Jambu Jyoti

Author(s): M A Dhaky, Jitendra B Shah
Publisher: Kasturbhai Lalbhai Smarak Nidhi Ahmedabad
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/006503/1

Page #1

Jambū-jyoti
(Munivara Jambūvijaya Festschrift)
Editors M. A. Dhaky J. B. Shah
Shresthi Kasturbhai Lalbhai Smarak Nidhi
Ahmedabad-380 004. (Gujarat) INDIA
Selle
lion international

www.jame brary.org

Page #2

JAMBŪ-JYOTI

Page #3

Shresthi Kasturbhai Lalbhai Smarak Nidhi (Ahmedabad)

General Editor Jitendra B. Shah
VOLUME-7

Page #4

Jambū-jyoti
(Munivara Jambūvijaya Festschrift)
Editors M. A. Dhaky J. B. Shah
Shresthi Kasturbhai Lalbhai Smarak Nidhi Sharadaben Chimanbhai Educational Research Centre
‘Darshan Opp. Ranakpur Society Shahibaug Ahmedabad-380 004 (Gujarat State) INDIA

Page #5

Shresthi Kasturbhai Lalbhai Smarak Nidhi Vol.7
Jambū-jyoti (Munivar Jambūvijaya Festschrift)
Editors M. A. Dhaky J. B. Shah
Published by
J. B. Shah Shresthi Kasturbhai Lalbhai Smarak Nidhi Sharadaben Chimanbhai Educational Research Centre
'Darshan' Opp. Ranakpur Society Shahibaug Ahmedabad-380 004 (Gujarat State) INDIA Phone : 079-22868739. Fax : 079-22862026
E-mail : sambodhi@sify.com Website : www.scerc.org
© Shresthi Kasturbhai Lalbhai Smarak Nidhi
Price : Rs. 800-00
Computer Type Setting Sharadaben Chimanbhai Educational Research Centre
'Darshan' Opp. Ranakpur Society Shahibaug Ahmedabad-380 004 (Gujarat State) INDIA
Printer Shivkrupa Offset Printers
27, Amrut Ind. Estate Opp. Dudheswar Water Tank
Dudheswar, Ahmedabad-4. Phone : 25623828, 25625698

Page #6

Foreword
With considerable delight and profound reverence, our Centre proffers this Felicitatory Volume to Muni Śrī Jambūvijayajī who is held in esteem both in India and in the West by scholars specialized in the fields of Indology and Jainology. We feel indebted to the scholars who have contributed to this Volume, several of whom, we are aware, must have worked for months in conducting indepth research to produce insightful results in their articles which they, on our request, sent as a token of their appreciation and respect for Muniji. We wish to thank them all. We would also like to thank the two learned editors of this Volume--Prof. M. A. Dhaky and Dr. Jitendra Shah-as well as the Centre's staff who assisted at the production level.
Ajay Chimanbhai
Trustee
Sharadaben Chimanbhai Educational Research Centre Ahmedabad. 1st May, 2004
000

Page #7

Page #8

Editors' Preface
Over seven years ago, we had approached Munivara Jambūvijayaji with a request to allow us to plan a festschrift in his honour. Muniji, much to our disappointment, firmly declined. We, however, persevered in our efforts at persuading him for the next two years. After going through the research publications of this Centre, he at last conceded but on three conditions : There must not appear his biographical sketch, nor words of praise for him; nor will be included his photograph in the Volume. We conceded. We next invited some 25 scholars, the response of at least 17 was positive: some could not contribute because of other commitments on hand, and a few others then were indisposed.
We feel grateful to the scholars for their learned articles appearing in the present Volume, which they sent by way of their appreciation for the Muniji's contributions to the Jaina āgamic and Indian dărśanic fields of research in general and the esteem in which they hold him. We feel that the findings and conclusions they had reached as the end-products of their research will be hailed as usefully contributive to the field of Jainological/ Indological studies. Muniji, too, we hope, will be pleased to read the erudite writings, several of which are commendably substantial and, most of them are non-sectarian in intent and orientation. It is hoped, these writings will advance the frontiers of knowledge in some areas and some specific aspects of Indological and Jainistic studies.
At the Centre, we were assisted in our task by Shri Akhilesh Mishra and Mrs. Purvi G. Shah at type-setting and laser-printing and Shri Naranbhai Patel at proof-reading. We are also grateful to the Shivkrupa Offset Printers, Ahmedabad, for their efforts at ensuring quality printing.
There has been a long, indeed inordinate delay in the Volume appearing in print; this happened thanks to the reasons / factors beyond our control. We crave indulgence of the learned contributors for the tardiness which is as unforgivable as was, we regret, unavoidable.
M. A. Dhaky
J. B. Shah

Page #9

Page #10

Contents
Foreword
Editors' Preface
1. Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
2. 'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between Jains and Heretics (Süyagada 2, 6). Part One
3. 'Asati' in the Alagaddüpamasutta
4. On 'Anandyamano yad anannam atti" ch. up. 4.3.7
5. Päninian Sütras of the Type artsfa दृश्यते
6. Arya Bhadrabāhu
7. The Date of Kasayapahuḍa
8. Correlation of Jaina Inscriptions with Sthavirāvalīs
9. Notes on Some Words in Oberlies 'Avaśyaka-Studien Glassar'
12. Grammatical Riddles from Jain Works
13. 'Antarvyäpti' Interpreted in Jainism.
Ajay Chimanbhai
M. A. Dhaky
J. B. Shah

Bansidhar Bhatt
W. B. Bollée
Ernst Steinkellner
M. A. Mehendale
George Cardona
M. A. Dhaky
K. R. Chandra
10. Who is the Author of the Pañcasūtra :
Cirantanācārya or Yakinisūnu Haribhadra ? candrasüri
11. The Humanism of Haribhadra
U. P. Shah

H. C. Bhayani
Acārya Vijayśila
Christian Lindtner
Nalini Balbir
Atsushi Uno
1
48
85
89
91
108
156
163
179
183
203
269
310

Page #11

10
14. Some Jain Versions of the
'Act of Truth' Theme
Paul Dundas
324
15. Sanskrit Sub-story and Subhāsitas
in the Prakrit 'Paümappaha sāmi-Cariyam' of Siri Devasūri
N. M. Kansara
335
16. Significance of New Inscriptions
from Koppala in Karnataka
Hampa Nagarajaiah
354
17. Hemaraj Pande's Caurāsi Bol
Padmanabh S. Jaini
374
18. How Jains Know What They Know :
A Lay Jain Curriculum
John E. Cort
399
19. Two Caityaparipātīs related to
'Citrakūta' tirtha
Jitendra Shah
414
000

Page #12

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
Bansidhar Bhatt
1) Introductory : Jainism is known for its ahimsa-ideal and karmadoctrine. Also, transmigration of the souls and wandering ascetic life are the additional ideas attributed to Jainism. Almost all scholars of Jaina community consider the Vedic or the Brahmanical texts lacking in the origins of ahimsă-ideal, karma-theory, transmigration of the souls and asceticism, and try to establish Jainism to be originated from an early non-Vedic, or say, pre-Vedic culture.
Without entering into the pros and cons of such a hypothesis, we intend in this paper to supply passages from the earliest strata of the Svetämbara Jaina Canon and passages parallel to them from the Brahmanical texts in order to illustrate mutual resemblances between the two types of literature, and moreover as "Prolegomena" to these parallels, we mention relevant views in summary form for showing how and in which situation the reform religions-Äjīvikism, Jainism, Buddhism, etc.-came into existence in India.
The texts of the Svetāmbara Jaina Canon selected for the parallel passages are the Ācāränga-sūtra, the Sütrakrtānga-sútra, the Uttaradhyayana-sūtra, the Daśavaikālika-sūtra and the Rsibhāsitāni. They generally belong to an early period ranging from the earliest period c. B. C. 3rd cent. to the latest period c. 6th cent. A. D. in the history of the Jaina literature, whereas, most of the corresponding Brahmanical passages are earlier than and some of them are at least contemporary to the Jaina passages as a whole.
(2) Limitations : We mention here precisely the views of some scholars from their analytical studies of early Brahmanical and Buddhist texts, but we have to refrain from including the analytical details into the scope of

Page #13

Bansidhar Bhatt
Jambū-jyoti
this short paper. The readers are requested to refer to the studies concerned for such details. Some important studies discussing Vedic / Brahmanical origins of ahimsā, karma-theory, transmigration of the souls, asceticism, etc. are grouped roughly in some heads and are included in I.... Bibliography : (2) at the end of this paper, for a ready reference. Parallels from the contemporary Buddhists texts could not be included, and the protocanonical texts of the Digambara Jainas being relatively younger than the Jaina texts under consideration, also have been neglected in the present
paper.
Ban:
Besides, we are not keen in supplying passages containing merely ideological resemblances, so far as some themes / descriptions of hells or hellish sufferings, religious suicide, rules and regulations for speech, the begging-tour, food and drink, etc. are concerned. Our main aim here is to project simply the most of the Jaina passages in the foreground and conspicuously to shed some light on them. The study of the type is an imperative and, to the best of our knowledge, it as yet has been unaccomplished in the field of Jainism.
Prolegomena
(3) Two Aryan Immigrations :- The early Aryan immigrants had settled before the next Aryan immigrants came to India. The early Aryans adhering to their conservative Indo-Aryan character had established some spiritual centres in surrounding areas in the north-west and in the east. They also had preserved their simple ritual customs and ancient dialects (cp. Horsch. pp. 418-419, 478 foll.). It is assumed that, in the complex structure of the Vedic society, many archaic traits of early Aryan tribal life might have disappeared, few of them by chance might be determined by means of studies of other traits of a successively integrated tribal life. (Op. also Parpola-1975 footnote 46 and Parpola-1973. See also his article : “The Coming of the Aryans to Iran and India......” Studia Orientalia, Cf. Helsinki 1988 pp. 195-302, Reviewed by K. R. Norman, Acta Orien, Upsula, 513, 1990 pp. 238-296).
(4) The Atharva-veda :- Though the Atharva-veda has some unorthodox character in its contents, its language and meters prove its

Page #14

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
ancient character in the Vedic literature. Its household rituals belong to the profane or popular customs, on the verge of the Vedic orthodoxy. It is mentioned alongwith the other three Vedas in the Satapatha-Brāhmaṇa, before Buddhism came into existence. The Atharvaveda does represent the Brahmanical culture as a whole (cp. Horsch. pp. 45-54). It was spread from the north-west slowly to the midland India and the east. It was not known in the period before the existence of Buddhism (cp. Horsch. p. 63. See also Tsujs Review on his monograph). It was generally known as the kṣatraveda, the Veda of the warriors, and was connected with the Vratyas (cp. Horsch. p. 428, Matas. p. 10 and footnote 40).
3
(5) The Vratyas:- The Vratyas are the members of the non-brahmanical cult of the Aryan origin. They are wandering kṣatriyas originally of the northwest, probably Kuru-Pañcālas, precursors of the dikṣitas, later of the Saivaites. They possess pure religious character and are much nearer to the Brahmanism in their thinking (cp.Horsch. pp. 401-402, 408). They are considered amongst the condemned brahmins of the east-Magadha, since they lost their contact with the orthodoxy (Horsch. p. 419). Particularly, the Vratyastoma ceremony is meant for their purification at the beginning of, and return from their royal expeditions. They are respected persons (arhan, divya, etc.). They organized samghas for their cult. They are distinguished by their priestly and royal functions, both at a time, but are not concerned directly with the new Brahmanical systems of the Aryavarta. The Vratyas are unorthodox in behaviour due to their contact with the earlier Aryans migrated to India. They spoke very old dialects (Horsch. p. 418, cp. Heesterman-1962, Parpola-1975 footnote 46.)
(6) Early Upanisads - Early Upanisadic doctrines originated in the extremely esoteric Brahmanical environment and were exclusively confined to intimate circles. The Upanisadic thinkers resorted to solitary places in order to get probably a bit of free thinking, secluded from the ritualistic surroundings. But it seems that the speculative ideas of the early Upanisads emerging from within the ritualism could not altogether resist its hold. The esoteric ideas being confined to restricted circles in solitary places developed independently and show no influences of contemporary heterodox ideas developing even in the same geographical regions (Horsch. p. 400).

Page #15

Bansidhar Bhatt
Jambū-jyoti
(7) Early Disputants :- Many disputants found in the Vedic literature or in some Upanisadic debates might more or less be classified among the unorthodox thinkers or "heretics". Their speculative ideas deserve further investigations, whether these independent thinkers were Aryans or not, whether and how their ideas originated independently, or irrespective of, or during various debates held within the orthodox brahmanical pockets (cp. Smith interalia).
Certainly, among these disputants, some might be learned brahmins themselves including the indigenous aryanized thinkers (cp. Kuiper, pp. 8, 96), some from the Aryan masses and some might be natives or the nonAryans as well (cp. Matas. p. 88).
(8) The Upanisadic Philosophy :- The esoteric doctrine of the punarmrtyu is pre-Buddhist and originated in its primitive for the early Upanisads. It was not recognized in the east. Its germs are found in devayāna=pitryāna descriptions of the early Brahmanical literature. Influence of the native thinkers on such Upanisadic thoughts is almost ruled out. In the same way, notions of karma and saṁsāra, and their binding character were originated and developed in their own way in the Brahmanical literature (cp. Horsch. p. 476). These Upanisadic doctrines somehow were permeated more or less by the ritualistic ideas, and remained effective for only small speculative circles (cp. Horsch. 197).
(9) Asceticism, karma, ahimsa :- Also, the ideas about renunciating the world or asceticism connected with the karma-theory and ahimsā are originated from the Vedic or Brahmanical literature. Heesterman has rightly observed that the renunciatory ideas, though similar in character but different in forms were prevalent among the Vedic Aryans and also among their contemporary non-Vedic or heterodox groups of thinkers, e.g. śramanas, the influence, if any, of the latter on the existing Brahmanical ideas carries too minor an importance to bring about any revolutionary ideas within the religious thinking pattern of the Aryans (Heesterman1962 pp. 24, 27; 1964 pp. 1-32: 1985 p. 40; cp. Horsch. p. 401, footnote 1; Wezler. p. 110, footnote 304; p. 127; and Bhatt-Rome, p. 32).
Gerow and Tull studied the Vedic-Brahmanical texts for the karmatheory and showed its origins from these texts (cp. Horsch. pp. 298 foll., 478 foll., and 1971; Bodewitz, Schmithausen-1994). Alsdorf (1961) and

Page #16

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
Schmidt (1968) contributed to the history of ideas about ahimsa and demonstrated the origins and development of ahimsa in the VedicBrahmanical literature (cp. also Heesterman-1984, Schmithausen-1991, Smith. pp. 189 foll.).
5
(10) Kṣatriyaisation:
The kṣatriyas had a powerful hold over the early Vedic society. It was extended from the social to the spiritual spheres. Since an opening of an office of the clergyman (purohita: royal chaplain or house-priest) at the royal courts, the philosophy of the brahmins was much influenced by that of the kṣatriyas, who appeared also as teachers in the ancient geneologies of teachers. They were liberal in belief, but faithful to the brahmanical theology. They remained in contact with the common masses, the native inhabitants and their beliefs, more often than with the priestly families. As a result, some local autochthon nobles or princes were influenced by and probably believed in the Aryan faith (cp. Horsch. p. 447). Royal family members could also act as priests in some ceremonies of ancient times.
The kṣatriyas were initiators of philosophical problems during the ritualistic debates. They offered new speculative ideas in contradistinction to the lucrative ritualistic theology of the brahmins. They surpassed the brahmins even in the matter of intelligent philosophical speculations on transmigration of the souls, law of karma, brahman-atman thinking and the ultimate release from the mundane existence (cp. Horsch., pp. 447 foll.).
In this connection, Matas' scholarly observations on the Rgvedic society are worthy of note. According to him, "sūris" (the lordly élite; later: kṣatriyas) opposed to one another, and "aris" (the religious élite, later: brahmins) also opposed to one another. Both these groups of the élite have their own rṣis, the sūri-led rṣis and the ari-led rșis, and were loyal to their groups. The sūris, typical warrior leaders, enjoyed more social prestige in many cases than their counterparts the aris, the clan-chiefs. But in the matter of hierarchy, the latter were superior to the former (Matas, pp. 12-14, also pp. 150.foll.).
(11) Aryans' Eastward March :- Kuiper considers: "The Rgvedic society consisted of several different ethnic components, who participated in the same cultural life." (p. 8) and adds that the natives of the Indus Valley seem to have been aryanized and had spread eastwards during

Page #17

Jambu-jyoti
the first millennium B. C. (cp. Kuiper. p. 95 and F. R. Allchin-1982 p. 332 cited). Moreover, eastern India was familiar to the Aryans in about 1200900 B. C. even before the later parts of the Satapatha-Brahmana came into existence (cp. Horsch. pp. 276-277; Smith. p. 153). During this period, the nobles and other persons of the border regions and isolated pockets lived a social and spiritual life of an antique form. They successively stimulated their non-Aryan neighbours of the border regions, spread their spiritual conservatism, and ultimately developed centres for a new spiritual life in the east.
The Situation in the East :
:
(12) The Aryans - The situation, particularly in the east, deserves special attention. The Aryans, due to their eastward advance, lost contact with the orthodoxy of the west and even of the Gangetic regions. They integrated themsevles and lived in harmony with the native inhabitants, while adhering to their Brahmanical faith-to the classical form of the Brahmanism of the time (cp. Horsch. pp. 418 foll.). The Aryans were orthodox, which means that they as yet had not lost their faith in whatsoever form of the classical Brahmanism, and at the same time, it can be said that they were going far from the orthodoxy, since their contact with the orthodox ritualists was lost or had been loose, their faith in it was getting relaxed.
6
Bansidhar Bhatt
(13) Language:- Prakritic languages / dialects replaced the classical Sanskrit by the end of the Nanda dynasty and at the rise of the Mauryan empire. The class/caste distinctions (varnas) in the society became loose, indeed not so rigid and strict as the traditional orthodox literature of the time describes (cp. Smith. p. 198).
(14) Aryan-non-Aryan Interaction: Various eastern inhabitants outnumbered the Aryans and/ or the aryanized ones. The conservative Aryans could not influence the non-Aryans. Among the easterners might be included the natives and many migrating from the neighbouring areas. Most of them might be heterodox, not believing in the Vedic ritualism, some of them might be antithetic or inert in their belief and behaviour, while some would be resisting, retarding, or submissive to the orthodoxy. But on the whole, the Aryans adjusted themselves with others in almost. every sphere of life.

Page #18

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
(15) Small Confederations - Small confederations (janapadas) in the east favoured an aristocratic form of government in about the 6th cent. B. C., the brahmins were graded next to the kṣatriyas in the hierarchy. All members of the newly urbanized areas around the Gangetic Valley enjoyed freedom and peace, and several nobles in their leisure and luxury could offer many speculative ideas with new perspectives in ethics, renunciation of the world, the yoga-methods, etc. in lieu of the sacrificial technics. The orthodox ritualists or the priestly-classes lost their hold on the intelligent classes of the nobles of the east. Almost all persons enjoyed political freedom and lived in leisure and luxury (cp. pp. 480-481).
7
(16) Ideological Upheaval :- The intelligent class expressed earnest desire to be free from the wordly sufferings. Almost every one tolerated the traditional values, even an orthodox authority so long as they were restricted to a normal social life, but could never do so at the cost of the spiritual values. People knew it for certain that, irrespective of their caste and creed, it was their right to be free from the samsaric bondage. It was considered the supreme goal to be achieved by all human beings, it cannot be achieved through rituals. Such a stand was supported by the prosperous classes of the society, the nobles and the ksatriyas.
(17) Esoteric vss. Exoteric - The Upanisadic debates, on the other hand, got royal support and solid footing in the royal courts. Metaphysical ideas were discussed in debates. Both, the orthodox and the heterodox alike, freely took part in intellectual and philosophical discussions. It proved a kind of anti-ritual reaction in which almost all, even the brahmins of the east were engaged (cp. Smith. p. 150). The leisure and luxury of the city-culture noticeable in the Jaina and the Buddhistic Canon remained absolutely in the background of the Upanisadic doctrines (cp. Horsch. p. 481).
(18) Reform in Sanskrit :- Many independent thinkers advanced some speculative ideas in public in about the 6th cent. B. C. against the orthodox Vedic Ritualism (cp. Horsch, pp. 465-466). Many of these thinkers were kṣatriyas of the Aryan Society. They played a significant role in setting forth philosophical ideas during the controversial discussions on rituals in and around the late Upanisadic period. They incorporated in the sacred texts some early unpopular and uncommon but anti-ritual ideas together with the earlier ideas of some personalities of historical importance; e.g.

Page #19

Jambu-jyoti
Yajnavalkya and others-who were much known for their views in the orthodox circles (cp. Horsch. pp. 388 foll.)-in order to get the new ideas easily sanctioned by the orthodoxy.
8
Bansidhar Bhatt
Subsequently, the literary activities of the intelligent scholiasts of the early formative period were in full swing with new speculative antiritual ideas and interpretations of the Brahmanical texts. They enlarged the bulk of the literature, namely the epics, the puranas, etc. by inserting in it from time to time the reflective ideas of other texts on the Sämkhya, Vedanta or Buddhist philosophies. Such a later Sanskrit literature obviously shows influence of the early texts in Prakrits, such as the Jātakas, the Dhammapadas, etc. (cp. Doctrine., §§ 10-11).
(19) Reform in Prakrits :-Early in the 7th cent., B. C. developed a kind of literature of the commons, e.g. the Jätakas, the Dhammapadas, etc. which contained, as a matter of fact, nothing specifically Buddhist, but generally Indian narratives in the epic gäthâs full of wisdom. This kind of folk's literature remained as a source material on the one side for the orthodoxy to develop the classical literature in Sanskrit, e.g. later Hindu texts epics, purāņas, etc. and on the other side, for the early Buddhist and Jaina scholiasts to develop their canonical texts in Prakrits in order to attract laypersons from the masses (cp. Horsch. p. 462 with footnote 1).
(20) Caste-system and the Sudras: It should also be remarked that the Sūdras no more swarmed into heresies. The role of the Sūdras in spiritualreligious life was much restricted. They were connected with itihāsas and purāņas. As stated above in (13), the caste distinctions in the society were in fact loose, and not so rigid as the orthodox treatises describe. We hardly find any attack of the reformists on the caste-system giving injustice, particularly to the Sūdras.
Ksatriyas ranked themselves higher than even the brahmins in the hierarchy. But, on the whole, all persons gave much importance to spiritual values which relied not on birth, caste, and wealth, or on the knowledge of the religious scriptures alone, but on moral character and renunciatory attitude (cp. Horsch. pp. 445, 447; Smith. pp. 153-154, 196, 198).
(21) "Kṣatriya Revolution" :- The ideological upheaval as described in the foregoing paragraphs (from 16 to 20) can be designated as the first

Page #20

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
“ksatriya revolution”, because the ksatriyas played a significant role from the beginning in initiating philosophical ideas in the Vedic/Brahmanical literature and also in the east. This revolution paved a way for the ensuing one of a democratic type (see below) which reached its culmination during the period of the Ājīvika : Gosāla, the Buddha, the Mahāvīra, and the others.
The reformists prescribed their own precepts for their followers who were mostly śramaņas, and borrowed some material from the literature of the commons for their laypersons who, due to which, appeared to have been "hinduised", since such a material of the folk's literature was borrowed and inserted also in the orthodox scriptures of the Hindus (cp. Horsch. p. 467).
(22) The Buddhists and the Jainas : - Most of the speculative ideas developed in the east have been somehow survived in the Jātakas, the Dhammapadas, and also in the early canonical literature of the Jainas and the Buddhists. But these scholiasts had no direct contact with, or sufficient knowledge of the existing orthodox Brahmanical texts. On the contrary, they remained confined to their organisations and had superficial and limited contact with the brahmanical circles of only the lower and popular strata (cp. Horsch. pp. 64-67, 462 with footnote 1). Under the circumstances, many speculative ideas in various dialects of the time developed within the boundaries of the popular strata, and are conspicuous for their mutual influences on contents and forms (Horsch. p. 363).
(23) Democratization in Reform : — It has been stated above (18-19, 21-22) that the literature of the commons had influenced both : the literature of the orthodox Aryans as also that of the Jainas and the Buddhists. This can be called a second revolution-a democratic reform, in which all the élite actually accepted and utilised the popular thought-material and evaluated it on par with their ideas in social and spiritual spheres (cp. Horsch. pp. 481-482).
(24) Sanskrit-Prakrit Parallels : As such, to get mutually resembling passages from the later orthodox texts and the Jaina or the Buddhist texts is just a matter of course. But to trace them also from the early Brahmanical texts and especially from the early Jaina texts is not altogether difficult, such an effort in point of fact is rewarding. We sometimes can have from them verbal common expressions, and sometimes passages similar in ideas.

Page #21

Bansidhar Bhatt
Jambu-jyoti
Resemblances, ideological or verbal, from the early Brahmanical texts would suggest some kind of mutual communications between the contemporary orthodoxy and some intelligent persons, probably the élite, the nobles, and others. But it is a fact that the passages show some similarities, the Sanskrit passages sometime do belong genuinely to the early strata of the Brahmanical texts, or they are at least earlier than the corresponding Prakrit passages from the Jaina texts. The Brahmanical passages of the type can hardly be ruled out as merely later ones, e.g.
Section 1 (41) :
10
अंधा तमसि वियाहिता ( v. 1 : तनं पविट्टा... ācāra I. 180.
cp... : ff... BdĀUp. 4. 4. 10 SpBr 14. 7. 2. 13
अन्धं प्रविशन्ति....
=
IsaUp. 9, 12. Sūtrakṛta 1. 11. 33.
***
Section 2 (11) :- Visam 40
cp.....f
(25) Earlier Studies: With an incentive of reevaluating the early Jaina texts from this particular angle, we studied some parallels and published the material precisely in 1989 (Bhatt 1989), and with some details in 1995 in Gujarāti (Bhatt 1995). Moreover, we presented an analytical study of early Jaina texts for the origin and development of the 12 anuvekkhas and traced parallels also from the Brahmanical texts (Bhatt 1994). But in this paper we present only the parallels in a simple catalogue form and put the entire material before the scholars for proper examination, and we request them to refer to our above-stated studies for a detailed. treatment of the passages in question.
=
... Īsa.Up. 1
(25) Parallels not Discussed It is true, issues arising out of the parallelism invariably demand analytical study of the parallel passages and examination of important views held by some scholars about the texts or passages concerned. Such a critical study is indispensable when the views are directly concerned with problems whether our passages traced as parallels from the texts-especially from the Brahmanical texts-show relatively an earlier character or not. This line of inquiry is intentionally not pursued here obviously for more than one reason.

First, the expected study which by itself has the character of a monograph, could not be linked even in its summary form with.

Page #22

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
the parallels in a short paper like this. (We hope, such a study will be presented on some other occasion in the future.)
Besides, the following factors have also been taken into our account. Some scholars have shown interest in tracing textual parallels of the type and studied them critically (for a list of some such scholars, see Bhatt 1996). Such a trend in researches is still in its infancy, and probably not known to the scholars in this part of the world where most of the research writings from abroad is somehow unobtainable.
In view of the mutually related character of the ancient Indian literature, this bare material might at the initial stage generate interest among the scholars who are except Hindi or their native language-not conversant with the English language and also with old or new research material of non-Indian origin (because of this reason, we had to resort quite often at intervals to Hindi -the national language of India---in order to explain to the scholars the contents of this paper, while delivering it before them at the All-India Oriental Conference, Prakrit and Jainism Section, January 1997, at the Jadhavpur University, Calcutta, India), and finally we consciously and determinantly endeavoured to get the textual parallels in Sanskrit-Prakrit published in Nāgarī (instead of their transliteration in Roman) character, so that this paper might be relatively useful to all scholars—those who do not understand or read English, and also those who are not much used to read properly the transliterated parallels in Roman script.
(26) Interdisciplinary Character :- As do the Buddhist so also the Jaina texts show some impacts of the early Brahmanism; they developed, certainly not without any impact. Early Jaina passages evidently show no repugnance to the Brahmanical groups of ascetics and to Brahmanical ideology either. This will be clear from the Catalogue of Parallels supplied separately at the end of this paper. Last, but not the least, in the situation where almost every field of Indological studies, particularly the Jainological and Brahmanical ones, is built up in such water-tight compartments, that no idea of their interdisciplinary character is let in, our title at the outset combining two disciplines, namely Jainism and Brahmanism shall, we hope, attract and incite the readers of both the disciplines at a time to break through the barriers created between various studies, e.g. traditional-modern, Indian

Page #23

12
Bansidhar Bhatt
Jambū-jyoti
foreign, Sanskrit-Prakrit, Jainism-Brahmanism, and so on, after they have even a cursory reading of our Catalogue of Parallels at the end of this paper.
The Catalogue of Parallels
Explanation :
(a) Jaina Texts :-- The five Jaina texts selected for the Catalogue of Parallels are the earliest ones in the history of Jaina literature. They are 1. Āyāra (Skt. Ācāra, = Āc.), 2. Sūyagada (Skt. Sūtrakệta, = Sū.), 3. Uttarajjhāyā (Skt. Uttarādhyayana, = Utt.), 4. Dasaveyāliya (Skt. Daśavaikälika, - Dasa.) and 5. Isibhāsiyāim (Skt. Rsibhāsitāni, = Rs), Ācāra's First Part (suyakkhandha, Skt. śrutaskandha called Bambhacera, Skt. Brahmacarya) and Sūtrakrta's First Part are given due importance, but their Second Parts are almost ignored for the present purpose. Besides, from other Jaina texts, some passages resembling with any of the passages of the above stated five texts are casually cited. (This is partly because of their relative lateness and sometimes secondary character.)
We use Sanskrit names instead of the original Prakrit names of the Jaina texts for the sake of brevity. The Sanskrit names, moreover, are popular and often in use also among the Jaina scholiasts.
(b) Sections :- The Ācāra, being the earliest of all the texts, has been given prime importance and the first place in the Catalogue, and next comes the Sūtrakrta which is followed respectively by the Uttarādhyayana, the Daśavaikālika and the Rsibhāsitāni. The Uttarādhyayana has been offered the third place and before Daśavaikālika, because it contains many passages resembling with Brahmanical passages. On the contrary, the Daśavaikālika and the Rsibhāṣitāni contain rather scanty amount of passages that parallel with the Brahmanical ones. Therefore, the passages of both these texts are included in one Section split up in to two parts. The Rsibhāsitāni being viewed apart from the first four "senior” texts of the Jaina Canon, is given the last place in the textual order. Thus, the five Jaina texts are allotted Sections 1-4 in the following order :
Section 1. Section 2 Section 3 Section 4.
Ācāra. Sūtrakrta. Uttarādhyayana. A. Daśavaikālika, and B. Rsibhāsitāni.

Page #24

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
13
Each section contains passages of only one Jaina text; Section 1 being exclusively meant for the Acāra, contains passages invariably from the Ācāra; in the same way, Section 2 covers passages exclusively from the Sūtrakrta, and likewise sections 3-4 contain passages respectively from the Uttarādhyayana (Section 3), the Daśavaikālika (Section 4-A) the and Rsibhāṣitāni (Section 4-B) as per given textual order.
(c) Units :-- The Sections 1-4 consist of “units” which are given serial numbers. The following factors constitute a unit :
1. A unit contains at least one Jaina passage which is comparable with
any Brahmanical passage in words or/and ideas.
2. A unit sometime may contain two or more than two Jaina passages
showing some sort of mutual similarity in words or/ and ideas.
3. Two or more than two Jaina passages differing from each other in
words or / and ideas are included each in separate units, provided they fulfil the condition 1 stated above—i.e. resemblance with Brahmanical passages.
4. A unit contains at least one or more than one Brahmanical passage
which somehow resembles in word or/and ideas with the Jaina passage(s) which the unit contains.
All passages running parallel to and coming after a Jaina or a Brahmanical passage are indicated by the mark : + at their beginning in order to point them out separately at a glance in a unit.
The units are not arranged according to the nature of Jaina passages, e.g. literary, philosophical, ethical, etc. A pair of cases of parallels from the classical Sanskrit literature is casually shown into square brackets, and some cases of parallels from the Buddhist sources are just referred to into brackets after the Brahmanical passages. The units in a section may contain Jaina passages from any of the chapters or sūtras of the text concerned.
(d) Criterion for Similar Passages :- Mutually resembling passages of a particular Jaina text can without any problem be included into appropriate units of a Section of that text, since the Jaina text, the units and the passages, all belong to one and the same Section. But, mutually resembling passages from two or more than two Jaina texts present

Page #25

14
Bansidhar Bhatt
Jambu-jyoti
problems in deciding on a particular Section into whose units the passages should be included. In the situation, we followed the above criterion in (b) for an allotment of Sections, namely a Jaina text of early character comes before the others of late character. Here also, we first decided which one of these texts stands first, prior to the other ones in questions, or, which Jaina text occupies a Section preceding in order, and then we included the resembling passages of other texts into appropriate units of that Section of the Jaina text which stands ahead of others in order. In this way, unnecessary details and repetitions are avoided. The criterion we followed is not suggestive of temporality--contemporary or early or late character of any of the passages included into a unit.
In short, Jaina passages of Sections 1-4 resembling with any of the Jaina passages of Section 1 are included into (appropriate units of) Section 1. Similarly, resembling Jaina passages of Sections 2-4 are included into Section 2, of Sections 3-4 into Section 3, of Section 4: A-B into its Part A, and of its Part B remain in their own Part B.
(e) Brahmanical Passages in Units: - The Jaina passage(s) in a unit must be followed by any number of Brahmanical passages which somehow are resembling in words or / and ideas with the former ones. We normally use an abbreviation "cp.” (= compare !) before the Brahmanical passages. It suggests that the Jaina passages are comparable with the Brahmanical ones. Thus, a unit opens with any number of Jaina passages and ends with any number of Brahmanical passages and displays their mutual resemblances.
Our Catalogue of Parallels does not exhaustively cover all passages or parallels. We could have collected probably a few more passages of the type from both, the Brahmanical and the Jaina literature. But such an exhaustive collection hardly would have added something to the main issue of this paper, namely an orientation in Jainism in relation to Brahmanism. This will be fruitful even with the Catalogue registering an optimum number of passages-nearly 300 Jaina and 350 Brahmanical ones accommodated in some 125 units.

Page #26

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
Section 1 : Ācārānga-sutra
Units :
(१) पुरत्थिमाओ वा दिसाओ आगतो अहमंसि, दाहिणाओ..., पच्चत्थिमाओ.., उत्तरातो..., उड्डातो..,
अधेदिसातो वा आगतो अहमंसि..
(Ac. I. 1)
Cp.... अधस्तादहम्, उपरिष्ठादहं पश्चादहं पुरस्तादहं दक्षिणतोऽहम्, उत्तरतोऽहम्, एवेदं सर्वगिति... (Ch. Up. 7. 25. 1) (Śv. Up. 1. 1) (Ch. Up. 7. 10. 2)
( Ác. I. 89) (Daśa. 5. 2. 6)
( Rs. 43. 1) (Ms. 6. 57) (Ndpv. Up. 5. 6) (Ac I. 122) (Daśa. 4. 9) ( Rs. 45.18)
(Sū. I. 11. 33 ) (Sū. I. 12. 18)
+ कुतः स्म जाता...
+
....इमा सर्वा प्रजा सत आगत्य न विदुः सत आगच्छामह इति....
(२) लाभो त्ति ण मज्जेज्जा अलाभो त्ति ण सोएज्जा...
+ अलाभो त्ति न सोएज्जा...
+ लाभम्मि जेण सुमणो अलाभे णेव दुम्मणो...
Cp. अलाभे न विषादी स्याल्लाभश्चैनं न हर्षयेत्... + अलाभे न विषादी स्याल्लाभे चैव न हृष्यते...
(३) आततो बहिया पास..
+ सव्वभूयप्पभूयस्स सम्मं भूयाइ पासओ, ... णावं कम्म न बंधई.
+ सए देहे जहा होति एवं सव्वेसि देहिणं...
+ तेसिं अत्तुवमाए थामं कुव्वं परिव्वए... + जे आत्तओ पासइ सव्वलोए... Cp. यस्तु सर्वाणि भूतान्यात्मन्येवानु पश्यति ।
सर्वभूतेष्वात्मानं ततो न विचिक्षति ॥ यस्मिन् सर्वाणि भूतान्यात्मैवाभूद् विजानत:.. + सर्वभूतात्मभूतात्मा कुर्वन्तपि न लिप्यते । आत्मवत्सर्वभूतानि यः पश्यति स पश्यति ॥ + इक्षते योगयुक्तात्मा सर्वत्र समदर्शन :.... + आत्मौपम्येन सर्वत्र समं पश्यन्ति योगिनः ...
(४) से ण छिज्जति ण भिज्जति ण डज्झति ण हम्मति कंचणं सव्वलोए... न भिद्यते न दह्यते न छिद्यते ....
Cp.
+ नैनं छिन्दन्ति शस्त्राणि नैनं दहति पावकः....
अच्छेद्योऽयमदाह्योऽयम्...
+ (See also : Suttanipāta 515)
(5) तुममेव तुमं मित्तं किं बहिया मित्तमिच्छसि ?
+ बंधपमोक्खो तुज्झज्झत्थमेव...
+
+

15
अप्पा कत्ता विकत्ता य दुहाण य सुहाण य।
अप्पा मित्तममित्तं च दुप्पट्ठिय सुप्पट्ठिओ ॥
एगप्पा अजिए सत्तू...

(ĪŚaUp. 6-7)
(Gt. 5.7)
(Gt. 6. 29)
(Gt. 6.32)
(AcI. 123,) (Sbl. Up. 9)
(Gt. 2.23-24 )
(Āc. I. 125)
(Ac. I. 155)
(Utt. 20.37)
(Utt. 23.38)

Page #27

16
Bansidhar Bhatt
Jambū-jyoti
+ एगं जिणेज्ज अप्पाणं...सव्वमप्पे जियं जियं...
(Utt. 9. 34,36) Cp. आत्मैव ह्यात्मनो बन्धुः...
बन्धुरात्मात्मनस्तस्य येनात्मैवात्मना जितः । आत्मनस्तु शत्रुत्वे वर्तेतात्मैव शत्रुवत् ।।
(Gt. 6. 5-6) + मन एव जगत्सर्वं मन एव महारिपुः...
(Tjbd. Up. 5.98) + मन एव मनुष्याणां कारणं बन्धमोक्षयो... (Mt. Up. 4. 11, = Tt. Up. 5. 3)
+ (see also: Dhammapada 380). (6) अत्ताणमेव अभितिगिज्झ एवं दुक्खा पमोक्खसि...
(Ac. I. 126) Cp. आत्मात्मनि गृह्यते....
(Sv. Up. 1. 15) + यस्मिन्सर्वाणि भूतान्यात्मैवाभूद् विजानतः । तत्र को मोहः कः शोकः एकत्वमनुपश्यतः ॥
(Isa Up. 7) + ...विशुद्धान्ता पश्यन्नात्मानमात्मनि..
(Mbh. 3. 213. 26) (7) दिटेहिं निव्वेयं गच्छेज्जा नो लोगस्सेसणं चरे... (Ac. I. 133, see also Ac. I. 99, 119) + निव्वेएणं भंते,...सिद्धिमग्गं पडिवन्ने य हवइ...
(Utt. 29. 2) + जावता व लोएसणा तावता व वित्तेसणा...
(Rs. 12. 1) Cp. परीक्ष्य लोकान् कर्मचितान ब्राह्मणो निर्वेदमायात्...
(Md. Up. 1. 2. 12) + तमात्मानं विदित्वा ब्राह्मणाः...लोकैषणायाश्च व्युत्थायाथ भिक्षाचर्यं चरन्ति... बाल्यं च पाण्डित्यं ___च निर्विद्याथा मुनिः, अमौनं च मौनं च निर्विद्याथ ब्राह्मणः... (BdĀ. Up. 3. 5. 1) + तदा जन्तासि निर्वेदम्...
(Gt. 2. 52) (8) जस्स नत्थि पुरे पच्छा मझे तत्थ कुओ सिया ?
(Ac. I. 144) Cp. आदावन्ते च यन्नासि वर्तमानेऽपि तत्तथा...
(Mdy. K. 6) + आदावन्ते च मध्ये च जनो यस्मिन्न विद्यते...
(Tjbd. Up. 1. 23) + अन्तर्यदि बहि: सत्यमन्ताभावे बहि न च...
(Tjbd. Up. 5.48) + (see also : Dhammapada 34=421) + आद्यन्तवन्तः कौन्तेय न तेषु रमते बुधः ।
(Gt. 5. 22) (9) णेव से अंतो णेव से दूरे....
(Ac. I. 148) Cp. तद्दूरे तदवन्तिके...
(Isa. Up. 5) + दूरात्सुदूरे तदिहान्तिके च...
(Md. Up. 3. 1.7) + न च याति न चायाति, न च नेह न चेह चित्....
(Mh. Up. 5-102) + दूरस्थं चान्तिके च तत्....
(Gt. 13. 15) (10) तुमं सि णाम तं चेव जं हंतव्वं ति मण्णसि,..अज्जावेतव्वं त्ति मण्णसि, ... तुम्हा ण हंता ण वि घातए..
(Ac. I. 170) + ...न हणे नो व घायए...
(Dasa. 6. 10) Cp. न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे...
हन्ता चेन्मन्यते हन्तुं हतश्चेन्मन्यते हतम् ।

Page #28

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
17
उभौ तौ न विजानीतो (v.t. विजानीते) नायं हन्ति न हन्यते ।। (Kth. Up. 1.2. 18-19) + य एनं वेत्ति हन्तारं यश्चैनं मन्यते हतम्..नायं हन्ति न हन्यते, ...कं घातयति हन्ति कम्...
(Gt. 2. 19,21) + ... न वधेनास्य हन्यत एतत्सत्यम्...
(Ch. Up. 8. 1.5. =8. 10.4) + (see also : Gandhari-Dhammapada 198, Suttanipata 705,
Anguttara-nikāya 4. 151, Udẫnavarga 5-19) (11) सव्वे सरा नियटृति, तक्का जत्थ ण विज्जति, मती तत्थ ण गाहिया, ओए अप्पतिट्ठाणस्स खेत्तण्णे...
(Ac. I. 176) Cp. अतळम्...नैवा तर्केण मतिरापनेया...
(Kth. Up. 1.2.8-9) + नायमात्मा प्रवचनेन लभ्यः....
(Kth. Up. 1. 2. 22=Md. Up. 3. 2. 3) + नैव वाचा न मनसा प्राप्तुं शक्यः...
(Kth. Up. 2. 6. 12) + न चक्षुषा गृह्यते नापि वाचा...
(Md. Up. 3. 1.8) + यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते, अप्राप्य मनसा सह....(Tait. Up. 2.4.1;2.4.9=Bhm. Up.) + न संदृशे तिष्ठति रूपमस्य...
(Sv. Up. 4. 20) + यस्माद्वाचो निवर्तन्ते, अप्राप्य मनसा सह...
(Tjbd. Up. 1. 19) + न शक्यते वर्णयितुं गिरा...
(Mt. Up. 4.9) Cp. संयुक्तनिकाय १.१५ ...कुतो सरो निवत्तंते...;
Rv. 10. 61. 4) (12) ण इत्थी ण पुरिसे ण अण्णहा...
(Ac. I. 176) Cp. नैनं वाचा स्त्रियं ब्रुवन् नैनं अस्त्रीपुमान् ब्रुवन् । ____ पुमांसं न ब्रुवन्नेनं वदन् वदति कश्चन ॥
(Ait. A. 2. 3.8) + नैव स्त्री न पुमानेषः नैव चैवायं नपुंसकः...
(5v. Up. 5. 10) + न स्त्री न योषिन्नो वृद्धा न कन्या न वितन्तुता...
(Tjbd. Up. 6. 28) Cp. त्वं स्त्री त्वं पुमानसि त्वं कुमार उत वा कुमारी... (Atharvaveda 10.8.27) (13) ..ण स्त्रीए ण उण्हे..
(Ac. I. 176) Cp. न शीतं न चोष्णम्...
(Ph. Up.) (14) से ण दोहे ण हस्से, ..ण किण्हे ण णीले ण लोहिते ण हालिद्दे ण सुक्किले ण सुरभिगंधे ण दुरभिगंधे ण तित्ते ण कडुए ण कसाए ण अंबिलेण मधुरे...ण संगे...ण सद्दे ण रूवे ण गंधे ण रसे ण फासे...
(Ac. I. 176) Cp. अशब्दम्...अरूपम्, अरसम्...अगन्धवच्च यत्....
(Kth. Up. 1. 3. 15) + ..तदक्षरम्...अस्थूलम्, अनणु, अहस्वम्, अदीर्घम्, अलोहितम्, अस्नेहम्...असंगम्, अरसम्, अगन्धम्...
(BdA. Up. 3.8. 8) + असंगो ह्ययमुच्यते, असंगो न हि सज्यते...
(BdA. Up. 3. 9. 26) + ..न शब्दं..न रूपं न रसं न गन्धम्...
(Ph. Up.) + न रूपमस्येह तथोपलभ्यते...
(Gt. 15.3) + (see also : Udānavarga 80)

Page #29

18
Bansidhar Bhatt
(15) अंडया पोतया जराउया रसया संसेयया सम्मुच्छिमा उब्भिया उववातिया...
Cp.... अंडजानि च जारुजानि य स्वेदजानि चोद्भिज्जानि च... + ... अंडजं जीवजमुद्भिज्जम्...
(āc. I. 49 = Daśa. 4. 1, Sū. I. 7. 1; 9. 8)
(Ait. Up. 3. 3) (Ch. Up. 6. 3. 1) (Ac. I. 64 ) (Utt. 13. 23; (Utt. 14.12) (Utt. 14.39)
(16) .. नालं ते तव ताणाए वा सरणाए वा....
+ न तस्स दुक्खं विभयंति नाइओ, न मित्तवग्गा न सुया न बांधवा....
+ जाया य पुत्ता न हवंति ताणं...
+ सव्वं पि ते अपज्जत्तं नेव ताणाय तं तव... Cp. यन्मया परिजनस्यार्थे कृतं कर्म शुभाशुभम् ।
एकाकी तेन दह्येऽहं गतास्ते फलभोजिनः ॥ + नामुत्र हि सहायार्थं पिता माता च तिष्ठतः । न पुत्रदारा न ज्ञाति-धर्मस्तिष्ठति केवलः ॥ + मृतं शरीरमुत्सृज्य... विमुखा बांधवा यान्ति... + (see also: Dhammapada 288) Cp. न मंत्रा न तपो दानं न मित्राणि न बांधवाः । शक्नुवंति परित्रातुं नरं कालेण पीडितम् ॥
(१७) व सयं लोगं अब्भाइक्खेज्जा णेव अत्ताणं अब्भाइक्खेज्जा...
+ इमे वि से नत्थि परे वि लोए, दुहओ वि से झिज्झइ तत्थ लोए.... Cp. अयं लोको नास्ति पर इति मानी पुनः पुनः वशमापद्यते ... (18) सव्वे पाणा....पियजीविणो जीविउकामा सव्वेसिं जीवियं पियं. Cp. न हि प्राणात्प्रियतरं लोके किंचन विद्यते ...

(19) आयतचक्खू... लोगस्स अहेभागं.. उड्डभागं... तिरियभागं जाणति... Cp. सर्वा दिश: ऊर्ध्वमधश्च तिर्यक् प्रकाशयन् भ्राजते यद्वनड्वान्.. (20) सुत्ता अमुनि: मुणिणो सययं जागरंति.....
+ पंच जागरओ सुत्ता, पंच सुत्तस्स जागरा... + आतट्ठे जागरो होहि...
Jambu-jyoti

(Gb Up. 4)
(पद्मपुराण ८१. ३३)
(Ac. I. 32) (Utt. 20.49) (Kth. Up. 1.2.6)
(āc. I. 78, Daśa. 6. 11) (Mbh. Anuśās. 113. 12) (Ác. I. 91) (Śv. Up. 5. 4) (Ac. I. 106)
( Rs. 29.2)
(Rs. 35. 15; 18-24; 38. 6)
(MS. 4. 23) (Ms. 4. 241 )
Cp. या निशा सर्वभूतानां तस्यां जागर्ति संयमी ।
यस्यां जाग्रति भूतानि सा निशा पश्यतो मुनेः ॥ + यत्र सुप्ता जना नित्यं प्रबुद्धस्तत्र संयमी ।
प्रबुद्धा यत्र ते विद्वान् सुषुतिं याति योगिराट् + अज्ञाने बुद्धिविलये निद्रा सा भण्यते बुधैः ... (21) स आयवी...वेयवी... बंभवी...
(Yv. Up. 22) (Vh. Up. 2.59)
(Ac. I. 107, 145, 174)
+ विरए वेयवियायरक्खिए...
(Utt. 15.2)
Cp....तं चान्तर्यामिणमिति स ब्रह्मवित् स वेदवित्... स आत्मवित्... ( BdĀ. Up. 3. 7.1) + ब्रह्मविदाप्नोति परम्...
(Tait. Up. 2. 1)
(Gt. 2. 69)

Page #30

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
19
+ ...यद् ब्रह्मविदो वदन्ति...
(Md. Up. 1. 1.4) (22) जे एगं जाणइ से सव्वं जाणइ...
(Ac. I. 129) Cp. यथा..एकेन मृत्पिडेन सर्वं मृन्मयं विज्ञातं स्यात्...
(Ch. Up. 6. 1.4) + ...आत्मा...द्रष्टव्यः...आत्मनः...दर्शनेन...इदं सर्वं विदितम्... (BdA. Up. 2. 4.5) + आत्मनि खलु विज्ञाते इदं सर्वं विदितम्...
(BdA. Up.4.5.6) + कस्मिन्नु..विज्ञाते सर्वमिदं विज्ञातं भवति?
(Md. Up. 1. 1. 3) + एकं सद्विप्रा बहुधा वदन्ति... ।
(Rv. 1. 164.46) + एकं सन्तं बहुधा कल्पयन्ति
(Rv. 10. 114. 5) (23) जे आया से विण्णाया...जेण जाणइ से आया..
(Ac. I. 17) Cp. ....लोकनमुं च विज्ञानेनैव विजानाति....
(Ch. Up. 7. 7. 1) (24) नावकंखंति जीवियं...
(Ac. I. 56, 129=Su. I: 3.4.15; 9.34 + कालस्स खंखाए परिव्वयंति...
(Ac. I. 166) + कंखेज्ज कालं जाव सरीरभेदो त्ति....
(Ac. I. 198) + जीवियं नाभिकंखेज्जा मरणं णो वि पत्थए....
(Ac. I. 232) + जइ जीवियं नावकंखए...
(Su. I. 2. 1. 18) + जीवियं नावकंखिज्जा....
(Su. I.3.2. 13) + कंखेज्ज कालं...
(Su. I.5.2.25) + कालोवणीए सरीरस्स भेए...
(Utt. 4.9) + कंखे गुणे जाव सरीरभेउ...
(Utt. 4. 13, also see Utt. 2.37) Cp. किमिच्छन् कस्य कामाय शरीरमनुसंच्चरेत्...
(BdA. Up.4.4. 12) + मृत्युं च नाभिनन्देत जीवितं वा कथंचन।
नाभिनंदेत मरणं नाभिनंदेत जीवितम् ॥ + कालमेव प्रतीक्षेत यापदायः समाप्यते । नाभिनंदेत मरणं नाभिनंदेत जीवितम ।।
(Ndpv. Up. 3. 60-61) + जीवितं वा न कांक्षेत कालमेव प्रतीक्ष्यते...
(Ndpv. Up. 5. 1) + (see also Suttanipāta 516) (25) सुसाणंसि वा सुण्णागारंसि वा रुक्खमूलंसि वा गिरिगुहंसि वा कुंभारायतणंसि वा...
(Ac. I. 204) + सुसाणे सुण्णगारे वा रुक्खमूले वि... (Ac. I. 279=Utt. 2. 20; 35. 6) Cp. ...शून्यागारवृक्षमूल...कुलालशाला...गृहकंदर...स्थंडिलेषु श्वेतकेतु..-वद्-शुक्लध्यानपरायणः...
शरीरमुत्सृज्य संन्यासेनैव देहत्यागं कोरति, स कृतकृत्यो भवति... (Ndpv. Up. 3. 86) + ...शून्यागार..., वृक्षमूलनिकेतो वा...ब्राह्मणः...
(Ndpv. Up. 5. 13) + ...शून्यागार...., वृक्षमूलकुलालशाला...गिरिकुहरकोटरकंदर..स्थंडिलेषु ...संन्यासेन देहत्यागं करोति...
(Yv. Up. 1) + ...यथा निग्रंथो...ब्रह्ममार्गे सम्यक्संपन्नः...शून्यागार...वृक्षमूलकुलालशाला....गिरिकुहर

Page #31

20
Bansidhar Bhatt
Jambu-jyoti
कोटर...स्थंडिलेषु...शुक्लध्यानपरायणः...संन्यासेन देहत्यागं करोति स परमहंसः...
(Jbl. Up. 6) मशान वासिनो वा...दिगंबरा वा... शुक्लध्यानपरायणा:... शून्यागार... वृक्षमूलकुलालशाला...गिरिकंदरकुहरकोटर....स्थंडिले....संन्यासेन देहत्यागं कुर्वन्ति ते परमहंसाः...
(Bhk. Up.) + (See also Suttanipāta 54. 4) + उपहरे गिरीणं संगमे च नदीनां धिया विप्रो अजायत।
(Rv. 8.6.28=Sama-Veda 2.2.2.9 (26) इमं पि जातिधम्मयं...वुड्डिधम्मयं...छिण्णं मिलाति...अणितियं...असासयं... चयोवचइयं.. विप्परिणामधम्मयं...
___ (Ac. I. 45) + ..भेउरधम्मं विद्धंसणधम्मं अधुवं अणितियं असासतं चयोवचइयं विप्परिणामधम्म...
(Ac. I. 153) Cp. ...षड्भावविकाराः, अस्ति, जायते, वर्धते, अपक्षीयते विपरिणमते विनश्यति....
(Nirukta 1.2 = Mahabhāsya 1. 3. 1. 11) + ..षड्भावविकारविहीनोऽहन्...दिगंबरसुखोऽहम्...
(Mt. Up. 3. 18-19) + ...षड्भावविकारशून्यः....
(Ndpv. Up. 7) + ....षड्भावविकारशून्यम्...
(MgL. Up. 4) + ...षड्भावेत्यादिसर्वदोषरहितम्...
(Vjsc. Up.) + ...परमहंसपरिवाड्...षड्भावविकारशून्यः...
(Ph. Up. 1) (27) बंभवं पण्णाणेहि परिजाणाति लोग...
(Ac. I. 107) + महावीरेहिं पण्णाणमंतेहि पण्णाणमुवलब्भ...
(Ac. I. 109) Cp....प्रज्ञानेनैनमाप्नुयात्......
(Kth. Up. 1. 2. 24) (28) वसित्ता बंभचेरंसि...
(Ac. I. 143, 183, 190 : also Ac. I. 155) + (See also The title "बंभचेर" for Ac. I.) + उट्ठाय सुबंभचेरे वसेज्जा....
(Su. I. 14. 1) + एतोवया बंभवति त्ति वुत्ता....
(Su. II. 6. 20) Cp. यन्मौनं...ब्रह्मचर्यमेव...तद् ब्रह्मचर्येण दैवात्मानमनुविद्य मनुते... (Ch. Up. 8. 5. 2) + ...ब्रह्मचर्येणानुविन्दन्ति...
(Ch. Up.8.4.3. = 8.5.4) + यदिच्छन्तो ब्रह्मचर्यं चरन्ति...
(Kth. Up. 1. 2. 15 = Gt. 8. 11) + सत्येन लभ्यः....ह्येष आत्मा सम्यग्ज्ञानेन ब्रह्मचर्येण नित्यम्... (Md. Up. 3. 1. 5) + ब्रह्मचर्येण तपसा देवा मृत्युमुपाघ्नत ।
(Atharva-Veda) (29) एस वीरे...जे बद्धे पडिमोयए...से सव्वओ सव्वपरिण्णचारी न लिप्पइ छणपएण वीरे...
(Ac. I. 103) + कहं भुंजन्तो भासन्तो पावं कम्म न बंधई ?
(Dasa. 4.7) ____Cp. ...न स ह तैरप्याचारम् पाप्मना लिप्यते शुद्धः...
(Ch. Up. 5. 10. 10)

Page #32

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
+ विदित्वा न लिप्यते कर्मणा पापकेन ...
+ न कर्म लिप्यते नरे...
+
सर्वभूतान्तरात्मा न लिप्यते लोकदुःखेन बाह्यः .... कुर्वन्नपि न लिप्यते ...
+
+ लिप्यते न स पापेन पद्मपत्रमिवाम्भसा...
(BdĀ. Up. 4. 4. 23 = Bdh. Dh. Sū. 2. 6. 11. 30; 2. 10. 17. 7; Ps. Sū. 5.20 ) ( IŚa Up. 2 ) (Kth. Up. 2. 5. 11)
(Gt. 5.7) (Gt. 5.10)
+ एवंविदि पापं कर्म न श्लिष्यते...
+ नैनं कृताकृते तप्यतः....
(Ch. Up. 4. 14. 3) (BdĀ. Up. 4. 4. 23) (Md. Up. 3. 3)
+ पुण्यपापे विधूय निरंजन: परमं साम्यमुपैति ..
+ हत्वापि स इमाँल्लोकान्नायं हन्ति न हन्यते ...
(Gt. 18. 17)
+ अजहुः कर्म पापकं पुण्या पुण्येन कर्मणा... (ŚpBr. 13. 5. 4. 3, SnkŚSū. 16. 9. 7)
(30) सच्चम्मि धिइं कुव्वहा...
+ सच्चमेव समभिजाणाहि, सच्चस्स आणाए उवट्ठिए मेहावी मारं तरइ..
+ आओवरया... लोगं उवेहमाणा...सच्चंसि परिविचिट्ठिसु...
+ तं सच्चं, सच्चवादी सोए तिण्णे...
+ सच्चे तत्थ करेज्जुवक्कमं...
+ अकोहणे सच्चरए तवस्सी...
+ से य सच्चे सुआहिए, सया सच्चेण संपन्ने...
+ सच्चेण पलिमंथए...
+ जिइंदिए सच्चरए स पुज्जो ....
Cp.
तद्वै तत् सत्यं बले प्रतिष्ठितम्....
... इदं सर्वं तत्सत्यं स आत्मा...
+ तस्य ह वा एतस्य ब्रह्मणो नाम सत्यमिति...
+
+ सत्यं त्वेव विजिज्ञासितव्यमिति,...
+ ... सत्यं ब्रह्म...
+ सत्यं सर्वं प्रतिष्ठितम्...
+ ....न वधेनास्य हन्यत एतत्सत्यम्... (31) अणुवरता अविज्जाए...
Cp. अविद्यायां बहुधा वर्तमानाः.. बालाः ..

21
(32) संतिं विरति उवसमं णिव्वाणं.....
+ उवसंते... परिव्वए...
Cp. ....शान्तो दान्त उपरतस्तितिक्षुः ... सर्वमात्मानं पश्यति....
+
... प्रपंचोपशमः शिवः...
सत्यस्य सत्यं प्राणा वै सत्यं तेषामेव सत्यम्...
(BdĀ. Up. 2. 1. 20 = 2. 3. 11 = ŚpBr. 14.5.1.23, 14. 5. 3. 11)
(Ch. Up. 7. 16. 1 ) (BdA. Up. 5. 5. 1) (MhNn. Up. 22. 1) (Ch. Up. 8. 1. 5, 8.10.4)
(Ac. I. 151) (Md. Up. 1. 2. 9)
(āc. 1. 96, 191, 196) (Ac. I. 116, 164)
(Ác. I. 117)
(Ác. I. 127) (Ac. I. 146) (Āc. I. 224, 228)
(Sū. I. 2. 3. 14)
(Sū. I. 10. 12) (Sū. I. 15. 3) (Utt. 9.21) (Daśa. 9. 3. 13) (BdA. Up. 5. 14. 4)
(Ch. Up. 6. 7.7; 6. 8.7)
(Ch. Up. 8. 5.4)

(Bdā. Up. 4. 4. 23)
(Mdy. Up. 7)

Page #33

22
Bansidhar Bhatt
Jambu-jyoti
+ ...शान्ति निर्वाणपरमान्...
(Gt. 6. 15) (33) ओए अप्पतिट्ठाणस्स खेत्तण्णे...
(Ậc. I. 176) Cp. तदेतदोजश्च महश्चेत्युपासीत...
(Ch. Up. 3. 13. 15) (34) ...कामकामी...सोयति...परितप्पति...
(Ac. I.90) Cp. स शान्तिमाप्नोति न कामकामी...
(Gt. 2.70) (35) ...धूणे (कम्म-) सरीरगं....
(Ac. I. 99, 141, 161) + धूणिय रयमलं...
(Dasa. 9. 3. 15) Cp. ...अश्व इव रोमाणि विधूय पापम्...धूत्वा शरीरम्....कृतात्मा... (Ch. Up. 8. 13. 1) + ते...सर्व एवाधून्वत जरसं तनूनाम्...
(Jm. Br. 2. 398, 3. 255) + ...समाधि-निर्धूतमलस्य...
(Mt. Up. 4.9) + ...सुकृतदुष्कृते धूनुते...
(Ks. Br. Up. 1. 4) (36) ...सो हं (सोहं ?) से आयावादी...
(Ac. I. 2.3) Cp. अयमात्मा सोऽहमस्मि...
(Ch. Up.) + ...अद्वयं पश्यत हंसः सोऽहमिति...
(NsUtt. Up. 9) (37) नातीतमलृ ण य आगमिस्सं अटुं णियच्छंति तथागता उ...
(Ac. I. 124) Cp. अन्यत्र भूताच्च भव्याच्च...
(Kth. Up. 1. 2. 14) + गतासूनगतातूंश्च नानुशोचन्ति पंडिताः...
(Gt. 2.11) (38) संधि लोगस्स जाणित्ता...
(Ac. I. 122, 170) + निव्वाणं संधए मुणि...
(Su. I. 9. 36; 11. 22, 34) Cp. बह्वीः संधा अतिक्रम्य...
(Kth. Up. 3. 1) (39) इहमेगेसि एगचरिया भवति...
(Ac. I. 151, 186) + ...एगे चरे...
(Su. I. 2. 2. 12) + ...तह एगचारी, एगंतमोणेण वियागरेज्जा...
(Su. I. 13. 18) Cp....एकाकी चरेत्...
(Phpv. Up.) + ...योगी रहसि स्थितः, एकाकी...
(Gt. 6. 10) (40) उम्मुंच पासं इह मच्चिएहि...
(Ac. I. 113) + पासबद्धा सरीरिणो..
(Utt. 23. 40) Cp....बालास्ते मृत्यो र्यन्ति विततस्य पाशम...
(Kth. Up. 1.4.2) (41) संति पाणा अंधा तमंसि वियाहिता
(v. L. तमं पविट्ठा)...
(Ac. I. 180) + तमाओ ते तमं जंति...
(Su. I. 1. 1. 14; 3. 1. 11) ...आतदंडा...गंता ते पावलोगयं आसरियं दिसं...
(Su. I. 2. 3. 9) आसूरियं नाम...अंधं तमं..
(Su. I. 5. 11) + निति तमं तमेणं...
(Utt. 14. 12) + ..अंधा...तमं पविट्ठा...
(Bhag. 7.7. 292)
+
+
+

Page #34

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
23
Cp. असुर्या नाम ते लोका अन्धेन तमसावृताः । ताँस्ते प्रेत्याभिगच्छन्ति ये के चात्महनो जनाः ।।
(Īśa Up. 3) + अन्धं तमः प्रविशन्ति...ततो भूय इव ते तमः...रताः.. (BdA. Up. 4.4. 10; = Isa. Up. 9, 12; Vjsam. 40.9. 12;
SpBr. 14. 7. 2. 13) + अनन्दा नाम ते लोका अंधेन तमसावृताः। ताँस्ते प्रेत्याभिगच्छन्त्यविद्वांसोऽबुधो जनाः॥ (BdA. Up. 4. 4. 11, = Vijsam.40. 3; see Kth. Up. 1.3,
SpBr. 14.7.2.14) + अन्धं तमः...
(Av. 18.3.3) + न हिनस्त्यात्मनात्मानं ततो याति परां गतिम्...
(Gt. 13. 28) (42) सत्ता कामेहिं माणवा..
(Ac. I. 180 = Su. I. 1. 1.6) + आरंभसत्ता पकरेंति संग...
(Ac. I. 62) + अतियच्च सव्वओ संगं...
(Ac. I. 184) + मंदा पकरेह पावं...
(Utt. 12. 39) Cp. तदेव सक्तः सह कर्मणैति... (BdA. Up. 4. 4.6; SpBr. 14. 7. 2. 8) + संगस्तेषूपजायते...
(Gt. 2. 62) + सक्ताः कर्मण्यविद्वांसः...
(Gt. 3. 25) + संगं त्यक्त्वात्मशुद्धये...
(Gt. 5.11) (43) णो पाणिणं पाणे समारंभेज्जासि...
(Ac. I. 121) Cp....प्राणभृतः प्राणं न विच्छिन्द्यात्...
(BdA. Up. 1. 5. 14) (44) ...चेच्चाण भेउर कायं संविहुणिय...भेरवमणुचिण्णे...कालपरियाए... (Ac. I. 228) + संवुडे देहभेदाए...
(Ac. I. 250) [For details, see above Section 1, (24) : the Jaina passages.] . CD.....शरीरमत्सृज्य संन्यासेनैव देहत्यागं करोति, स कृतकृत्यो भवति... (Ndpv. Up.3.86) + ...संन्यासेन देहत्यागं करोति...
(Yv. Up. 1) + ...संन्यासेन देहत्यागं करोति स परमहंसः...
(Jbl. Up. 6) + ...संन्यासेन देहत्याग कुर्वन्ति ते परमहंसाः...
(Bhk. Up) + ...संन्यासेन देहत्यागं करोति स परमहंसपरिव्राजको भवति...
(Phpv. Up.) [For details, see Section 1, (24-25), (57) : the Brahmanical passages.] (45) अंतो अंतो पूतिदेहंतराणि पासति पुढो वि सवंताई...
(Ac. I. 92) + विगिंच मंससोणितं...
(Ac. I. 143) Cp. ...जायस्स म्रियस्वेत्येतत्...तस्माज्जुगुप्सेत...
(Ch. Up. 5. 10.8) + मांस...शोणित...दूषिते...दुर्गन्धे...शरीरे...and + ...अस्थिचर्म...दूषिते विण्मूत्र...संघाते दुर्गन्धे...शरीरे...
(Mt. Up. 1. 2)

Page #35

24
+ ... शरीरमिदं... निरय एव... विण्मूत्र... मलै र्बहुभिः परिपूर्णमेतादृशे शरीरे...
(Mt. Up. 1. 3 = 3. 4, also Mt. Up. 2. vss. 4-8). (Ndpv. Up. 3. 46-48) (Śjbl. Up. 1. 21)
+ अस्थिस्थूणं... दुर्गन्धिपूर्णं मूत्रपुरीशय:... (MS 6. 76 foll. = MBh. 12. 329. 42) + किमिच्छन्न कस्य कामाय शरीरमनुसंज्वरेत्...
(BdĀ. Up. 4. 4. 12)
+ अस्थिस्थूणं... नरकेऽपि सः.... + अत्यन्तमलिनो देह:...
+ (see also Samyuttanikāya 421. 20-21 ) (46) एस परिण्णा पवुच्चति कम्मोवसंती... से हु दिट्ठपहे मुणी... Cp.... कर्मक्षये याति स तत्त्वतोऽन्यः...
(47) खेयण्ण- निक्कम्म, eg.
वीरे आतगुत्ते खेणे....
Bansidhar Bhatt
Cp. प्रधान-क्षेत्रज्ञपति र्गुणेश: ...
+ यश्चेतनमात्रः प्रतिपूरुषं क्षेत्रज्ञः...
+
.. नैष्कर्म्य...
+ ... योऽकामः निष्कामः... ब्रह्मैव सन् ब्रह्माप्येति...
(48) पासग, eg.
(49) तस थावर, e. g.
अदु थावरा य तसत्ताए तसजीवा य थावरत्ताए... Cp. स्थातुश्चरथं भ्रमते...
+ पशुंश्च स्थातॄंश्चरथं च पाहि...
+ जगतस्तस्थुषश्च...
+ जगतस्स्थातुरुभयस्य...
+ सर्वस्य लोकस्य स्थावरस्य चरस्य च...
(50) गंथ - गढिय, eg.
किमत्थ उवधी पासगस्स ? ण विज्जति... + उद्देसो पासगस्स नत्थि...
(Ác. I. 131 = 146) (Āc. I. 80, 151)
Cp. न पश्यो मृत्युं पश्यति ...सर्वं हु परमः पश्यति...सर्वग्रंथीनां विप्रमोक्षस्तस्मै मृदितकषायाय
तमसस्पारं दर्शयति....
+ यदा पश्यः पश्यते...ईशं पुरुषम्...
(Ch. Up. 7.7.2) (Md. Up. 3. 1. 3)

Jambū-jyoti
एस खलु गंथे... एस खलु निरए, इच्चत्थं गढिए लोए ..... Cp. यदा सर्वे प्रभिद्यन्ते हृदयस्येह ग्रन्थयः...
+ भिद्यते हृदयग्रंथि :... तस्मिन् दृष्टे परावरे....
+ सोऽविद्याग्रंथिं विकिरतीह...
(āc. I. 109) and निक्कम्मदंसी (Āc. I. 115, 145) (Śv. Up. 6. 16) (Mt. Up. 2.5)
(Āc. I. 97) (Ch. Up. 6. 4)
see (Gt. 3. 4; 18.49) (BdĀ. Up. 4. 4. 6)
(Ac. I. 267)
(Rv. 1. 58. 5) (RV. 1. 72-76)
(Rv. 1. 115. 1 = AV 13. 2. 35)
(RV. 4. 53.6) (Śv. Up. 3. 18)

(Md. Up. 2. 2. 8)
(Ác. I. 14)
(Kth. Up. 2. 6. 14) = SarR. Up. 32; Ygs Up. 5.45; Ap. Up. 4. 31 )
(Md. Up. 2. 1. 10)

Page #36

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
25
+ ...सर्वग्रंथीनां विप्रमोक्षः...
(Ch. Up. 7.7.2; 7. 26. 2) (51) तितिक्खते,etc.,e.g. एत्थ विरते अणगारे दीहरायं तितिक्खते...
(Ac. I. 156, + (see also Ac. I. 184, 231, 253) Cp. शान्तो दान्त उपरतस्तितिक्षः...आत्मन्येवात्मानं पश्यति... (BdA. Up. 4.4.23) + ...तास्तितिक्षस्व भारत,...
(Gt. 2. 14) (52) सोता, ओव, आवट्ट,e.g.
उढें सोता अहे सोता तिरियं सोता...एते सोता...आवट्टमेयं तु... (Ac. I. 174) + एस ओदांतरे मुणी...
___(Ac. 99, 161) Cp. पंचस्रोतोम्बुम्...पंचावर्ताम्...पंचदुःखौघवेगान्...पंचपर्वानधीमः... तस्मिन् हंसो भ्राम्यते ब्रह्मचक्रे...
(Sv. Up. 1. 5-6 = Ndpv. Up. 9. 4) + ब्रह्मोडुपेन प्रतरेत विद्वान् स्रोतांसि सर्वाणि भयावहानि...
(5v. Up. 2. 8) (53) cli che, e.g. (a) दिटुं सुतं मयं विण्णायं
(Ac. I. 133) Cp. आत्मा वा अरे द्रष्टव्यः श्रोतव्यः मंतव्यः निदिध्यासितव्यः... दर्शनेन श्रवणेन मत्या विज्ञानेन...
(BdA. Up. 2. 4. 5) + ...दृष्टे श्रुते मते विज्ञाते...
(BdA. Up. 4. 5.6) (b) पाणा भूया जीवा सत्ता...
(Ac. I. 49, 132, 138, 139) Cp....सर्वे प्राणा सर्वे लोका सर्वे देवा सर्वाणि भूतानि... (BdA. Up. 2. 1. 20) (54) chiasmus, e. g. जे गुणे से आवट्टे, जे आवटे से गुणे ।
(Ac. I. 41) + एत्थ सत्थं समारंभमाणस्स इच्चेते आरंभा अपरिण्णाता भवंति, एत्थ सत्थं असमारंभमाणस्स इच्चेते आरंभा परिण्णाता भवंति...
(Ac. I. 16; also passim...) + जे लोगं अब्भाइक्खति से अत्ताणं अब्भाइक्खति, जे अत्ताणं अब्भाइक्खति से लोगं अब्भाइक्खति...
(Ac. I. 22,32,56) + (see also su. I. 2. 1. - वैतालीय- meter construction) Cp. श्यामाच्छबलं प्रपद्ये शबलाच्छयामं प्रपद्ये...
(Ch. Up.8. 13. 1) + यस्यामतं तस्य मतम...अविज्ञातं विजानतां विज्ञातमजानताम्... (Kn. Up. 11 = 2.3) + अस्तीति चेन्नास्ति तदा नास्ति चेदस्ति...
(Tjbd. Up. 5. 26) + अन्तर्यदि बहि: सत्यमन्ताभावे बहि न च...
(Tjbd. Up. 5. 37) (55) आरंभ-समारंभ (आलभ),e.g. एत्थ सत्थं समारंभमाणस्स इच्चेते आरंभा अपरिण्णाया भवंति...
(Ac. I. 29) Cp. ...अनारम्भी...
(Gat. Dh. Su.3.24) (56) भुजंगमे जुण्णतयं जहा चए, विमुच्चती से दुहसेज्ज माहणे...
(Ac. II. 801)

Page #37

26
+ तयसं व जहाइ से रयं ...
+
जय भोई तयं भुयंगो निम्मोयणि हिच्च पलेइ मुत्तो...
+ ममत्तं छिंदइ ताहे महानागोव्व कंचुयं...
Cp. स यथाहिः, अहिच्छव्यइ, निर्मुच्येत ... एवमेव सर्वस्मात् पाप्मानो निर्मुच्येत ....
+
+
+
Bansidhar Bhatt
(JmBr. 2. 134)
+ यद्यथाहिनिवयनी वल्मीके मृता प्रत्यस्ता शयीतैवमेवेदं शरीरं शेते... (Bdā. Up. 4. 4. 7) + यथा पादोदरस्त्वचा विनिर्मुच्यते, एवं ह वै स पाप्मना विनिर्मुक्त:.... (Pśn. Up. 5. 5) + अहिनियनी सर्पनिर्मोको जीववर्जितः, वल्मीके पतितस्तिष्ठेत्, तं सर्पो नाभिमन्यते ... शरीरं (Vh. Up. 2. 67-68) + (See also Suttanipāta 1. 17; Gāndhāri-Dhammapada 81-90) (57) ततो णं महावीरस्स... सुक्कज्झाणंतरियाए, वट्टमाणस्स...दंसणे समुप्पण्णे...
नाभिमन्यते ....
(āc. II. 772)
+
... धम्म- सुक्काई झाणाई, झाणं तं तु बुहा वए....
(Utt. 30.35)
+ से किं तं झाणे ?...सुक्कज्झाणे... पण्णत्ते... (Aup. §30v = Bhag 25.7.237 - and 246 = Sth. 4. 1. 308, Prvy. 26) Cp....शुक्लध्यानपरायणः... शरीरमृत्सृज्य संन्यासेनैव देहत्यागं करोति, स कृतकृत्यो भवति.....
(Ndpv. Up. 3. 86 )
(Jbl Up. 6) (Bhk. Up.)
+

Jambu-jyoti
(Sū. I. 2. 2. 1)
(Utt. 14.34)
(Utt. 19.86)
..शुक्ल ध्यानपरायणः... संन्यासेन देहत्यागं करोति स परमहंस : ... .. शुक्लध्यानपरायणः.. संन्यासेन देहत्यागं कुर्वन्ति ते परमहंसा:... ..शुक्लध्यानपरायणः... संन्यासेन देहत्यागं करोति स परमहंसपरिव्राजको भवति...
...
(Phpv. Up.)
[For details, see above Section 1, (25): the Brahmanical passages.]

Page #38

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
मिलक्खू अमिलक्खुस्स जहा वृत्ताणुभासए । न हेउं से विजाणाइ भासियं तऽणुभासए । + जहा णाम कोइ मिच्छो नगरगुणे बहुविहे वियाणंतो । न चएइ परिकहेउं उवमाए तहिं असंतीए || + जहा न वि सक्को अणज्जो अणज्जभासं विणा दु गाहेदुं । तह ववहारेण विणा परमत्थुवदेसणमसक्कं ॥ Cp.... म्लेच्छाः स्वसंज्ञानियता:...
+ दुर्बोधं विषमं चैव राक्षसानां प्रकीर्तितम् ।
गूढाक्षरं तु यक्षाणां किन्नरैरुक्तवत् तथा ॥
Section 2
Sūtrakṛtānga-sūtra
+ (see also CatŚ. 8. 19)
अंधो अंधं पथं णितो दूरमद्धाणु गच्छइ... ।
+
अंधं व णेयारमणुस्सरित्ता...
+ अंधे व से दंडपहं गहाय...
+ यथान्धो वान्धमन्वीयात्...
+ णेता जहा अंधकारंसि गओ मग्गं ण जाणाति अपस्समाणो... Cp. दंद्रह्यमाणा परियन्ति मूढा अन्धेनेव नीयमाना यथान्धाः ...
(AUp. § 183 =

+ संबुज्झहा जंतवो माणुसत्तं दट्टं भयं बालिसेणं अलंभो....
+ इय जे मरंति जीवा, तेसिं पुण दुल्लहा
बोही...
... जाविंदिया न हायंति ताव धम्मं समायरे...
27
(Su. I. 1. 2. 15)
Prajñā. 2. 174)
दुक्खं ते नाइतुति सउणी पंजरं जहा....
+ सउणी जह पंसुगंडिया विहुणिय धंसयइ सियं रयं ....
+ दुक्खं ना तिउट्टंति सउणी पंजरं जहा...
+
..बद्धे गिए व पासेण...
Cp. स यथा शकुनि: सूत्रेण प्रबद्ध:... बन्धनमेवोपश्रयत एवमेव... प्राणबन्धनं हि

(Samay. 8)
(MBh. 8. 45.36)
(Kth. Up. 1.2.5 = Md. Up. 1. 2. 8) (MBh. 2. 38.3) (Sū. I. 1. 2. 22)
(Su. I. 2. 1. 15)
(VDhP. 4. 8)
(Sū. I. 1. 2. 19)
(Sū. I. 7. 16)
(Sū. I. 13.5) (Su. I. 14. 12)
(Ch. Up. 6. 8. 2) (YgŚ. Up. 59)
+ रज्ज्वा यद्वत् सुसंबद्धः पक्षी तद् वदिदं मनः...
+
पाशं छित्वा यथा हंसो... खमुत्क्रमेत्... छिन्नपाशस्तथा जीवः संसारं तरते सदा... (Ks. Up. 22)
संबुज्झह किं न बुज्झह संबोही खलु पेच्च दुल्लहा ....
(Sū. I. 2. 1. 1) (Utt. 10. 16, 18)
+ लद्धूण वि माणुसत्तणं... दुल्लहं... उत्तमधम्मसुई हु दुल्लहा...
+
.. बोही होइ सुदुल्लहा तेसिं....
+ ... बोही य से नो सुलभा पुणो पुणो...
(Utt. 8. 15) (Daśa. 11. 13) (Sū. I. 7. 11)
(Utt. 36.262) (Daśa. 8. 35)
+
Cp. उत्तिष्ठत जाग्रत प्राप्य वरान् निबोधत,...क्षुरस्य धारा निशिता दुरत्यया... दुर्गं पथस्तत् कवयो
वदन्ति...
(Kth. Up. 1. 3. 14)
(Sū. II. 1. 11)
(Sū. I. 4. 1. 9)

Page #39

28
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
Jambū-jyoti
+ इह चेदशकद् बोद्धुं प्राक् शरीरस्य विस्रस:...
(Kth. Up. 2. 6. 4)
+
...यो वा एतदक्षरन्... अविदित्वास्माल्लोकात् प्रैति स कृपणः... विदित्वा प्रति स ब्राह्मणः... (BdA. 3. 8. 10)
+ इहैव सन्तोऽथ विद्मस्तद् वयं, न चेदवेदी महती विनष्टि:...
+
+
Bansidhar Bhatt
+ इह चेदवेदीदथ सत्यमस्ति न चेदिहावेदीन्महती विनष्टि:... .. बहूनां जन्मनामन्ते ज्ञानवान् मां प्रपद्यते .... दुर्लभं तत्त्वदर्शनम्...
कुजए अपराजिए जहा अक्खेहिं कुसलेहिं दीवयं । कडमेव गहाय णो कलिं नो तीयं नो चेव दावरं || एवं लोगम्मिताइणा बुइए जे धम्मे अणुत्तरे । तं हि हियंति उत्तमं कडमिव सेसऽवहाय पंडिए ॥ Cp. कलिः शयानो भवति संजिहानस्तु द्वापरः ।
उत्तिष्ठत्रेता भवति कृतं संपद्यते चरन् ॥ (Ait. Br. 7. 15. 4=ŚpBr. 190. 17. 18)
+
उत प्रहामतिदीव्य जयाति कृतं यच्छ्वघ्नी विचिनोति काले....
(RV. 10. 42.9)
+
उत प्रहामतिदीवा जयति कृतमिव श्वघ्नी विचिनोति काले....
+ यथा कृताय विजितायाधरेऽयाः संयन्त्येवमेव...
(AV. 7. 50. 6) (Ch. Up. 4. 1. 4)
+
(MS. 1. 81)
Cp....मा गृधः कस्यस्विद् धनम्...
(BdĀ. Up. 4. 4. 14 = ŚpBr. 14. 7.2. 15) (Kn. Up. (13) = 2. 4, (Gt. 7.14) (Mh. Up. 4. 77)
.. चतुष्पात् सकलो धर्मः सत्यं चैव कृते युगे.... ... गिद्धनरा कामेसु मुच्छिया...
Cp. ... असितो देवलो व्यासः...
असिलो देविले चेव दीवायण महारिसि... पारासरे...
+ निम्ममे निरहंकारे...

