thinkers referred to these as enemies and so called them in uncom-plimentary terms. These were called Dasyus. The Aryan god India is hailed as Dasvuhatya, slaugh-terer of Dasyus. These enemies were styled as Ayajvan, ‘non-sacrificing’, Akarman’ without rites’, Adevaya’ indifferent to gods’, Anyavrata” follow-ing strange ordinances and Devapeeya’ reviling the gods.’ They are described as black skinned; Anas, ‘snub-nosed’. 1 he other epithet was Mridhravac’, unintelligible speech. Oriental scholars are of opi-nion probably rightly that these races of Dasyus who opposed the Aryans were the Dravidiyans, who inhabited the land, when the Aryans invaded the country. They are called Sisna-devas, because they worshipped the nude figure of man.

The outstanding Tamil treatise on grammar ‘Tolkappium’ informs us that the people of South worshipped the supreme deity called ‘Kandazhi’, which means one who destroys all karmas and becomes Parmatma. This is distinctly a Jain con- ' ception of God. The author of Tolkappium says that this Kandazhi was the object of worship in Tamil land. The other meaning of the term is one who destroys the Kandhu or post to which the victim or sacrifice was tied. The supreme being is so called because of the complete destruction of the institution of the Yagna in the land. The term shows the highest religious ideal associated only with Jainism. ( Pp. 6«>, 61, 68, 69 ).

The liberal-minded Vedic scholars admit the fact that there are references of Jainism in ancient Vedic literature. The Bhoodan leader Sri Vinoba had once written to me that Jainism is very ancient since it is mentioned in several Vedic mantras ( hymns ) i. e., ‘Arhana Idam Dayasey V ishwam Abhvama’ - ‘Oh Arhant, you extend your compas-sion over the entire world’. Prof. Virupaksha quotes from Rigveda showing that the hymn men¬tions Rishabha Deo, the founder of Jainism. In this respect it is to be pecifically noted that due to the crafty hand of some fanatics some hymns from the ancient Vedic books are being deleted in the later editions so that the antiquity of Jainism may not be proved on that basis. The great scholar of comparative religion Vidya-varidhi Champatrai Jain Bar-at-law in his valuable work ‘Rishbha Deva’ writes : “It is interesting to note that Jain writers have quoted many other passages from the Vedas themselves, which are no longer to be found in the current editions. Weeding has very likely been carried out on a large scale”. ( P. 68 ).

It is a matter of deep concern for all lovers of literature that the dragon of commumilism is out to cause inconceivable injury to literature. Rai bahadur Professor A. Chakravarty M. A. I. E. S. of Madras much deplored the evil practices of shortsighted fanatics, who are busy to do harm to the cause of sacred Tamil Jain litcratue. The Tamil scholar observes, “It is rather painful to learn that there is an organisation ostensibly working in the name of revival of Tamil culture, but intended to temper with important Jain classics in Tamil so that they might appear as works by non-Jain authors.” He further adds, “It is also painful to notice that rich and influential people are backing the movement.” It is upto the defenders of Law and Order to mitigate the mischief before it is too late.

It is worthy of note that Mohanjodaro and Harappa ex-cavations throw valuable light upon the antiquity of Jainism in that remote pre-vedic period. Nude idols in contemplative mood have been exhumed. Close and unbiased observation and deep study of the material leads to the conclusion that five thousand years ago the religion of Digam- ber Jains was in existence. The nude idols in fact represent the Jain yogin. The first Tirthankara Rishabha was the lord of Yogins. Acharya Mantunga in his marvellous Bhaktamara Stotra mentions Lord Rishabha as a great Yogin in these sublime words :—

