on No. 4. which is dated
in the year 9 of the king Kanishka or 87. A.D. (?) gives us a somewhat
ancient form of the name of the _ga[n.]a Ko[t.]iya_ and that of one
of its branches exactly corresponding to the _Vairi ['s]akha_.
Mutilated or wrongly written, the first word occurs also in inscriptions
Nos. 2, 6 and 9 as _koto-, ke[t.][t.]iya_, and _ka_ ..., the
second in No. 6 as _Vora_. One of the families of this
_ga[n.]a_, the _Va[n.]iya kula_ is mentioned in No. 6, and
perhaps in No. 4. The name of a second, the _Pra['s]navaha[n.]aka_,
seems to have appeared in No. 19. The last inscription mentions also
another branch of the Ko[t.]iya ga[n.]a, the _Majhima sakha_, which,
according to the _Kalpasutra,_ was founded by Priyagantha the second
disciple of Susthita. Two still older schools which, according to
tradition, sprang from the fourth disciple of the eighth patriarch, along
with some of their divisions appear in inscriptions Nos. 20 and 10. These
are the _Aryya-Udehikiya ga[n.]a_, called the school of the
Arya-Roha[n.]a in the _Kalpasutra_, to which belonged the
_Parihasaka kula_ and the _Purnapatrika ['s]akha,_ as also the
_Chara[n.]a ga[n.]a_ with the _Pritidharmika kula._ Each of
these names is, however, somewhat mutilated by one or more errata in
writing. [Footnote: Dr. Buehler's long note (p. 48) on these inscriptions
was afterwards expanded in the _Wiener Zeitschrift fur die Kunde des
Morgenlandes_ Bd. I, S. 165-180; Bd. II, S. 141-146. Bd. III, S.
233-240; and Bd. IV, S. 169-173. The argument of these papers is
summarised in. Appendix. A, pp. 48 ff.--Ed.] The statements in the
inscriptions about the teachers and their schools are of no small
importance in themselves for the history of the Jainas. If, at the end of
the first century A.D.(?) many separate schools of Jaina ascetics existed,
a great age and lively activity, as well as great care as regards the
traditions of the sect, may be inferred. The agreement of the inscriptions
with the _Kalpasutra_ leads still further however: it proves on the
one side that the Jainas of Mathura were ['S]vetambara, and that the
schism, which split the sect into two rival branches occurred long before
the beginning of our era. On the other hand it proves that the tradition
of the Svetambara really contains ancient historic elements, and by no
means deserves to be looked upon with distrust. It is quite probable that,
like all traditions, it is not altogether free from error. B