एयम... निम्ममो निरहंकारो चरे भिक्खू....
Cp.... चरति... निर्ममो निरहंकार :...
... किं नु वीरस्स वीरतं... Cp... इन्द्रस्य नु वीर्याणि प्रोवाच...
कम्ममेगे पवेदेंति अकम्मं वावि सुव्वया... Cp... किं कर्म किमकर्म... कर्मणो ह्यपि बोद्धव्यं...
अकर्मणश्च बोद्धव्यम्...
... जे केई जगई जगा, (तेसिं अत्तुवमायाए)...
Cp. (ईशावास्यमिदं सर्वं ) यत् किं च जगत्यां जगत्... ...मणसा कायवक्केण णारंभी...
Cp.... यतवाक्कायमानस:...
Su. I. 6 "वीरत्थुती" :
vs. 6 :- अणुत्तरं तप्पति सूरिए वा... तमं पगासे...

(Sū. I. 2. 2. 23-24)
(Sū. I. 2. 3. 8) (Isa. Up. 1)
(Sū. I. 3. 4. 3)
(Gt. 10.13)
(Sū. I. 9. 6) (Utt. 35.21) (Gt. 2.71)
(Sū. I. 8. 1)
(Ait. Br. 5.2) (Sū. I. 8. 2)
(Gt. 4. 16-17)
(Sū. I. 11.33)
(īśa. Up. 1 )
(Sū. I. 1. 9. 9)
(Gt. 18. 52 )

Page #40

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
29
+ जहा से तिमिर विद्धंसे...दिवायरे, जलंते इव तेएणं...
(Utt. 11. 24) + सुरो व्व दित्ततेए
(Aup. 8 30 = Prvy. 29) Cp. ज्योतिषां रविरंशुमान्...
(Gt. 10. 21) + ..तदादित्यः...स प्रजापतिः
(Yajur-veda. 32. 1) + दीप्तानलार्कद्युति-...
(Gt. 11. 17) + आदित्यवर्णं तमसः परस्तात्
(Gt. 8.9 = $v. Up. 3. 8) vss. 7-8 :- इंदेण देवाणं, ...सक्केव देवाहिवई जुइमं... + जहा से...सक्के देवाहिवई..
(Utt. 11. 23) Cp. देवानाम्...वासवः...
(Gt. 10. 22) vs. 8 :- महोदही वापि अणंतपारे... Cp. सरसाम्...साडारः
(Gt. 10. 24) + ता आपः स प्रजापतिः
(Yajurveda 32. 1) vs. 9 :- सुदंसणे वा नगसव्वसेटे... Cp. मेरुः शिखरिणाम्...
(Gt. 10. 23) + जहा से नगाण पवरे...मंदरे गिरी...
(Utt. 11.29) . + गिरिराया चेव मंदस्वर
(Prvy. 26) vs 11 :- पुढे नभे चिट्ठइ भूमिवट्ठिए.. Cp. द्यावापृथिव्योरिदम्...व्याप्तम्, ..नमःस्पृशम्...
(Gt. 11. 20, 24) vss. 12-13 :-...प्पगासे, विरायती कंचणमट्ठवन्ने...से जलिएव भोमे...पत्रायते सूरियसुद्धलेसे...मणोरमे ___ जोयइ अच्चिमाली... Cp. ..भाः सदृशी सा स्याद् भासस्तस्य महात्मनः...
(Gt. 11. 12) + ...आदित्यवर्णं तमसः परस्तात्...
(Sv. Up. 3. 8, = Gt. 8.9) + ...रवितुल्यरूप:...
(Sv. Up. 5. 8) + ...तदादित्यः...स प्रजापतिः
(Yajur-veda. 32. 1) vs. 18 :- रुक्खेसु...जह सामली वा Cp. अश्वत्थः सर्ववृक्षाणाम्...
(Gt. 10. 26) + जहा सा दुमाण पवरा, जंबू...
(Utt. 11. 27) + दुमेसु जहा जंबू
(Prvy. 26) vs. 19 :- चंदो व ताराण महाणुभावे + ...तदु चंद्रमा:...
(Yajur-veda 32. 1) + नक्खत्ताण व चंदिमा...
(Su. I. 11.22) + जहा से उडुवई चंदे नक्खत्तपरिवारिए...
(Utt. 11.25) + गहगण...तारगणं व जहा उड़पती
.. (Prvy. 26) Cp....नक्षत्राणाम्...शशां...
(Gt. 10. 21) vs. 20 :- नागेसु वा धरणिंदमाहु सेठे... Cp. + अनन्तश्च...नागानाम्...
(Gt. 10. 29)

Page #41

30
Bansidhar Bhatt
Jambū-jyoti
हत्थीसु एरावणमाहु... + ऐरावतं गजेन्द्राणाम्...
(Gt. 10.27) + जहा...कुंजरे..
(Utt. 11. 18) + एरावण इव कुंजराणं
(Prvy. 26) + सिहो मिगाणं... Cp. मृगाणां च मृगेन्द्रः...
(Gt. 10.30) + सिहे मियाण पवरे
(Utt. 11.20) + सीहोव्व जहा मिगाण
(Prvy. 26, 29) + सलिलाण गंगा... Cp. स्रोतसाम्...जाह्नवी...
(Gt. 10.31) + जहा सा नईण पवरा...
(Utt. 11.28) + ता आप: स प्रजापतिः
(Yajur-veda 32. 1) + पक्खीसु वा गरुले वेणुदेवो... Cp. वैनतेयश्च पक्षिणाम्...
(Gt. 10. 30) + ...दिव्यः स सुपर्णो गरुत्मान्
(Rv. 1 164.46) + सुपर्णं विप्रा...एकं सत्तं...कल्पयन्ति
(Rv. 10. 114.5) (14) जहा कुम्मे सअंगाइ सए देहे समाहरे। एवं पावाई मेधावी अज्झप्पेण समाहरे ।।
(Su. I. 8. 16) + कुम्मो व्व अल्लीण-पलीण-गुत्तो...
(Dasa. 8.40) + कुम्मो इव गुत्तिदिए अल्लीणे पल्लीणे चिट्ठइ,..
(Bhag. 25.7.215) + कुम्मो विव सअंगाई सए देहम्मि साहरे...
(Rs. 16. 1755) + कुम्मो इव...गुत्ते...
(Aup.8 30 = Prvy. 29) Cp. इन्द्रियाणि समाहृत्य कूर्मोङ्गानीव सर्वशः...
(Ndpv. Up. 3.74) + कर्मोङ्गानीव संहृत्य मनो हृदि निरुध्य च...
___ (Ks. Up. 3) + यदा संहरते चायं कूर्मोङ्गानीव सर्वशः...
(Gt. 2. 58) + यदा संहरते कामान् कर्मोङ्गानीव सर्वशः...
(MBh. 12. 168.40) + प्रसार्येह यथाङ्गानि कूर्मः संहरते पुनः...
(MBh. 12. 313. 39) + (see also Samyuttanikāya 1.7, 17 foll.) (15) सयं कडं णन्नकडं च दुक्खं आहेसु विज्जाचरणं पमोक्खं... (Su. I. 12. 11) ___Cp. विद्यया तदारोहन्ति यत्र कामाः परागताः । न तत्र दक्षिणा यन्ति नाविद्वांसस्तपस्विन-इति ।।
(SpBr. 10. 5. 4. 16) (16) सव्वं जगं तू समयाणुप्पेही पियमप्पियं कस्सइ णो करेज्जा... (Su. I. 10. 7 = 13. 22) + पियं न विज्जइ किंचि अप्पियं विन विज्जई...
(Utt. 9. 15) Cp. ..अशरीरं वाव सन्तं न प्रियाप्रिये स्पशतः...
(Ch. Up. 8. 12. 1) (17) नविणासी (वि णासी?) कयाइ वि...
(Su. I. 1.3.9) ___ + ...सतो य अत्थी असतो य णत्थि...
(Su. II. 6. 12)

Page #42

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
+ ण कदाति णासि न कदाति न भवति न कदाति न भविस्सति य... (Rs. 37. 1) Cp....न त्वेवाहं जातु नासम्...
(Gt. 2. 12) + ...न सन्न चासत्...
(5v. Up. 4. 18) + नासतो विद्यते भावो नाभावो विद्यते सतः...
(Gt. 2. 16) (18) ...भारवहा हवंति उट्टा वा...
(Su. I. 4.2. 16) + ...तुब्भेत्थ भो भारधरा गिराणं अद्रं न जाणेह अहिज्ज वेए...
(Utt. 12. 15) + जहा खरो चंदणभारवाही भारस्स भागी न हु चंदणस्स। एवं खु नाणी...न हु सोग्गइए ॥
(Av. Nir. 100) Cp. यथा खरश्चंदनभारवाही भारस्स वेत्ता न तु चंदनस्य ।
एवं हि शास्त्राणि बहून्यधीत्य चार्थेषु मूढाः खरवद् वहन्ति ।
(Nir. 1.8) = उत्तरगीता (v. L... वहेत् सः॥
+ (see also Sū. Sam. 4. 4) (19) भावणाजोगसुद्धप्पा जले नावा व आहिया...
(Su. I. 15.5) + सरीरमाहु नावत्ति जीवो वुच्चइ नाविओ...
(Utt. 23.73) Cp. ब्रह्मोडुपेन प्रतरेत विद्वान् स्रोतांसि सर्वाणि भयावहानि...
(Sv. Up. 2. 8) + सर्वं ज्ञानप्लवेनैव वृजिनं संतरिष्यसि...
(Gt. 4. 36) (20) मग्गं न जाणाति अपस्समाणे...धम्मं न जाणाइ अबुज्झमाणे से कोविए जिणवयणेण पच्छा...पासति...
(Su. I. 14. 13) Cp. ...एतां दिशं गन्धाराः, एतां दिशं व्रजेति, स ग्रामाद् ग्रामं पृच्छन् पंडितो मेधावी गन्धारानेवोपसंपद्यतैवमेवाहाचार्यवान् पुरुषो वेद...
(Ch. Up. 7. 14. 2) (21) Su. I. 4 "इत्थीपरिना", e. g.
___Cp. Mh. Up. 3. 35-37 (22) मुंजाओ इसियं...मुंजे इयं इसियं...
(Su. II. 1.9) Cp. ...यथा मुंजादिषीका विवृहेद् एवमेव...पाप्मनो निरमुच्यत... (Jm. Br. 2. 134) + ...तं स्वाच्छरीरात्प्रवृहेन्मुंजादिवेषीकां धैर्येण...
(Kth. Up. 2. 6. 17) + (see also Dīghanikāya 2. 77). (23) अव्वत्तरूवं पुरिसं महंतं सणातणं अक्खयमव्वयं च...
(Su. II. 6.47) Cp. वेदाहमेतं पुरुषं महान्तम्...
(5v. Up. 3.8) + तमाहुरग्र्यं पुरुषं महान्तम्...
(Sv. Up. 3. 19) + अचिन्त्यमव्यक्तमनन्तरूपम्...
(Kv. Up. 6) + ...अव्ययः...सनातनः...पुरुषः...
(Gt. 11. 18) + ...महतो महान्तम्..., पुरुषं सनातनम्...
(Mh. Up.4.71)

Page #43

32
(1)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(Kth. Up. 1. 2. 18 = Gt. 2. 20; Mh. Up. 5.165) + अविनाशी तु तद् विद्धि... विनाशमव्ययस्यास्य न कश्चित् कर्तुमर्हति .... (Gt. 2. 17) जहा य अग्गी अरणी असंतो खीरे द्ययं तेल्लमहा तिलेसु, एवमेव जाया सरीरंसि सत्ता....
(2)
(Utt. 14.18)
(7)
(8)
Section 3: Uttaradhyayana-sūtra
नत्थि जीवस्स नासु त्ति एवं पेहेज्ज संजए.... Cp. जीवापेतं वाव... म्रियते, न जीवो म्रियत इति ..
+ अविनाशी वा अरे अयमात्मा...
+
न जायते म्रियते वा विपश्चिद् अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराण: ..
+ क्षीरे सर्पिरिवार्पितम्...
+ अरण्यो र्निहितो जातवेदाः...
Bansidhar Bhatt
Cp. तिलेषु तैलं दधनीव सर्पिः, अरणीषु चाग्निः एवमात्मा गृह्यते ....
(Śv. Up. 1. 15
+ घृतमिव पयसि निगूढम् ...
+ तिलेषु तैलमिव....
+ तिलानां तु यथा तैलम्...
+ तिलेषु च यथा तैलम्....
Cp. समौ शत्रौ च मित्रे च.. सव्वारंभपरिच्चाओ....
+ Cp. सर्वारंभपरित्यागी... समलेडुकंचणे....
Cp. समलोष्टाश्मकांचन:..
समया सव्वभूएसुसत्तुमित्तेसु वा...
समो य सव्वभूएसु.... Cp. समोऽहं सर्वभूतेषु...
(Utt. 2. 27)
(Ch. Up. 6. 11.3) (Bdā. Up. 4. 5. 14)

लाभालाभे सुहे दुक्खे... समो निंदापसंसासु तहा माणावमाणओ....
Cp. स्तूयमानो न तुष्येत निंदितो न शपेत्परान्...
Jambu-jyoti
= Bhm. Up 1 ) (Śv. Up. 1. 16) (Kth. Up. 2. 4. 8) (Bhmbd. Up. 20)
(Hms. Up. 4) (Dhbd. Up. 7) (Bhmvd. Up. 35 ) (Utt. 19.25)
(Gt. 12. 18) (Utt. 19.29) (Gt. 12. 16)
+ सुखदुःखे समे कृत्वा लाभालाभौ.....
+ समः... मानावमानयो:, तुल्यनिंदास्तुतिः.... + ...तुल्यनिंदात्मसंस्तुति:....
जहा पोमं जले जायं नोवलिप्पइ वारिणा, एवं अलित्तं कामेहिं तं वयं बूम माहणा...
+ तम्हा खलु अपरिसाडिणो बुद्धा नोवलिप्पंति पुक्खरपत्तं व वारिणा...

+ सव्वे विरत्तो... न लिप्पए भवमज्झे वि संतो, जलेण वा पोक्खरिणी- पलासं ...
(Utt. 35.13) (Gt. 14. 24) (Utt. 19. 89 )
(Gt. 9.29)
(Utt. 19.90) (KthR. Up. 4)
(Gt. 2. 38)
(Gt. 12. 18-19)
(Gt. 14. 24)
(Utt. 25-27)
(Utt. 32. 34 etc., passim.)
(Rs. 22. 1)

Page #44

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
33
+ पोक्खरपत्तं व निरुवलेवे...
(AUp. 830 = Prvy.29) Cp. ...यथा पुष्करपलाश आपो न श्लिष्यन्त एवमेवंविदि पापं कर्म न श्लिष्यते...
(Ch. Up. 4. 14. 3) + न तस्य लिप्यते प्रज्ञा पद्मपत्रमिवाम्भसा...
(Mh. Up. 5. 173) + लिप्यते न स पापेन पद्मपत्रमिवाम्भसा...
(Gt. 5. 10) + (see also Suttanipāta 44. 8, 9)
अत्थि एगं धुवं ठाणं लोगग्गंमि दुरारुहं। जत्थ नत्थि जरामच्चू वाहिणो वेयणा जहा ॥ ...तं ठाणं सासयं वासं... सपत्ता न सोयंति...
(Utt. 23. 81, 84) Cp. तपसा कर्म कवयोऽनुगत्य आह्नाय मृत्युमतिमेधयायन् । यत्रामृतं न विद्यते नोत मृत्युस्तत्र विद्वांसः कवयो क्षियन्ति...
(Jm. Br. 2. 73-74) + न जायते म्रियते वा विपश्चित्...अजो नित्यः..
(Kth. Up. 1. 2. 18 = Gt. 2. 20; Mh. Up. 5. 165) + यद् गत्वा न निवर्तन्ते तद् धाम परमं मम...
(Gt. 15.6) (10) अयं...दुट्ठस्सो परिधावई, आरूढो कहं तेण न हीरसि? पधावन्तं निगिण्हामि सूयरस्सीसमाहियं, न मे गच्छइ उम्मग्गं...
__ (Utt. 23. 55-56) Cp. आत्मनं रथिनं विद्धि शरीरं रथमेव तु, बुद्धि तु सारथिं विद्धि मनः प्रग्रहमेव च, इन्द्रियाणि हयानाहु विषयाँस्तेषु गोचरान्...
(Kth. Up. 1. 3. 3-4) + ...दुष्टाश्वा इव सारथेः,...सदश्वा इव सारथे:...
(Kth. Up. 1. 3.5-6) + विज्ञानसारथि र्यस्तु मनःप्रग्रहवान् नरः...
(Kth. Up. 1. 3.9) + ...बुद्धीन्द्रियाणि...रश्मयः कर्मेन्द्रियाणि...हया रथः शरीरं मनो-नियन्ता ...(Mt. Up. 2.9) + दृष्टाश्वयुक्तमिव वाहमेनं विद्वान्मनो धारयेताप्रमत्तः ।
($v. 2.9) (11) जहा सा नईण पवरा सलिला सागरंगमा...
(Utt. 11. 28) Cp. यथा नद्यः स्यन्दमानाः समुद्रेऽस्तं गच्छन्ति...
(Md. Up. 3. 2. 8) + यथा नदीनां बहवोऽम्बुवेगा: समुद्रमेवाभिमुखा द्रवन्ति...
(Gt. 11. 28) + ...इमा...नद्यः...समुद्रमेवापियन्ति..
(Ch. Up. 7. 10. 1) (12) अउलं सुहं संपत्ता उवमा जस्स नत्थि उ...
(Utt. 36.67) + अमरोवमं जाणिय सोक्खमुत्तमं...
(Dasa. 11. 10) + ण वि अत्थि माणुसाणं तं सोक्खं... सिद्धाणं...णत्थि तस्स ओवम्म...
(AUp. 8 184 = Prajna. 22. 11. 171-175) Cp. ...ते ये शतं मानुषा आनन्दा...स एको ब्रह्मण आनन्दः.... (Tait. Up. 2. 8) + ...आत्मनि यत्सुखं लभेत्, न शक्यते वर्णयितुं गिरा...
(Mt. Up. 4. 9) + ...अथ ये शतं मनुष्याणामानंदा...अथैष एव परम आनंद एष ब्रह्मलोक:...
(BdA. Up. 4. 3. 32) (13) धणुं परक्कम किच्चा जीवं इरियं सया, धिइं च केयणं किच्चा सच्चेण पलिमंथए...
(Utt. 9. 21)

Page #45

34
(14)
(15)
(17)
(18)
(19)
Jambū-jyoti
Cp. प्रणवो धनुः शरो ह्यात्मा ब्रह्म तल्लक्ष्यमुच्यते, अप्रमत्तेन वेद्धव्यं शरवत् तन्मयो भवेत्...
(Md. Up. 2. 2. 4
(20)
Cp. इदमस्तीदमपि मे भविष्यति पुन र्धनम्...
(16)
....गमिस्सामो भिक्खमाणा कुले कुले....
Cp. पुत्रैषणायाश्च वित्तैषणायाश्च लोकैषणायाश्च व्युत्थायाथ भिक्षाचर्यं चरन्ति...
+ धनुस्तारं शरो ह्यात्मा... शरवत् तन्मयो भवेत्.... संखचक्कगयाधरे...
+ संखचक्कयगसत्तिणंदगधरा...
Cp. शंखचक्रगदा... धरस्य वै...
इमं च मे अत्थि इमं च मे नत्थि, इमं च मे किच्च इमं अकिच्चं ...
Bansidhar Bhatt
+
+
Cp. क्षुरस्य धारा निशिता दुरत्यया दुर्गं पथस्तत् कवयो वदन्ति... जहा उ चरई मिगे, एवं धम्मं चरिस्सामि...
+ मिगचारियं चरित्ताणं गच्छइ मिगचारियं...
..ये ह्युपवसन्त्यरण्ये शान्ता विद्वांसो भैक्षचर्यां चरन्तः.... त्रिषु वर्णेषु भिक्षाचर्यं चरेत्...
असिधारागमणं चेव दुक्करं चरिउं तवो...
+ ...गोवन्मृगयते मुनिः..
+ गोधर्मा मृगधर्मा वा... न लिप्यते कर्मणा पातकेन वा...
... भासच्छन्ना इवाग्गिणो...
+ भासच्छण्णो जहा वण्ही...
+
+
Cp.. .... दग्धेन्धनमिवानलम् ....
+
.. प्रच्छन्नो भस्मनेव हुताशन:..
+
... भस्मच्छन्नमिवानलम् ...
+
+
+
+
+

+ मिगचारियं चरिस्सामि सव्वदुक्खविमोक्खणि....
Cp. मृगैः सह परिस्पन्दः संवासस्तेभिरेव च ।
तैरेव सदृशी वृत्तिः प्रत्यक्षं स्वर्गलक्षणम् ॥ (Bdh. Dh. Su. 3. 2. 19 = 3. 2. 22)
+ कृच्छ्रां वृत्ति असंहार्यां सामान्यां मृगपक्षिभिः....
(Bdh. Dh. Sū. 3. 3. 21 )
(Sny. Up. 2.78) (Ps. Sū. 5. 18-20)
=
... भस्मच्छन्न इवानलः...
. भस्मांगवृतांगान् इव हव्यवाहान्... ... गूढोऽग्निरिव दारुषु ...
... यथानलो भस्मवृतश्च वीर्यवान्...
. भस्मच्छन्नानिवाग्नी स्तान्... ...जुगमित्तं च खेत्तओ... ...पुरओ जुगमायाए पेहमाणो.....
. जुगमायाए पेहाए...

Dhbd. Up. 14) (Rhd. Up. 38 ) (Utt. 11. 21) (Pvy. 15) (Gputt. Up. 1)
(Utt. 14.15 )
(Gt. 16.13) (Utt. 14.26)
(Bdā. Up. 4. 4. 23)
(Md. Up. 1. 2. 11)
(Sny. Up. 1) (Utt. 19.37 )
(Kth. Up. 1. 3. 14) (Utt. 19, 77-80)
(Utt. 19. 81-84) (Utt. 19.85)
(Utt. 25.18) ( Rs. 15. 1747) (Śv. Up. 6. 19) (MBh. 4. 34.29)
(MBh. 4.64.6) (MBh. 3. 262. 30) (MBh. 1. 178. 9)
(MBh. 12. 137.40)
(MBh. 4. 6.3) (MBh. 13.59.7)
(Utt. 24.7) (Daśa. 5. 1.3) (Daśa. 6. 150)

Page #46

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
35
Cp. तिष्ठतो व्रजतो वापि यस्य चक्षु न दूरगम् । चतुर्युगां भुवं मुक्त्वा ...
(Ndpv. Up. 3.66) + चरेत...युगमात्रावलोकी...
(Sat. Up. 18) (21) जहा भुयाहि तरिउं दुक्करो रयणायरो...
(Utt. 19.42) __ [Cp. तितीर्घ र्दुस्तरं मोहादुडुपेनास्मि सागरम्... Kalidasas Raghuvamsa 1. 2] (22) मिहिलाए डज्झमाणीए न मे डज्झइ किंचणं...
(Utt. 9. 14) Cp. MBh. 12. 9917 (see also 529. 6641) + (see also Jätaka 539. 125; Samyuttanikāya 1. 114; Mahāvastu 3.
453... from Utt. J. Charpentier. p: 314)

Page #47

Bansidhar Bhatt
Jambū-jyoti
Section 4: (A) Daśavaikālika-sūtra
कहं चरे, कहं चिट्टे, कहं आसे, कहं सए? कहं भुंजन्तो भासन्तो पावं कम्म न बंधई ?
(Dasa.4.7) Cp. स्थितप्रज्ञस्य का भाषा समाधिस्थस्य केशव? स्थितधीः किं प्रभाषेत किमासीत व्रजेत किम् ?
(Gt. 2.54) (2) ...मूलाओ खंधप्पभवो दुमस्स...
(Dasa.9.1) ___ + ...मूलसेके फलुप्पत्ती...
(Rs. 15. 1730). Cp. यद् वृक्णो रोहति मूलान्नवतर: पुन:...(BdA. Up. 3.9.28 = Sp. Br. 14. 6. 9. 3) (3) महुकारा समा...नाणापिंडरया...साहुणो...
(Dasa. 1. 5) Cp. ...सर्वं त्यक्त्वा माधुकरवृत्त्याहारमाहरन्..
(Ndpv. Up. 7) + ...माधूकरेणान्नमरनन्.....
(Phpv. Up.) + ...मधुकरवृत्त्याहारमाहरन्...
(Sny. Up. 2. 59) + ...मधुमक्षिकवत् कृत्वा माधूकरम्...
(Sny. Up. 2. 66) + ...चरेन्माधुकरं भैक्षं यति म्लेंच्छकुलादपि...
(Sny. Up. 2.71) (4) जहा ससी कोमुइजोगजुत्ते नक्खत्ततारागणपरिवुडप्पा, खे सोहइ विमले अब्भमुक्के...
(Dasa. 9. 1. 15) [Cp. नक्षत्रताराग्रहसंकुलापि ज्योतिष्मती चंद्रमसैव रात्रिः... Kalidasa's Raghuvamsa. 6. 22]
+ (see also Gandhārī Dhammapada 197.)
(B) Rsibhāsitāni, etc.
(1)
सव्वमिणं पुरा उदगमासि..
(Rs. 37. 2012) Cp. ...अग्रेऽप्रकेतं सलिलं सर्वमा इदम्, ...तुच्छेनाभ्वपिहितं यदासीत्...
__(Rv. 10. 129. 3, Jm. Br. 3. 367) से जहा णामते दड्डेसु बीएसु ण पुणो अंकुरुप्पत्ती भवति...ण पुणो सरीरुप्पत्ती भवति...
___(Rs. 20. 1780-1781) + से जहा णामए बीयाणं अग्गिदड्डाणं पुणरवि अंकुरुप्पत्ती ण भवई....
(AUp. 8 155 = Prajna. 36. 2176) + जहा दड्डाणं बीयाणं न जायंति पुणंकुरा। कम्मबीएसु दड्डेसु न जायंति भवंकुरा ।।
(Dasa. 5. 123) Cp. ज्ञानाग्निदग्धकर्माणम्....
(Gt. 4. 19) + दग्धे बीजे यथात्यन्तं प्रादुर्भवति नाङ्करः ।
कर्मबीजे तथा दग्धे न रोहति भवाङ्करः ।। (?) (Quoted in Ac. Cu. p. 129)

Page #48

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
37
(3)
इमा विज्जा महा विज्जा सव्वविज्जाण उत्तमा ।
जं विज्जं साहइत्ताणं सव्वदुक्खाण मुच्चति ।। Cp. [...सा विद्या या विमुक्तये... A floating verse ?]
(Rs. 17. 1757)
(Dasa. 5. 121)
Appendix (a) धूमहीणो जहा अग्गी खीयइ से निरिंधणे।
एवं कम्माणि खीयंति मोहणीज्जे खयं गए ।। Cp. यथा निरिन्धनो वह्निः स्वयोनावुपशाम्यते ।
तथा वृत्तिक्षयाच्चित्तं स्वयोनावुपशाम्यते । (b)...इज्जंजलि-होम-जप्प-उंडुरुक्क (v. L. उंदुरुक्क)-नमोक्कार... Cp....डुडुकार-नमस्कार-जप्योपहार...
(Mt. Up. 4. 6)
(Anuy. 27) (PsSu. 1.8)

Page #49

38
Bansidhar Bhatt
Jambū-jyoti
1. Abbreviations and Select Bibliography
(1) For “Prolegomena” :Alsdorf.
L. Alsdorf : Beiträge zur Geschichte von Vegetarismus und Rinderverehrung in Indien. Akademie d. Wiss. Liter. Mainz 6, 1961. For Review
on it, see Heesterman-1966 below. Bhatt-Rome.
B. Bhatt : Ahimsa in the Early Religious Tradition of India. Centre for Indian and Inter-relig. Studies,
Rome 1994. Bhatt-1989.
B. Bhatt: The Concept of the Self and Liberation in Early Jaina Āgamas. In : Self and Consciousness, Indian Interpretation. Centre for Indian and Inter
Relig. Studies, Rome 1989, pp. 132-72. Bhatt-1994.
B. Bhatt : Twelve aņuvekkhās in Early Jainism. In.
Fest. Klaus Bruhn... Reinbek 1994, pp. 171-93. Bhatt-1995.
B. Bhatt : Lupta-prāy Adi-kālīn Jain Tattva-jñānanā-Gūdh Samketo.... (In Gujarati). In Sāmīpya
12.1, B. J. Res. Inst., Ahmedabad 1995, pp. 1-49. Bodewitz.
H. W. Bodewitz : Review on Tull, see Tull below. In: Jourof the Amer. Orie. Soc. 3.1., New Haven
1991, pp. 173-74. Doctrine.
The Doctrine of the Jainas... from the original German : Die Lehre der Jainas ... by W. Schubring, Berlin 1935 translated in English by W. Beurlen.
Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi 1962. Gerow.
E. Gerow : What is Karma ?..... In: Proceedings. of the Conf., Sem. of Indian Studies, Stockholm
1982, pp. 87-116. Heesterman-1962. J. C. Heesterman : Vrātya and Sacrifice. In. Indo
Iranian Journal 6, The Hague 1962, pp. 1-37. Heesterman-1964. J. C. Heesterman : Brahmin, Ritual and Renouncer.
In : Wiener Zeitsch. f. d. Kunde Südasi., 8 Wien 1964, pp. 1-32.

Page #50

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
39
Heesterman-1966.
J. C. Heesterman : Review on Alsdorf, see Alsdorf above. In : Indo-Iran. Jour. 9, The Hague 1966, pp. 147-49.
Heesterman-1984.
J. C. Heesterman : Non-Violence and Sacrifice. In : Indolo. Taurin. 12, Totino 1984, pp. 119-27.
Heesterman-1985.
J. C. Heesterman: The Inner Conflict of Tradition. The Uni. of Chicago Press, Chicago 1985.
Horsch.
P. Horsch : Die vedische gathā-und śloka-Literatur. Bern 1966. For a Review on it, see Tsuj below.
Horsch-1971.
P. Horsch : Vorstufen der indisch, Seelenwander. - lehre. In : Asiat. Studien 25, Bern 1971, pp. 99157.
Kuiper.
F. B. J. Kuiper : Aryans in the Rigveda. Leiden Studies in Indo-Eur. 1, Amsterdam 1991.
Matas.
Parpola-1973.
E. A. Matas : Rgvedic Society. Leiden 1991. A. Parpola : Arguments for an Aryan Origin of the South Indian Megaliths. Madras 1973.
Parpola-1975.
A. Parpola : Sanskrit kāla- ... Dravidian kāl .... and the Mythical Cow of the Four Yugas. In : Indolo. Taurin. 3-4, Torino 1975-76, pp. 361-78.
Schmidt.
H. P. Schmidt: The Origins of Ahimsā. In: L. Renou Fel. Vol., Mêlanges D' Indianisme, Paris 1968 pp. 625-55.
Schmithausen-1991,
L. Schmithausen : The Problem of Sentience of Plants in Earliest Buddhism. Studia Philo.-Buddhica 7, Tokio 1991.
Schmithausen-1994.
L. Schmithausen : Review on Tull, see Tull below. In: Indo-Iran. Jour. 32.2, The Hague 1994, pp. 15158.
Smith.
R. M. Smith: The Early Heresies in the Developments of Indian Religions. In : Indolo. Taurin. 2, Torino 1974 pp. 149-98.

Page #51

40
Bansidhar Bhatt
Jambū-jyoti
Tsuj.
N. Tsuj. Review on "Horsch", In : Indo-Iranian Journal, 12, The Hague 1969 pp. 27-34.
Tull.
H. W. Tull: The Vedic Origin of Karma. New York 1990. For Reviews on it, see Bodewitz and Schmithausen-1994 above.
Wezler.
A. Wezler : Cattle, Field and Barley. In: Adyar Lib. Bulletin 50, Adyar-Madras 1986, pp. 437-77.
(2) For References :Note :
The texts / articles are arranged here roughly in different Topics from (A) to (E) on the basis of the ideas (in Topics mentioned) discussed in the studies concerned. In fact, our arrangement in Topics is overlapping, but it shall give the readers some information on the whole that these texts / articles also contain some source-material for the study of ideas mentioned in Topics.
Traces of karma, transmigration of the souls in early Brahmanical texts
W.D. O'Flaherty:
M. Witzel :
Introduction. To : Karma and Rebirth in Classical Indian Traditions. London 1980, pp. ix-xxv. Tracing the Vedic Dialects. In : Dialects ... IndoAryennes, Paris 1989, pp. 97-264. See also in Bibliography I (1) the following :
Bodewitz. Gerow. Heesterman-1964. Horsch.
Horsch-1971. Schmithausen-1994. Smith. Tull.
(B)
Traces of asceticism, Vrātyas as Aryans in early Brahmanical texts.
K. Rūping :
Zur Askese in indisch. Religionen. In: Zeitsch. f. Miss. -wiss. und Religionswiss. 2, Münster 1977, pp. 8198.

Page #52

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
L. Skurzak:
J. F. Sprockhoff :
J. F. Sprockhoff:
(c)
D. Seyfort Ruegg:
P. Schreiner:
W. Slaje :
(D)
M. Deeg:

Indian Asceticism in its Historical Development. In: Adyar Lib. Bulletin 31-32, Adyar-Madras 1968, pp.
202-10.
Die Alten im alten Indien.... In: Saeculum 30. 4. münchen 1979 pp. 374-433.
Aranyakas und Vanaprasthas In Wiener Zeit. f. d. Kunde Südasiens. Wien: 25. 1981 pp. 21-90; 28. 1984, pp. 5-43; 35. 1995, pp. 5-46.
See also in Bibliography I (1) the following:
Bhatt-Rome.
Heesterman-1962.
Heesterman-1964.
Heesterman-1985.
41
....
Horsch.
Kuiper.
Parpola-1975.
Traces of ahimsa in early Brahmanical texts :--- Ahimsa and Vegetarianism in the History of Buddhism. In: Buddhist Studies in Hon. of W. Rahula, London 1980, pp. 234-41.
Gewaltlosigkeit und Tötungsverbot in Hinduismus. In Angst u. Gewalt. Ed. H. von Stietencron, Düsseldorf 1979, pp. 287-308.
Heesterman-1966.
Heesterman-1984.
Bewußtsein und Wahrnehmungsvermögen von Pflanzen aus hindu Sicht. In: Graz Universitât, Graz 1989 pp. 147-69.
See also in Bibliography I (1) the following Alsdorf.
Schmidt.
Bhatt-Rome.

Schmithausen-1991.
Smith.
Wezler.
About Śramanas / shamans :
Shamanism in......Rv. 10. 136 and Rv. 7. 88. In: Jour. of Uni. of Nagoya 14, Nagoya 1993, pp. 95.
144.

Page #53

Bansidhar Bhatt
Jambu-jyoti
See also in Bibliography I (1) the following :Heesterman-1964. Parpola-1975. Heesterman-1985. Smith. Horsch.
Non-ahimsă in the Indus Valley :
C. L. Fabri :
The Cretan Bull-grappling Sport and the Bull-sacrifice in the Indus Valley Civilization. In : Annual Report, Archaeol. Survey of India, New Delhi 1934-35, pp. 93-101.
Mackay :
The Indus Culture ..... (?)
J. Marshall :
Mohenjo Daro and the Indus Civilization. I.....
See also in Bibliography I (1) the following -
Alsdorf.
Bhatt-Rome.

Page #54

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
II. Abbreviations and Bibliography
(1) Jaina Texts :Ac. Āyāranga-suttaṁ (Ācārāngasūtram). Ed. muni Jambūvijaya.
JĀgS. 2. 1. 1977. Ac.Cü. Ācāra-Cūrņi. Ed. Rşabhdevji kesarīmaljī Svetāmbar Samsthā,
Ratlam 1941. Anuy. Anuyogadvārasūtra, in : Nandisuttam and Anuogaddārāim.
Ed. muni Punyavijaya, Pt. D. Malvania, Pt. A. M. Bhojak, JĀgS.
1. 1968, pp. 59-205. Aup. Das Aupapātika Sūtra .... Einleitung, Text, Glossar by E.
Leumann, Abhandl. f. d. Kunde d. Morgenlandes 8. 2 Leipzig
1883. Also Kraus Reprint, Nendeln 1966. Āv-Nir. Avasyaka-Niryukti with Haribhadra's commentary. Āgamodaya
Samiti, Bombay 1916-17. Bhag. Bhagavati Vyākhyāprajñapti. (Viyāhapannatti). Ed. JĀGS 4.1
3 1974-82. Dasa. Daśavaikälika-sūtra. Ed. E. Leumann. English translation : W.
Schubring : Kleine Schriften, Wiesbaden 1977, pp. 118-248. Daśā. Daśāśrutaskandha, in : Suttāgame II pp. 919.46. Ed.
Pupphabhikkhu. Gurgaon Cantt. 1954. JĀNS. = Jaina-Agama-Series. Shrī Mahāvīra Jaina Vidyālaya, Bombay. Prajñā. Prajñāpanā. (Pannavaņāsuttam). Ed. muni Punyavijaya. JĀgS.
9.1. 1969. Praśnavyäkarana. in : Suttāgame I pp. 1199-1239. Ed.
Pupphabhikkhū. Gurgaon Cantt. 1953. Rs. Rsibhāṣitāni, in : Painnayasuttāim pp. 180-256. Ed. muni
Punyavijaya, Pt. A. M. Bhojak. JĀgS. 17. 1. 1984. Samay
Samayasāra of Kundakunda. Ed. A. Chakravarti, Bharatiya Jñānapītha, New Delhi 1971. (2nd Ed. A. N. Upadhye, H. L.
Jain.) Sth. Sthana, in: Suttāgame I pp. 183-315. Ed. Pupphabhikkhu.
Gurgaon Cantt. 1953
Prvy.

Page #55

44
Su.
Utt.
(2)
AL
ASS
Mt/Cow.
MUP.
NSP
PTS
Röer
SVUP.
YUP.
WLS
(a)
AitĀ.
Ait. Br.
AV.
GatDhSu.
Gt.
Jambu-jyoti Sūtrakṛta, in: Acārāngasūtra and Sūtrakṛtāngasūtra. Ed. muni Jambūvijaya. Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi 1978.
The Uttaradhyayana-sutra. Ed. J. Charpentier. Uppsala 1922.

Brahmanical Texts :
Some Abbreviations:
=
=
-
Bansidhar Bhatt
=
The Adyar Library Madras.
Anandāśrama Sanskrit Series, Poona.
The Twelve Principal Upanisads. Vol. 3, ed. T. Mitra, Cowel.
AL 1932.
Other than Upanisads :
Aitareya Aranyaka. Äss. 38, 1959.
Aitareya Brāhmaṇa. Ed. Th. Aufrecht, Bonn 1879.
Atharva-Veda. Ed. R. Roth., W. D. Whitney, Berlin 1924.
BdhDhSü. Baudhāyana Dharma Sutra. Ed. W. Caland. Bibliotheca Indica, Calcutta 1904-23.
Minor Upanisads. Vol. 1, ed. F. O. Schrader. AL 1912.
Nirnay Sagar Press, Bombay.
Pali Text Society, London.
The Twelve Principal Upanisads. Vols. 1-2, ed. E. Röer. AL 1931.
The Samanya Vedanta Upanisads, ed. Pt. A. Mahadev Sastri.
AL 1921.
The Yoga Upanisads, ed. Pt. A. Mahadeva Sastri. AL 1920. One Hundred and Eight Upanisads, ed. Wasudev Laxman Sastri Pansikar. NSP 1932.
Gautama Dharma Sutra. Ed. The Käsi Sanskrit Series 172. Banaras 1966.
Gītā, with a commentary by R. C. Zaehner. The Clarenden Press, Oxford 1972.

Page #56

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
JmBr.
Jaiminiya Brāhmaṇa. Ed. Lokesh Chandra, Nagpur 1954.
Mahābhāṣya. Patanjali's Mahābhāṣya. Ed. F. Kielhorn. Bombay 1892 foll. (Reprint: Osnabruck 1970).
Mahābhārata. Ed. V. S. Sukthankar, Poona 1933 foll.
Mäṇḍūkya-Kärikä: The Māṇḍūkya Upanisad and the Agama Sastra. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu 1990.
Manusmrti. NSP 1946.
MBh.
Mdy-K.
MS.
Nir.
Pasū.
RV.
SnkSSū.
SpBr.
Su-Sam.
VDHP.
VjSam.
Up.
(b)
Ait. Up.
Ap. Up.
BdA. Up.
Bhk. Up.
Bhm. Up.
Bhmbd. Up.
Bhmvd. Up. Ch. Up.

Nirukta of Yaska. Ed. N. Sköld, Leipzig 1926.
Pasupata Sūtra. Ed. R. Ananthakrishna. Trivandrum Sanskrit Series 143, Trivandrum 1940.
Ṛgveda. Ed. Vaidik Samsodhan Mandal, Poona, 1933 foll. Sankhāyana Srauta Sūtra. Ed. Lokesh Chandra, Nagpur
1953.
Satapatha Brāhmaṇa. Ed. A. Weber. Reprint: Banaras 1964. Suśruta Samhita, Pts. 1-3. Ed. Kāśī Sanskrit Granthamālā 156, Banaras 1954.
45
ViṣṇuDharmottara Purāṇa. Ed. Venkateshvar Press, Bombay (year ?).
Vājasaneyi-Samhitā, Mādhyandina-Sākhā and Kāṇva-Sākhā. Ed. A. Weber, Berlin 1852.
Upanisad. For Upanisads, see (b).
*
Upanisads :
Aitareya-Up. Rõer. pp. 233 fol. Annapūrṇā-Up. SVup pp. 26 fol. Brhad-Aranyaka-Up. ASS 15. 1914.
Bhiksuka-Up. MUp. pp. 231 fol. Brahma-Up. MUp. pp. 73 fol.
Brahmabindu-Up. NSP pp. 141 fol.
Brahmavidya-Up. YUp. pp. 249 fol. Chandogva-Up. ASS 14, 1914.

Page #57

46
Dhbd. Up.
Gb. Up. Gputt. Up.
Hms. Up.
Isa. Up.
Jbl. Up.
Kn. Up.
Ks. Up.
Ks.Br. Up.
Kth. Up.
Kth. R. Up.
Kv. Up.
Md. Up.
Mdy. Up.
Mgl. Up.
Mh. Up.
MhNn. Up.
Mt. Up.
Ndpv. Up.
Nsutt. Up.
Ph. Up.
Phpv. Up.
Pśn. Up.
Rdh. Up.
SarR. Up.
Sāt. Up.
Sbl. Up.
Sjbl. Up.
Sny-Up.

Bansidhar Bhatt
Dhyanabindu-Up. YUp. pp. 186 fol.
Garbha-Up. SVUp. pp. 168 fol.
Gopalottaratapini-Up. NSP. pp. 517 fol.
Hamsa-Up. YUp. pp. 559 fol. Īsa-Up. Röer, pp. 1 fol.
Jābāla-Up, Mup. pp. 57 fol.
Kena-Up Röer, pp. 13 fol.
Kṣurika-Up. YUp. pp. 37 fol.
Kausītaki-Brāhmaṇa-Up. SVUp. pp. 111 fol.
Katha-Up. Röer. pp. 39 fol.
Katha-Rudra-Up. NSP. pp. 473 fol.
Kaivalya-Up. NSP. pp. 128 fol.
Mundaka-Up. Ed. J. Hertel, Leipzig 1924.
Mandukya-Up. Röer. pp. 169 fol.
Mudgala-Up. SVUp. pp. 378 fol.
Mahā-Up. SVUp. pp.234 fol.
Mahā-Nārāyaṇa-Up. Ed. G. A. Jacob, Bombay Sanskrit Series,
Bombay 1888.
Maitrayaniya-Up. SVUp. pp. 388 fol.
Nāradaparivrājaka-Up. MUp. pp. 127 fol.
Nrsimhottaratapinī-Up. NSP. pp. 192 fol.
Paramahamsa-Up. MUp. pp. 43 fol.
Paramahamsaparivrājaka-Up. MUp. pp. 275 fol.
Praśna-Up. Röer. pp. 93 fol.
Rudra-hṛdaya-Up. NSP. pp. 478 fol.
Sarasvati-Rahasya-Up. NSP. pp. 551 fol.
Satyayaniya-Up. MUp. pp. 319 fol.
Subālā-Up. SVUp. pp. 460 fol.
Śrī-Jābāla-Darśana-Up. NSP. pp. 497 fol. Samnyasa-Up. NSP, pp. 411 fol.
Jambu-jyoti

Page #58

Jainism vis-à-vis Brahmanism
47
Svetāśvatara-Up. Röer. pp. 253 fol. Taittirīya-Up. Röer. pp. 181 fol.
Sv: Up. Tait. Up. Tjbd. Up. Tt. Up.
Tejobindu-Up. YUp. pp. 45 fol. Tripuratāpini-Up. NSP. pp. 532 fol.
Up. Vh. Up. Vjsc. Up. Ygs. Up. Yv. Up.
= Upanisad. Varāha-Up. YUp. pp. 464 fol. Vajrasūcikā-Up. SVUp. pp. 416 fol. Yogaśikhā-Up. YUp. pp. 390 fol. Yājñavalkya-Up. MUp. pp. 311 fol.
(3)
Miscellaneous Texts :PTS =
Pali Text Society, London. Anguttara-nikaya : PTS Reprint 1955 fol. Cat. S.:
Catuḥśataka of Aryadeva. Ed. K. Lang. Indiske
Studies 7, Kopenhagen 1986. Dhammapada :
PTS 1914. Digha-nikaya :
PTS 1890 fol. Gāndhari-Dhammapada: Ed. J. Brough, London Oriental Series 7,
London 1962. Jātakas :
PTS 1962 fol. Mahāvastu :
Ed. E. Senart, Paris 1882 fol. Samyutta-nikāya :
PTS 1913. Udānavarga :
PTS 1948.
000

Page #59

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between Jains and Heretics (Sūyagada 2, 6): Part one?
W. B. Bollée
śīlanka (śīlācārya) introduces this lecture by 17 Nijjutti stanzas”, only the first four of which occur pratīka-wise in Cū and are dealt with there. They commence with the niksepa of adda, the title of the lecture.
N 184. nāmam thavana addam davv'-addam c'eva hoi bhāv'-addam eso khalu addassa u nikkhevo cau-viho hoi ||
d: V: nikkhevõ cauvviho3
N 185. udag'-addam sār'-addam chavi-y'-adda vas'-adda taha siles'-addam | eyam davv'-addam khalu bhävenam hoi rāg'-addam 11
N 186. ega-bhavie ya baddhâue ya a(b)himuhie ya nama-goe ya ee tinni pagārā davv'-Adde honti nāyavvä 11
a : thus read with MSS in T; C: bhaviya-baddhāuya; TV : bhaviyabaddhāue;-b : thus read with MSS in T; TV: abhimuhae
N 187. Adda-pure Adda-su(y)o námeņam Addao tti an-agāro | tatto samutthiyam iņam ajjhayanaṁ Addaijjam ti 11 N 188. kamaṁ duvālas'-angam Jina-vayanam sāsayam mahābhāgam savv'-ajjhayaņāi tahā savv'-akkhara-samnivāyā ya 11 N 189. taha vi ya koī attho uppajjai taṁmi tańmi samayammi | puvva-bhanio anumao ya hoi Isibhāsiesu jahā 11
(N 184) Adda ('wet') can be looked upon as a designation, a figural representation, from a material and from a figurative point of view : this fourfold niksepa of adda does exist, no doubt (khalu).

Page #60

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
49
As is usual, the Nijjutti first niksepizes the title of the lecture, but for the details we mainly depend on Sīlânka, because for the Cunni we only have C with its many textual corruptions at our disposal.
Though I do not understand Jinadāsa's remark here", yet a hint can be drawn from him to the correct etymology of Addaya, namely one born under the asterism Ārdra, as mentioned by Pāṇini (4, 3, 28).
(N 185) "Moist” in material sense is moist with water (1), moist by nature (2), moist on the surface (3), oily (4) and sticky (5). Moist in a figurative sense is full of love-feeling.
Subsequently, śīlanka gives the following examples for dav'-adda : mud (1), Gmelina arborea (?), Sochal salt and the likes (2), camphor, red Aśoka? etc. (3), smeared with a fatty substance (as marrow) (4) and pillars, walls etc. smeared with hard mortaro (5).
(N 186) The quantity of life bound by a form of existence, the future name and the family—these are the three kinds of material adda one should know.
As to śīlânka, dravyârdra pertaining to Prince Ardraka can also be taken differently-according to Anuog $ 49110, that is -, namely concerning a soul which immediately after returning from a heaven'l is reborn in the person of Ardraka-kumāra whose quantity of life, name, and sex are the immaterial counterpart to dravyârdra'2
(N 187) In Addapura there lived a vagrant ascetic named Addaya, the son of Adda. After him, namely Addaya, this lecture got its name.
(N 188) The Jina's word, namely the 12 Angas, indeed is everlasting and eminent, (and) so are all their lectures and all combinations of syllables.
(N 189) Nevertheless, some truth appears this very moment as was said earlier and approved of in the Isibhāsiyäim.
As the stanza begins with taha vi ya a preceding jai vi is expected. Here apparently a stanza has dropped out which śīlâňka still had before him as he glosses the words jai vi by yady api sarvam-apîdam dravyârthatah sāsvatam.

Page #61

50
W. B. Bollée
Jambū-jyoti
Isibhāsiyesu : the 28th lecture of this text is called Addaijj'ajjhayanam. Besides, the Cunni on Anuog § 266 as well as Samav 23 mention our lecture and in Ţ II 136b 7 it says tathā pūrvam-apy-asāv artho'nyam uddisyokto'numatas'ca bhavati Rsibhāsitesûttarâdhyayanâdisu yathā. Utt 31, 16 mentions the 23 lectures of the Süyagada and Sāntisūri 616a 5 quotes Āvaśyaka-samgrahanī 36 (ĀVNHar 658a 12) enumerating the titles of the Sūy II lectures. Jinadāsa only tells us the Adda story, but does not comment on the following N stanzas :
N 190. ajj'-Addaena Gosāla-bhikkhu-bambha-vvai-ti-dandiņam | jaha hatthi-tāvasānam kahiyam inam-o tahā voccaṁ |
b: thus read m.c. for all edd. : bambhavaī; - d :?: vuccham N 191. gāme Vasanta-purae Sāmaio gharaņi-sahið nikkhanto | bhikkha-yariya-ditthā ohāsiya bhatta vehāsaṁ |||
N 192. saṁvega-samāvanno māi bhattam caittu diya-loe | caiūnaṁ Adda-pure Adda-suyo Addao jão || N 193. pīī ya donha dūo pucchaṇam Abhayassa patthave so vi | tenâvi samma-ditthi tti hojja padima rahammi gayā ||
N 194. datthum sambuddho rakkhio ya āsāna vāhana palāo pavvāvanto dhario rajjaṁ na karei, ko anno ? ||
c: thus to be corrected in Bollee 1995 : 136
N 195. a-ganinto nikkhanto viharai padimāě dārigā-vario su-yarana-vasu-hārāo ranno kahanam ca devie ||
c: thus v.1. in T for the metrically faulty : suvanna-vasu read by VT N 196. tam nei piyā tīse pucchana kahaņaṁ ca varaṇa-dovāre jānāhi pāya-bimbam āgamanaṁ kahana niggamanaṁ | N 197. padimâgaya-ssamīve sa-parīvārā a-bhikkha padivayanaṁ | bhogā suyāna pucchana suya-bãdha punne ya niggamanam || N 198. Rāyagihậgama corā rāya-bhayā-kahaņa tesi dikkhā ya| Gosāla-bhikkhu-bambhi ti-dandiyā tāvase[hi saha] vāly)o ||
d : thus read m.c. against VT and accordingly correct Bollée 1995 :
136

Page #62

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
51
N 199. vāe parāiittā savve vi ya saranam abbhuvagayā te Addaga-sahiyā savve Jina-vīra-sagāsě nikkhantä 1|
N 200.
na dukkarar vā nara-pāsa-moyanam gayassa mattassa vanaṁmi rāyam | jahā u cattavaliena tantuņā su-dukkaraṁ me padihāi moyanaṁ ||
a : thus MSS in T for :ņam;-c: all prints : vattâ
(N 190) That discussion of the monk Gosāla, the brahmin renouncer, the Tridandin, and the elephant ascetic with the venerable Addaka I shall recount just as it happened.
Tidandīņam: at Ţ II 154 b 4 śīlânka holds the speaker of Sūy 2, 6, 46 to be an eka-dandin; see my note on that stanza.
(N 191) In the village of Vasantapura, Sāmāiya went forth into homelessness with his wife. Seen a-begging, she was solicited (by him and therefore brought herself) to refuse food and hang herself.
Vasanta-purae : T II 137 b 1 Magadhā-janapade Vasanta-purako grāmah. modern Basantpur, north of Purnia, Bihar (Jain 1984 : 428).
Ohāsiya : Sa. *avabhāşita (Bollée 1994, s.v.).
Bhatta vehāsaṁ : T II 137 b 7 bhakta-pratyākhyāna-pūrvakam ātmódbandhanam akāri. Mahāvīra disapproved of violent deaths, but made an exception for hanging in extreme circumstances (Settar 1990 : 16 and 22 where our reference, and its combination with terminal fasting, is not dealt with, however).
(N 192) Panic-stricken (and) subject to illusion (he renounced) food, (died and) was reborn in heaven. After ending that course he was reborn as Addaya, the son of Adda, in Addapura.
Mai : ācāryasyânivedyâivasau māyāvi (T II 137 b 9). After this stanza Sīlanka's word commentary is silent till N 200. From N 195-199 the nijjutti's character as a teacher's aid of memory in a religion class becomes particularly clear. My rendering tries to mirror this style, but more than once cannot but be tentative.

Page #63

52
W. B. Bollée
Ja abū jy i
(N 193) Affection between the two. Messe iger He put a question to Abhaya. In the idea that there might be a sudden co aprehensive intuition (for Abhaya) a statue secretly travelled with this very (messenger),
Rahamsi : iyara-divase Abhayassa dhukko. Abhaya kumāra-sattam pāhu dań uvaņei bhanio ya, jahā Adda-kumāro añjalim karei, tena pāhudam paditthiyaṁ dūo ya sakkārio. Abhayo vi pariņāmiyāe buddhie pariņāmeuna so bhava-siddhio jo mae saddhim pim karei. Evaṁ saskappeüņa padimă kārijjai. Tam mañjūsāe chodhum acchai. So due anna yâvi āpucchai. Tena tassa mañjüsāe (padima) appiyā bhaņio ya eso, jahā kumāro bhannai eyam mañjūsam rahasse ugghādejjāsi, mā mahā - yana-majjhe, jahā na koi pecchei (Cū 415, 7 sqq.). As T II passes over these details of the statue story, he already may have read and not understood rahaṁmi.
(N 194) At (its) sight he did receive a revelation and, though guarded, he made off riding horses. Renouncing the world though held back, he did not rule. Who else (would) ?
Āsāņa vāhaņa : aśva-vāhanikayā vinirgataḥ (T II 138a 14). Cf. N 197 suyāna pucchana.
(N 195) Disregarding (a deity's warning) he fled the world, but remained under a layman's vow. (Then) he was sought in marriage by a young woman. Streams of golden gifts. Telling the king and queen.
(N 196) It was he whom her father brought her. Question and story about the way of choosing. You must recognize him by a disk on his feet / the shape of his feet. His arrival. Story. His renouncing worldly life.
(N 197) Near the man with the layman's vow she was constantly surrounded by others. The answer. Enjoyments. A children's question. The tying up by his son and his leaving into homelessness when (the 12 years' period) had come to an end.
(N 198) At his return to Rāyagiha (his former guardians had become) dacoits out of fear of the king. Their story and renunciation. The dispute with a Gosāla and a Buddhist monk, a brahmin, a Tridandin, and an ascetic.
(N 199) After being besieged in a religious dispute all of Ardraka's companions sought spiritual refuge with Mahāvīra and left worldly existence.

Page #64

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
(N 200) It is not difficult to free himself from the fetters of men for a mad elephant in the jungle, Oh king, but how to free myself from a thread turned around me as on a spindle seemed very difficult to me.
53
Jahā: etat tu me pratibhāti duşkaraṁ yac catatrâvalitena (!) tantună baddhasya mama pratimocanam (T II 139 a 14). The very rare word catta, Sa. cättra probably designates the skewer in D. Schlingloff's exemplary description of cotton manufacture in India (Schilingloff 1974: 86).
According to Silânka, in Vasantapuraka, a place in Magadha, there lived a layman named Sāmāyika who, after hearing a sermon of his teacher Dharmaghosa13, renounced the world and so did his wife. Once he happened to see her on his alms-round and wanted her. She, however, refused and, realizing that he would pursue her in his passion, stopped taking food and eventually hang herself. Disconcerted, he too, without telling his ācārya stopped eating, died, and reached heaven like she had already before him. Then he was reborn as Ārdraka, son of Ardraka, in Ardrapura14, whereas she obtained rebirth as a Sheth's daughter in Vasantapura15.
One day Ardraka betakes himself with an older attendant (mahattama) 16 to King Śrenika in order to present him as his father's bosom friend (paramamitra) with valuable gifts. When Ardraka hears that Śrenika has a worthy (yogya) son, he begs his attendant to offer this Prince Abhaya presents of himself, that is Ārdraka jr. Thus is done the day after the durbar in the royal palace. Abhaya kindly accepts the homage (?) 17. When Ardraka is back home the return presents from the King arrive, and from Abhaya a representation (image) of the first Tirthankara, the sight of which reminds Ardraka of his previous existences, inter alia, one as a deity. Not even satisfied by heavenly enjoyments, earthly ones interest him even less so that his father was worried and therefore had him guarded by 500 Rajputs. Nevertheless, at a ride on horse-back (? aśva-vāhanikā) 18 he manages to flee and subsequently renounces the world though a deity tries to prevent him and warn him of a danger.
When he reached Vasantapura and is practicing/undertaking kayôtsarga under the 11th layman's vow19, he is seen by the sheth's daughter who wants to marry him. Then the deity rains six and a half koți of gold for the girl and prevents 20 the king from seizing it only by letting arise snakes etc. When wooed later, she wants to be given only to that man in connection

Page #65

54
W. B. Bollée
Jambū-jyoti
with whom there had been a gold rain and whom she will know by a foot mark (pāda-gatâbhijñāna). This happens to be when Ardraka, who had continued wandering returns after 12 years, is recognized and, pursued by the woman, remembers the deity's warning, yet breaks his vow by an act of fate21 and becomes entangled with her. After the birth of a son, Ardraka wants to go his way again while the woman begins to earn a living for herself and her son by spinning cotton (karpasa-kartana). The son wraps his father up in 12 threads in order to persuade him to stay with his mother which the man then does for so many years. Subsequently, Ārdraka goes to Rājagrha. Yet on his way, he falls in with the 500 Rājputs who after Adraka's flight had not dared return to the king and subsisted on dacoity in a jungle stronghold. Ardraka instructs them and they become monks. On their entering the capital, Gośālaka, the elephant ascetics, and the brahmins22 are defeated in a dispute which establishes the connection with the theme of the canonical text below. When Ardraka betakes himself to the king, an elephant tied up vāri-chudhao sees him and wants to be freed by Ardraka's teya-pabhāva, but is destroyed (nattho, Cū ibid.). Ārdraka then speaks N 200 where, however, the mad jungle elephant does not fit the Cū story. In T, Ārdraka tells this episode to the king who asks him kathaṁ tvad-darśanato hasti nirgalah saṁvrtta iti and the reply is mahan Bhagavatah prabhāvah (T II 139a 13), which also diverges from N 200.
Then follows the main text of verses in Tristubh metre. In this metre the fifth syllable is in principle anceps, but in the Indian editions used here it is most times long23 a fact I have not indicated just as I have left out the ta-śruti or substituted it by ya.
The first two stanzas of the canon text are spoken by Gośälaka.
2, 6, 1
purā-kadam, Adda, imam suneha : eg'-anta-yārī samane pur'āsi | se bhikkhuņo uvanettä an-ege āikkhai 'nhim pudho vittharenam ||
a : thus J; TV: suneha-m-;-d: õikkhatinhim, V: aikkhaenhim, J: āikkhatenham
Hear, Adda, what he did long ago : at first he was a solitary monk, then he initiated many monks, and now he teaches

Page #66

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
the dhamma to each of them.
Purā-kadam : sarvair api Tirthakaraih k tam pure-kadam (Cũ 417, 6), pūrvam yad anena bhavat-tīrthakṛtā kṛtaṁ (Ț II 139 b 8 sq.).
Suneha: see Pi § 503 in fine. In Sanskrit, the use of the indicative pro imperativo is restricted to the first person (Speijer 1886: 276).
55
Eg'-anta-yari: the Tīkā tradition uniformly reads meganta°. As an enjambment of the a-pada is out of question and (m)e does not fit in the b-pada, nor does Sīlânka comment on it, we may assume a scribal error analogous with the many cases in Dasav and Utt where suṇeha me occurs, esp. at the beginning of a lecture, like at Utt 1,1 = Dasav 8, 1 anupuvvim suneha me; Utt 20, 38 where sunehi me is to be read instead of Charpentier's muṇehi, or Utt 35, 1 suneha me egamaṇā (thus read m.c.). This stanza portrays the Jain monk's full responsibility for his destiny and control of his life, his original isolation and independence, which mirror the state of the soul as conceived by Jainism (Dundas 1992: 37 with parallels), but is also the old Buddhist ideal (Suttanipāta 35 sqq.).
An-ega: acc. masc. pl., as in Pāli. This form should be added in Pi § 435. Aikkhai : also at Sūy 2, 1, 30 (cf. Pāli ācikkhati, BHS āciksati). 2, 6, 2
sā 'jiviyā paṭṭhaviyā 'thirenam sabhā-gao gaṇao bhikku-majjhe | āikkhamāņo bahu-janna-m-attham na samdhayai avareṇā puvvaṁ ||
d: TVJ samdhayai
This is the way of life adopted by an inconstant man: by going among (other) monks from his gana into an assembly and teaching mass salvation he behaves differently from his past (conduct).

Ajīviyā: the use of this word by the Ajivika Gosāla can hardly be by chance. According to Śīlânka, Gosāla here accuses the Jains of hypocrisy resp. renunciation of principles: "thinking 'ordinary people do not respect a person living alone' for opportunist reasons he (Mahāvīra) has surrounded himself with many followers". A saying in Ț underpins this reproach24.

Page #67

56
W. B. Bollée
Jambū-jyoti
Sabhā-gao etc. : 'to stand up in a crowd of men, surrounded by monks, and to teach his doctrines for the benefit of many people' (Jac.) following ? II 140 a 5 sabhāyāṁ gataḥ-sa-deva-manuja-parsadi vyavasthitaḥ, this being also possible. Here as in Vinaya I 5, 12, we can still see traces of the Vedic reluctance (Aranyakas) to divulge secret knowledge.-Ganao : ganaśo bahuśo 'n-ekaśaḥ (Ț loc. cit.), which ganatas can hardly mean. Or is gana(t)o a copyist's error for gaņaso ? This remains unclear; it was left out in Jac.'s rendering.
Bahu-janna-o: Pā. bahujañña for which PED refers to bāhu- (in one idiomatic expression only). - Cū 418, 2 janāya hitam janyam bahu-janaya bahu-janyaṁ taṁ cârthaṁ kathayati, T II 140 a 6 bahu-janebhyo hitaḥ artho bahu-janyo 'rthas.-Because of this adjective, attham, in my opinion, is the object of õikkhamāņo and not a postposition, as Jac. seems to think; but cf. stanza 4.
Samdhayāi: metrically conditioned form for which Cū 418, 3 reads samdhāyati, T II 140 a 7 samdhatte. For -äva- > -ā- see Pi § 165.
2, 6, 3
eg'-anta-m-eva-m-aduvā vi inhim, do v' anna-m-annam na samei jamhā puvviṁ ca inhim ca an-āgayam vā eg'-anta-m-eva padisamdhayāi |
a : VT and Basham 1951 : 53 n. 3 : evam aduvā; J : eva aduvā; - read : viy'? -V: enhim;--b:J: samenti;-d: VT and Basham 1.c. : evaṁ padio.
(He should live) either in solitude or (as he does) now, because these two (modes) are mutually exclusive.
(Adda speaks :)
He combines the past with the present and the future (by living) alone.
c = Utt 12, 32 a (with ca instead of vā and the variant puvviṁ ca pacchā ca tah'eva majjhe)
Eg'-anta : yadi ekânta-caritvam sobhanam, etad evâtyantam kartavyam abhavisyat (Cũ 418, 6, similarly T). In unpolished dialogue style, it is difficult to tell an adjective from a case form with no ending25.

Page #68

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
57
Vi : for viy' ? Unclear comments. Cū l.c. continues : uta manyase idam maha-parivara-vrttam sādhu(m) tad idam ädāv evâcaraniyam āsīt.
Puvvim : according to Piş 103 not corresponding to Sa.pūrvam (though the text of Sūy 1, 3, 4, 4 reads puvvam), but to Sa. ß pūrvīm like saddhim equals Ved. sadhrīm. However, cf. BHS pūrvi m.c. for pūrve as an adjective.
2, 6, 4
samecca logas tasa-thāvarānań khemaṁ-kare samane māhane vă | āikkhamāno vi sahassa-majjhe eg'-antayaṁ sārayai tahacce 11
a: thus J and Pi 591 for CTV : samicca
A śramaņa or brahmin who understands the living beingsthe moving and non-moving ones-one who makes (his fellow beings) feel at peace and secure, truly shows himself to be a monk even when teaching amidst (a) thousand(s).
Khemaṁ-kare : at Sūy 2, 1, 13 used of the rāja (Bollée 1977 : 135). Tahacce : other occurrences of this word, which is not found in PSM and APSÁK, seem restricted to Sūy 1, 13, 7 and 1, 15, 18. In the latter instance and in our place here Jac. rendered it by '(remaining in the same) mental disposition (as before)', presumably following the cites. Cū 419, 5 and T II 141 a 7 sq. explain it by tathârca equalling arcā (which in Sa. means 'worship’ or 'idol' [MW] with leśyā 'mental disposition' or śarīra and thus revealing their ignorance. Tahacca corresponds in meaning to Pā. tathatta and to BHS tathātva. The apparent development of -cc- < -tv- which Pischel (SS 281 and 299) and Roth (1983 : 157) assumed was repeatedly sh improbable by Norman not only for absolutives but also for caccara26. In the case of tahacca I think we have to do with a contamination of "tahatta and sacca.
2, 6,5
dhammam kahantassa u n'atthi doso khantassa dantassa jiy'-indiyassa | bhāsāě dose ya vivajjagassa
gune ya bhāsāya nisevagassa 11 a : CJ : kahentassa;-b:J: jitendassa;C: VTJ : bhāsaya

Page #69

58
W. B. Bollée
Jambū-jyoti
It is no offence, when a quiet and restrained man who is in control of his senses and does not use speech for negative purposes, but rather employs it positively, professes his dharma.
b = ĀyārN 231 a;-c: cf. Dasav 7, 56 ab U : = Sa. tu in the sense of api according to śīlânka. 2, 6, 6
maha-vvae pañca anuvvae ya tah'eva pañcâsava samvare ya 1 vira(y)im iha-ssāmaniyaṁmi panne lavâvasakki "samane" ti bemi ||
C:V: punne (following Sīlânka's cty. pārņe)
Who knows the five major and the five minor vows as well as the five influxes and the ways to ward them off, who knows the observances a monk in this world should keep, who pushes off (karmic) atoms, - he is a true monk. Thus I say.
d: cf. 20 d
.
Pañcâsava : I follow śīlanka (aśravān, Ţ II 141 b 7) and Jacobi (Cū is unclear) taking asava as an acc. pl. m. -ā with m.c. shortened ending27, as otherwise the second ya has no function.
Panne: T has this reading also in his text, but Sīlânka must have read punne in his exemplar, for he sankritizes pūrne - krtsne samyame vidhātavye, but mentions prājña as a pātha. Jacobi translates 'blessed (life of Sramanas)' which would correspond to punye in Sa.; as to this he gives no explanation. In this way the sentence made up of the pādas a-c lacks a verb, which Śīlânka supplies with prajñāpitavān and pratipāditavān, resp., and Jacobi by 'he teaches'. Perhaps the commentator objected to panne, because prājña resp. prajña (thus Cū 419, 11) seems to be used only absolutely ('wise') resp. ifc. in Sa. and Pāli, though otherwise in the latter two languages an accusative of the object at deverbative nouns at least is known28, if not as frequent as in Vedic29
The appearance of the varia lectio may have been caused by assimilation in the pronunciation of a and u.

Page #70

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
59
Lavâvasakki : see Bollée 1988: 63 note on 1, 2, 2, 20.
2, 6, 7
sīódagam sevau biya-kāyam āhāya-kammam taha itthiyão | eg'-anta-cāriss' iha amha dhamme tavassino nâbhisamei pāvam ||
d:J:ņo 'hisameti
In our faith no evil (karman) arises for an ascetic who drinks unboiled water, eats seeds (or) food prepared especially for alms receivers, or enjoys women, as long as he lives alone in this world.
Ahāya-kammaṁ : this form proves the new etymology *āghāta-karman '(food) for which killing has taken place proposed by Jain30. Such food as alms has always been forbidden to Jain and Buddhist monks in so far as the animal was killed especially for them31. The strict attitude concerning ahiṁsā may have accompanied the conversion of Rājputs in western India in the 7-8th cent. C. E., 32 a psychologically understandable phenomenon. Many Jains still consider themselves of Rājput origin33
Eg'-antao : cf. Basham 1951 : 115 "We have here a definite indication of lonely wanderers, not gathered in communities, living according to the ascetic rules laid down by Gosāla”.
Iha-0 : after the caesura, but should belong to the preceding part of the pāda. Abhisamei : sambandham upayāti (T II 142 a 12). In the sense of 'to come up, appear' abhisamaiti and abhisameti do not occur in Sa. and Pā.,
resp.
2,6,8
sīôdagaṁ vā taha biya-kāyam āhāya-kammaṁ taha itthiyão eyāi jāna - padisevamānā
agārino a-ssamanā bhavanti || c: TVJ : jānań (Adda speaks :)

Page #71

60
Jambū-jyoti
(Ascetics,) who use unboiled water or seeds, food especially prepared for alms receivers or who enjoy women-know these things! --are laymen, not monks.
W. B. Bollée
Siôdagam etc with regard to this the Jains originally sided with the Ājīvikas, as Suy 1, 3, 4, 1 sqq. show.
Jāņa: ŢII 142b 1 : jānīhi, jāņa is found also at Ayar 1, 3, 1, 1.
2, 6, 9
a: TVJ siya ya biodaga;-b: thus J; TV: bhavantu;-d: Ţ: u tam 'vi V: u tam pi, J: sevanti jam te vi.
biya ya siôdaga itthiyão paḍisevamānā samaṇā bhavanti | agāriņo vi samaņā bhavantu; sevanti ū te vi taha-ppagāram ||
If (ya) those who use seeds and unboiled water, and enjoy women are monks, then also laymen must be monks as they, too, practise such a regimen.
Cũ has a lacuna here: pratika, comment and stanza number 677 are left out. Śilânka explains: syad etad bhavadiyam matam yatha: te ekântacăriṇaḥ (...) katham te na tapasvina ity etad āśankyârdraka āha: yadi bijâdyupabhogino 'pi śramaṇā ity evaṁ bhavatâbhyupagamyate, evam tarhi (...). Though siya is typical for Jainism, it seems to me an early copyist's error influenced by the next stanza.
2, 6, 10
U: tu-r-avadhārane (T II 142 b 6). A restriction, however, does not fit here, rather a reason or a confirmation. U, therefore, may stand here for va
= eva.

je yâvi bīôdaga-bhoi bhikkhu bhikkham c' iham jāyai jiviy'-atthi | te nai-saṁjoga-m-avi ppahāya kāyôvagā n' anta-karā bhavanti ||
a: C je yâvi sītôdagam eva (emended as: biodaga bhoti) bhikkhu;— b: C ca iha; TVJ viham (T II 142b 8: bhikṣam ca);-d: J: 'nantakarā

Page #72

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
Besides, monks who use seeds and unboiled water, and seeking their sustenance in this world, go for almsfood will reincarnate (and) do not set an end (to samsara), even though giving up the contact with / separating themselves from their relatives.
c = 21c
Biôdaga: probably read: siôdaga-° (cf. Cu 421, 1).
Cū 420, 14: koī ņamm itthīo pariharati loka-rava-bhīto-bālo vṛddho vā―na dharma-yogyo vā strī- varjam api sītôdaga-bhojī nāma bhikkhū bhikṣāṁ ca iha tāva ke jivato dhyāna-nimittam jivit'-aṭṭhată evaṁ-prakārā. Nātīņa saṁjogo nãti-saṁjogo pūrvâpara-saṁbandhâdi, api padârthâdiṣu nati-samyogam iti duppajja hanijjam. Mumukṣavo 'pi santaḥ kayopakā eva bhavanti, an-antam kurvantity an-anta-karaḥ karmaṇām saṁsārasya bhavasya duḥkhānām evêty arthaḥ.
Bhikkham etc.: cf. Dasav 9, 1, 6 jo vā visam khayai jīviy'-atthi, which passage in the same metre Silânka may have had in mind when reading viham (though c and v are easily interchanged of course), but he does not comment on it and in fact it makes no sense here. Jacobi, too, passes over this word. I, therefore, adopted the Cu reading.-Another hint at a possible connection with the above Dasav passage is the sg. jayai required by the metre as against jayanti. The short plural forms-bhoi bhikkhu may have contributed to jāyai.
Käyôvagā: cf. SN II 24, 26 bālo kāyassa bhedā kāy' ūpago hoti.
(Gosāla speaks :)
2, 6, 11
61
imam vayam tu tumã pau-kuvvaṁ pāvāino garihasi savva(m) eva | päväino u pudho kitṭayantā sayam sayam diṭṭhi karenti pâu ||
a: C: thus corrected for originally : evam vai tumam;-b: J: garahasi; TVJ: savva;-c: V: pāvāiņo puḍho pudho kitt;-d: V: karonti; -J: pāuṁ

But if you advance such an opinion, you categorically reproach all who profess a religious life.

Page #73

62
W. B. Bollée
Jambu-jyoti
(Adda speaks :)
Every single person, however, who professes a religious life, however, praises his own persuasion and makes it publicly known.
Vayaṁ : vāi corrected as vayaṁ (Cū 421, 4) resp. vācam (T II 143 a 6). For this reading there are therefore two, for the interpretation several possibilities, all supposing not very satisfactory presumptions, e.g. vais requires an unfound Old Indian etymon *vācī, the -ā- of which became -ain a pretonic position (Pi § 413)34. Furthermore, for Pā. vacī PED only gives Sn 472 and for the rest takes this form to be a compound form of vaco. Vayam could also be an accusative and equal Sa. vacas, also in Pă. (Gg. S 99), yet apparently in both middle Indo-Aryan canonical languages only the instr. of this word occurs, in Pā. also vaco - Amg. vao. Finally, the Amg. equivalent of Sa, vrata could be considered which, however, semantically does not fit here very well.
Pāu-kuvvam : in the canonical seniors pāu-karai is restricted to Süy and Utt and has for objects dhammam (Sūy 1, 2, 2, 7 and 1,12, 19), vinayam (Utt 1, 1) and āyāram (Utt 11, 1). Old Pāli (e.g. Sn 316 with dhammam) is no help to our problem either and the same holds true for imam, which is acc. sg. mfn. (Pi § 430).
Pāvāiņo : 'philosophers' (Jac.); pravadana-śīlā prāvādukāḥ (Cū 421, 7), similarly Śīlâńka. This word, as well as semantically in fact also the four preceding stanzas, must probably be connected with Ayār 1, 4, 2 and 3, esp. 1, 4, 2, 6, where pāvāuyā are addressed, and with 1, 4, 3, 2* pāvāiyā and Sūy 2, 2, 80 pāvāuyā. Schubring renders the Āyār references by 'Widerredner' and gives as their etymon JHS prāvādika prāvāduka resp.; cf. Pā. păvadati 'to dispute'(PED). Sa. pravādin has a short first syllable and a slightly different meaning.
Pudho : cf. 1, 1, 3, 13 cd pudho pāvāuyā savve akkhāyāro sayam sayam. 2, 6, 12
te anna-m-annassa u garahamānā, akkhanti bho ! samanā māhana ya sao ya atthi a-sao ya n'atthi garahámo ditthim, na garahāmo kimci ||

Page #74

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
a: C: thus corrected for originally : annamannassa tu te; -J: 'assa vi gara";—b:J: akkhanti u samo
śramanas and brāhmanas, sir, criticize each other : one's own side is (right), the opponent (wrong). We only censure a wrong view, (but otherwise, we do not censure anything.
Akkhanti : ākhyānti (Cū 421, 11), ācaksate (Ţ II 143 a 12). Formally, Jinadāsa is right (cf. Pi § 492), semantically there is no difference here.
Sao etc. : “(The truth, they say, ) is all on their side [...]" (Jac.). Svam ātmiya-vacanam ity arthah, tasmāt sutaṁ śreyo 'sti nirvānam ity arthah (Cū 421, 11 sq.), svata iti svakiye pakse svâbhyupagame 'sti punyaṁ tatkāryam ca svargâpavargâdikam asti (T II 143 a 14 sq.). I have not found any parallels. Formally sao can equal Sa. satas as well, as is shown by 1, 13, 1 c (also Tristubh metre) : sao ya dhammam a-sao a-sīlam santim asantim karissāmi pāum. - In Pā. the gen. sg. sato is not found apparently (PED, Gg.).
Garahāmo etc. : “But we blame only the wrong dictrines and not at all (those who entertain them)' [Jac.]
Ditthim : at Cū 421, 14 referable particularly to the Buddhists, as to which Jinadāsa may rather have had his own times in view than the past of the text. In the d pāda either the object must be supplied which is hard here or one must render the second garahāmo by to call names and take kimci as a predicative attribute of the object (which, however, is missing then also) as apparently the commentators do : tān nanu kimca garahāmo ? Jinadāsa asks and replies on Adda's behalf : na, yathā tvam, pāpa-drstih mithya-drstih mūdho mūrkhaḥ a-jānako vêti (Cū 421, 14) and similarly Sīlânka : na kaṁcid (!)35 garhāmaḥ kõna-kunthôdghattanadi-prakāreņa36. Controversies abounding in invectives during religious disputes occurred not even long ago. Thus von Glasenapp (1928 : 14) wrote about Dayanand Sarasvati, who originally was a follower of Sankara and later founded the Arya-samāj : “Mit seiner gewaltigen Stimme suchte er bei seinen endlosen Redekämpfen die Gegner niederzuschreien und sparte auch nicht mit Schimpfworten, wenn es galt, sich ihrer zu erwehren.37"
2, 6, 13
na kimci rüven' abhidhārayāmo sa-ditthi-maggam tu karemu pāum |

Page #75

64
W. B. Bollée
magge ime kittie āriehim an-uttare sap-purisehi añjū ||
b: J: sam diṭṭhimaggam tu karemo
By no mans do we criticize (a person's) private qualities, but we (only) proclaim our own religious way. This way, the unexcelled (and) straight one, has been recommended by noble men, by good people.
Jambu-jyoti
Na kimci etc. : "We do not detract from anybody because of his personal qualities" (Jac.). Śīlânka explains the opening words by na kañcana śramaṇaṁ brāhmaṇaṁ vā (T II 143 b 10 sq.), cf. note on prec. stanza.
Rūveṇa: according to Cũ 422, I apparently a physical quality by which one reviles a person is meant, "as when someone says to another who makes a mistake: One-eye! Humpback! Leper 138 or reviles him as to his origin: "He is doing the work of a Canḍāla39." In the same way (one should not say) : "Bloody Tridandin, damned sophist !40 What you preach here is wrong. What does the stupid Kapila think how the soul does act ?" etc41.
Further, the Buddhists, too, are being abused42 and their doctrine of the skandhas attacked. At Ț II 143 b 11 the gloss on rūveṇa is restricted to insult because of bodily parts provoking abhorrence, or caste or the (ab) use of caste marks43.
Abhidharayamo:vācam bemi (Cũ 422, 7), garhanâbuddhyôdghaṭṭayamaḥ (T II 143 b 11 sq.). The verb, which has a counterpart in Pāli and BHS, there means 'to uphold, maintain' (CPD) resp. 'to support; assist' (BHSD), in Sa. also 'to resist' (MW)44. In our passage, however, it can hardly be anything but equivalent to garahai, cf. Ved. abhibharati 'to lay or throw upon (as a fault or blame)' (MW); for the semantic development cf. jugupsati as a desiderative of VGUP.

