On the Indian Sect of the Jainas by Johann Georg Bühler
page 4 of 72 (05%)
page 4 of 72 (05%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
in the North West Provinces, are just as numerous, if not more so, than
the latter, and also appear here and there in western Râjputâna and Gujarât: see _Indian Antiquary_, vol. VII, p. 28.]âeach of which is split up into several subdivisions. The Digambara, that is, "those whose robe is the atmosphere," owe their name to the circumstance that they regard absolute nudity as the indispensable sign of holiness, [Footnote: The ascetics of lower rank, now called Paá¹á¸it, now-a-days wear the costume of the country. The Bhaá¹á¹Ã¢raka, the heads of the sect, usually wrap themselves in a large cloth (_chadr_). They lay it off during meals. A disciple then rings a bell as a sign that entrance is forbidden (_Ind. Ant._ loc. cit.). When the present custom first arose cannot be ascertained. From the description of the Chinese pilgrim Hiuen Tsiang (St. Julien, _Vie._ p. 224), who calls them Li-hi, it appears that they were still faithful to their principles in the beginning of the seventh century A.D. "The Li-hi (Nirgranthis) distinguish themselves by leaving their bodies naked and pulling out their hair. Their skin is all cracked, their feet are hard and chapped: like rotting trees that one sees near rivers."]âthough the advance of civilization has compelled them to depart from the practice of their theory. The Åvetâmbara, that is, "they who are clothed in white"âdo not claim this doctrine, but hold it as possible that the holy ones, who clothe themselves, may also attain the highest goal. They allow, however, that the founder of the Jaina religion and his first disciples disdained to wear clothes. They are divided, not only by this quarrel, but also by differences about dogmas and by a different literature. The separation must therefore be of old standing. Tradition, too, upholds thisâthough the dates given do not coincide. From inscriptions it is certain that the split occurred before the first century of our era. [Footnote: See below p. 44.] Their opposing opinions are manifested in the fact that they do not allow each other the right of intermarriage or of eating at the same |
|