132 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [N.S., XV, 
vas just a concourse of four elements, the space being the 
repository of the senses, the soul being just a chemical product 
of matter and nothing more. Ajita rendered a great service to 
Indian philosophy by the positive side of his philosophy which 
was directed against the dualistic or pluralistic theory of Kac- 
cayana _ That which is psychical is corporeal. ‘ Tam jivo tam 
sariram.’’ Thus Mahavira and Buddha fitly described the main 
content of Ajita’s doctrine. What Ajita really contemplated 
was not to identify body with soul, or matter with spirit, 
but to point out that a particular object of experience must 
be — viewed as an. indivisible 
the chieftain Payasi who idneee on the line of Ajita 
Ajita’s doctrine to be a doctrine of non-action gg eam A 
thus deprived life of its zest. However his service to Mahavira 
and dha was considerable: (1) He led them to think of 
waalite or real object as a single indivisible whole, and (2) he 
led them to seek for the ground of moral distinctions in the 
volition of mind rather than anything else 
urana Kassapa.—The Buddhist Samafifiaphala Sutta 
gives a distorted, mutilated picture of the philosophical specula- 
tions of Purana Kassapa. The Buddhist teachers are led by their 
moral predilection to judge only the moral bearing of Kassapa’s 
philosophy. They assert that P. Ka assapa rules oh: the wot 
i 
doctrine under Akiriyavada. The Buddhist account keeps the 
— side of Aite s philosophy in the background. How- 
important passage of the Jaina Sutrakritanga®* 
x ae inten that his was really a theory of the passivity 
ou 
of ‘Wh a man acts or causes seg to act, it is 
- his soul which acts or causes t akarayu 
a).” The Jaina commentators identify this doctrine with 
the Sankhya philosophy which also posits soul as a passive 
ner he conceived the part played by the soul in the conscious 
experience of the individual. The Sankhya system speaks 
no doubt of soul as a mere passive spectator while prakriti 
performs all active functions of the body and the mind. 
But he tried to get over the difficulty by asserting that the 
| Sutrakritaénga, 2 1. 15-17. 2 Sutrakritanga, 1. I. 13. 