Magge etc.: 'I have been told the supreme, right path by worthy, good men' (Jac.).
Ime: nom. m. sg. (Pi § 430).
Āriyehim sarva-jñais tyājya-dharma-dūra-vartibhiḥ (T II 144 a 3). According to Leumann (1921: 40) "das Beiwort edel fehlt bei Mahāvīra und Andezen - im Gegensatz zum Buddha," but Śīlânka apparently does relate it to Arhats and the same is the case, I would say, with Ayar 1, 2, 2, 3 esa magge äriyehim paveie. At SN III 4, 15 ariyă are equalled to sap-purisă.

Page #76

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
Anuttare: cf. DN II 246, 6* esa maggo uju45 maggo esa maggo an-uttaro.
2, 6, 14
uddham ahe yam tiriyam disāsu tasa ya je thāvara je ya pāṇā | bhūyâbhisankāě duguñchamāņo no garahaï vusimam kimci loe ||
65
a: Jahe ya; -c Ţ: bhūyâhisamkabhi, V: bhayâhisamkabhi; TVJ : duguñchamāṇā
A (person) leading a monk's life and dreading to harm (other) beings— beings that move beyond, under and horizontally in the directions and such as do not do that- by no means criticizes anything in the world.
a cf. PindaN 363;-c 1, 14, 20 a
Bhūyâbhisankāe: sankâlaye aṇṇāṇe ca (Cū 423, 2), bhūtaṁ-sadbhūtam tathyaṁ tatrâbhiśankayā (Ț II 144 a 8 sq.) which Śīlânka follows up by the right explanation.
Vusimam 'well-controlled' (Jac.), 'sage' (Caillat 1991 86 and 88). Mme. Caillat suggests "vusimaṁ could have been an old equivalent of tīrthakṛt, a 'fordmaker', or a 'sage", with PSM connecting the word with Sa. bṛsi 'a pad, (esp.) the seat of an ascetic' + -ma(nt) -. Thus the image would be that the monk use his seat as a raft to cross samsara. Rafts for crossing rivers have of course been employed from time immemorial46.
Kimci loe: Osavva-loe tti trailokye pasaṇḍa-loke vā (Cū 423,3). Mme. Caillat reads kimci, but translates "the v(usimam) does not blame (anybody) in the world" perhaps thinking of kamci in 2, 6, 12.
(Gosāla speaks :)
2, 6, 15

agantagagârě ärām'-agāre
samane u bhie na uvei vasam |
dakkha hu santi bahave manussā
ūṇâirittā ya lavālavā ya ||
a: C āgantäre, TV: āgantagare, J: āgantāgāre; - c: J: maņūsā
In a hostel or hospice in a garden, however, your solicitous monk won't stay, for there are many clever people (there), some of whom are too little communicative, others too voluble.

Page #77

66
W. B. Bollée
Jambū-jyoti
Āgantao etc. : the metrically wrong traditions may have been brought in from Āyār 1, 8, 2, 3 āgantāre ārāmâgāre48. Cū yields little here, but Śīlanka's comment runs āgantukānāṁ - kārpaţikâdīnām agāram āgantâgāram (? II 144 b 6 sq.). My conjecture restores the metre, and the compound has a counterpart in Pā. ägantukâgāra (SN IV 219, 9 and V 51, 24).
Uvei vasaṁ : vāsam upaiti (T II 144 b 8). The idiom once occurs in Pāli : tattha yo samano vā brāhmano vā väsar upeti (SN IV 348, 19), but of Buddhist monks apparently vāsaṁ upagacchati was used (see PTC). T obviously read tattha before na. Cf. note on vs. 16 infra.
Dakkhā : nipunāh prabhūta-śāstra-viśāradāh (Ţ II 144 b 9); strikingly, the sākyas are not mentioned in first instance here.
Ünâirittā : 'lower or nobler men' (Jac.). Cū 423, 6 sq. here comments kimcid unena kecid atiriktā; jattha ünā atiriktā vā, tattha samadhi atthi (?) and T II 144 b 11 "nyūnāh” svato 'vamā hīnā jāty-ādi-atiriktā vā; tābhyām parajitasya mahāṁcchāyābhraṁsa iti49. Against Silânka's interpretation can be said that the monk does not belong to this world and as such stands outside the system of upper and lower classes.
Lavālavā : 'talkative or silent men'(Jac.)50. Our commentators' glosses run japa-lapa vyaktāyām vāci “lapālapa” iti vīpsā bhṛśaṁ-lapā lapālapā vā, jahā dava-davâdi turitam vā gaccha gaccha vā; uktam hi : "deva-devassa.” Athâpi yaṁ evaṁ vada-vadâdi kim evam lavalavesi ? (Cu 423, 7 sq.); lapā
īcālāh ghositâneka-tarka-vicitra-dandakāh tathā a-lapā-mauna-vratikā nisthita-yogāh (!) gudikâdi-yuktā vă, yad-vaśād abhidheya-visayā vāg eva na pravartate (T II 144 b 12 sq.). Though the item last-mentioned is an interesting piece of information about ascetics with a vow of silence who, if they were not completely bound by it, helped themselves by a pebble or so in their mouth “So that no word by which contents can be intimated was produced"...from a silent ascetic a Jain monk would have little to fear. I would, therefore, like to agree with Jinadāsa and take lavālava in an intensive sense, in our passage also with metrically required --51. Lapalapa is not found in Sa.-nor is lapa, for that matter—but it does occur in Pālis2
The meaning of the last line is, I believe, that the monk on the one hand can incur harm at the hands of an interlocutor who expresses himself

Page #78

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between...
67
too briefly and thus may provoke dubiosities, and on the other hand, by being washed away from his own persuasion into heresy by a flux of arguments an adversary might come up with.
2, 6, 16
mehāvino sikkhiya buddhimantā suttehi atthehi ya nicchaya-nnā | pucchińsu mā ne an-agāra anne ii sankamano na uvei tattha ||
b:J: nicchaya-nnū;-c:J: aņagāra ege
In the uneasy idea "some recluse or other (of those who are) wise; have finished their training; obtained insight and are well acquainted with your scriptures and their meaning might ask me questions" he does not go there.
d = 18 d
Sikkhiya : śikṣitā an-egāņi vyākarana-Sāṁkhya-Višesika-BauddhâjīvikaNyāyâdīņi śāstrāņi (Cū 423, 9), śikṣām grāhitāḥ śikṣitāḥ (T II 145a 1). The final syllable of sikkhiya, handed down as short in all editions, is metrically anceps and therefore the lectio difficilior here. On this basis the form would have to be taken in absolute sense though as such remarkable in the present context; cf. thavara in 14b, where according to the rules thavarā could be expected without prejudice to the metre.
Suttehi etc. : "sūtre” sūtra-visaye viniscaya-jñāh tathā artha visaye ca niscaya-jñā yathâvasthita-sūtrârtha-vedina ity arthah (T II 145a 1f.). For the loc. -hi- stated by Pi § 363 to occur only in Apabhramśa-see Lüders 1952 : $ 220 (cf. note on vs. 22). Jacobi renders as '(...) men, who are well versed in the sacred texts and their meaning'. Thus the monks of other denominations53 apparently knew the Jain sūtras so well, that Mahāvīra's disciples did not like to enter into a discussion with them (and should not do so, Sūy 1, 1, 4, 2; Āyār 2, 3, 2, 17; Uvās 58 < Schubring, $ 163)54.
Passages like these seem to corroborate Schubring's thesis regarding the grounds for the disappearance of the Puvvas55. In the Pāli canon, however, not only the heretical doctrines are somehow discernible (as against the Suyagada—the remainder of the Puvvas), but even the names of

Page #79

68
Jambu-jyoti
the teachers are mentioned. Furthermore, it may be asked, if only by mere accident Vaddhamäna and Gotama never met.
W. B. Bollée
Pucchimsu mă: for the aorist as prohibitive tense cf. Päli, e.g. MNI 387, 22 må man etari pucchi.
Ne in Pi § 431 and Geiger / Norman § 107 only given as acc. pl. of (e)na/ena, but Pi § 415 mentions it also as acc.sg. of the personal pronoun of the first person, though in brackets, which may mean that he had not found the form in the texts.
Na uvei: upagacchati (Ț II 145a 3); cf. note ad vs. 15 supra.
(Adda speaks :)
2, 6, 17
no 'kama-kiccä na ya bäla-kicca rayabhiyogena kuo bha(y)enam | viyāgarejjā pasinam na vâvi sa-kāma-kiccen'iha äriyāṇaṁ ||
a: thus CT; VJ: nākāmakiccā; c: VT: viyāgarejja
He should reply to (a) question(s) or not (as the case may be), but neither do so eagerly nor rashly nor on the king's orders or because he is afraid, yet worthy people's questions he should be pleased to answer.
No 'kāma" : notwithstanding the uniform tradition of no 'kāma" in Cũ and which, however, omit the avagraha, a reading nåkāma" can be concluded from the commentaries. I have therefore kept no, cf. Suy 1, 1, 1,
1656
Kuo bhayenam: '(nor) from fear of anybody', which Jacobi can hardly have meant in the sense of kuo ci like the interrogative pronoun can be used instead of the indefinite one in familiar German57.
Viyāgarejjā: at ȚII 145a 12ff. several times sanskritized as vyāgrniyād. Pasiņam sg. or plur. (see Lüders 1954 143ff. referred to by Geiger / Norman 1994 71, but some reject an acc. plur. masc. -am).
Na vâvi: Ț II 145a 13 na ca-nâiva.
Sa-kāma-kiccena: sanskritized sva-kama-kṛtyena (Ț II 145b 1), but as a pendant of a-käma-° in the a-pada I would prefer sa-".

Page #80

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
69
Ariyānañ : āryāņāṁ sarva-heya-dharma-dūra-vartināṁ tad-upakārāya dharma-deśanām vyāgrnīyād asau (T II 145b 2f.). This and the next stanza show that ā. means : fellow believers. Thereby, however, Adda recognizes Gosāla's reproach as correct.
2, 6, 18
gantā ca tattha aduvā a-gantā viyāgarejjā samiy' āsu-panne an-āriyā daṁsanao parittā ii sankamāno na uvei tattha ||
a : VJ: tatthā
Whether he goes there or not, quick-witted he will give correct answers/explanations. Fearing lest they be heretics because they have turned away from the (right) belief he does not go to them.
d =
16
d
Gantā : taken by śīlanka (Ţ II 145b 4) and Jacobi to pertain to the monk's pupils (vineya), who in my opinion are not meant here, at any rate not by Gosāla.
Samiy': 'impartially' (Jac.), samatayā - sama-drstitayā (T II 145b 6). The latter sanskritization is impossible; formally and semantically, however, samyak and samakam would do 58. Cf. Sūy 1, 2, 2, 6 samiyā dhammam udāhare munī, āyār 1, 7, 8, 14 samiyā āhare munī and Sūy 1, 2, 2, 8 pānā (...) samayam samīhiyā with samiyam uvehāe as a Cū variant and samayam tatth' uvehāe in Āyār 1, 3, 3, 1.
Asu-panne : 'the wise man' (Jac.), sarva-jña (T II 145b 6). With the exception of Āyār 1, 7, 1, 3 (prose) I have only found references of this compound in tristubh metre59. It seems to be absent in Pāli and Sa.
Parittā: 'men have fallen (from...)' (Jac.), pari-samantād itāh-gatah prabhrastāḥ (T II 145b 8). Paritta may be best taken as a ppp. of pra V RIC 'leer werden' (pwb] (to become empty), i.e. approximately 'without. This meaning is not attested in Sa. and Pāli.
2, 6, 19
paņņam jahā vaņie ūday'atthi āyassa heum pagarei sangaṁ |

Page #81

70
W. B. Bollée
ta(y)-ūvame samaṇe Nāya-putte icc eva me hoi mai viyakkā ||
a: VJ uday',-c: V: tayovame; J: tauvame;-d: V: viyakko
The śramana Nayaputta acts just as a profit-oriented merchant procures goods for his income (and) thereby a karmic bond/dependence (from others). This is my view and opinion.
b# 21 d
Jambū-jyoti
Right from the start Gosāla's attack was directed against Mahāvīra's alleged inconsequence: the fact that he first lived alone and then decided to go into the public eye surrounded by monks and to proclaim his teaching (vss. 1-2).
Jacobi's rendering of the first line runs 'As a merchant desirous of gain (shows) his wares and attracts a crowd to do business (...)', which involves the assumption of a hard zeugma or a complementary verb to pannaṁ as provided by the commentaries". Prakaroti means 'vollbringen, ausführen, bewirken, veranstalten, machen, anfertigen; s.aneignen, nehmen (dārān ein Weib)' (pwb) as far as concerns the meanings possible here. The doctrine, which is not expressed clearly, represents Mahāvīra's true doctrine; the asyndetically connected words pannaṁ and sangam share the notion of binding and form a unity of contrasts-the material and the spiritual-which their chiastic position underlines.
Panṇam glossed by Silâñka inter alia as camphor, aloe, musk and amber61

Ūday'-atthi: cf. Pā. uday'-atthika (AnguttaraN II 199, 20) where the Jain Śākya Vappa complains to the Buddha that he is like a merchant making every effort to sell his goods yet does not realize any profit. As a disciple Mahāvīra's he would believe himself seyyathāpi (...) puriso uday'-atthiko assa paniyaṁ poseyya so udayam c'eva na labheyya. The commercial simile may be typical of the Jains and testifies to the great age of their professional activity (cf. also vs. 21).
Ayassa heum: cf. bahu-janna-m-attham in vs. 2.
Pagarei sangam: "samja samge" saṁjanaṁ saktir vā saṁgaḥ (Cū 425, 7; pagarei is not glossed), mahā-jana-sangam vidhatte (T II 146a 12). See further infra at vs. 21.

Page #82

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
Viyakkā in Pāli and Sa. only masc.
Naya-putte: see note on 2, 1, 13 (Bollée 1977: 139) and on the Nāga tribe see Kosambi 1963: 33.
(Adda speaks :)
2, 6, 20
navam na kujjā, vihuṇe purāṇaṁ ciccâmaim tãi ya sâha evam |
eyāvayā bambha-vaya tti vutta tassôday' -atthi "samaṇe” tti bemi ||
71
b: V: tai yam āha, J: tāyati sâha; - c: Cũ 426, 1: etavato, Ţ: etovayā, J: ettavayā; -TVJ: bambhava(t)i tti; - J: vutte
He does not effect new (karman) and casts off old (karman) by giving up wrong views. Therefore (sa) the saint spoke accordingly in this respect they are called men of excellent vows. Only he who strives at this gain is a monk" thus I say.
Navam etc. : here Cũ 425, 12f. quotes DasavN 383 (...) nānī navam na bandhai62.
Vihune: vidhūnayati - apanayati (Ț II 146b 3).
Ta(y)i: apparently connected by Jinadāsa with √TṚ: tīrṇo vi parān tāretîti (Cu 425, 11f.). Śilânka, however, glosses trāyī--Bhagavān sarvasya paritrāṇa-silo (...) tāyī vā mokṣam prati; aya-vaya-maya-paya-caya-t a y anaya gatāv ity asya rūpam63. Jacobi ('who protects others') follows the latter, but Schubring first started from tyāginaḥ (Schubring 1926 133 note 7), but later (Dasaveyālia, Isibhāsiyaim) changed his mind in favour of trayin (see Alsdorf 1965: 5). See further my note ad 1, 2, 2, 17 and Roth 1968: 46ff.
Sa eva-Bhagavān eva—āha, yathā vimati-parityāgena moṣka-gamanasilo bhavati (T II 146b 5ff.).
Eyāvaya etc. 'Herein is contained the vow (leading to) Brahman (i.e. Mokṣa)' (Jac.). Etāvatā saṁdarbheṇa (T II 146b 6).

Bambha-vaya: brahmaṇaḥ padam brahma-padam va brahma-vratam vā (Cū 426, 1), brahmaṇo-mokṣasya vrataṁ brahma-vrataṁ (T, 1.c.).

Page #83

72
Jambu-jyoti
Though the first explanation can also be defended - brahma-pada occurs in Sa. 'Brahmas Stätte' (PWB), here perhaps in the sense of 'excellent way'64. Pada is used in Pāli as a synonym of patha (PED, s.v.)-I consider the second one more probable. The word occurs also with -vv-, e.g. MahānisīhaBh 1794. -Cf. also Ayar 2, 16, 2 aṇ-anta-samaya, for which see Bollée 1990: 32.
Tassa etc. 'this is the gain which a śramana is desirous of. Thus I say' (Jac).
2, 6, 21
W. B. Bollée
[sam]ārabhate vaniyā bhūya-gāmaṁ pariggahaṁ c'eva mamāyamāṇā | te nāi-samjoga-m-avi ppahāya ayassa heum pagaranti sangaṁ
a: C: samārabhante hi vaṇiyā;-b: J: mamāyamīṇā;-d: V: pagarenti; J: pakarenti
Merchants kill many living beings and even though giving up the contact with/separating themselves from their relatives they acquire property; (in doing so) they take up a (karmatic) bond merely for the sake of material gain.
c: cf. Ayar 1, 2, 5, 3 where between pariggahaṁ and a-mamāyamāṇe the metre requires a short syllable like tu or ca;-c = 10 c;-d 19 b
Arabhate etc.: Jacobi takes this form as a sg. and renders 'a merchant kills (...)'. On account of their business activities with many waggons, draught-animals and camels merchants kill living beings65.
Pariggaham du-padaṁ caup-padaṁ dhanaṁ dhanṇa-hiranṇasuvaṇnâ(d)i (Cũ 426, 4, similarly Ț). Sustaining a family compels the laymen to strive for property.

Pagaranti sangam bhṛśam karenti prakarenti, saktim sangaṁ (thus read in stead of samyam, Cũ 426, 7), sambandham kurvanti (T II 146 b 12). Cf. Ayar 1, 1, 7, 6 ārambha-sattā pakarenti sangaṁ “(... those are involved in sin who...) and engaging in acts, are addicted to worldliness' (Jac.), '... der Betätigung ergeben wirken sie Verknüpfung [mit der Welt]' (Schubring 1926: 72).

Page #84

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
2, 6, 22
vitt' -esino mehuṇa-saṁpagāḍhā te bhoyan' -aṭṭhā vaṇiyā vayanti | vayam tu kāmesu ajjhovavannā an-ariya pema-rasesu giddha ||
Property-minded and engaging in sexual relations these merchants say (they behave thus) to earn their living (or wander around for pleasure). We, however, (believe that they are) given to the pleasures of the senses, not (serious) believers (and) lustful.
Mehuna: why this and pema-rasesu giddha should be particularly characteristics of merchants is not clear. Does vaniya in fact stands for (Jain) laymen? Then the reason why these characteristics are mentioned here would become understandable for many souls are destroyed in sexual intercourse67. Chastically as to the a-pāda here property and disregard for living beings are taken up once more in vs. 23 a.
73
Jinadāsa then admonishes those who live in that way by means of several quotations citing the first: śiśnôdara-kṛte, Pärtha ! (426, 9f.) at Cu 86, 7f. ad Ayar 1, 2, 5, 5 introduced by bhaniyam ca loge vi and completed as follows: prthivīm jetum icchasi/jaya śiśnodaram, Pārtha ! tatas te prthivi jită. The first pada reminds us of Mbh (cr. ed.) 1, 164, 13 b p. j. icchată and the last one of Mbh 5, 148, 4 a tatas te pṛthivī-pālāḥ.
Vayanti: vrajanti (Cu 426, 8), to which Silânka adds: vadanti vā (Ț II 147a 1), perhaps because Ayar 1, 1, 7, 6 arambhamānā vinayaṁ vayanti / chandôvaniyā ajjhovavannā/ārambha-sattā pakarenti sangam.
2, 6, 23
arambhagam c'eva pariggaham ca a-viussiyā nissiya āya-daṇḍā | tesim ca se udae, jam vayāsī, caur'-ant' an-antaya duhaya, nêha ||

They neither give up killing nor property, but stick to it. They are inconsiderate, but their gain which you mentioned (will serve) them only to endless distress in the (whole) square (world), not only here.
A-viussiya 'they do not abstain from (...)' (Jac.), avosirium (Cũ 427, 1), a-vyutsṛjya-a-parityajya (T II 147a 4). If anywhere, it is with this rare

Page #85

74
W. B. Bollée
Jambū-jyoti
form that the occasional parallelism of verse numbers is remarkable, in this case 1, 1, 2, 23 je u tattha viussanti, saṁsāram te viussiyā-68, where I should now like to translate : 'wer damit aber aufhört, beendet für sich den Samsāra'. Cf. also Theragāthā 784 a-vyosita",
Nissiyā : for this form cf. sikkhiya in vs. 16. Āya-dandä : see my comment at 1, 2, 3, 9 (Bollée 1988 : 75f.).
Vayāsī : according to Pi $ 516 = avādīh, but cf. Pāli avacāsi (Geiger/ Norman § 165.1); vayāsī points to vs. 19.
Caur'-ant': for this notion see Schubring 1935: 8 103. Jacobi translates the second line as : 'and their gain of which you spoke, will be the endless Circle of Births and pains manifold'. Perhaps he wanted to read : -antā ya duhı ya.
Néha : Jacobi here remarks : “Nehā or nedhā. According to śīlâňka it is na iha : 'not even here (do they find the profit they seek)'. I think it may be the Prākrt equivalent of anekadhā or it could stand for snehāh, in which case the meaning would be : love's (reward will be) pain”. Faute de mieux I have followed the commentator, as Jacobi did not convince me. 2, 6, 24
n'-egant’-an-accantiya ūdae so vayanti te do vi gunodayammi | se üdae sâi-m-ananta-patte
tam ūdayaṁ sāhae tai nāi | a : CT : neganta naccantiva thus corrected in C for original : naccantiya V: neganti naccanti ya; - TV : odae; J: udaye se;: VTJ : udae;-d: VT : udayam, J: uddayam, TV : sähayai, J: sähati
This gain of theirs is uncertain and not without an end. They experience (these qualities, both of them, (only) in the beginning. The gain acquired through him (i.e. Mahāvīra), however, has a beginning, but no end. The saint (and) guide/naya gives away his gain.
N'egant': n'eganti n'accanti ity adi, ekântena bhavatîty ekântikah (...) ātyantikah sarva-kāla-bhavi (T II 147a 9f.). For the seventh syllable -a see vs. 16 (sikkhiya).
Vayanti etc. : (...) tad-vido vadanti tau ca dvāv api bhāvau vigataguňôdayau bhavatah (T II 147a 11; similarly Cū 427, 5 f. where guna is

Page #86

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
glossed pagāra). Jacobi saw that this interpretation cannot be correct, yet to read gune 'dayammi, as he does, is not necessary for guno° can represent guna + ūo or gun' uo. The a-pāda, too, reads odae for udae. Vayanti ~ vrajanti,
-
as in vs. 22.
Se udae: put chiastically and thus in a certain contrast with ūdae so.
Sahaye etc.: 'the saviour and sage shares his profit (with others)' (Jac.). Sahaye akhyāti silāhati (Cũ 427, 7), kathayati ślāghate vā (T II 147a 14). As to the form, sahaye (thus to be read m.c.) can correspond to ślāghate or ślāghayati as well as to sadhate or sadhayati. The verb last mentioned has many meanings, inter alia, 'to grant, bestow, yield' [MW] and these appeared better to me.
Tāi nāī: ṇātîti jñātiḥ kulī (Cū 427, 8), jñātī jñātāḥ kṣatriyā jñātaṁ vā vastu-jātam vidyate yasya sa jñātī, vidita- samasta-vedya ity arthaḥ (T II 147b 2f.). Though his gloss is otherwise wrong yet Śilânka makes us suppose that we might read Nãe and consider this to be short for Nayaputte, cf. Dasav 6, 21 na so pariggaho vutto Nayaputteņa tāiņā. Nevertheless I would prefer to take nae Pāli nāgo Sa. nāyakaḥ, as in Suttanipata 522 (... vimutto) nāgo tādi pavuccati tathatta '(... being completely released.) Such a one is rightly called "nāga". (Norman 1992: 57).
2, 6, 25
75
~
a-himsayam savva-payâņukampi dhamme thiyam kammavivega-heum | tam aya-dandehi samāyarantā a-bohie te padiruvã eyam ||
He does not harm anyone, has pity and compassion for all beings, is of unshakeable faith (and) makes that his actions are judged correctly. He who puts him on a par (?) with inconsiderate people is a model of folly.

Savva-payâṇukampī :~ī uniform reading for which, if correct, cf. Edgerton, BHSG 10.54; otherwise the ending might be emended -im though nasalisation in MSS equals lengthening of the preceding vowel.
Dhamme thiyam: this expression is found also in Pāli, e.g. Sn 250, 327 etc70. Cu 427, 11 dasa-vidhe dhamme", Ț II 147b 9 paramârtha-bhūte. Kamma: '(who) causes the truth of the Law to be known' (Jac.).

Page #87

76
W. B. Bollée
Tam etc 'him you would equal to those wicked men' (Jac.).
Aya-dandehi: see at 1, 2, 3, 9.
Samāyarantă: samăcaranti iti samaṁ acarantă samācarantā, tulyaṁ kurvantā ity arthaḥ; samānayanto vā samānaṁ kurvantā ity arthaḥ (Cũ 427, 13), samācaranta-ātma-kalpaṁ kurvaṇti vaṇig-ādibhir udāharaṇaiḥ (T II 147b 10). Sa. samâcarati means 1. 'to act or conduct oneself towards' (loc.); 2. 'to practise, do; 3. to associate with' (instr.; MW). In Pali only the second meaning is testified to, but at our place, only the causative of the third meaning, if at all, would make sense. A possible alternative may be a derivation from VKAR: samākaroti means 'to bring together, unite' (MW). That would fit exactly, though the verb seems to occur in Vedic only and not at all in Pāli. Samāyaranta, however, cannot be anything else but a nom. pl. and therefore, it is not clear to me, why Jacobi could separate it from te in the d-pada.
A-bohie etc. "This is the outcome of your folly' (Jac.).
Quotations in the commentaries
As noticed elsewhere?2 Mbh quotations can present readings rejected in the critical edition.
Jambū-jyoti
aya-vaya-maya-paya-caya-taya-naya gatau (T II 146b 5 ad Suy 2, 6, 20) = 147b 1 ad Suy 2, 6, 24. Cf. Hemacandra 1979: 101 (790ff.)
aśoka-vṛkṣaḥ sura-puspa-vṛṣṭir divya-dhvaniś câmaram āsanam ca bhāmandalam dundubhirata-patraṁ sat-prātihāryāņi Jinêśvarāṇām (Cū 418, 4 ad Sūy 2, 6, 2)

ahimsă satyam a-steyam brahmacaryam a-lubdhatā (Ț II 142b 1 ad Suy 2, 6, 8). Quotation of Mbh 14 App. 4. 2214.
āśvade sighra-bhāve ca (Cũ 426, 12 ad Sũy 2, 6, 22)
udaiga pakkheve (Cũ 426, 2 ad Suy 2, 6, 20)
kamu icchāyām (Cũ 424, 3 ad Sūy 2, 6, 17)
citte tayitavye (Cũ 428, 6 ad Suy 2, 6, 25)
cira-samsaṭṭho 'si me, Goyamā (Cū 424, 7 ad Sũy 2, 6, 17). Quotation of Viy 14, 7 [samsitthe].
chatram chatram pātraṁ vastraṁ yaṣṭim ca carcayati bhikṣuḥ veṣena parikarena ca kiyatâpi vinā na bhikṣâpi (T II 139b 14f. ad Suy 2, 6, 2)

Page #88

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
jahim jassa ja vavasiyam (Cū 421, 13 ad Sūy 2, 6, 12) tvaci bhogah sukham māṁse (Cū 414, 1 ad SüyN 185)
dittham miyam a-samdiddham (Cū 419,8 ad Sūy 2, 6,5). Quotation of Dasav 8, 48a.
deva-devassa (Cū 423, 8 ad Sūy 2, 6, 15) navam na kujja vihane purănam (Cũ 425, 12 ad Suy 2, 6, 20)
nānam sikkhai nānam gunei nanena kunai kiccāim nānī navam na bandhei etc. (Cū 425, 12 f. ad Süy 2, 6, 20). Quotation of DasavN 383 [bandhai).
pāeņa khīņa-davvā (Cū 423, 14 ad Sūy 2, 6, 16)
Brahmā lūna-sirā Harir drái sarug vyālupta-śiśno Harah, Süryo 'py ullikhito 'nalo 'py akhila-bhuk Somah kalarkankitah | svar-nătho 'pi visamsthulah khalu vapuh-samsthair upasthaih krtah, san-mārga-skhalanād bhavanti vipadah prayah prabhūnām api || (Ţ II 143b 12 ff. ad Sūy 2, 6, 13)
Bhagavam pañca-mahavvaya-gutto indiya-sãvudo ya virao ya | annesis pi tam-eva ya dhammaṁ desei gāhei || (Cū 419, 12 f. ad Sūy 2, 6, 6)
mana puvvangama [?] (Cū 428, 5 ad Süy 2, 6, 25)
rāga-dveşau vinirjitya kim aranye karisyasi ? atha no nirjitāv etau kim aranye karisyasi ? (? II 141a 10 f. ad Sūy 2, 6, 4)
vidyā-vinaya-sampanne brāhmane < gavi hastini > (Cū 424, 2f. ad Sūy 2, 6, 16). Quotation of Mbh 6, 27, 18ab.
vişayā vinivartante nirāhārasya dehinaḥ (Cū 426, 12 ad Sūy 2, 6, 22). Quotation of Mbh 6, 24, 59ab = 12, 197, 16ab.
śanke praharşa-tulā (Cū 425, 1 ad Sūy 2, 6, 18)
śiśnôdara-krte, Pārtha ! (Cū 426, 9 f. ad Sūy 2, 6, 22. The complete śloka is found Cū 86, 7 f. ad Āyār 1, 2, 5, 5. Cf. Mbh 3, 2, 61a)
sañja sange (Cū 425, 7 ad Sūy 2, 6, 19) sukhāni dattvā sukhāni (Cū 420, 6 ad Sūy 2, 6, 7)
Annotations :
1. The abbreviations for the titles of Indian texts are those adopted for my Studien
zum Süyagada: C = pratikas in Jinadāsa's Cūrni (1950); T = Süy text in Silânka's commentary vol. II (1953); V = Vaidya's ed. (1928); J = Jambūvijaya's ed. [1978]. Cũ = Cũrni, T = Tikā.

Page #89

78
W. B. Bollée
Jambū-jyoti
2. Minor variants are noted in Bollée 1995: 135f. 3. This “correction” of T by Vaidya, just as his adoption of T's reading at N 198 d,
shows the correctness of Alsdorf's remark in his Itthīparinnā paper (Alsdorf 1974:
194 note 5). 4. Vattha na khiva-m-addena vann'-addam citta-kammâdisu ārdakam likhitam
Ardrānaksatram likhitam (Cū 413, 12sq.). 5. See Hilka 1910 : 33. 6. Śrīparni-sovarcaladikam (Ţ II 136 a 2). 7. Muktā-phala-raktâśokâdikam (T ibidem). 8. Vasayôpaliptaṁ vasârdram (II 136 a 3). 9. Vajra-lepâdy-upaliptaṁ stambha-kudyâdikam (1.c.). 10. Tattha negama-samgaha-yavahārā ti-viham samkham icchanti, tam jahā :
ekkabhaviyam baddhâuyam abhimuha-nama-gottaṁ ca. 11. The particulars of this process, which stricto sensu seems to contradict Buddhist
conceptions, are told by Buddhaghosa with regard to the future Buddha, but will represent a common Indian idea as the Tusita-devatā who form the setting see off the reincarnated in the Nandavana. Sumangalāvilāsinī 430, 11 states that sabbadevalokesu hi Nandavanaṁ atthi yeva. Thus beings enjoying their positive karman in other devalokas will leave these in the same way. (See Bollée, A Note on the Birth
of the Hero in ancient India (in press]). 12. Ekena bhavena yo jīvaḥ svargâder āgatya (...) asannataro baddhâyuskaḥ (...)
asannatamo 'bhimukha-nama-gotro yo 'nantara-samayam evârdrakatvena
samutpatsyate - ete ca trayo'pi prakārā dravyârdrake drastavyāh (T II 136 a 6sqq.). 13. In another context (ĀvCū 526,4 and in a stanza from a longer metrical quotation
in the vrtti 169 a 1 on Āyār 1, 1,7,1*) mentioned as the teacher of Jiyasattu, Rājā of Vasantapura. I do not understand why this prince in PrPN I, p. 288 no. 15 should probably be identical with a ruler of Rāyagiha of that name in Nirayāv 4, 1, as suggested by Chandra and Mehta at no. 38. A Jiyasattu of Vasantapura is
also found at AvCū 498, 6 and 503, 6. 14. For the formationcf., e.g., Prince Selaga of Selagapura in Nāyā 1,5. Localisations
like these naturally are of little importance for the historicity of Sūy 2, 6 as already
Basham 1951 : 54 remarked. 15. Here Jinadäsa's version diverges in that the nun is reborn in a foreign country
(meccha-visaye) as Addaya, son of Prince Addaga and his queen Dhārini, whereas

Page #90

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
79
Sāmāyika returns to this world as a Sheth's daughter in Vasantapura (Cū 415, 2
sq.).
16. Cū 415, 4 sqq. only speaks of a dūta. 17. Abhaya-kumarenâpi pariņāmikyā buddhyā pariņāmitam (T 138 a 5 sq.). 18. Derivate of asva-vāhana 'das Reiten zu Pferd' (Schmidt, Nachträge). 19. Cū 416, 7 reads sāvaga-padimā instead of uvāsaga- (see Schubring 1978: S163).
Thus the layman is completely put on an equal footing with the monks. At T II 138
b 3 it reads anyatara-pratimā-pratipannah kāyôtsarga-vyavasthitah. 20. Read vidhrto instead of vighrto at Ţ II 138 b 5. 21. Tathāvidhakarmôdayāe câvaśyam-bhāvi-bhavitavyatā-niyogena ca, ȚII 138b 13. 22. Called dhijjāti in Cū 417, 2; see Bollée 1977: 112 and 1988: 279. The word in
question seems to be first a term of abuse used by brahmins for non-brahmins who returned the invective as a nickname for the former. Even brahmins who had become Buddhist monks sometimes could not abstain from their old habit as stated in Udāna 28, 11, where we hear of the brahmin bhikkhu Pilinda-Vaccha's
custom of addressing his confratres by vasala-vāda. 23. Even if this results in an impossible form like the imperative jāņam in vs. 8. 24. Ekāki viharaṁl lokikaih paribhūyata iti matvā loka-parkti-nimittam mahān
parikaraḥ krtah (on loka-pa[n]kti see Bollée 1977: 151), tathā côcyate : "chattram chättram pātram vastram yastim ca carcayati bhiksuh | vesena parikarena ca
kiyatâpi vină na bhiksâpi" || (T II 139 b 13 sqq.). 25. As to this see Jacobi's remark on Utt 1, 7 and infra Sūy 2, 6, 6. 26. CP Norman I (1990) 12ff. 27. Cf. BHSG $ 8.94. 28. Speijer 1886: $ 52; Sen 1953 $ 16. 29. Speyer 1896: $ 25. 30. R. P. Jain 1983: 65 sqq. 31. See e.g. Alsdorf 1962:5 sqq. 32. See e.g. K. C. Jain 1963 : 17f. 33. Granoff 1989:204. 34. At the references mentioned in Pi 88 356 and 409 vayam corresponds to Sa. vayas. 35. Yet cf. kiñcid at T II 143 b 10. 36. Udghattana must have an extended conception of outbreak (of violence or passion)'

Page #91

80
W. B. Bollée
(MW), namely, 'passionate utterance, abuse', cf. ghattate 'to hurt with words, speak of malignantly' (MW).
37. 'At his endless duels of words he tried to shout down his opponents with his formidable voice and was profuse in invectives when it was necessary to withstand them."
Jambu-jyoti
38. Cf. Ayar 2, 4, 2, 1.
39. Cf. Ayar 2, 4, 1, 8.
40. This translation of parivrājaka follows Seidenstücker 1920: 125.
41. Rūvam iti yathā loko lokaṁ kasmimścid aparādhe akrośati: "Kāṇaḥ ! kubjaḥ ! kodhi" (Sa. kusthi)! vêti jätyä vêti "Caṇḍāla-karma karoti." Naivam kimcid rūpeṇa "Tridandika dustha! Parivräjaka dustha! Idam te durdṛṣṭaṁ śāsanaṁ. Tena mûrkhaKapilena kim dṛṣṭam, yena kartā kṣetrajñaḥ ?"
42. He kaṣāya-kantha ! (Cu 422, 5)
43. Jugupsitângâvayavôdghaṭṭanena jātyā tal-linga-grahaṇôdghaṭṭanena vā.
44. Following this meaning Jacobi translates Utt 2, 21 'sitting there he should brave all dangers.' He may have read similarly to Charpentier tattha se citthamāṇassa uvasaggåbhidhärae, yet I do not understand his construction then. Säntisüri reads uvasagge bhidharae, which does not solve the difficulty. Only his readinguvasaggabhayam bhave allows for a harmony with citṭhamāṇassa (thus also Alsdorf in a marginal jotting in his hand copy of Charpentier). The latest Utt edition, the one made by Punyavijaya and Bhojak (Bombay, 1977), in the b-pada has the traditional version of the European ed. The only other reference for abhidharayai I have found seems to me just as suspect: Dasav 5, 2, 25 a monk is recommended to visit every house on his almsround and niyam kulam aikamma üsaḍham nåbhidharae, which Schubring renders by 'he should not pass by a lowly house and go only to a noble one.' As to the meaning this no doubt is correct, just as Haribhadra paraphrases the verb by yäyät. Then one should either assume a meaning 'to patronize-which in fact would reverse things-or read abhidhāvae.
45. Thus read for uju in the PTS ed.
46. See e.g. Hornell 1920: 174 sq.
47. 1991: 88.

48. In the Ayar chapter containing his analysis, p. 61, Schubring expresses himself to the effect that this line starts with prose. In his hand copy, however, he later emended the text as follows: agant' ārāmâgāre game nagare vi egayā vāso.

Page #92

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
81
49. Chāyā-bhramba iti 'loss of face.' 50. Similarly Basham 1951:53. 51. Otherwise these formations have an -- in the joint of the compound; for examples
from Pāli see PED s.v. kiccā-kicc, and Gg. 8 33; for Sa., Wackernagel 1905 : 148
(8 61) and Debrunner 1957:44; and, for both, Hoffmann 1975: 113-119. . 52. Mahāniddesa 226, 28 in the form lapaka-lapaka, in Vism 26, 3 also as lapa-lapa,
used of a talkative monk. 53. Buddhists, inter alios (Cū 423, 12). 54. Interdictions of intercourse with heterodox people occur in Hinduism, e.g.
Visnupurāna 3, 18, 79 and 96ff. 55. See Bollée 1977: 32. 56. The verse number parallel 1, 2, 1, 17 contains no....na 'not at all. 57. See Duden, 1984: $ 579. 58. Cf. Milindapanha 82, 31ff. 59. Sūy 1, 5, 1, 2; 1, 6,3; 1, 6, 7; 1, 6, 25; 1, 14, 4; Utt 4, 6. 60. Ghettuna (Cū 425, 7) – grhītvā (T II 146a 12). 61. Karpūrâgaru-kastūrikâmbarâdikam, T II 146a 11. 62. Cū : bandhei. 63. Quotation from unknown source. 64. For brahma in this sense see Zaehner 1969 : 214. 65. Kraya-vikrayârtham sakata-yāna-vāhanôstra-mandalikâdibhir anusthānaih (T II
146b 9). 66. On slavery in India see, e.g., Jain 1984 : 140ff. 67. See Bollée 1977: 30. 68. Bollée 1977 : 99. 69. Sa. vyavasita : vyavasyati. 70. See PTC s.v. thita, p. 230b line 15 from bottom. 71. Cf. Thā 10, 945 (Suttâgame I 304, 23) dasa-vihe samana-dhamme pannatte tam
jahā khanti, muttī etc. 72. Bollée 1977: 71 n. 80. 73. The titlepage of the 2nd vol. of my pothi is missing and the year of publication
and serial number were not mentioned in Velankar's Jinaratnakośa.

Page #93

82
W. B. Bollée
Jambū-jyoti
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ludwig Alsdorf, 1962 Beiträge zur Geschichte von Vegetarismus und
Rinderverehrung in Indien. AdWLitMainz. Geistes- u. soz. wiss. Kl. Jg.
1961. Nr. 6. Wiesbaden. do. Les Etudes jaina. Paris 1965. do. Kleine Schriften. Wiesbaden 1974. Anuogadārāim. See Nandisuttam Arthur L. Basham, History and Doctrines of the Ājīvikas. London 1951. Willem Bollée, Studien zum Sūyagada I. Wiesbaden 1977. do. 1988 Studien zum Süyagada II. Stuttgart. do. 1990 Āyāranga 2, 16 and Sūyagada 1, 16. Journal of Indian Philosophy
18:29-52. do. 1994 Materials for an edition and study of the Pinda- and Oha-Nijjuttis of
the Svetämbara Jain tradition. Part 2 : Preliminary text and Glossary.
Stuttgart. do. 1995 The Nijjuttis on the Seniors of the Svetâmbara Siddhanta : Ayāranga,
Dasaveyaliya, Uttarajjhāyā and Sūyagada. Stuttgart. Candravijaya (ed.) 1979. See Hemacandra
Albert Debrunner, Nachträge zu Wackernagels Altindische Grammatik II, 1.
Göttingen 1957. Günther Drosdowski, (ed.) Grammatik der deutschen Gegenwartsprache.
Mannheim 1984.
Duden. See Drosdowski. Paul Dundas, The Jains. London 1992. Helmuth von Glasenapp, Religiöse Reformbewegungen im heutigen Indien.
Morgenland. Darstellungen aus Geschichte und Kultur des Ostens. Heft
17. Leipzig 1928. Phyllis Granoff, Religious Biography and Clan History among the Svetâmbara
Jains in North India. East and West 39, 1989: 195-215. Hemacandra Dhātupārāyana, ed. Munichandravijaya. Pālitāna 1979. Alfons Hilka, Die altindischen Personennamen. Breslau 1910.

Page #94

'Adda' or the Oldest Extant Dispute between....
Karl Hoffmann. See J. Narten.
J. Hornell, "The origins and ethnological significance of Indian boat. designs." Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal VII, 3. Calcutta 1920. Hermann Jacobi, Jaina Sütras II. SBE. XLV. Oxford 1895.
Jagdish C. Jain, Life in Ancient India as Depicted in the Jain Canon and Commentaries. Delhi 1984.
83
Kailash C. Jain, Jainism in Rajasthan. Sholapur 1963.
Hiralal R. Kapadia, Prohibition of flesh-eating in Jainism. Review of Philosophy and Religion IV 1933: 232-39.
Damodar Dh. Kosambi, The Autochthonous Element in the Mahabharata. JAOS 84 1963 34-44.
Ernst Leumann, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Buddhismus VI. München. Buddha und Mahāvīra, die beiden indischen Religionsstifter. Zs. für Buddhismus IV 1921. (1922).
Munichandravijaya. See Hemacandra 1979.
Nandisuttam and Anuogaddārairń Jaina Agama Series ed. No. 1. Bombay
1968.
Johanna Narten, (ed.) Aufsätze zur Indoiranistik I. Wiesbaden 1975. Kenneth R. Norman, The Group of Discourses. vol. 2. London 1992.
Gustav Roth, 'A Saint like that' and 'A Saviour' in Prakrit, Pāli, Sanskrit and Tibetan Literature. in: Śrī Mahavir Jaina Golden Jubilee Volume 1, English section. Bombay 1968.
Samavāyāngam, Agamôdayasamiti 15. Mehesana 1918.
Dieter Schlingloff, "Cotton-manufacture in ancient India." JESHO XVII, 1 1974, 81-96.
Richard Schmidt, Nachträge zum Sanskrit-Wörterbuch in kürzerer Fassung von Otto Böhtlingk. Leipzig 1928.
Walther Schubring, Worte Mahāvīras. Göttingen 1926.
do. Die Lehre der Jainas. Berlin 1935.
do. The Doctrine of the Jainas. (translation of prec.) Delhi 1978. Karl Seidenstücker, See Udäna 1920.

Page #95

84
W. B. Bollée
Shadakshari Settar, Pursuing death. Dharwad 1990.
Sukumāra Sen, "Historical Syntax of Middle Indo-Aryan," IL XIII 1953 :
1957.
355-473.
Jacob S. Speijer, Sanskrit Syntax, Leiden 1886.
do. Vedische und Sanskrit Syntax. Strassburg 1896.
Sūtrakṛtângacurnṇī, Rṣabhdevji Keśarimalji Śvetâmbar samsthā. Ratlam 1950. Sūtrakṛtângam II, Goḍīpārśva Jaina Grantha-mālā 7. Bombay 1953. Suyagaḍamgasuttam Ed. Muni Jambūvijaya. Jaina Agama Series 2. Bombay
1978..
Udana Das Buch der feierlichen Worte des Erhabenen. Übers. von Karl Seidenstücker. Augsburg 1920.
Uttarādhyayanānī Ātmavallabhagranthâvali 12 and? 1937. Jakob Wackernagel, Altindische Grammatik II, 1. Göttingen 1905. Repr.
Jambu-jyoti

Moriichi Yamazaki,
Yumi Ousaka, Uttarajjhāyā Word Index and Reverse Word Index. Philologica Asiatica Monograph Series 11. Tokyo 1997. R. C. Zaehner, The Bhagavadgītā. Oxford 1969.
000

Page #96

Asati' in the Alagaddūpamasutta
Ernst Steinkellner
In an earlier paper, I tried to explain how and why a denial of the existence of a permanent self (attā) by the Buddha cannot be definitively attached to the attribute in the expression saccato thetato anupalabbhamānel. I also rejected (in note 35) the possibility propounded by K. R. Norman? that in passages of the Alagaddūpamasutta (MN I 135 ff.) the Buddha denied its existence "by implication, if not explicitly". Then I said with regard to the concluding sentence of the first paragraph (MN I 135, 27 - 136, 15), where the Buddha deals with six wrong views (ditthitthānāni), namely so evaṁ samanupassanto asati na paritassatīti (MN I 136, 15 f.) that "the attribute asat refers to the ideas, "mine, I self" as identified in the views rejected above...", and "that it cannot be understood as an attribute of the Self..."4
Following Buddhaghosa (Ps II 111, 11 - 15), I took this sentence to be the conclusion of the preceding paragraph and, therefore, related asati to the last of the preceding views, namely that there is a self and that "after death I will exist, as permanent, lasting, eternal, unchanging" (so pecca bhavissāmi nicco dhuvo sassato avipariņāmadhammo..., MN I 135, 37 f.).
However, limiting of the reference of asati to the last view is certainly wrong. It would have to refer to all the six views mentioned, i.e. the view of an untrained person with regard to rūpa and the other constituents "that is mine, I am that, that is my self" (etaṁ mama eso 'ham asmi eso me attā, MN I 135, 31)s. It may be possible to regard these six views as non-existent (asat) when in the second part of the paragraph-the trained expert in the dhamma correctly considers rūpa etc. as “that is not mine”, etc., thereby eliminating the wrong views, rendering them non-existent. But why would the Buddha then conclude with the words "He, when regarding (these six

Page #97

86
Ernst Steinkellner
Jambū-jyoti
items) in this way, is not anxious about something which does not exist” ? Anxiety (paritassana) was not considered at all in the preceding text. Therefore, it does not seem appropriate to summarize in opposition that anxiety does not prevail with the trained expert in the dhamma. However, if it is stated here, at the end of the paragraph, that the trained person (ariyasāvako) is not anxious about something which does not exist (asati na paritassati), this statement implies that (although not indicated at all) the opposite is the case indeed with the untrained person (assutavā puthujjano) who cares for his possessions and his own existence and, thus, might be anxious when hearing the Buddha's teaching for uprooting all resolve for the corresponding wrong views. In this sense the last sentence of the paragraph indicates a new, hitherto not yet mentioned consequence of the preceding which demands an explanation. This explanation is, then, delivered in the following paragraph. In other words, while the reference of asati to something in the preceding paragraph is not very likely, the statement that he is not anxious (na paritassati) in conclusion indicates a newly considered consequence of the preceding paragraph which, however, has not been touched upon so far.
The solution to this textual problem is not my own. I owe the decisive clues to my friends Lambert Schmithausen? and Enomoto Fumio rather than as a concluding sentence of the preceding paragraph, this sentence must be considered as introducing the topic of the following paragraph, namely that of anxiety about something which does not exist (asati paritassana).
The Buddha ends the preceding, or begins the following paragraph first by referring back to the trained person who correctly regards rūpa etc. as "that is not mine", etc. (so evaṁ samanupassanto), and then introduces
1). And, indeed, anxiety (paritassanā) is the topic of the next paragraph (MN I 136, 17 - 137, 16). It is here, then, that we have to look for the terms which asati refers to.
After the introductory sentence of the Buddha (so evam samanupassanto asati na paritassatiti, MN I 136, 15 f.), the theme of anxiety is developed in four steps consisting of a monk's four questions together with the Buddha's answers, the first being asked with reference to the words of the Buddha which introduce this paragraph (evam vutte...):

Page #98

'Asati' in the Alagaddüpamasutta
la (136, 1823): ... bahiddhā asati paritassanā ti (136, 18) 1b (136, 23-29): ... bahiddhā asati aparitassana ti (136, 23 f.) 2a (136, 29-137, 4): ... ajjhattaṁ asati paritassanā ti (136, 29 f.) 2b (137, 4-16): ... ajjhattam asati aparitassanā ti (137, 4 f.)
In the first case, one grieves etc. (la), or one does not grieve etc. (lb) for something objective, something external (bahiddha) which does not exist (asati), because it is either no longer existent now1o, or because now there is no chance of obtaining it11.
In the second case, one grieves etc. (2a), or one does not grieve etc. (2b) for something subjective, something internal (ajjhattam), namely the self (attā) as one might wrongly imagine it (ekaccassa evam diṭṭhi hoti 136, 31), which does not exist asati), because the wrongly imagined self will be no longer existent in the future12, after hearing the Tathāgata's dhamma for uprooting all resolve for, etc., the wrong views (ditthiṭṭhānādhiṭṭhāna... 136, 33 - 37).
87
Thus, it is indeed the self which, as something internal, is said to be non-existent (asat), here. But it is the wrongly imagined future nonexistence of the self only that this paragraph deals with, and, it neither explicitly nor implicitly denies the existence of the self as such.
That I dare to offer what is essentially a footnote to a previous footnote as a contribution to this volume in celebration of the Muni Jambuvijaya demands an apology. But the subject's import is considerable. For what it means is no less than the dispelling of the last vestiges of doubt that could possibly creep in upon the point then made, that the Buddha did not expressly state a negation of the existence of a self.
Annotations :
1. E. Steinkellner, "Lamotte and the Concept of anupalabdhi", Études asiatiques, 46, 1, Bern etc. 1992, pp. 398-410.
2. K. R. Norman, “A Note on attā in the Alagaddupama-Sutta", in Studies in Indian Philosophy. A Memorial Volume in Honour of Pandit Sukhlalji Sanghavi, Ahmedabad 1981, pp. 19-29.
3. Ibid., p. 28.

Page #99

88
Ernst Steinkellner
Jambū-jyoti
4. E.g. with F. J. Hoffman, Rationality and Mind in Early Buddhism, Delhi 1987,
p. 53. 5. Although, contextually, asati could also refer to rūpa, etc.; however, this is
nonsensical, because rūpa, etc., certainly does exist. 6. This is Buddhaghosa's interpretation : iminā bhagavā ajjhattakkhandavināse
aparitassamānam...Ps II 111, 13 f. 7. A marginal note in the manuscript of his lectures on Buddhist Philosophy of 1988/
1989 (V, 8) reads: "The sentence does not go well together with the preceding. ... With regard to the following, however, it is meaningful. But there it refers, on the one hand, to no longer existing external things one grieves after, and, on the other hand, to the imagined future non-existence of the ātman (in the mind of somebody who responds to the teaching of the Buddha with the view of a static eternal self" (my translation). I would like to thank Professor Schmithausen for
allowing me to publish this note and to use his idea for my paper. 8. In a letter of October 23rd, 1992, Enomoto says: “I would think the attribute asati
still refers to something objective (bahiddha) and subjective (ajjhattam),..." 9. I.e., according to Buddhaghosa, requisites (parikkhāra), like valuables, vehicles,
mounts, gold, and jewellery (Ps II 111, 20 and 25). 10. Because it was taken away or ruined by kings, thieves, fire, etc. (Ps II 111, 26 -
28). 11. āhu vata me, tam vata me na tthi, siya vata me, tam vatāham na labhāmīti. MN
I 136, 20 f.
12. ucchijjissami nama su, vinassissāmi nāma su, na su nama bhavissāmīti. MNI 137,
1 f.
O00

Page #100

On 'Anadyamāno yad anannam atti' Chandogya Upanisad 4.3.7
M. A. Mehendale
H. Lüders' has very extensively dealt with the Samvargavidyā of the Ch. Up. 4.1-3. There he has compared the Upanisad text with the parallel version from the Jaiminiya Upanisad Br. 3. 1-2. In his discussion of the relationship between the two passages Lüders came to the conclusion that the teaching presented in the Ch. Up. is later than the one in the Jaim. Up. Br. He has also argued that, in all probability, the Upanisad version is directly based on the Brāhmaṇa version. However, in spite of this direct relationship, there are certain differences between the two texts. Lüders has given satisfactory explanations of almost all these differences.
In one respect, however, Lüders felt puzzled. In the text of the Jaim. Up. Br., while replying to what the Brāhmaṇa, who begged food, had to say about the identity of the highest god2, Abhipratārin Kākṣaseni said that he knew of a god3 who was even higher than the one known to the Brāhmaṇa since the god known to him (Abhipratārin) swallowed the god known to the Brahmana. This is expressed in the Jaim. Up. Br. as anadyamāno yad adantam atti 'Who (i.e. the Vata), while not being himself eaten, eats the eater' (i.e. the Prāṇa)*.

In the parallel passage of the Ch. Up., however, the above lines appears as anadyamāno yad anannam atti 'Who while not being himself eaten, eats what is not food." Lüders says that it is difficult to find the reason for the change of adantam (Jaim. Up. Br.) to anannam (Ch. Up.)' It seems, however, possible to suggest a solution to the difficulty. In the Jaim. Up. Br. the expression used to denote Prana, 'individual breath,' is adantam, 'the one that eats'. This is an indirect way of referring to Prāna. It is very likely that, in a different version of the Jaim. Up. Br., now lost to us3, Prāna was directly

Page #101

M. A. Mehendale
Jambu-jyoti
referred to by the word anantam 'one that breathes'. The last quarter of the stanza in that lost version, accordingly, could have read anadyamāno yad anantam atti 'himself not being eaten, he (Vata) eats the one that breathes (Prana).' Our Ch. Up. stanza was based on this presumably lost version of the Jaim. Up. Br. and not on the one which we now possess. The word anantam of this version understandably, was changed to anannam. The change was not the result of a phonetic change (nt > nn), but, in all likelihood, was the result of a mistake committed by a copyist somewhere in the manuscript tradition. The change of nt to nn is quite conceivable in the Devanagari writing.
90
Annotations :
1. Philologica Indica (Göttingen, 1940), pp. 361-390 (Zu den Upanisads. I. Die Samvargavidyā).
2. This, according to the Brähmaṇa, was Prāna.
3. This, according to Abhipratārin, was Våta.
4. Vata is said to eat up Präṇa, because the individual prana enters Väta after the death of a person. Cf. Lüders., Phil. Ind., p. 383.
5. Which, in the Ch. Up., is put in the mouth of Saunaka Käpeya and not of Abhipratärin Käksaseni.
6. For the explanation of anannam, see Lüders, pp. 388-389.
7. "Schwerer ist es, für die Änderung vom adantam zur anannam einen Grund zu finden"., Phil. Ind., pp. 385-386.
8. Lüders refers to this possibility when he says ".. da ein grosser Teil der vedischen Literetur verloren gegangen ist...." Phil. Ind., p. 383.
000

Page #102

Pāninian Sūtras of the Type अन्येभ्योऽपि दृश्यते
George Cardona
:
1. The1 Mahābhāṣya on Aṣṭādhyāyī 6.3.109 (f) has a well known discussion concerning model Sanskrit speakers, referred to as f:. The question is posed: If the śistas are the authority with respect to correct speech forms, what purpose does the Aṣṭādhyāyī serve? The answer is The Aṣṭādhyāyī serves to make one know the śistas, as follows. Someone who is studying the Aṣṭādhyāyī observes that someone else, although he is not studying this grammar, uses the correct forms that are provided for therein. The student then reasons: Due to the grace of fate that is his or to his nature, this person uses the correct forms provided for in the Aṣṭādhyāyī without studying it. I reason that he knows other correct forms too2. According to Patañjali, then, a śista is not only a model for the correct speech forms explicitly provided for (fafe: :) through operations stated in sutras of the Aṣṭādhyāyī but he also knows other correct speech forms (3), which are not explicitly provided for in this manner. In this way, the Aṣṭādhyāyī serves not only to account directly for correct speech forms but also to account indirectly for such forms, by referring to the usage of accepted model speakers. As Hari puts it3: the grammar serves as a means for conveying the correctness of items of the type qe by virtue of their being sista usage, because one knows who the śistas are.
What Paniniyas say concerning Aṣṭādhyāyī 6. 3. 109 thus has important implications for the concept of what a grammar is supposed to accomplish. To begin with, a grammar is a means of explaining (3) through derivation the accepted usage that is the object of description. In addition, it is taken for granted that this usage includes open sets of items the grammar does not account for directly through description, so that Pāņini recognizes a living native language that is developing. The distinction in question is

Page #103

92
George Cardona
Jambū-jyoti
comparable to the one between ordered sets of elements-ganasexhaustively listed with respect to certain operations and groups of elements—referred to as 37fm -which only represent a part of an open set of items with some common characteristic(s). The question remains whether the view Patañjali espouses in the Mahābhāsya on 6.3. 109 can be considered to reflect Pāṇini's approach.
2. Consider now a group of sūtras which have two features in common: they refer to something as 'seen' and speak of other elements, using 32 or sale
2.1. El 31 236 37RTONHf Erud (tal: [])!
2.1.1. 6. 3. 137 comes after a series of rules that provide for longvowel substitution. For example, El 31 884 of up 7&TUTFITfa1499मणिभिन्नछिन्नच्छिद्रस्रुवस्वस्तिकस्य । ६। ३। ११६ नहिवृतिवृषिव्यधिरुचिसहितनिषु क्वौ । ६॥ ३॥ १२२ उपसर्गस्य घज्यमनुष्ये बहुलम्।
According to 6. 3. 115, before of Uf 'ear in a compound, the final vowel of a term denoting a mark used as a brand (784) is replaced by a long vowel, except for the vowels of विष्ट, अष्टन् 'eight', पञ्चन् 'five', मणि 'jewel', भिन्न 'broken', छिन्। 'cut', छिद्र 'a cut', स्रुव 'sruva spoon', स्वस्तिक,e.g., दात्राकर्ण (-दात्रकर्ण) 'an animal with a sickle symbol as a brand on its ear' but 348ch of an animal with eight stripes on its ear'. By 6. 3. 116 long-vowel replacement applies to a final vowel of a prior term in a compound if this is followed by a derivate in fata from one of the following verbs : FE'gird, put on', 'turn, occur', 79 ‘rain', 24'pierce', 57'shine, please', 'bear', 77'stretch'; e.g., 3414€ (-3976) 'sandal', içe (Fiqo) 'a district, yiqq( )‘rain season'. 6.3. 122 provides that the final vowel of a preverb is replaced by a long vowel before a derivate in except in derivates that refer to a human (374567); in addition, the sūtra provides that this replacement applies variously (agm19). For example : atasta (-fakta) 'wetting particularly', 374186f (37441f) “wiping away', with lengthening, and SR prasāra 'spreading, expansion' without lengthening FIUTC 'a Nisāda', which refers to a particular human being, also does not show lengthening.
None of the rules from 6. 1. 115 to 6. 1. 136 provides for the long vowels of - in af 'fighting in which opponents grab each other by the hair', - in o f 'fighting in which opponents grab each other by

Page #104

Paninian Sutras of the Type अन्येभ्योऽपि दृश्यते
93
the hair of the head', FUST- in Gusicfus 'fighting in which opponents hit each other with sticks', het in eufe 'fighting in which opponents hit each other with their fists'. Moreover, Pānini explicitly provides for such derivatess. 6.3. 137 allows for the required long-vowel replacement. The rule does not, however, specify any domain of application in the way that preceding sūtras do. It simply says that the replacement applies also to others (
R T ). In other words, this rule lets long-vowel substitution apply to elements for which this operation has not been provided for, terms which occur with long vowels in actual usage. This is said explicitly in the Kāśikā, which also notes that this accords with the usage of sistas.
I think there can be no doubt whatever concerning two points. First, what the Käśikā says agrees with what Patañjali and Bhartshari said about śista usage. Second, this is the only reasonable way to account for Pāṇini's formulation. The Astādhyāyī has a series of sūtras providing explicitly for long-vowel replacement as illustrated. This substitution applies in specified domains. In addition, in some domains it applies variously. That is not to say that the replacement takes effect optionally, for this would mean the optional substitution would apply in every instance of the specified domain. Instead, the replacement applies obligatorily in some instances, not at all in others, and optionally in still others (see note 26). The replacement by a long vowel applies also to elements for which this operation has not been provided explicitly. Moreover, the rule stating this does not specify a domain : Pāṇini says simply priarufa ‘also of others'.
2.2. 31 PI 80 37 afy zgud
2.2.1. 3.2.101 is connected with the following sūtras : 31 PIEL सप्तम्याञ्जनेर्डः । ३। २। ६८ पञ्चम्यामजातौ । ३। २।९९ उपसर्गे च सञ्ज्ञायाम् । ३।२। १०० अनौ कर्मणि ।
All these rules serve to introduce the suffix 3 after 77 'be born, arise, come into being construed with certain items, as follows:
3.2.97 : 7 construed with a term containing a seventh-triplet nominal ending; e.g., F F: 'born in a lake' and GT: 'born in a stable', equivalent to la: and GREA:.
3.2.98 : 57 construed with a term containing a fifth-triplet nominal ending, provided the nominal term in question does not designate a generic class of substances (अजातौ); e.g., बुद्धिज: 'arisen from the intellect' and दुःखजः

Page #105

George Cardona
Jambu-jyoti
'resulting from suffering', equivalent to fa: and ::, but no comparable formation corresponding to 3d: 'born from a horse'.
94
3.2.99: construed with a preverb, provided the derivate formed is a term referring to a particular thing (4) and not to just anything born; e.g., 'living creature'.
3.2.100 : जन् used with the preverb अनु (अनु जन् 'be born after, follow...in succession') and construed with a term signifying an object (f); e.g., पुमनुज: 'born after a male', equivalent to पुमांसमनुजात: .
3.2.101 then provides that follows construed also with coöccurring terms other than those specified in the preceding rules (3). 3. 2. 97 specifies a term with a seventh-triplet ending, but there are derivates like 3 'not born', such that is construed with a term that contains a firsttriplet ending: 7. 3. 2. 98 requires a term that does not refer to a class of individual substances characterized by a generic property, but there are derivates such as which has arisen from Brahmanas'. 3. 2. 101 requires not only a complex but also a coöccurring item signifying an object. On the other hand, there are derivates such as 'one born later, younger sibling', not construed with an object-signifying term. All such cases are taken care of by 3. 2. 1017.
Once more, a sūtra provides for an operation with a domain that is simply additional to the particular domains stated in related rules but not specified any more. Consequently, one must observe usage to know just what is allowed and what is not
2.3. ३।२।१७८ अन्येभ्योऽपि दृश्यते ।
2.3.1. This sūtra is related to ३।२।१७७ भ्राजभासधुर्विद्युतोर्जिपृजुग्रावस्तुवः क्विप् । which introduces the affix क्विप् after भ्राज् ' shine', भास् 'shine, appear', धुर्व् 'harm', 'flash', 'be strong', 'fill', 'speed', and 'praise' construed with 'stone'. The derivates refer to agents which perform the acts in question habitually, as part of their nature, or wells. For example, fa 'lightning'. 3. 2. 178 states that faq is seen to occur also after other verb bases under the same conditions, thus accounting for derivates like fo ...which cuts..."'
2.4. ५।३।१४ इतराभ्योऽपि दृश्यन्ते । concerns taddhita affixes optionally introduced after padas formed from a 'much, many' and pronominals

Page #106

Paninian Sutras of the Type अन्येभ्योऽपि दृश्यते
95
other than those of the subset beginning with få but including the interrogative किम्10.
2.4.1. This sūtra is related to the following: 41316 TR
41310 तसेश्च । ५।३।९ पर्यभिभ्याञ्च । ५।३।१० सप्तम्यास्त्रल् । ५।३।११ इदमो हः । ५।३।१२ किमोऽत् । ५।३।१३ वा ह चछन्दसि।
5.3.7-9 provide that a pada with a fifth-triplet ending is followed by तसिल. which also replaces तसिll and foliows padas with परि, अभि; e.g., ततस् (–तद्-अस्-तस्) from that', यतस् 'from which', परितस् 'round about in all directions', 34TH 'from both sides'. 5.3.10-13 introduce affixes after padas with a seventh-triplet ending. In general, to follows any such pada formed with a base of the group stated in 5. 3. 2 (see 2.4 with note 10), but & follows such padas containing 564. A pada with foot takes the suffix 377. In Vedic usage, moreover, optionally follows such a pada. For example : 77 ( C-5-7) 'in that, there', 7 'in which, where', 5E (4564-3-7) 'in this, here', 09 ( 164-5-37) 'in which, where ?', E 'in which, where ?'. According to 5. 3. 14, the affixes introduced by preceding rules also are seen to occur after padas with other vibhaktis (51927:). That is, afect and I can follow padas with endings of triplets other than the fifth and seventh. One can say, for example, 41 and , where is coreferential with a nominative and an accusative, so that it is derived with an after padas with endings of the first and second triplets.
Moreover, one must appeal to usage in order to know what particular nominal bases enter into such formations. From what is said in the Mahābhāsya, it is clear that, at Patañjali's time, the affixation provided by 5. 3. 14 applied for padas with the bases Hall you', starya 'long lived', danifiy beloved of the gods', and 341404c 'long lived', all used as equivalents of a second person pronoun"2. It is also clear from the way Panini formulates 5. 3. 14 that at his time the domain of the affixation was not definite.
2.5. 3131830 37221sfg gula
2.5.1. This sūtra is related to 3131876 3770199 (STE:19 h Engh Degret [8P]) ३।३।१२९ छन्दसि गत्यर्थेभ्यः ।
According 3. 3. 128, 19(-37) is affixed to verbs in -ā construed with $96, hand to form derivates meaning 'easy to...' and 'difficult to...'; e.g., ईषत्पान 'easy to drink', दुर्दान 'hard to give', सुदान 'easy to give'. By 3. 3. 129, युच्

Page #107

96
George Cardona
Jambū-jyoti
follows verbs of movement (tref zz:) to form comparable derivates in Vedic (छन्दसि). For example : सुतरण 'easy to cross' (e.g., RV 4. 19.6d : सुतरणाँ अकृणोरिन्द्र सिन्धून् ॥ Indra, you made the rivers easy to cross...'), दुश्च्य वन 'hard to shake' (e.g., RV 10. 103. 2bc : युत्कारेण दुश्च्यवनेन धृष्णुना । तदिन्द्रेण जयत तत्सहध्वम् Win, prevail...with Indra who does battle, is hard to shake, is daring.'); see also Debrunner 188 (section 83). According to 3. 3. 130, युच् is seen to occur in Vedic usage also after other verbs, under the same conditions. For example, सुवेदन 'easy to find', as in RV 10. 112. 8d : सुवेदनामकृणोब्रह्मणे गाम् ॥ “You made the cow easy to find...'
From what Pānini says, then, in the Vedic traditions known to him, such derivates with were generally formed from verbs of motion and occurred also with other verbs, but he could not determine any definite distribution as to the semantics or formal properties of the other bases in question.
2.6. ३।२।७४ आतो मनिन्क्वनिब्वनिपश्च (विच् छन्दसि [७३]) । ३।२।७५ अन्येभ्योऽपि दृश्यन्ते । ३।२।७६ क्विच।
2.6.1. 3. 2. 74 allows विच् and also मनिन्, क्वनिप् and वनिप् to follow verb bases that end in -ā, provided these verbs are used in construction with a coöccurring item terminating in a nominal ending. The derivates formed, moreover, occur in Vedic. For example : सुदामन् (nom. sg. सुदामा) 'one who gives well' (-दा-मन् : मनिन्), सुधीवन् (सुधीवा) 'one who places, makes well' (-धा-वन् : क्वनिप्), भूरिदावन् (भूरिदावा) 'one who gives much' (-दा-वन् : वनिप्), कीलालपा (कीलालपा:) 'one who drinks kilala' (–पा-: विच्). 3. 2. 75 states that these affixes occur (दृश्यन्ते 'are seen') after other verbal bases also (अन्येभ्योऽपि); for example, सुशर्मन् (सुशर्मा) one who destroys well' (--मनिन्), प्रातरित्वन् (प्रातरित्वा) 'one who goes in the morning' (-इ-वन् : क्वनिप्), विजावन् (विजावा) 'one who is born, one who procreates' (-जन्-वन् : वनिप्), रेष् (रेट्) 'one who suffers harml" (रिष्-विच्). 3. 2. 76 then allows क्विप् also to follow any verbal base; e.g., उखास्रस् (उखास्रत्) '...which falls from the ukha pot' (-स्रन्स-क्विप्).
2.6.2. 3. 2. 76 is related to two other sātras : ३।२।६१ सत्सूद्विषद्रुहदुहयुजविदभिदछिदजिनीराजामुपसर्गेऽपि क्विप् । ३१ २। ८७ ब्रह्मभ्रूणवृत्रेषु क्विप् (कर्मणि हनः [८६] भूते [८४])।
According to 3. 2. 61, क्विप् is introduced after certain verbal bases if these are used in construction with a coöccurring item terminating in

Page #108

Paninian Sutras of the Type अन्येभ्योऽपि दृश्यते
97
a nominal ending, which can also be a preverb (344185f9). The bases are : ‘sit', & *give birth to', for 'hate', se 'wish ill to someone', FE ‘milk', yer join, yoke', fate know', 'be', fare 'break', ferc 'cut, fo 'conquer, win, be victorious', # 'lead', {15 ‘shine, rule”; e.g., pferhe one who sits in a pure place', parą one who gives birth to a hundred', ufgq one who hates exceedingly', HEG who wishes ill to, deceives a friend', VIIGE 'Cow milker', 37845 'horse yoker', acfaç 'one who knows the Veda', 18646 ‘one who breaks a piece of wood', रज्जुछिद् 'one who cuts a rope', शत्रुजित् 'conqueror of an enemy', सेनानी 'leader of an army'. 3. 2. 87 introduces faaly after 6 ‘kill' if this is construed with any of the terms at 'Brāhmana', 'foetus', u "Vstra' signifying an object of killing, provided also that the act is referred to the past : 1667 (nom. sg. बरहा) 'one who has killed a Brahmana', भ्रूणहन्, वृत्रहन्. This sutra provides a two-fold restriction with respect to 3. 2. 76. There is a restriction regarding the base & used with reference to past killing, such that this takes fagy only if it occurs with one of the terms given in 3. 2. 87; thus, to refer to a person who has killed a man, one uses हतवत् (nom. sg. masc. हतवान्), as in पुरुष हतवान्. Moreover, there is a restriction regarding past time reference, such that only fony is allowed to occur after used with reference to past killing and construed with the terms and so on; this accounts for the use of a derivate like पितव्यघातिनः पितव्यघाती 'one who has killed his paternal uncle14 but not
1.15 3. 2. 87 thus restricts the scope of 3. 2. 76 so that cannot take folay without limitation. 3. 2. 61 applies to introduce foam only to bases construed with a coöccurring nominal (3496), which may be a preverb, but 3. 2. 76 does not have this limitation16.
2.6.3. As Kāryāyana and Patañjali go on to remark", if one considers 3. 2. 87 to apply in the manner described, then the formulation of the next sūtra, 3. 2. 88: Emosgefa I, serves a purpose. This sūtra provides for Vedic usage (छन्दसि), wherein हन् takes क्विप् variously (बहुलम्). Thus, -हन् occurs with upapadas other than those specified in 3.2.87, as in TEL FUET YTET who has killed his mother, his father, his brother18'; and 37f4alla: ‘slayer of enemies19, contains - Ela -, derived with the suffix 37420
2.6.4. Now, consider 312108 H aetare il fuchi 319109 310 49: 1 Birroz fast 3-ofe I According to 3. 2. 71-72, in usage found in mantras fuan follows श्वेतवह्, उक्थशस्, and पुरोडाश् as well as यज् used with the preverb अव. 3. 2. 73 introduces for after 75 used with 34 to form derivates found in general Vedic usage.

Page #109

98
George Cardona
Jambū-jyoti
3.2.74-76 apply as shown in 2. 6. 1. It is reasonable, I think, to accept what the Kāśikā says about 3. 2. 75. The Kāśikā remarks that 3. 2. 75 uses दृश्यते in order that usage be followed (प्रयोगानुसरणार्थम्)21. This accords with what Patañjali said much earlier (see 1 with note 2), since the accepted usage is that of model speakers. That is, the Vedic usage known to Pānini was such that he could determine particular domains in which fua and faz occurred. Moreover, verbs in -ă could form derivates with fr and so on (3. 2. 74 [2.6.1]) in compounds. In both Vedic and the spoken language Pānini describes, the same suffixes occur with verbs in -ī and also other verbs, as could fetaly, too, both in compounds and independently. In other words, for Vedic eft and so on had a restricted domain of usage, which could be described formally. In Panini's bhāsā, on the other hand, the domain of these affixes had spread, but the development was still at a stage where Pāṇini could not formally describe this with precision. In fact, these affixes were being generalized fully. He therefore provides that these affixes, and 1894, are seen to occur elsewhere also. The exact extent of their usage, then, is still in flux within the community of model speakers.
2.6.5. One final point has to be taken into account, concerning 3. 2. 1 (see note 20). This is formulated as a very general rule, whereby 374 could occur with any verb whatever. Accordingly, the sūtra allows derivates such as 3 frigef 'one who looks at the sun'. The discussion of this sūtra in the Bhāsya ends with Kāryāyana's statement that such derivates are not used to signify the meanings in question, so that the grammar does not have to state an exhaustive listing of possible derivates in order to preclude these and some others22. That is, formally derivates like frigef are comparable to derivates like the pot maker', yet in the spoken language of Kātyāyana's time and place they were not used to express what one expressed using a phrase 3fifgrunaufa. Panini recognizes the fact that derivates with 374 have a very general domain. He therefore formulates a general rule. In effect, he understands that 374| can indeed be used with any verb construed with an object. The resulting derivate might not immediately appear the best usage to a native speaker, but such a speaker has to admit its grammatical correctness and acceptibility. It is as though a modern speaker of English used a derivate like axer referring to someone who wields an axe. This is not the best of usage, but one has to admit it is grammatically well formed and acceptable.

Page #110

Paninian Sutras of the Type अन्येभ्योऽपि दृश्यते
99
The difference between 3. 2. 1 and 3. 2. 75, then, is that fit and so on, used after verbs construed with upapadas, did indeed have a restricted specifiable domain at one stage of the language and were being generalized, so that one has to observe the usage of model speakers to determine grammatically appropriate usage.
2.7. 31319 30162) EC14 (ACH [3.2.123] H 1414 (3.2.85]) 1 31 31 3 asfo दृश्यन्ते । ३।३।३ भविष्यति गम्यादयः ।
2.7.1. 3.3.1 states that the affixes of the set beginning with 34 occur variously (46474) when an action signified by verbal bases to which they are introduced is referred to current time (acne). For example : ons 'artisan', ary 'wind', 4r 'anus', gry 'medicinal herb, physician', hry 'bile', tang 'sweet', Hn 'noble person, sādhu', 3771 'fact23. 3.3.2 then provides that the same affixes also are seen to occur when an action is referred to the past. For example, Art vartman 'path' refers to something that has been gone on (974)24. Further, 3.3.3 states that the derivates 1147 and so on refer to the future : 74 'one who will go, a traveller', 3T one who will come', प्रस्थायिन् 'one who will depart', प्रतिरोधिन् 'one who will oppose', प्रतिबोधिन् 'one who will awaken', ufunt 'one who will oppose', Alfr 'one that will be contrary to', uffit 'one who will come back”, 314Ifti 'one who will come', fa7 'which will be 25)
2.7.2. A ślokavārttika on 3.3.1 gives reasons why Pāņini formulates this sūtra with 25614 instead of simply saying 30144:, thereby providing that derivates with the affixes of the set beginning with 34 are acceptable correct usage. The property of applying variously (alem H) is taken into account because the affixes 34 and so on appear, in derivations actually provided for, after a small number of the possible bases, not all the bases after which such affixes could occur, and because only most of the actually possible affixes are actually introduced in derivations provided, not all of the possible affixes. In addition, there is a residue of operations that is not taken care of in the derivations as actually provided26. The Kāśikā captures the major emphasis of this by noting that the affixes in question appear also with bases other than those after which they are explicitly provided for and some, though they are not explicitly provided for, are inferred from usage27.
2.7.3. In 3.3.2, Pāṇini uses Eged, and the Kāśikā remarks that this is meant in order that one follow usage in determining which particular

Page #111

100
George Cardona
Jambu-jyoti
affixes of the sunfc set are used when an action is referred to the past28.
hough, according to the Kāśikā, both Astādhyāyi 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 thus involve a necessary recourse to usage for determining what the rules are to allow, there is nevertheless a difference between the two, which justifies their different formulations. Now, if instead of 3.3.1 as formulated, Pānini had stated 3 a1, thereby providing that unādi affixes occur optionally (at), this sūtra would provide that all unādi affixes apply optionally under conditions stated. As shown in 2.7.2, this is clearly different from what 3.3.1, with 66714, allows29. Moreover, even given the very broad variation that 3.3.1 thus allows for, it does not obviate the need for a separate rule 3.3.2. The former provides for unādi affixes under a single condition of time reference : an action is referred to current time (aHT). 3.3.2, on the other hand, allows for some unādi affixes when an action is referred to the past. In addition, 3.3.1 applies in general (STOT 'for the most part'), but 3.3.2 applies with respect to only a subgroup of unādi affixes : some of these also are used with past-time reference30. In addition, there is an enumerable subgroup of items used with future reference, covered by 3.3.3.
2.8. &18193 11910€ grapfa Ered i provide that certain operations are seen to apply also in Vedic.
2.8.1. 6.4.73 has to do with augments added to verbal stems followed byendings that replace the L-affixes लुङ्ल ङ्लु ङ्. By६/४/७१ लुङ्लङ्ल क्ष्वडुदात्तः। such stems receive high-pitched 37€ as an initial augment. 3Tę occurs only with consonant-initial bases, however, since this general rule has an exception : &18167 377SFIGHTE provides that high-pitched 3775 is added as an initial augment to vowel-initial stems. In addition, 6.4.73 states that 377€ is also seen to occur in Vedic usage. Now, 6.4.71-72 do not specify that the augments in question are added in the currently spoken language alone, so that it would make no sense to say that 6.4.73 simply provides for the use of 377€ also in Vedic. This sūtra must, on the contrary, provide for a broader use of this augment than is the norm in the currently spoken language. That is, the rule provides that 317 occurs also with stems other than those for which specific provision is made in 6.4.7231, thus accounting for the fact that in Vedic 317 occurs with consonant-initial as well as vowel-initial stems. For example : आयुनक् । अयुनक् 'yoked'.

