with the intention of combining their sects and fusing them into one. The fact that these two teachers lived together for a long period, presupposes, it would appear, some similarity between their opinions. I have already pointed out above, in the note on <page xxvi>, that the expression sabbe satta sabbe pana sabbe bhuta sabbe giva is common to both Gosala and the Gainas, and from the commentary we learn that the division of animals into ekendriyas, dvindriyas, &c., which is so common in Gaina texts, was also used by Gosala. The curious and almost paradoxical Gaina doctrine of the six Lesyas closely resembles, as Professor Leumann was the first to perceive, Gosala's division of mankind into six classes; but in this particular I am inclined to believe that the Gainas borrowed the idea from the Agivikas and altered it so as to bring it into harmony with the rest of their own doctrines. With regard to the rules of conduct the collective evidence obtainable is such as to amount nearly to proof that Mahavira borrowed the more rigid rules from Gosala. For as stated in the Uttaradhyayana XXIII, 13, <page 121>, the Law of Parsva allowed monks to wear an under and upper garment, but the Law of Vardhamana forbade clothes. A term for naked friar, frequently met with in the Gaina Sutras, is akelaka, literally 'unclothed.' Now the Buddhists distinguish between Akelakas and Niganthas; e.g. in Buddhaghosa's commentary on the Dhammapadam it is said of some Bhikkhus that they gave the preference to the Niganthas before the Akelakas, because the latter are stark naked (sabbaso apatikkhanna), while the Niganthas use some sort of cover 'for the sake of decency,' as was wrongly assumed by those Bhikkhus. The Buddhists denote