Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of Indian Literature v2.c26: Appendix VI. The Year of the Death of Mahāvīra

A History of Indian Literature v2.c26

Language
English

Appendix VI. The Year of the Death of Mahāvīra

v2.c26.2

According to the usual chronology of the Śvetāmbara Jainas, Mahāvīra died 470 years before the beginning of the Vikrama era, *i.e.*, in 527 B.C., but according to the Digambaras, in 605 B.C. These dates are probably based upon erroneous calculations, for they are as difficult to reconcile with the one and only firmly established fact, namely that Buddha and Mahāvīra were contemporaries and lived in the reigns of Kings Bimbisāra and Ajātaśatru, as they are with other traditions of the Jainas themselves. There is a tradition of the Jainas, which can be traced as far back as the 11th century A.D., according to which Candragupta was anointed king 155 years after the death of Mahāvīra. Now it is true that even the date of Candragupta's coronation is by no means certain. Otto *Stein* (Archiv Orientální 1, 1929, 354 ff., 368 ff.) has shown that Candragupta cannot have been crowned king before 318-17 B.C. If we assume 317 B.C., hypothetically, as the coronation year, then the Nirvāṇa of Mahāvīra would have taken place in 473-72 B.C., and that of Buddha in 480-79 or 483-82 B.C., according to whether we assume 28 or 25 years as the length of Bindusāra's reign. J. *Charpentier* (Ind. Ant., 43, 1914, 118 ff., 125 ff., 167 ff. and Cambridge History, I, 150 ff.) has attempted to prove that Buddha died in 477 B.C. and Mahāvīra in 467 B.C. H. *Jacobi*, who formerly (The Kalpasūtra of Bhadrabāhu Ed., Introduction, p. 6 ff.) had likewise assumed the date 467 B.C., now accepts (Buddhas und Mahāvīras Nirvāṇa und die politische Entwicklung Magadhas zu jener Zeit in SBA, 1930, p. 557 ff.) 484 B.C. as the year of Buddha's death and 477 B.C. as that of Mahāvīra, as a " sure foundation " for the history of Magadha, and he sets out from the year 322 B.C. as the year of Candragupta's coronation. S. V. *Venkateswara*, JRAS, 1917, 122 ff., has tried to prove that Māhavīra could not have died earlier than 437 B.C.

v2.c26.3

None of these datings can be reconciled with the tradition, preserved in three different passages in the Pāli Canon (Dīgha III, 117, 210; Majjhima II, 243f.) and also in the Chinese Dīrghāgama (s. S. *Behrsing* in Asia Major VII, 1931, p. 1ff), that the Nighaṇṭa Nātaputta died a short time before Gotama. *Jacobi* SBA 1930, 558 ff., assumes that this report was only invented in order to connect with it the story of the quarrels in the community of the Nighaṇṭas after the death of the Master. Of course, this is possible, but I have grave doubts that such a report which, as the Chinese translation shows, belongs to an earlier Canon, should be mere invention. I should prefer to say that the real date of Mahāvīra's Nirvāṇa is still unknown.

v2.c26.4

*Cf.* also K. B. *Pathak* in Ind. Ant. 12, 1883, p. 21f.; *Hoernle* in ERE I, 261; *Smith*, Early History (4th ed.), pp. 34, 48f., and *Guérinot*, La religion Djaina, p. 41.

Linked texts (5)