Page #112

Paninian Sūtras of the Type अन्येभ्योऽपि दृश्यते
e.g.,
2.8.2. According to ७/१/७५ अस्थिदधिसक्थ्यक्ष्णामनडुदात्तः (तृतीयादिषु [७४] अचि [७३]), अनङ् substitutes for the final -इ of अस्थि 'bone', दधि 'curds', सक्थि 'thigh' and зf 'eye' before a vowel-initial ending of triplets starting from the third; अस्थि-आ (instr. sg. : third-triplet ending य ) → अस्थन् - आ अस्था32, दधिआ... दध्ना, सक्थि आ ... सक्थ्ना, अक्षि- आ...अक्ष्णा, but अस्थिभ्याम् (instr.-dat.abl.du), दधिभ्याम्, सक्थिभ्याम्, अक्षिभ्याम्, with the endings भ्याम् of the third, fourth, and fifth triplets. In addition, ७१/७६ छन्दस्यपि दृश्यते । states that अनङ् is also seen to occur as a replacement for the 3 of these stems in Vedic usage. The situation here is comparable to that of 6.4.73 (2.8.1): Since 7.1.75 does not apply specifically in the spoken language alone, thus excluding Vedic usage, 7.1.76 cannot be meant to provide for Vedic usage involving the same endings as covered by the preceding sutra. On the contrary, 7.1.76 has to allow the replacement in places where this is not provided for by the preceding rule: before consonant-initial endings, before endings other than those of the triplets starting with the third, and before elements other than endings33. For example: अस्थभि:, अक्षभि: (instr. pl.); अस्थानि (acc. pl.); अक्षण्वता (instr. sg.) 'which has eyes', अस्थन्वन्तम् (acc.sg.) 'corporeal', with अक्षन् and 3- before the suffix a, which is not a vibhakti.
3. The evidence considered here is best accounted for on the thesis that Panini34 has described a living spoken language of his time35, a language that exhibits traits found in any living language. In particular, Pāṇini has to take into account that there are relations among variants which can be described in a determinate fashion and others which cannot. Thus, there are instances where elements or operations A and B are complementary, each occurring in a specifiable domain. There are also instances where A and B vary within a stateable domain. In addition, there are instances such that, in a determined domain, there is indeterminate variation. This is the situation for which Panini says that certain operations apply variously (g) in a stated domain. Conversely, there are instances where the operations are determined but the domains in question remain partly indeterminate. This is the situation for which Panini states that given operations are seen to occur under conditions other than those already stated. To reiterate the first example considered: Panini can indeed specify certain places where long-vowel replacement applies in prior members of compounds (2.1.1). He must also accept, however, that this substitution applies to vowels of items which he cannot specify. Accordingly, he says

101

Page #113

102
George Cardona
(6.3.137 [2.1]) that such long-vowel substitution is seen to apply to items other than those he has previously specified. Similarly, having gone as far as possible in stating the domains of certain affixes, he has to admit that they are seen to occur under additional, indeterminate, conditions.
Jambu-jyoti
Clearly, Panini does not consider it his task to put a strait-jacket on some state of a language to have it go on as a frozen fossil. On the contrary, he describes a living language used by native speakers who were carrying out innovations and generalizations. Moreover, Panini's rules recognize, as should any grammar, that the final results of developments which have started cannot be predicted. Hence, the Aṣṭādhyāyī appropriately includes what I call 'escape rules', statements which, I think, testify to the acumen and insight of Panini.
Annotations:
1. A short version of this paper was presented at the Xth World Sanskrit Conference in Bangalore (January 3-9, 1997), and an abstract under the title 'Escape rules in Panini: sūtras of the type "anyebhyo' pi drsyate" was published in the proceedings of this conference: Xth World Sanskrit Conference... English Abstracts (New Delhi : Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan, 1997),. pp. 412-413. I have used the following abbreviations: RV: Ṛgveda, Kāś.: Kāśikāvṛtti: Aryendra Sharma, Khanderao Deshpande, D. G. Padhye 1969-70, PM: Padamañjarī: Dwarikadas Shastri and Kalika Prasad Shukla 1965-1967, Paddhati: Vṛsabhadeva's Paddhati: K. A. Subramania Iyer 1963a, Pr.: Padīpa: Vedavrata 1962-63, Bh.: Mahābhāṣya : Abhyankar 1962-72, LSS: Laghuśabdendusekhara with Bhairava's Candrakala (edited by Narahari Śästri Pendse, reedited by Gopala Śăstrî Nene, Varanasi : Chaukhambha Sanskrit Sansthan, 1987), Väs: Värarucasangraha with Nārāyaṇa's Dīpaprabhā (edited by D. N. Pandey, Varanasi : Chaukhambha Sanskrit Sansthan, 1986), vt. vārttika, VPVṛ.: Vṛtti on the Vakyapadīya: K. A. Subramania Iyer 1963a, VS Vājasaneyisamhitä, SK: Siddhantakaumudi : Giridhara Śarmā Caturveda and Parameśvarānanda Sarma Bhaskara. For full bibliographic references, see Pänini, A Survey of Research (The Hague: Mouton, 1976, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1980 [reprinted 1997]). In addition, 'Debrunner' refers to Albert Debrunner, Altindische Grammatik von Jakob Wackernagel, Band II, 2: Die Nominalsuffixe (Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1954) and 'Cardona 1997 refers to Panini, his Work and its Traditions, Volume I: Background and Introduction, 2nd edition, revised and enlarged (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass).

Page #114

Paninian Sutras of the Type अन्येभ्योऽपि दृश्यते
103
2. Bh. III.174.10-15 : यदि तर्हि शिष्टाः शब्देषु प्रमाणं किमष्टाध्याय्या क्रियते । शिष्टज्ञानार्थाष्टाध्यायी। कथं
पुनरष्टाध्याय्या शिष्टाः शक्या विज्ञातुम् । अष्टाध्यायीमधीयानोऽन्यं पश्यत्यनधीयानं ये चात्र विहिताः शब्दास्तान्प्रयुञ्जानम् । स पश्यति नूनमस्य दैवानुग्रहः स्वभावो वा योऽयं न चाष्टाध्यायीमधीते ये चास्यां विहिताः शब्दास्ताँश्च प्रयुङ्क्ते । नूनमन्यानपि जानाति । एवमेषा शिष्टाज्ञानार्थाष्टाध्ययी। The Bhasya on 6.3.109 has been discussed often; see most recently Cardona 1997:551-553 (834). 3. VPVr 1.12 (43.8-9): शिष्टज्ञानाच्च पृषोदरप्रकाराणां शिष्टप्रयोगत्वात्साधुत्वप्रतिपादने निमित्तं व्याकरणम्। 4. Vrsabhadeva refers to the two types as अन्वाख्यात and अनन्वाख्यात : Paddhati 1.12
(43.22, 24-26) : एवं तदन्वाख्यातानां व्याकरणमुपायः । अनन्वाख्यातानामपीति दर्शयति... शिष्टज्ञानाच्च इति । तैर्य उपदिष्टा लक्षणेन नान्वाख्याताः पृषोदरप्रकारास्ते तत्प्रयुक्तत्वात्साधव इति ज्ञायन्ते । एवं पारम्पत्तेिषां व्याकरणं साधुत्वप्रतिपत्तौ लघुरुपायः।
5. Bahuvrihi compound by 2.2.27 : तत्र तेनेदमिति सरूपे | Samasanta इच् by 5.4.127:
इच्कर्मव्यतिहारे। 6. Kas 6.3.137: अन्येषामपि दी? दृश्यते । स शिष्टप्रयोगादनुगन्तव्यः । यस्य दीर्घत्वं न विहितं दृश्यते च
प्रयोगे तदनेन कर्तव्यम्।
7. The Kāśikā includes all these and more. In particular, it considers that Pāṇini's use
of 3hf is intended to allow all the conditions given in previous rules to be superseded, so that, for example, a derivate with can refer to a kāraka other than an agent, as in faimoat', which is derived from 67'dig' and refers to something that has been dug : अन्येष्वप्युपपदेषु कारकेषु जनेर्डप्रत्ययो दृश्यते । सप्तम्यामित्युक्तम् असप्तम्यामपि दृश्यते । न जायते इत्यजः । द्विर्जाता द्विजाः । पञ्चम्यामजातावित्युक्तम् जातावपि दृश्यते । ब्राह्मणजो धर्मः । क्षत्रिय युद्धम् । उपसर्गे च सञ्ज्ञायामित्युक्तम् । असज्ञायामपि दृश्यते। अभिजाः परिजा: केशाः । अनौ कर्मणीत्युक्तम् । अकर्मण्यपि दृश्यते । अनु जातः अनुजः । अपिशब्दः सर्वोपाधिव्यभिचारार्थः। तेन धात्वन्तरादपि भवति कारकान्तरेऽपि । परितः खाता परिखा आखा।Other Paniniyas interpret अपिsimilarly, e.g.,SK
3011 (IV.83). 83.2.134: आ क्वेस्तच्छीलतद्धर्मतत्साधुकारिषु । is a heading valid through 3.2.177, providing
that the affixes introduced by rules of this section are introduced to signify agents thus qualified. 37/'up to and including is used, so that fetal by 3.2.177 is introduced
under these conditions, as is also the same affix introduced by 3.2.178. 9. Kas 3.2.178 अन्येभ्योऽपि धातुभ्यस्ताच्छीलिकेषु क्विप् प्रत्ययो दृश्यते । युक् भित्। I cannot take up
here the reasons--given in the Bhāsya on 3.2.178 and elsewhwere—for stating
this sūtra. 10. 5.3.14 is part of the section of rules headed by 5.3.2 : किंसर्वनामबहुभ्योऽव्यादिभ्यः । 11. ५.४.४४-४९ : प्रतियोगे पञ्चम्यास्तसिः । अपादाने चाहीयरुहोः । अतिग्रहाव्यथनक्षेपेष्वकर्तरि तृतीयायाः ।
हीयमानपापयोगाच्च । षष्ठ्या व्याश्रये । रोगाच्चापनयने ।

Page #115

104
George Cardona
Jambū-jyoti
12. Bh. II.405. 14-15 : इह कस्मान्न भवति सः तौ ते। भवादिभिर्योग इति वक्तव्यम्। के पुनर्भवादयः । भवान्
दीर्घायुः देवानाम्प्रिय: आयुष्मानिति । Later Paniniyas consider that दृश्यते in the sutra has the effect of so delimiting its application;e.g., Kas. 5.3.14 : दृशिग्रहणं प्रायिकविध्यर्थम् । तेन भवादिभिर्योग एवैतद्विधानम् ।
13. VS 6.18 : रेडस्स्यग्निष्ट्वा श्श्रीणातु... '(Fat,) you are harmed; may the fire cook you...'
14. With the affix णिनि by 3.2.86 : कर्मणि हनः (णिनिः [७८]).
15. In his first várttika on 3.1.87, Kātyāyana says this sūtra serves to formulate
a restriction : ब्रह्मादिषु हन्तेः क्विब्वचनं नियमार्थम् ॥ In the Bhasya, Patanjali notes that the restriction is two-fold, with respect to verbal base (76744) and the time reference (कालनियम) : Bh. II. 112.9-12 : नियमार्थोऽयमारम्भः । ब्रह्मादिष्वेव हन्तेः क्विब्यथास्यात् । किमविशेषेण । नेत्याह। उपपदविशेष एतस्मिंश्च विशेषे। अथ ब्रह्मादिषु हन्तेणिनिना भवितव्यम् । न भवितव्यम् । किं कारणम् । उभयतो नियमात् । उभयतो नियमोऽयम्। ब्रह्मादिष्वेव हन्तेर्भूते क्विब्भवति क्विबेव च ब्रह्मादिष्वति । As Kaiyata points out in his Pradīpa on this passage, Patañjali accepts only these two restrictions, not the four-fold restriction — such that the upapada and affix are also restricted — which others accept. Kaiyata also remarks that this four-fold restriction is not to be granted acceptance, since it conflicts with the Bhāsya : Pr. III. 255 : एतदेव नियमद्वयं भाष्यकारेणाश्रितम् ब्रह्मादिषु हन्तेरेव भूते क्विब्भवति ब्रह्मादिषु हन्तेः क्विब्भूत एवेत्येतत्तु नियमद्वयं नाभ्युपगतम्। अन्यैस्त्वाहोपुरुषिकया चतुर्विधो नियमो व्याख्यातः । स भाष्यविरोधान्नादरणीयः । The source Kaiyata ridicules here is the Kāśikā, which, in its commentary on 3.1.87, does indeed say the rule involves four restrictions. Additional details need
not be discussed here, since they do not affect my main topic. 16. Here too there is a difference of opinion. The Kāśikā interprets 3.2.76 as introducing
fea4 after all verbs, whether or not they are construed with an upapada, and to form derivates used both in Vedic and in the spoken bhāsa of Panini's time : सर्वधातुभ्यः सोपसर्गेभ्यो निरुपसर्गेभ्यश्च छन्दसि भाषायां च क्विप्प्रत्ययो भवति । The Dipaprabhaon Vas23 (p. 58), on the other hand, says 3.2.76 introduced the affix only to bases construed with an upapada :क्विप्चेति सोपपदेभ्य: सर्वधातुभ्य: सामान्येन विहित: क्विप्|Ifa derivate likeगिर् (nom. sg. ît:) 'speech’is derived with ftaby 3.2.76—thus, e.g., SK 2983 (=3.2.76 [IV.70])
- then obviously the sūtra does not require a verb to be used with an upapada. On the other hand, if the akrtigana सम्पदादि along with varttika 9 on 3.3.108 (सम्पदादिभ्यः foq9) is invoked to account for derivates like for (thus Bhānuji on Amarakośa 1.6.1), then one can adopt the alternative view. The consequence of this is that such derivates as fTe, which must have been known to Pānini, since they were used from earliest Vedicon, have to be accounted for by an addition to the grammar. I therefore consider the Kāśikā's interpretation preferable.

Page #116

Paninian Sutras of the Type अन्येभ्योऽपि दृश्यते
105
17. 3.2.87 vt. 2: 7911 ara a chef: Il Bh. II. 112.14-15: 13 ra a he
उपपन्नो भवति बहुलं छन्दसीति । यो मातहा पितृहा भ्रातृहा । न च भवति अमित्रघातः। 18. The Paippalāda Atharvaveda has (19.46.14): THIET FUQET TARTET, with Tone
who has killed his sister'. 19. Atharvaveda Paippalada 2.88.lab : AT HET STRATEGI 3C4A: The Saunakīya
Atharvaveda (1.20. 4ab) has pa gre HER GTRIPATHIÊ Stega: 1 and the Rgveda
(10.152.1ab) has fire rent HER BRfHaC) 34 1 20. 3.2.1. Afuerai See 2.6.5. 21. Kāś 3.2.75 : E0-cu FC 437 SETG21576 Frafra aftur yra
दृश्यन्ते विच्च । सुशर्मा । क्वनिप् प्रातरित्वा प्रातरित्वानौ । वनिप् विजावा अग्रेगावा । विच् खल्वपि रेडसि पर्ण
न वेः। अपिशब्दः सर्वोपाधिव्यभिचारार्थः । निरुपपदादपि भवति धीवा पीवा । दृशिग्रहणं प्रयोगानुसरणार्थम् । 22. 3.2.1 vt. 4-5 : 379fri aT II 377694111 11 23. These are derivates with the affix 34 by Unādisūtra 1.1 : ha14ffaa hizZ
34 Note that Farg has a general reference, to anything that is sweet to the taste (स्वद्यते), but that कारु refers specifically to an artisan (शिल्पिन्), not just anyone who does something ( fa). Pāņinīyas are therefore doubtless correct when they say that 5510414 is understood in 3.3.1. Accordingly, the sütra provides that the affixes in question are introduced to form derivates with specific referents and this variously,
so that some of the derivates can have general referents. 24. This is a derivate with off by Unādisūtra 4.144: HUTZHETI, which allows
this affix to follow all verbal bases. as is the first example given in the Kāśikā on 3.3.2, which also gives the examples 'skin' and 'ashes', derived from aligo about' and 'TH‘shine'. In his comments on Uņādisūtra 4.144, Ujjvaladatta
also gives these derivates and refers to Astādhyāyī 3.3.2. 25. These are the derivates given in the Kāśikā, which treats the set gamyādi as an
exhaustive listing (परिगणनम्). Of these, only गमिन्, आगामिन्, भाविन, and प्रस्थायिन् are directly derivable by known Unādisūtras : 4.6-9 : TARA: 34fs furci 9991791: The Padamañjari on Kāśikā 3.3.3 refers to these — but with variants 311fs force and Make: for Uņādisūtra 4.7, 9 — and notes alternative ways of accounting for the other examples : प्रतिरोधिन्, प्रतिबोधिन्, प्रतियोधिन्and प्रतियायिन्arederived with णिनि byAstadhyayi 3.1.134 : नन्दिग्रहिपचादिभ्यो ल्युणिन्यचः ।। प्रतियोगिन्is derived with घिनुण by Astādhyāyi 3.2.142: He'; others say some of the derivates are formed with fufa by Astādhyāyī 3.2.78:49dfUFRE I; and still others say that these derivates are simply given as ready-made in the list accompanying Astādhyāyī 3.3.3. PM

Page #117

106
George Cardona
Jambū-jyoti
1
III. 7 गमी आगामीति । गमेरिनिः आङि णिच्चेतीनि भावी प्रस्थायीति । अस्मिन्नेवाधिकारे भुवश्च प्रात्स्थ इतीनि: । णित्त्वाद् वृद्धिर्युक्च । रुधिबुधियुधियातिभ्यः प्रतिपूर्वेभ्यो ग्रहादिणिनिः । अस्मादेव निपातनादित्यन्ये । सुप्यजातावित्यन्ये । प्रतियोगीति सम्पृचादिसूत्रेण घिनुणि चजो कु घिण्ण्यतोरिति कुत्वम् । णिनिप्रत्यय एव न्यवादिपाठादस्मादेव निपातनाद्वा कुत्वमित्यन्ये ।
I
26. 3.3.1vt. 1: बाहुलकं प्रकृतेस्तनुदृष्टेः प्रायसमुच्चयनादपि तेषाम् । कार्यसशेषविधेश्च तदुक्तम्... This ślokavärttika and Patanjali's comments on it appear to assume, as later Paniniyas explicitly state, tha: the derivations are according to sûtras of another grammar, the Unädisutras. I do not enter into this question here, except to remark that, in the Indian context, a mere list of affixes without rules introducing them to bases, would indeed be anomalous. Jinendrabuddhi (Nyāsa III. I) cites a traditional verse stating on what basis the property of applying variously is attributed to operations: because an operation sometimes applies, sometimes does not apply, sometimes applies optionally, and because sometimes some other operation applies: afcqft: क्वचिदप्रवृत्तिः क्वचिद्विभाषा क्वचिदन्यदेव विधेर्विधानं बहुधा समीक्ष्य चतुर्विधं बाहुलकं वदन्ति ।। This verse is well known, cited elsewhere in full (e.g., Anantabhatta on Vājasaneyiprātiśäkhya 3.18, Hemacandra on Siddhahemaśabdānuśāsana 8.1.2) or in part (e.g., PM III.I) as well as simply alluded to indirectly (e.g., Uvata on Vajasaneyiprātiśākhya 3.18).
1
27. Kas 3.3.1 उणादयः प्रत्यया वर्तमानेऽर्थे सञ्ज्ञायां विषये बहुलं भवन्ति । यतो विहितास्ततोऽन्यत्रापि भवन्ति । चिदविहिता एव प्रयोगत उन्नीयन्ते ।
28. Kas 3.3.2 पूर्वत्र वर्तमानाधिकाराद् भूतार्थमिदं वचनम्। भूते काल उणादयः प्रत्यया दृश्यन्ते । वृत्तमिदं वर्त्म । चरितमिदमिदि चर्म भसितं तदिति भस्म दृशिग्रहणं प्रयोगानुसारार्थम् ।
|
29. This is brought out in the Balamanorama on Siddhāntakaumudi 3169 (३.३.१ [IV.307) explaining Bhattoji's statement that some affixes not explicitly provided for are to be inferred (केचिदविहिता अप्यूह्याः) उणादयो वेत्यनुक्त्वा बहुलग्रहणस्य प्रयोजनमाह केचिदविहिता अप्यूह्या इति ।
30. Siddhāntakaumuditattvabodhini IV. 308 नन्वेवं वर्तमानग्रहणं च उणादयो बहुलमित्यत्र नानुवर्त्यताम् । एतच्चोत्तरसूत्रं च त्यज्यताम् । अविशेषेण कालत्रयेऽपि प्रत्ययलाभादिति चेदत्राहुः । बाहुल्येन वर्तमाने भवन्ति भूतभविष्यतोस्तु क्वचिदेवेति विवेक दर्शनार्थमिति । Candrakalā on Laghuśabdenduśekhara 3.3.1 (II. 816) : न च वर्तमाने इति सूत्राद्वर्तमान इति नानुवर्तनीयम्। एवञ्च भूतादौ सिद्धिर्भविष्यत्येवेति भूतेऽपीत्यादि न कार्यमिति वाच्यम् । प्रायेण वर्तमान एव क्वचिदेव तु भविष्यति वेति व्युत्पादनाय पुनः सूशरम्भात् । Similarly, Nyāsa and Padamañjari on Kasika 3.3.2 (III.6).
31. Kas. 6.4.73 यतो हि विहितस्ततोऽन्यत्रापि दृश्यते ।
32. 6.4.134 आनोपोऽनः ।

Page #118

Pāņinian Sütras of the Type 3
zitsfu Eyed
107
33. Kāś 7.1.76 : a fafectats analfa erudi testry #641 39761grafa gredi ei uitat Strefa: (RV 1.84.13a) YGS -
yhteellisal: 11 (VS 25.21=Ķv 1.89.85) i iditeदिष्वित्युक्तम् । अतृतीयादिष्वपि दृश्यते । अस्थान्युत्कृत्य जुहोति । विभक्तावित्युक्तम् अविभक्तावपि दृश्यते ।
378 van esta i spreyta frechen faufa (RV 1. 164. 4b) || 34. I have considered only the Pāninian evidence because of space limitations.
Comparable statements are found elsewhere in early Pāninīya works: 2.1.33 vt. 1 (perfecteatasoa Erea I), 5.1.57-58 vt. 6 (3772221ste Egud ERYTGIETY 11), 5.2.112 vt. 1 (aden 05 sf Erud II), 5.2.120 vt. 1 (20US Sfa Esad II), Bhāsya
on 3.2.48 (II. 103. 14 : 374 376 347505 afgerandi 37 af starfa 141). 35. Of course, he also takes earlier archaic usage into account, as has been noted in
sections above. 36. This is connected with the issue of how, in ancient India, one viewed the usage we
refer to as Sanskrit, including both the spoken language of Pānini's period, with its dialect variations, and earlier Vedic : as manifestations of a single eternal language or a product of human beings. Although the Astādhyāyī does not say anything explicit concerning this, Kātyāyana and Patañjali do consider the issue whether speech is eternal or produced. I cannot enter into a discussion of these questions here. They have been dealt with recently by Deshpande; see his Sanskrit and Prakrit : Sociolinguistic Issues (Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi 1993), pp. 53-74. Let me say only that I see no contradiction between Pāṇini's describing a state of language such that certain developments had begun but not yet been carried out and Pāṇiniyas' maintaining theoretically that all manifestations of Sanskrit speech represent an eternal language. There can be, in the Pāṇinian scheme of things, a perennity of a flow (E N) such that what appear to be newly created elements are merely manifestations of entities always there in the eternal flow. Obviously, I do not think that the conclusions I have reached on the basis of the evidence considered here require one to consider Pāṇini a linguist who claims to be describing a language historically.
000

Page #119

Ārya Bhadrabāhu
M. A. Dhaky
Preliminary Considerations
From at least the post-Gupta period, the patriarch Arya Bhadrabāhu (c. B.C. 325-297) has been held in the highest esteem and unswerving reverence by the principal Jaina sects, the designation ‘Jaina' anciently was known as ‘Nirgrantha.' The notices on Bhadrabāhu largely hail from the literature of the two surviving major sects of the Nirgrantha-darśana, Svetāmbara and Digambara. Bhadrabāhu is reckoned and adored by both sects as the last caturdaśapūrvadhara' as well as the śruta-kevali2. And yet the glaring fact remains that he very largely has remained an illusive figure. The Jaina writers of our own times possess a strong, even an obsessive, bias for his supposedly inestimable greatness. As a result, they failed to see through the veil of illusion created by some stray but relatively late-some contradictory and confused-literary and inscriptional references to him and likewise could not escape the spell of ethos of the dazzling aura they themselves projected around him. Some of them explicitly believed (and still believe) in all that was attributed to him in the past as an invariate fact, a tangible and truthful reality. The high-pitched reverential attitude adopted for Bhadrabāhu has not only hindered an objective approach toward searching and reconstructing his realistic image, not even a sketchy history based on available evidentiary facts, but also, as its consequence, has disallowed taking dispassionate estimation of him and his supposed contributions. This happening, in essence and so far, has led to preclude examining the very basis on which the edifice of esteem for him was built. Likewise, excepting for one category of literature, the niryuktis, very little effort had been made in the past toward checking the veracity of the claim for what are looked upon as the works authored by him in the Northern Nirgrantha (Svetāmbara) tradition3.

Page #120

Ārya Bhadrabāhu
The Northern as well as the Southern Nirgrantha Church has preserved only small bits of information on Bhadrabāhu, some seeming reliable, some probable or plausible, some undoubtedly falling in the category of 'doubtful,' and still others that frankly are at variance with the other recorded facts as well as internal evidence present in his supposed works and hence clearly undependable. The present article intends to focus critically on the image of Bhadrabahu as it emerges through the light cast by the evidence preserved within the relatively earlier and more trustworthy sources, though later writings will not be neglected: This evidence, in point of fact, lead to some hitherto unsuspected angles and consequently to surprising implications and conclusions. Some among the available Northern Nirgrantha sources relatively are earlier than the known Southern : hence these will be noticed here first, followed by the Southern, and next the information gathered from both sources will be compared, evaluated, integrated wherever plausible, and used in the discussions to follow. And finally will be presented the conclusions that may flow therefrom.
II
Northern Nirgrantha literary sources on Bhadrabahu
The earliest extant source on Bhadrabahu is the Sthaviravali or hagiological list of pontiffs incorporated in the Paryuṣaṇā-kalpa. In its present shape, it was compiled partly from the preëxisting lists and partly completed in V.N.S. 980/993 or A. D. 503 or 5164. The Sthavirāvalī, in point of fact, is the result of a five-phase growth and correspondingly contains portions of different periods, the portion forming Phase I begins its statement, after a brief introduction, with the gaṇadhara-apostle Sudharma the direct disciple of Arhat Vardhamana alias Jina Mahāvīra—and next serially follow the names of four patriarchs as successors, the list terminating with the fifth pontiff Arya Yaśobhadra (c. B.C. 350-325) who, as we learn from the Sthaviravali's Phase 2 portion, was the preceptor/guru of Ārya Sambhūtavijaya and of Arya Bhadrabāhu. The Phase I portion, predictably, may have been composed in a still older linguistic form as well as, perhaps, a little more archaic stylistic mould, in Ardhamāgadhi, plausibly at the end of the first Synod convoked in Pataliputra (in or before B.C. 300) for the redaction, the first in recorded history, of the Nirgrantha śruta/scripture/ canon after the end of a long draught* in Madhyadeśa. The Phase 2 of
Its duration is reported, in some sources to be discussed, of 12 years.

109

Page #121

110
M. A. Dhaky
Jambū-jyoti
the Sthavirāvali embodies a portion which, in point of fact, came from another and, seemingly, somewhat later source. It represents a shorter version (saṁksipta vācană), as against the much more elaborate Phase 3 portion (vistrta vācana), commencing as it does from Arya Yaśobhadra and his two aforenoted disciples and extending further down, through six successive pontiffs, to Arya Vajra's disciple Arya Vajrasena and ending with the names of the latter pontiff's four disciples (c. 1st cent. A.D.)S. But, it is the aforenoted Phase 3 portion, which covers an enlarged version of the second, is very, very important, because it, for the first time, gives detailed denominations along with the succinct indications on the origination of the various gaņas (cohorts), their sākhās (branches), and their kulas (regional and clanal groups), all of these being the subdivisions formed by the specific bands of mendicants. Arguably, the starting point for these group-proliferations temporally must be located a few decades after Arya Bhadrabāhu from whose senior disciple Godāsa, the earliest and hence the very first gana of the Nirgrantha monastic system is reported, as per the northern hagiological tradition, to have emanated. (This may have taken place some time in the latter half of B.C. the third century.) While the list of succession within this Phase 3 (which figures in several manuscripts of the Paryusanā-kalpa) terminates with Arya Phalgumitra (c. early 1st cent. A.D.), some mss. also contain a Phase 4 extension leading up to Arya Skandila (or Sandila)—the 17th pontiff in succession from Ārya Phalgumitra—who presided over the Synod convened in Mathurā inc. V. N. 830-840/A.D. 353-3637. These four successive sections of the sthavirāvali are in prose and were dovetailed to form a single continuous text, largely in Ardhamāgadhī, by casting them into a homogeneous stylistic mould which doubtless reveals a few lately introduced linguistic affectations of the Mahārāstrī Prakrit. The last, or Phase 5, which is the latest portion of the Sthavirāvali, however, is in versified form and unambiguously is rendered in Mahārāstrī Prakrit. It starts from Arya Phalgumitra and, after mentioning the 16th pontiff in succession, namely Arya Dharma who was the guru of Arya Skandila, switches over to Arya Jambū (apparently the confrère of Arya Skandila of whom it takes no notice) and next gives the names of six pontiffs in succession, the sixth being Devarddhi ganī8 who chaired the Valabhi Synod II in A.D. 503, or, according to an alternative tradition, in A.D. 516',

Page #122

Ārya Bhadrabāhu
111
the period when the Maitraka viceroy Dhruvasena I was governing from Valabhī in the Surāstra region on behalf of some imperial power, either Gupta or, perhaps, Vākāțaka 10. For our purpose, only the second and the third Phase of the Sthavirávali are relevant; for it is these two which give some initial, though very succinct but the earliest and significant information on Bhadrabāhu.
The source of information, contemporaneous (or may be even earlier) in time, in the past, was the Gandikānuyoga of Ārya Syāma I alias Ārya Kālaka I (c. 1st cent. B.C.-A.D.) which plausibly contained passages in a chapter (gandikā) that had dealt with Bhadrabāhu, namely the “Bhadrabāhu-gandikā,” a section noted in a different context in the Samavāyānga-sūtra (147)". This latter agama, the fifth of the 12 angas, was updated (or rather recompiled with many additions, as a replacement palpably of an earlier shorter version)* in or soon after A.D. 363 and thus in the latter half of the last century of the Kuşāna rule in Mathurā. Regrettably, the Gandikānuyoga, like all other works of Arya Syāma, is for long lost12. It is, however, likely that, for a part of the information on Bhadrabahu in late Gupta āgamic notices, the ultimate source may have been this work.
The source next in time is the Sthavirāvali of the Nandisutra of Deva Vācaka (c. mid 5th cent. A.D. 13); but that work only briefly alludes to Bhadrabāhu and his gotra (familial lineage) and, in point of fact, adds nothing more to what is gleaned from the Phase 2 portion of the aforenoted Sthavirāvalī of the Paryusanā-kalpa.
After the Nandisūtra, the works which mention Bhadrabāhu, in one or the other context, are the Uttarādhyayana-niryukti (c. A.D. 525 and later) 14, the Titthogālīya i.e. Tirthāvakālika (or Tirthodgărika)-prakirnaka (c. mid 6th cent. A.D.)"5, the Vyavahāra-bhāsya (c. late 6th cent.) 16, the Āvasyakacūrni (c. A.D. 600-650)17, the Uttarādhyayana-cūrni (c. A.D. 650-700) 18, and the Āvasyaka-vrtti of Haribhadra sūri (c. mid 8th cent. A.D.). Among the medieval sources, the first is the Kahāvali of Bhadreśvara sūri (c. late 10th century)20. A fairly dependable medieval source, like the Parisista-parva (c. A.D. 1166) of Ācārya Hemacandra of Purnatalla-gacchao1, apparently
* Abhayadeva sūri (latter half of the 11th century), in his commentary on
the Samavāyānga, refers to its shorter version which apparently was available in his time. I forego citing the source since it is a secondary point.

Page #123

112
M. A. Dhaky
Jambū-jyoti
is indebted, mainly indeed, to the aforenoted work for its information on Bhadrabāhu namely the Kahāvali and, to some extent, to the Tirthāvakālika and the Avaśyaka-cūrni, though for a few details, Hemacandra also may have consulted one or two other concise textual sources, including perhaps a Southern one.
Southern Nirgrantha Sources on Bhadrabāhu Unlike Northern and, importantly, the Southern sources also include epigraphical. Among the literary works—what have been looked upon by Western (particularly German) scholars as secondary, substitute, or surrogate āgamas, theĀrādhanā of Śivārya (c. early 6th cent.)22, and the Tiloyapannatti, (Trilokaprajñapti, assigned to c. mid 6th cent. A.D.)23 are the earliest to have a bearing, in a small measure though, on Bhadrabāhu. Next comes the Harivamsa-purana of Jinasena of Punnāta Sangha (A.D. 783)24, the Dhavalā-tīkā of Svāmī Vīrasena of Pañcastūpānvaya (completed A.D. 816)25, as also the Ārādhanā-Kannada-tīkā (popularly known as Vadda Ārādhane26), now ascertained to be a work of Bhrājisnu (c. A.D. late 9th or early 10th cent.])27, and the Brhat-kathākośa (A.D. 931) of Harisena28 (who, too, like Jinasena, was a monk of the Punnāta Sangha29). All of these, in the Southern context, relatively are older and more useful among literary sources. Incidentally, also theBhāvasangraha of Pt. Vāmadeva (c. 16th cent.), the Bhadrabāhu-carita of Ratnanandi (c. 16th cent. A. D.) 30, the Munivamśābhyudaya of Cidānanda-Kavi (A. D. 1680), and the Ratnāvalīkathākośa of Devacandra (A. D. 1838)* which contain overtly sectarian material and which, from their particular standpoint, orientation in thinking, liking, and hence the attitude adopted and predilections set, has been considered authoritative and used by some Digambara Jaina scholars.
As for the the epigraphical domain, it is restricted exclusively to Karnataka and, the earlier records there, happen to be the inscription no. 1 (c. A. D.600)31 as well as no. 24 (c. mid 7th cent. A. D.) 32 at the Cikkabeta or Candragiri, Sravanabelgola, are more ancient and, to a large extent, also crucial. Also are the two inscriptions from some site in the Srirangapattanam taluq (c. A. D. * The first, the third, and the fourth work, all very late, were not available to me for
consultation. But, from their content known through others' writings, they all are, like Ratnanandi's work, highly sectarian.

Page #124

Arya Bhadrabāhu
113
900). Moreover, the Śravanabelgoļa inscription no. 251 at the Bhadrabāhu cave on Cikkabeta and datable to c. 11th cent. A. D., the two epigraphs from Humca (A.D. 1075, 1077) and one other there datable to the c. 13th cent. A. D.33 are to some extent relevant to the discussions in the present context. All of these will be discussed in section VI where they have a direct pertinence.
. IV
The Deducible Facts from Sources While focusing on this aspect, the first to be noticed, since more ancient, are the Northern sources 34. The second Phase of the Sthavirāvali of the Paryusanä-kalpa (c. 1st cent. A.D.) notices two disciples of Arya Yaíobhadra (the fourth patriarch after the apostle Sudharmā), namely Arya Sambhūtavijaya and Arya Bhadrabāhu as earlier stated. It next turns to Arya Sthūlabhadra (the disciple of Arya Sambhūta) and his seven successors up to Arya Vajrasena and next mentions the latter's four disciples. Hereunder I quote from the text (after removing the Mahārāstrī affectations and, as its consequence, restoring the original Ardhamāgadhī linguistic form) only that portion which has relevance to Bhadrabāhu :
थेरस्स नं अज्जजसभद्दस्स तुंगियायनगुत्तस्स अंतेवासी दुबे थेरा-थेरेअज्जसम्भूतविजए माढरसगुत्ते, थेरे अज्जभद्दबाहु पाईनस गुत्ते।
This statement reports that Bhadrabāhu was the disciple of Arya Yaíobhadra and had belonged (prior to ordination) to the family having the Prācīna-gotra, which, in essence, may imply that he belonged to the "Prācī” or eastern country35. The country immediately easterly in relation to Magadha is Varendra with Vanga including ancient Rādha (called Lādha in Māgadhī), these being the major territories forming ancient (as well as undivided modern) Bengal.(The Nandi-sthavirävali (c. A.D. 450], as remarked earlier, repeats this information36.)
The literary passage immediately next in sequence is the enlarged version of the hagiographical list-the Phase 3 of the Sthavirāvali of the aforenoted Paryusanā-kalpa—which thus runs :
थेरस्स नं अज्जजसभद्दस्स तुंगियायनगुत्तस्स इमो दो थेरा अन्तेवासी अहावच्चा अभिन्नाता हुत्था ।। तं जथा-थेरे अज्जभद्दबाहु पाईनसगुत्ते, थेरे अज्जसम्भूतविजए माढरसगुत्ते। थेरस्स नं अज्जभद्दबाहुस्स पाईनसगुत्तस्स इमे चत्तारि थेरा अन्तेवासी अहावच्चा अभिन्नाता हुत्था । तं जथा-थेरे गोदासे १, थेरे अग्गिदत्ते २, थेरे जन्नदत्ते ३, थेरे सोमदत्ते ४ कासवगुत्तेनं । थेरेहितो गोदासहिंतो कासवगुत्तेहिंतो इत्थं नं

Page #125

114
M. A. Dhaky
Jambu-jyoti
गोदासगणे नामं गणे निग्गए, तस्स नं इमाओ चत्तारि साहाओ एवमाहिज्जति। तं जथा—तामलित्तिया १, कोटिवस्सिया २, पोंडवद्धनिया ३, दासीखव्वडिया ४।।
This passage gives more details on Bhadrabāhu. Besides repeating the information of the passage in the preceding Phase 2 portion, it further reports that he had four disciples : Godāsa, Agnidatta, Yajñadatta, and Somadatta, all of whom belonged to the Kāśyapa-gotra. From the chief disciple Godása, a cohort of friars called 'Godāsa-gana' emerged; and, from this gana, had emanated four specific sākhās or branches of mendicants, namely the Tāmraliptikā, the Kotivarsīyā, the Paundravardhanikā, and the Dāsīkarvatikā. Three of these sākhās evidently took their denominations after the contemporary towns of the following names—Tāmralipti (Tāmluk), Kotivarsa (Kotipura?), and Pundravardhana (Pānduā), while Dāsīkarvata is still unidentified though it may be conjectured that it was a smaller habitational settlement of the servant caste as its name suggests, very likely was located in Bengal and either had disappeared in the past or if it exists, today it may be known by some other appelation37. The three identifiable are, of course, ancient towns located in Bengal.
Bhadrabāhu's connection with Bengal is supported, in fact further confirmed, by notices, though late, inside the Southern sources. The Vadda Ārādhane tikā of Bhrājisnu reports that Bhadrabāhu was born in Kaundinī in the Pundravardhana territory and was initiated by ācārya Govardhana38 And, Harisena (of the Punnāta Sangha) (A.D. 931), slightly differing from Bhrājisnu, mentions that Bhadrabāhu was born in Kotipura/Kotinagara situated in the Pundravardhana territory39. He was tought, groomed, and next initiated by the Caturdaśapūrvadhara Govardhana muni. Bhadrabāhu thus, and to all seeming, was a native of ancient Bengal, a conclusion to which the historian of eminence, R. C. Majumdar, earlier had reached but, his concerned publications are, at the moment, not available to me40. And arguably, Bhadrabāhu's disciple Godāsa and his immediate disciples and in turn their hagiological descendents as well as followers, reported exclusively in the early Northern source, too, had hailed from Bengal as inferrable from the sākhă-denominations that specifically, indeed indubitably, reveal connection with Bengal41
These notices on Bhadrabāhu and his disciples also raise some questions. First, why no ganas and their sākhā sub-orders emanated after the other

Page #126

Ārya Bhadrabāhu
115
three disciples of Bhadrabāhu. Generally speaking, as inferred from the further details given in the Sthavirāvali (Phase 3), in the palpably early stages of growth of the Northern Nirgrantha Church, the sub-orders of friars did sometimes originate from the confrères of the chief disciple of a pontiff : Second, what happened to the sub-orders of the Godāsa-gana; for nothing afterwards has been reported about them in the ecclesiastical or epigraphical records either, the latter largely are encountered in Mathurā. After the passage dwelling on Bhadrabāhu's disciples, the Sthavirāvali takes up Sthūlabhadra, disciple of Bhadrabāhu's confrère Arya Sambhūta and, further onwards, gives particulars of Sthūlabhadra's descendents, indeed not for once returning to Bhadrabāhu's line, an omission the significance of which later will be discussed. The hagiographical position from Arhat Vardhamāna onwards and especially after Arya Jambū—the disciple of ganadhara Sudharmāand up to Bhadrabāhu and his disciples, according to the first three phases of the Sthavirāvali of the Paryusanā-kalpa, may be tabulated as follows :
Arhat Vardhamāna (Preached c. B.C. 507-477)42
Ganadhara Gautama
Ganadhara Sudharma
Arya Jambū
Ārya Prabhava
Ārya Sayyambhava (or Svāyambhūva)
Ārya Yaśobhadra
Arya Sambhūta
Ārya Bhadrabāhu (c. B.C. 325-297)
Ārya Sthūlabhadra
Godāsa
Agnidatta
Yajñadatta
Somadatta

Page #127

M. A. Dhaky
The next source, which preserves a small piece of information on Bhadrabahu, is the Uttaradhyayana-niryukti (c. A.D. 525). In this work it is reported that the four disciples of Bhadrabahu (the niryukti does not specify their names) died in peace in a cave at Vaibhāragiri near Rājagṛha, having faced sīta parişaha, visitation of severe chill43:
116
राजगिहंमि वयंसा सीसा चउरो उ भद्दबाहुस्स । भारगिरिगुहाए सीयपरिसया समाहिगया ||
Jambū-jyoti
The Uttaradhyayana-niryukti's verse, in point of fact, clarifies the import of a relevant (and earlier) verse from the Maranavibhakti-prakīrṇaka (c. 2nd3rd cent. A.D.)44, which apparently alludes to this very incident although, like the Uttaradhyayana niryukti, it specifies no names of the friars involved: it does mention Rajagṛha, but not the Vaibharagiri cave there. Moreover, it does not specifically state that these four were the disciples of Bhadrabahu : रायगिहनिग्गया खलु पडिमापडिपन्नगा मुनीचउरो । सीत विहूय कमेणं पहरे पहरे गया सिद्धि ।।
— मरणविभक्तिप्रकीर्णक ४८९

- उत्तराध्ययननियुक्ति ९१
However, the combined information from the last two sources would lead to infer that, what was intended to be conveyed, is the death of the four disciples of Bhadrabahu due to the visitation of severe chill (on Vaibharagiri) in Rajagṛha. According to the Uttarādhyayana cūrņi (c. A.D. 675-700), these four disciples were of the Vanika (merchant) community and belonged to Rajagṛha45. But each one of them, according to this source, died at a different locale within Rajagṛha46. These four disciples evidently were different, as will be shown, from the earlier four noted, beginning from Godāsa, in the Sthavinavali. We will look into other information in the post-niryukti literature as the discussion progresses.
Turning now to the Southern literary sources, the earliest two works which tabulate the spiritual lineage of Bhadrabahu, namely the Trilokaprajñapti47 and the Śravanabelgola Inscription No. 148 are about five to three centuries and odd decades posterior to the relevant two earlier portions of the Sthaviravali of the Paryuṣaṇā-kalpa cited in the foregoing discussion. And the two sources next in date, the Harivamsa-purana49 and the Dhavala

Page #128

Arya Bhadrabāhu
117
tīkā50, largely follow the preceding two Southern sources, adding no new information. Keeping in view the temporal position of these sources, it is clear that the earliest is not earlier than mid sixth century, the earliest being the Trilokaprajñapti whose sectarial affiliation is, in fact, somewhat dubious since, like the agamas inherited by the Svetāmbara sect, it stipulates 12 instead of the 16 kalpas for the Kalpavāsī gods, the figure 16 otherwise is firmly held by the Digambara sect.
The Southern (and South affiliated) sources inter alia with some minor variations in a few nominal details, present the following pontifical sequence after Arhat Vardhamāna's disciple and grand disciple, the apostles Sudharmā (Lohārya in Southern version) and Jambū51 : Trilokaprajñapti śB.Ins.No.1 Harivamśa-purāņa Dhavalā-tīkā (c. mid 6th cent. A.D.) (c. A.D. 600)
(A.D.783)
(A.D.816) Lohārya Lohārya Lohārya
Lohārya
Jambū
Jambū
Jambū
Jambū
Nandi
Visnudeva
Visnu
Visnu
Nandimitra
Nandimitra
Nandimitra
Aparājita
Aparājita
Govardhana
Govardhana
Govardhana
Govardhana
Bhadrabāhu
Bhadrabāhu
Bhadrabāhu
Bhadrabāhu
Viśākha
Viśākha
Viśākha
Viśākhācārya
The confrontation of the Northern and the Southern hagiologies of Bhadrabāhu reveal intriguing, even sharp differences between the two. Contrast on at least five points clearly are discernible : First, the Southern gurvāvalīs under reference do not prefix the honorific term "Arya" before the pontiffs' appellations; second, they take no notice of their gotras; third, they are silent on the names of the four disciples of Bhadrabāhu; instead, only one name figures as Bhadrabāhu's disciple, Viśākha, not found in the northern list; fourth, and as a direct consequence of the third difference, the Godāsa-gana and its four sākhās find no mention there; and fifth and the major, which is the sharpest, difference is about the names of the post

Page #129

118
M. A. Dhaky
Jambu-jyoti
Jambū predecessors of Bhadrabāhu including his own preceptor's name in both sources. In the present state of our knowledge, it is difficult to explain this too obvious a difference, no question of reconciling the two lists52. One of them is inaccurate or both may be unaware of certain realities of the past.
Now, to some other facts/anecdotes recorded in Southern sources. The Ārādhanā of Sivārya (c. early 6th cent. A.D.), a Yāpaniya work (or plausibly of its likely parent sect, the Boţika-Ksapanaka of north India, founded by the schismic pontiff Arya Sivabhūti in the second century A.D.) only records a single fact : It states that Bhadrabāhu passed away by resorting to avamodarya, reduction in the quantity of the food intake. It does not, though, specify the place where he breathed his last. Nor does it note his 'predecessors,' or 'successors' names either. The Kathākośa of Harisena (A.D. 931), however, mentions that, after the prediction he made of the 12 years' draught in Ujjayani, Bhadrabāhu passed away in Bhādrapadadeśa (unidentified, but may be contiguous to the Pāriyātra region adjacent to the Mālava country) by anaśana or rite of suspension of aliment53. The earlier noted Kannada work, the Āradhanā-tīkā, however, despite several legendary and imaginary elements appearing in its long-winding narration, does state that Bhadrabāhu passed away by avamodarya but that event occurred in Śravanabelgola. (The details and implications of these differing statements are reserved for discussion in Section VI.)
V
Works attributed to Bhadrabāhu
From at least the time of the opening verse of the Daśāśrutaskandhaniryukti and the Pañcakalpa-niryukti (both c. A.D. 525) and, following it in time, of the Pañcakalpabhāsya of Sanghadāsa gani (c. A.D. 550) as well as the Daśāśrutaskandhacūrņi (c. mid 7th cent. A.D.), the authorship of the three chedasūtras--the Daśāśtrutaskanda (also called the Ācāradaśā), the Kalpa, and the Vyavahāra of the Northern or Ardhamāgadhī canon-is attributed to Arya Bhadrabāhu54 Bhadrabāhu, in the post-Gupta Svetāmbara (as well as the medieval and possibly pre-medieval Digambara) tradition, is believed to be the last patriarch to have possessed, as had been noticed in the foregoing pages, the complete knowledge of scriptural works (śrutakevali). Likewise, he is looked upon as the last to have possessed the knowledge of the 14 Purva-texts55; hence he also had been called

Page #130

Arya Bhadrabāhu
119
the antima caturadaśa-pūrvadhara in the post-Gupta, pre-medieval, and medieval exegetical and the late biographical literature of the northern tradition. The current svetāmbara Jaina tradition, and even the critical Western scholarship, hardly had doubted the pious assumption regarding Bhadrabāhu's authorship of the Kalpa and the Vyavahāra (along with the Daśāśruta)56, and hence no attempt was made to check the accuracy/ veracity of the belief and hence of the tradition by verifying the premises on which it may have been founded.
The Kalpa and the Vyavahāra are formularies embodying the monastic codes containing the basic rules of conduct, the first text enjoining what is admissible and what is not for the Nirgrantha mendicants and nuns; the second, in its primary intentions, lays down the rules of atonement embracing large areas of conduct as well as what must be done in cases of the transgression of the disciplinary rules, surprisingly with fair amount of detail for the age they were formulated, together with some other material. (As the matter stands, these two texts, along with the Daśāśrutaskanda, till now have not been subjected to detailed textual, linguistic, analytical, and stylistic study.)
The style and, no less the content, of the first two works under reference-both being in the sūtra or prose form-should be able to reveal whether the monastic situations/conditions envisaged therein can be consistent with, or can really go back to the times as ancient as those of Arya Bhadrabāhu (c B.C. 325-297). And, predictably, the study of the terminology and expressions, language and phrase-structure together with the formal habits and cadence, can cast light on their true temporal status and sectarial affiliation. These factors can be considered here but only very briefly.
Terminology, Style, and Content
1) Unlike the most ancient among the extant āgamas, namely the Ācārānga (Book I, c. B.C. 450-300), and next the Sūtrakrtānga (Book I, earliest parts c. B.C. 300-100), and the Uttarādhyayana (early chapters c. 3rd cent. B.C. to 1st cent. B.C.-A.D.), and unlike also the early Pāli Buddhist works57, the term acela for the nude friar is almost completely absent in the Kalpa as well as in the Vyavahāra58. The two works, instead, mention the Jina-kalpa and the Sthavira-kalpa states (sthitis) for the Nirgrantha

Page #131

M. A. Dhaky
Jambū-jyoti
recluses59. (The Vyayahāra also mentions pāņipratigrahadhāri [bowl-less mendicants] and Pratigrahadhāri [in essence monks using a begging-bowl]). These terms, on the other hand and, significantly, are absent in the āgamas of the pre-Christian Era. What is more, there is here noticeable a scholastic approach and classificatory tendencies about the kalpa-sthitis which do not seem compatible to, or correspond with the much simpler and straightforward (but very stern) ideals held, and the precise rules laid down for the acela or nude friars and, by contradistinction, for the sacela friars (in that early age having minimal allowable possession for them) in the undoubted oldest strata of the earlier agamas such as the Acārānga Book I. Even the style and phraseology of these specific kalpa-sthiti passages in the Kalpa widely differ from those of the rest of the text. These passages apparently had been introduced at some point in time from somewhat later and different, yet relatively ancient, source. These formidable facts raise the first solid suspicion on the supposedly high antiquity of the Kalpa and the Vyavahāra and their authorship ascribed to Bhadrabāhu.
120
2) Both of these works reflect a highly developed state of organization of the Nirgrantha clergy, as also a well-established as well as much proliferated monastic church. On the testimony of the third phase of the Sthaviravali (c. A. D.100) of the Paryuṣaṇā-kalpa, the first ganas or organized bands of friars and mendicants (nigganthas, bhikkhus) and nuns (nigganthis, bhikkūṇīs) progressively began to be instituted some 50 years or so posterior to Bhadrabāhu* and had diversified further, indeed considerably so into śākhās and kulas by, and even before, the first two centuries of the Christian Era. The ganas, in the next stage, also were further divided into sambhoga-groups60. The Vyavahāra refers to this latter term which, however, nowhere appears in the earlier canonical literature including even the Acārānga Book II (c. Ist cent. B.C.-A. D.): It does figure though in ★ A late Sātavāhana inscription in one of the Junnar caves in Maharashtra refers to "Siddh-gane Aparajite." [Cf. S. Nagraju, Buddhist Architecture of Western India, (C. 250 B.C.-A.D. 300), Delhi 1981, "Appendix: List of Brahmi Inscriptions from the Rock-cut monuments of Western India," p. 331, Ins. no. 10.] If the Aparajita noted here is the grand preceptor of Bhadrabahu, then the convention for the gana formation may have started a few decades earlier. The whole problem needs further investigation. (This gana has not been noticed even from an early literary source. It is noted late in the Southern work, the Śrutavatāra [c. 10th cent.].)

Page #132

Ārya Bhadrabāhu
121
the Mathurā inscriptions; but the earliest of those which have this term are of the middle Kusāna period, generally datable to c. 3rd cent. A. D. or slightly earlier 61. And the terms ganāvacchedaka (administrator of the gana) and his female counterpart, the gaṇāvacchedikā (next to mother superior), figuring in the Vyavahāra-sūtra, appear neither in the earlier canonical texts nor anywhere in the inscriptions. These monastic positions/titles had been instituted and apparently, therefore, the terms denoting them had been coined and had come into currency, arguably some centuries posterior to Bhadrabāhu's time62.
3) The Kalpa permits the friars to have cloth (vattha, vastra), also a piece of cloth for foot-cleaning (pādapuñchanaka), and a blanket (kambala), the possessions which enter somewhat later into (and even may have been interpolated into) the corpus of monastic rules embodied in the somewhat younger portions of the Acārānga I, but are more regularly referred to thereafter. The Vyavahāra-sūtra, moreover, is much too lenient in allowing several objects as friar's possession : these include a leatherpiece, a leather-bag, a cloth-curtain, a stick, and even an umbrella63. A rule such as this could be an anathema to the followers of the doctrine of the total non-possession (or exceptionally and indeed exceedingly restricted possession) for recluses belonging to the Church of Arhat Vardhamāna, to which the patriarch Arya Bhadrabāhu traditionally had belonged. Here, in point of fact, is discerned a clear-cut introduction of the elements consistent more with the practices of the followers of the Church of Arhat Pārsva (and hence of the Pārsvāpatyas) rather than those of the Church of Arhat Vardhamāna64. Friars who kept such accessory objects (upakaranas) later will be classed as "Päsatthā" or wayward and degraded or, alternatively, perhaps more accurately, implied to be (or may be interpreted simply as) those who had not joined the reformed and sternly ascetical Church of Arhat Vardhamāna but had stayed within the more lenient Church of Arhat Pārsva (hence Pārsvastha). The position in the Vyavahāra, for such sections of the text, either indicates a period considerably later than that of Arya Bhadrabāhu or else, if it really is early, reflects a very different monastic ideology and practices. It unquestionably stands farther from the extremely austere and strict monasticism of Arhat Vardhamāna. Vyavahāra's moderate discipline comes closer to not only what is attributed to the Church of Arhat Pārsva but also, to a fair degree, to the Order of Buddha. In point of fact,

Page #133

122
M. A. Dhaky
Jambū-jyoti
in terms of the doctrinal principles and consequent monastic rules, such a situation was to manifest in the future times in western India, indeed some centuries posterior to even the period of Arya Raksita (c. 1st cent. A. D.) who had permitted only one additional pātra or bowl65 beside the usual (single) begging bowl and who advocated and practised strict nudity, allowing no other possession including loin cloth (kati-bandhana, kați-pattaka, cola-pattaka) for a friar66, the kati-bandhana, interestingly, is noted in the Kalpa and in the relatively later portion of the Acāränga I. (If the Kalpa indeed was authored by Bhadrabāhu, then this point will have a bearing on Bhadrabāhu's doctrinal leanings and creedal connections.)
4) The Kalpa loudly talks about a “shelter-building” (uvassaya, upāśraya) which temporarily may be occupied by friars and nuns and also enters into considerable detail relating to its surroundings as well as its internal disposition 67. Places such as these as temporary resorts for recluses virtually is an impossible reality in the early phase of the Church of Vardhamāna : because, the earlier āgamic injunction refers exclusively to cemetery (susāna i.e. smaśāna), ruined and desolate dwelling-houses (sunnāgāra, śūnyāgāra), and tree-bases (rukhamūla, vrksamüla) as places appropriate for recluses to take shelter by or into68. The Kalpa, of course, is aware at least of vrkşamüla and also adds there 'bamboo-clump base' which it permits to the nirgranthas but forbids to the nirgranthis, nuns69. However, the older spirit and the forms of very rigorous ascetic practices are somewhat wanting in this (as well as, even more so, in the Vyavahāra) text.
The Kalpa, though forbidding the nuns to stay at the travellers' lodge (agamanagrha), permits the mendicants to do so70. The latter clause is again inconsistent with the most ancient friars' discipline if we take into account the earlier notions of the Nirgrantha monastic constraints as laid down in, or understandably followed within, the Church of Arhat Vardhamāna. Indeed, this and several other such points encourage toward reassessing the nature of monastic discipline of Bhadrabāhu's time.
5) The style of the Kalpa, though sounding fairly ancient where the sūtras generally begin as 'No kappati' (not permissible), or ‘Kappati' (permissible), is seldom encountered in other disciplinary agamas like the Acārānga Book II, the Nīšitha, etc. It is, perhaps, likely that such a style of phrasing may have been peculiar more to the books of monastic codes,

Page #134

Arya Bhadrabahu
now lost", of the Church of Arhat Pärśva rather than of Arhat Vardhamana and adopted for the composition of the Kalpa. Bhadrabähu, it must be remebered, knew by heart the Pürva texts of the Church of Arhat Pärśva as per the tradition.
Looking now at the mode of expression of the Vyavahära, it is, in point of fact, and visibly, different from that of the Kalpa, although Bhadrabāhu is claimed to be the author of both the works. It also largely differs from the style of the agamas of the first three phases". Moreover, the Vyavahāra, both in style and content, is heterogeneous in character, with chapters possibly of differing dates, details, and perceptions74.
123
The text of the Kalpa as well as that of the Vyavahära conceivably may have been modified at a few places and augmented or added to, or subtracted at some points of time in the past, a possibility which cannot be ruled out. Since both works also were included in the sacred treatizes of the Yāpaniya Sect, it may be concluded that they already were known and recognized as an authoritative part of the canon before the 2nd cent. A.D. in the Northern Nirgrantha Church". Supposing it can be established that the earliest portions of the two texts are indeed datable to the Maurya period, it would then raise some serious questions :1) Was Bhadrabahu their author? 2) If he were, did he lean toward the monastic discipline of the Church of Parsva or, alternatively, did he sanction generous concessions for accommodating the mendicants and nuns of the Church of Parsva who, assumably, may have been progressively joining the Church of Arhat Vardhamana ? Since, as is believed in the tradion, he had mastered the 14Purvas-arguably the āgamic books of the Pārsva's sect-there is a possibility that he was fully conversant with the Pārsvian monastic disciplinary code and, as a result, may have been influenced by it. If this surmise is accurate, it may, in turn, compel us to revise our views on Bhadrabahu. The present discussion perhaps opens a door to what seemingly is an entirely unsuspected and uncharted area of investigation". Of course, it will all depend on the definitive evidence, besides. the presently known post-Gupta tradition, that the Kalpa and (the parts of) the Vyavahara were authored by Bhadrabahu.
The third work, namely the Daśāśrutaskandha olim Acaradaśā, both from the standpoint of style and content, is far more heterogeneous in composition and in content: and, for the style of a few of its chapters,

Page #135

124
M. A. Dhaky
Jambū-jyoti
it positively looks away from Bhadrabāhu's times. These chapters, in fact, are younger in age. It, therefore, raises even graver doubts about the veracity of its long believed attribution to Bhadrabāhu. It likewise presents a somewhat more complex situation78, needing a separate investigation involving elaborate and an in-depth discussion.
Before closing this section, it may be noted that the Southern tradition does not attribute the composition of any work to Bhadrabāhu. It only believes that he was responsible for introducing and propagating the Nirgrantha religion in Southern India79. And later, in the eighth century, Padmanandi of the anvaya Kondakunda, known from the 13th or at most the 12th century as ‘Kundakundācārya' in the Digambara sections in north India, is said to have regarded Bhadrabāhu as his gamika-guru' or a teacher by virtue of his being, as he may have believed, in the Bhadrabāhu's sectarial tradition80
VI
Śruta-Kevali Bhadrabāhu, Candragupta, Sravanabelgola, and Southern Jaina Traditions
Fairly considerable literature has grown in English and in German, not to say in Hindi and in Kannada which revolve around the Southern Nirgrantha traditions that associate Bhadrabāhu and Candragupta on one hand and on the other hand associate the two to the famous tīrtha site of Śravanabelgola inside ancient Gangavādi, located in Southern Karnataka The trends of discussions and conclusions drawn therein reveal a picture in which some scholars agreeing, others rejecting, a few sitting on fence while some sensing not enough strength in available evidence yet willing to concede credibility to the tradition. When all is said and done, some among the noteworthy writings which dwell on this subject at some length, impress the reader as either one-sided since they refuse to use, even allude to, sources which go against their cherished intentions (or declare them as late although they are not), often indeed uncritical or insufficiently critical or wanting in an objective as well as common sense approach. Perhaps the only, rather very partial, exceptions are the much too succinct statements within the discussion by the editorial team of the Epigraphia Carnatica Volume II (Mysore 1973) and a brief observation by A. M. Ghatage81
The earliest, and indeed crucial, evidence in the Southern context is the Śravanabelgola Sanskrit inscription No.1 (c. 600 A. D.), which more or

Page #136

Arya Bhadrabāhu
125
less had been the starting point of discussion in several serious writings. It refers to a prediction in Ujjayanī by Bhadrabāhu, an expert on the eightfold omenology (astānga-nimitta)—he is not called there either 'śrutakevali' or 'caturdaśa-pūrvadhara 82—of the visitation of a 12-year famine (dvādaśa samvatsara-kāla-vaisamya, implied to be in north India) whereupon the entire Nirgrantha community (samasta-samgha) from north India (Uttarāpatha) migrated to south India (Daksināpatha). At some point, when this congregation (samgha) was passing through southwestern Karņāța (the specific area later to be called Gangavādi), a pontiff by name Prabhācandra, sensing his end approaching, separated himself from the congregation and clambered the hill Katavapra (Cikkabetta or Candragiri Hill in Śravanabelgola) along with one disciple (name not specified) with the objective of passing away in peace (samadhi) by the rite of suspension of aliment unto death (sanyāsārādhitavān). And in course of time, some 700 other friars in succession followed (the same path, of dying by the rite of sallekhanā), the inscription in question reports as its end note83.
The said inscription does not bring Bhadrabāhu to this Hill; his rôle was confined to making the prophesy of the oncoming draught that was to last for 12 years. Indeed, the central focus of the inscription is "Prabhācandra," not Bhadrabāhu. What is more, the inscription is silent on Candragupta, a significant omission. There is likewise not the slightest indication there to warrant equating Prabhācandra with Bhadrabāhu and, the unnamed accompanying disciple, with Candragupta; nor, on the other hand, is there even the vaguest hint that would allow identitying Prabhācandra with Candragupta. Indeed, no source clarifies that the Maurya emperor Candragupta, after his supposed ordination as a Nirgrantha friar, was rechristened Prabhācandra. Such an identification has been conjectured by some writers of our times, but without any clear or firm evidence to base upon. In any case, the inscription, like the Arādhanā of Sivārya, is silent on what happened to Bhadrabāhu or where he proceeded after the prediction he is said to have made in Ujjayanī.
Now, to explain away the silences, an inference has been drawn from this inscription that two Bhadrabāhu-s (as stated here in annotation 82) are implied, the first one is he who figures in the pontifical sequence from Lohārya downwards, that is the one who was the disciple of Govardhana and the preceptor of Viśākha as also the preceptor of Candragupta : It was he who,

Page #137

126
M. A. Dhaky
in the tradition, was the śrutakevali and the caturdaśa-pūrvadhara : the second Bhadrabahu who, in due course flourished in that monastic tradition, was the aṣṭānga-naimitika (expert on eightfold omenology). It was he who predicted the visitation of the 12 years' famine in Ujjayanī. But neither of the two Bhadrabāhu-s is, even implicitly, said there to have visited Śravanabelagola. It was Prabhācandra who passed away on the Katavapra Hill there according to that earliest inscription from Śravanabelagola.

Jambū-jyoti
The commemorative record under reference, moreover, is not contemporaneous with the passing away of Prabhācandra. It arguably was engraved centuries after the period of the supposed happening of the event which, implicitly though, is much later than c. B.C. 300 (Bhadrabahu's time) and predictably even a few years after the second Bhadrabāhu conjectured, by some scholars, from the data contained in the inscription. And between the date of Prabhācandra's passing away and the date of this inscription of c. A.D. 600, significantly, no commemorative inscriptional record is found on this Hill even when it clearly refers to the passing away of some 700 other friars after Prabhācandra on this Hill84. The inscription seemingly records the essence of a "legend" or "belief," current in the late sixth century, of the death by self-mortification earlier on this Hill, of a pontiff named "Prabhācandra," a nomen which has no parallel in the period between the Mauryan and the very early centuries of the Ganga (or for that matter contemporaneous Kadamba) period in Karnata, or for that matter in the inscriptional or literary records of the earlier periods-be they Nirgrantha, Buddhist, or Brahmanical-in north India. Typologically, the name does not accord with the fashions in vogue for personal appellations before the sixth, or at most the fifth century A.D85. Prabhācandra, doubtless, will be a very popular nomen for the monks in pre-medieval and, even more so, in the medieval Digambara Jaina Church. In literature, the earliest reference noticeable for this appellation is by Pujyapāda Devanandi (activec. A.D. 635685) in his Jainendra-sabdaśästra, referring as he does to a peculiar grammatical formation in Sanskrit by Prabhācandra86 and the next is in the encomium of the Jayadhavala-ṭīkā (began by Virasena, completed by his great disciple Jinasena (c. A.D. 837) in which Jinasena eulogizes the (poetic) qualities of the Candrodaya-kāvya of Prabhācandra87, the reference in the latter two cases might pertain to one and same poetPrabhācandra-though not to the Candragiri-Prabhācandra who is purported

Page #138

Arya Bhadrabahu
to belong to earlier times88. After these two relatively early Prabhācandrasone figuring in the 600 A.D. inscription, the other appearing in the two literary allusions, one being post-Gupta (early Calukya) and the other pre-medieval (early Raṣṭraküța)-several other Prabhācandras successively came in different ganas and gacchas till the late medieval times as inferred from the Digambara inscriptional and literary/ hagiological and allied notices. This early 'Prabhācandra' of Śravanbelgola, then, generates an enigma which will need future efforts and concrete, indeed more definitive, evidence to resolve it. One thing is certain. He cannot be connected either with Bhadrabahu or with Candragupta.
Within 50 years of this earliest inscription on Candragiri mentioning Prabhäcandra, scores of other inscriptions are encountered from whose report it is clear that the pontiffs and mendicants, monks and nuns, vied with one another ritually to give up their life on this sanctified Hill. Could the legend of the first Prabhācandra-a figure unknown in the annals-passing away here have inspired this phenomenal (and from the standpoint of Jainism a sacred and elevating) activity of self-mortification on this Hill? Arguably not. A more powerful stimulus was needed for this development. Plausibly, between c. A.D. 550-650, a new and a parallel legend was being worked out, at some Jaina centre in Karnataka, of Śrutakevali Bhadrabahu and his supposed disciple, the Maurya emperor Candragupta, laying down their life by the sacred rite ofsallekhana on this Hill. Some anecdotes or bits of partially valid historical facts must have existed for the formulation of such a legend.
127
The beginning of a part of this belief, somewhat vaguely though, may be sensed in a statement occurring in the Tiloyapaṇṇattī (Trilokaprajñpti, c. A.D. 550 with sizeable later additions) that, among the crowned kings, Candragupta was the last to be initiated to the Order89: There is, though, no clarification in this notice whether the 'Maurya' Candragupta is implied and who his preceptor was. It is only the epigraphical records, in date posterior to the Tiloyapanṇatī, to be noticed now, which implicitly or explicitly connect the two.
The most crucial on this issue is the Śravanabelogol inscription 17-18 (32) in Kannada, dateable to c. mid seventh century. It states: "When the Faith that had much prospered in the time of the pair of the chief among the sages Bhadrabahu and Candragupta-who shed lustre on it, later grew dimmed, (then) the coral-lipped Säntisena, the chief among the ascetics,

Page #139

128
M. A. Dhaky
Jambū-jyoti
rejuvenated it: And on the hill at Velgola, having given up food etc., attained the (state of) cessation of birth (i.e. attained salvation) : 990
श्रीभद्रबाहु सचन्द्रगुप्तमुनीन्द्रयुग्मदिनोप्पेवल्। भद्रमागिद धर्ममन्दु वळ्लिक्केवन्दिनिसळ्कलो ॥ विद्रुमाधरशान्तिसेनमुनीशनाक्किएवेळगोळ।
अद्रिमेलशनादि विट्टपुनर्भवक्केरे आगि ॥ This inscription for certain connects Bhadrabāhu with Candragupta, arguably as the teacher and the disciple, though it does not explicitly associate the two with Śravanabelago!a. However, the act of including this phrase in the draft of the inscription would be meaningless if the composer of the text had not intended to convey the connection of the two with this sacred Hill. From this standpoint, it may be regarded as the earliest pointer, even somewhat obliquely, toward that direction.
Next of note are some inscriptions, all of them of medieval period and not valuable as weighty evidence in the historical construct for times very ancient. An inscription of c. A. D. 1110 (71[166]) in the Bhadrabāhu cave, records that some Jinacandra bowed to the feet (carved imprints] of Bhadrabāhusvāmi : And, below the footprints carved on the summit of the Cikkabetta hill, is a 13th century record purporting to the effect that they are those of Bhadrabāhusvāmī. What is more, in the two records from Srirangapattana taluk, of c. A. D. 900 [E.C. Vol. III, Sr. 147, 148], it is stated that Kalbappu (Katavapra or Cikkabetta Hill) is blessed with the (carved) imprints of the feet of Bhadrabāhu and Candragupta. Moreover, an inscription of A. D. 1163 (Nos.40 [54], new no. 71) refers to śrutakevali Bhadrabāhu and his disciple Candragupta. Likewise, a record of A. D. 1129 (Nos.5 [67], new no.77) refers to the celebrated pair. And on a pillar in the Siddharabasadi environs on the Doddabetta (Vindhyagiri, Śravanabelagola) are two late records, the first of A. D. 1398 (No.105, [254]) mentioning śrutakevali Bhadrabāhu and the second of A. D. 1432 which mentions śrutakevali Bhadrabāhu and his disciple Candragupta'l It thus remains established that, at the dawn of the medieval period, the Bhadrabāhu-Candragupta pair and their association with Sravanabelgola was a firmly established fact in the Digambara Jaina lore and later was persistently recalled as inferred from the above-cited inscriptions. And the footprints of Bhadrabāhu were carved on Cikkabuta or Candragiri before A. D. 900.

Page #140

Arya Bhadrabāhu
129
Turning next to the Southern literary sources having a bearing on Bhadrabāhu, the earliest, as was pointed out, is the Ārādhanā of Sivärya (c. 6th cent.), a Yāpaniya (or Botika-Ksapanaka) and not Digambara work. It, however, refers to only a single point related to Bhadrabāhu, namely his death due to reduced food intake:
ओमोदरिए घोराए भद्दबाहू असंकिलिट्ठमदी। घोराए विगिच्छाए पडिवण्णो उत्तमं ठाणं ॥
-ITETIT 8439 The next source is the Ārādhanā-tīkā, also known as the Vadda-Arādhane (c. 9th or early 10th cent.), the commentary in Kannada by Bhrājisnuo, on the above-cited śivārya's Ārādhanā. Unlike the inscriptions, it delineates Bhadrabāhu's life-sketch wherein a small part seems somewhat genuine, but the rest has a look and flavour of fiction as well as smell of fabrication and coloured by sectarian bias, the latter part omitted here in discussion since irrelevant in the present context.
'In the town of Kaundini within the Pundravardhana county,' says Bhrājisnu, 'ruled a chief called Padmaratha with his consort Padmaśrī. To his high priest Somaśarmā and wife Somaśrī was born Bhadrabāhu.'
The names, except for Bhadrabāhu and the localities noted there, obviously are fictitious. The commentary next enters into a lengthy mythical account concerning caturdaśapūrvi Govardhana (ultimately the one who initiated Bhadrabāhu) and immediately next the one relating to Bhadrabāhu. This portion we may leave out for good. What is contextually significant is of course the notice that Bhadrabāhu not only learnt the Anga texts (the 11 Nirgrantha canonical works) but, significantly, also the Purvatexts from his preceptor Govardhana.
The Commentator then dwells not upon the Maurya emperor Candragupta but his grand son Aśoka reigning in Pătaliputra. Next he turns to another phase of the anecdote, the queen Candrānanā, consort of Asoka's son Kunāla, the prince who was blinded by an official due to a wrong reading (tempered version?) of the emperor's communication. She gave birth to a son who was named Samprati-Candragupta by Aśoka. Following this account, starts a lengthy mythical narrative concerning the previous embodiment of that prince, which being totally useless as history, has to be ignored. The grown up Samprati-Candragupta is placed by the Commentator in

Page #141

130
M. A. Dhaky
Jambū-jyoti
Ujjeni (Ujjayani) which is next visited by Bhadrabāhu, alongwith a large group of friars. There he sojourned in some park. Interestingly, Bhadrabāhu is qualified by the commentator as 'Caturdaśa-pūrvadhara' and not 'astānga-naimitika' in contrast to the Sravanabelagola inscription of c. A.D. 600. King Samprati-Candragupta visits Bhadrabāhu and embraces the vows of the (Nirgrantha) lay-follower. One day. Bhadrabāhu, during his almsbegging tour, entered a house where a child in a swing said : “Revered Sir, go away, go away!” He took these words as omenic of the onset of a draught: on asking for how many years, the child, by gesture, indicated the figure 12. Whereupon Bhadrabāhu assembled the disciples and announced the visitation soon of 12 years famine and proposed to migrate to South. The same night the King dreamt 16 strange and prognosticative dreams, their interpretation by Bhadrabahu leading to the same conclusion, of the oncoming eventuality of the prolonged draught. (The lengthy narrative relating to this imaginary event is omitted here.) The King, now knowing about the impending calamity, joined the Order of the Mendicants. Bhadrabāhu next sent a message to the mendicants in Madhyadeśa to migrate to South. And he, with his new disciple Samprati-Candragupta and eight thousand friars moved toward the Southern country. On the way, when they reached Katavappu (Katavapra, Candragiri in Sravanabelgola), he sensed that his end is near. Whereupon he sent the sangha under the leadership of his other (arguably senior) disciple Viśākha to the Tamil country. He next clambered the hillock Kațavapra with Samprati. Candragupta, undertook the rite of avamodarya and sanyasta, eventually passed away and, was born as god in the Brahmakalpa heaven with the life span of ten sāgaropamas94. Samprati-Candragupta stayed on at Kațavapra, and, as for alms, he was eating what a sylvan deity of that area offered. After 12 years, when the news reached that the drought in Madhyadeśa had ended, Viśākhācārya returned from south to Katavapra advised SampartiCandragupta not to accept food from a deity, and proceeded toward north. Samprati-Candragupta who, staying as he did for all those years close to the (commemorative) shrine of Bhadrabāhu on the hillock, eventually passed away and (he, too,) was born in the Brahmakalpa with the life span of ten sāgaropamas.
Forgetting the imaginary elements which are innate to the Indian narrative class of writings in ancient and medieval India–Jaina being

Page #142

Ārya Bhadrabāhu
131
famous for its super-inflated megalomania and super-astronomical pampalomania--the problems that this kathā generates are, even at the first look, these :
1) In the established history of India, Samprati was junior to Bhadrabāhu by four generations, he being the great grandson of emperor Candragupta's son Bindusāra. Moreover, he never was known as Candragupta. So, this notice in the commentary is very visibly anachronistic besides betraying gross historical confusiono. (Samprati, of course, had ruled from Ujjayanī, but his preceptor was Ārya Suhasti who in turn was Ārya Sthūlabhadra's disciple, as gleaned from the post-Gupta śvetāmbara sources. And that hagiographical notice perfectly synchronizes with the known dates of the Maurya imperial chronology.
2) It is clear that, the legend of Prabhācandra and his unnamed disciple as noted in the Sravanabelagola inscription of c. A.D. 600, is transferred here to, or superimposed on Bhadrabahu and Candragupta duo. This new legend of the association of those two celebrities with Śravanabelagoļa apparently had come into currency in Karnataka by, or before, circa the mid seventh century and Bhrājisnu used it to fit it in his narrative context. The two inscriptions from Seringapattam taluq which are more or less contemporaneous with Bhrājisnu's commentary, likewise cannot be reckoned as good evidence for Bhadrabāhu-Candragupta connections with Śravanabelagola. The whole episode smells of improbability and hangs on a slender thread of an untenable notice. A solid and an unambiguous as well as fairly early evidence of Bhadrabāhu's migration with Candragupta to Śravanabelgola is wanting. No reliance can be placed on later writings which come in conflict with what is said and implied in the relatively earlier sources. The earliest inscription referring to Bhadrabāhu does talk about migration to South, but in that event neither Bhadrabāhu, nor Candragupta, or both were involved; and the earliest available literary source-Bhrājisnu's Kannada commentary (c. 9th - 10th cent.), too, does not illuminate the history because of the confusions it creates.
3) The commentator had given no thought on the logistics of as many as eight thousand friars travelling together, the problems about feeding them under the strict Nirgranthist rules of bhikṣā, besides providing them camping facilities, which virtually would be unmanageable in those times. In the pre-Mauryan and Mauryan periods, megalithic culture had prevailed

Page #143

132
M. A. Dhaky
Jambu-jyoti
in Karnataka. But the nearest megalithic habitations were some miles away from Śravanabelago!a. There is, indeed, no evidence that śravanabelagola, with its starkly stony terrain, was inhabited even long centuries after the Maurya times.
There are conflicting notices as to the region where the famine was to visit as per the prediction; was it just Madhyadeśa (central and eastern Uttar Pradesh) or was it the entire northern India. In the former case, there was no need to migrate to Southern India. Also, a continuous draught lasting for as many as 12 years would create a havoc in the ecology of the concerned territories. Most rivers progressively would have dried up. The Jaina writers (of both sects) gave no thought on what, under such circumstances, would have happened to the Brahmanists, the Buddhists, the Ājivakas and other people who all together must have constituted the far larger part of population than the Nirgranthas in north India. Such an eventuality also would have destroyed the larger part of flora and fauna, besides human population of north India. And the Buddhist annals surely would have taken note of it.
The South-oriented source, next in time, seemingly is the "Bhadrabāhu-kathānaka" inside the Brhat-kathākośa of Harisena (A.D. 931)%. It largely agrees with the Vadda-ārādane in several details. It mentions the capital town Koțipura (in Bengal, which, as the author reports, was called in his times Davakotta), the names given of the ruling king and his consort and those of Bhadrābāhu's parents there are the same as mentioned in the Arādhanā-tīkā. When Bhadrabāhu was young, the caturadaśapūrvi Govardhana muni, who was on his way to Ujjayantagiri* for paying obeisance to Jina Nemi, visited Kotinagara (=Kotipura). Bhadrabāhu apparently was initiated on that occasion by Govardhana muni who imparted the knowledge of the scripture (śruta) to him. After some years, Bhadrabāhu, alongwith the caturvidha-samgha, visited Ujjayani-puri (Ujjain), located on the river Kșiprā, in Avanti-visaya. There ruled king Candragupta with his consort Suprabhā. He was (already) a (Nirgrantha) śrāvaka possessing true faith (samyag-darśana). While sojourning in Ujjayanī, once on his begging tour, in one mansion, Bharabāhu saw a child
*
This Tirtha, however, was not founded till we come to the initial centuries of the Common Era.

