The account of Nâtaputta's death is still more important. "Thus I heard it", says an old book of the Singalese canon, the _Sâmagâma Sutta_, "once the Venerable one lived in Sâmagâma in the land of the Sâkya. At that time, however, certainly the Nigaṇṭha Nâtaputta had died in Pâvâ. After his death the Nigaṇṭha 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 Vardhamâna 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 Nâtaputta's death in more detail. In a lengthy account they give as the cause of the same the apostacy of one of his disciples, Upâli who was converted by Buddha. After going over to Buddhism, Upâli 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 Nigaṇṭha fell into despair. He declared his alms-vessel was broken, his existence destroyed, went to Pâva, 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 Vardhamâna entered _Nirvâṇa_, 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 Nâtaputta as a member of the Brâhmanic sect of the Âgniveśyâyana, whilst Vardhamâna belonged to the Kâśyapa. 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 Vardhamâna, who outlived his master, Sudharman being an Âgniveśyâyana.] 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.