Poet Jinasena in his Mahapurana remembers, Rishabha by 1008 sacred names. He called Rishabha as ‘Yogi’, ‘Yogindra’, ‘Yogatma’, ‘Yoga-vida’, ‘Yogi-vandita’, ‘Sarva-yogishwara’, ‘Yogishwara- rachita’. In this light if our scholars carefully study the Indus Valley literature they will admit that the nude idols bear testimony to the influence of Rishabha Deo. The emblem of the Lord is that of a bull, therefore the Indus seals bearing bull must be referring Lord Rishabha. The other name of the Lord is Vrishabha Nath Vrishabha means a ‘Bull’. Therefore in (lie foreword of a Tamil book Prof. Chakravarty concludes, “From these facts we can easily establish that the religion associated with Lord Vrishabha is the earliest one in the ' world.” In this respect the observations of the eminent archaeologist Ramprasad Chanda are valuable :— “The pose of the image ( standing Rishabha in Kayotsarga form from Mathura repro¬duced in fig 12 ) closely resembles the pose of the standing deities on the Indus seals. Among the Egyptian sculptures of the time of the early dynas¬ties (III - VI) there are standing statuettes with arm hanging on two sides ... But though these Egyptian statues and the archaic Greek Kouri show nearly the same pose, the lack the feeling of aban¬donment that characterizes the standing figures of the Indus seals three to five ( plate 11 F. G. II with a bull (?) in the foreground may be the prototype of Rishabha.” ( Modern Review, August 1932— “Sindh Five Thousand years Ago”—plate 11 fig.-d. and p. Page 159 ).

A critical survey of the Veda shows that inspite of rituals and euologies of various forces of nature some hymns like the Nadsiya Sukta show lofty philosophical ideas, it is hence probable that the main source of these thoughts might be other than the Vedic one and it may be pre-Vedic. Dr. Mangal- dcv M. A., Ph. D. feels that “Jain philosophy might be a branch of the pre-Vedic current of thought. Some Jain terms like ‘Pudgala’ ( matter ) support the aforesaid conjecture.” Dr. Heinrich Zimmer in his ‘Philosophies of India’ opines on the basis of Mohanjadaro materials that Jainism along with Yoga and Samkhya systems of thought existed in the country before the Aryans came to India.

Acharya Samant Bhadra’s Svayambhu Stotra enlightens that the life of Bhagwan Parasvanath, the predecessor of lord Mahavira had influenced the ascetics who were then living in the forest— erimr: SKUT sftFeft. This indicates that the Arya of the Upnishad period must have been influenced by i lie grand, noble and sacred personality of Lord Parasvanath, otherwise the man busy with propita- ting various gods and other objects of nature to satisfy his worldly cravings would never have so suddenly developed himself to the high spiritual status, wherein Atmavidya—the knowledge of the Self and the quest of Immortality got prepoderence over material gains and worldly pursuits In the illuminating introduction of Tirrukkural, Professor.

A.Chakravarty shows that the Jain thought and Ahimsa culture had influenced the people of far-off countries. He says, “The apostles of die non-vio¬lence cult must have travelled beyond India preach¬ing their doctrine through propaganda. They must have travelled through Persia, Syria, and as far as Egypt. They were evidently very successful in their preaching of the ideal of non-violence. The Mitras in Persia, and the Essenes in Syria have accepted this religion of Ahimsa. In Persia, there were two Zoroasters, the former lived about six thousand ( 6000 ) B. G. and the other about 5C0

B.C. The former represented the early Aryans in Central Asia. There they proclaimed that it was necessary to propitiate God by sacrificing hundreds of horses, thousands of cows and tens of thousands cf small cattle at his altar. But the second Zoroaster proclaimed a bloodless altar. This clearly proves that second Zoroaster was already under the in¬fluence of the cult of non-violence, of Ahimsa preached by the followers of Parsva.”