Page #144

Arya Bhadrabāhu
resting in a swing. The child made him a gesture to leave, which he took as an omenic sign and predicted the onset soon of a 12 years' famine, whereupon the Sangha proceeded to Dakṣinapatha while he himself retired to (some unspecified place within) the Bhadrapradadeśa where he passed away in peace. Before that, Candragupta joined the Order of Mendicants and was called 'Candragupti muni'. The narrative's details up to the prediction part essentially are the same as in the Ārādhana-ṭīkā; but Hariṣena does not send Bhadrabahu to Śravanabelagola, a point on which he, in fact, sharply differs from, or rather contradicts, Bhräjisņu. Also, the king's name he specifies is just 'Candragupta,' not 'SampratiCandragupta;' what is more, the Maurya emperor Candragupta had ruled from Pățaliputra, not from Ujjayanī, though that viṣaya apparently was included in his empire (and a century or so afterwards, his fifth descendant Samprati will govern it). And Harisena does not mention the 16 dreams dreamt by Candragupta that confirmed the visitation of 12 years' famine and, further more, the other undesirable consequences that will follow therefrom. Lastly, he does not state what happened to Candragupti muni, whether he accompanied Bhadrabāhu, or remained in Ujjayanî, or went along with the Congregation to the Southern country.
Among the Northern narrative sources on Bhadrabahu, usually, why totally neglected by the scholars using Southern sources, four happen to be more important. The earliest is the Tīrthāvakālika prakīrṇaka (c. A.D. 550). Its author first lays down the details of Bhadrabahu's hagiology, which, of course, follows that of the Paryuṣaṇākalpa-Sthavirāvalī as well as of the Nandisutra. Next, in its exposition, it brings in Bhadrabahu in connection with a single, and an important, episode described through 63 verses in Prakrit. As the work goes on to say, after the end of the prolonged drought (its duration unspecified) in Madhyadeśa (eastern U.P.), the (Bhiksu-) sangha assembled in Pataliputra (in Magadha) to reconstitute the agamas since many learned pontiffs had lost the memory of several texts due to their abandoning regular recitational practice-some knowledgeable friars even may have passed away-during those trying years. The munis, who participated in the proceedings of the Synod, are reported to have reconstituted the 11 anga-texts but, as the work reports, none of them remembered the 12th one, the Dṛṣṭivada, in which were included the Purvatexts-in all probability the works of the Church of Arhat Pārsva—which

133

Page #145

134
M. A. Dhaky
Jambū-jyoti
arguably contained Pārsva's pravacana or teachings. The only pontiff who is said to have possessed the knowledge of the Purva-texts was Bhadrabāhu who was not present at the Synod. (It is not clarified where he then was and why was he not present despite his eminence.) A messenger from the Council was sent to him, respectfully addressing him as the 'Jina of their times' and requesting him to pass the knowledge of those texts to the Council, to which he declined, expressing as he did disconcern and detachment. That angered the (leaders of the) Sangha who next sent a categorical/unequivocal notice warning him that he, as he himself is aware of the rule, in that event, will be excommunicated. Thereupon Bhadrabāhu yielded, agreeing to impart instruction to some bright young mendicants. Whereupon Sthūlabhadrao, alongwith 500 friars—the figure of course is very highly inflated, a characteristic tendency noticeable in Jaina writings of this class—was sent. While other mendicants eventually deserted since the tempo of teaching was very slow, Sthūlabhadra alone persisted: and he persevered in learning from Bhadrabāhu. He progressively learnt the ten Purva-texts. In the meantime his seven sisters (who had embraced the Order of the Nuns) came to visit himo8. Bhadrabāhu informed them that Sthūlabhadra then was meditating behind the Siva temple. In order to impress them with the supernatural powers he had acquired, Sthūlabhadra assumed the form of a lion which frightened the nuns who ran back to Bhadrabāhu telling him that the lion seems to have devoured Sthūlabhadra. Bhadrabāhu assured them that the lion is Sthūlabhadra himself. This incident of misuse, by Sthūlabhadra, of the extraordinary powers made Bhadrabāhu unhappy. He, consequently, refused to impart further instruction to Sthūlabhadra whose repentance-full appealings softened him and he passed the texts of the remaining four Purvas but withheld the exposition of their meaning. Ignoring the miraculous element which predictably emanated from the belief that the Purvas included a text that embodied the secrets of magical powers (Vijjāpāhuda/ Vidyāprābhrta ?)—the belief reflecting profound reverence of later ages toward the assumed mystical character of, and awe in which the long lost Pūrva-texts were held by, the later writers—the central fact remains that Sthūlabhadra had been deputed to Bhadrabāhu by the Pāțaliputra Synod to learn the Drstivāda that included the Pūrva texts. The BhadrabāhuSthūlabhadra connection may be inferred through an earlier reference,

Page #146

Ārya Bhadrabāhu
135
in Umāsvāti's Praśamarati-prakarana (c. A.D. 350), which tacitly hints to the myth of Sthūlabhadra's vanity due to his acquiring magical powers through the sacred literature and, as its consequence, he generated in his psyche (a sub-variety of) kasāya-passion called śruta-mada/vanity due to possessing (the rare) knowledge of the canon, the knowledge which otherwise was meant for eliminating vanity of all kinds99 :
माषतुषोपाख्यानं श्रुतपर्यायप्ररूपणां चैव। श्रुत्वाऽति विस्मयकरं विकरणं स्थूलभद्रमुनेः ॥ सम्पकोद्यमसुलभं चरणकरसाधकं श्रुतज्ञानम् । लब्ध्वा सर्वमदहरं तेनैव मदः कथं कार्यः ।।
—urerfayah UT 84-8€ The medieval commentator of the Praśamarati-prakarana, namely Haribhadra sūri (A.D. 1129) 100, thus explains the content of those verses relating to Sthūlabhadra and tacitly hints to the episode due to which (the quantitative) degradation/disappearance of the scripture or canon (śruta-viccheda) began:
'अतिविस्मयकरश्च विकरणं' वैक्रियसिंहरूपनिर्माणंस्थूलभद्रमहर्षेर्जामिआर्यिकाणां दर्शनाय, 3114femfidi sfodrach ui yarfooo....101
The next source, the Avasyaka-cūrni (c. A.D. 600-650), follows the Tirthāvakälika in time as well as in content, but specifies two additional details (not noted in the Tirthāvakālika), the first being that the drought had lasted for 12 years (as is also stated in the Southern sources) and, second, Bhadrabāhu had moved to Nepāla during that distressful period 102.
The third source, the Kathāvali of Bhadreśvara sūri (c. late 10th cent.), repeats what the Tirthāvakālika as well as the Avasyaka-cūrni record, differing only on a few minor details, or adding small particulars not mentioned by the former two sources. Like the cūrņi, it states that Bhadrabāhu with Sthülabhadra eventually had moved to Pātaliputra103, apparently after the major part of instruction to Sthūlabhadra on the Purvatexts was over while in Nepāla.
The fourth source in sequence is the Parisista-parva of Hemacandra 104 It clarifies a couple of points left partially unilluminated by the former three works. Plausibly, on the basis of what is noted in the Avaśyaka-cūrni, it records that, at the time of the Pātaliputra Synod for the redaction of

Page #147

136
M. A. Dhaky
Jambū-jyoti
the canon, Bhadrabāhu was in Nepāla where, as stated also in the cūrni, Hemacandra adds, he had undertaken the yogic mahāprāna-sadhana. As its prelude, Hemacandra also talks about the 12 years' drought whereupon the pontiff Susthita dispersed the Samgha to different congenial locales and, at that time, emperor Candragupta attained Samādhimarana, peaceful end/death by ritually undergoing starvation. The work earlier talks at great length about Cānākya and how he helped Candragupta in vanquishing Nanda and in seizing his empire. Then there is a brief report on Candragupta's son and successor Bindusāra, followed by that on Aśoka, his son Kunāla, and the circumstances under which Kunāla was blinded; also, he mentions Kunāla's consort (by name Śaraccarī) and their begetting the son Samprati who eventually was given a share in Aśoka's empire. (He very plausibly ruled from Ujjayanī as his capital.) The account thus far and in part is endorsed by the earlier sources except that (Arya) Susthita, in point of fact, was to appear on the historical scene a couple of centuries later105. But more serious confusion appears when Hemacandra starts talking about a "second 12 years drought” and Bhadrabāhu next meeting Samprati, an impossible reality, unless he is some other Bhadrabāhu, about whom nothing is known from any other source. It was Arya Suhasti, disciple of Śthūlabhadra, who was contemporary as also the preceptor of Samprati. And this latter notice seems plausible since it synchronizers with the historical chronology of the Mauryan dynasts.
VII
Conclusions After assessing the total evidence from the available earlier writings and related pre-medieval and medieval epigraphs from Karnataka on Arya Bhadrabāhu, the following facts, by way of recapitulation, together with a few additional, brief, clarificatory, and further elucidatory observations now may be put forward. Alongwith it a few speculative thoughts also will be included. The picture delineated even by the collective information from all of the presently available sources, however, is far from complete. There are several gaps, lingering doubts, unresolved enigmas and obvious improbabilities ranged against the apparent plausibilities. The conflicting positions are present at several crucial points, paths, and turnings. As a result, the determinations in all such cases, wherever made, or plausibilities in happenings, wherever suggested, are at best tentative.

Page #148

Ārya Bhadrabāhu
137
1) Ārya Bhadrabāhu doubtless had flourished during the régime of the first Maurya monarch Candragupta who had vanquished the Nanda and inherited his empire early in the last quarter of B.C. the fourth century, the general consensus for the absolute date of that event veers around B.C. 322106
2) Bhadrabāhu belonged to Prācīna-gotra and thus to Bengal as earlier perceived by U.P. Shah; and, R.C. Majumdar (who otherwise had not seen the Southern and South affiliated literary sources) likewise had arrived at the same conclusion on the basis of the appellations of the sākhās or monastic branches emanated from his senior disciple Godāsa--that Bhadrabāhu was a native of Bengal. The Southern literary sources unequivocally endorse that inference, adding that he was born and (in his earlier years) had lived in a town within Bengal—be it Kaundini or Kotipura-and was initiated in Pundravardhana.
3) According to the second as also the third phase growth of the Sthavirāvali of the Paryusanā-kalpa (c. A.D. 100), Bhadrabāhu was the disciple of Arya Yaśobhadra, the fifth pontiff in the hagiological descent from Arhat Vardhamāna. According to the Southern and South-affiliated Jaina literary sources (earliest of which dates from circa the mid 6th century onwards) as well as the Sravanbelagola inscription of c. A.D. 600, however, his preceptor's name was Govardhana who, too, might have been a Bengālī. As an after thought, a reconciliation between these two totally divergent notices, the Southern being four to five centuries younger in date than the Northern, may be suggested by assuming that Govardhana may have been the vidyāguru-not the diksāguru—who probably had taught the 14 Pūrva-texts to Bhadrabāhu. And the Southern sources, for that matter, in the hagiological sequence, connect Bhadrabāhu with Govardhana.
4) Bhadrabāhu, according to the earlier noted Sthavirāvali, had four disciples, namely Godāsa, Agnidatta, Yajñadatta, and Somadatta. They all, as their appelations unambiguously suggest, were brahmins. The Uttarādhyayana-niryukti reports the death of four disciples of Bhadrabāhu (who earlier were initiated in Rājagļha), on Vaibhāragiri near Rājagļha due to śīta parīşaha, suffering by severe chill. In the gloss given by the Uttarādhyana-cūrni, regarding the death of the four disciples in question, they are said to have died at different locales within Rājagrha's environs, of

Page #149

M. A. Dhaky
course due to the same cause, though it likewise does not identify them. This statement, as regards the four disciples of Bhadrabahu who died by suffering from intense cold, is broadly confirmed by a notice in the Prakirṇaka class of agamic work, the Maraṇasamādhi, a pre-medieval compilatory work, which absorbed the versified content of eight earlier texts, largely of pre-Gupta (Mitra-Saka-Kuṣāṇa) date, within it. Now, the cūrṇi calls these latter four disciples as of vanika or mercantile community. Clearly, then, these four unnamed disciples were different from the former four named and, as their names suggest, of brahmin extraction.
138
5) Bhadrabahu's senior disciple Godāsa as well as the latter's disciples, too, must have hailed from Bengal, as indicated by the appellations of the śākhās or branches of mendicants that afterwards had emanated from them, namely the Tamraliptikā, the Koṭivarṣīya, the Paundravardhanikā, and the Dasikharvatikā. Of these, at least the first three definitely were named after the then existing ancient towns in Bengal.
Jambu-jyoti
6) The authorship of the three agama-category of works, namely the Daśāśrutaskandha, the Kalpa, the Vyavahara, as also of the Niryuktis traditionally is attributed to Bhadrabahu in the Śvetāmbara sect. Of these, the first three texts, afterwards classified under the Chedasutra category that dwells on the rules for acara or monastic discipline, the Kalpa alone and, plausibly, for its larger part (which seems ancient and largely uniform in style), may have been his work. The Niryuktis seemingly are as late as early sixth century A.D., of course partly based on older material. (The Logassasutta induded within the Avasyaka compendium is a hymn to the 24 Jinas and ascribed to Bhadrabahu by Śīlācārya in his Acārānga-vṛtti [latter half of the 9th cent. A.D.]. However, as I elsewhere have suggested, it could have been the inaugural hymn of the Prathamänuyoga of Arya Syama 1 (c. 1st cent. B.C -A.D.), which was the earliest work to notice the 24 tirthankaras, giving as it also did their biographical (in most cases of course overtly fictitious) sketches.) The Śvetāmbaras also attribute the famous magical and very popular hymn, the Uvasaggahara-thotta [Upasargahara-stotra], composed in the Mahārāṣtrī Prākṣta, to Bhadrabāhu. (In the Digambara sect, it is believed to be a composition by Manatungācārya, c. late 6th-early 7th cent. A.D., an equally erroneous and hence untenable ascription,) That work, as is obvious by its language, style, content, and spirit seems a composition by

Page #150

Ārya Bhadrabahu
some medieval Śvetāmbara abbatial (caityavāsī) monk practicing sorcery and plausibly belonged to the late ninth or early tenth century A.D. as the of the hymn suggest.
7) It is likely that the emperor Candragupta, in the last year of his regnal period, may have been admitted by Bhadrabahu to the Order of Mendicants. The combined information obtained from the Tiloyapaṇnati (c. mid 6th cent.) and several inscriptions from Śravanabelagola dating from circa the mid seventh century onwards, provide such an indication. The 12th century Śvetāmbara writer Hemacandra, on the basis of some source before him, records that Candragupta attained Samādhimaraṇa 107, death by the rite of suspension of aliment which, too, would hint towards a possibility that he had embraced Nirgranthism. There is thus some degree of probability on this score even when the concerned sources are not sufficiently ancient. Some hazy but a genuine memory of the past event seems to have been preserved in that tradition 108. Bhadrabahu doubtless was contemporary of Candragupta but not of Samprati who, in point of fact, was the son of Candragupta's great grand son Kunāla*. Both Bhrājisņu, the author of the Karṇāṭa-ṭīkā on the Ārādhanā and Hemacandra, the author of the Parisistaparva, are confused on this point. Samprati's association with Ujjayanī as his capital (by virtue of his becoming the ruler of the western half of Aśoka's empire) does seem a historical reality or at least a plausibility.
139
8) As for Bhadrabāhu's visit to Śravanabelagola alongwith his mendicant disciple Candragupta and the passing away of both of them there, it is not so recorded in the earliest inscription from Śravanabelgola (c. A.D. 600). The inscription does mention Bhadrabahu in connection with the prediction he made in Ujjayani of the 12 years' drought, but does not mention Bhadrabahu and Candragupta or bring them to Śravanabelagola, although this eventuality of historic importance and of considerable significance could hardly have been missed by the author of the draft of the inscription. Instead, it mentions Prabhācandra to have died there 109. And no direct or indirect allusion to the effect of Bhadrabahu's and
Candragupta's association with Śravanabelagola is available in Northern Indian Jaina sources. Somewhere in Karnataka, this belief was taking shape apparently in the late sixth century and was firmly established by mid seventh The dynastic order is Candragupta, Bindusara, Aśoka, Kuṇāla, and Samprati.

Page #151

M. A. Dhaky
century as earlier had been suggested here on the basis of an inscription, on the holy hill Katavapra, concerning Säntisena, of c. mid seventh century. Bhrājisnu, in the Ārādhanā-ṭīkā (c. late 9th or early 10th Cent.), positively associates Bhadrabāhu and Candragupta with the Śravanabelgola hill. On this point, Harisena's Bṛhadkathākośa (A.D. 931) comes in conflict with the Bhrājisnu's ṭīkā. For it reports that Bhadrabahu, after the prediction he made, retired from Ujjain to (some site in) Bhadrapradadeśa where he died by resorting to avamodarya or progressively decreased intake of food, the latter fact, without mentioning the locale sinvolved, was noted earlier and originally in Śivarya's Ārādhanā (c. early 6th cent). The Bṛhadkathākosa throws no light on Bhadrabahu's disciple Candragupta as to what he did and where he was after he embraced the Order. Bhrājiṣnu, however, avers that he was with Bhadrabahu when the latter passed away in Śravanabelagola by anasana rite and the sage Candragupta, who stayed over there, died sometime after the 12 years' draught. The Northern sources say nothing on how and where Bhadrabāhu died.
140
9) The most intriguing point is the presence of Bhadrabāhu simultaneously at two places and, on the opposite score, also in two times as deduced from two completely contradictory reports :(1) during and after the draught, he was in Nepāla; and (2) just before the onset of draught, he was in Śravanabelgola and his passing away there very soon after ! The Northern records, available from c. mid sixth century onwards are unanimous that, when the Pataliputra Synod was convoked after the draught for the redaction of the agamas in c. B.C. 300 (or a few years before that date), Bhadrabahu was in Nepala and Sthulabhadra-disciple of Bhadrabahu's confrère Arya Sambhūta (and son of Sakaṭāra, minister of Nanda) was sent by the Pataliputra Council to Bhadrabahu for learning the 14 Purva-texts from him. The Southern literary sources, all of which are late, on the other hand, claim that Bhadrabahu was in Ujjayani, had predicted the onset of 12 years draught, and either before or just at the beginning of the 12 years famine, proceeded either to Bhadrapadadeśa where he passed away by reduction in food-intake, or to Śravanabelgola where he went along with his royal disciple Candragupta, passed away by anasana rite, and had sent the Sangha with his disciple Viśākhācārya to Southern India (Tamilnadu). The Southern sources, moreover, show no knowledge about the Pataliputra Synod which assembled after the long draught and that

Jambū-jyoti

Page #152

Árya Bhadrabāhu
141
Bhadrabāhu was still alive and then was in Nepāla 110. It is difficult to reconcile the two totally differing and absolutely conflicting notices, their content standing poles apart. If these two represent not only very different traditions but also may refer to two separate Bhadrabāhu-s, which, somewhat remotely, may be a plausibility, then the first Bhadrabahu belonged to the Mauryan period and the second was of a later date who may have migrated to Sravanabelgola. However, the concerned biographical anecdotes of the two Bhadrabāhu-s (if the second really existed) were confounded in the past and the today's messy confusion arises therefrom"11. It generates a formidable conundrum which, in the present state of evidence cannot be resolved.
10) The complete absence in north India of inscriptions mentioning the ganas and the sākhās that had originated from Bhadrabāhu's lineage is a pointer to the fact that Bhadrabāhu's disciples and hagiological descendents were not in north India (Bengal and perhaps Orissa to be precise) and, by implication/deduction, had migrated to the Southern territories and settled there. Some, plausibly during the years of the draught, had gone as far as Simhala-dvīpa, while several apparently had settled in the Pāndyan country in lowermost Tamilnadu where the earliest grotto inscriptions (c. B.C. 2nd1st cent A.D.) indicating the passing away, apparently of the Nirgrantha recluses—assumably by the rite of sallekhana-have been inferred"12.
11) Bhadrabāhu of the Mauryan period, even if he really may have gone to Sravanabelgola, he may have done so a few years subsequent to the Pātaliputra Synod and after Sthūlabhadra's learning the Pūrva texts from him. There is no reason to brush aside the Northern sources on the point of Bhadrabāhu-Sthūlabhadra association. That particular tradition is, as recorded in the Northern literarily notices, positively anterior by about three centuries to the mid-seventh century Southern epigraphical reference that at best is suggestive only obliquely of the Bhadrabāhu-Candragupta connection with Śravanabelagola, while another epigraphical source at the same site, which is half a century anterior to the former, explicitly refers to Prabhācandra and his (unnamed) disciple and not at all to Bhadrabāhu and Candragupta : but the earliest literary source, the commentary of Bhrājisnu (c. 9th-10th cent.) talks about Bhadrabāhu and SampratiCandragupta (the ruler of Ujjayanī) visiting Sravanabelagola and not the Maurya emperor Candragupta (who ruled from Pātaliputra), who was

Page #153

142
M. A. Dhaky
Jambū-jyoti
Samprati's great grand-father's father. (Bhräjisnu doubtless is confused on this point.)
12) A question, indeed of sterling importance, also arises why Bhadrabāhu, despite his eminence and seneority, was not present at the Pătaliputra Synod. It seems that, today's Bengal-Bihar divide seemingly had existed even in early Mauryan times. Bhadrabāhu apparently was alienated, the preponderance (and consequent predominance) of the mendicants from Magadha and from other territories, some of which now forming the State of Uttar Pradesh, at the Pātaliputra Synod and contrariwise, not according due importance to the Bengālī Bhadrabāhu, perhaps not even inviting him for the Redaction Conference, may have hurt him and consequently he may have remained aloof by staying in Nepāla and thereby completely ignoring the Synod113. (The 'diktat' or command of the Synod to pass, what then had become very rare, the knowledge of the Pūrva texts, may have served to sprinkle salt on the wound.) That the tempo of teaching was very slow, proves that Bhadrabāhu was an unwilling horse and only reluctantly had imparted the instruction to Sthūlabhadra.
And the legendary anecdote of Sthūlabhadra's vanity bordering on deliquency was created, plausibly in pre-Gupta times or earlier (since the legend already was known to Umāsvāti) to cover up the fact that Bhadrabāhu had withheld the last four Pūrva texts while the teaching had entered into the final phase. And there is no clarity on the point whether the Pātaliputra Council had continued their sessions indefinitely and had waited till the return of Sthūlabhadra. The medieval sources briefly note that both Bhadrabāhu and Sthūlabhadra had reached Pataliputra after the major part of teaching was over.
13) Since Bhadrabahu either had not visited Karnataka at all, or, if he did, he may have stayed at Śraveņabeļag!a for a very brief period before he passed away : How, in that event, indeed in that extremely short period and under the avamodarya (or anaśana) vow as he is said to be, did he propagate the Nirgrantha religion in Southern India is a moot point. The more likelihood is that it was his hagiological descendents as well as some other contemporaneous Nirgrantha mendicants, who had migrated during the drought period to Tamilnadu and settled there, possibly were

Page #154

Arya Bhadrabāhu
143
responsible for the propagation of Nirgrantha-darśana in South, particularly and at first in the Tamil country and some time after in Andhradeśa 114 There may have been more than one group of mendicants that migrated from the northern (essentially eastern) to southern India 115, indeed progressively so in different ancient centuries.
Bhrājisnu, as well as Harisena, talk about the events in north India during the famine as well as what happened after Viśākhācārya returned to north India in post-famine time. They are, of course, not only poorly informed but are overtly sectarian and the South affiliated sources posterior to these two earliest ones only repeat what the above-noted two authors said and the further additions of details they made only betray their very strong sectarian bias with increased hate and venom. (I intend to deal with that part of the storey, of what happened during the draught years and in post-Bhadrabāhu times in north India, as perceived by medieval and postmedieval Digambara writers, in a future paper.) in Karnataka, the Nirgranthas eventually may have moved from western Andhradeśa as well as from north western Tamilnadu and settled there only in the late third and early fourth century of the Common Era as indicated by the earliest charters from the lower Gangavādi and the Kadamba country that predate the known Śravanabe!goļa inscriptions116. The principalities of the Gangas and the Kadambas by then already had been founded. No earlier Jaina vestiges including epigraphs, or literary notices either, between c. B.C. 300 and A.D. 300 so far are known from Karnataka*
*
There, of course, are reported a few grotto inscriptions of c. the 2nd or 3rd century A.D. mentioning the death (by sallekhanā rites) of the (Nirgrantha) mendicants in lower southern Gangavādi.

Page #155

144
M. A. Dhaky
Jambū-jyoti
Annotations : 1. The 14 Pürva texts were believed to be the older and fundamental ägamus. To
all seeming, they were of the sect of Arhat Pārśva and some of them plausibly had covered the early phase of Nirgrantha scholasticism. These texts' cosmography and probably much of the basic Nirgrantha doctrines (including the theory of eight karmas) and the dogmatics, besides disciplinary rules and allied matters, predictably had permeated through-of course by then in a developed form-in some of the available earlier agamas, particularly their later chapters, and the younger agamas, of the saka and Kuşāna periods, as well as the āgamic works, all of the Northern tradition of Arhat Vardhamāna's Church. To a fair degree, this applies also to the much younger surrogate canon of the Southern tradition. As for the Niryuktis, these largely are composed in the Mahārāstrī Prakrit, are cast in the Āryā meter, and adopt the niksepa method of examination in determining the word's meaning intended in the given context. The German Jainologists ascribe these to c. 80 A. D. Muni Punyavijaya, however, regarded them still younger in date, composed as they must have been soon after the Valabhi Synod II (A. D. 503/516), and hence this date could be circa A. D. 525. Afterwards, however, he changed his view and ascribed them to the early centuries of the Common Era. However, I seem to think that his earlier determination is valid. The Mahārāstrī Prakrit does not appear even in the Sātavāhana inscriptions before c. 200 A. D. and the first available work in Mahārāstrī, the Tarangavaikahā of Padalipta sūri I also dates around A. D. 200
225. The Niryuktis do contain some older, but largely relatively later material. 2. Literarily 'omniscient by virtue of the complete knowledge of the sacred scripture.' 3. Since the Yāpanīya sect (mainly located in Karanataka) recognized the āgamas
including the 'Kalpa (Brhad-Kalpasūtra)' and the Vyavahāra,' both of which the Svetāmbara sect attributes to Bhadrabāhu, it is likely that, that sect, too, attributed these to Bhadrabāhu. (This, of course, is my feeling. There is, at the moment, no direct evidence to that effect.) These two different dates are given in some manuscripts of the Paryusanākalpa at the end of the "Jinacaritra” (which is the second of the three sections of the Paryuşanä-kalpa,) In some, the date given is V.N. 980; in a few others, according to another tradition, V.N.993. The first date apparently originates as per the Mathurā Synod's tradition; the other plausibly was due to the Valabhi Synod I tradition as earlier was suggested and, as I recall, by Muni Kalyānavijaya in one of his works. (It was, perhaps, his Vīranirvana Samvat aur Jaina

Page #156

Arya Bhadrabāhu
145
Kālagananā, Hindi. At the moment it is not handy.) For the date of the nirvāņa of Jina Mahāvīra, I have followed Jacobi's determination, namely B.C. 477. According to the tradition recorded in Dharmasāgara's autocommentary on his Pattāvali (late 16th-early 17th cent.), the Paryusanā-kalpa was first recited in the assembly of Dhruvasena (I) of the Maitraka dynasty at Anandapura (Vadanagar) in north Gujarat. Hence Jacobi's determination appears valid; for the Maitraka prince named Dhruvasena (I) did flourish in early sixth century A.D. Seemingly, Dharmasāgara had before him some old traditional record. For no one before him mentions the name of this king, which was known only through the copper plate charters of the Maitraka donor rulers that were discovered,
deciphered, and studied in the last century. 5. These dates are suggested here on the basis of a reasonable guess, based on computa
tions and synchronisms, the details regarding which I shall not dwell upon here. For these are being discussed in a separate paper, "The Paryusanā-kalpa sthavi
rāvalī—eka Adhyayana" (Gujarātī), still incomplete, to be published in future. 6. Ārya Phalgumitra apparently was contemporary of Arya Raksita, the latter pontiff
reported in later literature as the one who classified the śruta/canon into four anuyoga-categories, namely the Dharmakathānuyoga, the Caranakaranānuyoga, the Ganitānuyoga, and the Dravyānuyoga. Since the term anuyoga is synonymous also with vācanā or redaction, a hitherto unreported synod may be suspected in this notice. It may also be added that the available āgamas are not categorically arranged into four anuyogas or classes stipulated in the above-noted later tradition. Hence, the term anuyoga, in the above-noted context, may be understood more accurately as vācanā rather than categories of canonical literature. Phalgumitra, for certain, figures in the main line of succession and Raksita, who otherwise may have played a key rôle at the Synod, apparently had belonged to a collateral branch (avāntara sākha): Hence the name of Arya Raksita (who otherwise was of considerable eminence) does not, but his much less famous contemporary Ārya Phalgumitra's does figure at the point where the Third Phase of the Sthavīrävali terminates. Seemingly, each one of the Sthavirāvali's five Phases ended soon after a redaction of the agamas took place. Thus, each time it had to be extended after the happening of a redaction. If a redaction of the āgamas did happen in Phalgumitra's time, the place where the elders met for that purpose is not recorded in the available literature. (No redaction had been undertaken after the Valabhi Synod II in c. A.D. 503/516.)

•

Page #157

M. A. Dhaky
Jambu-jyoti
7. Medieval sources specify this date: The computed date for Arya Skandila / Śandila also accords with this date: the date thus seems probable. I reserve detailed discussion on this date for a future paper.
146
For this Phase 5, in fact for the whole of the Sthavirävali, I have consulted the Paṭṭavali-samuccaya, Ed. Muni Darśanavijaya, Śrī Caritra-Smaraka. granthmālā, Viramagām 1933, pp.1-11.
9. These two different dates are recorded, as specified in annotation 4, at the end of the "Jinacaritra" section in some later manuscripts of the Paryusanākalpa. Muni Punyavijaya's edition does not give the second or alternative date, namely V.N.993/ A.D. 516: (Cf. his Kalpasūtra, Ahmedabad 1952, pp. 59-60, sūtra 200). Valabhi Synod II was convoked for collating and reconciling the differences and divergencies in the versions fixed at the Mathura Synod (c. A.D. 363) chaired by Arya Skandila (or Sandila) and the contemporaneous Valabhi Synod I presided over by Arya Nagarjuna of the Nagendra-śākhā. This fact is reported in the Kahävali of Bhadresvara süri (c. late 10th century A.D.: unpublished) and, if I correctly remember, in one of the commentaries by Malayagiri (c. 3rd quarter of the 12th cent. A.D.).
10. As I recall, the noted epigrapher and historian H. P. Shastri favours Gupta as the more probable sovereign power under which the Maitrakas ruled before they became independent rulers.
11. Cf. the Thanamgasuttaṁ and Samaväyämgasuttam, Ed. Muni Jambūvijaya, JainaĀgama-Series No.3, Bombay 1985, p. 450.
12. Arya Syāma is credited in the two seventh century curni commentaries on the Bṛhatkalpasūtra to have composed the Prathamänuyoga (embodying lives of the 24 tirthankaras), the Gaṇḍikānuyoga (treating the lives of the Cakravartis, Vasudevas, and some other early great men), the Lokānuyoga (dealing, as its title suggests, with cosmology/cosmography), and some Samgrahanis or collections of topical verses, some of which may have been inserted in the corpus of the agamas of the Śaka and Kusāna periods and some of them apparently were utilized in the formulation of the texts of some of the Prakirnaka agamic works. All of the works of Arya Syama, however, are lost, but were available for consultation to the compiler of the Samavāyānga-sūtra (c. A. D. 353/363). The curnis interpret the heading 'Lokānuyoga' in a way different from mine. However, as the title suggests, it must pertain to cosmology/cosmography. (For details and discussion on Arya Syama and his contributions, see Punyavijayaji' article, "Prathamanuyogaśästra ane Tenā Pranetā Sthavira Arya Kālaka," (Gujarati),

Page #158

Arya Bhadrabahu
Jñänäñjali, Vadodara 1960, pp. 122-129. (This article originally was published in Acarya Sri Vijayavaallabhasüri Smaraka Grantha, Bombay 1956, pp. 49-56. 13. As I elsewhere have shown, the date of Deva vācaka is c. mid fifth century A.D. and not c. A. D. 400: (Cf. "Bhadräryäcārya ane Dattiläcārya" Gujarati, Svädhyaya, Vol.14, Vadodara V.S.2037/A. D. 1981. This article has been incorporated in the author's Nirgrantha Aitihäsika Lekha-Samuccaya, pt. 1, Ahmedabad 2002, pp. 103-113.)
The hagiological table of Deva väcaka and of Devarddhi gani is as follows:
Deva vācaka (Nandisutra:
c. A.D. 450)
Dusya gani kṣamāśramaṇa
Sthiragupta kṣamāśramaṇa T Kumāradharma gani

Devarddhi kṣamāśramaṇa (chaired Valabhi Synod II: c. A.D. 503 or 516)
147
Cf. here the annotation 36 for quotation.
See the "Uttaradhyayana niryukti," the Niryukti-sangraha, (comp.) Vijayajinendra sūri, Śri Harṣapuspämṛta Jaina Granthamälä, Vol.189, Lakhabawal (Lakhābābal) 1989, 2.91, p. 373.
Bhadraryācārya
15. Muni Kalyanavijaya and, following his view, Pt. Malvaniya dated this work to the fifth century of Vikrama Era (c. A.D. 345-445). (See Kalyäṇavijaya, Vira nirvana Samvat aur Jaina Kälagaṇană, (Hindi), Jalor S.1987/A.D. 1931, p.30, and D. Malvaniya, "Study of Titthogaliya," Bharatiya Puratattva (Muni Jinavijaya Felicitation Volume), Jaipur 1971, pp.129-138.) I would, on the basis of style. and content, prefer the date c. A.D. 550 for this work: It must be available to the author of the Vyavahära-bhāṣya (c. late 6th cent.) which, as noted by Malvaniya, mentions this text: (Malvaniya, p.137). It is, however, not noted in the list of the Prakirnaka works in the Nandisutra (c. A.D. 450). This significant omission almost confirms the date I here have suggested.
16. It apparently is the latest among the earliest āgamic bhāṣyas.
17. It is one of the two earliest extant cürņis, the first being the Daśavaikālika-cūrni of Agastyasimha (c. A.D. 575). The time bracket A.D. 600-650 for the Avasyakacurni was suggested, if I have remembered correctly, by Leumann. I have tested the validity of that date: It certainly is probable.

Page #159

M. A. Dhaky
18. Thiscürni, like that on the Acäränga and the one on the Sūtrakṛtānga, is younger
among that class of agamic exegetical literature.
148
19. Haribhadra (active c. A.D. 740-784), as guessed by earlier writers, apparently had begun his literary career by writing vṛttis in Sanskrit on the agamas like. the Nandi, the Anuyogadvära, and the Avasyaka in c. A. D. 750.
Jambu-jyoti
The Kahavali of Bhadreśvara süri is as yet unpublished. Prof. Harivallabha Bhayani had assigned the task of its editing to Dr. Ramanik Shah. I am grateful to Dr. Shah for giving me the gist of the "Bhadrabähu-kathä" incorporated in that medieval work. As for its date, see my paper, "Kahävali-karty Bhadreśvara sûrino Samaya," (Gujarati), Sambodhi Vol.12, Ahmedabad 1982-83. It has been included in the Nirgrantha Aitihäsika Lekha-Samuccaya, pt.1, Ahmedabad 2002, pp.103113. (There, the word was 'kartṛ' in the original rubric which here is replaced by 'kartta.')
21. Sthaviravalicarita or Parisistaparvan, (Ed.) Hermann Jacobi, sec. ed., Calcutta 1932, pp.242-248; and Sri Parisistaparva (Gujarātī), translator Rajasekhara süri, Ahmedabad 1994, pp.182-186. The particulars on the content of the Parisiṣṭaparva will be cited in this article at a relevant point in the discussion.
22. Bhagavati Aradhana, pt.2. (Ed.) Pt. Kailäścandra Siddhantaśästri, Solapur 1978, p.707. The work earlier has been identified as of the Yapaniya sect by Pt. Nathooram Premi, A. N. Upadhye, and even Pt. Kailashchandra Shastri agreed with this attribution. I forego citing references to their writings since not directly relevant to the present discussion.
23. Tiloyapannatti, pt.1., Jivarāja Jaina Granthamälä 1, Sholapur V.S. 2000/A.D. 1944, 4. 1476-1482, p.338.
24. Harivarśapuräna, Jäänapitha Mürtidevī Jaina Granthamälä, Vol.27, sec. ed.,. Ed. Pannalal Jaina, Delhi/Varanasi 1972, 1. 60-61, p.7.
25. Satkhandagama, pt.1, (Eds.) Hiralal Jain and A.N. Upadhye, Śrimanta Setha Sitabray Laksmicandra Jaina Sähityoddhäraka Siddhanta Granthamälä 1, Sholapur 1973, pp.66-67; cf. there the Dhavala-tikā, the portion that concerns with the hagiology of early pontiffs.
26. See B.K. Kharabadi, Vaddärädhane: A Study, Karnataka University Research Publications Series: 38, Dharwad 1979. See there "6. The Story of the Sage Bhadrabahu," pp. 49-56.
27. Its editor Kharabadi ascribes the work to Śivakoti and dates it to the tenth century. But Hampa Nagarajaiah has shown, on the basis of a reference in the Punyaśrava

Page #160

Ārya Bhadrabāhu
149
kathākosa (c. 11th cent. A.D.) that the author was one Bhrājisnu and because the work uses old Kannada, it may be dated to the ninth century :(Cf. his article, the "Ārādhanā Karnāta-tīkā,"Jain Journal, Vol. XXXIII, No.4, April 1999, pp.166
170.) 28. Ed. A.N. Upadhye, Singhi Series No. 17, Bambai (Mumbai, Bombay) 1943. 29. Ibid., cf. there the Harisena's prasasti, pp. 355-356. 30. Bhadrabāhu Caritra, Translator (in Hindi), Pt. Udayalālajī Kāslivvāl, Surat
(1911 ?), pp.317-319. 31. In view of its importance, the text of this inscription is here fully quoted :
सिद्धम् स्वस्ति। जितम्भगवता श्रीसद्धर्म तीर्थ-विधायिना। वर्द्धमानेन सम्प्राप्त-सिद्ध-सौख्यामृतात्मना ।।१।। लोकालोक-द्वयाधारस्वस्तु स्थास्नु चरिष्णु वा। संविदालोक-शक्तिः स्वाव्यश्नुते यस्य केवला ॥२॥ जगत्यचिन्त्य-माहात्म्य-पूजातिशयमीयुषः । तीर्थकृन्नाम-पुण्यौघ-महार्हन्त्यमुपेयुषः ॥३॥ तदनु श्री-विशालयम् (लायाम्) जयत्यद्य जगद्धितम् ।
तस्य शासनमव्याजं प्रवादि-मत-शासनम् ॥४॥ अथ खलु सकल-जगदुदय-करणोदित-निरतिशय-गुणास्पदीभूत-परमजिन-शासनसरस्समभिवद्धित-भव्यजन-कमल-विकसन-वितिमिर-गुण-किरण-सहस्र-महोति महावीर-सवितरि परिनिर्वृते भगवत्परमर्षि-गौतम-गणधर-साक्षाच्छिष्य लोहार्य-जम्बु-विष्णुदेवापराजित-गोवर्द्धनभद्रबाहु-विशाख-प्रोष्ठिल-कृत्तिकार्य-जयनाम सिद्धार्थधृतिषेणबुद्धिलादि-गुरुपरम्परीणक्क्रमाभ्यागत-महापुरुषसन्तति-समवद्योतितान्वय-भद्रबाहु-स्वामिना उज्जयन्या-मष्टाङ्गमहानिमित्त-तत्त्वज्ञेन त्रैकाल्य-दर्शिना निमित्तेन द्वादश-संवत्सर-काल-वैषम्यमुपलभ्य कथिते सर्व्वस्सङ्घ उत्तरापथाद्दक्षिणापथम्प्रस्थितः क्रमेणैव जनपदमनेक-ग्राम-शत-सङ्ख्यं मुदित-जन-धन-कनक-सस्यगो-महिषा-जावि-कल-समाकीर्णम्प्राप्तवान् अतः आचार्यः प्रभाचन्द्रो नामावनितल-ललामभूतेऽथास्मिन्कटवप्र-नामकोपलक्षिते विविध-तरुवर-कुसुम-दलावलि-विरचना-शबल-विपुल सजलजलद-निवह-नीलोपल-तले वराह-द्वीपि-व्याघ्रर्भ-तरक्षु-व्याल-मृगकुलोपचितोपत्यक-कन्दरदरी-महागुहागहनाभोगवति समुत्तुङ्ग-श्रृङ्गे सिखरिणि जीवित शेषमल्पतर-कालमवबुध्यात्मनः सुचरिततपस्समाधिमाराधयितुमापृच्छ्य निरवसेषेण सङ्घ विसृज्य शिष्येणैकेन पृथुलतरास्तीण-तलासु शिलासु शीतलासु स्वदेहं संन्यस्याराधितवान् क्रमेण सप्त-शतमृषीणामाराधितमिति जयतु जिन-शासनमिति । (For the source,see Hiralal Jaina,Jain-Silalekha-sangrahah, pt. 1. Manikyacandra
Digambara-Jaina-Granthamālā, vol. 28, Bombay (1928 ?), 1-2. 32. For the details, see the above-cited work and the "Introduction" by the compiler.

Page #161

150
M. A. Dhaky
Jambu-jyoti
33. See the "Introduction,"Epigraphia Carnatica, Vol.II, Institute of Kannada Studies,
University of Mysore, Mysore 1973, pp.ixxiv-ixxvi. 34. These have been completely ignored by all of the writers on Bhadrabāhu who
exclusively used southern sources. (The Digambara writers, understandably,
recognize only Digambara-mānya sources.) 35. Some three decades ago, U.P. Shah, in the course of a personal discussion, had
conveyed to me his thinking about interpreting this word. I here have followed it. 36. The concerned verse is as follows:
जसभद्द तुंगिय वंदे संभूयं चेव माठरं। भद्दबाहुं य पाइण्णं थुलभदं च गोयमं ।
-TEE .6.28. (Ed. Punyavijaya muni, Jaina-Agama-Granthamālā, Vol. 1, Mumbai (Bombay)
1968, p. 6). Also see the Tīrthāvakālika-prakirnaka. 37. After all, kharvata means a relatively smaller settlement. And when it is prefixed
by the term 'Dāsī,' it was an humble place, indeed of lesser consequence. 38. Vadda Ārādhane, pp. 49-50. 39. Brhadkathākośa, p. 317. 40. The great historian R.C. Majumdar, apparently on the basis of the śākhá names
of the Godāsa-gana, had reached the conclusion that Bhadrabāhu hailed from
Bengal. As it happened, his relevant published works currently are not handy. 41. Tāmraliptikā, Kotivarsīyā, and Pundravardhanikā emanate from Tāmralipti,
Kotivarsa, and Pundravardhana, as earlier inferred here, and all of these towns are located in Bengal under their modern derivative appelations. Recent researches tend to bring down the date of Gautama Buddha by about a century, toward c. B.C. 400-383, with a few years plus or minus. If this date finally holds, then Arhat Vardhamāna's date must also slide down and stabilize at c. B.C. 415-400 since, according to the Pāli sources, he predeceased Buddha. This date does not seem incompatible with the computable time-brackets for the successors of Vardhamāna. The traditionally held B.C. 527 as the date of Vardhamāna's nirvana, of course, is totally unrealistic on several counts, just as it upsets several firmly established historical dates, synchronisms, and time
brackets, an issue that cannot be dealt with in this article. 43. While citing the actual past instances of friars who had suffered from one or
the other type of the 22 parīşahas or visiting sufferings noted in the āgamas, for
42.

Page #162

Arya Bhadrabāhu
151
the visitation of the śīta-parīşaha or suffering due to severe cold, it cites this episode as a typical instance. See the Uttarādhyayana-niryukti 2. 91 inside
the Niryuktisangraha, p. 373. 44. Painnayasuttań pt. 1, Ed. Muni Punyavijaya, Jaina-Agama-Granthamālā Vol.
17, (Pt. 1), Bombay 1984, p. 184. 45. See the Uttarādhyayana-cūrni, Rishabhadeo Kesharimal, Ratlam 1933, pp. 56
57. 46. Ibid. 47. Tiloyapannati, pt. 1, 4.1476-1482. (Eds. A. N. Upadhye and Hiralal Jain, Jivaraj
Jaina Granthamālā No. 1, Sholapur 1943, p. 338. 48. Quoted here in the annotation 31 along with the particulars on its published
source. 49. Ed. Pt. Darbarical Kothiya, Mānikyacandra-Jaina-Granthamālā, Vol. 32, pt. 1,
Bombay 1930, p. 6, 1, 60-62. 50. See the Dhavalā tīkā in the Satkhandāgama, 1-1-1, Eds. Pt. Foolchandra and
Pt. Hiralal, Amaravati 1939, pp. 65-66. 51. The nomens such as Nandi, Nandimitra et cetera were to come into vogue in
times posterior to Mauryan in Indian cultural history. 52. However, I intend to throw a small suggestion in the concluding remarks of
the paper. 53. Brhatkahākośa, p. 318. 54.
वंदामि भद्दबाहुं पाईणं चरिम सयलसुयनाणि। सुत्तस्स कारगमिसिं दसासु कप्पे य ववहारे।।
—ay statief teffi 8.9.. 55. Already noted in the relevant foregoing pages. 56. However, Schubring has pointed out the anomalous situation in the Doctrine of
the Jaina, sec. ed. 2000, Delhi, pp. 109-112. 57. This statement is based on the information I got from late Pt. Malvaniya. I have
yet to verify it with the Pāli texts. 58. This is rather strange, because the mendicants, in that early age, preferred the nude
state. 59. See particularly the last portion of the Kalpa, namely the sixth uddeśa, its end
part and its commentaries. For the Kalpa and the Vyavahāra, I have used Muni Kanhayālāl's edition, Rajkot 1969.

Page #163

152
M. A. Dhaky
Jambū-jyoti
60. As inferred from a few Mathurā inscriptions. 61. The precise date will depend on the date of beginning of the Kusāna Era. 62. That surmise seems reasonable in the present state of available evidence. 63. See the Vyavahāra-sūtra, eighth uddeśa. 64. The study of the oldest portions of the Ācārānga Book I leads one to such
a conclusion 65. The tradition is recorded in the pre-medieval svetāmbara literature. 66. See my article "On the Implication of the Nāgnya Parisaha in the
Tattvārthādhigama sūtra," Jainism and Prakrit in Anciut and Medieval India,
Ed. N. N. Bhattacharya, Delhi 1994, pp. 413-419. 67. See the Kalpa, third Uddeśa. 68. See the Uttarādhyayana sütra, modelled upon the severe ascetical style of Arhat
Vardhamana himself as narrated in the Uvadhāna sütta of Ācārānga I. 69. Kalpa, seeond Uddeśa. 70. Ibid. 71. A few sūtras taken from such works later were incorporated in the Sthānanga. 72. Such as possibly the lost Kalpakalpa. 73. These fall within the pre-Mauryan to the Kusāna times. 74. See the details of content and style of each chapter and the strata within them. 75. This seems plausible in view of the presence of uncomformities and heterogeneity
noticeable in the character of the content. 76. Quotations from the version of the Kalpa possessed by the Yāpanīya sect figuring
in Aparājita sūri's commentary (c. late 8th cent. A. D.) on the Ārādhanā of śivārya would lead to such an inference. The Botika-Ksapanaka sect was founded by the schismic Arya Sivabhūti who separated from the main stream Nirgrantha Church somedate in the second century A. D. The Yāpanīya sect apparently was
the off-shoot of the Botika settled in northern Karnataka. 77. The discussion needs a very detailed analysis of the texts in question, which, of
course, cannot be attempted in this paper. 78. Same remarks hold here, too, as they do in the context of the annotation 77.
This is the view largely held by the pundits of the Digambara sect and by those who follow them.
79.

Page #164

Ārya Bhadrabāhu
80.
बारस अंगवियाणं चउदसपुव्वंगविउलवित्यरणं । सुयणाणि भद्दबाहू गमियगुरुभयवओ जयओ ॥
- बोधपाठ ६.२.
(f: Ed. Pt. Pannalal Soni, Manikyacandra-Digambara-Jaina-Granthamälä, Vol. 17, Bombay, V. S. 1977 [A. D. 1927], p. 127.) 81. Unfortunately, the original article by A. M. Ghatage is not handy. If my memory does not play me false, it had appeared in one of the issues of the Jaina Gazette. 82. Hence some scholars have concluded that he was a later and hence different Bhadrabahu about whose date the opinions widely differed.
83. See here the entire text of the inscription cited under annotation 31.
84. However, we must remember that, at least three temples were built on that hill top to the north of this earliest inscription engraved on the surface of the groundrock there. Could these have covered and hence concealed beneath them some still earlier inscriptions?
86.
85. At least I so for have not come across the examples of the personal names ending with 'candra' in the earlier context.
रात्रेः कृति प्रभाचन्द्रस्य
153
- जैनेन्द्रशब्दशास्त्र ४-३-१८०
For discussion, see Nathooram Premi, Jaina Sahitya aur Itihasa (Hindi), Samsodhitasähityamälä, Vol. 1., Bambai (Mumbai, Bombay) 1956, p. 74.
87. For elucidation, see Premi, "Virasena, Jinasena aur Gunabhadra," Jaina Sahitya., p.. 137

88. Provided, of course, the belief/tradition recorded there is sufficiantly accurate. 89. मउडधरेसुं चरिमो जिणदिक्ख धरदि चंदगुत्तो य ततो मउडधरा दु प्यवज्जं णेव गण्हति ॥
- निलोयपण्णत्ती ४-१४८१
-
90. I have based this passage on the information noted in the Introduction by Pt. Vijayamurti-his compilation earlier referred to here-as also the Introduction by the editiors of the Epigraphia Carnatica, Vol. 1, (sec. ed.), Mysore, and the observations thereof.
I have based this passage also on the information noted in the Introduction by Pt. Vijayamurti in the Introduction by the editiors of the Epigraphia Carnatica, Vol. I, Mysore and the observations thereof.
92. Bhagaveti Ārādhanā, p. 707.

Page #165

154
M. A. Dhaky
Jambū-jyoti
Sastra
93. For particulars on the source, see here annotations 26 and 27. 94. Vadda-Arādhane, p. 55. 95. It also comes into conflict with the traditions preserved in the sixth century and
subsequent works of the Svetāmbara Church. 96. Brhadkathākośa, pp. 316-318. 97. According to the Sthavirāvalī of the Paryusaņā kalpa, he was the disciple of Arya
Sambutavijaya. From his medieval biographical sources, he is known to be the son of Sagadāla (Šakatāra), minister of Nanda, and had seven sisters. Apparently, he must be the youngest child of Sakatāra and must be in his prime of life when sent to Bhadrabāhu by the Sangha. His future disciple, Arya Suhasti, was to be the preceptor of Maurya Samprati, grandson of Asoka, arguably in the pontiff's
advanced age. 98. This account is given, among the older sources, in the Tirthāvakālika and
the Kahāvali. 99. See the Praśamaratiprakaraṇa, Ed. Pt. Raj Kumar, Śrimad-Rājacandra-Jaina
Šāstramālā, Agas V. S. 2044/A. D. 1988, pp. 64, 65. 100. He is a medieval author, a namesake of the famous Haribhadra sūri of the eighth
century. 101. Praśamarati., p. 65. I suspect that the "Bhadrabāhu-gandikā' (probably a chapter
of the lost Gandikānuyoga of Arya Śyāma, c. 1st cent. B. C. - A. D.) may have contained this myth and this may have been the source of the tradition before
Umāsvāti. 102. ŚrimadĀvaśyakasūtram (Uttarabhāgah), Ratlam 1929, p. 187. 103. According to the cūrni, the episode of the visit of the sisters of Sthūlabhadra took
place at the devakulikā when Bhadrabāhu and he were camping at, or close by,
Pätaliputra. 104. For particulars, see annotation 21.. 105. For details, see the Sthavirāvali. 106. This is the view of the Indian historians, a few of whom, as I recall, also suggested
B. C. 325 for that event. The Greek sources state it to be B. C. 312. 107. Pariśīstaparva, translation, p. 176. 108. The Parisistaparva of Hemacanda (betweenc. A. D. 1160-1170) so states. 109. Further confusion is added by the interpreters of the Sravanabelgola inscription
of c. A. D. 600.

Page #166

Arya Bhadrabāhu
155
110. Some scholars think that it was the Tarai area of Nepāla. 111. In fact more number of Bhadrabāhu-s are implied : 1) The first, of the Mauryan
one, contemporary of Candragupta; 2) The second of the period of Maurya Samprati; 3) The third, a contemporary of the Digambara Guptigupta who was Candragupta; 4) The fourth a contemporary of Varāhamihira who was the author of the Niryuktis; and the fifth was a Svetāmbara monk who composed the Jina sahasranāma-stotra. See, however, Schubring's obervation based on Leumann's statement : 'IEUMANN, however, points out that, in this list that already existed in the eighth century, "the second Bh. is but a chronistic repetation..." (The
Doctrine., p. 53.) 112. See R. Champakalakshmi, “9 South India,” Jaina Art and Architecture, Vol. 1,
(Ed. A. Ghosh), Bhāratīya Jñānapītha, New Delhi 1974, pp. 92-103. 113. This, to me, seems a plausibility. Schubring, on a related point, thus notes:
"The inner reasons are explained by IEUMANN, Übersicht p. 26f.” (The Doctrine., p. 47, infra.) What these 'inner reasons' in their perception were, cannot be guessed untill we have the translation in English of the Leumann's famous and
oft-referred to work. 114. The recent discovery of the remains of a Jaina stūpa at Vaddamanu founded
C. B. C. the first century. (Cf. T. V. G. Shastri et al, Vaddamanu Excavations (1981-85), Birla Archaeological and Cultural Institute, Hyderabad, Hyderabad
1992. 115. Implicitly from Bengal and Orissa. It is easier to enter Andhradeśa by land route;
and to the Tamil country, by sea route, particularly to the Pandyan country via
some port such as Nāgapattinam. 116. These date from c. A. D. 300 in Gangavādi and from c. A. D. 464 or so in
Kadambavādi. (I here forgo stating the related details.)
000

Page #167

The Date of Kasāyapāhuda
K. R. Chandra
The available canonical orāgama literature inherited by the Svetāmbara sect originally was composed in Ardhamāgadhi; whereas that of the Botika/ Ksapanaka of northern Indian and its derivative the Yāpanīya of Southern India had inherited the āgamas which were composed in Sauraseni. The surrogate or iso-āgamic works of the Digambara Church, too, had employed Saurasenī Prakrit. The earliest works of this pro-canonical literature are the Kasāyapāhuda, the Satkhandāgama, and the works of Kundakundācārya. There is a general trend among the contemporary Digambara authors to place Gunadharācārya, the author of theKasāyapāhuda, earlier than Kundakundācārya, the author of the Samayasāra, the Pravacanasāra, the Pañcāstikāya, and a number of other works.
In this article, the language of the Kasayapāhuda and of the Pavayanapāhuda olim Pravacanasāra is analysed with the view to finding out which work can be assigned an earlier date on the basis of the main linguistic characteristics.
Linguistic Data I Phonological Changes
Kasāyapāhuda (=KP)
Pavayanasāra (=PS)
Number
Percentage
Number
Percentage
(i) medial -t
(including -to,-tā, -ti, te,-tu)
O
0.80
84.8
94.63
=-d- =-y- or -a-
413 74
15.2
4.57

Page #168

The Date of Kasāyapāhuda
157
92.6
(ii) medial -d=-d- 136 =.y- or -a- 11 (iii) medial -th
98.0 2.0
7.4
=-th
1
1.5
(e.g. atha, verse No.128)
=-dh
13
20
54.5
=-h
78.5
45.5
(iv) medial -dh
=-dh
21
31.3
57.8
--h-
46
68.7
42.2
II Morphology
Kasāyapāhuda (=KP)
Pavayaņasāra (=PS)
Number
Percentage
Number
Percentage
A. Declensional Suffixes
(i) Neuter gender : Nom. & Accu. Plural
Number
Percentage
Number
Percentage
-ni
50
27
-im
(ii) Locative Singular -mhi 35 -mmi 19
B. Verbal Terminations
3rd person sg. termination of Present tense
73
216
-di,-de -i, -e
95 35
27

Page #169

158
K. R. Chandra
Jambū-jyoti
C. Three Prakrit forms of verbal root bhū
4
=bhava =hava
5 2.5
=ho
76
92.5
D. Participle : Affixes of Absolutive
1. Sanskrit Forms (tatsama)
To T2T5(-)
59(+)
2. Sanskrit forms with phonological changes 0
To 125 3. Prakrit Forms 3 1 00
15 Various Affixes of Absolutive (see D Participle; as above)
1
36(-)
1. Sanskrit -ya
0
5(-) ādāya 3.7 abhibhūya
2.45
Pavayanasāra (=PS)
Kasāyapāhuda (=KP) Number
Percentage
Number
Percentage
2. (Sanskrit forms with phonological changes)
(i) -iya (-ya) o
16.5(+) panamiya 3.1, pappa 1.65, 2.77,
etc.)
(ii) -ttā (-tvā)
0
14(+) [cattā 2.98, ditthā 3.52,
etc.)

Page #170

The Date of Kasayapāhuda
159
(iii) -ccā (-tvā)
0
7(+) [kiccă 1.4,
soccā 3.7, etc.)
(iv) -cca (-tya)
0
L
50.) (paducca 1.50, 2.44)
(v) -ija (-dya)
0
12.) [āsejja 2.91, samāsejja 1.5, etc.)
(vi) -ccha (-chya) 0
2.5 [āpiccha 3.2]
(vii)-bbha (-bhya) 0
2.5 [uvālabbha
1.88]
Total
0
0
25
59
3. Prakrit forms
(i) -dūna
33.3
2.5(-)
66.7
0
(ii) -tūnam
2 (i) e.g. ovattedūņa 94
e.g. sunidūna
1.62
(ii) e.g. mottūnam 27,28
8
19(+)
(iii) - ittā (iv) -iya
0 0
0 0
14(+)
Examples from Pavayanasāra
(iii) jānittă 2.102, nirumbhittă 2.104, pecchittā 3.35, etc.
(iv) bhaviya 1.17, khavīya 2.103, etc.

Page #171

160
K. R. Chandra
Jambū-jyoti
E. Affix of Future
-hi
hohimti 68
-ssa
bhavissadi
2.20, jivassadi
2.95
Analysis The above tabular analysis of the data culled from the above-noted two works of Ācārya Gunadhara and Kundakunda reveals that the Kasāyapāhuda and the Pavayaņapāhuda (the Kaşāyaprabhrta and the Pravacanaprābhrta) respectively have their comparative position of the peculiarity of language as follows:(i) The PS retains medial -t- approximately at the rate of 1%, changes
(voices) it to-d-at 95% and drops at that of 5% whereas the KP at 0%,
85% and 15% respectively. (ii) As regards medial -d - the former retains it at the rate of 98% and
drops it at that of 2% whereas the later retains at 93% and drops it at
7%. (iii) The medial -th-is voiced in the former work at the rate of 54.5% and
changed to -h-at 45.5% whereas in the later work it is voiced at the rate
of 20% and changed to -h- at the rate of 78.5%. (iv) The medial -dh- is retained at 58% and changed to -h- at 42% in
the former work but in the later work the rate is 31% and 69% respectively.
Thus, in the evolutionary stage of MIA. the dialect of the KP reflects a stage later than that of the PS.
Morphological study of these two works reveals that (i) the PS has not a single suffix of Nom. and Accu. plural of Neuter in -
im whereas in the KP it is available at 4% : (ii) As far as the suffixes of loc. sg. are concerned, there is no considerable
difference worth distinction between-mhi and -mmi. (iii) The termination of present tense III person singular is -di or .de
available at the rate of 100% in the PS whereas in the KP it is at the rate of 73% and the other termination -i or -e at the rate of 27%. This shows

Page #172

The Date of Kasāyapāhuda
161
that the language of KP is highly influenced by the Mahārāstrī Prakrit
in this respect. (iv) The verbal root vbhū is employed as bhav-, hav- and ho- at the rate of
9, 61 and 30 percent in the PS while in the KP their rate is 5, 2.5, and 92.5 percent respectively. The Prakrit form ho- is rather a later development whereas bhav- and hav- belong to the earlier strata of
the MIA. dialects. (v) The number of absolutive participles in the KP is not so numerous as
to compare their variety for deciding the time of its composition but it is evident that the PS employs older affixes (Sanskrit and Sanskritlike) in greater number whereas the KP uses purely Prakrit affixes like -dūna and -tūnam. This trait proves that the date of KP is later than
that of the PS. (vi) The affix of the future tense is -ssa- in the PS whereas -hi- in the KP
and this goes against its being an earlier work than the PS.
Thus, the study of the linguistic data proves that the Kasāyapāhuda is a work composed later than the Pavayanapāhuda. In this context it is not convincing to accept the opinion of those scholars who assign it a date earlier than that to the Pravacanasāra of Kundakunda.
Annotations : PS = Pavayanasāra or Pavayanapāhuda, KP = Kasāyapāhuda
1. Date of Kundakundācārya A. According to A. N. Upadhye, "the age of Kundakunda should be limited in the light
of the circumstantial evidences noted above to the first two centuries of the Christian era." He further notes “I am inclined to believe, after this long survey of the available material, that Kundakunda's age lies at the beginning of the Christian era."
See his Pravacanasāra, "Introduction", Agasa 1964, p. 21. B. N. C. Shastri is of the same opinion as given by A. N. Upadhye : See his
प्राकृत भाषा और साहित्य का आलोचनात्मक इतिहास, वाराणसी १९६६, पृ० २२५. C. J. C. Jain is of the opinion that Ācārya Kundakunda seems to have flourished in
the third or fourth century A. D. Vide miçan mifere cat sfer, armurt 88€8, Ļo p90. D. H. L. Jain thinks it worthwhile to place Kundakunda in the beginning of the fifth
century A. D. or a little earlier than that : See his rite Fitofa er at योगदान, भोपाल १९६२, पृ०८३.

Page #173

162
K. R. Chandra
2. Date of Gunadharäcārya
A. J. C. Jain is of the opinion that Gunadharācārya belongs to the 2nd-3rd Century A. D. Vide प्राकृत साहित्य का., पृ० २९१.
B. H. L. Jain is not sure about the date of Gunadharäcārya. He is unable to say definitely whether Dharasenācārya connected with the Satkhandagama was earlier or posterior to Gunadharācārya. He assigns 2nd cent. A. D. to the Satkhandagama. Accordingly, the date of Gunadharācārya would fall either in the 1st or the 3rd cent. A. D. See his भारतीय संस्कृति में, पृ० ८२.
Jambu-jyoti
C. Shastri feels that the Kasayapähuda is a work of earlier date than the Satkhandagama as well as the works of Kundakunda and, therefore, according to him, Gunadharācārya should be assigned the 1st cent. A. D. Vide ger en fanfice का., पृ० २१३.
Thus we find that the opinions of the above-cited scholars differ on the date of Gunadharācārya. None is positive regarding his date which ranges between the 1st to the 3rd century A. D. and the date of Kundakunda also differs according to different scholars. His date fluctuates between the 1st and the 8th century A. D. One fact is clear that all these scholars place Gunadharäcärya anterior to Kundakundäcārya but the features of the language of PS and KP clearly demonstrate that the Pavayaṇasära is a composition datable earlier than the Kasayapāhuḍa. In conclusion, it is to be surmised that, if the editions of the texts studied herewith have been edited, linguistically, faithfully by their learned editors and there is no doubt about the authorship of these two works, then it may seem positive that Gunadharācārya is an author dated later than Kundakundäcārya.

(As for the date of Kundakundäcārya, the linguistic analysis can be more trustworthily applied in date-determination after isolating on the one hand the earlier äryäs/gāthās etc. (most of these arguably incorporated by the author himself) and on the other hand by removing the later interpolations. The available historical evidence as well as the textual studies combined with style and content do not warrant anteriority of Kundakundäcärya to either the Kasayapahuḍa or the Satkhaṇḍagama. Formally, and linguistically, too, there are several detectable/obvious modemisms, highly advanced ideas (totally unknown to the Jaina authors till the medieval times), as also the presence several uncharacteristic Prakrit words artificially created from Sanskrit. -Editors)
ᄆᄆᄆ

Page #174

Correlation of Jaina Inscriptions with
Sthavirāvalīs
U. P. Shah
While welcoming participants at the Seminar in Ahmedabad on the 'Aspects of Jaina Art and Architecture (Nov. 18, 1973), I had noted : "It is high time that all Jaina inscriptions from Mathurā are re-read and the old readings checked and revised wherever necessary. It is also necessary to have fresh verdict of the eminent epigraphers apropos the age of the script in each individual case, in the light of the advancement of our knowledge achieved during the past 50 to 70 years. The data from the Jaina sthavirävalīs has to be correlated and we have to see if we can fix, with the help of these sthavirāvalīs, the period of at least a few monks appearing in these inscriptions. For it is now becoming certain that there have been mistakes in the old readings.
"The reading “Vodve thupe" for instance was incorrect. Prof. Alsdorf had written to me that Lüders had revised it but could not publish the new reading in his life-time. Actually, the reading is pratimăvo dve thupe devanirmite". In another instance K. D. Bajpai showed that the old reading "Arhat Nandyāvarta" was wrong. The name, as he correctly read it, was Munisuvrata.....2"
“There are inscriptions, for example, which are dated around the year 30, the script in these inscriptions should be the same or very similar. There are inscriptions which are dated around 50, and around 90. The script of these inscriptions in each group must be identical. If this is not so, then the inscriptions are dated in different eras or with the sign for hundred omitted as earlier was suggested by Lohuizen-de-Leeuw."
With such fresh studies, we have to see whether the sthavirāvalis in the Paryusanā-kalpa and the Nandi-sūtra can further help us in identifying

Page #175

164
U. P. Shah
Jambū-jyoti
the pontiffs and monks whose names figure in the inscriptions and we must see what the traditional date for them is. Let us first take the instance of an inscription in the Son Bhandar Cave at Rājgir (Fig. 1). The inscription generally is interpreted as meaning : "Muni Vairadeva, the jewel among the ācāryas (and) of great lustre, caused to be made, for obtaining nirvāna, two auspicious caves which are worthy of ascetics and in which were placed the images of the arhats (i. e. tīrthankaras)."
There are two Son Bhandar caves at Rājgir, adjoining each other, the second seems to have been appropriated by the Vaishnavites in the Gupta period. The inscription under reference has been understood to suggest that Ācārya Vairadeva had both the caves excavated and images installed therein. A student of Jaina canonical literature and the pattāvalīs would immediately see that 'ācāryaratnam Muni Vairadevah of great lustre' can be none else than the great ācārya Arya Vajra, sthavira Arya Vaira of the Sthavirāvalīs. I had identified this pontiff as such in an earlier paper, and the terminal date of Vajra, according to the Jaina traditions, was shown to be around A. D. 57 According to Jaina tradition, Arya Vajra died in the 584th year after Mahāvīra's nirvāṇas. (According to Harmann Yacobi's corrected date for Mahāvīra's nirvāna, it should be A. D. 107).
The inscription, however, is assigned to the third or fourth century A. D. on paleographical grounds. But the cave's architecture, as shown by S. K. Sarasvati, essentially agrees with the earlier type of Barābar and Nāgārjuni caves and the learned authority had felt that the age of the Son Bhandar cave perhaps belonged to a date not far removed from them. The two Son Bhandar caves are more or less simple; the carved reliefs inside were added later as has been the case with several other early caves in India. The door of the Son Bhandar cave has sloping jambs with a taper of about six inches from the base to the top. The roof is cut into an arch, the arch has a rise of about 4ft. 10 inches and the height of the chamber is a little less than 12ft. It is clear that the caves are not later than the first century A. D. and that when the inscription was carved they were regarded as excavations originally done at the instance of Muni Vairadeva, and were in possession of those who belonged to the line of Muni Vairadeva.
S. P. Gupta has published a photograph of the still remaining traces of the Mauryan high polish of the wall of the rock-cut cave? This certainly suggests an early date for the Son Bhandar cave, not later than the first

Page #176

Correlation of Jaina Inscriptions with Sthavirāvalīs
century A. D. Doubts have been raised by R. N. Mishra and Jyoti Prasad Jain regarding the identification of ācārya Vaira with the Svetambara* Arya Vajra and they suggested that the caves belong to the Digambara sect. There is no ācārya Vaira known to any Digambara paṭṭāvalī and even amongst the Svetämbaras there is no other Vaira (=Skt. Vajra) who is such an illustrious great pontiff except Arya Vajra referred to above. Arya Vajra had a disciple called Vajrasena. Vajrasena, according to the medieval Śvetāmbara tradition ordinated some monk-disciples at Śūrpāraka (modern Sopără near Bombay)". Out of these four disciples started the four ancient kulas (orders of Jaina monks), namely, Nägendra, Candra, Vidyadhara and Nirvṛtti. Arya Vajra, the preceptor of Arya Vajrasena, is reported to have visited the Abhira country, Daksinapatha11 and Śrīmāla, modern Bhinmäla in Märväd)12
165
I had suggested that the inscription referring to Arya Vajra may be posthumous and A. Ghosh, the editor of the Jaina Art And Architecture remarked on this suggestion that "the identification suggested by him is therefore highly probable. About the date of the caves he drew attention to S. K. Sarasvati's views." Vairi (Vajrī) śākhā, known from some Jaina inscriptions from the Mathura Stupa, originated from Arya Vajra (Pkt. Vaira) according to the Sthavīravali of the Paryuṣaṇā-kalpa.
S. P. Gupta, in his Roots of Indian Art, pp. 198 ff., has discussed the architecture of the Son Bhandar cave and compared it with that of the Barabara, Sudämä, and Dasaratha caves. He concludes: "....look at the Son Bhandar cave from any angle, the picture that emerges remains the same it is one of the most important missing links between the early Mauryan caves and the pre-historic caves. The Barabara caves are the logical outcome of the Son Bhandara cave(s)." He further writes: "The fact that the Son Bhandar cave has generally been dated to the fourth century A. D. on palaeographic grounds appears to shake the very foundation of the pyramid of our arguments. The inscription on the outer wall of this cave's, in fourth century Brahmi characters, states that the cave was cut by the Jaina muni Vairadeva who installed some Jaina images in it. The reading
Recent researches on our side show that he was a pre-svetambara pontiff of the main stream northern Nirgrantha sect.-Editors

Page #177

Jambū-jyoti
of this inscription, however, has been debated as it admits an alternate meaning according to which the term used for 'cutting' may equally apply to the cutting or fashioning of the images. In that case, the cave was earlier than the date of the images and the inscription put together. Saraswati has argued in favour of the dichotomy that exists between the actual date of the excavation of the cave and its real use by the Jaina muni Vairadeva."16
166
U. P. Shah
I had corresponded with late A. Ghosh when he was editing the volumes of the Jaina Art and Architecture. He referred to my views and remarked that the identification suggested by me was highly probable. It seems he thought over the whole inscription again when he gave the reading of the inscription to S. P. Gupta with the normal prose order of the verse of the inscription and a new special prose order (published in The Roots of Indian Art, p. 202). According to this new prose order the translation reads: "Muni Vairadeva, the jewel among the äcäryas (and) of great lustre, caused to be made the two auspicious caves which are worthy of ascetics as those in which the images of Arhats (i. e., tīrthankaras) are installed." (This would mean that he did not have the caves excavated but only had images installed therein) 17.
This inscription has an additional importance for the history of the Jaina Church. It speaks of caves in which images are installed and which were fit for residence by Jaina monks practising austerities. This practice technically is caitya-vasa. Usually, the Jaina friars do not stay in Jaina shrines. Vajra-svāmī or Arya Vajra, a great knower of the Jaina canon and a jewel amongst the ācāryas, was an innovator and reformer. I had discussed this inscription with the late Muni Punyavijayji. He had informed me that, according to the Svetambara Jaina traditional beliefs, Vajra-svāmi (Arya Vajra) started certain practices which are characteristic of the caityavāsī monks. Later, there was degradation amongst the caityavāsī monks but, in the beginning, the caityavāsa or abbetial practice, attributed to Arya Vajra in the Jaina tradition and supported by this very important old inscription, was not degraded in terms of monastic rigour, staunchness, and discipline. Arya Vajra, in point of fact, was held in high esteem as much in his own times as was in later centuries.
I believe that this inscription had to be carved on the wall in c. fourth century A. D. when one of the two caves, the eastern one, fell into the hands

Page #178

Correlation of Jaina Inscriptions with Sthavirāvalis
167
of the followers of the Vaisnava sect. This was done by the Jainas of the school of Arya Vajra who still had retained possession of the western one of the two caves. The original Jina image or images of the time of Arya Vajra now do not exist.
The followers of the Digambara sect are reluctant to accept the above-noted interpretation for the fear of Svetāmbaras being acknowledged as owners of this and other sites at Rājgir. But this inscription about Arya Vajra (who is known to the early pattāvalīs inherited by the śvetāmbaras ) refers to the times when the Svetāmbara-Digambara schism did not originate nor had the difference about Śvetämbara and Digambara images in worship come.18
We may next turn to the other problematic epigraphs. Two inscriptions from Jaina stūpa at Kankālī Tilā, Mathurā, especially are intersting as they refer to a Jaina ācārya well-known to us from the pattāvalīs and other Jaina texts. The first dated in the year 52 (=A.D. 130)*, on the pedestal of a broken image, was published by Bühler in "Further Inscriptions From Mathura”, inscription no. 18, Epigraphia Indica, Vol. II (reprinted ed.), pp. 203-204. The second edited by Bühler in El., Vol. I., pp. 391, no. 21, as inscribed on the pedestal of a headless image of Sarasvati (fig. 2) from Kankāli Țilā, Mathura. This is dated in the year 54 (=A. D. 132).
Lüders discussed them again in the Indian Antiquary, Vol. XXXIII. pp.104f. Transcripts of Bühler's readings, placed side by side, are also reproduced there (fig.--). .
Bühler translated the first inscription as under :
"Success! The year fifty-two, 52, the first month of winter, the twentyfifth day, 25, - at that moment (was dedicated) the gift of the worker in metal Gottika, the śūra, the son of śramanaka, at the request of the preacher Ārya Divita, (who is) the convert of the gani Arya Manguhasti (and) pupil of the preacher Arya Ghastuhasti out of the Kotiya gana, the Vera (Vajra)
* The new date for the beginning of the Kusāna Era, as recently calculated by Harry Falk is A.D. 137. Hence the date of this inscription would be A. D. 189.-Editors.
+ The figure is also read at '94, - in which case, following Falk's determination, the date of the image would be A. D. 231. The style of the image perfectly accords with this date.-Editors.

Page #179

168
U. P. Shah
Jambū-jyoti
śākhã, the Sthānikiya kula, and the srigrha sambhoga. May it be for the welfare and happiness of all creatures !"
Ārya Manguhasti was the pupil of Arya Ghastuhasti and Bühler's insertion of (and) after Arya Manguhasti is not justified, since the general usage for mentioning the teacher or father of a person in inscriptions etc. is such. The insertion of the word 'and' would show that Ārya Divita was a pupil of Arya Ghastuhasti.
According to the correction by Lüders in J.R.A.S., 1911, pp. 1084, 1086, read, 'the Golika' instead of the member of the committee (Gottika) and Koliya' (Kautika) instead of 'Kottiya' (Kauttika.)
In the second inscription dated year 54, Lüders' correction, is : read *Koliya' instead of ‘Kottiya' (Kauttika). This second inscription, on the pedestal of the image of Sarasvati, may be translated as under :
"Success! The fourth month of winter, the 10 day, on that date (specified as above), the gift of the worker in metal(iron--loha), Gova, the son of Siha, at the request of vācaka Arya Deva (who is) convert of gani Arya Māghahasti, the pupil of vācaka Arya Hastahasti out of the Koliya (Kautika) gana, Sthānikiya kula, Vajrī Sākhā, Śrīgrha sambhoga.”
On comparing the two inscriptions, it is obvious that the Gani Arya Manguhastin, pupil of Vācaka Ghastuhasti (Ārya Hastahasti) of the inscription dated in year 52 is the same as Ganin Ārya Māghahasti, pupil of Vācaka Ārya Hastahasti of the inscription dated Samvat 54. Gana, kula, sākhā, and Sambhoga in both the cases being identical, there can be no doubt in regarding Arya Manguhasti as the same person as Arya Māghahasti. And Arya Manguhasti is the same as the Sthavira Arya Mangu of the Sthavirāvali of the Nandi-sūtra19. The Nandi-sūtra-sthavirāvalī gives the paramparā or succession list of the heads of the Vācaka-vamsa, who succeeded one after the other from Ganadhara Sudharmā down to Dusagani (Dusya gani). In verse 26 of this Sthavirāvali, we are told that Sthavira Svāti of Hārīta gotra was succeeded by Arya Śyāma of Hārīta gotra. The latter is followed by Arya Sandilla (Śandilya) of Kausika gotra, succeeded by Arya Jitadhara and Arya Samudra whose word was regarded as authority in islands and beyond the three oceans (vss. 26, 27). As I have elsewhere shown, Arya Śyāma is Ārya Kālaka of the Kālakācārya-kathās

Page #180

Correlation of Jaina Inscriptions with Sthavirāvalis
169
and Arya Samudra is his grandpupil Arya Sāgara śramana of the same Kālaka-kathās20. Next, in vs. 28, Ārya Mangu is paid respects in the following words :
Bhanagam karagam jharagam pabhavagam nāņa-damsanagunānam vandāmi Ajja-Mangum suyasāgarapāragam dhiram ||28||
The above-cited gāthā shows how great a sthavira the Arya Mangu was. He was a pontiff of great virtues of jñāna and darśana, a great personality who could impress upon others (and who had superhuman powers, the pabhāvaga=prabhāvaka one who had crossed the ocean of canonical learning (śrutasāgara-pāraga]).
These inscriptions show that Arya Mangu belonged to Vera or Vaira, i.e. Vajra or Vajrī sākhā. Origin of this sākhā, according to the Sthavirāvali of the Paryusanā-kalpa (according to its vistrta-vācanā), is as under :
"From the two sthaviras of the Vyāghrāpatya line, Susthita (alias Kotika) and Supratibuddha (alias Kākandaka) branched out the gana named Kotika which had four sākhās and four kulas. What were the sākhās? They were : First, Uccanāgarī, and then Vidyādharī, Vajrī, Madhyamikā-such were the four sākhās of the gana named Kotika.” Arya Mangu or Arya Māghahasti belonged to this Vajri sākhā. The two inscriptions discussed in the foregoing refer to this Vajri or Verā or Vairā sākhā derived from Arya Vajra who was a pupil of sthavira Arya Sīhagiri (Simhagiri), jātismara of the Kausika gotra, as the Sthaviravalī tells us in sū.11. This sthavira Ārya Sīhagiri and sthavira Arya Sānti-sainika (= śāntisena ?) were the two disciples of Sthavira Āryadatta who was a disciple of sthavira Arya Indradatta who himself was a disciple of sthavira Arya Supratibuddha alias Kākandaka. Both Susthita (alias Kauţika) and Supratibuddha (alias Kākandika) were disciples of Ārya Suhasti. We know from other sources that Sthavira Arya Suhasti was a contemporary of the Mauryan ruler Samprati. Suhasti is credited to have brought Samprati to the Nirgrantha fold.
In an inscription published by K. D. Bajpai21 and again discussed by M.A. Dhaky22 we find reference to Kautika-gana, śāntinika-kula, an the Vajrī sākhá in the inscription which is dated in the year 17 of Kaniska, which proves that both Ārya Sāntinika, the contemporary of Arya Sīhagiri and Arya Vajra, the pupil of Sīhagiri lived before the year 17 of Kaniska, since Vajrī sākhă is said to have originated from Arya Vajra. Since Manguhasti

Page #181

170
U. P. Shah
Jambu-jyoti
or Māghahasti of inscriptions dated in the years 52 and 54 belonged to Vajrī sākhā, it would show that Manguhasti or Māghahasti flourished later than Arya Vajra3.
Now, if this Māghahasti is the same as Ārya Mangu, then Ārya Mangu is later than Arya Vajra. But the Tapāgaccha-pattavali, says saptasastyadhikacatuhsatavarse 467 Arya Manguh. But the same Tapāgaccha Pattavali (composed in V. S. 1696 = A. D. 1639-40) says the following about Vayarasāmi (Vajrasvāmi) :
तेरसमो वयरसामि गुरू। व्याख्या - तेरसमो त्ति श्रीसीहगिरिपट्टे त्रयोदशः श्रीवज्रस्वामी र्या बाल्यादपि जातिस्मृतिभाक्, नभोगमनविद्यया संघरक्षाकृत्, दक्षिणस्यां बौद्धराज्ये जिनेन्द्रपूजानिमित्तं पुष्पाद्यानयनेन प्रवचनप्रभावनाकृत्, देवाभिवंदितो दशपूर्वविदामपश्चिमो वज्रशाखोत्पत्तिमूलम् । तथा स भगवान् षण्णवत्यधिकचतुःशत ४९६ वर्षान्ते जातः सन् अष्टौ ८ वर्षाणि गृहे, चतुश्चत्वारिंशत् ४४ वर्षाणि व्रते षट्त्रिंशत् ३६ वर्षाणि युगप्र०, सर्वायुरष्टाशीति वर्षाणि परिपाल्य श्री वीरात् चतुरशीत्यधिकपंचशत ५८४ वर्षान्ते स्वर्गभाक् । श्री वज्रस्वामिनो दशपूर्व-चतुर्थसंहनसंस्थानानां व्युच्छेदः ।
चतुष्कुलसमुत्पत्तिपितामहमहं विभुम् । दशपूर्वविधि (दं) वन्दे वज्रस्वामिमुनीश्वरम् ।।
-पट्टावली-समुच्चय, part 1, p. 47 But we must remember that, just as Kautika or Kotika gana had a Veri or Vairī or Vajrī śākhā, Vārana gana had a Hattikīya kula (corrected by Lüders as Ārya Halakīya kula) with Vajranāgarī sākhā, mentioned in a Jaina Inscription from Mathurā dated Samvat 4, vide Lüders' Inscr. no. 16. Thus Veri or Vairi and Vajranāgarī are two different sākhās. (See also inscription on 1.234, Lucknow Museum.)
___Lüders' Ins. no. 18, dated in the Samvat 5 of Devaputra Kaniska refers to Kautika gana, Brahmadāsika kula, and Uchenāgarī sākhā. These are also referred to in Luders' Inscriptions nos. 19 and 20 of Samvat 5. The Uccaināgarī sākhā emanated from Ārya sāntiseniä according to the vistyta vācană of the Paryusaņākalpa Sthavirāvali. This sāntinika was contemporary, senior confrère of Sīhagiri (Simhagiri) the teacher of Arya Vajra. It is interesting to note that, in the inscription discussed by Bajpai and Dhaky, earlier referred, a mendicant of the śāntinika kula became a member of Vajrī sākhā and not of the Uccenāgarī sākhã said to have been started under Arya śāntinika.

