________________
11
detached themselves from the original stock. This is the judicial shibboleth met with in the Law Reports and acted upon as the surest touchstone of justice where Jaina rights are concerned.
For ages schoolboys have been taught: "Jainism is a compromise between Hinduism and Buddhism." Thus, by implication, Jainism would be subsequent to both. Even learned text-writers have fallen into and repeated the error. E.g., Golûp Chandra Sarkâr Sastri, in Hindu Law of Adoption (T.L.L. for 1888) Edition 1891, at p. 452. The same author repeats that Jainas may be called Hindu dissenters, that Jaina Yatis are Digambaras who follow Mahavira, and Svetumbaras who follow Pârsvanâth; and that Jainism originated in the N.-W.P.
But all these statements are entirely wrong. Jainism is not a compromise between Hinduism and Buddhism. It is far otherwise. Dr. Thomas (quoted in J. H. Nelson's Scientific Study of Hindu Law, 1881, at pages 91-2) is making a statement along the lines of history and Jaina tradition. The learned Doctor holds Buddhism to be an off-shoot of Jainism, and proceeds: "It is sufficient to observe that the history of the Jaina religion, when constructed, must be of prime importance to the student of Hindu Law, because it will show beyond all possibility of doubt that Jainists are not Hindus and cannot legally be subjected to the Hindu
INHERITANOE AND PARTITION.