“A study of the religion of the Mitras in Persia also shows the influence of the non-violent cult of Ahimsa because their religion also was associated with a bloodless altar. The Essenes, the mystical group of Israel, were also influenced by the ascetics, who were called Gymnosophists, who were preaching in Alexandria, in Egypt. The term Gymnosopbist means nude philosopher. The term Gymnosophist is used by the Greek scholars to denote the Digambara sect. These Digambara teacher must have travelled upto Egypt preach¬ing their doctrine of Ahimsa. They must have in¬fluenced these people to give up meat-eating and drinking wine because they considered the absti¬nence from meat-eating and drinking wine as the important ethical aspect of their*religion.”

“These Essenes were ascetics strictly following the tenets of Ahimsa. Immediately prior to Jesus, the Essenes were very strong in Palestine. John, the Baptist was an ascetic-teacher belonging to this school of Essenism. As an ascetic he was very austere in his life, completely abstaining from meat and drink. On account of the influence of the Indian teachers of Ahimsa doctrine, the Essenes of Palestine did not recognise the racial discrimination which the orthodox Jews practisied. Jews made a sharp distinction between man and man. Jn order to keep the Jewish sect exclusive, the Jews adopted a system of circumcision. All the members of the sect must undergo the cermony of circumcision. John, the Baptist evidently did not recognise this distinction, hence he did not recognise even the ceremonial circumcision. He introduced a new method of purification, baptism. Any one irrespec¬tive of creed could accept and undergo this cere¬monial practice. It is merely a purification by water. T his purification by water is only symbolic, repre¬senting the real purification of the heart. Equality of all human beings in the field of religion, com¬pletely abstaining from animal food and intoxicat¬ing drink were the fundamental items of religious reform introduced by John, the Baptist. Jesus, the loundcr of Christianity must have accepted this doctrine, when he received baptism, under John, the Baptist before he began preaching his reformed religion. Jesus also strongly repudiated the racial discrimination, which was the central doctrine of orlhodox Judaism. Before Jesus began his new niovcmenl, lie must have absorbed a good deal of the non-violence cult from John the Baptist and oilier leacher of Essenism. The doctrine of Ahimsa spread beyond Syria and Palestine in 600 B. C. Pythagoras, who lived about 532 B. C. was a great piiil osophor in the prc-Socratic period.... As a religious leacher, he insisted that his disciples should completely abstain from meat and intoxicating drink. ( Tirukkural-Introduction XXXIII-IV ).

In this context the following observations are remarkable, “Jina means one who has conquered ( from the Sanskrit root ‘ji’ to conquer ) and is free. A follower of Jina is a Jaina. The tradition embodied in Jain Literature is that this religion is eternal and that it is revealed in each cycle of time by a series, of teachers called Tirthankaras ( ford- makers across the stream of existence ). In the present cycle of time there have been twenty-four Tirthankaras, the first of whom was Rishabha Deva. This tradition is partially supported by accounts found in Brahmanic literature. According to the Bhagavat-Puran, Rishabha Deva was the fifth in descent from Swayambhu-Manu and belonged to a line of saints called ‘Vatarasana Munayah’ ( saints who lived on air, i. e. who fasted ). These saints are also mentioned in the earlist part of the Rig- Veda, where a number of hymns are devoted to them and some of the practices attributed to them are in conformity with the principles of Jainism. It will thus be seen that the pre-valence of the Jaina doctrines goes back at least to the earliest Vedic Age.”

Jainism, not a revolt religion
While considering the antiquity of Jainism some scholar, politicians hold that Jainism is a revolt religion It is more or less a protestant form of Hindu ideology, therefore it is anterior to the Brahminical religion. This conjecture is without any foundation or sound proof, which can stand to reason or the researches made in the field of history and archaeo-logy. The uptodate researches have established the origionality of Jain thought which has deeply in-fluenced the Indian mind. Comparative study of religious literature supports several points in favour of Jainism e. g. The Jain view of twenty- four Jain prophets is supported by various religions. In his book Rishabhadeo C. R. Jain observes “There is a special fascination in number four and twenty. The Hindus have twenty-four avtars ( incarnation ) of their favourite God Vishnu, there are twenty-four counsellor gods of the ancient Babylonians, the Buddhist poist four and twenty previous Buddhas, that is teaching gods. The Zoroastrians also have twenty-four Ahuras who are regarded as the mightiest to advance desired and domination of blessings ( p. 58 ).