Page #182

Correlation of Jaina Inscriptions with Sthavirāvalīs
On the analogy of the name Uccenāgari (of the city Uccenagara-modern Bulandas'ahara)+ shall we suppose that there was a place called Vajranagara from which was derived the Vajranāgarī śākhā ?
Ārya Mangu was a famous and revered pontiff having considerable/ proficiency in śruta or the Jaina Canon and was a prabhāvaka ācārya. The Himavanta Sthaviravali (supposed to be spurious) says that Arya Mangu was a pupil of Ārya Samudra. In this context we must note the order of gāthās of the Nandisūtra Sthavirāvalī :
हारियगुत्तं साइं च, वंदिमो हारियं च सामज्जं । वन्दे कोसियगोत्तं संडिल्लं अज्जजीयधरं ॥ २६ ॥
तिसमुद्दखायकित्ति दीवसमुद्देसु गहियपेयालं । वन्दे अज्जसमुद्दं अक्खुभियसमुद्दगंभीरं ||२७|| भणगं करगं झरगं पभावगं णाणदंसणगुणाणं । वंदामि अज्जमंगुं सुयसागरपारगं धीरं ॥ २८ ॥
Next come two verses which are not commented upon by the author of the Nandi curni nor by Haribhadra sūri in his commentary and which are not found in all manuscripts of the Nandisūtra. Editors of the Pattāvali-Samuccaya, part 1, give them as extra verses found in some mss. only and do not give them continuous numbers. Even in the critical edition of the Nandi-sutra published by the Mahavira Jaina Vidyalaya these were not accepted as verses of the original text and are treated as doubtful. They are :

वंदामि अज्जधम्मं, वंदे तत्तो अ भद्दगुत्तं च । तत्तो अ अज्जवयरं, तवनियमगुणेहिं वयरसमं ॥
वंदामि अज्जरक्खि-खमणे रक्खिअचरित्त सव्वस्से । करंगभूओ, अणुओगो रक्खिओ जेहिं ||
- पट्टावली समुच्चय, I. p. 13.
Then we have :
नाणम्मि दंसणम्मिय तवविणए णिच्चकालमुज्जुत्तं । अज्जानंदिलखमणं, शिरसा वंदे पसन्नमणं ॥ २९ ॥
—दिसुत्त, (Bombay ed p. 6)
+ Ucchera in M.P. according to Sagarmal Jain.-Editors.
171

Page #183

Jambū-jyoti
The Tapagaccha-Paṭṭāvalī says that Ārya Samudra and Arya Mangu belonged to another lineage and thus it does not help us much in deciding whether Arya Mangu was later than Arya Vajra or was his Junior contemporary. When the Mathura inscriptions speak of Arya Manguhasti or Maghahasti as belonging to Vairi śākhā, we have to presume that he was either later than Arya Vajra or was his junior contemporary or that the Vairi śākhā to which Maghahsti belonged had started before Arya Vajra if the dates of Arya Mangu (467 years after Mahāvīra) and of Arya Vajra (years 496 to 584 after Mahāvīra) given by the Tapagaccha Paṭṭāvali in the 17th century are to be believed. It is difficult, however, to rely on the dates it gives composed as it was in as late a period as the 17th century. But it is certain that, as shown by the Nandi-sthavirāvalī, Ārya Mangu succeeded Ārya Samudra as 'Vācaka-mukhya', the Nandi-sthavirāvalī concerns itself with the Vācakas. Ārya Mangu's active association with Mathura is supported by several texts. Hence it is reasonable to regard Arya Mangu of literary works and Arya Manguhasti or Maghahasti of the two Mathurā inscriptions referred to above as identical24.
172
U. P. Shah
In the Prakrit Proper Names (Ed. Pt. Dalsukh Malvania), part II, p. 537, we have the following entry about Mangu :- A learned preceptor (Nan. V. 29). Owing to his greed for food he became a Jakkha after his death at Mathurā (Nis. Bh. 3200. Nis. Cũ. II. pp. 125-26; III. p. 142. Av. Cũ. II. p. 80. NanM. p. 50. GacV. p. 31.). He had a different opinion regarding dravyācārya (Av. Cū. I. p. 585. Brhm. p. 144. Vyabh. 6. 239 ff.)25. Samudda was his preceptor and Nandila26 his disciple (Nan. 28, 29).
In the "Pratikramana adhyayana" of the Avasyaka cūrņi, while referring to the pratikramana of three types of gaurava-virādhanā, the story is given of Arya Mangu, a Jaina monk who was reborn as a Yakṣa in Mathurā on account of egoism: xxx तिसुवि उदाहरणं महुराए अज्जमंगू आयरिओ तिव्वगारवाभिभूतो अपडिक्कतो कालं कातुं महुराए णिद्धवणजक्खो उववण्णो, ताहे जक्खायतणस्स अदूरेण साहुणो बोबेंताणं जक्खपडिमं अणुपविसितुं जीहं निल्लालेति, एवं अण्णदावि कते साधूर्हि पुच्छितो भणति - अहं सो पावकम्मो अज्जमंगू जीहादोसेण एत्थ उववण्णो तं मा तुब्भे गारवपहिबद्धा विद्धंधसा होहिह, एतेहिंगारवेहिं जो मे Gagesfa Av. Cù. I. p. 80.
The Niśitha cürni calls him a bahuśruta, well-versed in canon, and having a large group of disciples : लोभे इमं उदाहरणं - "लुद्धणंदी” अहवा "अज्जमंगू”

मधुरा मंगू आगम बहुसुय वेरग्ग सड्ढपूया-य । सातादि - लोभ - णितिए, मरणे जीहाइ णिद्धमणे ॥३२०० ||

Page #184

Correlation of Jaina Inscriptions with Sthavirāvalis
173
___ अज्जमंगू आयरिया बहुस्सुया अज्झागमा बहुसिस्सपरिवारा उज्जयविहारिणो ते विहरंता महुरं णगरी गता। ते “वेरग्गिय"त्ति काउं सड्ढेहिं वत्थातिएहिं पूइता, खीर-दधि-घय-गुलातिएहिं दिणे दिणे पज्जतिएण पतिलाभयंति । सो आयरियो लोभेण सातासोक्खपडिबद्धो ण विहरति । णितिग्रो जातो । सेसा साधू विहरिता । सो वि अणालोइय पडिक्कतो विहारियसामण्णो वंतरो णिद्धमणा जक्खो जातो | xxxx साहूहिं पुच्छितो भणाति-सोहं अज्जमंगू इड्डिरसपमादगरुओ मरिऊण णिद्धमणे जक्खो जातो, तं मा कोइ तुब्भे एवं लोभदोसं करेज्ज ॥ ३२००
-Nisītha cürņi (Agra, 1958), Vol-II Sū.43, 44764-177.3200, pp. 152-153. Also see ibid., p. 125.
The Digambara author Svāmī Virasena (A. D. 817), in his commentary, the Dhavalā on the Satkhandāgama of Puspadanta and Bhūtabali, and ācārya Jinasena (A. D. 837) who finished his guru Vīrasena's incomplete commentary, the Jayadhavalā, on the ancient Kasaya-pāhuda-sutta and Yati-Vrsabha's cūrni on the Kasāya-Pāhuda, repeatedly cite Mahāvācaka Ārya Nāgahasti kşamāśramana, Mahāvācaka Ārya Manksu kşamāśramana, and Mahāvācaka Ārya Nandi ksamāśramana27. Prof. Hiralal Jain, the editor of the Satkhandagama, identifies Mahāvācaka Nāgahasti and Mahāvācaka Manksu with Arya Nägahasti and Arya Mangu of the Sthavirāvali of the Vācakas of the Svetämbara tradition given in the Nandi sūtra of Deva vācaka (c. A. D. 450) 28.
We have shown above that, according to the archaeological evidence of the two inscriptions from Mathurā, Ārya Māghahasti (identified with Arya Mangu as earlier shown) is later than Arya Vajra since Mangu belonged to Vajrī-śākhā. This goes against the dates given in the Commentary on the Tapāgaccha-pattāvali. Under the circumstances, we have to reject the late literary evidence of the Commentry on the Tapāgaccha pattāvali. But, if we can fix up the date of Arya Mangu, we can fix up the age of the above-noted inscriptions. At present these inscriptions are regarded as dated in 52 and 54 = A. D. 130 and 132 This would show that the era of A. D. 78 is used in these inscriptions.
Dhaky takes the date of Mahāvīra's nirvāna as 477 B. C. following Jacobi. Thus Arya Vajra's date would be A. D. 177 and Arya Mangu would be a junior contemporary of Arya Vajra or letter a little later than Arya Vajra. Dhaky, following A. K. Narain, takes the initial year of the Kusana era as A. D. 105 and A. D. 78 as the initial year of the Saka era. If the dates in the two inscriptions discussed here are in the Kusāna era, then they are

Page #185

174
U. P. Shah
dated A. D. 155 and A. D. 157 according to Dhaky's calculation of the Kusana era.*
Jambū-jyoti
We have to remember that there are two types of inscriptions from Mathura. One type which refers to the year of Kanişka or Huviska. But those which do not refer to the Samvatsara (Era) of any king-must we regard them as dated in the Kuṣāṇa era ?
The analysis done above is an idle exercise to arrive at a solution of the problem of the era or eras used in the Jaina Inscriptions from Mathura. If identification of the acaryas named in these inscriptions and finding out of their age from the sthaviravalis could help us, it would be a great forward step. For the present we can say that Arya Mangu cannot be earlier than Arya Vajra. Vajra's date would be either between B. C. 57 and A. D. 57 (acc. to traditional date of Vira. nirväna) or B. C. 7 to A. D. 177 acc. of Jacobi's calculations29.
Annotations:
1. This was a case of splitting the words, written in a line in inscriptions and manuscripts, in a correct way. The inscription referred to two (dve) images (pratimavo) installed in the devanirmita stúpa. Similarly, in the Vasantagadh Jaina bronze inscription of Samvat 744 (A. D. 688), it is said that the silpin Śivanāga cast two images of the Jinas. The other (identical) image is not inscribed.
2. See my observation in Aspects of Jaina Art and Architecture, Eds. U. P. Shah and M. A. Dhaky, Ahmedabad 1975, p. xii. In the inscription, the name ingraved is actually 'Munisucrata', a scribal error for 'Munisuvrata".
3. However, cf. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report, 1905-1906, p. 98, 166.
4. "Muni Vairadeva of Son Bhandar cave inscription, "JBRS., December 1953, pp.410.
-412.

5. For more information about Vaira, see, M. J. Mehta, and K. R. Chandra, Prakrit Proper Names, vol.II., pp. 660-661, and the "Parisiṣṭaparva" of Hemacandra's Triṣastiśaläkāpuruşacarita. According to the Vicaraśreni of Merutungācārya (Ancalagacchiya: late 14th cent. A. D.) and the Duḥṣamākāla-samaṇasarghatthava, of Dharmaghoşa súri (c. 3rd quarter of the 13th cent. A. D.), the date of Arya Vajra is Now, of course, that date has to be reconsidered.-Editors

Page #186

Correlation of Jaina Inscriptions with Sthavirāvalīs
175
calculated as Virät 548-584, i.e., A. D., 21-57; vide Muni Nathmalji, “Jaina Darśana Manana aur Mīmāṁsä, (Hindi), App.I.p.63. This of course would be the date of Ārya Vajra as ācārya or as head of the group of monks. Also cf. M. D. Desai, Jaina Sahitya no Samksipta Itihāsa (Gujarätī), Bombay
1933, pp. 31, 37, 124, 6. Also see, A. Ghosh (Ed.), Jaina Art and Architecture, vol. II. Delhi 1974, pp. 88-89,
118-119 and plates 51, 52. 7. Gupta, S. P., The Roots of Indian Art, Delhi 1980, p. 201, pe.99, b.c. 8. A. Ghosh (Ed.), JAA. Vol. I., pp. 119-120 and infra. 9. See the Brhat-Kalpa-Bhāsya, pp. 917-921. Also cf. the Pattāvali-samuccaya,
Ed. Darśanavijaya, “Guruparvakrama" of Gunaratnasūri, p. 26, and Śri Tapägaccha
Pattāvali, pp. 47-48, and the Kalpa-sutra sthaviravali, p. 8. 10. Avaśyaka-cūrni, pp.396-397. 11. Ibid., p. 404. 12. Avaśyaka-tīkā, p. 390. 13. A. Ghosh, JAA. vol. I., p. 89, note 7. 14. Gupta, The Roots., pp. 199-200. 15. There are many more inscriptions in the cave, including one or two in Shell
characters. To my knowledge, none of these other inscriptions so far have been
published. 16. Gupta, pp. 201-202. S. K. Saraswati, in The Age of Imperial Unity, pp. 502 f. 17. The inscription is read as under by A. Ghosh :
निर्वाणलाभाय तपस्वियोग्ये शुभे गुहेऽर्हन्प्रतिमाप्रतिष्ठे।
आचार्यरत्नं मुनिवरदेवो
विमुक्तयेऽकारयत् ऊढतेजाः॥ The Normal prose order is : आचार्यरत्न ऊढतेजा मुनिवरदेवो निर्वाणलाभाय विमुक्तये(च) तपस्वियोग्ये शुभे ऽहत्प्रतिमाप्रतिष्ठे गुहेऽकारयत्। The new suggested prose order is : आचार्यरत्न ऊढतेजा मुनिवैरदेवो निर्वाणलाभाय विमुक्तये(च) शुभे गुहेऽर्हत्प्रतिमाप्रतिष्ठेऽऽकारयत् । - The Roots of Indian Art, p. 202. Lüders' List of Brähmi Inscriptions, no. 959; Cunnigham, Arch. Surv. Rep. Vol. I. p. 25; Bloch, A. S. 9.,A. R. for 1905-06, p. 98, note 1.

Page #187

176
U. P. Shah
Jambū-jyoti
18. For some canonical references to Arya Vajra, see Prakrit Proper Names, Vol.II.,
pp. 660-661. 19. The Sthavirāvalī is given in sūtra 6 of the critically edited Nandi-sūtra, pp. 68, vss
23-24, Mahāvīra Jaina Vidyalaya, Bombay 1968, Edsn. Muni Punyavijaya,
Pt. Malavaniya, and Pt. A. M. Bhojaka. 20. "Suvarnabhumi meṁ Kālakācārya" (Hindi) published in Śrī Vijaya Vallabha-sūri
Smāraka Grantha, Bombay 1956. Also see, U. P. Shah, "Kālakācārya-A Revolutionary Jaina Monk," Bharati (Journal, B.H.U.) forthcoming issue as R.C. Majumdar Commemoration Volume; and “Jaina Anuśrutis About Kālaka" Journal
of Indian Museums, 1959. 21. K. D., Bajpai, “Three New Kushana Inscriptions from Mathurā,"Jaina Antiquary,
Vol.XVI. no.1. pp. 13-16. 22. M. A., Dhaky, “A Propos of the śāntinika Kula of Kautika Gana," Bhārati, New
Series no.2, (Vārānasi) 984, pp. 149-151. 23. The other alternative is that the Vairišākhā originated earlier than Arya Vajra.
For Ārya Vajra, see, Āgamic Index of Prakrit Proper Names, Ed. Dalsukh Malvania,
Ahmedabad 1972, part-II. pp. 660-661. 24. Incidentally, I would want to point out that 'hasti' seems to have been a suffix
added to different personal/pontiffical names, e.g. Nāga-hasti, Su-hasti, and others. Whether all monks with hasti ending names belong to one line or not is to be investigated. But the name Ghastuhasti as the teacher of Arya Manguhasti suggets that monks with hasti-ending names belong to the same line. Ghastuhasti is an old Prākrta form for Hastahasti and Ghastu may be a scribal error for Ghasta. Now, we have in the Paryusanā-kalpa sthavirāvali a few verses in the end after the prose Sthavirāvali ending with Phalgumitra, the disciple of Arya Pusyamitra; also the disciple of Ārya Ratha who was a disciple of Ārya Vajrasena, in turn the disciple of Arya Vajra. Amongst these nine verses, we have two names: Sthavira Hasta as well as Sthavira Ārya Hasti. But we do not know for certain that the monks mentioned in these nine verses are in order of teacher and the taught or are just names of some chiefs of the line of Phalgumitra. The verses are as under :
वंदामि फग्गमित्तं च गोयमंधणगिरिंच वासिदै । कोच्छं सिवभूइं पिय, कोसिय दोज्जंतकण्हे य ।।१।।
तं वंदिऊण सिरसा, चित्तं वदामि कास्सवं गोत्तं । नक्खं कासवगोत्तं, रक्खं पिय कासवं वंदे ॥२॥

Page #188

Correlation of Jaina Inscriptions with Sthavirāvalīs
177
वंदामि अज्जनागं च गोयमं च जेहिलं च वासिटुं। विण्हुं माढरगोत्तं, कालगमवि गोयमं वंदे ॥३॥ गोयमगोत्तकुमारं, सप्पलयं तह य भद्दयं वंदे। थेरं च अज्जवई, गोयमगत्तं नमसामि॥४॥ तं वंदिऊण सिरसा थिरचित्तचरित्तनाणसंपन्न । थेरं च संघवालिय कासवगोत्तं पणिवयामि ।।५।। वंदामि अज्जहत्थि च कासवं वंतिसागरं धीरं । गिलाण पढममासे, कालगयं चेव सुद्धस्स ॥६॥ वंदामि अज्जधम्मं च सव्वयं सीललद्धिसंपन्न । जस्स निक्खमणे देवो छत्तं वरमुत्तमं वहइ ॥७॥ हत्थं कासवगोत्तं धम्मं सिवसाहगं पडिवयामि । सीहं कासवगोत्तं धम्म पिय कासवं वंदे ।।८।। सुत्तत्थ रयणभरिए, खमदमभद्दवगणेहिं संपन्ने।
देवड्डिखमासमणे कासवगोत्ते पणिवयामि ॥९॥* It is of course obvious that these găthās are added sometime after the second Valabhi council that met under the leadership of Devarddhi gani kşamāśramana, Possibly, the gathās refer in brief to the lineage to which belonged Devarddhi gani
ksamaśramana. 25. अहवादव्वायरिओ तिविहो-एगभविओबद्धाउओ अभिमुहणामगोत्तो, xxणिबद्धाउओ उजेण आउयं बद्धं,
अभिमुहणामगोत्तो जेण पदेसा उच्छूढा, अहया मूलगुणणिव्वत्तित्तो उत्तरगुणनिव्वत्तिओ य, सरीरं मूलगुणो, चित्तकम्मादि उत्तरगुणो, अहवा जाणओ भविओ वतिरित्तो, मंगवायगाणं समुहवायगाणं नागहत्थिवायगाणं
जथासंखं आदेसो---- AvCu.I.p. 585. 26. The Nandisutra edited by Muni Punyavijaya reads Ajjānandila and not Ajja Nandila
in the Nandi sthaviravali. The correct name probably was Arya Anandila, since the editors of the critical edition by Muni Punyavijaya, Dalshukh Malvania, and Amritlala Bhojak, give only one v.1., 3touttifest and do not read Ajja Nandila from any ms. referred to by them. One does not know when the name Ārya Nandila came in currency. (could the Arya Nandi of the Dhavala-tīkā be Ārya Nandila or
Arya Anandita? -Editors) 27. See Hiralal Jain, the Satkhandāgama Vol. I, “Intro.," pp. 49-50, the Dhavala,
अ०१४४०; theJayadhavalā, अ०१२३९; theDhavala, अ० १४२९, १४५८; theJayadhavala, अ० ९७३. Also Hindi "Intro.," to Satkhandāgama, Vol.II.p. 36.
*
We think that this hagiological list follows the sequential order. -Editors.

Page #189

178
U. P. Shah
Virasenasvami, in his margalācarana to the Jayadhavala tika, writes:
जेहि कसाय- पाहुडमणेयणयमुज्जलं अनंतत्थं । गाहाहिं विवरियं तं गुणहरभडारयं वंदे ॥६॥
गुणहरवयण विणिग्गय गाहाणत्थोवहारिओ सव्वो । जेणज्जमंखुणा सोसणागहत्थी वरंदेऊ ॥७॥ जो अज्जमंगुसीसो अंतेवासी विणागहत्थिस्स सो वित्तिसुत्तकत्ता जड़वसहो मे वरं देऊ ॥८॥ - कसायप्राहुड, भा० १, p. 4

Jambu-jyoti
Gunadhara composed the Kasayaprabhṛta in gāthās. Arya Mankhu fully grasped the meaning of the gatha's uttered by Gunadhara. Yativṛṣabha was the author of the Vrttisütra (curnisūtra). Yativrsabha, according to Virasena, was the disciple of Arya Mangu and also disciple (antevāsi) of Nagahasti.
28. See an. 26 where Av. Cür. p. 585 refers to Arya Mangu, Ārya Samudra, and Arya Nāgahasti as Vācaka. It is, then, certain that Arya Mangu of the Svetambara texts is identical wish Arya Manksu of the Dhavala and the Jayadhavala, etc. 29. According to the avacuri on दुःषमाकाल श्री श्रमणसंघस्तोत्र of धर्मघोष, वज्रस्वामी was dcárya (head) for 36 years including wh. 584 years A. M. elapsed so बज्र 548 to 584 A. M. 21 to 57 A. D. or 71 to 127 A. D. (Jacobi).
OOO

=

Page #190

Notes on Some Words in Oherlies 'Avasyaka-Studien Glassar'
anguṭṭhi -
The derivation from sk. a-v gunth- involves phonological difficulties. Des'. 1-6 and Sam Kaha 284.2 have this form, considering the variants and the Pali form one suspects scribal corruption; Ogumtthi- only may be genuine.
āla
H. C. Bhayani
alo dinno 'accused falsely' ('Kathakoṣaprakaraṇa', p. 31, 1.-4.)
Mod. Guj. al 'false charge'.
al devu 'to accuse falsely'.
uvvar 'to be saved, to remain'.
The vowel which is left behind after the loss of intervocalic non-aspirate stops is called udvṛtta svaraudvṛttā saved in the Prabandhakośa, p. 50,
1. 26.
H. ubarnā, Guj. ūgarvu.

=
Ūsemṭiya -
Ūsemṭiyaim is equated with paribhūyāim 'insulted, disdained'. This meaning seems to have been originally a secondary meaning. DN. 8. 29 has recorded simḍha in the sense of nāsikā-nāda 'whistling through nose, snorting !' I have shown that the variant reading Simta should have been preferred instead of Simḍha in view of the forms we find in several NIA languages. DK. also has recorded simți which is interpreted 'sound of sneezing' from the Avaśyaka-cūrṇi.*
★ Studies in Deśya Prakrit, p. 98. Cf. siti (Guj.) meaning whistle. -Editors

Page #191

180
H. C. Bhayani
Accordingly, usemiția- primarily must have meant 'loud snorting made as a gesture of disdain, insult or disapproval', u- deriving from sk. ud -. Kattaliya
-
Guj. kātlī (written kātali) - a piece, consisting of the portion between the two joints in the stalk of sugar-cane, juvār, bājrā etc.
khaḍa-pūlaya- Guj. khad no pūlo - 'a bundle of grass'.
(C DIAL 3769; 8349)
Jambū-jyoti
Gaccha :
Original meaning 'a tree'. Like a tree and its branches (śākhā), the Jaina gacchas have their śäkhās (C DIAL. 3949)
*gakṣa.
gaḍdi: Sk. gantrī is a sanskritization like vapta for bappa.
gālaṇaga Guj. galnu (written galanu) 'cloth filter to filter water, strainer'. Guj. galvu (written gālavu) 'to filter'. (C DIAL. 4143; 4074)
jhāḍa: Previously Pk. jhäda 'bush, thicket' has been connected with some Munda words. (Turner, 5362). It is more probably of Indo-Aryan origin. From Sk. jaṭā - 'root' (C DIAL - 5086), we can have a derivative jāța - 'a mass of twisted roots', which changed to Pk. jhada (for the change word-initial Sk. j-> jh- is common in several NIA languages.)
-
thiggaliya - Guj. thīg-du 'a patch especially put on cloth to mend rent.' (C DIAL - 6096)
dullalia: In GK 892 and duvviaddha in GK 56, both rather mean 'highly fond of, 'addict of, addicted to'. In that changed meaning, both words commonly occur in Prakrit literature.

dhikkā: Guj. ḍhiko; dhiko 'hard blow with the fist' - (with initial retroflex, not dental.)
dhijjāiya Besides the literal sense, the artificial etymological connection with Sk. dvijatika- is also implied.
pheṭṭā: 'Stroke'. We previously have noted its occurrence from Agastyasimha's curni on the Dasakāliya-sutta (Ed. Muni Punyavijaya, Prakrit Text Society Series, no. 17) in the following passage (p. 105, 1. 28); elao simgena pheṭṭãe vā āhanejjā ‘or a ram may strike with his horns or deal

Page #192

Notes on Some Words in Oherlies Āvaśyaka-Studies Glossary
181
a head-stroke'. Compare Guj.; phet (t.) phét mārvī 'to slap. 'a slap (on the face or back)'; with mārvā 'to strike'. (See the Anusandhan, 1, p. 13).
billagira - 'bilva-juice'. Des'. 6.148 - giri = bijakośa - 'seed-vessel Nis'. Cū. 2, p. 185 gira=bījakośa, (Deśikośa). Svayambhu's Paümacariü, Vol. II,
Word-Index गिरोमय Old gloss : on it अजयोदस्य मध्यबीजम्. Possibly गिरि+ओम (=sk. 3794) 'tiny' Guj. gar 'pulp of a fruit'.
In his translation of Hemacandra's Desīnāmamālā (1974), B. Doshi has equated Deśya giri with Guj.gar. So Billa-gira = 'pulp of the bilva fruit'.
Vajjhā : From Sk. vadhyā - ‘killing' (PSM., C DIAL 11255) The meaning of govajjhā - ‘killing of a cow' in its later history has changed somewhat. Guj. gojhārī ('guilty of murder or killing; a place (e.g. a well, river, house, etc.) associated with incidents of murder or suicide and hence inauspicious'.) < Pk. *gojjārayam gojjhārayam, SK.* govadhyākārakam.
The meaning of govadha - / gohatyā - 'killing of cow', considered a great sin, came to be generalized at a later stage. Compare the semantic change in goyuga - 'a pair of animals', gomaya - 'dung'. With gavajjhā compare thā-vajjasha in the Kathākośaprakarana, p. 32. 1.1. (C DIAL 11255).
Vāulia : Vāulia-parisasana - (GK 628).
Com. vāuliā-sabdaḥ svalpa-khātikayām desī; svalpa-gartā-; vāuliā is not attested elsewhere. It seems to be a corrupt reading. The actual word must have been vāhalia. DN. 7. 39 records vāhalī in the sense of laghu-jalapravāha- 'a small stream.' vahaliyā occurs thrice in the Vajjālagga (105, 259, 261) in the sense of ksudra-nadī. Old Guj. vāhalā, Mod. Guj. vahelo, Marathi vāhali all mean 'a streamlet.' It is easily explained as a derivative from vāha 'stream' with the diminutive suffix -la-(fem. -liyā-). (CDIAL 11607) (The other term allied/cognate in meaning, namely võkalo needs separate investigation. - Editors.)
Saudi : Saudi means 'the covering sheet, blanket etc. spread over the body from head to foot and pressed under the sides, in the state of lying down.' It has come down to Modern Gujarati as 'sod'. The phrase sod tānine sūvt means 'to lie down in the above manner'; sod-mă levū 'to take somebody (e.g. a baby) under such a cover (close to one's chest or body). During winter there is the practice of first spreading the covering sheet full

Page #193

182
H. C. Bhayani
Jambū-jyoti
length over the bed-sheet and then getting under the former. In the account of Cellanā (No. 12, p. 364), while sleeping, her arm was unconsciously so stretched that it came out of the head to foot covering blanket ('saudi'). Feeling numbness she pulled it inside but felt shivering all over her body.
suraha : -bha- is found (mostly) as a suffix in several animal names in Sanskrit : ibha, kacchabha, karabha-, kalabha-, gardabha-, tittibha-, dundubha, rāsabha-, vrsabha-, śarabha-, śalabha-, sairibha-. Correspondingly Pk. forms have ha- karaha-, kalaha-, gaddaha-; dunduha-, rasaka, risaha-, saraha-, salaha-, seriha-. On this analogy sunaha- for sunaa-. It is unnecessary to assume a hypothetical sunakha-. (As against CDIAL 12528.)
Reference Works :
Anusandhan, A Periodical, Ahmedabad. Avasyaka-studien : Glossar ansgewählter Wörter, Thomas Oberlies, stuttgart
1993. Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages, R. L. Turner, London
(CDIAL) 1965. Daskāliya-sutta with Agastyasimha's Cūrni, Ed. Punyavijaya Muni. Dešināmamālā of Hemacandra, R. Pischel and Ramanujaswami. (DN.), 1965. Deśī sabdakośa, Ed. Muni Dalaharāja, Ladnu 1988. Gāhākosa of Sātavāhana-Hāla (=Saptaśatakaṁ des Hāla) (GR.) Ed.
A. Weber, 1966 (DS.) Kathākośaprakarana of Jineśvarasüri, Ed. Jina-Vijaya Muni, Bombay 1949. Päiasaddamahannavo, H. Sheth, Paümacariü of Svayambhū Ed. H. C. Bhayani, Vol. II, Bombay 1953. Studies in Desya Prakrit. H. C. Bhayani, Ahmedabad 1988. Vajjālagga Ed. M. V. Patwardhan, Ahmedabad 1969. Prabandhakośa of Rājasekhara, Ed. Jinavijaya Muni, Bombay 1935.
000

Page #194

Who is The Author of the Pañcasūtra : Cirantanācārya or Yākinisūnu Haribhadra ?
Ācārya Vijayaśīlacandra sūri
The Pañcasūtra is a concise treatise enjoying considerable respect among the Svetāmbara Jaina munis for several centuries past. It contains an essential spiritual experience and systematic presentation of the matter meant for the sublimation of soul and purification of mind. It is charmingly composed in succinct, elegant, and meaningful sūtras in Prakrit. Despite its small size, it enjoys popularity to an appreciable degree.
Ācārya Haribhadra sūri has also written a terse, well-composed, and facile commentary on this small work, of which several editions have appeared in print. Its critical edition, however, has been only recently published by the B. L. Institute of Indology, Delhi, competently edited by Munirāja Jambūvijaya'.
Up to this date, no reference as to its author has been encountered in existing sources. In point of fact, no one has tried to investigate it. On the contrary, all so far have accepted the authenticity of the traditionally floating information that some Cirantanācārya has composed this work. The trem 'Cirantanācārya' has two plausible explanations : First, cirantana means ancient (and hence the work by some ancient ācārya) : Second, it may mean the appellation proper of the äcārya who composed it. Out of these two views, the former view has been universally accepted.
Indeed, few critical discussions about the authorship of this treatise have been done; yet all contemporary writers on it concluded : The author of this work is unknown. Let us first notice these opinions.

Page #195

184
Ācārya Vijayaśīlacandrasuri
Jambū-jyoti
1. In his introduction to the Pancasūtra, V. M. Shah offers two views :
(1) It is composed accordingly by FERIER meaning ancient preceptors or preceptor having the name FORTH. The first meaning is more likely. It is difficult to assign individual authorship to works like this.
(2) The term fee : is unhelpful in deciding the authorship. The plural form can be used out of respect (mānārthe bahuvacanaṁ) for the author. At the same time, it is very likely that ancient authors might have composed the sūtras and Haribhadra sūri might have put them together
2. Writes K. V. Abhyankar : "The Pañcasūtra which is a small elegant treatise written by some old writer whose name has still remained unknown."
3. A. N. Upadhye categorically records : "It is not possible to talk of [an] individual authorship with regard to works like [the] Pañcasūtra. The basic contents of this book are as old as Jainism. They are a literary heirloom preserved in the memory of Jain monks.”
4. And the considered opinion of V. M. Kulkarni is :
“ 'The language of the post-canonical Jaina works is partly Prakritthe so-called Jaina Māhārāstrī—and partly Sanskrit.' (M. Winternitz). The language of the known Prakrit works of Haribhadra is Jaina Māhārāstrī whereas the present work is written in Ardhamāgadhi prose; and this prose shares quite a few peculiarities of the diction and style of the canonical works. This fact suggests that Ācārya Haribhadra was possibly not its author. It is not unlikely that the author of [the] Pañcasūtra regarded the contents of the text as the property of the entire Jain Samgha and preferred to remain anonymous. It is also suggestive of its early date of composition. How early it is difficult to say. Since Haribhadra does not know who its author was we may not be far wrong in saying that it was composed about a century or so before Ācārya Haribhadra flourished.”
The gist of the aforementioned four opinions is this : these unanimously proclaim that Ācārya Haribhadra sūri is not the author of the Pañcasūtra. Besides this, Munirāja Jambūvijaya, the editor of the dependable critical edition of the Pañcasūtra, is inclined to opine that Ācārya Haribhadra sūri

Page #196

Who is The Author of the....
probably may be the author of the Paficasūtra. Inspite of this sensing, in the absence of definite evidence, Munivara Jambūvijaya did not commit to any positive statement but conceded to the tradition, and prefixed the title of the work with the phrase चिरन्तनाचार्यविरचितम् .
185
It should, however, be clear that, as against this established tradition and the opinions of the aforenoted scholars, the author of the Pañcasūtra is definitely Haribhadra sūri himself, indeed to the total exclusion of any other more ancient author. To corroborate my statement, I shall produce evidence searched out by critically examining some internal and external aspects of the text of the Pañcasūtra.
1. There are three significant sentences at the end of the commentary of the Pañicasūtra: प्रव्रज्याफलसूत्रं समाप्तम् । एवं पञ्चमसूत्रव्याख्या समाप्ता ॥ समाप्तं पञ्चसूत्रकं व्याख्यानतोऽपि ॥
Among these, the third sentence deserves special consideration. It comes from the pen of the commentator and therefore implicitly written to mean समाप्तं पञ्चसूत्रकं व्याख्यानत: ' Had the commentator and the author of the Pañcasūtra been different, the phrase in question, ought to have been in the form समाप्ता पञ्चसूत्रकवृत्तिः', while here it is समाप्तं पञ्चसूत्रकं व्याख्यानतोऽपि and the last word of the phrase, f, holds a suggestive significace. The term 3+fq implies that the Pañcasūtra has been completed in the sense of "together with the commentary." If 3ft is deleted from this sentence, it would mean. that the Pañcasūtra is completed 'in the form of commentary.' The addition of only one word 'af' changed the entire contextual meaning. This would then suggest that, had the commentator and the author of the Sutra been different individuals, such a phrasing would never have been possible. Now, who the commentator was, is of course quite certain. And, therefore, in light of the aforenoted phrasing, if we regard him as the author also of the Sutra, it would be thoroughly compatible.
Predictably, some scholar may say: 'At the end of the original text, the author of the text has employed the sentence 'a' to indicate the completion of the original text. In the same way, in the continuation of that sentence, the commentator has employed this sentence to indicate the completion of the commentary and, therefore, it is not proper to connect the latter with the original text and hence to its unknown author.' By way of response to this objection, it may be said: If the argument referred to in

Page #197

186
Ācārya Vijayaśīlacandrasuri
Jambu-jyoti
the preceding paragraph may be valid, the commentator would have put either 'समाप्तं पञ्चसूत्रकं व्याख्यानतः' or the sentence “समाप्ता पञ्चसूत्रकवृत्ति. And this could then be regarded as a proper ending. Moreover, after this, there is a positively independent sentence Trachelcht HATHTO, which has been written by the commentator. As a result of this phrase, the whole contextual reference of the sentence समाप्त पञ्चसूत्रकं व्याख्यानतोऽपि, is altogether changed and this sentence written by the commentator himself, clearly establishes the oneness of the commentator and the author of the original text. Nevertheless, with reference to the points to be later discussed, if we critically consider this matter, the doubt, it any still remains, will be cleared.
Second, had the original author employed the phrase 4481 , it would imply the completion of the 19th and not the 1950; but the commentator writes HR SEC11. Elsewhere also in the commentary, the commentator recognises this composition definitely as T E1012. Is it possible for a master commentator like Haribhadra sūri to take liberty of this kind with the phrase employed by the original author at the end of the original text.? And, can such a liberty be deemed proper or in the fitness of things ? On the contrary, an ancient commentator like Haribhadra sūri would proceed in his commentary remaining thoroughly faithful to each and every word of the original author and on this very account an inference can be advanced that, had the commentator been the original author of the text, he would make any desired addition in the matter of the original text. From this standpoint, if he himself had coined the title for the original text, then alone in the commentary and at the end of the commentary) he would employ the appellative term पञ्चसूत्रकं.
2. After the sentence SEC Heinatsfy, the commentator had also put some devotional sentences : "77: gacar Part 1 of 4* नमः । सर्ववन्दनार्हान् वन्दे । सर्वोपकारिणामिच्छामो वैयावृत्यम् । सार्वानुभावादौचित्येन मे धर्मे प्रवृत्तिर्भवतु । Hot Arall: ufan: hoy, u Heal: fer-: H, Hot Heal: HfCH: AI 1113
It has been an established tradition of the commentators that their dutiful work is to provide word by word elucidation of the matter discussed by either the original author or the ER. When their work is finished, the commentators end the text after writing either a verse or verses or some prose lines indicating the completion of the treatise. But, thereafter, the commentators never made any addition of their own to the commentary.

Page #198

Who is The Author of the....
187
Even Ācārya Haribhadra sūri has not taken such a liberty in the commentaries on his own works, the Yogadrstisamuccaya and the Pañcavastuka or for that matter in the commentary of the text the Sodaśaprakarana. Other great commentators also have not taken such a liberty. From this we may get an idea of the established convention as indicated above.
Quite contrary to this established tradition, after the completion of the commentary of the Pañcasūtra, Haribhadrācārya has put nearly six sentences : Granted that they are in Sanskrit, but they have been inserted in such a way that they can be ranked with the originalsūtras. If these sentences are compared with the sentences 741 FH H ul4 etc. in the final 15th prose section of the first free of the Pañcasūtra barring the difference of language-the Sūtra text being in Prakrit, the commentary in Sanskrit - there is no difference at all in the style and presentation of the two. Further, with reference to this, the sentences, सर्वनमस्कारार्हेभ्यो नम:15 and सर्वे सत्त्वाः सुखिनः
16 [repeated three times incorporated in the prose section of the commentary, positively appear to be the respective reflections of the sentences 741 H (here, had it been 7415#4, it would appear more consistent and more pleasing) नमोक्कारारिहाणं17, and सुहिणो भवंतु जीवा18 found in the prose section of the original text.
The aforementioned situation clearly, indeed positively, leads us to believe, indeed on firm grounds, that Haribhadra sūri is also the author of the Sūtra text and for that very reason, during the process of repeatedly experiencing the devotionally emotionalised moments, he might have incorporated this small prose section in the commentary. It does not sound superfluous when he says that. He would not have taken such a liberty had he been just the commentator and not the author of the original text.
3. The great epistemologist Yaśovijaya Gani of the 17th century, on whom was bestowed upon the title wa TT, at the time of referring to the Pañcasūtra in the 1971, includes the following phrases :
पापप्रतिघातगुणबीजाधानसूत्रे हरिभद्रसूरिभिरप्येतद्भव-सम्बन्धि भवान्तरसम्बन्धि वा पापं यत्तत्पदाभ्यां परामृश्य मिथ्यादुष्कृतप्रायश्चित्तेन विशोधनीयमित्युक्तम् । तथा हि "सरणमुवगओ अ एएसिं......इत्थ forgifuges 3"1119

Page #199

188
Acārya Vijayaśīlacandrasuri
Jambū-jyoti
Having considered the sins committed either in this birth or in the past existences, by the term , Haribhadra sūri also has stated to undergo the expiatory purification in the form of 172166on. After having stated this, he has inserted a prose section of the first sūtra of the Pañcasūtra and thereafter Upādhyāya Yaśovijaya has offered its explanation in his own style.
In the aforementioned Sanskrit sentences, Yaśovijaya clearly has stated 44faeigu HTET TEE SER44ffput, but not frecuentaqat or
E l. This is a noteworthy point. This indicates that Yasovijaya may have possessed some credible tradition wherefrom a clear conviction of attributing the authorship of the Pañcasūtra with assuredness to Haribhadra sūri could be had. Otherwise, without the tradition before him, he could not have believed it nor would he have employed such a definitive sentence With reference to such minor matters, we may take a single example of his rational vigilance. The i Sytch is also a product of Haribhadra sūri, and Yasovijaya wrote a commentary upon that work as well. Therein, in the last UTSYC, there are 17 verses instead of 16. In the 17th verse, there is a clear indication of the author's name as aan FI EH14320. From this statement we can naturally conclude that only Haribhadra sūri is the author of that verse and, by extension, of the ut syichych UT. But, in the mind of Yaśovijaya, there might have arisen another optional thought about this 17th verse, on account of which, at the end of the commentary on that verse, he has inserted a sentence as 'Fresneler 21. From only this much context, it can be understood that it was not possible for him to put the sentence 414.......... SERWSuffers according to blind following. He had a firm conviction that the author of the Pañcasūtra is Haribhadra sūri and for that reason he has employed such a phrase. From this testimony, too, it can be deduced that Haribhadra sūri is the author of the Pañcasūtra.
4. Farla, ustech, 3780, 591204, fafgeht, 1910—such titles available in the domain of Jaina literature are thanks to the special predilection of naming the works; it is, moreover, characteristic of Haribhadra sūri alone. Any other author might have entitled the work as पञ्चसूत्र or पञ्चसूत्री. The name पञ्चसूत्रक may flash in the understanding of only Haribhadra sūri. While offering guidance regarding the etymological interpretation of the term FC, Munirāja Jambūvijaya has observed as under : "The title of the work written by Ācārya Haribhadra sūri is 499

Page #200

Who is The Author of the....
189
in the practical convention, still he has given o ch as a title for it and he has shown its etymological interpretation in the same, refer to page No. 80, foot note No. 5 in this very work. The etymological interpretation and the meaning of the term " Ech should be understood in the same way."22 This perceptive observation lends a positive encouragement to my above arrived deduction that such topical appellations characteristically were designed by Haribhadrācārya.
5. The more important on the score of procedure will be to scrutinize the significant words, phrases, clauses, and sentences available in other works composed by Haribhadra sūri and those paralleled in the Pañcasūtra. Let us institute a comparison of some of the portions of the SE with those of other works such as the विंशतिर्विशिका, the धर्मबिन्दु, the योगदृष्टिसमुच्चय, and the षोडशक, all by Haribhadra suri.
[1] In the fourth sātra of the पञ्चसूत्रक, there appears a phrase व्याधितसुक्रियाज्ञात, it is as follows :
'वाहियसुकिरियानाएणं, से जहा केइ महावाहिगहिए, अणुभूयतव्वेयणे विण्णाया सरूवेण, निविण्णे तत्तओ, सुवेज्जवयणेण सम्मं तमवगच्छिय जहाविहाणओ पवन्ने सुकिरियं, निरुद्धजहिच्छाचारे, तुच्छपत्थभोई मुच्चमाणे वाहिणा नियत्तमाणवेयणे समुवलब्भारोग्गं पवड्डमाणतब्भावे, तल्लाभनिव्वुईए तप्पडिबंधाओ सिराखाराइजोगे वि वाहिसमारोग्गविण्णाणेण इट्ठनिप्फत्तीओ अणाकुलभावयाए किरिओवओगेण, अपीडिए, अव्वहिए, सुहलेस्साए वड्डइ, वेज्जं च बहु मन्नइ'23 etc.
This very aftrafohl3117 is to be met with in the verses of the 12th fafgroht of the fagfafafgroht, in a slightly different phraseology and context :
'नो आउरस्स रोगो नासइ तह ओसहसुईओ ॥१२॥ न य विवरीएणेसो किरियाजोगेण अवि य वड्डेइ। इय परिणामाओ खलु सव्वं खु जहुत्तमायरइ ॥१३॥ थेवोऽवित्थमजोगो नियमेण विवागदारुणो होइ। पागकिरियागओ जह, नायमिणं सुप्पसिद्धं तु ॥१४॥ जह आउरस्स रोगक्खयत्थिणो दुक्करा वि सुहहेउ। इत्थ चिगिच्छाकिरिया तह चेव जइस्स सिक्खत्ति ॥१५॥24
And this very fact is more clearly discernible in the 16th verse of the 12th षोडशक:

Page #201

190
Acārya Vijayaśīlacandrasūri
'व्याध्यभिभूतो यद्वन्निर्विण्णस्तेन तत्क्रियां यत्नात् । सम्यक्करोति तद्वद् दीक्षित इह साधुसच्चेष्टाम् ||' 25
[2] In the fourth sutra of the Pañcasūtra, a group of sentences occurs as undernoted:
‘से समलेट्टुकंचणे समसत्तुमित्ते नियत्तग्गहदुक्खे, पसमसुहसमेए सम्मं सिक्खमाइयइ, गुरुकुलवासी, गुरुपडिबद्धे, विणीए, भूयत्थदरिसी, न इओ हियतरं ति मन्नइ, सुस्सूसाइगुणजुत्ते तत्ताभिनिवेसा विहिपरे परममंतो त्ति अहिज्जइ सुत्तं ॥ 26
The verses of the 12th विंशिका, partly bearing verbal similarity and reverberating the significance of those sentences are as follows:
'इत्थ वि होइगसुहं तत्तो एवोपसमसुहं ॥४॥ सिक्खादुगंमि पीई जह जायइ हंदि समणसीहस्स ।
तह चक्कवट्टिणो वि हु नियमेण न जाउ नियकिच्चे ॥५॥ russ विहिणा सुत्तं भावेण परममंतरूव त्ति ॥ 27

Jambū-jyoti
[3] In the fourth sūtra of the Pañcasūtraka, there are sentences 'आयओ गुरुबहुमाणो अवंझकारणत्तेण । अओ परमगुरुसंजोगो । तओ सिद्धी असंसयं । ' 28 Now, the following verse of the second bears complete similarity with the above sentences:
गुरु पारतन्त्र्यमेव च तद् बहुमानात् सदाशयानुगतम् । परमगुरुप्राप्तेरिह बीजं तस्माच्च मोक्ष इति ||१०|| 29
The significant point here is that the phrase
appearing in the text of the Pañcasūtra has been explained as मोक्षं प्रत्यप्रतिबद्धसामर्थ्यहेतुत्वेन in its commentary and the phrase सदाशयानुगतं appearing in the verse of षोडशक has been also explained as सदाशय: संसारक्षयहेतुर्गुरुरयं ममेत्येवंभूतः कुशलपरिणामस्तेनानुगतं गुरुपारतन्त्र्यं 31 by its commentators. On this account, not only the verbal agreement but also the similarity of the reading of these two separate treatises becomes evident.
[4] 'निदंसणमेत्तं तु नवरं सव्वसत्तुक्खए सव्ववाहिविगमे सव्वत्थसंजोगेणं सव्विच्छासंपत्तीए जारिमेयं एत्तोऽतगुणं खु तं भावसत्तुक्खयादितो । रागादयो भावसत्तू, कम्मोदया वाहिणो, परमलद्धीओ उ अत्था, अणिच्छेच्छा इच्छा। एवं सुहुममेयं, न तत्तओ इयरेण गम्मइ, जइसुहमिवाजइणा, आरुग्गसुहं व रोगिण त्ति विभासा || 32 ( In the fifth sūtra of the Pañcasūtra)
जं सव्वसत्तु तह सव्ववाहि सव्वत्थ सव्वमिच्छाणं । खय-विग़म-जोग- पत्तीहिं होइ तत्तो अणंतमिणं ||३|| रागाईया सत्तू कम्मुदया वाहिणो इहं नेया । लद्धीओ परमत्था इच्छाऽणिच्छेच्छमो य तहा ||४||

Page #202

Who is The Author of the....
अणुहवसिद्धं एवं नारुग्गसुहं व रोगिणो नवरं ।
गम्मइ इयरेण तहा सम्ममिणं चितियव्वं तु ||५|| 33 (20th विंशिका)
How striking is the correspondence between the two aforementioned references, the first lying in the fifth sūtra of the Pañcasūtra and the second in the verses of the 20th सिद्धसुखविंशिका.
for
[5] In the same way, the sentence of the fifth sutra अनंता 34 can be compared with the sentence जत्थ य एगो सिद्धो तत्थ अनंता 35 of the verse 18th of the 20th fafi.
191
[6] Also, there is a sentence in the fifth sūtra of the Pañcasūtra as
36. This is powerful and regulatively assuming the form of an argument, and as it can be easily compatible in different references, it can be employed there. And, for this very reason, in the 19th verse the of 20th faf, Haribhadra sūri has employed this very argumentative sentence as below :- एमेव भवो इहरा ण जाउ सत्ता तयंतरमुवेइ | 37
Here, the reading, which has been traditionally accepted everywhere and which has been incorporated by Abhyankar in the fafafafant edited by him, is as below :- एमेव लवो इहरा ण जाउ सन्ना तयंतरमुवेइ | 38 This reading appears to be faulty after considering the method of the employment of the sentence 'न सत्ता सदंतरमुवेई in the Pañcasūtra. सत्ता might have been transformed into सन्ना through the mistake of the scribe or it is possible that it might have been incorrectly read and the reading also positively appears in some manuscripts. Therefore, the very sentence appears appropriate and consistent in meaning and from all these considerations, it per se becomes an established truth, indeed beyond any doubt, that the author of the faint and the ч is one and the same person.

[7] The discussion, which is carried on in the following sentences of the fifth sutra of Pañcasūtra - ण दिदिक्खा अकरणस्स । ण यादिट्ठम्मि एसा । ण सहजाए णिवित्ती । ण निवित्तीए आयट्ठाणं । ण यण्णहा तस्सेसा । ण भव्वत्ततुल्ला णाएणं । ण केवलजीवरूवमेयं । '39 etc. is the same in a slightly differing manner in the following verses of the second विंशिका, namely लोकाऽनादित्वविशिका.
'जह भव्वत्तमकयगं न य निच्चं एव किं न बंधोऽवि ? | किरियाफलजोगो जं एसो ता न खलु एवं ति ||१४||

Page #203

192
Ācārya Vijayaśīlacandrasuri
Jambu-jyoti
भव्वत्तं पुणमकयगमणिच्चमो चेव तहसहावाओ। जह कयगोऽवि हु मुक्खो निच्चोऽवि य भाववइचित्तं ॥१५।। एवं चेव यऽदिक्खा (दिदिक्खा) भवबीजं वासणा अविज्जा य ।
सहजमलसद्दवच्चं वन्निज्जइ मुक्खवाईहिं ।।१६॥'40 [8] In the same way, we find the very rational annotation of the sentences-अणाइजीवे अणादिजीवस्स भवे, अणादिकम्मसंजोगणिव्वत्तिए+1 in the first sutra and अणाइमं बंधो पवाहेणं42 in the fifth sutra, in nearly initial 12 verses43 of the second विशिका.
[9] A free translation of the sentence सुद्धधम्मसंपत्ती पावकम्मविगमाओ, पावकम्मविगमो तहाभव्वत्तादिभावाओ44 of the firstsutra isclearly noticeable in the first verse :
'निच्छयओ पुण एसो जायइ नियमेण परमपरियट्टे।
तहभव्वत्तमलक्खयभावा अच्चंतसुद्धत्ति ॥१॥45 of the fourth fafgrch and the first half of the eighth verse, 'gefa सहजमलभावविगमओ सुद्धधम्मसंपत्ती'46 of the selfsame विंशिका.
[10] The sentences in the third sūtra are as under :
'तओ अणुण्णाए पडिवज्जेज्ज धम्मं । अण्णहा अणुवहे चेवोवहाजुत्ते सिया । धम्माराहणं खु हियं सव्वसत्ताणं । तहा तहेयं संपाडेज्जा । सव्वहा अपडिवज्जमाणे चएज्ज ते अट्ठाणगिलाणोसहत्थचागनाएणं ।'47
Some aphorisms of Haribhadra sūri's enfans may now be compared with those noted above. These are :- तथा-गुरुजनाद्यनुज्ञेति ।।२३। तथा तथोपधायोग इति ॥२४॥ दुःस्वप्नादि कथनमिति ॥२५॥ तथा विपर्ययलिङ्गसेवेति ॥२६॥ दैवज्ञैस्तथा तथा निवेदनमिति ॥२७॥ न धर्मे मायेति ॥२८॥ उभयहितमेतदिति ॥२९॥ यथाशक्ति सौविहित्यापादनमिति ॥३०॥ ग्लानौषधादिज्ञातात त्याग इति ॥३१॥48
The beauty of the situation here is that the translation of certain aphorisms bearing numbers 23, 24, 31 from among the aforementioned is directly met with in the afore-recorded original textual matter, while the sense of the remaining aphorisms is found in the commentary of the Pañcasūtra49. This fact strongly corroborates the circumstance that Haribhadra sūri positively is the author of the Pancasūtra as well as its commentary.
[11] The context of the two sentences 'ण दिदिक्खा अकरणस्स' and 'ण सहजाए forfat50' incorporated in the fifth sūtra exactly corresponds with the two following verses of योगदृष्टिसमुच्चय :

Page #204

Who is The Author of the....
193
'दिदृक्षाद्यात्मभूतं त-न्मुख्यमस्या निवर्तते। प्रधानादिनतेर्हेतु-स्तदभावान्न तन्नतिः ॥२००।। अन्यथा स्यादियं नित्य-मेषा च भव उच्यते । एवं च भवनित्यत्वे कथं मुक्तस्य सम्भवः ॥२०१।।'51
[12] I guess that the term FGEHT in the Jaina literature is for the first time noticeable in the works of Haribhadra sūri. Out of his works :
(i)
The term FGEST is employed in the above-recorded verse, bearing the number 200 of the TTEC tau.
(ii) The employment of the term fe has been attributed to ancient writers
[Patañjali and so forth according to the commentary] by incorporating the clause 'FeHiftępuifayda ffad 29' in the verse bearing the number
489 of the trang 152 (iii) The term FEST is again encountered in the phrase 'ta ta feferal in
the 16th verse of the 2nd faft, of the fagfafafgroht. The traditionally famous reading 'Taa asfal, which has been accepted by Abhyankar is incorrect and inconsistent. Here, if we accept the reading factal, then alone it sounds appropriate in case of all other situations53.
(iv) The term fEAT is employed in the eighth verse of the 15th 1621. of
the olsyrchycut, which is as follows:'714AGI TERGEETIHA I
ricom: 154' Here the term FGEH does not offer the meaning, which has been attributed to it in other treatises. Here this term is used in the sense of 371104 consistently with its etymological interpretation gel10591 FGES. Here we can clearly see how intelligently and consistently a Jainācārya employs the term FEHT, which bears a technical meaning according to the Sankhya school of philosophy. Yet, the application the term, even when the context is changed, does not seem improper.
It is possible that Haribhadra sūri might have employed this term in his other works also. Now, we have to see whether he has employed the term दिदृक्षा in the sentence 'ण दिदिक्खा अकरणस्स'55 of the Pancasutra in the same sense in which he has used this term in the aforementioned three works barring the STCH.
[13] The term 94474E756 is employed in the fourth sūtra of the Pañcasūtra. This appears to be a favourite term of Haribhadra sūri, because it appears

Page #205

Acārya Vijayaśīlacandrasūri
also in the fagfafafa [8/3], though in a different contextual sense. There it bears the meaning "Adoration conferring all-sided auspiciousness (सर्वमंगलकारिणी पूजा). In the tenth verse of the ninth षोडशक this adoration has been styled fat, but the commentator Yasovijaya has suggested that worship to have been published by समंतभद्दा 8.
194
[14] Lastly, let us glance at the sentences in the ending portion of the Pañcasūtra. It has been written in the last aphorism that f लिंगविवज्जयाओ तप्परिण्णा । तयणुग्गहट्टाए आमकुंभोदगनासनाएणं एसा करुणत्ति वुच्चइ 59 et cetera. The sense which is embodied in the above aphorism, appears exactly in the same significance in the concluding portion of the योगदृष्टिसमुच्चय :
'हरिभद्र इदं प्राह नैतेभ्यो देय आदरात् ॥ २२६॥ अवज्ञेह कृताऽल्पाऽपि यदनर्थाय जायते । अतस्तत्परिहारार्थं न पुनर्भावदोषतः ॥ २२७॥ 60
Jambu-jyoti
The contents given in these works, if passed to unworthy persons, the persons will become victims in any sort of calamity; therefore, it is a favour to them in not giving them the contents. Such a compassionate attitude, even in different words, can be impartially seen here.
All afore-recorded references unambiguously show that, it is very positively Haribhadra sūri and none else who emerges as the author of the original text of the Pañcasūtra. Had it not been so, the content-references of the Pañcasūtra cannot bear similarity with the several corresponding references from the many works-Prakrit as well as Sanskrit-of that Acarya to such an extent.

Despite this clear internal evidence, if the view of attributing the authorship of the Pañcasutra to an unknown ancient (f) ācārya or the one by name 'Cirantana' who might have flourished prior to Haribhadra sûri be maintained, we will be forced to accept that Haribhadrācārya might have borrowed verbally as well as sensewise all the above recorded references from 'the others' works compared with the references of the Pañcasūtra and the contents discussed therein and, simultaneously with this, the originality of Haribhadra sūri observable in the presentation of matter, thoughts, and all of his works would come to nil. A conclusion such as that would amount to doing the gravest injustice to him and to his works.

Page #206

Who is The Author of the....
6. Pt. Bechardas Doshi had observed: "From the linguistic point of view, grammarians have given three types of Prakrit: (1) Prakrit that is based upon Sanskrit; (2) Prakrit that is like Sanskrit (3) Native Prakrit.....The grammar (of Hemacandrācārya) belongs to the first category."61
195
In consonance with the above-mentioned view, if we examine the language of the original text of the Pañcasūtra, we will be convinced of its being the language, observing as it does all the later rules of the Hemacandrīya grammar. The language of the works such as the fagfaff and so forth by Haribhadra sūri is typologically the same. We can understand this phenomenon after taking into consideration the Prakrit words coming from Sanskrit and those bearing the similarity with Sanskrit, employed by the author, in his works. And the same is the situation with the Pañcasutra. For this very reason, there is no difficulty at all in taking Haribhadra sūri as the author of the original text of the Pañcasūtra.
Even though some scholars are led to suppose that the language of the Pañcasūtra is not Prakrit (Jaina Mahārāṣṭrī) but is Ardhamāgadhi, like the language employed in the ägamas, yet they have not put forward convincing reasons or evidence in corroboration of this supposition. It is possible that, having seen the employment of in the singular forms of nominative case in construction like अणाइजीवे, भवे, कम्मसंजोगणिव्वत्तिए, दुक्खरूवे,
62 etc., those scholars might have been led to stipulate the language of the Pañcasūtra as Ardhamāgadhī. But against it, had they taken into account the unambiguously employed in the Prakrit language in the singular forms of the nominative case elsewhere in many places in this very work in the construction such as रागदोसविसपरममंतो, केवलिपण्णत्तो धम्मो, सरणमुवगओ, विवरीओ य संसारो, अणवट्टियसहावो' 3 etc., they would not have arrived at the above supposition. Quoting the view of M. Winternitz, Kulkarni concludes: "The language of the post-canonical Jain works is partly Prakrit-the so called Jaina Mahārāṣṭrī and partly Sanskrit. The language of the other Prakrit works of Haribhadra sūri is Jaina Mahārāṣtrī, whereas the Pañcasūtra is written in Ardhamāgadhi prose. So Acarya Haribhadra sūri was possibly not its author, but it is a treatise written by some ancient Acārya prior to Haribhadra sūri."64 But the striking similarity of the language

Page #207

Acārya Vijayasilacandrasūri
discernible in other works of Haribhadrācārya and in the Pañcasūtra, as also the similarity of linguistic usages involving संस्कृतसम and संस्कृतभव words as stated above, positively proves that the work in question is composed not in Ardhmägadhi but in Prakrit.
196
Jambu-jyoti
Also, the argument advanced by Kulkarni that "The treatise in question is in Ardhamägadhi prose and so it is not written by Haribhadra süri because his other treatises are in Prakrit" hold no water. Is it not possible that the same author can employ different languages and different dictions? Is it not possible that the same author can write in versified form as well as in prose ? To the contrary, this situation indicates to a profound and highly erudite genius possessing the knowledge of several languages. If a competent Gujarāti or Mahārāṣṭrian poet/ author can write prose/poetic literature in other languages such as Hindi, English, and so forth as he would in his own native tongue, then what obstacle lies in the way in believing that a master scholar like Haribhadra sūri can write works in different varieties of Prakrit ?
7. The second point of importance is that the Pañcasūtra probably is believed to have been the work of Cirantanācārya and until now the tradition continues that the name of the 'Cirantanäcärya' is unknown. Now, a question arises: This Cirantanācārya is inevitably considered to be f (ancient) for us even today and, therefore, we can take it for granted that, he perhaps may be believed to be unknown even in the past centuries. But how can it be believed that this Cirantanācārya and his name might be unknown to Acarya Haribhadra sūri? Kulkarni believed that this Cirantanācārya might have flourished a century or more before Haribhadra sūri65. And if we are to proceed on the line that the Pañcasutra is a postcanonical composition, we must accept the above inference of Kulkarni. Could it be consistently rational that the name of Cirantanācārya, who might have flourished a century or two before Haribhadra sūri may be an author unknown or unfamiliar to Haribhadra süri ? Definitely not. Like this work, its author also (if he were a different person) cannot be unknown to Haribhadra sûri and had he known the author of the original text, he would not have remained silent about his authorship and unhesitatingly revealed his name. This consideration once again leads us to believe that Haribhadra sūri himself was the author of the sutra-work.

Page #208

Who is The Author of the...
197
The gist of the above discussion is that, just as Haribhadra süri is the author of the commentary of the very rich, in the same way he himself is the author of the Sūtra-text of the Pañcasūtraka. Concomitantly with the establishment of this truth, the tradional belief upheld by four scholars, namely Shah, Abhyankar, Upadhye, and Kulkarni and the arguments they offered for the corroboration of this belief, per se become invalid.
A question that now arises is precisely this. Though Haribhadra sūri is the author of the Pañcasūtra, yet whence and when arose this confusion / uncertainty about the authorship of this composition ?
From the investigations carried out, it seems that the confusion may have arisen in the 15th century of Vikrama Era or somewhere closer to that date. In the three available ancient palm-leaf manuscripts of the Pancasūtra, which in all probability were written between the 12th and the 14th century of Vikrama Era, as recorded by Munirāja Jambūvijaya, there is no reference anywhere to its author. The only indication there is 'HHT TE66'. It can be inferred that, during that period, there might not be any confusion regarding the authorship of this work. The first record of the type may be sensed in the following statement :
‘पाञ्चसूत्रं प्राकृतमूलम्, सूत्राणि २१०. gfu afya CC067
The list of the Jaina works in the afgufat which was prepared by some learned Jain-monk early in the latter half of the 16th century of Vikrama Era, does not refer to this record regarding the author of the Pañcasūtra and therein it has been reported that the commentary thereon is 'Hāribhadrī.' It cannot be denied that the confusion might have arisen from this record. If we focus on this record and read evig cuci Elfu po afro afecco', and if we draw therefrom the meaning—The Pañcasūtra in the Prakrit language having 210 sūtras, and the vrtti thereon equal in volume to verses 880—with the addition of the particle 27, it cannot be denied that the term Haribhadri is supposed to have covered both the Sūtra (original text) and the Vrtti (the commentary). And the term Haribhadri is in the feminine gender consistently with the feminine gender of the word Vrtti.
Of course, this may be looked upon as a little far-fetched; for all earlier scholars, in view of the fact that author's name was not specified for

Page #209

Acārya Vijayaśīlacandrasūri
Jambū-jyoti
the Sūtra-text, were led to believe that the qualification Haribhadri (f) only indicated the name of the commentator since it unambiguously refers to the term af. But, it is a noteworthy circumstance that, in this record, regarding the name of the original author there is no statement like चिरन्तनाचार्यकृतं or अज्ञातकर्तृक. And that circumstance corroborates the erroneous interpretation stated above. However, instead of adopting this line of thinking, someone, after noticing the above-noted record, might have taken the work as and thereafter that faulty supposition may have been perpetuated.
198
After this, from the colophons of the two manuscripts of the Pañcasutra, copied in the 17th century of Vikrama Era, it can be clearly understood that either during that time or a little before it, a misunderstanding that the author of the Pañcasūtra and its commentator may have been different persons and that the name of the original author was unknown, may have gained currency. Those colophons are as follows:
‘समत्तं पंचसुत्रकं ।। छ ।। कृतं चिरन्तनाचायैर्विवृतं च जाकिनीमहत्तरासून श्रीहरिभद्राचार्यैः ।।'68
It is probable that, perhaps there may have been such colophons in other manuscripts also, copied during that period. And the tradition reflecting the miscomprehension regarding the identity of the author of the Pañcasūtra may have arisen from such misleading records. The direct consequence of such colophons leading to such a misunderstanding was that, instead of taking the sentence 'कृतिः सिताम्बराचार्यहरिभद्रस्य, धर्मतो याकिनीमहत्तरासूनोः ' put by the commentator (i.e. the author), after the sentence E
at the end of the commentary of the Pañcasūtra-in the reference of the original text and commentary, critics of our times may have taken this sentence to apply to the commentary alone.
And the second happening strenghthening the above-mentioned misunderstanding is that, at the end of the work composed by Haribhadra sūri, the term for which appears as a signifier of Haribhadra's work, is not present in the concluding portion of the Pañcasūtra text.
Now, when we know that the belief of attributing the authorship of the Pañcasūtra text to Cirantanācārya is not older than the late medieval times and we have at some length discussed the evidence regarding Haribhadra's authorship of the text of the Pañcasūtra as well as

Page #210

Who is The Author of the...
199
the commentary thereon, the sentence fa: fugliore' is positively by Haribhadra süri and it is certain that the phrase is employed here in reference to the original text together with the commentary. Also, granted that the term watake does not directly appear, its sense arguably has been conveyed by the author in a different way. Hafare means emancipation from the transmigratory cycle. In the last sentence of the Pañcasūtra, the author has suggested the expectation of emancipation, but it is not through the term face, but through the term f1:44, employed there either affirmatively or positively. Refer, in this context, the last sentence of the Pañcasūtra :
एसा करुण त्ति वुच्चइ एगंतपरिसुद्धा अविराहणाफला तिलोगनाहबहुमाणेणं निस्सेयससाहिग त्ति पव्वज्जाफलसुत्तं ।।69
If, however, the demand for the term fake is insisted upon, then even in the end portion of the commentary supposed to be written by Haribhadra sūri, the term face is nowhere noticeable ! And on that ground the authorship of Haribhadra sūri for the commentary can as well be objected, even denied. So, taking the term f: HH as synonymous with the term wafake, would allow us in connecting the total composition with Haribhadra sūri.
Regarding the authorship of the Pancasūtra, M. A. Dhaky, in his communication some years ago to me, wrote:
"Your Holiness believes this text to be the composition of Haribhadra sūri instead of Cirantanācārya. Examining the original text from the standpoint of matter, diction, and style which are replete with gracefulness and elegance, it also seems to me that it is a post-canonical work : it, moreover reflects the constructions of phrases and sentences which can be called relatively modern. Haribhadra sūri has neither referred to the name of the Echinor has he respectfully presented the text as ancient. Also, he has not offered obeisance to the ETC. Thus comprehending, it may seem that the commentator and the author of the original text is the same person."
Thus, as deduced from the bulk of evidence, internal as well as external, Haribhadra sūri arguably is the author also of the text proper of the Pañcasūtra.
The Pañcasūtra, a work which may have been composed by him in the evening of his life, appears to be the essence of his life-long study of

Page #211

200
Ācārya Vijayaśīlacandrasūri
Jambu-jyoti
the śāstras. There can be no denying that this composition happens to be the manifestation of the spiritual ecstasy, his attainment of the higher level in the practice of mystical science. From the ratiocinations discussed in the attega tolet which are introduced in the Pañcasütra, probably more charmingly and in brief and pithy sentences as also a quotation from that work? at one place in the commentary of the Pañcasūtra, this latter work must be subsequent to the composition of the UTTECH art and his other works. Prior to this, he may have composed several other works covering different topics, including plausibly m, in the later part of his life. And in that late lot appears the composition of the Pañcasūtra.
Abhyankar, too, with reference to this very point, records his own opinion as underquoted :
"एतै रचितानां तेषां तेषां ग्रन्थानां क्रमप्रतिपादने टीकाग्रन्थाः प्रायः प्रथमं रचिता अनन्तरं धर्मकथा रचितास्तदनन्तरमनेकान्तजयपताका-लोकतत्त्वनिर्णयादयः प्राधान्येन जैनसिद्धान्तप्रतिपादनपरा ग्रन्था निर्मितास्तदनन्तरं षड्दर्शनसमुच्चय-शास्त्रवार्तासमुच्चय-पञ्चाशकादयो दर्शनग्रन्थास्तदनन्तरं च योगदर्शनप्रतिपादकौयोगबिन्दु-योगदृष्टिसमुच्चयौ रचिताविति भाति । सर्वेषामन्ते परिणतप्रज्ञैरेभिरागमसारभूतः स्वकीयग्रन्थप्रतिपादितानां विविधानां विषयाणां सङ्ग्रहस्थानभूतश्चासौ विंशतिविशिकानामा ग्रन्थो frefreilfa 171" To this we may add : 6967778 ANANAR T FAST H107T पञ्चसूत्रकस्य सटीकस्य रचना सन्हब्धा स्यादिति ।"
The aforenoted criticism leads us to conceive that, here in the field of Jaina literature, perhaps there may have been two methods of composing works :
1. The method of amplifying, in the works that follow in succession, the topics that were elucidated in the earlier works.
2. The method of abbreviating, in the fresh works, the topics elucidatively presented and at some length in the earlier works. With reference to Bhagavān Haribhadra sūri, it can be stated that, out of the above two methods, he might have adopted the second. For getting a clear understanding, it may be stated that he might have composed some of his notable works in the following chronological order:
1. Pañcāsaka 2. Vimśikā 3. Sodaśaka 4. Astaka 5. Pañcasūtraka

Page #212

Who is The Author of the....
201
In the medieval biographical tradition, Haribhadra sūri enjoys a reputation in the field of Jainism as the author of 1444 Prakarana works. A few Prakarana-treatises and a few commentaries (on the works earlier composed) written by him, are available. Among these, those that are in our possession-specially, those in whose appellations numeral-words are employed-are available. Thanks to the deduction now reached that Haribhadra sūri is the author of the Pancasūtra, a most notable example has been added to the list of his works and this is a circumstance signifying our good fortune and indeed is a matter of gratification.
Annotations : 1. B. L. Series, No. 2; Ācārya Haribhadra sūri Granthmālā, Vol. No. 1, General
Editor : V. M. Kulkarni, Ed. Muni Jambūvijaya, Delhi 1986. 2. Pañcasuttam, Ed. V. M. Shah, Bombay 1934, “Introduction," p. 17. 3. Ibid., p. 20. 4. Ibid., “Foreword”, p. 69. 5. Pancasūtrakam, Ed. Muni Śrī Jambūvijayajī, Delhi 1986, "Introduction," p. 33. 6. Ibid. 7. Ibid., Prastāvanā, pp. 4-5. 8. Ibid., p. 80. 9. Ibid., p. 80. 10. Ibid., p. 81. 11. Ibid., p. 80. 12. Ibid., Prastāvanā, p. 3. 13. Ibid pp. 80-81. 14. Ibid., p. 24. 15. Ibid., pp. 80-81. 16. Ibid. 17. Ibid., p. 24. 18. Ibid. 19. Dharmaparīksā, Ahmedabad V. S.1998 (A. D. 1942), pp. 23-24. 20. Sodaśaka Prakaranam, Bombay 1984, p. 96. 21. Ibid. 22. Pañcasūtrakam, Jambūvijaya, “Intro.," p. 4. 23. Ibid., pp. 50-53-54.

Page #213

202
Ācārya Vijayaśīlacandrasuri
Jambu-jyoti
24. Viņśati-Vimśikā, Ed. K. V. Abhyankar, Bombay 1932, pp. 38-39. 25. Sodaśakaprakaranam, Bombay 1984, p. 70. 26. Pañcasūtrakam, Jambūvijaya, pp. 45-46. 27. Vimsati-Vimśikā, p. 37. 28-30. Pañcasūtrakam, Jambūvijaya, pp. 57 and 58. 29-31. Sodasakaprakaranam, Bombay 1984, p. 10. 32-34. Pañcasūtrakam, Jambūvijaya, pp. 70 and 75. 33-35. Vimsati-Vimśikā, pp. 61 and 63. 36. Pañcasūtrakam, Jambūvijaya, pp. 68. 37-38. Vimsati-Vimśikā, p. 63. 39-41-42-44. Pancasūtrakam, Jambūvijaya, pp. 73,3,71, 6. 40-43-45-46. Vimśati-Vimśikā, pp. 6, 4-5-6, 11-12. 47-48-49-50. Pañcasūtrakam, Jambūvijaya, pp. 37-40 and 73. 51. Haribhadra yoga bhārati, Bombay V.S.2036 (A. D. 1980), p. 123. 52. Ibid., p. 286. 53. Vimśati-Viņšikā, p. 6. 54. Sodaśakaprakaranam, Bombay 1984, p. 85. 55-56. Pañcasūtrakam, Jambūvijaya, pp. 73 and 76. 57. Vimsati-Vimsikā, p. 24. 58. Sodaśakaprakaranam, p. 85. 59. Pancasūtrakam, Jambūvijaya, pp. 78-79. 60. Haribhadra yoga bhāratī, pp. 129. 61. Prakrit Vyakarana, Pt. Becharadas Doshi, Ahmedabad 1925, “Praveśa", p. 12. 62. Pancasūtrakam, Jambūvijaya, p. 3. 63. Ibid., pp. 11-13-16. 64-65. Ibid., "Intro.," p. 33. 66-67-68. Ibid., “Prastāvanā”, pp. 4-3-4. 69-70. Ibid., pp. 80-66. 71. Vimsati-Vimsikā, "Prāstāvikam, Nivedanam," p. 7.
OOO

Page #214

The Humanism of Haribhadra
Christian Lindtner
1. In a modern world of chaos, where intolerance and superstition are often marketed as religion, where ignorance and political correctness too easily masquerade as reason, and where hypocrisy presides proudly and unopposed on the throne of humanity and humility; in a world where pristine ideals of virtue and honour, and of beauty no less than of nobility, are regularly held up to common ridicule and vilification and such is the modern world of the profiteering mentality and the vulgarity of the mass media-in such a world, some solace and strength, I find, may be sought from the ancient sources of Greek and Indian philosophy.
In the last hundred years or more, Western society has been infiltrated by a corruption so pernicious as now to pose a severe threat to the very foundations of European culture. Never before in history, perhaps, has the call for individuals with a sense of loyalty, honesty, and dutythe hallmarks of the Indo-European character-been so urgent if the total disruption of Western civilisation is to be averted.
It is seldom realized that human dignity is a matter of participation in the life of reason and the quest for virtue. And when it comes to human freedom, licentia is, by and large—following upon the failures of reasonmistaken for libertas.
When we study the ancients, we find ourselves in good company. The study of the languages of old serves, in itself, to sharpen our faculty of discrimination. All over the world, the arts and the humanities are now in a phase of decline, in some places they are long extinct, to most places they never even reached out. Our universities have become breeding grounds for mass education, or even indoctrination, that leaves less and less room for the aristocratic pursuits for which the academies, in the interest of

Page #215

204
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
the public weal, were originally designed by the rare species of men of virtue and talent.*
The common ideal of the ancient Greek, Roman, and Indian philosophers was freedom of mind through spiritual purification and the ceaseless exertion of the faculty of reason. When the Western philosophers spoke of virtus and ratio, their Indian colleagues spoke of dharma and buddhi (dhi, mati, prajñā, etc).
We here can speak of the common ideals of Aryan humanism.
In today's world, this aristocratic ideal is being revolted against on several fronts.
First, there is the ignorance of the masses. There is no reason naïvely to assume that the masses today are less prone to superstition or more inclined to enlightenment than they have been in the past. It is as if the masses simply want to be deceived, and the mass media as a rule serve their interests well in this regard.
No less ferocious is the threat against Aryan humanism posed by the educated minorities that are now haunting our universities on a global scale.
Part of the reason for this sad state of affairs are the events that took place in 1968 and the years that followed. This was the period of the student revolts, the main purpose of which was to abolish the authority of traditional European ideals of science and culture. The minds behind this academic revolution apparently addressed themselves to the majority of students who had little or no academic experience. To deceive them was easy enough. They considered themselves Marxists, their mentality was proletarian, and their purpose was, as said, to eliminate and replace the traditional European ideals, which were, undoubtedly, those of the élite and largely based on authority. The old academic élite found itself belonging to a minority, and in our modern "democratic" society where numerical majority proves decisive when it comes to political power, scholars of the old school soon found themselves reduced to silence and deprived of influence. Gradually, the old territories of the arts and humanities were occupied by the so-called
* We fully agree with the author in everything he said.
- Editors.

Page #216

The Humanism of Haribhadra
205
social sciences, and by psychology, etc. Largely responsible for this revolution were various representatives of the Frankfurt school. The revolution in 1968 was to a considerable extent a continuation of the bolshevik revolution half a century earlier. Marx and Freud were the founding fathers. It was a revolution that was largely a revolt against reason. Adorno expressed it neatly defining “philosophy" as "eine Art von rationalem Revisionsprozess gegen die Rationalität” (Rolf Wiggershaus, Die Frankfurter Schule, München 1986, p.12). What he meant to say, of course, was that this was a political revolt against reason by unreason. In sum, the academic revolution of 1968 was a movement against the authority of reason, and what moved it were largely myths and messianic hopes with a Judaic origin.
Thirdly, Christian dogmatism and Christian theology can also be seen as movements against reason. Christianity, too, (like Islam) has, of course, partly Judaic roots. True, some of the most honest theologians in the academic world now admit that, much of what we read in the Bible, is nothing more than myths having little or nothing to do with actual history. Though thus paying at least lip service to reason, many of them still insist, against reason, that certain myths or dogmas can be justified by "mere faith”. But, of course, a mere confession of faith has nothing to do with scientific validity.
Against this background we can speak of the three Abrahamic religions as opposed to what I would, as said, call the Aryan humanism of the ancient Indian and Greek philosophers, and of traditional European science, spiritual as well as physical.
Science looks for historical explanations, it researches the true and natural causes of events that took and that take place in time and in space. Science wants to know what actually happens by tracing events back to their natural causes. It, therefore, does not accept magic and miracles, nor does it accept any explanation presupposing creation out of nothing. Without the concept of true and natural causes, there is no concept of science.
The traditional conflict between science and religion, between knowledge and faith, thus basically reflects entirely diverse attitudes to the problem of natural causality. The focus of science is on nature, on growth in time and space. The dogmas and myths of Abraham's religions fail to respect all natural limitations and, therefore, also the limits of reason.

