1898.] Annual Address. 43 



the instance I have noted is an instructive one in that respect : isolated 

 coincidences possess very little evidential force. ^ With regard to 

 Buddhism and Jainism there are numerous coincidences in smaller 

 details between tlie lives and doctrines of Buddha and Maliavira ; and 

 this circumstance was long considered a good reason for discrediting 

 the story of the latter and of the early existence of the Jain sect. But 

 the sketch of Mahavlra's life which I have given above shows that in 

 the main it was entirely different from Buddha's. 



Before touching on the alleged doctrinal and ceremonial coincidences, 

 it may be well to point out that neither Buddhism nor Jainism are 

 religions in the strict sense of that word. They are rather monastic 

 organizations. They are orders of begging fraternities, in many 

 respects similar to the Dominicans and Franciscans among ourselves. 

 Both were founded at the end of the sixtii and beginning of the fifth 

 centuries B.C. That period was a very active one in Northern India 

 with respect to religious matters. The times were rife with religious 

 movements. Many monastic orders sprung up: Buddhism and Jainism 

 were only two among tliem, though they were the most important and 

 most enduring. A third contemporary order, that of the Ajivikas, 

 which only enjoyed a transitory existence, has been already mentioned 

 by me incidentally. It must not be thought, however, that the institu- 

 tion of monasticism was any innovation on the existing religious condi- 

 tions of the country. That institute formed an essential part of the 

 original Brahmanism. The old Brahmanic religion ordained man's life 

 to be spent in four consecutive stages, called A9ramas. A man was to 

 commence life as a religious student, then to proceed to be a householder, 

 next to go into retirement as an anchorite, and finally to spend the 

 declining years of his life as a wanderinjr Sanyasin or mendicant. These 

 Sanyasins or Brahmanic mendicants form the prototype of the great 

 monastic orders that arose in the sixth century B.C., the only difference 

 apparently being that the Brahmanic mendicants never formed them- 

 selves into such large organisations as the Buddhists and Jains, The 

 rules and observances which were prescribed for the former were either 

 adopted or imitated by the latter. It is this circumstance whitih ex- 

 plains most of the coincidences that have been noticed between the Bud- 

 dhists and Jains : tliey followed the same model. Thus to mention but one 

 striking example, the rule of ahim^d or 'I'espeet for life ' which forms 

 such a prominent feature in Buddhism and even more so in Jainism, 

 is one which was binding on all Brahmanic mendicants. In course of 

 time a tendency arose in Brahmanism to limit the entry into the stage' 



8 For another curious coincidence, relating to the parable of the Three 

 Merchants, see Jacobi's Translation of th-e Uttaradhyayaua Sutra, p. 29. 