The renowned Hindu scholar Dr. S. Radha- kridinan remarks “Jain tradition ascribes the origin of the system to Rishabhadeva, who lived many centuries back. There is evidence to show that so Jar back as the first century B. C. theie were people, who were worshipping Rishabhadeva, the first Tir-thankara. There is no doubt that Jainism prevailed even before Vardhaman or Parasvanatha The Yajurveda mentions the name of three Tirthankaras- Risliabu, Ajitnath and Arishtanemi. The Bhagwat- Purana endorses the view that Rishabhadeva was the founder of Jainism.” ( Indian Philosophy vol. 1, page 287 ).

Imminent scholars hold that Jain thought was not only very old but it had greatly influenced the Indian culture by its powerful massage of Ahimsa. Vedic scholar B. Ci. 1 ilak had observed; “In ancient limes innumerable animals were butchered in sacrifice. Evidence in support of this is found in various poetic compositions such as Meghaduta, but the credit of the disappearance of this terrible inassae'c from the Brahmanical religion goes to the share of Jainism”. The name of our country Bharata bears the influence of Emperor Bharata Chakravarty who was the illustrious son of Lord Rishabhadeva the founder of Jainism. Bhagvata Purana endorses the view that this country was named Bharat after his eldest son Bharat who was a great scholar, devotee and expert in Paravidya — the supreme knowledge, also called ‘

Markandaya, Kurma, Vishnu, Linga, Skanda, Brahmanda and other Hindn puranas also support the above contention. Jinasen in his Mahapuran clearly tells that King Bharat was the devotee of Jain religion whose greatness got the stamp of his name upon our country. No doubt some scholars probably out of religious zeal try to prove that it was the son of Sakuntala and king Dushyant after whom India is called Bharata. This stand has no historical proof or bachground. No one knows about the brilliant achievements and outstanding accomplishments of the son of Sakuntala. Several Jain books specially the Sanskrit Mahapurana of Jinsen, Bharatesh Vaibhava of Poet Ratnakar in Kannada present the glorious account of Bharat, who was the son of Rishabha deo. When the Jain and Vedic literature equally hold the influence of Bharat the eldest son of Rishabha deo upon the nomenclature of this country it is no use in build¬ing imaginary castles in the air. As a matter of fact we should have high esteem and veneration, for truth. It is a great sin to twist truth in support of false and imaginary ideology. Therefore poet Tagore has invoked God to save the persons, who are unable to discern real religion.

Jainism—Distinct Religion, :—
Since this country is known as Bharat, the religions born in it will appropriately be called Religions of Bharat or Hindustan. When the word ‘Hindu’ connotes a particular religious denomina¬tion its use cannot be made for all Indian religions. People with political motives threaten that if those who are in fact out of the Vedic fold do not surren¬der and call themselves as followers of Hinduism, misfortune will befall upon them. This threat or intimidation cannot come in the way of scholarly studies or investigations. Let us see whether Jainism is a part of Hinduism or not ?

With a view to properly comprehend the matter the following points should be dispassionate¬ly considered. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru in his ‘Discovery of India’ remarks, “An Indian Chris¬tian is looked upon as an Indian, wherever he may go. An Indin Moslem is considered an Indian in Turkey or Arabia or Iran or any other country, where Islam is the dominant religion.” He further adds that, “A Christian or a Moslem could and often did adapt himself to the Indian way of life and culture and yet remained in faith an orthodox Christian or Moslem. He had Indianised himself and became an Indian without changing his reli¬gion.” “In the countries of Western Asia, in Iran and Turkey, in Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt and else¬where India has always been referred to and is still called ‘Hind’ and everything Indian is called Hindi.” ( pp. 57, 74 ).