Page #217

Jambu-jyoti
This, of course, is not a new observation. The great Roman Emperor, Julian, for instance, in his Against the Galilaeans (39 A), wrote: "It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was. convinced that the fabrication of the Galilaeans is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. Though it has in it nothing divine, by making full use of that part of the soul which loves fable and is childish and foolish, it has induced men to believe that the monstrous tale is truth."
206
Christian Lindtner
One thing that should be a cause of alarm, and of which the reader is. perhaps not aware, is the fact that "enlightened" nations such as Germany and France, today have laws that impose restrictions upon the freedom of speech and research. It is, for instance, deemed a crime if a scholar in public questions or denies certain officially accepted views concerning recent European history. A free and open scientific discussion about certain events will not be tolerated. Numerous excellent scholars have already been severely punished for violating these suppressive laws, which obviously are in conflict with fundamental and internationally accepted principles about freedom of research and speech. But the most disturbing aspect of this is, in my opinion, that such suppression of academic freedom is allowed to pass without hardly any single individual or institution raising its voice in protest.
It is a matter of common knowledge that, after a war, the victors write history as they wish it to be seen. Thus truth invariably suffers. This also happened after World War II. Many myths and lies were concocted, as always in such cases. Even today, more than half a century after the events, it is, as said, punishable by law in several European countries to question or reject these myths and lies in public. In general the masses are ignorant of the deceptions, whereas the educated élite dares not to speak out. History is being perverted, and with the distortion of history there is a distortion of the human mind. Reason is being replaced by myth. The circle is vicious. This is sick and it is ridiculous.
Thus, we are today experiencing a common revolt against reason. Of course, this development was anticipated long ago by many a keen observer. The warnings though, were hardly heeded. Who, for instance, today is aware of a prophetic book such as The Revolt against Civilisation by Lothrop Stoddard (1883-1950), who saw the main reason for the revolutionary unrest of our century in the gradual biological

Page #218

The Humanism of Haribhadra
207
deterioration of the human stock that also in the past brought great civilisations to an end. In Europe there is, as said, a current ban on academic freedom. Socrates was charged with impiety, for corrupting young men and for introducing new gods. His real offence was rather that he was too reasonable. In my opinion, it is our duty to resist those who wish to impose limitations upon the freedom of science and research. A scholar must, with Descartes, be permitted to insist : de omnibus dubitandum. He must have the courage to resist the ignorance and superstition of the masses, and the treason of the educated pseudo-intellectuals.
Under these circumstances, we must cherish the efforts of all those rare individuals who, often with considerable personal sacrifice, devote their lives to making the sources of ancient wisdom easier of access to us. Our obligation to the past generations of Indologists and Classical philologists is enormous, and will always serve as a source of edification and inspiration to those who cherish the freedom of the human spirit.
For this very reason it is a rare pleasure for me to contribute to a felicitatory volume now offered to the distinguished savant, Muni Jambūvijaya. His many learned works are well-known and duly appreciated by his grateful colleagues or students all over the world. Even here, in the old kingdom of Denmark, Muni Jambūvijaya's editions of Hemacandra, Candrānanda, etc. have been studied, if only by one or two Sanskrit scholars. His monumental edition of the Sanskrit text of Hemacandra's celebrated Yogaśāstra forms the indispensable basis of my Swedish student, Dr. Olle Qvarnström's heavily annotated English translation (forthcoming). Following the gracious advice of my Jaina friend, I myself first published some brief selections (I. 1-46; II. 1-17; IV. 1-5) from that important book in 1984. This was the first translation of an ancient Jaina text to appear in the Danish language, but, no matter how limited the readership may be, it will not be the last.
2. From our point of view, one of the most interesting ancient Jaina savants is the philosopher Haribhadra Sūri, the celebrated author of texts such as the Šāstravārtāsamuccaya, the Yogabindu, the Yogadrstisamuccaya, the Yogaśataka, the Saddarśanasamuccaya, the Anekāntajayapatākā, the Sarvajñasiddhi, the Lokatattvanirnaya, the Sodaśakaprakarana, the Lalitavistarā, etc. (for further details, see H. R. Kapadia (Ed.),

Page #219

208
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
Anekāntajayapatākā I-II, Baroda 1940-1947, and R. Williams in BSOAS 28/ 1 (1965), pp. 101-106). His Dharmabindu and the Pañcasūtraka are available in the excellent critical editions of Muni Jambūvijaya.
The situation outlined above is made even more complicated by the fact that the fundamental harmony between Greek and Indian philosophy is often overlooked. Those who read Greek seldom read Sanskrit. Those who read Sanskrit seldom read Greek. Those who read Greek are rare, those who read Sanskrit are even rarer.
That the most recent results of modern scholarship are not necessarily the most reliable, and that even our greatest authorities can commit the grossest errors on the most fundamental issues, can be illustrated by the following quotation from the second volume of W.K.C. Guthrie's monumental, A History of Greek Philosophy (Cambridge 1965, p. 53, n. 1): "But in truth the motives and methods of the Indian schools, and the theological and mystical background of their thought are so utterly different from those of the Greeks that there is little profit in the comparison."
According to my experience, Guthrie's view is shared by most students of Classical philology and Greek philosophy. And yet it is as wrong as can be. And, what is more, the practical consequences of this error are very serious for reasons I shall come back to, and for reasons already suggested above. Had Guthrie and other students of Greek philosophy taken the trouble to consult e.g. the old Allgemeine Geschichte der Philosophie of Paul Deussen, they would probably not have exposed themselves to the error of discarding the achievements of ancient Indian philosophy.
As suggested e.g. by Haribhadra in his Šāstravärtäsamuccaya 23, with the auto-commentary, there is, in spite of terminological differences, a certain unity of thought shared by all the classical darśanas of Indian philosophy. The key term is 'dharma.' This fundamental concept has two aspects, a practical and a theoretical. We may here also speak of yoga, one aspect has to do with karma, another with jñāna. The difference is largely one of degrees of purity. Through moral purification one prepares oneself for intellectual purity. Yoga brings about clarity and peace of mind. Otherwise it is impossible for a yogin to see how things really are. It is only by seeing for oneself (tattvajñāna, tattvadarśana, etc.) how things really are that one's mind becomes free. Moral purity may bring about

Page #220

The Humanism of Haribhadra
the happiness of rebirth in heaven, but intellectual purity, which is tantamount to omniscience, or perfection of scientific knowledge, is essential for the attainment of the highest good: the freedom of mind, spiritual and physical liberation. The common goal of classical Indian philosophy, then, is beatitude (sukha), either in heaven or in liberation. The method is purification, first moral, then intellectual.
209
True, all the classical darśanas disagree on what tattva is. But they all agree that the highest goal is freedom, and that this can only be achieved. through a scientific knowledge of true causes. They also agree that moral purity is a prerequisite for the achievement of the summum bonum.
When it comes to the question about the source of dharma, some schools call upon the authority of the Vedas and those great men who follow the Vedas, others refer to the authority of a Bhagavat, such as Kṛṣṇa, the Buddha, or Mahavira. Corresponding to the double dharma, such a Bhagavat invariably has two bodies, a physical and a spiritual, or rather: to his devotees, he seems to have two bodies. He is, at the same time, Brahman as well as Brahmā, a god and a creative human being.
A Bhagavat, naturally, deserves the bhakti of his devotees; the reason for this is that he takes upon himself the arduous task of explaining, as a human, the dharma that he himself, as a divine being, has realized for himself. Bhakti then, is love and loyalty to the Bhagavat and his dharma.
In order to be considered worthy of the unconditional loyalty of his devotees, a Bhagavat must not only be compassionate-this is the motive for his taking upon himself the task of a teacher-but also he must be omniscient (sarvajña). If not, how could one be sure that he really knew what he was talking about?
The contradiction posed by the dogma of a Bhagavat's omniscience created a certain rivalry between the various Bhagavat movements. This was only natural. Some would point out various contradictions and flaws in the scriptures of rival schools, others would insist that all contradictions were only apparent, as the words of the Bhagavat would depend on the capacities of the different audiences addressed. In any case, each of the Bhagavat schools would agree in defending themselves against the attacks of the Brahmins upholding the authority of the Vedas, as against

Page #221

210
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
the Word of the natural fallibility of a human Bhagavat. Defending their faith, they were forced, little by little, to extol and eventually apotheosize their Bhagavat to a status where man has become god. Haribhadra, accordingly, addresses Mahāvīra as Mahādeva.
In spite of his apotheosis, a Bhagavat remains a human ideal, suitable for the imitation of man. Ultimately, a Bhagavat is pure science, pure reason, and as such within the reach of human efforts in terms of dharma and
yoga.
Now, dharma has to do with good and evil, with happiness and with suffering. That happiness (sukha) is good, and that suffering (duhkha) is evil, is never questioned. On this issue there is a universal consensus among all philosophers. When it comes to deciding the number and the nature of the various principles endorsed by the various schools, however, there is room for disagreement, but there is no room for disagreement on how the variance should be handled. This should happen (not by suppression of the freedom of science and speech, of course) but by an open and public debate in which one supports one's theses by having recourse to the authority of “means of cognition” (pramāna) accepted by all parties. One's position must not be contradicted by perception, inference, etc.
The appeal to reason and tolerance is expressed well in a verse quoted in the commentary to Haribhadra's Saddarśanasamuccaya (Ed. Luigi Suali, p. 110), the source of which is the Buddhist Samkarasvāmin's Devātiśayastotra 17 :
paksapāto na me Vire na dvesah kapilādiņu | yuktimad vacanaṁ yasya tasya karyah parigrahah 11
This readiness to discuss any dogma with arguments pro et contra, can only meet with our approval, and in the current academic atmosphere of European and American institutions of higher learning, it is something we can only benefit from taking to our hearts. Only on one issue, however, there was no debate. Those who rejected dharma were also excluded from debate, as “nihilists", or madmen. Krsna (BG 4.8) and Manu, leave us in no doubt that society was not prepared to tolerate such criminals. Likewise, even certain Buddhist sources condemn such individuals as asaṁvāsya and akathya, people you cannot live together with, and people whom you cannot

Page #222

The Humanism of Haribhadra
211
communicate with. Man derives his dignity not through his mere birth and existence, but through his participation in dharma. A man without dharma is but a mere beast, a common Indian adage sums up.
Turning to the classical Greek and Roman sources, we discover that the goals and methods are, in principle (but not in all its ramifications and details), similar to those that characterize classical Indian philosophy. Here, too, the ideal is that man should seek happiness through moral and intellectual purification. The normal life of the common, credulous and ignorant populace is considered unsatisfactory, much like a disease.
Taking Cicero as our eloquent and well-informed guide, we observe that virtus--the closest Latin equivalent to dharma-comprises the four "cardinal virtues"-scientia, justitia, fortitudo, and temperantia. In reality virtue-like dharma-is one. For practical purposes it can be said to have four aspects. These four aspects, furthermore, can be reduced to two, namely actio vitae and cognitio verior, if we were to translate into Sanskrit : karmayoga and jñānayoga (or tattvajñāna, etc.).
As opposed to mere brutes, observes Cicero, men are endowed with reason (ratio), and among all the properties and inclinations of men, there is none more natural and peculiar to them than an earnest desire and search for truth, and so they esteem the knowledge of things secret and wonderful as a necessary ingredient of a happy life. And he goes on (de officiis i. 15): “Thus, son Marcus, have I given you a rough draught, and just the outlines, as it were, of honesty; which, could she be seen in her full beauty with mortal eye, would make the whole world (as Plato has said) be in love with wisdom (sapientia). Now whatever is contained under the notion of honesty (honestum = virtus) arises from one of these four heads; first, a sagacious inquiry and observation for finding out of truth; second, a care to maintain that society and mutual intercourse which is between them; to render to every man what is his due; and to stand to one's words in all promises and bargains; which we call justice; third, the greatness and unshaken resolution of a truly brave and invincible mind; and last, a keeping of our words within the due limits of order and decency; under which are comprehended temperance and moderation. Now, every one of these several heads, though they all have a mutual connection and dependence on one another, has yet its peculiar class, as it were, and respective set of duties

Page #223

212
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
arising from it. From that, for example, which is mentioned first, and under which prudence and wisdom are contained, arises the duty of seeking, contemplating, and finding out truth, which is the proper and peculiar business of those virtues : for it is then, and then alone, that we justly esteem a man prudent and wise, when we find that he is able to see and discover the truth of things; and of an active, vigorous, and penetrating mind, to give an account of the reasons of them; so that it is truth that is the proper object of both these virtues, and that about which they are only concerned. The other three heads more peculiarly belong to the active life, and their business lies in procuring and keeping what is necessary for the preservation of it; as in holding up mutual love and correspondence among mankind; in an elevated greatness and strength of mind; which appears, as in getting things profitable and pleasant for ourselves and dependents, so more especially in despising and being above them. Then, as for the last, namely order, uniformity, moderation, and the like, it is plain that they belong not only to contemplation, but have also a respect to our outward actions; since from keeping of these within the bounds and limits of order and moderation, we are said to observe what is virtuous and becoming" (Thomas Cockman's 1699 translation, with slight changes).
A happy life, our ancient authorities agree, is a life of virtue and honesty. And such a life is also a life in love of truth. For further details I may refer the Latin reader to the philosophical works of Cicero, for as the Great Frederick once said-die sind alle sehr gut—they are all very good!
3. This, finally, brings us back to Haribhadra. The reader will have understood that I have thought it necessary, or at least useful, to introduce this great philosopher to persuade the reader that his work is not merely of antiquarian interest, but that modern academics can indeed benefit greatly from the study of his writings. And it is as a helping hand to those that would read his Astaka (and Lokatattvanirnaya) in the original Sanskrit that this work is here offered—as far as I am aware—for the first time in a modern translation. While it goes without saying that a reading of a translation will never replace the study of the original, it also seems evident that at least a brief survey of the basic ideas of the original may well serve to improve its proper understanding.

Page #224

The Humanism of Haribhadra
213
Some repetitions of what was said above are unavoidable. Here is a survey of the main arguments of Haribhadra's Astaka, I-XXXII :
I. Mahādeva deserves our bhakti, not only because he himself is omniscient and free from all moral and intellectual impurities, but also because he has taught us a scientific method that enables us also to destroy the obvious sufferings of saṁsāra completely.
II. It is by following the rules of dharma, and by avoiding vices such as hiṁsā, etc., that we may purify our body and our soul.
III. Also, by worship of Mahādeva, we may purify ourselves. External worship leads to svarga, whereas spiritual worship leads to moksa, or nirvāna, the total extinction of karma.
| 1V. One should employ dhyāna on dharma as a sort of fire to burn away the impurities of karma. Liberation, or moksa, is the result of jñāna and dhyāna.
V-VII. Among the three kinds of alms, the most perfect one is the one associated with pure intentions. A mendicant prefers to enjoy his meals in private.
VIII. Renunciation (pratyakhyāna) can be either material or spiritual. The latter consists in the correct mode of behaviour (caritra), and it is conducive to mukti.
IX. Of the three kinds of jñāna, the one aware of tattva is the highest. It is described in the agama, and it brings about great prosperity (mahodaya), i.e. liberation from the bonds of karma.
X. Among the three kinds of vairāgya, the third is associated with sajjñāna, or tattvaparijñāna and, as such, it is one of the means also conducive to the attainment of siddhi, i.e. liberation.
XI. The term tapas may be ambiguous; austerity may be painful, surely, but properly understood (i.e. according to yukti and agama), tapas consists of a special kind ofjñāna, sarvega, and śama. As such tapas serves to destroy the impurity of karma, and to bring about true happiness (sukha).
XII—XIII. When it comes to the various kinds of debate (vāda), the one on dharma presupposes a serious interest in the real truth (tattva). Its

Page #225

214
Christian Lindtner
purpose is to sharpen one's understanding of what the scriptures have to say about dharma, i.e. ahimsă, etc. Naturally, agama, our source of dharma, must not be contradicted by perception or by reasonable arguments. There is, to be sure, no point in trying to prove the validity of these means of valid knowledge (pramäņa). This would only lead us to absurdities. Their validity is a matter of common consent (prasiddhi). When all scriptures ("science") agree on dharma, we can safely rely on their authority.
Jambū-jyoti
XIV-XVI. There being various one-sided views about the nature of the soul, it is important-also in order to uphold the doctrine of ahimsa-to understand that the soul is, depending on various points of view, permanent as well as impermanent, etc. It must never be forgotten that ahimsă ist fundamental for bringing about svarga as well as mokṣa. The Jaina view of the soul is established not only by lokaprasiddhi, but also by sadbuddhi.
XVII-XVIII. As opposed to the Bauddhas and Brahmins who follow Manu, etc., an orthodox Jaina mendicant, true to the ideal of ahimsă, abstains from eating meat altogether.
XIX-XX. Likewise, he abstains from drinking liquor, and from sexual intercourse, both of which are sources of corruption, and thus in conflict with the laws of dharma.
XXI. It is far from sufficient merely to learn about dharma from agama, or sastra. There must also be room for dharmavāda, as said, and one must always try to understand dharma with sūkṣmabuddhi.
XXII. An advanced student understands the value of purity of character (bhāvaviśuddhi, cf. the Bhagavadgitä 17.16: bhāvasamśuddhi).
XXIII. A word of warning to those who vilify the dharma of Jainism.
XXIV-XXV. The results of following dharma are always positive. Virtuous behaviour brings about rebirth in heaven, and in the end, through jñāna, ultimate happiness, namely liberation.

XXVI-XXVII. A clarification of some moot points concerning the generosity and compassion of the Bhagavat.
XXVIII. It may be a virtuous thing for a ruler to abandon his kingdom.
XXIX. Equanimity (sāmāyika) is also a factor of mokṣa, being a benevolent attitude that purifies all activities. It is a sort of longing,

Page #226

The Humanism of Haribhadra
215
or striving (prarthana) for bodhi, etc. (and as such, we may add, comparable to the bodhicitta of the Bauddhas, see e.g. my Nagarjuniana, p. 183).
XXX. Thanks to its sāmāyika, tapas, etc. the soul finally becomes absolutely pure, omniscient and illuminated. In this state it illuminates, or cognizes, everything, including itself.
XXXI. Due to a particular sort of karma the liberated soul of the Lord still goes on with its dharmadeśanā, adapting the teachings according to the capacity and demands of the various audiences (-again, exactly like the bodhisattva of the Bauddhas).
XXXII. To be sure, liberation is due to the extinction of all karmas. It is freedom from rebirth, and absolute happiness. It is bliss, and it is entirely good, etc. Most scholars would agree with Haribhadra about this, he concludes, even though it cannot really be expressed in words. A final punyaparināmanā (to use the Bauddha term).
4. Clearly, Haribhadra is anything but a narrow-minded sectarian. When it comes to scholastic details he is undoubtedly a Jaina, but on fundamental issues he is so openminded and catholic that he almost stands out as a spokesman of classical Indian philosophy in general. He was naturally aware of this, for instance when he appeals to the authority of sarvaśāstrasamsthiti, when he rejects internal disputes as matters of mere samjñā, nāma-, or abhidhānabheda, when he advises us to reject paksapāta, and when he insists on our taking on an attitude of mādhyasthya.
The concept of dharma is, as it were--not only for Haribhadrathe cardinal point that lends a certain unity and coherence to his manifold views. It therefore seems reasonable to collect some of his most significant remarks from his authentic works, showing his views on dharma and various concepts closely related to dharma.
1. First of all, dharma consists in practice, or activity, anusthāna (DB 1.3). It is something we have to do, dharmaḥ kāryah (DB 1. 64). Another most frequent term for activity is yoga, and all purposeful human activity should focus on dharma-dharmottaro yogah (DB 5.73; Comm: dharmaphalaḥ sarva eva yogo vyāpārah). Yoga is a particular form of dharma, a dharmavisesah (Comm. to YS 2 : anusthāna is a kriyārupa having to do with vidhi and pratisedha). Understandably, compounds such as

Page #227

216
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
or dharmānusthāna, and dharmayoga (AP 27.8; YBD 3) and the like, are typical. The best translation of dharma is thus duty or virtue, officium or virtus.
2. There are two kinds of dharmic activity, moral practice (karma), and scientific knowledge (jñāna, samjñāna) (ŚVS 1 ff; DB 1.2-3). Corresponding to this, one may also speak of two kinds of yoga, or even of three kinds of yoga (yogatraya), namely the activity of mind, language, and body (DB 6.12). From various other points of view, there are three or eight kinds of yoga, etc. Still, yoga is basically an activity that leads to moksa : mukkhena joyanāo jogo savvo vi dhammavāvāro (YV 1).
3. Corresponding to the two kinds of dharma and yoga, there are two kinds of results (phala, DB 7.5). Both are satisfactory(sukha), only in differing degrees. The first consists in the happiness of rebirth in svarga, the second in the bliss of nirvana (DB 4.83 & 8.64). The latter is a yoga without any further activity, i.e. yoga as a result, as opposed to yoga as an instrumental activity, or means (DB 8.67). It is also defined as apavarga (DB 2.77-78), or as Brahman (YB 506), as purification, visuddhi (SVS 11). This is the ultimate goal of all human endeavour : nirvanaphalam atra tattvato' nusthānam (DB 6.19). In other words, yoga is moksahetu (YB 3 & 301), as is dharma. When it is said that ahiṁsā brings about svarga and moksa (AP 30.2), ahimsā then means moral and intellectual "innocence". As such, ahimsā is the best form of activity, it is the very essence of dharma, or yoga.
Verily, dharma is one, the difference between practice and theory being but a difference of purity (śuddhi, visuddhi). Purity, again, is omniscience (AP 30.2).
The double aspect of one and the same Dharma is also suggested by a celebrated verse in the Bhagavadgitā 5.5cd (cf. 3.3), a scripture to which Haribhadra frequently alludes :
ekam sāṁkhyam ca yogaṁ ca yah paśyati sa paśyati
Understandably, Haribhadra praises the dharmamāhātmya (YDS 163). Considering this fact (according to the consensus of sarvaśāstra), no benefit in this world is as great as that of dharmadeśanā, and dharma is our only true friend, dearer than life (YDS 58 ff). Normal life is like a great disease, mahävyādhi, Haribhadra often reminds us.

Page #228

The Humanism of Haribhadra
4. Our knowledge of dharma-which is also defined as śrutacāritrātmaka (Comm. ad DB 3.69)-is derived from science, dharmastu na vină śāstrāt (YB 222 ff). Or, according to the fragmentary Brahmasiddhantasamuccaya (BSS) 143 :
dharmadharmavyavasthāyāḥ śāstram eva niyāmakaṁ | taduktasevanad dharmaḥ, adharmas tadviparyayāt || Exactly the same view is expressed in the Bhagavadgītā 16.24:
tasmāc chāstraṁ pramāṇaṁ te kāryākāryavyavasthitau ||
Experience shows, however, that only some individuals are capable of receiving the dharmadeśanā (DB 2.40 & 2.81; LTN 2 ff.). Not all human beings can receive the saddharmabija (DB 2.1), they are apātra, or abhavya (DB 2.81).
217
It is because they teach us authoritatively, that we must have bhakti to sadyogaśāstresu (YDS 110; cf. YB 222 ff). Also, we must have bhakti to a sarvajña, a Bhagavat who is dharmadeśaka (DB 6.48). He teaches the truth, for na dharme māyā (DB 4.31).
Truth is intimately related to dharma. Along with yajña, tapas, and dhyāna, satya is thus said to be dharmasadhana (BSS 114). Otherwise, the main "causes" of dharma are the five mahāvrata, which include satya and ahimsā, etc. (SVS 5).
That satya and dharma are intimately related is a common notion of Indian philosophy and law. When the Bauddhas, for instance, propagate the four Aryan Truths, these truths are truth about Dharma and about the dharmas (manifesting the Dharma, in the singular) i.e. about tad ekam as opposed to idam sarvam-the dharmādhātu as opposed to the sattvadhātu. There are four Aryan truths in order to be complete, for Dharma must stand firmly on four feet. This, as known, is an old Indo-European notion. Manu 1.81 is almost too famous to quote :
catuṣpāt sakalo dharmaḥ satyam caiva kṛte yuge | nādharmeṇāgamaḥ kaścin manuṣyān prati vartate ||

More precisely, that the source of dharma is science (śāstra, sadyogaśāstra), means that the source of dharma is the agama of a Bhagavat who is sarvajña. Only a Bhagavat who is omniscient knows what he is

Page #229

218
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
talking about. To others he teaches the dharma that he himself has discovered. In reality there is only one sarvajña, though there appears to be many (such as Mahāvīra, Buddha, etc.). What a Bhagavat teaches others is something-namely dharma--that in a sense transcends our senses, it is atīndriyārtha (YDS 98 & 144; YB 425 ff). The dharma that a Bhagvat has seen personally is not within the field (visaya) of anumāna (YDS 144). Not even a Bhagavat can communicate true knowledge—it remains a matter of personal practice—but as a teacher he can teach a method of obtaining knowledge for one self. He can speak the truth, however.
Even though we must "take his word for it", his words must nevertheless not be in conflict with the common means of knowledge (pramāna). As a rule, āgama must be supported by yukti (LTN 16 & 18) :
yac cintyamānam na dadāti yuktim pratyaksato nāpyanumānataśca | tad buddhiman ko nu bhajeta loke gośrngatah ksīrasamudbhavo na ||
āgamena ca yuktyā ca yo 'rthaḥ samabhigamyate | parīksya hemavad grāhyah paksapātāgrahena kim ||
Neediess to say, this method of scientific investigation is an old one in India. Already in the Carakasashita, as known, we read : dvividham eva khalu sarvam-sac-cāsac ca-tasya caturvidhā parīksā : aptopadeśah pratyakşam anumānam yuktiśceti.
Therefore, to conduct a scientific parīksā, Haribhadra repeatedly emphasizes the need of the development of intelligence, dhi, buddhi, prajñā, mati. One of his favourite terms is sūksmabuddhi, the subtle intelligence necessary for understanding dharma. Intelligence enables us to discern truth from falsehood, and without the faculty of discrimination there is no true knowledge. Man is a rational creature. To attain the highest form of yoga a philosopher must employ his intelligence in three ways :
agamenănumănena dhyānābhyāsarasena ca tridhā prakalpayan prajñām labhate yogam uttamam ||
The verse is found in YB 412, and repeated in YDS 101 and BSS 62 (with the variants yogābhyāsarasena in b, and tattvam uttamam in d). It is

Page #230

The Humanism of Haribhadra
219
also found in Vyāsa's commentary to Yogasūtra 1.48. (In Buddhism and in Vedānta, of course, the same distinction is to be found.) If we translate prajña, buddhi, mati or dhi with reason, ratio, and if we keep in mind that the ultimate meaning of reason has to do with the realization of dharma, then it is clear that philosophy always has a moral or a religious background.
It would be superfluous to mention that all other classical darśanas constantly emphasize the need of reason (buddhi, prajñā, mati, dhi, etc.) as the instrument that brings about tattvajñāna. (A statistical investigation would undoubtedly show that these synonyms for reason are most frequently employed in the instrumental case.)
It should be clear in our minds that dharma has to do with itikartavyatā, our duties : it tells us what to do, and what not to do. The knowledge of dharma, therefore, is direct, and thus dharma is not a direct object of anumāna or any other pramāņa, with the possible exception ofyogipratyaksa (which is, however, only a pramāņa figuratively speaking, for in action the distinction between means and goals of knowledge are obliterated). In other words, dharma tells us what to do, it has to do with values, whereas a pramāna has to do with “facts”, it is a means of deciding what is and what is not. We can speak of dharmajñāna, but it would be odd to say that we possess dharmapramāna. We cannot “hold” an activity in our hands, so to speak : scimus, qvia facimus.
Scientific statements must never be contradicted by perception or inference. Also, dry logic, suskatarka, or bad logic-kutarka-may lead us astray (YDS 86-152). Spiritual liberation presupposes true science. It is a knowledge that cannot be communicated, but it is also a knowledge that cannot be contradicted. It transcends reason without being in conflict with reason. Dharma, therefore, is also a matter of wisdom, not merely of dry erudition.
It is in this sense (to avoid "scientific religion” or “religious science" ) I here suggest that we may speak of the humanism of Haribhadra. At the root of true humanism we find a deep desire for clarity and purity.
Why this is so, is in itself a scientific question sui juris. It is, perhaps, only in the light of modern biology that we can hope for an answer to this difficult question—if ever.

Page #231

220
Jambū-jyoti
5. Finally a word about Haribhadra's philosophical syncretism. If he himself had a word for "syncretism", it is suggested by the term samuccaya— often found in the title of several of his works, such as Śāstravārtāsamuccaya (SVS), Yogadrstisamuccaya (YDS), and Saḍdarśanasamuccaya (SDS). In these treatises Haribhadra provides a systematic review of the main views of various opponents, rejects some as illogical, and accepts others as partly true from his own Jaina standpoint of anekantavāda, or syādvāda.
Christian Lindtner
In SDS 2, for instance, Haribhadra claims that there are only six classical systems of Indian philosophy. Their fundamental differences (mulabheda) have to do with the devata and the number and nature of tattvas accepted by them. Otherwise, they all agree that sukha-that of svarga and that of mokṣa-is the outcome of dharma, just as duḥkha is the result of papa (SVS 2). (True, there are also some Nihilists such as the Lokayata or Cārvāka, known to maintain that dharma and adharma do not exist at all. For them kāma is the highest dharma, a position that men of wisdom must reject as absurd (SDS 81-87).)
Haribhadra is aware that the common ideal of a double dharma is expressed in different terms in different texts (SVS 23):
bhogamuktiphalo dharmaḥ sa pravṛttītarātmakaḥ | samyagmithyādirūpaś ca gītas tantrantareṣv api
In his commentary to SVS 23, Haribhadra adds that others prefer the terminology abhyudaya and niḥśreyasa. Needless to say, the earliest classical sources for this is Vaiseṣikasūtra 1.1.2: yato 'bhyudayaniḥśreyasasiddhiḥ sa dharmaḥ.
Before Haribhadra, Buddhist scholars had adopted this terminology. Thus Śāntarakṣita, in his Tattvasaṁgraha 3486 (known to Haribhadra, who mentions Sāntarakṣita) writes:

yato 'bhyudayanispattir yato niḥśreyasasya ca | sa dharma ucyate tādṛk sarvair eva vicakṣaṇaiḥ ||
And already many centuries before Santarakṣita, Nāgārjuna, in the introduction to his Ratnavali 1. 2-4, had also adopted the terminology of Vaiśesika (often mentioned by him) when he presented the Buddhist Dharma to his reader :

Page #232

The Humanism of Haribhadra
221
dharmam ekāntakalyānam rājan dharmodayāya te vaksyāmi, dharmaḥ siddhim hi yāti saddharmabhājane ||
prāg dharmo 'bhyudayo yatra paścān naihśreyasodayah samprāpyābhyudayam yasmād eti naihśreyasaṁ kramāt 11
sukham abhyudayas tatra mokṣo naiḥśreyaso matah | asya sādhanasaṁksepah sraddhāprajñe samāsatah 1
śrāddhatvad bhājate dharmam prājñatvād vetti tattvatah | prajñā pradhānam tv anayoh śraddhā pūrvamgamāsya tu |
Mahāyāna not only makes the distinction between abhyudaya/ naiḥśreyasa, or between sraddhā/prajñā, but also between punyaand jñānasambhāra. So Mahāyāna obviously also recognizes the double dharma of karma and jñānakānda.
On the other hand, there was no universal agreement about the source, or root of dharma. Some would find the dharmamūla in the eternal Word of the Veda, insisting that no human being could have any knowledge about what was atindriya. This position was taken by Kumārila and others. The Jainas and the Buddhists, on the other hand, would reject the authority of the Veda, replacing it with that of a compassionate and omniscient Bhagavat. Since, in the end, a Bhagavat is a body of knowledge, the difference, after all, may not be that great. Passages such as Manu 2.6 ff :
vedo 'khilo dharmamülaṁ smrtiśīle ca tadvidām | ācāraś caiva sādhūnām ātmanas tustir eva ca ||
reflect a later period where an attempt has been made to combine the authority of the impersonal Vedic Word with that of an authoritative human/divine Bhagavat etc.
When the Buddhists and the Jainas replaced the Word of the Veda with the Word of their omniscient Bhagavat, they faced a new problem. Which Bhagavat was the true and omniscient Bhagavat? Some Buddhists and some Jainas, identifying Bhagavat with Brahman, would opt for a syncretistic solution claiming that one and the same Bhagavat/ Brahman actually appeared in different forms, as Buddha, Visnu, Mahāvīra, etc. Early evidence for such a syncretistic tendency is found in the Lankāvatārasūtra

Page #233

222
Jambu-jyoti
(p. 192), and this standpoint is also taken by Haribhadra (who, incidentally knows this sūtra, see AP 17.8). This is what Haribhadra says in YDS 128: eka eva tu mārgo 'yam teṣām samaparāyaṇaḥ
Christian Lindtner
The great Nyaya philosopher, Jayantabhatta, in his Agamaḍambara 4.57, is of the same opinion:
ekaḥ śivaḥ pasupatiḥ kapilo 'tha viṣṇuh samkarṣaṇo jinamuniḥ sugato manur vā | saṁjñāḥ paraṁ pṛthag imās tanavo 'pi kāmam avyākṛte tu paramātmani nāsti bhedaḥ ||
(For further evidence of such syncretism, see Kamaleswar Bhattacharya, "Religious Syncretism in Ancient Cambodia", in Dharmadūta. Mélanges offerts au Vénérable Thich Huyên-Vi, Paris 1997, and Kameshwar Nath Mishra (Ed.), Glimpses of the Sanskrit Buddhist Literature, Varanasi 1997, pp. 47-56.)

Another noteworthy feature that Haribhadra shares with several other classical Indian philosophers concerns the relationship between agama and anumāna/tarka. As said, once we have learned about dharma from āgama/śāstra it is also our duty critically to analyse and understand what we have read or studied. To avoid misunderstandings, anumāna/tarka is indispensable. Some intellectuals, however, go too far failing to see that dharma is not within the viṣaya of anumana/tarka. (This would reduce dharma, which consists, in practice, of a purely "academic" matter, so to speak.) Hence we find authorities such as Manu, Bhartṛhari, Kambala, Bhavya, Śankara and Haribhadra warning their readers against kutarka, against placing too much emphasis on anumāna, or on dry logic, suskatarka. (See my paper "Linking up Bhartṛhari and the Bauddhas" in Asiatische Studien 47/1 (1993) for references.) Even though their devatā (iṣṭa-deva) and their tattvas differ, all these authorities agree that dharma should be supported by but never contradicted by anumāna/tarka/yukti. In SVS 210 we find Haribhadra quoting Manu 12.106 with approval (with the var. dharmasastram for dharmopadeśam). Dharma, in other words, must be accepted on the basis of faith and reason. Those who simply reject dharma (and, consequently, adharma) must be rejected as Nihilists.

Page #234

The Humanism of Haribhadra
223
Another odd group is represented by the saṁsāramocaka. Perhaps the first author to refer to those who endorse murder (i.e. hiṁsā) as a means of liberating others from the sufferings of saṁsāra, is Kumārila (see Wilhelm Halbfass, India and Europe, Albany 1988, p. 329, with ref.). An echo of Kumārila (ŚV 5.5) is found in Bhavya's Madhyamakahrdaya 9.35. The argument is that if agama without reason were sufficient to establish dharma, then even the saṁsāramocaka would be justified in killing other living beings in order to “liberate” them, for this is what their scriptures command them to do. The otherwise rare term is also found in Sankara and in Haribhadra (ŚVS 150). The saṁsāramocaka violates the common opinion that defines dharma as ahiṁsā (some ref. in Halbfass, op. cit., p. 554). A mere appeal to āgama thus proves nothing as it would have too many absurd consequences.
When Haribhadra mentions the ten causes (hetu, sādhana) of dharma (as opposed to the ten causes of pāpa), he again reflects sarvaśāstrasaṁsthiti (ŚVS 4-5). Similar lists are found in Buddhist sūtras and in Manu 12.3-7, q.v., etc. They have to do with the purification of mind, speech, and body, i.e. with the two kinds of yoga.
Included in this list are the five virtues of ahiṁsā, satya, asteya, brahmacarya and aparigraha. The Jaina sources have much to say about these (see e.g. R. Williams, Jaina Yoga, London 1963, pp. 55–-99). They are also listed in the Yogasutra 2.30; Gaudapāda ad SK 23, etc. Interestingly, a Buddhist author describes the saddharma of Śākyamuni as consisting of satya, honesty (mi bslu), brahmacarya, discipline (dul ba), and love (brtse) (see Johannes Schneider, Udbhatasiddhasvāmins Visesastava, Bonn 1993, p. 68, v. 65). Summarized under the twin concept of śraddhã and prajñā (corresponding to the double dharma) similar lists may be found in Nāgārjuna's celebrated Ratnāvali, which, as said, also refers to the definition of dharma given in Vaiśesikasūtra 1.1.3.
When it comes to psychology (in the most literal sense of the word), Haribhadra, too, by his own admission, takes a syncretistic stand. It is the nature of the soul to get to know itself by its own innate light. Only the defects of karma prevent it from always grasping itself in that original state of omniscience. It can be directly perceived through yogic perception (ŚVS 86-87):

Page #235

224
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
ātmanātmagrahe tasya tatsvabhāvatvayogataḥ | sadaivāgrahaṇam hy evam vijñeyaṁ karmadoṣataḥ || ataḥ pratyakṣasamsiddhaḥ sarvaprāṇabhṛtam ayam | svayamjyotiḥ sadaivātmā tathā vede 'pi pathyate ||
So he shares a standpoint also often expressed by other Jaina and Bauddha savants. And Sankara expresses himself in almost the same words when speaking of an avagati that is kūṭasthaḥ svayaṁsiddhātmajyotiḥsvarūpeti ca (Upadeśasāhasrī 2.107, etc.). Dharmakirti (quoted by Sankara, US 18.142) is basically of the same opinion when speaking of the undivided buddhi which only experiences itself and svayam saiva prakāśate (Pramāṇaviniscaya 1.38). In Bhartṛhari, one of Haribhadra's other authorities, we come across expressions such as punyatamaṁ jyotis, tamasi jyotiḥ śuddham, etc. (see Väkyapadīya 1.12, 18, etc.). As Haribhadra points out (above), this is an old Vedic idea, for as e.g. Frauwallner observed: "...die alte Vorstellung des Atman als leuchtend und glanzend, ein altes Erbstuck aus einer Agnilehre, ist auch der Yajnavalkyalehre geläufig" (Kleine Schriften, Wiesbaden 1982, p. 110). Numerous other sources could be quoted to the effect that Haribhadra's doctrine of atman as svayamjyotiḥ is shared by the agama of many other classical Indian philosophers ("psychologists").
(The notion of the natural luminosity of reason is common in Europe, too. Descartes, for instance, often speaks of man's intellectus as a lumen naturale and he is, in the Meditationes de Prima Philosophia, aware that mens, dum intelligit, se ad se ipsam quodammodo convertit.)
It is thus a common Indian ideal that, even if the source of Dharma is agama, still āgama is no āgama if contradicted by perception or reason.

For long all civilized Romans and Greeks rejected the Christian innovations as pure superstition, but in the long run, as known, the myths and the miracles found more attentive ears than the wisdom of the Greeks. Politics and propaganda proved stronger than truth and science. The sway of lokapakti was successful.
Haribhadra, then, is a noble Indian spokesman of a universal humanism that crusades not only against those that seek freedom through kriyāmātra, but also against those who propagate, in various ways, dharmadvesa.

Page #236

The Humanism of Haribhadra
It is, in short, as if the modern apostles of sociology and psychology etc. have succeeded in reducing the four traditional puruşärthas to two, namely artha and kāma, leaving out dharma and mokṣa. They have thus failed to realize that the rejection of dharma and mokṣa reduces man's pursuit of artha and kāma to that of a mere beast. (On the four kinds of life there is a good discussion by Aristotle, in his Nicomachean Ethics (1095b), to which I invite the Aryan reader's attention.)
225
What the world needs today is a new aristocracy of virtue and talent (Jefferson). If the study of the writings of Haribhadra may serve as one of the many means to that end, then no further apology is needed for bringing out his nice little book on the causes and effect of dharma, of which even a small drop can provide the student who is bhavya with some nourishment.
Chapters (prakarana) 17 and 18 of the Astaka were translated into French by W.B. Bollée as "Le Végétarisme défendu par Haribhadrasūri contre un bouddhiste et un brahmana", in N. K. Wagle and F. Watanabe (Eds.), studies on Buddhism in Honour of Professor A. K. Warder, Toronto 1993, pp.22-28. I am not aware of any other modern translations. The text used was published in Ahmedabad samvat 1968 (1911), with the commentary of Jinesvara/Abhayadeva. An edition of the text from 1941, with a translation into Gujarātī, was also consulted. Minor misprints and errors, all obvious, were tactically made.
A translation of the Lokatattvanirnaya is also appended. It, too, will provide the reader with an arsenal of arguments against some obvious modern articles of superstition. I could here use the text published (with an Italian translation) by Luigi Suali in 1905, in the Giornale della Societa Asiatica Italiana, vol. 18, pp. 263-319. The text seems first to have been published in Bhavnagar 1902. I could also consult the reprint from 1921, with a Gujarāti translation. A brief discussion is found in Kapadia, op. cit, II, pp. xxxiv-xxxv. See also Karl H. Potter (Ed.), Bibliography of Indian Philosophies, Delhi 1970, pp. 130-132.
Finally, I wish to thank Dr. Olle Qvarnström (Lund), Professors Nalini Balbir (Paris), Klaus Bruhn (Berlin), and W. B. Bollée (Heidelberg) for providing me with (copies of) various rare publications by Haribhadra and others. A special debt of gratitude I own to our guru Muni Jambūvijaya,

Page #237

226
Jambu-jyoti
who for so many years never failed to let me share the fruits of his learned. and unselfish labours.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
1.
Christian Lindtner
A TREATISE OF OCTADES
I. Eight Verses in Honour of Mahadeva
[Jina] certainly has absolutely none of the desire that [normally] creates impurities. Nor does he have any of the hatred towards living beings that is [like] a forest fire having tranquillity as its fuél.
Nor does he have the delusion that covers true cognition and causes impure behaviour. His greatness is celebrated in the three worlds. He is called Mahadeva !
He is free from desire, he is omniscient, a master of eternal bliss, beyond even a little bit of impure karma, and he is absolutely undivided.
All the gods find him worthy of honour, and all the yogis meditate upon him. He is the author of all the rules of wisdom. He is called Mahadeva !
Being thus in possession of virtuous conduct, he has launched a science that is a path to bliss, the highest light, [and] free from the three kinds of blemish.
Moreover, the method to propitiate him is, of course, simply always to try hard to serve him, to the best of one's ability according to rule. Such [devotion] will necessarily grant good results!
By following the advice of a good doctor one may get totally rid of one's disease. Likewise, by following the words of [Mahadeva] one may certainly destroy samsara completely!
With true devotion (bhakti), I will always keep on paying homage to Mahadeva who is thus [as described above], who is tranquil, who has done his duty, and who is a man of intelligence (dhi)!
II. Eight Verses on Ablution
There is said to be two kinds of ablution [in Jainism]: One is physical, and one is spiritual. Others speak of an external and an internal [kind of ablution to much the same effect].

Page #238

The Humanism of Haribhadra
227
2.
To clean a part of one's body with water for a moment, mostly without disturbing others, is called physical ablution.
If a person engaged in something unclean has done so, and then, according to rule, pays homage to sacred images and guests, then this [kind of ablution] will also purify him (spiritually).
4.
[It purifies him) because it actually is experienced to do so since it is a cause of spiritual purification. This is because it brings about new good qualities even if some of the old] blemishes are still present.
5.
In science the set of rules for bringing about virtue (dharma) depends on a person possessing authority. It must be understood [that this set of rules] has to do with virtue and vice. It can be compared to a remedy against a disease.
6.
Spiritual ablution is said always to purify the soul with the help of the water of contemplation (dhyāna). The impurity it refers to is karma.
The foremost among sages have stated that this ultimate kind of ablution for sages increases their vows and good behaviour when they have abstained from vices (such as] violence.
Having performed ablution properly in this way, one gets rid of all impurities. One will not become defiled again. Thereby one has performed ablutions in the real sense of the term !
III. Eight Verses on Worship
1.
The (worship] of “eight flowers" is said to produce heaven and liberation. There are, according to those who see the truth of the matter, two kinds : An impure and the opposite (i.e. a pure form of worship).
[When one worships Mahādeva] with flowers, small or abundant, of various sorts, of pure origin, just as it happens to be, fresh, in pure pots...
3.
(And then] offers them to the God of gods, who is free from the eight kinds of decay, and who has the wealth of virtues arising from that, (then) this sort of worship) is called impure.
4.
By nature this kind (of worship] is mixed, because spiritual (purification) is a result of physical (purification, as suggested above).

Page #239

228
Christian Lindtner
Jambu-jyoti
[This kind of worship) must be understood to bring about heaven (svarga).
But there is also [a kind of worship having to do with] spiritual "flowers" that consists of the virtues of scientific statements. They never wither, for (science) is full of them, and so they are [always] fragrant.
6.
These are the real [spiritual] flowers : Non-violence, honesty, not stealing, chastity, non-attachment, devotion to one's guru [or parents), penance, and insight. A [worship] offered to the God of gods with such (“flowers”), full of respect and out of piety—such a [worship] is said to be pure.
7.
By such (worship] a spiritual attitude is commended. From this the extinction of karma will surely result. Nirvana follows from the extinction of karma. So this kind (of worship) is approved by good
men.
IV. Eight Verses on Making a Fire
1.
Using his [eight kinds of] karma as fuel, a consecrated (monk] should, with the fire of meditation on dharma (dharmadhyāna), try to make a solid fire with true imagination as oblation.
Consecration (i.e. monkhood) is said to be for the purpose of liberation. Since this (namely liberation) in the scripture is said to be the result of insight and meditation, therefore there is this aphorism in the Śivadharmottara (or Nandikeśvarasamhitā] :
3.
“By worship (of a god, one may attain] an abundant kingdom. By making a fire [one attains) wealth. Austerity is for the clearing of bad karma. Insight and meditation bring about liberation".
4.
But bad karma can take place when one is in possession of kingdom and riches. Therefore, recourse to the two causes of these [namely kingdom and riches, i.e. worship and making a fire] is not blameless. This must be considered correctly !
Since the clearing of such [bad karma) takes place by means of austerities, and not by means of gifts etc., therefore it is not possible in

Page #240

The Humanism of Haribhadra
229
any other way. Also, a great soul [Vyāsa] has said so sin the Mahābhārata 3.2.47] :
"If one desires wealth for the sake of dharma, then it would be far better not to have any desire at all. Of course, it is far better not to touch mud than only having to wash it off again".
7.
But by resorting to the road to freedom, these [good results of making a fire of dharmadhyāna] will in all probability become even more splendid on earth. They will, in fact, become beneficial. There is a consensus about this in all good (and sound] scriptures.
Sacrifice and pious works, as prescribed for one having desires, do not lead to freedom. However, if one has no desire, they do. This is the only suitable way of making a fire !
V. Eight Verses on Alms
1.
Those who know the truth have said that there are three kinds of alms : The first is the one that produces all perfections. The second destroys manliness. [The third] is alms for subsistence (or survival].
When an ascetic has attached himself to meditation (dhyāna), etc., when he remains loyal to the orders of his guru, and when he never undertakes [anything bad], then [this kind of alms) is considered to bring about all perfections.
Out of a pure intention [the first kind of alms] is prescribed for the benefit of the body of householders so that an unattached ascetic roaming about like a bee can prolong his life, etc.
If a religious mendicant behaves against this and involves himself in bad karma, then this sort of alms) is said to destroy his manliness.
A fat and foolish [mendicant) piteously fills his belly with alms, [thus] degrading dharma. He simply destroys his manliness.
6.
[When mendicants] who are destitute, blind or lame, and incapable of doing anything else, roam about for alms just to survive, then this is called alms for subsistence.

Page #241

230
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
7.
It could not be so bad [to give] such alms to such [miserable people] for, of course, in this way they do not cause derogation of dharma, for they merely awaken our compassion.
Also, it must be understood, that those who give (alms] to them will get a reward that depends on the field [i.e. the kind of person who receives the alms), or on the intention (on the part of the donor). This is a pure and rewarding [kind of alms].
VI. Eight Verses on Alms that Produce All Perfections
1.
When the food [offered] to an ascetic is not made, not ordered to be made by others, and not at all prepared for him, only then) is it declared to be pure [and] purifying.
2.
Opponent : But if [the food) is not prepared [for him) in advance, then how can one give it [to him] with the intention of offering it? So it is wrong to say that it is pure !
3.
Reply : This is not the case, for alms should only be received in the house of good householders. There is no other place that one could otherwise strive for the good of oneself and others.
Opponent : But when the [food) is spoiled, then, in particular, there is an intention !-Reply : Such a refutation would not be correct as long as (we are] speaking of beggars !
5.
We should also mention the object of such an [intention] : It is for the sake of good karma, and it has to be due to the impossibility of naming the [mendicant) in question. (This is what a pure intention must be like). Otherwise a “competent” (person], is not (really] competent.
6.
If one has an intention, for one's own enjoyment of a thing, where the gift is parted out, then, at the time of action, it is bad as an object of both [persons involved).
But, in the case of an undertaking suitable to oneself, a corresponding intention is under no circumstances bad. This is because it is a pure attitude; it is like association with something else that is pure.

Page #242

The Humanism of Haribhadra
231
8.
Thus there is also a clear advantage [to be had from giving food] not prepared [for a particular guest]. So it has not been said to be an impossibility. This is perfection of competence. The religion of an ascetic is exceedingly difficult !
VII. Eight Verses on Meals in Private
1.
In order to avoid good and [bad karma, a mendicant] who has turned away from all [bad) undertakings, who wants to be free and who has developed himself spiritually, prefers to take his meals in private.
When a miserable (mendicant), for instance, suffers from hunger and notices someone eating a meal, and then asks for something, one may, out of compassion, give him something. This is generally said to be a bond of good karma.
3.
However, (philosophers] who speak of liberation do not approve of this sort of [bond], because it is the cause of rebirth. This is because the sacred scriptures agree that liberation is due to the extinction of good and bad karma.
In most cases a humane person will not fail to give such a (miserable mendicant a meal to eat]. Since it is his nature to do like that he is also capable of remaining at ease.
5.
11,
If, however, one fails to give [a meal) to a miserable (mendicant) etc., then enmity will certainly be the result. From that follows hatred towards the teachings, and from that a long line of bad rebirths.
In this case (those who know the truth] have spoken of a bond of bad karma which is in conflict with the intention of the scriptures. This is because it would be the cause of such [bad karma not to give a meal to a mendicant] out of negligence when one has the means to do so.
7.
Of course, the intention of the scriptures must always be effected strenuously as far as possible by a [mendicant] who wants to be free and who is concerned with no other occupations.
Since it has thus been shown in the scriptures that in both cases it is a bad thing to take a meal in public, therefore, it is reasonable to give it up.

Page #243

232
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
VIII. Eight Verses on Renunciation
1.
There are two kinds of renunciation, a material and a spiritual. The first one, of course, has to do with attention etc., the other is considered to be quite different from this. [There are several] hindrances for renunciation : Attention, lack of order, and lack of ripening as well. Another (hindrance) is lack of energy.
2.
It sometimes happens that incapable (students are full] of attention to profit and other [material values). But, according to the scriptures, this is not worth anything. Therefore, attention is blameworthy in such cases.
Just as people normally do not grasp science, etc., because of lack of order [in their studies), thus this must also be considered a result of there being something wrong.
5.
Likewise, if one is not ripe enough for renunciation (even though one observes that things] cease being permanent, this is also a bad (renunciation). This is due to one's lack of devotion to the orders of Jina, and to one's lack of longing for liberation.
When [one's renunciation] is disturbed by the arising of impure karma---due to lack of exalted energy--this is still called material renunciation.
7.
As opposed to this, Jina has spoken of spiritual renunciation. It consists in the correct mode of behaviour. It is necessarily a means of bringing about liberation.
When one, with true devotion, understands what the Jina says, then, even if it is disturbed by something material, it still will be a cause of spiritual renunciation.
IX. Eight Verses on Knowledge
1.
The great sages say that there are three kinds of] knowledge (jñāna) : One that (merely) reflects an object, one that changes with the soul, and one that is aware of true reality (tattva) :

Page #244

The Humanism of Haribhadra
233
2.
The one that reflects an object can be compared to the delusions of [foolish] children etc. with regard to poison, thorns, jewels etc. It is not aware that these [dangerous things etc.) must be avoided, etc.
3.
Such [wrong knowledge) is said to be characterized by careless activity etc. It ends in obstruction in the form of ignorance. It is the cause of great harm.
4.
5.
[When the knowledge] of one just about to fall, etc. is not in doubt about such problems, etc., [then] it is considered to be related to a change of the soul when applied to the attainment of misfortune, etc. [When such a knowledge] can be made manifest through a corresponding mode of activity, etc., when it is connected with something real, and when it arises from a decrease of the obstructions of knowledge, then, as a rule, it is the cause of dispassion.
6.
[When knowledge that] is correctly aware of the truth means that a healthy and calm [person) is as sure as one can be about certain things having to be avoided, etc., [then it is] fruitful.
It is said that it can be obtained by means of a pure mode of behaviour with regard to [things that are] right, etc. It means the end of (all] obstructions of true cognition, and it is the cause of great prosperity.
8.
Those who are devoted to the scriptures should always strive for this by rigorously abandoning bad beliefs with the sincerity of faith etc. in the path (of Jainism).
X. Eight Verses about Dispassion
1.
There are, according to tradition, three kinds of dispassion (vairāgya) : The first is called meditation on suffering, the second has delusion as its origin (mohagarbha), the (third] is associated with true knowledge. [The first] is mostly the cause of separation, etc. from something being the opposite of what one likes. It is not [quite] free from what one should, to the best of one's ability, try to renounce, etc.
It creates disgust, it is full of dispair, [and it may be] the cause of suicide, etc. Such meditation on suffering is normally considered the first (and fundamental kind of] dispassion.

Page #245

234
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Christian Lindtner
Jambu-jyoti
When one is certain that the soul here [in this world] is either entirely one, eternal and unbound, or, momentary [and] unreal, [and one] therefore regards normal life as being without value...
Then this kind of dispassion is said to have delusion [about the soul] as its origin. [It applies to a person] who is calm so as to abandon this [i.e. normal life], and who also sincerely behaves in a good way.
Most of these souls, as they transform, are, of course, bound by external desire, etc. Due to this, woe! the souls remain in the normal cruel life. Those who see the truth say that dispassion associated with true knowledge consists in having understood so [i.e. in knowing] how to abandon this [namely samsara], and in its total abandonment.
This necessarily comes about as a result of a complete understanding of the truth. So, this [dispassion associated with cognition of reality] is the means of attaining perfection, as the Jinas have, in fact, declared !
XI. Eight Verses on Austerity
Some [ignorant people] think that austerity (tapas) consisting in suffering [may bring about mokṣa], but this is not logical. This is because it is the nature of this [sort of tapas] to arise as karma, just as in the case of the suffering of a bull, for instance..
If it were so, then all who practise tapas would have to suffer. This is because they are characterized by the specific property [namely suffering] of that [namely tapas], just like a rich man is [characterized] by a large amount of riches.
Also, if so, according to your interpretation, great practitioners of tapas would have to belong in hell, etc. [which is, of course, characterized by suffering]. Since the most important thing for them is the happiness of equanimity, yogis are, however, not afflicted by suffering.
Therefore, intelligent people must abandon this kind [of bad tapas] as being foreign to logic and to the scriptures. Since it produces a kind of dhyana that is not recommended, it mostly causes injury to oneself.

Since the Jinas have urged us never to relinquish the activity (yoga) of our mind and our senses, how, therefore, could it [namely tapas = yoga] possibly have the nature of suffering?

Page #246

The Humanism of Haribhadra
235
Sometimes there may be a little bit of pain in the body from not eating, etc. This is just like the behaviour of an ailment. It does not contradict the point we here wish to make.
7.
Surely, when looked upon in the perspective that) one's desired aims are fully achieved, torment of the body (= tapas) is not painful. In this case one can also compare it to [the trouble and the final profit] of those who are traders of precious stones, etc. So, it must be known, tapas essentially consists of a special kind of insight, longing for liberation (samvega) and calmness. It is a purity by destruction of karma, and it consists of pleasure without any pain !
8.
XII. Eight Verses on Debate
1.
The greatest sages have declared that there are three kinds of debate (vāda) : A dry debate, a controversy, and a moral debate.
When an 'ascetic has [a debate] with a foolish (opponent] who is exceedingly arrogant, who has a most ferocious mind, and who really hates dharma, then this is called a dry (or useless] debate.
3.
This kind (of debate] has two aspects : If [the opponent] triumphs, dharma will be neglected, etc. If he is defeated, [dharma] will be degraded. So [this kind of debate) really increases misfortune.
4.
Again, (if one has a debate) devoted to quibble and futile rejoinders with a wretched mean person only interested in profit and fame, this is traditionally called a controversy.
5.
In this case it is very difficult for an honest man to remain true to his own principles. But even if he does win [the debate), imperfections such as karma that restricts, etc., will impede his (good) fate.
6.
[A moral debate) is a debate on dharma that one has with an intelligent person who is interested in the next world, who is impartial, and who really understands the truths in his (or one's] own scriptures.
7.
If one wins, the result is a blameless comprehension of dharma, etc. If one is defeated [the result is also positive, for then] one's personal delusion is necessarily destroyed.

Page #247

236
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
8.
Here, moreover, a learned (student) should (only) take up a debate after he has decided whether the place, the time, the participants, etc. are important or unimportant, and after he has become familiar with the philosophy of the Jina.
XIII. Eight Verses on a Debate about Dharma The scope of a moral debate is simply to acquire [an understanding] of the meaning (of the scriptures etc.) in question, based on various texts. It can be defined as a means of producing dharma.
2.
These are the five means of purifying oneself accepted by all moral persons : Non-violence, truth, not stealing, liberality and avoidance of sexual intercourse.
Where these five reasonably belong in their fundamental sense, and where they do not [belong], this is something that should be considered scientifically based on a text by means of an interpretation of that text.
4.
Moral
Moral people, however, are not required to provide a definition of the means of knowledge, etc. This is because it would not serve any purpose etc. Accordingly, the great sage (Siddhasena] has said [in his Nyāyāvatāra 2 :]
"The sources of valid knowledge are already well-known, and so is the conduct based upon them. It, therefore, serves no purpose to provide a definition for proof] of the sources of valid knowledge."
Surely, one may try to establish [a pramāna] either by proving it by means of (another] pramāna, or without doing so. But in the first case], how can one logically give a reasonable proof of the (pramāna that has to be established] by one that has not yet been defined for ascertained to exist] ?
7.
Alternatively, what is the point of providing a defination (of a pramana], if the (pramāna) has been established by another pramana that has not been ascertained to exist ? It is simply mental blindness !
8.
Moral persons should, therefore, free from desire, simply consider [moral] matters as they are stated [in the scriptures] with diligence, for this is the only way] to perfect one's desired aims.

Page #248

The Humanism of Haribhadra
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
XIV. Eight Verses Crushing the Thesis of an Absolutely Permanent
[Soul]
8.
237
Some people have the one-sided view that the soul is absolutely permanent. But how can they, in the original meaning of the word, logically maintain (that a permanent soul] is subject to violence, etc.?
[Since a permanent soul is also] one without activity, it is clear that it can never kill anybody, nor can it be killed by anybody. Thus it has nothing to do with violence!
But if there is thus no violence at all, then non-violence cannot be anything real. Furthermore, truth and all the other [virtues mentioned above] are also [not real], because they were supposed to produce non-violence [which, as said, apparently does not exist].
So, if this were a correct interpretation [of the status of the soul] and these [virtues] did not exist, then the entire practice of observances, etc. would be good for nothing. It would simply be a matter of delusion!
Also, [a permanent soul] could not possibly be united with a physical body. If it could, it would also be omnipresent, and therefore samsăra could not be conceived.
As a result of this [absurdity] all the words [of Jina] would be but empty talk Good rebirth as a result of good karma, bad rebirth as a result of bad karma, insight and liberation.
The same mistake occurs if one assumes that the [soul] has a place of enjoyment as its object, for how could [a soul] without activity enjoy [any object] when it is quite different from that [object which is not without activity]!
If one accepts that the [soul] can be active, then all this is possible. [If one wants everything] to be blameless in the fundamental sense of the word [soul], then one must resort to another philosophical system. XV. Eight Verses Crushing the Thesis of an Absolutely Impermanent [Soul]
1.
If one [e.g. a Bauddha] assumes that the "soul" is a kind of continuum of [momentary] instants of cognition, then, no doubt, violence, etc., is

Page #249

238
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Christian Lindtner
nothing real, for that is contradicted by the [Buddhist's] own. philosophical position..
1.
Jambu-jyoti
[A "soul"] held to be momentary will continue [unchanged] when it is not connected to a cause of destruction. And if there is no destruction [of the soul] from any other [external cause] then violence also can have no cause.
Therefore [violence] either always exists or never exists. An occasional existence would, of course, have to depend on a prime cause.
Nor can [someone] who interrupts the continuum [of the "soul"] actually cause harm [to the "soul"]. This is because such a ["soul"] cannot be produced since [according to the Bauddhas] it only exists in a relative sense.
Nor can a particular moment [of the "soul" be produced] by the [very] same [moment], for that would create uncertainty. Thus, in fact, the [moment to be produced] would [have to] be considered [the same as] the one producing, because it serves as material cause.
And if the given [moment] has the status of producing harm [upon another moment of the soul], then there would be no [moment] that did not produce harm. Thus it would never stop doing so, because it is invariably producing [harm].
7.
It must be considered carefully why there is a mentioning of this [namely non-violence] in the scripture. The object to which it refers must, indeed, be meaningful!
8.
If there is no such thing as [non-violence], then truth, etc. are not really possible, for our Muni has said that the [other virtues] are there to protect this [namely non-violence, ahimsă].
XVI. Eight Verses Adorning the Thesis that [the Soul] is Permanent and Impermanent

Only if the soul is in fact permanent and impermanent, different from and not different from the body, will violence and so on make sense, for there is [only] then no contradiction.

Page #250

The Humanism of Haribhadra
239
2.
4.
When a person causes harm (to someone) with the intention of causing damage to his body, he says, due to his wretchedness : "I am going to kill !". Such violence has a cause ! When, due to causal necessity, there is a maturation of the karma [accumulated from killing the victim that had] to be killed, then the killer will be responsible for his deed. It [namely violence] will be evil, for it is the result of an evil [intention on his part). So, by abstention from what, according to the good teaching, is impure karma, one can, alas, stop such [violence] simply by always having good intentions ! Such non-violence is considered fundamental for producing heaven and freedom. In order to take good care of this (namely non-violence], it is reasonable that one protects truth, etc. So the [soul) is proved to be permanent amd (impermanent], etc., because it can remember, recognize, and because it can touch and feel the body. It is also considered to be permanent and impermanent, etc.] because it is established to be so by cornmon opinion. Assuming the (soul] has the size of the body, and that it has attributes such as contraction, etc., then, due to good karma, it can go upwards [to good rebirth), etc. So everything is exactly as it should be !
6.
7.
8. With a good mind this should be considered by a man whose soul is
impartial. It simply must be understood. For good men there is no other valid interpretation (of the soul] !
XVII. Eight Verses Reprehending the Enjoyment of Meat
[An opponent), too much of a disputant, says that a good man is allowed to enjoy meat, as he may [enjoy] rice, etc., for meat is only a small part of a living being.
Reply : Since the decision about what one may and may not eat actually entirely depends on the scriptures and on (what) mankind in general accepts, therefore this (opinion] is improper.
3.
According to these (sources] one may consume one part of a living being, but not certain other parts. From this point of view it is all right [to consume] e.g. the good milk [but not the] blood of a cow etc.

Page #251

240
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
4
When we think that certain things) should not be consumed, it is not because they are "parts of a living being". It is rather because they belong to another soul, for this is generally accepted to be so in the scriptures.
[If the opponent's reason for prohibiting the enjoyment of meat was true) then it would not at all be reasonable to prohibit (the enjoyment] of the flesh of a (Buddhist] monk ! It would even be permitted to eat his bones, for they are, without exception, simply "parts of a living being" !
6.
If, based on a somewhat similar argument, [our opponent) accepts the practice of seating meat), then you could also treat your wife and your mother in the same way, for both of them are women ! (i.e. living beings partly to be eaten] !
7.
Hence an intelligent person [only] expresses an opinion based on science as well as on the common opinion of] mankind. In this way he is intelligent in all matters. Otherwise he would be like a crazy fool!
But, by the way, has not (the enjoyment of meat] already been carefully prohibited by a competent [authority) in your own texts, e.g. in the Lankāvatārasūtra ? So does it not mean anything ?
XVIII. Eight Verses Reprehending the Enjoyment of Meat Another (opponent Manu), forgetting all about the proper meaning of the word [namely māṁsa) that he himself has expressed, has said something about this matter, thus (inadvertently] bringing the former and the latter meaning in mutual contradiction :
[Manusmrti 5.56 :) “There is nothing wrong in eating meat, there is nothing wrong in drinking or in having sexual intercourse. This is the normal behaviour of living beings. It is, however, very good to abstain from all this".
(Manusmrti 5.55 :] "Me he will eat in the next world, whose meat I eat in this world. Wise men say this is what it means to eat meat”. Thus the fault here simply consists in being born !-There is no eating [of meat] foreign to the book (of Manu] ! The prohibition (above) is
4.

Page #252

The Humanism of Haribhadra
5.
If the priests desire so, a duly authorized [priest] may eat consecrated meat even if he has to kill living beings.
7.
6.
If [the opponent says] that there is nothing wrong in this, [then we reply] that it does not follow that he abstains from doing so [i.e. from eating meat] by not eating meat on other occasions. This is because it has been proclaimed as a fault not to eat [meat] in this [book, namely Manusmrti 5.35 :]
8.
1.
2.
3.
based on common opinion, but according to the meaning of another statement [in the same book], it is justified [to eat meat]:
5.
241
6.
"If a duly authorized priest does not eat meat, then, after his death, he will become an animal for twenty-one rebirths".
If to abstain from [eating meat] is the same as being a religious mendicant, then the lack of [positive] result coming from not understanding this, is a fault of his. He is certainly not free from faults [if he does not abstain from eating meat] !
XIX. Eight Verses Reprehending Drinking Liquors
Moreover, liquor is a cause of heedlessness and at once destroys a sound mind. It is like a disorder of friendly relations. To object that there is nothing wrong with this is outrageous!
There is no need to waste many a word on this, for it can be seen with one's own eyes. Even at present the problem with [alcohol] is that it also makes one look like a big fool.
4.
A certain sage practised tapas, but then Indra became afraid and sent some goddesses to seduce him. And so they approached him...
According to tradition also, a sage who had reached the inner light and whose tapas was great, nevertheless, due to liquor, was seduced by some heavenly maidens. So, like a fool, he went to hell.
Politely they propitiated him as he stood there facing the women. They told him to enjoy either liquor and meat or sex, according to choice.
Thus addressed by them he saw that both were causes of hell: The [evil] in the form of liquor (at least] was preceded by a pure motive.

Page #253

242
7.
8.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Christian Lindtner
He then chose liquor, but by enjoying it he lost his peace in dharma because of intoxication. By killing a goat for the sake of spice he in fact did all the things [he should not have done].
Jambu-jyoti
And thereby he lost his power. When he died he went to hell. Thus it is good for moral people to know that liquor is a source of corruption ! XX. Eight Verses Reprehensive of Copulation
Since copulation is necessarily the result of desire, how then, can one say that it is not a sin? Hence it is prohibited in the sacred texts.
Opponent [objection]: But there is no sin in [copulation] if a man desires a son for the sake of dharma, and if he only is occupied with his own wife [and only engages in this practice] at the suitable time and in a proper way?
Reply: It is inconsistent, for [the prohibition] is not absolute, for [you are only] like one who blames [copulation]. Since [it is said] that one should bathe after having studied the Veda, [copulation] is approved after one has studied.
Since [the text], however, does not say [that copulation is approved of] only after one has performed the ceremony of bathing, therefore the stage of a householder is inferior. Also, at that [stage] such [copulation is practised], so, logically, it is not reasonable to applaud it.
Opponent: The applause [of copulation] just means that it is not a sin -Reply: How can that be? For when one praises it for not being a sin, this implies that it [in other cases and in general] selfevidently is full of sin!
Since the cause of one's engagement in such [copulation, is, as said, desire], and since there is no possibility of having the intention to give it up, therefore it is not good to speak about providing rules in order to justify matters of simple desire.

The great sages have declared, in the holy scriptures, that such [copulation] is harmful for living beings. And this is because they have understood [copulation to be as dangerous as] going into burning sparks in a tube.

Page #254

The Humanism of Haribhadra
8.
1.
3.
2.
It is like someone who receives a prescription [from a doctor who] wants to give him a medicine for his ailment. But he does not accept it and so, in the end, he will really regret it:
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Also [copulation] is the root of bad dharma. It increases existence in samsara. If one does not want to die [and be reborn] one must avoid it like poisoned food!
XXI. Eight Verses on Having Recourse to a Subtle Intelligence
Men interested in dharma must always try to understand dharma with an intelligence that is subtle. Otherwise, if they do so with a [weak] moral intelligence, it will follow that it is impeded.
243
"Once I received a very good prescription, but I did not at all feel ill. O, how unfortunate am I ! Woe! I have failed to achieve [the freedom from disease] I wanted so much!"
Likewise, of course, this "prescription" [of dharma] has to do with a state of being "sick". Since this is considered to be so by good men, should great souls then think that it is bad?
Even certain ordinary people, from another point of view, have seen this point, with an eye for subtle matters. For this reason they have declared as follows:
"Let the good that you have done to me ripen in your limbs ! In misfortune a man receives the fruit [of good karma] in return for what good he has done".
Thus it must be understood that a moral obstruction or dilemma always depends on one's understanding of what is inferior and superior in regard to conflicting prescriptions, etc. Also, when dealing with rules for ascetics, etc., [i.e. rules] in conflict with the principles stated in the holy texts...
[Then] it must be known that the moral dilemma depends on different kinds of substances, etc. [So, to avoid moral obstructions,] one must resort to true impartiality, paying attention to the dharma of the scriptures [with a subtle intelligence].

Page #255

244
Christian Lindtner
Jambu-jyoti
XXII. Eight Verses Examining the Purity of Character
1.
One must also understand the purity of character that follows this path (of Jainism]. It is always pleased to attain insight, but in itself it is never selfish.
2.
Desire, hatred, and delusion are the [three main] causes of impurity of a man's character. It must be known that the more they increase, the more will his [impurity of character) actually increase. So, when the impurity of one's character] has thus increased, “purity” is merely an empty word. Being fabricated by the skill of one's personal intellectual constructions, it will be without meaning.
3.
When there is no longer any delusion left over, selfishness will not occur any more. To depend on something that has good qualities, is, of course, a means of preventing such [bad things] from increasing further.
Therefore, the sage who knows the sacred scriptures, has also said that with regard to all actions such as consecration, offerings, etc., [one must certainly perform them) with the hand of a patient ascetic with equanimity.
A person who has not got this cannot even act in an expedient manner. If one does not know the value, etc. of a pure character for oneself and for others—how can one have it?
7.
Therefore, (purity of character as stated] belongs to an advanced and capable student who by nature has a pure mind, a man who can distinguish the [right] places and measures [from the wrong ones), a man who respects virtuous men...
Purity of character, as stated, belongs to a man who acts decently, a man who, by abandoning wrong beliefs without hesitation, is totally devoted to the sacred scriptures.
XXIII. Eight Verses Rejecting Slander of the Doctrine
1.
A (rogue] who, even quite relaxed, is busy slandering the doctrine (of the Jainas] will certainly also cause harm to other living beings, for such [slander) is the cause of wrong belief.

Page #256

The Humanism of Haribhadra
245
2. Moreover, it may well be a major cause of life in saṁsāra which is
terrible in its ripening, something cruel that increases all the bad things.
3.
If a [good man] on the other hand does all he can to extol the doctrine, he will also restore the right belief here [in Jainism] for the benefit of others. Such a [behaviour] achieves the unsurpassed (stage).
4.
[The highest stage) is free from the intense impurities, it is associated with virtues such as mental calm etc., it is the cause of all kinds of happiness and, it brings about the bliss of perfection.
5.
For this reason, an intelligent person should be very careful not to slander the doctrine, [for such slander) is a major means of producing bad karma.
The blame (that incurs) from such slandering of the doctrine in one rebirth after another can always banish one's soul, because it is so important (and serious].
7.
If one has the energy to do so, one must certainly try to extol (the doctrine] here. This is because such an (elevation] is really a successful seed of all kinds of success.
8.
Therefore one achieves an elevation that produces welfare in one rebirth after another. It will necessarily bring slander of all things to an end.
XXIV. Eight Verses Explaining how Good Karma Follows from Good
Karma
1.
Just as a man goes from one good house to another (good) house, thus [one may go] from one (good) rebirth to [another) rebirth due to one's good karma (dharma).
2.
Just as a man goes from a good house to another house (that is not so good], thus [one may go] from a (good) rebirth to a [bad] rebirth due to one's bad karma (dharma).
3.
Just as a man may go from a bad house to another house that is even worse, thus (one may go from a bad] rebirth to another rebirth that is even worse due to one's very bad karma.

Page #257

246
Christian Lindtner
Jambu-jyoti
4.
6.
Just as a man may go from one bad house to another house (that is not bad], thus [one may go from a bad) rebirth to another rebirth (that is not so bad] due to one's good karma Therefore (good) men must always perform good karma that is connected with good karma, due to the power of which all kinds of success will arise without failing. This is something that is done with a will that (has been made] pure by sacred scriptures that are true. Moreover, it arises from [men] who are experienced in insight. It never comes from any other source. That one follows the path (of Jainism) is a good thing that certainly comes about quite naturally. [It is, however,] due to the kindness of [elders who are] experienced in insight (ñana) that one achieves a success that is unsurpassed. Kindness towards living beings, dispassion, honouring of one's guru [or parents) according to rule, and a pure moral behaviour--this is good karma that is connected with seven more] good karma.
8.
XXV. Eight Verses on the Major Result of Good Karma Connected
with Good Karma
So one must understand that the highest result is due to one's achievement of excellence. Making one a worthy person through one's good and decent behaviour is a means of producing liberation.
Since the good and decent behaviour in this case is something hereditary, it is, of course, according to the tradition of the Guru of the world, something that one should also reasonably be grateful for (or : resolute about].
According to the tradition of the Jinas, (a good man], in order not to alarm his parents [and], in order to secure the stability of important matters so that good things can flourish, is like this [in his way of thinking] :
“As long as my parents are living in this house, I will also live in this house, according to their wish !"
"My parents may live in the house of their obedient (son]. I can join thic order oi uscetics later on when it is finally suitable".

Page #258

The Humanism of Haribhadra
247
6.
Such an abstention from all bad karma is fully accepted by good men. Therefore a (mode of behaviour] that alarms one's parents is not at all suitable.
7.
To be obedient to one's parents is certainly a very auspicious commencement of such (good and decent behaviour) : One's parents are a great object of worship for men who are engaged in dharma.
8.
If a man loves his parents he is considered a grateful person, a person who worships the dharma and his parents. He is a man who participates in the pure dharma.
XXVI. Eight Verses to Establish the Greatness of the Gifts of the Ascetic
1.
It is not correct if one thinks that the great gift of the Guru of the world can be calculated. A sacred text which starts with 3.000.000.000 (gifts and goes on may here] be mentioned.
2.
Objection : In the appropriate texts of others, the [number of gifts] is described by others as innumerable. This-i.e. the [term "innumerable"]-is precisely suitable here [in our scriptures], for it fits with the meaning of the word "great".
3.
Therefore, because of their great dignity, as a whole, the status of Gurus of the world here [in our scriptures] logically belongs to these
[Jinas) only. Everything, of course, is great to great (men) ! 4. Reply : One [Bauddha) may argue thus out of delusion, not being able
to determine the meaning of the sūtra properly. From this one can see how limited this (man's sense of] logic is !
5.
Strictly speaking, it is of course true that the great gift (or generosity] of the Guru of the world can be calculated. Hence it is set out in the sūtra that the number can be increased and increased.
6.
How can [his great generosity] be expressed in a precise number ! That would be due to an error ! Therefore the concept of a number should be understood in the sense as expressed (as "infinite"].
7.
This is also [a token of his great authority. If people in most cases are not interested in its presence, it is because it is associated with a very special kind of pleasure (unknown to them).

Page #259

248
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
8,
If, however, they have studied dharma, then, by its yoga, they will come to see the truth. This is his great greatness. He is the only guru of the world !
XXVII. Eight Verses Refuting that Jina's Gift is without Value
2.
An opponent may object : What, exactly, is the benefit to be established from his gift so that one may with certainly obtain liberation in this very rebirth ? Reply : It is because such karma responsible for the incarnation of an ascetic (tirthakrnnāmakarma) arises in heaven only that he is active in the welfare only of all living beings. Also, a great soul [is active) in demonstrating the factors of dharma and of his gift. He does so by means of (factors] properly belonging to various stages (of virtue), and this is because he has compassion for each and every [living being]. (His gift) produces a pure mental attitude, and it cuts down pertinacity. It is a vital factor for true elevation, and it generates compassion. Also, it generates insight.-Even though Bhagavat here, in his second birth, puts on a divine cloth, he still-has a generous mind. This is due to his extraordinary compassion.
4.
6.
So, his task of duty [i.e. generosity and compassion) cannot therefore be considered a matter of a different attitude. On the other hand it is true that one stage of virtue is conditioned by another (stage of] virtue.
As to the sūtra that begins : “Those, however, who praise the gift...", great souls must look upon this as referring to different stages (of virtue).
8.
So, there is really no new meaning of this to be established from that. It is, in fact, as before. Thus karma is cast off.
XXVIII. Eight Verses showing it not to be Wrong for an Ascetic to
give away even his Kingdom etc.
1.
Another opponent objects : It is certainly a fault of his to give away his kingdom, etc., for as a king he has a great responsibility. [If he gives it away] he does not understand the path to truth.

Page #260

The Humanism of Haribhadra
249
2.
Reply : Surely, if he does not give away his kingdom, then his peoplesince he may not be the [right] leader—will, due to the evil of the times, start fighting with one another about the borders.
3.
Since they will destroy a lot in this world and in the one to come, and since it will not be possible for a great soul [i.e. the king] to remain indifferent (as he wants to) if he has the military] power [to engage in a war)...
4.
Therefore, in order to help them, it would be a virtuous thing on his part to give away his kingdom-especially if he is a guru of the world who is consecrated for the welfare of others !
Likewise, with regard to the rules, of wedding, etc., and with regard to determining works of art. It would not be wrong (for him to give up these things). It would, in fact, turn out to be the best form of good karma.
6.
On the other hand, it is a very useful thing to protect living beings from even greater evils. It is something that is good for them as well as for him.
7.
Just as it is not wrong of him to protect elephants, etc. by pulling them into holes, etc., thus he (can do what seems necessary to protect other living beings) if there is no other alternative.
8.
This is also something that must be maintained here (when talking about giving away his kingdom). Otherwise the instruction (for a king] may well result in moral evil, since it is the cause of bad karma (dharma), etc.
XXIX. Eight Verses Showing the Nature of Equanimity
The Omniscient [Jinas] have also said that equanimity is a most important factor for liberation. It is said to belong to great souls who are (pure) like sharp knives and sandalwood.
It must be understood that it is really absolutely blameless. This is because it has the nature of a sound mentality that is the result of a [spiritual] purification by means of all kinds of yoga.

Page #261

250
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
3.
On the other hand, the kind of mind that people in general consider sound is, if one considers it closely, not of the same sort, even if it can be related to a similar dignity.
4
"May this [equanimity) fall to my lot, and [may I take all] the bad karma of the world (upon myself] ! May all the living beings also achieve liberation by means of my good deeds !"
5.
Opponent: Since this is an impossibility because [authoritative) tradition has it that the buddhas (= the Jinas) are in Nirvana, then, if it were possible, it would also presuppose that at least one of these Jinas] was not in liberation !
Reply : To think so may seem logical, but it is in fact quite wrong. The good [state of Nirvāna] must be understood to be quite another state. (Here we are dealing with something) that is like striving etc. for enlightenment etc. [that one does not have].
7.
A kind mind towards a mischievous (person] is due to [one's wish] to bring about something extraordinary. One that is mischievous due to selfishness does not care about such a misfortunate (person].
8.
Thus a mind that is different from equanimity may be happy at another (spiritual] level. But the one that is the result] of absolute purification must be known to be absolutely happy.
XXX. Eight Verses on Omniscience
A soul that has been purified through equanimity by the destruction of all obstructing karmas obtains an absolute [knowledge, or omniscience] that illuminates the inhabited and the desolate world..
It [namely omniscience] can only arise when one's insight, tapas and good behaviour are (perfect]. So, the [omniscience] of the [soul) is the same as its purity. Here [in Jainism) it is held to be obtained thus :
3.
This is the real nature of the soul. (Normally], however, it is covered. by impurities without [temporal] beginning. It is as with the rays from a precious jewel [in mud) : Thanks to the destruction of the [impurities] it may become (clear and shining] by means of this somniscience :)

Page #262

The Humanism of Haribhadra
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
It is because the soul has the nature of this [namely omniscience] that it illuminates the inhabited and the empty world. So, as soon as it arises, it is as explained.
251
[When omniscience is present] in the soul it is also maintained to be aware of itself, for this [awareness of itself] is an attribute of the soul. Its reality never changes, for it cannot possibly move, etc.
Also, the light of the moon etc. cognized here [in the soul] is only something that is known, for the light in the form of matter is not an attribute of the [soul itself].
Therefore it also illuminates everything it reaches, for it cannot logically be otherwise. So, according to sound reason, it can also be cognized by self-cognition.
In the empty world there is no attribute without a substance, nor is there any lord where the principle of movement (motion, dharma) ends. If one gets one's soul from going there, it cannot be. So [it must be] as explained.
XXXI. Eight Verses on the Teaching of the Ascetic
Though the [Jina] is free from desire, he still goes on teaching the dharma. This is due to the arising of the Ascetic's karma of personal incarnation, experienced as something good.
Aiming at enlightenment as the best, he is, of course, totally devoted to the welfare of others. This man, a splendid character, undertakes karma accordingly.
As long as he abides by this it will keep on taking place. The Guru of the world [is active in] teaching the dharma, for it is his nature to do
So.
Though his teaching is [really] one, still it is capable of producing a salutary understanding, referring to many things, in many living beings.
This is so because of the power of an inconceivable quantity of good karma. And so there is nothing in the three worlds that cannot be achieved by those of superior good karma.

