The Cambridge History of India, Vol. I: Ancient India v1.c18.11

v1.c18.11

For a considerable time European scholars were unable to form a clear opinion on the rise and growth of Jainism owing to the absence of original texts which were then scarcely available in Europe. Thus the older generations of Sanskrit scholars may be said to have shared principally two different opinions on these matters. Colebrooke, Prinsep, Stevenson, E. Thomas, and others thought Jainism to be older than Buddhism—an opinion to which we may now willingly subscribe—mainly from the reason, that a disciple of Mahāvīra called Indrabhūti Gautama was held to be the same person as Gautama the Buddha. On the other hand, other distinguished Orientalists such as H. H. Wilson, Lassen, and even Weber, were of the opinion that Jainism was only one of the many different sects into which Buddhism was divided at an earlier or later date after the death of Buddha. Such a view might easily be held on the basis of certain somewhat striking resemblances which are found in the Buddhist and Jain records of which at that time only a comparatively small number had found their way to Europe. This latter hypothesis has now been thoroughly refuted by the works of two eminent German scholars, Bühler and Jacobi, who have laid down a sure foundation for our knowledge of Jainism by a thorough investigation of its old canonical texts and a comparison of these with the scriptures of the Buddhists and Brāhmans. Starting therefore from the standard works on Jainism published by Professor Jacobi, and making use of the materials, which have been collected and examined by other scholars, we are now able to obtain a fairly clear view of the early history of Jainism.