Swami Vivekanand’s observations are valuable, “The word Hindu by which it is the fashion nowa¬days to style ourselves has lost all its meanings, for this word merely meant those who lived on the other side of the river Indus (in Sanskrit Sindhu ). This name was murdered into Hindu by the ancient Persians and all persons living on the other side of the river Sindhu were called by them Hindus. Thus this word has come down to us and during the Mohammedan rule we took up the word our¬selves. There may not be any harm in using the word, of course, but, as I have said, it has lost its significance for you may mark that all the people who live on this side of the Indus in modern times do not follow the same religion as they did in ancient times. The word, therefore, covers not only Hindus proper but Mohammenans, Christians, Jains and other peoples who live in India. I, there¬fore, would not use the word Hindu. What word should be used then ? The other words which alone we can use are, either the Vedics, followers of the Veda or better still the Vedantists, follower of Vedanta.”

To call the inhabitant of Hindustan as ‘Hindi’ is quite rational, but if instead of this ‘Hindi’ we use the word ‘Hindu’, it creates lot of complica¬tions and difficulties As a matter of fact Hindi or Hindu would have meant the same thing, but by common usage and custom ‘Hindu’ word has taken a religious connotation and it is being used to describe the adherents of Vedic faith. Were it otherwise, the Moslems, Christians or Parsis would never have been described and treated as non- Hindus. The same logic applies to the followers of Jainism and Budhism Therefore they should be described as other than Hindus, since Jainism and Budhism are not part or parcel of the Vedic faith alias Hinduism or Brahmanical religion.

In this context it is necessary to discuss as to who are Jains ? Those who worship the 24 Jain Tirthankaras ( Super-men ) and have faith in their teachings, which abound in the philosophy of ‘Ahimsa’ and ‘Syadvada’. The followers of Vedic religion are called Hindus. The eminent Hindu jurist, Doctor Sir Harisingh Gour explains about the term Hindu in these words:— “We are called Hindus a term for which there is no scriptural authority. It is a term coined by the Muslim con¬querors of India to describe the non-decrepit people living in the cis-Indus country. At the most the term is about 300 years old, while Hinduism which we practise today is about 1200 years old”. The word Hindus is derived from the word Sindhu. The change of the word ‘Ha’ (|) into ‘Sa’ (g) is also in vogue. In the Marwadi language this is clearly visible. Therefore a Sanskrit poet has funnily ad¬monished that one should not accept blessings from the inhabitants of Marwar where ‘S’ is used for ‘H’ because if they want to say “live” for hundred years it will mean early death because the word “Satayu’* (CTcug) would take the form of “Hatayu” (^rrg) caus¬ing all the mischief, Sanskrit lexicons do not contain the word Hindu. The only Sanskrit work which makes men-tion of Hindu is Meru Tantra. Persian books do mention the word ‘Hind’. The Zendavesta of the Parsees uses, ‘Hapta, Hindu’ for ‘Sapta Sindhu,’ ‘Homa’ for ‘Soma’, ‘Hapta’ for ‘Sapta’ and ‘Ahura’ for ‘Asura’*.

The Aryans who had penetrated into India from Central Asia were called “Hindu” because of the river known as Indus. Later on the words obtained a religious connotation denoting the votaries of Hindu religion, who pin their faith in the Vedic lore. The Hindu Scholar Or. Sir Radha- krishnan opines ‘The Veda is the basis of Hindu religion. Hindu is one who adopts in his life and conduct any of the religious traditions developed in India on the basis of the Vedas’. This easily leads us to the conclusion [that Hindu stands for one who follows vedic religion. The Jains, who were apostles of perfect and pure Ahimsa doctrine have got no faith in the Vedas, which have sanctioned animal sacrifice and whereby innumberabe animals were butchered in the wholy name of religion.

The great Hindu author of Gita Rahsya, Lokmanya B. G. Tilak explains, ‘Hindu as, one who believes in the authority of the Vedas.’

