the meal, in which he forbade his disciples to partake of the flesh of such animals as had been killed on their account.  The legend also corroborates the account in the Jaina works, according to which Vardhamana often resided in Vai[’s]ali and had a strong following in that town.  It is probably related to show that his sect was stricter, as regards the eating of flesh, than the Buddhists, a point, which again agrees with the statutes of the Jainas. [Footnote:  S.B.E.  Vol.  XVII, pp. 108-117.]

The account of Nataputta’s death is still more important.  “Thus I heard it”, says an old book of the Singalese canon, the Samagama Sutta, “once the Venerable one lived in Samagama in the land of the Sakya.  At that time, however, certainly the Niga[n.][t.]ha Nataputta had died in Pava.  After his death the Niga[n.][t.]ha wandered about disunited, separate, quarrelling, fighting, wounding each other with words.” [Footnote:  The passage is given in the original by Oldenberg, Leitsch. der D. Morg.  Ges.  Bd.  XXXIV, S. 749.  Its significance in connection with the Jaina tradition as to their schisms has been overlooked until now.  It has also been unnoticed that the assertion, that Vardhamana died during Buddha’s lifetime, proves that the latest account of this occurrence given by traditions 467 B.C. is false:  Later Buddhist legends (Spence Hardy, Manual of Budhism, pp. 266-271) treat of Nataputta’s death in more detail.  In a lengthy account they give as the cause of the same the apostacy of one of his disciples, Upali who was converted by Buddha.  After going over to Buddhism, Upali treated his former master with scorn, and presumed to relate a parable which should prove the foolishness of those who believed in false doctrines.  Thereupon the Niga[n.][t.]ha fell into despair.  He declared his alms-vessel was broken, his existence destroyed, went to Pava, and died there.  Naturally no importance is to be given to this account and its details.  They are apparently the outcome of sect-hatred.] Here we have complete confirmation of the statement of the Jaina canon as to the place where Vardhamana entered Nirva[n.]a, as well as of the statement that a schism occurred immediately after his death.

The harmony between the Buddhist and Jaina tradition, as to the person of the head of the Nirgrantha is meanwhile imperfect.  It is disturbed by the description of Nataputta as a member of the Brahmanic sect of the Agnive[’s]yayana, whilst Vardhamana belonged to the Ka[’s]yapa.  The point is however so insignificant, that an error on the part of the Buddhists is easily possible. [Footnote:  According to Jacobi’s supposition, S.B.E.  Vol.  XXII, p. xvi, the error was caused, by the only disciple of Vardhamana, who outlived his master, Sudharman being an Agnive[’s]yayana.] It is quite to be understood that perfect exactness is not to be expected among the Buddhists or any other sect in describing the person of a hated enemy.  Enmity and scorn, always present, forbid that.  The most that one can expect is that the majority and most important of the facts given may agree.