44 Annual Address. [Feb. 



of a mendicant to persons of the Brahman caste. It is probably this 

 circumstance which first led to the formation of non-brahmanic 

 orders such as those of the Buddhists and Jains, which were 

 chiefly and originally intended for persons of the second or 

 Ksatriya caste, though eventually other caste-men were also admitted. 

 It is easy to understand that tliese non-brahmanic orders would 

 not be looked upon by the Sanyasins as quite their equals, even 

 when they were quite as orthodox as themselves, and on the other hand 

 that this treatment by the Bralimanic ascetics would beget in their 

 rivals a tendency to dissent and even to opposition. Thus the 

 Buddhists and Jains were not only led to discard the performance of 

 religious ceremonies which was also done by the Brahmanic mendicants, 

 but to go further and even discontinue the reading of the Vedas. It was 

 this latter practice which really forced them outside the pale of Brah- 

 manism. The still very prevalent notion that Buddhism and Jainism 

 were reformatory movements, and that, more especially, they represented a 

 revolt against the tyranny of caste, is quite erroneous. They were only 

 a protest against the caste exclusiveness of the Brahmanic ascetics ; but 

 caste as such, and as existing outside their orders, wa,s fully acknowledged 

 by them. Even inside their orders, admission, though professedly 

 open to all, was practically limited to the higher castes. It is also 

 significant for the attitude of these orders to the Brahmanic institutions 

 of the country, that though in spiritual matters their so-called lay- 

 adherents were bound to their guidance, yet with regard to ceremonies, 

 such as those of birth, marriage and death, they had to look for service 

 to their old Brahmanic priests. The Buddhist or Jain monk functionated 

 as the spiritual director to their respective lay communities, but the 

 Brahmans were their priests. 



It will thus be seen that the points of resemblance, undoubtedly 

 existing between the orders of the Buddhists and Jains, are the natural 

 result of the surrounding conditions under which they both arose and 

 lived. Their points of difference are numerous, both in regard to doctrine 

 and practice. They are so many, and often so minute and technical, 

 that it would be difficult for me to render them intelligible within a small 

 compass ; nor would such an exposition be of any general interest. 

 Those whom it may interest, will find the subject fully and ably discuss- 

 ed by Professor Jacobi in the Introductions to his Translations (see 

 footnote, on p. 3). I may mention, however, two points which I believe 

 have not been elsewhere noticed, but which, to my mind, very clearly 

 bring out the extreme difference in the character and practice of the 

 two orders. There is a celebrated term common to both the Buddhists 

 and Jains ; the term tri-ratna or " the three jewels." With the former 