This is enough to establish that the Jains and Budhists cannot be called Hindus since they do not regard the Vedas as their religious scriptures. The point has been made clear by Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru in these illuminating words, which are sure to convince every fair, just and rational mind§ “Budh¬ism and Jainism were certainly not Hinduism or even the Vedic Dharma. Yet they arose in India and were integral parts of Indian life, culture and philosophy. A Budhist or Jain, in India, is a hund¬red percent product of Indian thought and culture, yet neither is a Hindu by faith. It is therefore en¬tirely misleading to refer to Indian culture as Hindu culture.” ‘ The word ‘Hindu’ does not occur at all in our ancient literature. The famous Chinese pil¬grim It-Sing who came to India in the Seventh cen¬tury A. D. writes in his ‘Record of Travels’ that the northern tribes that is the people of Central Asia called India “Hindu” ( Hins-tu ) but he adds “this \s not at all a common name and the most suitable name for India is the ‘Noble Land' ( Arya-Desha ). The use of the word ‘Hindu’ in connection with a particular religion is of very late occurence”.

- Our great poet Dr Rabindra Nath Tagore also held Jains and Buddhists as different from Hindus. This point becomes clear for in his reputed ‘National Anthem’ ‘Jana Gana Mana...’ he enume¬rates Jains. Buddhists, Muslims, Parsees, Hindus etc., separately. Thou art the ruler of the minds of all people Dispenser of India’s destiny Day and night thy voice goes out from Land to land calling The Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, and Jains round Thy throne and the Parsecs, Musalmans and Christians Victory, victory, victory to Thee.

The great German Scholar Dr. Jacobi has come to the conclusion that Jainism has an entirely independent existence. Dr. A. Guiernot of Paris in ‘Jain Bibliographica’ says, “Jainism is very original, independent and systematic doctrine”. The great scholar of comparative religion Shri Vidya Varidhi Champatrai Bar-at-Law has come to the conclusion that Jainism is, in fact, a science and other reli-gions have concealed truth under beautiful allegories. “As Science precedes allegory”, in the word of Carlyle. “Jainism is the forerunner of all other religions.’ The learned scholar explaining his point says “Religion then, is a science and originated with the Jains. All the chief religious quarrels of men have arisen without exception through mytho¬logy and will end the moment it is thrown away by men. The descendants of former (Scientific Section) are termed ‘Jains’ today, those who allegorised first of all are the Hindus” (Rishabhadev).

K is worlhy of note that the Jain scriptures called llic Agamas, Jai.n God. and Jain religious preceptors arc quite different from those of Hindus. Jain worship, the mantras, Jain ideal of worship etc., arc quite different. The reputed Jain philosophy know as the doctrine of‘Syadvada’, which is highly respected by the modern people was vehemently opposed by reputed Hindu thinkers of yore called Badarayan and Shankaracharya. The Jains do not eat or use the offerings made in their worship. No spiritual or religious sanctity is attached to take a dip in a Stream or Sea. Animal sacrifice to propitiate any deity, flesh-eating or hunting for sport are strictly forbidden in Jainism. God is the perfect state of the Soul. The Creator, Sustainer and Destroyer God of Hinduism finds no place in Jainism. Jain Tirlhas, festivals, ethics, art, history and view of life are distinctly separate from those of Hindus. Posses- sionlessness or non-attachment is the hall-mark of Jainism. Therefore in keeping with this lofty ideal Jain Idols are nude. The views of non-Jains are quite separate & distinct.

