Page #1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ THE DATE OF VIDYANANDA : LITERARY AND EPIGRAPHICAL EVIDENCE M. A. Dhaky Vidyananda, and Manikyanandi (of the Pariksamukha fame), the pontiffs of the Southern Church, alongwith Siddharsi (active c. A. D. 880-920)' of the Northern Church, belong to the last batch of the great epistemologists within the ambit of the Brhad-Nirgrantha tradition. Vidyananda's known works, some of which are famous, are the Tattvartha-sloka-varttika?, the Astasahasri, the Yuktyanusasanalankara", the Vidyananda-mahodaya', the Apta-pariksa", the Pramana-pariksa', the Patra-pariksa, the satyasasana-pariksa', and the Sripura-Parsvanatha-stotra. The writers of this century had for long been placing him between the last quarter of the eighth and the first quarter of the ninth century A. D. and thus to the pre-medieval times. While late K. B. Pathak is one of the earliest to situate him in c. A. D. 816, but without producing much supporting evidence, it was Darbarilal Kothiya who collected much of the vital evidence which had bearing on the issue and presented it in his "Introduction" in Hindi to Vidyananda's Apta-pariksa where he almost convincingly fixed his date to c. A. D. 775-840" Kothiya's main points (which incidentally includes, according to his method of investigation, an observation that Vidyananda did not anywhere refute Vacaspati Misra, the famous mid 9th century scholiast and commentator of the works belonging to various darsanas) had been summarized by Gokul Chandra Jain in his "Introduction" in Hindi to the Satyasasan[a] Pariksa, pp. 29-31. Nathmal Tatiya, in his prefatory paper, "A compendium of Vidyananda's Satyasasana-pariksa" to the Satyasasan[a] Pariksa edited by Jain, had, however, pointed out that Vidyananda, in the Satyasasana-pariksa, had in point of fact quoted an inaugural verse from the Bhamati-tika on the Nyaya-varttika of Udyotakara (c. 6th-7th cent. A. D.) as cited by Vacaspati Misra, and also had drawn attention to a reference by Vidyananda to Misra himself at another place there as "Nyayavarttikakara"12 Seemingly based on the indicators in Tatiya's prefatory, Jain, in his aforementioned "Introduction," cited the relevant verse and the phrase from Vidyananda, which went against Kothiya's assertion that Vidyananda did not refute Vacaspati Misra"3. Vidyananda, on this showing, has to be placed some time after A. D. 850. Since the style of writing of Vidyananda (as of Siddharsi's) and also the phrasing, choice of words, as well as approach betray the colour and flavour of medievalism, further doubts arise about his so far conceded early date. In point of fact, the suspicion is well-founded as will now be shown. For determining Vidyananda's more precise date, a re-engraved copy in c. mid 12th century of an earlier inscription of s.s.993/A. D. 1071-1072 from Gavarvad (medieval Gavarivada) in Karnataka! is very helpful. In this inscription, the donee is a Digambara Jaina divine Tribhuvanacandra whose hagiological history is given, and therein Vidyananda finds a mention as a confrere of Manikyanandi. (See the Table appended at the paper's end.)
Page #2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ M. A. Dhaky Nirgrantha The inscription gives one information which is crucial in determining Vidyananda's date. It states that Ganga Permadi (Satyavakya Permanadi alias Marasimha II (who is not the Ganga prince Satyavakya Racamalla II), founded a Jaina temple at Annigere (Annigeri) in memory of his father Ganga Butuga II (and this is not Butuga I as Kothiya had determined, or surmised or may be had depended on some other earlier scholar's determination) and handed it over to Gunakirtti, the disciple of Manikyanandi; and Manikyanandi has been mentioned there as a confrere, possibly senior, of Vidyananda. The known dates, according to the available inscriptions, of Ganga Permadi fall between c. A. D. 962 and 974. The Annigere temple, therefore, may plausibly have been founded and made over to Gunakirtti during those years. Assuming that Gunakirtti's guru Manikyanandi by that date was not alive and Gunakirtti himself was fairly advanced in age, the date of Manikyanandi, and hence of Vidyananda, can be broadly bracketed between A. D. 900-950 or about 100-125 years posterior to what had been surmised by Kothiya and the writers beforels and after him. In this connection Barnnet's remarks are worth noting. "One is tempted to identify this pair of scholars with the famous Vidyananda-Patrakesari and the latter's disciple Manikyanandi, who wrote the Pariksha-Mukha and its commentary Prameya-chandrika. But Mr. Pathak has shown reasons for believing that VidyanandaPatrakesari is referred to in the preface of Jinasena's Adi-purana, and that the former was an older contemporary of Manikyanandi, the author of Pariksha-mukha; and Jinasena's latest date is Saka 820 (J.B.B.R.S. 1892, p. 219 ff.) Now the Manikyanandi of our inscription must have been living shortly before Saka 890, since his disciple Gunakirtti was contemporary with the Ganga Permali, hence the gap between the two dates cannot be bridged over." But Jinasena in the Adipurana (c. A. D. 830-839) referred to Patrakesari and not to Vidyananda : For Vidyananda and Patrakesari, though for long confounded, are not the same persons. Parrakesari is an earlier Digambara epistemologist who flourished some time in the seventh century as was conclusively proven by Jugalkishor Mukhtar". Also, Manakyanandi was not the disciple but, as