In his Jain Law ( P. 18 ) Shri Champat Rai Barrister says; that the Jains do not regard any Hindu scripture as an authority nor do the Hindus attach any sancrity to any of the Jain Agamas-Shastras. If there is any similarity between Jains and Hindus it is with respect to some outward ceremonies; but the r import also is different. Similarity in dress and few other forms and customs is due to their long asso¬ciations, climatic common factors etc. It is unfair to run to the conclusion on the above basis that Jainism is not independent. In social and secular matters points of uniformity and similarity with the Muslims can also be seen but this would not lead one to the conclusion that Hinduism is not different from Islam. The harrowing and merciless persecution of Jains is also responsible for encouraging theJainsfor survival to adopt some of the Hindu formalities and ceremon¬ies, which did not effect the Jain faith or rules of conduct. The great Jain sage Somadeva has specially sanctioned ‘Jains to welcome all rites and ceremonies of other sects, provided they do not injure the sanctity of their faith or distract them from their rules of sacred conduct’. To pacify the greedy pries- hood the Jains, in their difficult times, engaged them to serve in their sacred places and also invited them to perform their matrimonial rites, still the guiding sacred literature was always non-Vedic. The Law of Jains is in fact separate from the Hindu Law. The following pertinent ^ remarks of Justice J. L. Jaini M. A., Bar-at-Law are useful in this regard. He observes “No doubt, in many things our legal system will take its color from the legal notions of our neighbours, even as in dress and many external things, we unconsciously imitate our neighbours. But the spirit of our Law remained as distinct from that of the Laws of Brahmins and others, as Jainism is different from the religion of the Vedas, Upnisha- das and Puranas. Well, in accordance with the conclusions of Montesquieu our climatic circums- tances being the same Jain Jurisprudence would run on lines similar to those of Hindu Jurisprudence. But the fundamental divergence between Hindu and Jain theology would work out most important dilfcrences in the principles and details of the two sysioms.”

The fancy dream of negativing the existence of Jains on the basis of Hindu Law disappears by the decisions of distinguished Hindu Judges of the High Courts of Bombay and Madras. Justice Rangnekar of the High Court of Judicature Bombay observes:-

“It is true the Jains reject the scriptural charac-ter of the Vedas and repudiate the Brahminical doctrines relating to obsequial ceremonies, the per-formance of shradhas and the offering of ablutions for the salvation of the soul of the deceased. Amongst them there is no belief that a son by birth or adop¬tion confers spiritual benefit on the father. They also clilT'cr from the Brahminical Hindus in their conduct towards the dead, omitting all obsequies after the corpse is burnt or buried. Now it is true as later historical researches have shown that Jainism prevai¬led in the country long before Brahminism came into existence or converted into Hinduism. It is also true that owing to their long association with the Hindus, who formed the majority in the country, the Jains have adopted many of the customs and even ceremonies strictly observed by the Hindus and pertaining to Brahminical religion.’’

The Acting Chief Justice Kumar-Swami Shastri makes the following remarks in 50 Madras, pp. 228, 229 and 230:-

“Were matters res integra, I would be inclined to hold that modern research has shown that the Jains are not Hindu dissenters but that Jainism has an origin and history long anterior to the Smrities and commentaries which are recognised authorities on Hindu Law and usage. In fact Mahavira, the last of the Jain Tirthankaras was a contemporary of Buddha and died about 527 B. C. The Jain religion refers to a number of previous Tirthankars and there can be little doubt that Jainism as distinct religion was flourshing several centuries before Christ. In fact Jainism reject the authority of the Vedas which form the bed-rock of Hinduism and denies the effica¬cy of the various ceremonies which Hindus consider essential. So far as Jain Law is concerned it has its own Law books of which Bhadra Bahu Samhita is an important one. Vardhaman Neeti and Arhana Neeti by the great Jain teacher Hemchandra deal also with Jain Law. No doubt, by long association with Hindus, who form the bulk of the population, Jainism has assimilated several of the customs and ceremonial practices of the Hindus. But this is no ground for applying the Hindu Law as developed by Vijyaneshwar and other commentators several centuries after Jainism. Jainism was a distinct and separate religion with its own religious ceremonial and legal system enblock to Jains and throwing on them the onus of showing that they are not bound by the law as laid down by the Jain law-givers. It seems to me that in considering question of Jain law, relating to adoption, succession and partition we have to see what the law as expounded by the Jain law-givers is, and to throw the onus on those who assert that in any particular matter the Jains have adopted the Hindu Law and customs and have not followed the law as laid down by their own Shastras.”

“ It is human in shape and feature, yet as inhuman as an icicle; and thus expresses perfectly the idea nl successful withtlrawal from the round of life and death, personal cares, individual Jestinv, desires, sufferings and events Hindu leader Shri V. D. Savarker, for India has been the lather-land as well as the holy land of Jains, therefore the Jains are Hindus.

This definition is faulty in as much as it is also applicable to the Muslims and Christians who are expressly accepted by all as non Hindus. India is the sacred land of the Khoja Muslims, for their Religious- Head Aga Khan belongs to Indian soil. Similarly the Divine of Roman Catholic Church St. Xaviers had died in the Bombay Presidency and so India became a sacred and holy land for Christians also. According to the new definition the Hindu territory of Kash- mere would hardly be treated a land of Hindus since it is not within the range of River Indus and the Indian Ocean. Furthermore when due to partition of India the West Punjab and the Province of Sindh have gone to the share of Moslems, the definition has now become utterly devoid of all sense and interest. This definition reminds us of the anecdote of Aristotle, who felt ashamed because his definition of man as an animal with two feet was shown fallacious by citing the example of a cock, who also possesses two feet. The President of the Constituent Assembly Dr. Rajendra Prasad had nominated a Jain representative to the Minority Advisory Committee to the Constituent Assembly. This supports the contention of the Jains that they cons¬titute as a separate entity. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the Prime Minister of India regards the Jains as an important minority community of the Indian Domi¬nion. In his Allahabad-speech on 3rd of September, 1949, Panditji said ‘No doubt India had a vast majority of Hindus, but they could not forget the fact that there are also minorities-Muslems, Christians, Parsls and Jains. If India was understood a ‘Hindu- Rashtra’ it meant that the minorities were not cent percent citizens of the country.

Reputed historian Dr. R. C. Mazumdar opines that the Brahminical religion of ancient India has now adopted a new nomenclature Hinduism. He observes “It is thus obvious that the foundation of that phase of Brahminical religion, which we call today Hinduism, were laid during the period under review.” (The Classical Age, chapter on Religion and Philosophy p. 366 ). From this it is evident that Jainism cannot be treated as a subsect of Hinduism, since ancient records prove that Jainism and Buddh-ism were separate from Brahmanism. The inscriptions of Asoka state that in the ancient period of Indian History Jainism and Buddhism were as independent as the then prevalent Brahminical religion, which is these days called by the familiar term Hinduism. Therefore this stand is inconsonance with reasoning that Jainism is a distinct and independent system of thought.

Conclusion :
In short Jainism is one of the most ancient religions of the world. It was founded by Lord Rishabhadeo. The august influence of Rishabhadeo is unique. To the world he gave the religion of Ahimsa termed as Jainism While he had renounced his royal pleasures at Prayag, modern Allahabad, the land has occupied a place of eminence in the galaxy of sacred places. When after a very long fast he had taken his first meal at Hastinapur near Delhi in the month of Baisakha sudi third-summer season the date has become conspicuous as a sacred day all over India. It is called Akshaya Tritiya This country is called Bharat after his emperor son Bharat Chakravarty-sovereign ruler. His other son was Bahubali called Gommateshwara. His monolithic 57 feet high majestic and magnificient image at Sravan- belgola ( Mysore State ) is a wonderful object of universal veneration. Thus the world is much in-debted to Lord Rishabhadeo for his supreme con-tributions. Mahavira was not the founder of Jainism. Before him twenty three Tirthankaras had flourished. History reveals the fact that under Jain rule the land was very glorious, powerful as well as peaceful. Those who are really interested in individual as well as universal peace ought to seriously ponder over Jainism and its ennobling culture.