has been shown, the confrere of Vidyananda as is clear from the Gavarvad inscription. And the temporal bracket of the concerned Ganga Permadi's activities is c. A. D. 962974. The epithets mahavadi (the great dialectician) for Vidyananda and tarkikarka (the sun among logicians) for Manikyanandi used in the inscription, leave no doubt that no other Vidyananda and Manikyanandi but those two illustrious epistemologists are implicit in that context. Likewise, this is the only inscription which mentions these two notable figures. Also, the divine Tribhuvanacandra's claim of succession from those two illustrious pontiffs does neither seem spurious ror a pretence. No attempt at appropriation of these great names by way of establishing a glorious lineage for himself can be smelled in the draft; or else, some other wellknown names such as Samantabhadra, Patrakesari, Devanandi, and Akalankadeva could as well have figured. The hagiography has all the
Page #3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ Vol. 11-1996 The Date of Vidyananda.... 27 appearance of being unambiguous and hence of indubitable genuineness. The temporal bracket of Vidyananda, on this showing, can now firmly be ascertained to have been between A. D. 900 and 950 as noted earlier in the discussions Mula Sangha-Nandi Sangha (Valgara-gana) Ganganvaya-guru Vardhamana Mahavadi Vidyananda-svami Tarkikara Manikyanandi + Gunakirtti Contemporary of Ganga Permadi (c. A. D. 962-974) Vimalacandra Gunacandra Gandavimukta I Abhaynandi Siddhantika Sakalacandra Sarvamalanvita Gandavimukta II Mantravadi Tribhuvanacandra (Ins. A. D. 1071-1072) ANNOTATIONS : 1. Siddharsi's most famous works are the Upamitibhavaprapanca-katha (Sanskrit) (A. D. 905) and his commentary in Sanskrit (c. A. D. 900) on the Upadesamala of Sanghadasa gani (c. mid 6th cent. A. D.). Recently, I have shown that the Nyayavatara, a famous dvatrimsika in Sanskrit on the Nirgrantha pramanasastra, is not the work of Siddhasena Divakara (c. A. D. 400-444) as had been held by many but of Siddharsi : (Cf. "The Date and Authorship of Nyayavatara", Nirgrantha I, Ahmedabad 1996.) Also may be added the sakrastava as Siddharsi's work, though hitherto steadfastly, insistently, but wrongly attributed to Siddhasena Divakara. This is a further commentary on the southern adoption of the Tattvarthadhigamasutra of Umasvati (c. A. D. 350-375), the latter work is called the Tattvartha-sutra in the fold of the Digambara Jaina sect. 3. This is an enlarged commentary incorporating the Astasati of Bhatta Akalankadeva (active c. A. D. 730-780) on the Aptamimamsa of Samantabhadra (C. A. D. 575-625). 4. The work is a commentary on the Yuktyanusasana of Samantabhadra. 5. Vidyananda has referred to this work in his Tattvartha-sloka-varttika and in
Page #4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ M. A. Dhaky Nirgrantha the Astasahasri. The work till now is unavailable. 6. The work has been inspired by the inaugural verse of the Sarvarthasiddhi-tika on the Tattvartha-sutra by Pujyapada Devanandi (active c. A. D. 635-680). 7. Probably inspired by Akalankadeva's Pramana-sangraha as well as plausibly some other works of a few preceding authors. 8. It embodies a critical analysis on the characteristics of 'patra'. 9. The work compares the epistemological stands of other philosophical schools with that of the Nirgrantha. Ed. Gokul Chandra Jain, JMJGSG No. 30, Calcutta-VaranasiDelhi 1964. The information in annotations 1-9,11, and 12 in this paper has been abstracted from Gokul Chandra's "Introduction" in Hindi of the selfsame work, pp. 32-34. 10. This is a hymn addressed to Jina Parsva of Sripura, the latter place was a tirtha in that period, situated as it probably was somewhere in Karnataka. 11. Cf. G. C. Jain, "Introduction" to SSP. 12. Tatia, "A Compendium.," p. 13. 13. Jain, p. 8. There is also other evidence inside Vidyananda's work. For example his citing from Suresvara Misra's Sambandha-varttika. Suresvaracarya was the principal disciple of Sankaracarya whose traditional date is A. D. 780-812. The reference to 'Satyavakyadhipa' in some of the Vidyananda's works had been taken by Kothiya (and possibly by Pathak) as Ganga Racamalla Satyavakya, the nephew and successor of Ganga Sivamara I (Jain, "Introduction," p.31.) However, "Satyavakya" was also the title of Ganga Permanadi (Marasimha II) (c. A. D. 963-974), son of Ganga Butuga II. And it is he who is implied in the context under discussion 14. Cf. L. D. Barnett, "Two inscriptions from Gawarwad and Annigeri of the Reign of Somesvara II : Saka 993 and 994," Epigraphia Indica, Vol. XV, 1919-20, pp. 337-348. 15. Cf. Mahendrakumar Jain, "2. The Authors, T. Vidyananda :" Siddhivinishchaya-tika of Shri Anantaviryacharya, the commentary on Siddhivinishchaya and its Vritti of Bhatta Akalanka Deva, 7 Jnanapitha Murtidivi Jain, Granthamala, SG 22, V.S. 2015 (A. D. 1959), pp. 49, 50. Pt. Jugal Kishor Mukhtar also believed Vidyananda to be of ninth century. (Cf. "Svami Patrakesari aur Vidyananda," Jaina Sahitya aur Itihasa par Visada Prakasa, (Hindi). Calcutta 1965, p. 652. 16. Cf. Barnett, pp.338, infra 2. 17. Cf. "Swami Patrakesari.," Jaina Sahitya aur Itihasa. pp.637-667. 18. Vidyadhara Joharapurkar, in his "Introduction", summarizes the content of the Gavarvada inscription but offers no comment on the implications which have a vital bearing on the date of Vidyananda as also of Manikyanandi. (Cf. Jaina silalekha Sangraha, MDJG No. 48, Varanasi V. N. 2491/A. D.1964, pp. 10, 11.)