Page #263

252
6.
1.
8.
Christian Lindtner
Jambu-jyoti
The reason that the ultimately true [teaching] is not given to incapable [students] is, one must know, due to their bad qualities. It is not due to [those] of Bhagavat!
Also, it is a fact that, at sunrise, owls cannot see anything. This is due to their karma, by nature impure. One must understand [the problem of teaching] to be the same.
Likewise, this [teaching] will also, (indeed) certainly delight living beings then as now-provided they are capable and pure in their minds.
XXXII. Eight Verses on Liberation
1. Liberation is due to the extinction of all karmas. It is free from rebirth, death, etc. It is entirely free from any kind of suffering. It is full of absolute happiness.
2. It must be understood that the highest state has no contact with suffering. Nor is it separated from it without interval. It is removed from desire.
3. Someone may object: It is impossible for the Lords of perfection to be happy when they cannot [in their state of perfection] enjoy food, drinks etc. We must ask this person this question:
4. What is [normally] the purpose of enjoying food etc. ?-To stop hunger etc., of course.-And what is the result of stopping it ?-That they always enjoy [the best of] health.
5. In fact one gives medicine to an unhealthy person, not to a healthy one. Those who have obtained an endless abundance of health do not need to enjoy food, etc.
6. For them, it must be understood, even sexual enjoyment, etc. is of no significance at all, because they have no delusions.
7. The happiness in this state is a natural one, it depends on nothing else, it is free from desire, it is without opposition, and it is always free from
samsåra.

8. Other intelligent men say that it has the form of ultimate bliss. Since it thus has the form of being entirely good, this is, of course, suitable [from the Jaina point of view also].

Page #264

The Humanism of Haribhadra
253
9. This is something that yogis must experience personally. For other
[common people, however, Nirvāna) is something they may hear about from the sacred texts. Since it cannot be compared to anything, it
cannot, obviously, be spoken about. 10. The good karma I have acquired by composing this text called "Eight
Verses"-may all people become happy by being free from bad karma thanks to that!
Appendix
A Settlement with Popular Principles
(Lokatattvanirnaya)
1. With devotion I first bow down before [Mahāvīra) who is one, and not
one, who by nature is absolute (knowledge), the supreme among Jinas. In order to enlighten capable students, I will now describe the principal doctrines of common people.
2. It is, of course, quite correct that [good men] engaged in favouring
[all other people) should not discriminate between students] who are capable and incapable [of achieving liberation]. Nevertheless, an intelligent (teacher) must first investigate the kind of audience he has to address).
3. (An incapable student] whose mind during the sermon is hard as
a thunderbolt/diamond, who is as void as a sieve, who creates dust like a buffalo, and who absorbs impurity like a filter...
4. To preach (anything) to such (an incapable student), who is like a deaf
person, is just as useless as to churn water. Also, [preaching to him would be like] dancing before a blind man. In fact, only a capable student can understand [what he is told).
5. Opponent : If a student cannot be enlightened it is only due to
the stupidity of his teacher ! When (students] are turned down by a bad teacher, he is like [a bad] cowherd (leading astray his] cattle.
6. Reply : But what can even an eloquent teacher do about [stupid
students] who are not Aryans ? Even if a carpenter may have a sharp axe, he still will spoil wood that is of bad quality.

Page #265

254
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
7. Any attempt of impressing the truths of science upon a mind that is
not quite tranquil will have a bad consequence. It would be [as silly as to apply] a soothing (medicine] against a fever that has newly arisen.
[The patient will only get worse). 8. When the moon or the sun has arisen, then even ten millions of pure
flaming lamps will be of no use to a blind man. Likewise [it is useless]
to teach (students] blinded by the darkness of ignorance. 9. A snake and a cow may drink pure water from the same pond.
In the snake, however, it is changed into poison, but in the cow it becomes milk !
10. When good men and bad men drink the water of knowledge from
the pond of true knowledge [i.e. Jainism), then that ("water"] is transformed into something true in good men, and into something bad in bad men !
11. Water with the same taste [as rain] falls from the sky and reaches
the earth. But then it changes its taste due to the many different
repositories (in which it is imbued). 12. The word that emerges from the mouth of a (Jaina) preacher may
have one and the same "taste" (or meaning]. Nevertheless, it will be perceived in different ways depending on the different attitudes of [the different listeners).
13. An example : Due to its own fault an owl cannot see when the sun is
shining. Also, it happens that a kankatuka-bean is not prepared (for being consumed), even though it has become ripe, like any other (edible). In the same way evil men may have been in touch with the Jaina doctrine—which really makes sense of all fundamental concepts—but still, with their evil minds, do not understand it, even though they have the same opportunity [to listen] to its preaching (as other students do).
14. As a horse may leap up towards another horse, and as a boat may be
tied to another boat in the midst of the ocean, thus modern society, clever in matters of public opinion only, roams wildly about on the waters of heedlessness (or superstition).

Page #266

The Humanism of Haribhadra
255
15. As long as one only thinks of what public opinion requires, one will be
concerned with practical means [only]. It is, however, necessary to deepen one's mind based on facts, for competent (or original] opinions do not simply fall down from the sky !
16. If [a thing] that one considers in the light of perception and inference,
does not give any logical meaning, what intelligent person in the world would then accept it ! Surely, milk cannot be had from the horn of a cow !
17. Only those (students] who are capable of being educated (vaineya =
bhavya) by skilled educators can, in fact, be educated. Those who are not capable of being educated cannot be educated [even] by skilled educators. By burning etc., gold that is impure can become gold that is pure. A lump of iron, however, can never become gold even through a process of breaking and burning it.
18. When [a capable student) analyses and understands the meaning [of
what he is told) with the help of tradition (agama) and reason (yukti), then he may accept it as gold. What would be the point accepting it merely out of partiality ?
19. When children receive sweetmeat from their mother without
considering its bad effects, they will, later on, very much regret having done so-just like a man who receives (false) gold.
20. Ears are made for hearing, language and intellect are there for critical
analysis. If a man does not critically analyse what he has heard, how can he figure out what he ought to do?
21. When a man with his eyes notices poison, thorns, snakes or mosquitos,
he turns the right way in avoiding all these [obstacles). Thus you must analyse the mistakes relating to wrong knowledge, wrong traditional learning, wrong views and wrong ways. How can any opponent deny this?
22. “Lords” (such as] Rsabha, Visnu, Hara and Hiranyagarbha have never
been experienced [by any person) through the senses. One should learn about their personal virtues from scriptural tradition and then analyse (whether it all makes sense, cf. 18]. Who could have any objection to this?

Page #267

:56
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
23. Visnu, in his terrible hand, bears a raised club. Siva wears a lolling
garland of skulls, bones and heads of men. Mahāvīra, on the other hand, has an abundance of absolutely calm behaviour. Which one of them should we honour-the one who is calm, or the one whose nature is violent ?
24. Visnu is supposed to have destroyed the family of Duryodhana and
many others. Hara (i.e. Siva] is supposed to have destroyed [the citadel of] Tripura. Moreover, Guha (or Skanda) deprived (the mountain] Krauñca of its firm strength. Mahāvīra, however, only does what is good for the entire world!
25. It is certainly not the supreme religion (when Visnu etc.,] says : “This
one I must torment, this one I must protect, this one I must kill”. Mahāvīra, whose mind is set on the bliss and benefit of summum bonum and worldly success, also has enemies, surely, but not ones that can be deceived by him.
26. The words of Visnu create sins such as desire, etc. the words of Siva
makes one behave like a madman. Those of the Muni (Mahāvīra] alleviate all sins. So you must consider who is worthy of true adorableness !
27. One is prepared to kill others without mercy, another tries to offer
refuge for the protection of the world. One has desire, another is free from desire. Consider this carefully and tell me which one of the two is worthy of honour !
28. Which intelligent person can honour Indra who carries a thunderbolt,
Bala who holds a plough, Visnu who carries a discus, Skanda who bears a spear, and Rudra (or Siva] who dwells in cemeteries and carries a trident as his weapon, (when he also sees that] they are tormented by faults and fears, that they lack compassion, are fools, carry various arms, and that they are engaged in combat with all kinds of living beings!
29. I seek refuge with that sage [Mahāvīra] who provides protection for
(all] creatures, who is absolutely free from all vices, and whose mind strives for the welfare of others. He does not carry a spear, nor does he

Page #268

The Humanism of Haribhadra
257
carry an enamoured youth on his lap. He carries no spear, no discus, no plough or any other weapon as, for instance, a staff.
30. Under the influence of desire, the violent Rudra without shame seduces
a woman. Visnu is even more cruel. Skanda behaves ungratefully when he personally kills his own kinsmen. Pārvatī killed Mahisa when she was sick of desire for the bones, the flesh and the fat of a man. Ganesa loves to drink liquors. In the best among the Jinas, however, there is not even a very tiny fault.
31. Brahmā had his head cut off, Hari had pain in his eyes, Hara [or Siva]
was emasculated, the Sun was wiped away, Agni is omnivorous, and Soma is branded by a spot. The Lord of heaven (or Indra) is also said to have become unsteady when influenced by some sexual organs of beautiful appearance. So, for the most part, even the gods run into misfortune due to aberration from the right path.
32. This Bhagavat (Mahāvīra] is not necessarily] our friend, nor are
the others (necessarily] our enemies. We have never seen any one of them personally, directly with our own eyes. However, when we hear how extraordinary his words and his fine behaviour actually are, we rely on Mahāvīra out of eagerness (lolatā = bhakti) for the eminence of his moral virtues.
33. Sugata [i.e. Mahāvīra) is not our father, nor are the [Jaina] ascetics
our enemies. They have not given us any property, nor has Jina, nor has Kanāda, etc., taken anything from us. Bhagavat Mahāvīra, however, is only concerned about the welfare of the world. His pure preaching removes all impurities. It is for this reason that we are devoted (bhakti) to him !
34. (Mahāvīra] is always [a master] of good intentions, who constantly
supports the world. He is the one who has rendered this world, sick in so many ways, healthy again. He knows everything that one can know as clearly as something in the palm of one's hand. With devoted minds good men should seek refuge with the unequalled Sugata !
35. Those who honour Thee, O moon among the leaders of Munis,-even
if they do so without complete sincerity, by chance, just to imitate others, or out of doubt--still, they will attain divine success!

Page #269

258
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
36. Out of desire and hatred, in order to steal the riches of the asuras and
the gods, [Hari] once committed fraud with his mind intent on taking away the earth. Nevertheless, Hari is still to be hailed as worthy of honour even though he is not at all free from unsteadiness. People who do not honour (Mahāvīra), who is totally free [from such defects), must be full of delusion !
37. If he—be it Brahmā, Visnu, Varada, Sankara or Hara-has given up
selfishness and delights in the welfare of others, and if he always knows everything, in all its forms, in all its aspects, variously and unequalled, then I honestly seek refuge in such an unequalled (hero] whose mode of behaviour is inconceivable.
38. I have no predilection for Mahāvīra, nor do I hate Kapila, etc. What
one must do is to embrace (a hero) whose words are reasonable !
39. Surely, some of all these must be omniscient and in possession of
the illustrious doctrine of absolute altruism. Such a one must be followed by a man with the subtle eye of intelligence. What is so special about the words of useless pundits !
40. He who has no fault at all, he who has all the good virtues—to him I
pay homage—be it Brahmā, Visnu, or Maheśvara !
41. Disputants discuss various matters with regard to the actual truth about
the creation of the world. Those to whom it is not known in advance, may have to have the truth decided by means of discussion (vāda) [or by means of syādvāda).
42. Those who believe in creation maintain that the entire world is created.
The adherents of Maheśvara [or Śiva say] that the world as a whole has a beginning and an end.
43. Some say that the world can only have been created by īśvara, others
say that it was created by Soma or Agni. Some maintain that the world is made up of six things, i.e. substance, etc. :
44. The truth, according to Kanāda, etc., is substance, quality, motion,
generality, inherence, and particularity. This is Vaišeşika, and the world, by the large, goes along with it (or consists of it).

Page #270

The Humanism of Haribhadra
259
45. Some maintain that the entire world, including human beings, is
created by Kāśyapa. Some maintain that the three worlds are created
by Daksa and Prajāpati. 46. Some say that Hari (or Visnu], Śiva and Brahmă constitute one trinity :
Siva is the seed of the world, Visnu its creator and Brahmā its activity.
47. Some say that the entire world is created by Visnu, some say that it is
created by Time. Some say that it was produced by īśvara, some say
that it was created by Brahmā. 48. The followers of Kapila maintain that everything arises from
the unmanifest (nature]. The opinion of Sākya [i.e. Mahāyāna) is that [everything) is mind-only and empty.
49. Some say that it was produced by Purusa, others say that it was
produced by fate or by nature. Some say that it was created from Brahmā, or from the Egg.
50. Others say that everything takes place accidentally (or at random).
Some say that everything is produced through change of the elements.
Some say that it has many forms. So there are many opinions. 51. [Those who believe in Visnu, say :] Visnu is in the water, Visnu is in
the ground, he is in space encircled by Vişnu. There is nothing without Visnu in the world which is full of the lines of Visnu.
52. [As is said in the Svetāśvatara-Upanisad 3.16:] "Everywhere He is hands
and feet, everywhere He is eyes, head and face. Everywhere in the world He has ears. He is related to everything".
53. [Bhagavadgītā 15.1 :] “They speak of the undying fig-free that has its
roots above and its boughs beneath. Its leaves are the Vedic hymns. He who knows this knows the Veda”.
54. [From a Purāna :) “When everything was changed into one ocean, when
(everything) immovable and movable had perished, when the gods and men had perished, when snakes and demons had perished..."
55. “When it had been entirely transformed into an abyss of darkness
without any of the great elements, then the inconceivable omnipresent Soul, who was resting there, devoted himself to austerities”.

Page #271

260
Christian Lindtner
Jambu-jyoti
56. "As He was resting there a lotus expanded in his navel. Like the disc of the lately risen sun it was charming with its golden pericarp".
57. "Here Brahma was born with his staff, water-pot, sacrificial thread and garment of antelope-hide. He created the mothers of the world :"
58. "Aditi was the mother of the crowds of Gods, Diti of the Asuras, Manu [the father] of men, Vinată [was the mother] of all the various kinds. of birds,"
59. Kadrū was the mother of the serpents, Sulasă the mother of the various kinds of Nāgas, Surabhi the mother of the quardrupeds, Ila of all the seeds".
60. Some maintain that their creation went even further. Some say that the [world] was created without caste. Some say that it [was created] with castes, etc.
61. [Those who believe in Time, say :] "Time produces all creatures, and Time takes living beings back again. Time is awake when others are asleep. Time is certainly most difficult to overcome".
62. [Those who believe that Iśvara creates the world, say :] "Here [in this world] it is the duty of a king to protect his subjects. Likewise, the great Iśvara, the Lord of everything, takes care of everything in the world".
63. "When man is ignorant he is not at all master of his own happiness and suffering. Forced by Isvara he goes either to heaven or to hell".
64. "Isvara is subtle, inconceivable, without all the usual organs of sense, omniscient, the creator of everything. He can be achieved in ecstacy (dhyana) by the yogic striving of yogis whose minds are pure. Those who are desirous of perfection, and who love the bliss of peace should always meditate upon Isvara in the form of the moon, sun, fire, earth, water, wind, a consecrated person, and space".

65. [Those who believe in Brahmā, say, in the Manusmrti 1.6 and 1.7 :) "[In the beginning] there was a sort of darkness. It could not be discerned, it was without marks, it could not be figured out, it could not be known, it was, as it were, entirely asleep".

Page #272

The Humanism of Haribhadra
261
66. "Then the self-existent Lord, unmanifest, caused (the world] to become
manifest. He put his energy into the four great elements, etc., became visible and dispelled the darkness".
67. In order to let the world grow he created his mouth, arms, thighs
and feet [the four castes :) priests, warriors, workers and servants".
68. [Sāmkhya : ) Some say that the world arises from the unmanifest
[nature]. It consists of the five elements that have various bodies, names and forms.
69. The primary cause of everything is called "nature". It is omnipresent,
universal, permanent, subtle, without marks, without consciousness, without activity, one.
70. (Samkhyatattvakaumudi 22 and 23:] "From nature comes the Great.
From that selfconsciousness. From that the group of sixteen. From the five that come from this group of sixteen, the five elements".
71. "The fundamental nature has no modifications. The seven beginning
with the Great, etc., are modifications of nature. The group of sixteen are modifications. The spirit is not nature, nor is it a modification”.
72. It cannot be defined as the gunas, nor can it be defined as effect or
cause. Therefore, the spirit is quite different [from nature, etc.). It seems to] enjoy the results (of its karma), but it is, in fact, not active at all.
73. As long as the gunas of nature are active, the spirit [identifying itself
with them) is perverted because it is enveloped in darkness. As long as it is unenlightened it thinks that it is active, but actually it cannot even break a blade of grass.
74. [The Buddhists say, in Vimsatikā 1:] "All this is mind-only, because
the "things” that appear, are actually unreal. [Normal experience) is like the experience of one suffering from cataract has of [unreal] cocoon (making insects] (kośakārakītaka), etc."
75. When [people are] afflicted by anger, sorrow, intoxication, madness,
desire and such faults, they "see” unreal things as being present right before their eyes”.

Page #273

Jambu-jyoti
76. [Those who believe in Purusa, say in the Svetasvatara-Upanisad 3.15:] "Everything is Purusa, everything that has been, and everything that will be. Also, he rules over immortality, for by food he springs up".
262
Christian Lindtner
77. [Isa-Upanisad 5] "That which moves, that which moves not, that which is far away, that which is close by, that which is inside all this, that which is outside all this"..
78. [Śvetāśvatara-Upanisad 3.9] "Nothing is greater than this, nothing is smaller or mightier than this. It stands like a tree sustained in heaven, alone. The entire universe is full of Purusa".
79. [Brahmabindu-Upanisad 12 ] "It is one only, the true soul. Then everything is dissolved [in it]".
80. [Bhagavadgītā 15.16 : ] "There are two "persons" in the world. One is perishable and one is imperishable. The perishable is all creatures. The imperishable is said to be aloof".
81. [Others say: ] "Even though scientific books are available, even though [competent] speakers are still left, nevertheless, if they do not know the Self, men are certainly killing themselves".
82. "The Self is certainly the divinity, it is everything. Everything consists in the Self. It is, of course, the Self that produces karmic activity of embodied beings".
83. "The Self is the creator, the Self is the bestower of happiness and suffering. The soul is heaven and hell. The soul is this entire world".
84. [Bhagavadgītā 5.14] "The Lord does not create the activity and the actions of the world. The bond between one's actions and their result takes place as a result of nature".
85. "Since the nature of the Self is knowledge, it arises by itself as cognition. Therefore, and also because it arises by its own activity, the Self is called 'self-existent"".
86. [Bhagavadgītā 2.23 and 2.24 :] "Swords cannot cut it, fire cannot burn it, water cannot wet it, wind cannot dry it..."
87. "It cannot be cut, it cannot be broken, it is said to be indescribable. It is permanent, omnipresent, firm, unmoved and primeval".

Page #274

The Humanism of Haribhadra
88. "It is imperishable, it is the elementary Self, it is called the bestower. It is breath, it is the highest Brahman, it is the "goose", and it is Purusa". 89. "There is no other seer, listener or thinker higher than this. Nor is there any agent, enjoyer or speaker [apart from this]".
263
90. "The conscious [Self] is bound by karma, i.e. by steady application. In this way it comes to exist. By getting rid of it [it attains] the highest stage". 91. [Bhagavadgītā 6.5 ] "One should save oneself by one's own Self. One should not disappoint one's own Self. The self is the only friend of oneself. The self is also the only enemy of itself".
92. "My friends may be very pleased with me, and my enemies may be very angry with me. They cannot, however, do anything to me that I have not already done myself previously".
93. Incarnate [Selves] perform good and bad actions personally. They also enjoy good and bad results personally.
94. In the forest, in combat, in the midst of foes, water or fire, on the ocean, or on the top of a mountain-one's previous good actionns protect one whether one is asleep, heedless, or in a difficult position.
95. [The fatalists say :] "Surely, wealth, virtue, and knowledge do not depend on one's own free will. Nor does moral conduct, happiness or suffering. Having mounted the vehicle of Death, being forced by the charioteer, I[have to] go along the path that Fate leads me."
96. "Whenever the result of a formerly done action is, so to speak, remaining in deposit, then mind, with a lamp in its hand, as it were, will always be ready, eager to receive it."
97. "Law, order, necessity, nature, time, the constellations, Iśvara, Karma, fate, fortunate actions, Yama, death - [they are all] synonyms of an action formerly done."
98. "Most excellent of Pandavas! when people do not remember an action formerly done, then it is called 'fate' ".
99. [Those who believe in nature, say :] "Who is the cause of the sharpness of thorns, and who is responsible for the diversity of beasts and birds? Everything is due to nature. There is no freedom of action. Effort of will is nothing."

Page #275

264
Christian Lindtner
Jambu-jyoti
100. “The thorn of the jujube tree may be sharp, straight or curved. Also, its
fruit is round. Please tell me, who made it so ?” 101. [Those who believe in the imperishable Brahman, say:] "Time emanated
from the imperishable. Therefore it is held to be pervading. This creation is said to begin with the pervading, and to end with nature."
102. [Others say : First there was] a part of the imperishable. From that
[came] wind. From that fire; from that water; from water earth came forth. This is how the elements came into being".
103. (Those who believe in the cosmic egg, say :) “Nārāyana is higher than
the unmanifest. From the unmanifest the cosmic) egg came forth. Inside the egg [all] these [empirical] distinctions belong, and so does the earth with its seven continents”.
104. "The water within [the earth), the oceans, the caul (of foetus),
the mountains; in this egg the fourteen worlds have their foundation".
105. (Manusmrti 1.12 :] "He, the Lord, stayed in that egg for a whole year.
Then, by contemplating upon himself, he sliced that egg into two".
106. (Manusmrti 1.13 :) “Out of the two fragments he created the sky
and the earth", etc. 107. [Those who believe that creation has no cause, say :] “The manifold
things that come into being every moment, surely come into being without a cause. Without being [there already] nothing can come into being. Something lacking the possibility of coming into being is as
[unreal] as a flower [growing] in the sky". 108. [Those who believe in necessity, say :) "A thing that must occur based
on the power of necessity will necessarily be good or bad for human beings. Even if people make a great deal of effort, that which shall not be will not be. Nor can that which must be fail to be".
109. [The evolutionists say :] “At every moment and in regard to
the individual of all things, evolution takes place. It does not depend
on one's free will, for one's free will develops gradually". 110. "It is true that we Piśācas live in the forest, but we never ever touch
a drum even with our fingers. Still the rumour has spread all over the earth that Piśācas beat the drum !"

Page #276

The Humanism of Haribhadra
265
111. [The materialists say :] "Earth, water, fire and wind are [the four
elements, or] principles. Bodies, senses, objects and ideas are based on their union. Consciousness is like the power of an intoxicating draught.
Souls are like bubbles on water. The spirit is a body with consciousness.” 112. "Bodies, objects and senses are material. Nevertheless, stupid (teachers]
teach [their students) that it is something else [namely an 'immaterial
soul'] that is an active principle”. 113. "This world only extends as far as do the objects of our senses. So,
charming young lady, it is a foot-mark of a wolf (made in the snow by some deceitful villagers] that those who have not learned very much are talking about".
114. "Austerities, various (self-]torments, self-control, fraud with regard
to eating, rituals such as Agnihotra are [all] seen to be like childish
play". 115. [Those who believe in plurality, say :) “Causes are quite different, and
effects are also different. Therefore, for sure, karma has no meaning in the three periods of time".
Refutation :
1. The opinions of those who believe in the creation (of the world) are
not alike. They themselves cannot reach an agreement. I will now show how (all their opinions) are in conflict with logic.
The origin of the world that exists and does not (yet] exist would have to be from a previous cause. However, there cannot be (a creator of a world that already) exists, nor can there be a creator of one that does not exist. This is because being and non-being cannot occur
together. 3. The creation of something that does not exsit certainly cannot take
place in any of the three periods of time. An example (of something unreal would be] the horn of an ass. Therefore the world is a natural
one [the causes of which cannot be explained in terms of time). 4. [The opinion) of the Jainas : As a whole no material and immaterial
thing really suffers destruction or change. However, in a certain sense one can say that a thing usually does change its mode of being.

Page #277

266
Christian Lindtner
5. Those in the opinion of whom the world is [the creation] of Kasyapa, Dakṣa, etc.-how can they [explain that there] suddenly is an existence [of the world] when the world was not there [to begin with] ?
Jambu-jyoti
6. When everything, including the earth, the sky, etc., is destroyed, what, then, is the world? Is it intellect? Something unmanifest that is deposited ? But what form does it have?
7. [The Buddhists who are supposed] to have the best of all instructions, have explained that everything [= the entire world] is the product of something individually unique (svalakṣaṇa), immaterial or material, that exists in its own unique way.
8. But this means that all things in this world, material and immaterial, must have the same individuality. Anything that does not have that individually must therefore be held to be as unreal as the son of a barren woman! [In other words: Many individuals cannot make a real whole]. 9. If the horn of a horse cannot arise [or be created] from the horn of an ass, then, likewise, for certain, real things cannot arise from unreal things.
10. Here [some people think] that something sometimes can manifest itself from something unmanifest that is lacking characteristics. But if Soma, etc., already have bodies, then the elements do not exist [since Soma etc. can do without them].
11. But if the group of great elements does not exist then they [namely Soma, etc.,] cannot have any bodies! [And that goes for all the gods :] Soma, the Egg, Pitämaha, Hari as well as Pasupati and Dinapati.
12. And when they do not have any bodies, it is impossible to make any distinction between intelligence and mind. When they are absent, reflection and certainty cannot come into being: it is not possible !
13. When they are absent there can be no will. When there is no will, then action has no value. To do something makes no sense because actions have no value.

14. [A new argument :] If the world is created by such a [god], who, then, created him? Or is it your opinion that he is uncreated? It must be understood, if this is the case, that the entire universe here likewise [must be uncreated].

Page #278

The Humanism of Haribhadra
15. Let us discuss [the concept of a creator] assuming for a while [that god is responsible] for the creation of the world! First of all, he cannot have done his duty with regard to the human aims of existence : A competent [or trustworthy god] does not make a dirty mess of the world!
267
16. What have the ghosts, etc., or gods, etc., done to offend him, since he has assigned them to pleasures and sufferings that they are not responsible for themselves?
17. And, again, assuming he has the power required to do so, why has he not made the world a prosperous one? He is responsible for the fact that the world suffers enormously on the path of rebirth, old age and death!
18. If he has created the world, then why does he destroy it again? Why did he create it if it was his intention to destroy it again?
19. What is the good of having destroyed or created the world? Or what is the point of forcing living beings to suffering such as rebirth, etc.? 20. A potter may suddenly break e.g. a pot the body of which is made up of elements. Likewise, the creator [suddenly may kill his own] creatures without mercy.
21. Which great scholar (suri) would, for the sake of his felicity, seek refuge with such an extremely evil [god] who makes all kinds of living beings suffer, and who always, and without good reason, is hostile towards the world!
22. When he destroys the world that he himself has created he is not bound by any affection for others. But does a [normal] father, even with a violent mind, not feel bound [by compassion not] to kill his son ?
23. If the world was created in the past thanks to the power(vigraha) of a creator, how come it is not created now thanks to the power of that very same creator?
24. At present living beings are created in many different wombs. It has always been like that say the perfected [Jinas], who know the way the world works.

Page #279

268
Christian Lindtner
Jambū-jyoti
25. If one thus analyses the various [theories about] creation, in conflict
with one another as they are, they must all be abandoned, because they are void of reason, just like the (absurd] speculations about both
Visnu and Siva. 26. [There are various possibilities :) The creator can be free, unfree, he
can have a body or she may be without a body], he can create [a world] that exists or does not exist. But none of these arguments make any sense at all.
27. If he is free he does not create the world, because, being free from
desire, he is not bound by karma. When a (creator] is subject to desire, etc., he has a body and is necessarily bound by his karma.
28. The (Jinas] who have perfected themselves by virtues such as (correct]
knowledge, behaviour, etc., are eternal and blissful in their perfection. They are, most of them, free from the karma of bodily activities. They
do not have any lord above them. 29. To be lord in saṁsāra is the result of karma, and it differs from one
country to another. A single lord, being a creator without a body, is not to be found anywhere in the world.

Page #280

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
Nalini Balbir
0. Broadly speaking, Indian riddles can be divided into two groups : First, those where the question invites a global answer corresponding to the meaning of the stanza taken as a whole are sometimes instances of fine muktaka-poetry. The technical term used to name representatives of this category is generally prahelikā. The second category includes all types of charades and clearly belongs to the field of śabda : there, the stanza is made of two or more independent questions, according to the pattern A, B, C, ... N. While the answers A, B, C ... are made of short words or monosyllables, the last one N consists in the sum of all the elements. The generic term used for this category is praśnottara, of which there are several varieties, depending, for instance, on the types of combinations or on the nature of the elements to be guessed. Like all fields of science in India, riddles have their śāstras too. The Vidagdhamukhamandana by Dharmadāsa (on which see below § 1.3) is the most famous of them. It extensively and systematically deals with the subject and considers all subdivisions of the two categories defined above.
Both types are tests of intelligence, but they require slightly different qualities from the questioner as well as from the discoverer. For praśnottarariddles, which are thus based on the de-composition of long sequences into small elements and are clearly meant to display knowledge, it is indispensable to possess erudition in mythology, poetic conventions, realia, etc. and full proficiency in all topics connected with the mastering of language. This means a perfect knowledge of lexicography in all its aspects, mainly of a synonymic kosa such as of Amarasimha and even more of the so-called Ekāksara- or Dvyaksara-kosas, since words consisting in one or two syllables are so widely used in this context?. Needless to say,

Page #281

270
Nalini Balbir
Jambū-jyoti
an unbeatable familiarity with all the niceties of grammar, especially sandhi and morphology, is an utmost requirement2.
In this paper, I would like to study some riddles propounded by Jain munis of the past which have grammar as their central subject. This is humbly offered as a token of respect and profound admiration for a Jain monk who is an embodiment of the Jain tradition as well as of that makes a genuine pundit. Let us just remember that, apart from editing several works from the Jain Āgamas as well as important Jain treatises like the Dvādaśāranayacakra, the Strīmuktiprakarana, the Yogaśāstra, or the Pancasūtraka, Muni Jambuvijayaji- Maharaj has also to his credit a critical edition of the Sanskrit part of Hemacandra's grammar with its auto-commentary), and is himself a capable writer of learned articles or introductions in Sanskrit besides Gujarati.
This is certainly not a coincidence if all the riddles which will follow are written in Sanskrit, even if they sometimes occur in works otherwise written in Prakrit (Jayasimhasūri's Dharmopadeśamālāvivarana, Āmradevasūri's Ākhyānakamanikośa-vrtti) or in the work of an author who can write in both languages (Jinavallabha, $ 1.1). The study of a good deal of riddles found in Jain Prakrit narrative works clearly shows the strong impact of the Sanskrit tradition when it comes to this topic, and the feeling that Sanskrit is undoubtedly considered the language of scholarship and erudition par excellence prevails : besides the few cases of Prakrit works including riddles in Prakrit, there are those which, having Prakrit as their basic language, use more Sanskrit than Prakrit or exclusively turn to Sanskrit for riddles4. On the other hand, even when praśnottaras are written in Prakrit, they very often appear as transpositions or translations of Sanskrit patterns, using, for instance, the same ekāksara-words as their Sanskrit counterparts. In the case of grammatical riddles, the place of Sanskrit becomes even more important : they all are in fact in Sanskrit, to the extent that there is no trace whatsoever of any reference to the rich tradition of Prakrit grammar and hardly any presence of Prakrit forms in our corpus.
What I call “grammatical riddles” refer to five cases : --Prasnottaras of any variety containing grammatical questions (I);
--Praśnottaras where the ultimate aim is to discover a form which is both a nominal and a verbal form (II);

Page #282

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
271
- Praśnottaras where the ultimate aim is to discover a grammatical technical term (III);
- Praśnottaras where the ultimate aim is to discover a grammatical sūtra (IV);
- Praśnottaras concerned with knowledge of metrics (V), since chandas can be considered as an appendix of grammars.
1. Besides the corpus of Jain narrative works just mentioned, where riddle-verses generally form a small separate section and are exchanged as a pastime between a group of friends, members of a learned gosthi or a bride and bridegroom just after marriage, the sources used for the present investigation include three specialized texts :
1.1 The Praśnottara-sasti-ekašata (=JP) is from the pen of Jinavallabha, a prominent Śvetāmbara ācārya from the Kharatara-gaccha who lived in the last quarter of the 11th and the first of the 12th century and has many works to his credit. Jinavallabha's work is not a sästra because it completely lacks definitions. Except for the first mangala-verse dedicated to Pārsvanātha, the remaining 159 stanzas are riddle-verses, including the two last ones where the author gives the names of his spiritual masters and his own (vss. 159-160). Each of this riddle-verse is followed by the name of the variety it represents and by the answer. Since Jinavallabha's work is obviously meant to display excellence and cleverness in the topic, these mere indications are by no means sufficient to make the common reader able to understand the process of the riddle. Therefore a commentary is indispensable.
The printed text of the Praśnottara is found in a book where various small texts, mainly hymns, are collected : Śrīstotraratnākaradvitiyabhāgah satīkah. Śrī Yaśovijaya Jainasamskrta Pāthaśālā, Mehsana, vīra samvat 2440/A. D. 1914, p. 1a-33b. Each verse is followed by an anonymous Sanskrit avacūri (here : Ed.). Besides this edition, the following two manuscripts have been used for the present investigation and will be quoted whenever they are found to be illuminating :
-Al : manuscript No. 5000 kept in the L. D. Institute of Indology, Ahmedabad; 32 pages; tripātha-type; prsthamātrā-script; copied in sam. 1686 ( = A. D. 1629).

Page #283

272
Nalini Balbir
Jambū-jyoti
-A2 : manuscript No. 6198 kept in the L.D. Institute of Indology, Ahmedabad; 20 pages; pañcapātha-type?.
The identical commentary they contain, although apparently based on the avacūri found in the printed edition, is sometimes more detailed or clearer in its wording. It was written by a certain Punyasāgara in [V.]Sam. 1644 (= A.D. 1587).
The popularity of Jinavallabha's work is demonstrated by the rather larger number of available manuscripts, the fairly good number of commentaries it has given birth to, as also by the fact that some of his riddles have been borrowed by Jain writers (see below $ 3: JP 31).
1.2. The Prašnāvali ( = P), edited along with Jinavallabha's work (p. 55a-58b), is a short set of 15 Sanskrit riddle-verses followed by an avacūri. There is no mention of the author in the printed edition, but the text is usually ascribed to Municandra, a famous Jain author and commentator of the late 11th and early 12th century (he died in [V.] Sam. 1178 A.D. 1122). See further § 4 below.
1.3. Mahākavi Ajitasena's Alaskāracintāmani (=AC) is a fullfledged work on poetics in Sanskrit verses. The system of exposition is what we expect in an alaskāraśāstra : definitions followed by illustrations. There has been some discussion about the date of its composition, which has been reasonably ascribed to the last quarter of the 15th century by Dr. Nemi Chandra Shastri, the editor of the text, and by A. N. Upadhye. All the available manuscripts, which are not very numerous, are written in Kannada script and housed in the libraries of Karnataka (Moodbidri); none seems to hail from North India. The second chapter (pariccheda), where the author states his wish to tackle the subject of sabdālaskāra (vs. 1), is in fact mostly devoted to a detailed treatment of praśnottaras and citrabandha. As is wellknown, the position of these two varieties of literary compositions is somewhat ambiguous: they are considered as attractive and striking because of their peculiarities and the great amount of virtuosity they require, but, at the same time, they are said to represent poetry of inferior quality (adhamakāvya), especially by the strong advocates of the dhvani-theory.*
Ajitasena's work, coming rather late in the rich Indian tradition on poetics, is naturally indebted to the authors who have preceded him. It is
* Like Anandavardhana (c. 9th cent.). -Editors.

Page #284

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
273
interesting to note, for instance, that it shows several affinities with Vidyānātha's Pratāparudriya, a popular treatise in South India*. The Hindi introduction of the editor includes a detailed comparison of the AC with other Indian works on poetics (Nātyaśāstra, alaṁkāra-chapters of the Agnipurāna, Bhāmaha, Dandin, Udbhata, Rudrata, Rājasekhara, Bhoja, Mammata, Vāgbhata, Hemacandra, Viśvanātha and Vijayavarni's Srngārārnavacandrikā) and presents a critical appraisal of the material included in the AC. As a Digambara Jain, Ajitasena of course draws inspiration from his own religious tradition and often quotes from the basic works or authors representing this cultural background (Adipurāna, Samantabhadra, etc.).
The second chapter on praśnottaras (not considered as such in the Hindi introduction) is no exception to this tendency. Ajitasena's sources are not here the above-mentioned alamkāraśāstras, where riddles, albeit present, are not the main topic, but the standard treatise on the subject, namely Dharmadāsa's Vidagdhamukhamandana (= VMM). Dharmadāsa's original Buddhist affiliation can be stated with some amount of certainty on the basis of internal evidence and there is no need to reject it as insufficient, but this has never been an obstacle to the diffusion of the VMM in broad circles. The Jains, who have shown considerable interest in all linguistic games and have never despised anything connected with śabdālaṁkāras, could not ignore the VMM : manuscripts of the VMM are numerous in Jain libraries 10; Jinaprabhasūri (early 14th cent. A.D.), a Svetāmbara, is among those who commented upon it, and our Ajitasena's aim was obviously to make the VMM suitable for a Digambara Jain audience. Hence the following result : the verses giving the table of contents and the definition-verses, which are devoid of all sectarian character whatsoever, are almost identical to those of the VMM or, in case they are changed, show very minute differences, as if the author had had before him a copy of the original work and had deliberately introduced some small modifications like a plagiarist would do (see examples below § 4, 9 and 15). As for the illustrative verses, they are sometimes clearly based on the VMM (below § 7 and 9) or at least inspired by it, they are simply different because
* If it has reference to Pratāparudra, the last Kākatīya king of Tilangāna, its date of
composition may be some year in the first quarter of the 14th century.-Editors

Page #285

274
Nalini Balbir
Jambu-jyoti
the author has produced some verse of his own, or they are deliberately changed in order to give them a Digambara Jain colouring instead of a Buddhist one: a clear instance is provided by the riddle of the variety called tārkya, where the stanza is so built as to yield the answers vijñānavādinaḥ in the VMM (2.58) andanekantavādah in the AC (2.59)'. Whatever the case, a close comparison with the VMM always proves useful, especially when, more often than once, the present text of the AC (and its Hindi rendering) are unsatisfactory. One of the aims of this paper is to show that the second chapter of this work cannot be neglected by those who study riddles12
(1) 13
2. Grammatical riddles meant to test basic knowledge of the language are illustrated by the following stanza :
...kim vā rūpaṁ tado jasi ?
satr-caturthy-ekavaco bhavater iha kim bhavet ? (bhavate; Jayasimhasūri, Dharmopadeśamālā-vivarana p. 43).
... Or what is the form of tad in the nominative plural ? te
What would be the form for the root bhū in the present participle dative singular ? bhavate
This is one among many cases showing the all-pervading prevalence of Päninian metalanguage, at use even in works of indisputable Jain origin. Here, the aim is not to investigate the familiarity with a specific grammatical school and its terminology, but only to ask a rather simple question which should not arouse any difficulty for anybody having a minimal training in indigenous Sanskrit grammar. As a matter of fact, the technical terms used are of an elementary type. The answer to the first grammatical question is to some extent dependent on the answer to the second one, since jas could theoretically refer to the feminine as well as to the neuter. But both answers have to be compatible, therefore tāh / tâni are easily ruled out.
Practice of language and knowledge of technical terminology go together in the following question :
*... pada-nipunaih pañcami kena vācyā ? (bhāmāratasanatemanasi; JP 71)
By which (element) can the connoisseurs in the field of words express the ablative case ? - By tas (tasā, instr. sg.).

Page #286

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
275
Regarding phonetics, questions connected with the status and transformation of the visarga form a specific group :
*... kūdrśaḥ syād visargaḥ ? (vyantarādivyastah; JP 27)
How would the visarga be? - It throws down the s (s-tah, sam sakāraṁ tasyatīti s-tah, kvip, ct. mss. Al, A2, Ed.).
*... kam upaiti sarva-vidhibhir-jāto visargah kutah ? (P 11)
Where does the visarga go, produced from where through (the application) of all rules ? - (it goes) to r (coming) from r (ram rah).
*... kīdrg nāmi-parā visarga-vihatir-vidvan ? (P 11)
O learned man, how is the destruction of the visarga when it follows a vowel causing cerebralization ? - It gives (i.e. produces)r (ra-rā); cf. nāmi-paro ram, Kātantra 1.5.12, and the other rules of this section which all concern the treatment of the visarjaniya.
3. Questions where the point is to find a synonymical root are rather frequent in riddle-verses. The knowledge of dhātupāthas, a field which belongs both to grammar and to lexicography, is required for this purpose 14. Since there are generally several synonyms, the choice could be difficult. The selection of the adequate root and the elimination of the others are to be operated in view of all the questions making the riddle, because only one is able to fit in.
*... dāṇammi ko vã dhāū ? (rāmāyaṇe; Jayasimhasūri, Dharmopadeśamālā-vivarana p. 90)
...Or what is the root for 'to give'? - rā -: cf. rā dāne, Pān. Dhātup. 2.48; Palsule 1955, 180 s.v. dāne.
*... viratau ko dhātuh ? (malayamarutah; JP 31)15
... What is the root for 'to cease'? - yam - cf. Palsule 1955, 193 s.v. viratau, the only source mentioned being Vopadeva.
* bhuktyarthateha vihitā katamasya dhātoh? (visadapañcamah; JP 53)
For which root has the meaning 'to eat' been prescribed ? - camah, “for the root cam-": cf. Palsule 1955, 166 s.v. adane.

Page #287

276
Nalini Balbir
Jambū-jyoti
*... prayoga-nipunaiḥ kaḥ śabda-dhātuh smrtah? (madguravojinesvarasürayah; JP 159)
... Which is the root for 'to emit a sound that the people versed in the correct use of language have taught ? - ras - cf. Palsule 1955, 195 s.v. śabde.
*ko dhātur gamane ? (P 7)
... What is the root for 'to go'? - mīmu : cf. ama drama hamma mīmr gam gatau quoted by the avacūri on P = Pān Dhātup. 1.493-496; compare Hemac. Dhātup 1.392-396 : ama drama hamma mimr gamlrṁ gatau. Here the choice has to be compatible with the last question of the stanza vidito vargantya-varnaś ca kah? which directs towards a root beginning with the letter m-.
* ko dhātur vada resane ? (P 11)
Say, what is the root for 'to yell’? - ri : cf. ri resane ri-dhātuh of the avacūri, reminding of Pān. Dhātup. 9.30 ri gati-resanayoh (and Hemac. Dhātup. 3. 18 rims gati-resanayoh); Palsule 1955, 190.
In our next two examples, the standard straightforward wording is replaced by something less expected, but quite usual in the context of riddles :
*... atho khādad-grhītāvadat : "kidrg bhāti saro 'rhataś ca sadanam ?”... (jinavallabhena; JP 160)
And the root 'to eat' together with the root 'to take' said : "How does a lake look beautiful ? And how does a Jain temple look beautiful”...
As a matter of fact, in riddles anybody or anything, whether an object, an abstract entity, or even a word, can be the grammatical subject of a verb meaning to speak’. This has an impact on the reply, which will in turn be addressed to these speakers, now in the vocative form. This is another way to demonstrate one's own ability in the field of grammar by building vocative forms of monosyllabic words or artificial compounds. Thus here, the answer will be :
Root 'o eat' together with root 'to take' ! adorned with lotuses (does a lake look beautiful) and full of Jinas (does a Jain temple look beautiful) : al-la, vana-ji (i.e. secondary derivative with the possessive suffix -in from vana-ja "lotus"), jina-vat.

Page #288

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
Al-la is the vocative of the dvandva formed by ad- 'to eat' and lã - 'to take' (cf. Palsule 1955, 168 s.v. ādāne)16.
* ko krīḍārtha-dhātur vadet "ko'ṣṭavimśatayā prasiddhim agamad varṇaḥ kakā-lekhake ?" (P-12)
Who, being a root meaning 'to play', would say "Which is the letter of the consonant chart that is known to be the 28th ?" - Root 'to play' ! the letter 1.
The last question stated in a rather simple way points to the root las, recorded in the Dhatupaṭhas (cf. lasa śleṣaṇa-krīḍanayoḥ, Pāṇ. Dhatup. 1.746 = Hemac. Dhatup. 1.543; Palsule 1955, 172 and 196). The root which was the speaker in the question has to take the form of the vocative when it becomes the addressee in the answer (las lasatīti kvip prathamā si, vyañjanāc ca si-lopah, he laḥ, ct.); lah is also the nominative form for the la-kāra.
277
4. Such an elementary prerequisite as the knowledge of the alphabet and of the Sanskrit phonemes has been variously applied in the context of riddle-making.
First, the varnas are useful because they provide convenient and obvious monosyllables for praśnottaras :
*
tavargge pañcamaḥ ko vā? (kumjarena; Jayasimhasūri, Dharmopadeśamālā-vivaraṇa p. 43)
What is the fifth letter in the group of cerebrals? - na
khāntaṁ brūhi kim ṇāntaṁ icchasi ? (īhālaṁkārasangatam; Bhavadeva, Pärśvanathacarita 2.224)
Tell the letter which comes after kha (and) which one do you require coming after na ? - ga (and) tam.
...

In the 15 verses of the Praśnāvalī, the last question of the riddle invariably concerns a letter (varna), more precisely a consonant or a class of consonants (varga). It can be expressed very simply under the form : What is the third consonant (vs. 2), the twentieth (vs. 4), the twenty-first (vs. 5), the twenty-sixth (vss. 8-9), the twenty-seventh (vss. 10-11), the twenty-eighth (vs. 12; above), the thirtieth (vs. 15), meaning that all answers will contain respectively ga, na, pa, ya, ra, la, and sa. A short descriptive statement can replace the serial number: the questions 'What is the last phoneme of the last group ?' (vs. 7) and 'What is the last phoneme

Page #289

278
Nalini Balbir
Jambū-jyoti
among the semi-vowels17 ?' (vss. 13-14) respectively mean words including ma and va. When they occur, indirect statements based on numerical equivalences are not too difficult to grasp : 'What is the phoneme in the sequence of phonemes and at the same time the label of a group of consonants which corresponds to the digits of the moon ?' (vs. 3) refers to ta, the 16th consonant, and 'What is the letter in the chart of consonants (ka-ka-lekhake) that has got the (same number as the) number of Jinas ?' (vs. 6) refers to bha, the 24th consonant. The point is then to use this information as a hint to answer the other questions of the stanza, which are much more tricky, to find out ekāksaras or dvyakşaras containing the given consonant (e.g., mama, ami, mīmu, mu, ume, amai, mas, ama, aumam and mas are the words answering the different questions put in vs. 7).
Jinavallabha combines the use of the alphabet as well as lexicographical matter in a sophisticated manner which is peculiar to his work. The first stage is to produce new synonyms for words offered in the question by adding or suppressing syllables in a given phonetic sequence (dhvani, sabda, pada, varnāli). Then comes the real answer to the riddle, which consists in making a bahuvrīhi-compound describing how the starting phonetic sequence has been modified. There are 16 such instances which can be classified as follows according to the pattern they exhibit :
The starting point is a word, i.e. a meaningful phonetic sequence which will acquire a different meaning suiting the question once it has been submitted to modification. The position within the alphabet of the letter to be discovered is described in a rather indirect fashion :
* jāmātaraṁ samākhyāti kidrśo vathara-dhvanih? (agadaśamah; JP 35)
How does the word “stupid' denote a bridegroom ?-Once it is deprived of the tenth letter, starting with ga (a-ga-daśamah), i.e. tha : vathara → vara.
* aśiva-dhvanir ākhyāti tiryag-bhedam ca kīdrśaḥ ? (aparäjayah; JP 15) How does the word 'inauspicious' denote a kind of animal ?-Once the vowel coming after a is removed (a-parāj-ayah, where ac is the pratyāhāra for a vowel in Pānini's grammar), i.e. i : aśiva → aśva 18.
* brüte sipha-dhvanir atha Śriyam atra kīdṛk? (visadapañcamaḥ; JP 53)

Page #290

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
How does the word 'fibrous root' denote Lakṣmi ?-Once it is deprived of sa and of the fifth letter, starting with da (vi-sa-da-pañcamaḥ), i.e. pha: sipha > i + ā> Ya, one of the several synonymic monosyllables for Lakṣmi.
The same process is applied to a word which is partly meaningful and partly made of a sequence of phonemes created ad hoc :
*
kidṛg bhumiśubhasa-sabda iha bho viśrambha-vāci bhavet? (atanavamadaśamah; JP 55)
279
How does the word bhūmiśubhāsa denote 'trust' ?-Once it is deprived of the ninth and the tenth letters, starting with ta (a-ta-nava-daśamaḥ), i.e. bha and ma bhümiśubhasa > *uisuäsa > viśvāsa.
*
nayanagati padam kīdṛk pūjayatīti artham abhidhatte ? (apaprathamangajam; JP 85)
-
How does the word nayanagati express the meaning 'to worship' ?— Once it is deprived of the first letter before pa (i.e. na) and once it has ja instead of ga (a-pa-prathamaṁ ga-jam) : nayanagati → yajati.
In several cases, the starting point is clearly a mere phoneme or a phonetic sequence without any meaning. A rather simple instance involving only one type of modification, namely an addition, is:
*... atha silpi-śikya-dehän udāharati kā-dhvanir atra kīdṛk ? (jinadantarucayah; JP 2)
How does the sound kā denote 'a craftsman', 'a rope', 'a body' ?— Once it ends (respectively) with ru, ca or ya (anta-ru-ca-yah): kā → kāru, kāca, kāya.
An illustration for modification through removal of a syllable is : *nasthātavyamca-sabdo'yam pradoṣam kidṛśaḥ ? (vitathavacanaḥ;
JP 62)
How does the word 'and it should not be stated' denote 'evening?' — Once it is deprived of ta, tha, va, ca and na (vi-ta-tha-va-ca-naḥ) : nasthātavyaṁca → sāyam.

In the following riddle, the syntactic pattern is not a bahuvrīhi as is usual, and instead of forming a long compound, the answer is extremely short, leading to an effect of surprise, which is also a part of riddle-games :

Page #291

280
Nalini Balbir
*adivārī-sabdo vā kais tyaktaḥ praha gṛha-deśam? (yaih; JP 52)
Of which elements should the word adivārī be deprived to denote a part of a house? Of i, i and a (i-i-a in the instrumental plural > yaih): adivari →dvar, 'a door'.
*
When the synonyms which are to be found out are not ordinary words, but typical ekākṣaras, the effect of surprise and the pleasure of the discovery are even greater :
asumeti-padam kīdṛk Kāmaṁ Lakṣmïm ca bodhayati ? (avatamasam;
Jambu-jyoti
JP 7)
How does the sequence asumeti refer to Kāma and Lakṣmi in the vocative? - Once it is deprived of the letters va (i.e. u and a), ta, ma and sa (a-v-a-ta-ma-sam): asumeti → E, vocative of I, a frequent synonym of Kama, and I, vocative of I, a frequent synonym of Lakṣmi. Both these monosyllables are well recorded in Ekākṣarakoṣas and widely used by Jinavallabha in his Praśnottara.
On the other hand, there are riddles of this type implying two types of modifications, an addition combined with a suppression, in which case the answer can be expressed through two bahuvrīhi-compounds :
* Hara-nikara-patha-svah-sṛṣṭi-vāci narnaga-padaṁ kidṛg? (bhavamāsvasādiśastanam; JP 16)
How does the word narnaga designate 'Śiva', 'a collection', 'a path', 'the sky', 'creation' ?-Once it starts (respectively) with bha, va, mā, sva or sa and is deprived of na (bha-va-ma-sva-sādi śasta-nam) : narnaga→→ Bharga, varga, marga, svarga and sarga.
* vadati javina-śabdaḥ kīdṛśaḥ sat-kavīndrāḥ
kathayata jana-śūnyaṁ kajjalaṁ bhartsanam ca? (vyantarādivyastaḥ; JP 27)
Good poets tell : how does the word javina denote 'deserted by people', 'collyrium' and 'threat' ?-Once it starts with vi, am or tar, and once vi has been thrown away (vy-am-tar-ādi-vy-astaḥ): javina→ vijana, añjana, tarjana.

kīdṛk / pūta-vāta-paritāpa-mlecchopāsti-nuti-gṛha-krīḍā homa-viśva-vegavato jalpati pavadanada-padam? (papadayasestabhadehabhujādivipadam; JP 34).

Page #292

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
281
How does the word pavadanada denote 'fire', 'wind', 'scorching heat', ‘barbarian', 'worship', 'praise', 'house', 'play', 'oblation', 'universe', 'quick' ? - Once it starts with pā, pa, da, ya, se, sta, bha, de, ha, bhu or ja and once it is deprived of pa and da (pa-pa-da-ya-se-sta-bha-de-ha-bhu-jādi vi-padam): pavadanada pāvana, pavana, davana, yavana, sevana, stavana, bhavana, devana, havana, bhuvana and javana.
* tvamaladaya-pada vā āśrayābhāva-mürcchā
kataka-nagavićeşān kīdrg āmantrayeta ? (āvipravamādyatvamadam; JP 39)
How would the wordtvamaladaya refer to‘abode', 'inexistence', 'fainting', 'bracelet' and a specific mountain in the vocative?—Once it starts withā, vi, pra, va orma and once it is deprived oftva, ma and da (a-vi-pra-va-mādy a-tva-madam): tvamaladaya →ālaya, vilaya, pralaya, valaya and Malaya.
*ura-sabdah kalyanada-bala-hima-śrngān vadati kīdrk ? (ādiśyantaravaviśikhānuḥ; JP 11)
How does the word 'sheep' denote 'bestowing prosperity', 'army', 'cold' and 'summit' ?-Once it starts with si, has in the middle va, vi, si or kha, and once it is deprived of u (ādi-si-antara-va-vi-si-kha-an-uh): ura → śivara (ra, agent noun built on the root rā 'to give'), sivira 'military camp', śiśira and śikhara.
Finally, substitution of syllables is also one process at work. It can be expressed either through the pregnant use of the locative case in conformity with the process applied in the grammatical metalanguage or through a compound (va-ņā, JP 54, below; and ga-jam, JP 85, see above):
* ravaravaka-varnāli kīdrg bravīti gatāratim ? (aparāvanā; JP 54)
How does the sequence ravaravaka denote somebody who has no regret ?-Once it is preceded by a and once it has ņā instead of va (a-parā va-nā) : ravaravaka → a-ranaranaka.
* paścădudbhava-jānusambhava-narān daityāntya-damstrāngajān
Mandań ca kramaso muja-dhvanir agāt kīdrk kva kasmin sati ? (ajāmadahatabhāpūrvomene; JP 22)
How does the word muja denote respectively 'one who is born after', 'coming from the knee', 'man', 'demon', 'tusk', 'born from one's own body', 'Saturn', what being where ?-Once it starts with a, jā, ma, da, ha, ta, or

Page #293

282
Nalini Balbir
Jambū-jyoti
bhä, when there is na instead of ma (a-jā-ma-da-ha-ta-bhä-pūrvo me ne): muja — anuja, jānuja, manuja, danuja, hanuja, tanuja and Bhānuja''.
In all these cases, whatever the process at work, the analysis of the compound which forms the answer in the smallest possible elements looks both artificial and skillful.
(II)
5. We now come to varieties of grammatical praśnottaras which are defined and illustrated in the relevant śāstras. In the so-called nāmākhyātajāti, the same sequence of phonemes is submitted to a twofold analysis and can be understood both as a noun (substantive, adjective, indeclinable) and as a verb. Mahākavi Ajitasena states :
sup-tin-anta-prabhedena suyogitvād dvidhottaram ekam eva bhaved yatra tan nāmākhyātam ucyate (AC 2.55)
When an answer, which is twofold because of a good grammatical connection, corresponding respectively to an inflected nominal form and to an inflected verb form, is the same, the riddle is called nāmākhyāta, "noun (and) verb."
This verse obviously echoes Dharmadāsa's definition; both the syntactic pattern and the vocabulary are identical, except for one word :
ekam evottaram yatra suslistatvād dvidhā bhavet sup-tin-anta-prabhedena nāmākhyātam tad ucyate (VMM 2.37)
When the same answer becomes twofold because of a good double meaning, corresponding respectively to an inflected nomimal form and to an inflected verb form, the riddle is called nāmākhyāta, "noun (and) verb.”
In the VMM, this variety is illustrated through 18 examples, a fairly large number compared to what we get for other types. Three groups can be sorted out depending on the pattern at work :
5.1. Q1 + Q2 ... + Q →A, + A, ... + A, as nominal forms and Q, → A, A, ... + A, as a verbal form. E.g.,
padam anantara-vāci kim isyate ? kapi-patir vijayī nanu kidrśah ? para-gunaṁ gaditum gata-matsarāḥ kuruta kim satataṁ bhuvi sajjanāh ? (VMM 2.39)

Page #294

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
283
Which word expressing the absence of interval is desired ?-In immediate succession anu
And how can the Lord of Monkeys be victorious ?_With Rāmah saRāmah
O good people who are free from envy, what do you always do on the earth in order to tell others' virtues ?--We follow (them) anusarāmah
This pattern is exhibited in 13 cases :
a-bhi bhavati / abhibhavati (2.38) - anuja grhe/ anujagrhe (2.40) - samă dadhi re / samādadhire (2.41) - avamaṁ tāraḥ / avamantārah (2.42) • a-nu mātā ase / anumātāse (2.43) - dāsyā mahe / dāsyāmahe (2.44) - prayāsī ati / prayāsyati (2.45) - santi a-jatu / santyajatu (2.46) - ali lavam alīlavam (2.48)-samaram jayam / samaranjayaṁ (2.51) - parā ājaye mahi / parājayemahi (2.52) - vină udaye yam / vinodayeyam (2.53).
Whereas some of the verbal forms to be discovered are rather simple, some others are not so common in the ordinary language and require a full knowledge of grammar.
5.2. The functioning of the second pattern, represented only by two instances, is basically the same, but instead of forming only a verbal form one of the answers is a syntagm or a full sentence :
nadi iyatāṁ / na dīyatām (2.47) - mānava nagāḥmā anavana gāḥ (2.49)
5.3. In the last pattern, the stanza is made of two questions only. The first one produces a noun, the second one a verb : Q, → A as a noun and Q, → A as a verb. The difference is that here the answer is not progressively built with the help of two or more elements which are piled up as in the preceding cases. E.g.,
kim akaravam aham Harir mahīdhram sva-bhuja-balena gavāṁ hitam vidhitsuh ? priyatama-vadanena pīyate kaḥ
parinata-bimba-phalopamah priyāyāḥ ? (VMM 2.50) 1, Hari, what did I do to a mountain with the strength of my own arms, as I wanted to do something useful for the cows ?-You held (the Govardhana) adharah

Page #295

284
Nalini Balbir
Jambū-jyoti
In a beloved one what is the thing resembling a ripe bimba-fruit that is drunk by the mouth of a lover ? --The lip adharah
The two other such instances are : sa-mada-āsyah / samadāsyah (2.54) and a-hāsyatām/ ahāsyatām (2.55).
6. In Jinavallabha's Praśnottara there are three instances which come under the caption nāmākhyāta-jāti according to the commentary of mss Al and A2, while the avacūri going with the printed edition gives them the more general label dvir-gata-jāti (for JP 81, 83) or vyasta-samasta-jāti (for JP 66). The first two correspond to the definition given above and are identical with the last pattern described for the VMM.
* prcchāmi jala-nidhir "aham kim akaravam sapadi śasadharābhyudaye ?”
alam udyamaih suktinām ity ukte kīdrśaḥ kaḥ syāt ? (JP 81)
I, the ocean, I ask : "What did I immediately do at moonrise ?"-You gleamed20 samudalasah
When he is told : “Enough exertion for good people !”, who would be how ?—The idle fellow (would be) full of joy sa-mud alasah
* rataye kim akurvātāṁ parasparam dampati cirān militau ? mokşa-patha-prasthita-matiḥ pariharati ca kīdrśīm janatām ? (JP 83)
What did a couple do mutually concerning love once they met after a long time ?-Both of them rushed (to make love) atattvaratám
What type of crowd does the one who has engaged himself on the path of Liberation avoid ?-(The crowd) who finds pleasure in what goes against the (true) principles a-tattva-ratām
In this verse, the discrepancy between the tense used in the question (the imperfect) and the one used in the answer (aorist) is worth noting. It is unusual in the context of riddles, but easily explainable within classical Sanskrit where both tenses are more or less freely exchanged.
The next instance shows how basic patterns are liable to variations. Instead of one verbal form, there are two here, which are then combined to make a rather sophisticated compound :
* tanvi ! tvam netra-türnodgata -madana-sarākāra-cañcat-katākşair laksył-krtya smarärtän sapadi kim akaroh subhru ! tīksnair abhīksnam ?

Page #296

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
285
kim kurvāte bhavābdhim su-muni-vitaranād dāyaka-śrāvakau drāk ?
śraddhāluh prāpta-mantrādy-ucita -vidhi-parah prāyasah kīdrśah syāt? (JP 66)
O fair one ! Having taken as your target those who suffer from love, what did you do immediately and repeatedly, lovely woman ! with your moving and sharp sideglances resembling the arrows of Kāma quickly discharged by your eyes ? pierced (them) avidhyam
What do the one who gives and the Jain layman quickly do regarding the ocean of rebirth when a good monk makes them cross?
—They both cross tarataḥ
Generally how will be a faithful fellow who has received mantras and is fully devoted to the relevant rules ?-He will find pleasure in putting an end to what goes against the rule. a-vidhy-anta-ratah
7. Ajitasena's AC has two instances of the nāmākhyāta-variety. Both are clear representatives of the pattern analysed in $ 5.1.: questions 1 and 2 lead to the answer as a noun, question 3 to the answer as a verbal form. But, as is often the case, the text needs emendation :
* sevitä vihvalaṁ kartuṁ kā ksamā suciraṁ ghatah nambho dharati kidrksam sastram kurutha dhidhanāh ? (AC 2.56) surāmaḥ. surā. āmah. surāmaḥ dadmaḥ
The above investigation of the illustrative verses found in VMM and JP should have made clear that nāmākhyāta-riddles, like all other praśnottaras, are built on strict grammatical patterns : a question including kim means a substantive in the answer (with the same grammatical gender as the interrogative pronoun), a question containing kīdsk or the like implies an adjective, simple or compound, in the answer, a question with a verb in the second person implies a verb in the first person in the reply, etc. Sticking to these facts is necessary and proves specially rewarding when it comes to understand texts which are badly transmitted. This holds true for the second line of the above verse which should be read :
nāmbho dharati kidrk ? kim21 śāstram kurutha dhīdhanāh ? The whole verse can then be translated :
What is the thing, the addiction of which can make one confused ? -Alcohol surā

Page #297

286
Nalini Balbir
Which type of pot cannot retain water for long-An uncooked one.
ämah
O intelligent fellows, what do you do concerning the treatise ? -We give (them) well (?; cf. rā dāne, Dhätup.) su-rämaḥ
Ajitasena's second instance reads:
* yāminīpratimāyoge kidṛśam yatinām kulam ?
kam vandante surā nityam ? kāmaṁ kim akarot sudhiḥ? (AC 2.57) abhyabhavam. abhi bhayarahitam. abhavam samsärahīnajanam. abhyabhavam niräkaromi sma.
Here again, a simple correction would suit the grammatical pattern of the riddle better. The answer as a verbal form is abhyabhavam, 1st person of the imperfect. The corresponding question should then normally include a second person: akaroḥ instead of akarot.
How is a group of Digambara monks when practising kayotsarga in the night ?-Without fear a-bhi
Who is it that the gods always respect ?-The one who is free from rebirth a-bhavam
O wise man, what did you do with desire ?-I overcame (it)
Jambu-jyoti
abhyabhavam
In this case, a comparison with the VMM further shows that Ajitasena has drawn inspiration from this work not only for definitions but also for illustrative verses, transforming what is found in VMM 2.38 in order to suit an ascetic context :

samara-sirasi sainyam kidṛśam durniväram ? vigata-ghana-nisithe kidṛśe vyomni śobhā ?
kam api vidhi-vasena präpya yogyābhimanam jagad akhilam anindyam durjanah kim karoti ?
What type of army is difficult to attack at the front of a battle?
-The one who has no fear a-bhi
In a night without clouds in which type of sky is there light?
-In (a sky) with stars bhavati
When, by chance, he has got some reason to be arrogant, what does a bad fellow do with the whole world of unblamable people ?-He humiliates (them) abhibhavati

Page #298

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
(III)
8. In the preceding category, the words to be guessed belong to the language used in performance. But several grammatical riddles are also meant to test the proficiency in the field of metalanguage, when the question and/or the answer involves a pratyāhāra (§ 8.1) a kṛt or taddhita affix (§ 8.2) or a grammatical technical term (§ 9). As will be seen, in all instances but one (§ 8.2) the standard is Pānini's metalanguage: 8.1. * agre gamyeta kena? (halāsamstarasamsarayetaḥ; JP 36) What is it that should go in front ?-The consonant (hala, instr. sg.) Hal is the well-known pratyāhāra for referring to the consonants. As for the respective importance of consonants and vowels in the linguistic system, the commentary (mss A1, A2) states: svarāt pradhanam vyañjanaṁ bhavati, a belief already handed down in the older tradition: cf. vyañjanaṁ svarāngam (Taittirīya Prātiśākhya I, 6 quoted by Abhyankar 1961 under vyañjana).
* pratyāhāra-viśeśā vadanti: "Nandi nigadyate kīdṛk ?" (ajagaṇaḥ; JP 76)
Certain pratyāhāras say: "How can Nandin be called?
-O ac, ak and an, (he can be called) an attendant of the Unborn (=
Śiva).
287
Here the sequence ajagaṇaḥ is understood in two different ways: first as aj-ag-aṇaḥ, which forms the vocative of a dvandva compound made of the three Paninian pratyāhāras referring respectively to the vowels (ac), to the vowels as such (a/a, i/ī, u/u, rf and !: ak), to vowels and semi-vowels taken together (an), then as Aja-gaṇaḥ (nom. masc. sg.).
8.2.* syad utaḥ kena vṛddhiḥ ? (virājñāvinudatipāpam; JP 6) By what is the vṛddhi of u caused ?-By tip (tipā).
Tip is Panini's marker for the personal ending of the Parasmaipada 3rd person singular. The commentary of JP explains: tip-pratyayena 'uto vṛddhir' ity ādinā nautīty ādau yathā vṛddhir bhavati, and thus quotes the beginning of Pan 7.3.89 uto vṛddhir luki hali, “A root ending in u which has no Present characteristic gets vṛddhi before a pit sārvadhātuka affix beginning with a consonant"22
guna-vṛddhi vāj-jhalau kasya? (syuh; JP 148)
*

Page #299

288
Nalini Balbir
Jambū-jyoti
Which (root) has a guna and a vrddhi which are both vowels and consonants ? - The root r (uh, gen. of this root).
The reason is that the guna of this root is ar (vowel+consonant) and its vrddhi is ār (idem), as the commentary explains : ar-ār-laksana-gunavrddhi ac-halau svara-vyañjana-rūpe kasya dhātoh syātām ? uh r-kārasya rddhi r-to dur. ur ādese dity-antya-hrasvādeh r-lope uh iti rupa-siddhih.
The following instance is fairly sophisticated :
* "nirdambheti yad arthatah pranigaded rūpam vi-pūrvāc ca tat
mināteh kam apeksya jāyata ?", iti ktvā-pratyayah prcchati (bhavadyavādeśam; JP 98)
The affix ktvā asks : "What needs to be taken in consideration in order that the root 'to hurt', preceded by vi, takes the meaning ‘not deceitful' ? - Having the substitute yap instead of you : bhavad-yab-ādeśam23.
As a matter of fact, when the root mi, mīnāti is used as a simplex, it will form its absolutive with the suffix - tvā (ktvā in Pānini's language), but when it is preceded by the prefix vi, its correct absolutive will be vi-māya (see Pān. 6.1.50 for the substitution of a in this situation) and will thus use the suffix -ya (krt-affix) which Panini calls lyap (cf.7.1.37 samāse 'nañ-purve ktvo lyap), and which Jinavallabha calls yap (> yab through sandhi)24. In doing this, he here follows the metalanguage of Hemacandra's grammar where the counterpart of Pāṇini's sūtra reads : a-nañaḥ ktvo yap (3.2.154).
9. A variety of riddle where the answer should consist in a grammatical technical term is recorded in the specialized treatises (AC and VMM) and is named śābdīya-jāti. Here again, Ajitasena's AC follows Dharmadāsa's VMM and, like his predecessor, he considers the definition of this variety along with the definition of three other varieties involving knowledge of specific fields, namely tārkya-jāti "philosophical" (see above $ 1.3 end), sautra-jāti (below IV) and śāstraja-jāti "scientific” (AC 2.58 and VMM 2.56). But these types were probably considered obvious, or best understood through concrete examples, since there is hardly any definition (iñeyaṁ.../ śābdīyam śabda-samjñābhiḥ...., VMM 2.56;...sabdād udbhavam ... sābdaṁ ..., AC 2.58).
The illustrative verse of the AC as it is edited reads as follows:
na ślāgh[y]ate munih kasmai? sub-antam kim nigadyatām ?.

Page #300

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
a-kārādy-anubandhānāṁ dhātūnāṁ nāma kiṁ vada ? (AC 2.61) parasmaipadam. muniḥ parasmai na ślāghate sva-guṇādhikaṁ dharmam na jñāpayati, api tu sva-nindāṁ para-praśaṁsāṁ ca karotīty arthaḥ, śabda-jātiḥ [Ed. śābdījātiḥ].
Who is it that the ascetic does not praise ?-An other person parasmai How is an inflected nominal stem called ?-A word padam Tell, which name is given to the roots having the anubandha a, etc. ?— parasmaipadam
Now, the wording of the first and the third questions and their respective answers are obviously unfitting. The explanation of the first answer given by the author is rather tortuous, unconvincing and contradicts the answer parasmai. Further, parasmaipadam cannot apply to roots possessing the anubandha a, on the contrary, this vowel normally "indicates the placing of the Atmanepada affixes after them, if it be uttered as anudātta and of affixes of both the padas if uttered svarita25."
289
Once again, a look at the VMM helps to restore the proper text because it immediately appears that Ajitasena borrowed from it. In all editions and manuscripts we read :
na ślāghate khalaḥ kasmai? sup-tin-antam kim ucyate?
lādeśānāṁ navānāṁ ca tināmṁ kim nāma kathyatām? (VMM 2.61) Who is it that the wicked fellow does not praise ?-An other person parasmai
How is an inflected nominal stem called ?-A word padam
What is the name given to the nine verbal endings having la as their substitute? parasmaipadam
The contents of the first question and its answer are in agreement with common sense of observation, and the answer to the third question is in agreement with grammatical theory: lah parasmaipadam (Pān. 1.4.99)26. Now, on the other hand a part of the manuscript tradition, mirrored in the common Indian editions of the VMM. also adds another stanza 27:
satatam ślāghate kasmai nico ? bhuvi kim uttamam ?
kartary api rucādīnāṁ dhātūnāṁ kiṁ padaṁ bhavet? (VMM 2.62) Who is it that the mean fellow always praise ?-Himself atmane What is the best thing on earth ?-A place padam

Page #301

290
Nalini Balbir
Jambū-jyoti
What would be the word (i.e., verbal affix) for the roots 'to shine' and others, even if there is an agent ? ātmanepadam
There are good reasons to think that this verse is an interpolation favoured by concatenation with the preceding one, the existence of an identical pattern in the first part of both verses, and the feeling that parasmaipadam could not go without ātmanepadam28. But, whatever the textual history, it seems clear that the author of the AC had before him a manuscript of the VMM containing the two stanzas and that this situation produced confusion and overlapping. This is evidenced by the manuscript tradition of the AC itself : pāda c has a variant reading which is nkārādyanubandhānāṁ (instead of akarādy-anubandhānām) and the commentary too : ātmanepadam. ātmane na ślāghate munih sva-ślāghāṁ na karotīty arthah. In short, the only way to make Ajitasena's verse agree both with common sense and grammar is to suppose that the answer is to be read as ātmanepadam :
Who is it that the ascetic does not praise ?-Himself ātmane
... Tell what is the name to be given to the roots having the anubandha ? ātmanepadam
(IV)
10. Like the sabdīya-jāti (89), the sautra-jāti is illustrated but not defined. It is probably not a result of mere chance that all examples of this variety (whether in the VMM or elsewhere) exclusively refer to the field of grammar: sūtra-style and grammatical teaching are traditionally considered to go together. The structural pattern of such riddles can be described on the basis of the two instances available in the VMM : as usual in praśnottaras, the global answer is progressively formed by piling up several units corresponding to the same number of questions (here three), whereas the last question concerns the sūtra itself and gives a hint as to the treatise where it is to be found :
yamah, agam, dhane / Pānini-sūtram ca kidrksam ?- yamo gandhane, Pận. 1.2.15 (VMM 2.59)
višesanam, ekā, arthena / sūtram Candrasya kidrksam ?-visesanam ekārthena, Candra-vyāk. 2.2.18 (VMM 2.60).

Page #302

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
291
11. Riddles of this kind available in our Jain corpus refer to a variety of works. To some extent they are of interest for the history of grammatical tradition and for an appraisal of the spread of grammatical schools in Medieval India.
11.1. Jinavallabha's Praśnottara devotes two rather elaborate stanzas to the sautra-jāti, but the commentators' silence about the quoted sūtras and their sources is noteworthy. In the first stanza the pattern is different from the instances of the VMM because it represents a mixed type, called by the author trih-samasta-sútrottara-jāti. Instead of being reached at through the piling up of micro-elements, the sequence forming the answer is taken as a whole and can be understood in three different ways :
sva-janaḥ prcchati, “jainair aghasya kaḥ kutra kīdṛśe kathitaḥ ?" kathayata vaiyakaraņāḥ sūtram Kätyāyaniyaṁ kim ? (JP 64)
One's own kinsman asks : "What have Jains said of sin regarding which thing of which type ?"--Kinsman, bondage regarding the means of activity which is a very big fight bandho, bandho 'dhikarane 'dhika-raņe
Tell, grammarians, what is Kātyāyana's sūtra ? bandho 'dhikarane29
If we except the vocative and the rather artificial analysis of adhikarane as adhika-rane, a compound of rare occurrence (even in the Poona Sanskrit dictionary), the first part states fundamentals of the Jain doctrine with the relevant technical terminology : karmic bondage (bandha) is one of the fundamental truths (tattvas, cf. Tattvārthasūtra 1.4); as for the term adhikarana, for which the standard passage is Tattvārthasūtra 6.8 : adhikaranam jīvājīvāḥ (developed in the subsequent sūtras), its first meaning 'basis or means (of any activity) "30 applies here as well. However, the fact that all activity is viewed as generating particles of karman in the individual soul has led to a restriction of meaning; hence the explanation of adhikarana as "a means, implement or weapon of karmic bondage" and the translation of TS 6.8 as "The instruments of long-term karmic inflow are both sentient and non-sentient entities31." This traditional semantic equivalence accounts for the gloss adhikarane pāpa-vyāpāre of the commentaries on JP 22 (quoted in note 29).
On bandho 'dhikarane as a grammatical sūtra, all the commentaries are silent. The identification of the Kātyāyana mentioned by Jinavallabha

Page #303

292
Nalini Balbir
Jambū-jyoti
with Panini's vārttikakāra can be easily ruled out because the corresponding rule in Panini's grammar is not a vārttika and has a word-order different from what we have here : adhikarane bandhah (3.4.41), “(The affix ‘namul comes) after the verb 'bandh' (to bind) when (a word expressing) location (is in construction with it)." In the context of riddles and grammar, where precision and strictness are fundamental, such a discrepancy is of importance. It is very likely, however, that our Kātyāyana is the grammarian also known as Vararuci "to whom some works on Prakrit and Kātantra grammar are ascribed32" As a matter of fact, bandho'dhikarane is a sūtra that occurs in the fourth chapter of the Kātantra which is devoted to the discussion of krt-affixes (4.6.25)33, a problematic chapter generally
nsidered as a later addition to the original sūtrapātha and explicitly taken by the commentator Durgasimha to be the work of Kātyāyana :
vrkṣādivad ami rūdhāḥ krtină na krtāḥ krtah,
Kātyāyanena te srstā vibuddhi-pratibuddhaye34. Jinavallabha is in agreement with this traditional opinion. His riddle is one of the hints indicating the vast circulation of the Kātantra in Medieval India, also among Jain circles in Gujarat (see further § 12).
11.2. In his second instance of the sautra-jāti Jinavallabha resorts to the pattern expected for this kind of riddle, but makes it sophisticated, hence savoury, through the use of uncommon words to be found in the answers. As a matter of fact, his purpose is not to write a handbook, as Dharmadāsa did with the VMM, but to display his virtuosity :
jantuh kascana vakti, "kā kva ramate?" procuh kacan kidrśān? brahmadi-trayam atra kah krśayati ? kved-āgamaḥ syāj janeh ? kim vänukta-samuccaye padam ? atho dhātuś ca ko bhartsane ? kim sūtram sudhiyo 'dhyagīsata tathā Vibrāntavidyadharāh ? (JP 122) sütrottara-jātih : jhasyekācovaśaḥsdhvoścabhas. A certain being says : "Which lady finds pleasure where ?" -Fish, Lakşmi (finds pleasure) in Visnu jhași, I E > jhasye How do they describe the hair ?-As "worshipping the head" kācah
Who is it that makes thin the three (Brahma, etc.) ?-The one who makes thin Brahma, Śiva and Visnu va-śaḥ
Before what would there be the accrement it in the root 'to be born' ? -Before s and dhv s-dhvoh

Page #304

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
293
And which is the word used in the meaning of accumulation though not actually stated ? - "And” ca
And which is the root that is used in the meaning "to insult" ? --The root bhas” bhas
And which is the sūtra that the clever Viśrāntavidyādhara taught ?The sūtra jhasy ekāco baśaḥ sdhvoś ca bhas
The lexicographical niceties of this stanza require some explanation : jhasi is the vocative of the feminine word jhasi; I for Lakşmi and A (here in the locative E) for Visnu are some of the ekāksara-words Jinavallabha likes best; kācaḥ is the accusative plural of an artificial tatpuruşa compound of etymological value made of ka ("head") + a(ñ)c (root noun meaning "which worships", cf. añc pūjane, Dhātup.) > kāc; va-śaḥ is the nominative masculine singular of a tatpuruşa compound made of U-U-A ( > va through sandhi) + śaḥ (cf. śo tanūkarane, Dhātup.), where U is an ekākşara-designation for Brahma and then for Siva. One could also consider that the designation for Siva is Ū (also found in Ekāksarakosas with this meaning).
Further, the stanza is also a small collection of individual grammatical questions of the types we saw earlier scattered in different verses :
—there is a question on a synonymic root : bhas bhartsane, see for instance Hemacandra, Dhātup. 1.521; Palsule 1955, 187.
-The statement defining ca is well-known from the Kāśikā : ca-kāro 'nukta-samuccayārthah (Kāś. on 2.4.18, etc.: Abhyankar 1961 p. 21; F.Kielhorn, “Notes on the Mahābhāsya : 7. Some devices of Indian grammarians", Ind. Antiquary 1887, p. 251 = Kleine Schriften, ed. W. Rau. Wiesbaden, 1969, p. 240).
Finally, one is asked a question concerning grammatical metalanguage and requiring familiarity with Pāņini's sūtra 7.2.78 : (it, implied by anuvštti from 7.2.66) ida-janor dhve ca, where ca implies the recurrence of se from the sutra just coming before :
"i is added before se (including the substitute sva]) as well as before dhve (including the substitute dhvam) in roots 'to praise' and 'to be born 35.”
Like in other instances of the sautra-jāti, the question about the sūtra is the last of the riddle. The source is indicated, but is hardly palpable because

Page #305

294
Nalini Balbir
the corresponding text has not been handed down to us. The name Viśrantavidyadhara is indeed known from references or quotations found in the indigenous tradition, but there have been some discussions on whether to understand it as referring to a work or to an author. The syntax of our stanza makes it clear that Jinavallabha thinks about a teacher. But it is equally clear that in the following verse of the section of the Prabhavakacarita devoted to Mallavādin
sabda-sastre ca Visräntavidyadhara-varäbhidhe
nyāsaṁ nyasam cakre Ipadhi-vṛnda-bodhanaya sphuṭārthakam
Jambu-jyoti
(chap. 10, vs.38) it refers to a work (authored by a certain Vamana, as other references show), and to the commentary written on it by the famous author of the Dvādasaranayacakra. Anyway this question is probably not so relevant, and it could well be that the rather expressive name Viśrantavidyadhara (= V.) designates both the work and its author, as when one says "the MonierWilliams". If the statement that Mallavädin (between sam. 400 and sam. 600)* commented it is true, it means that (the) V. is quite early.
The original source of the sutra may be problematic, but the sutra itself
jhasy ekaco baśaḥ sdhvoś ca bhas
is well-known in wordings which are very close to each other in the following grammars :
* ekaco baso bhas jhas-antasya sdhvoḥ (Pän. 8.2.37, with ante ca through anuvṛtti from 8.2.29)
jhaṣa ekācaḥ sdhvor baso bhas (Candra-vyāk. 6.3.69) *ekaco baso bhas jhasah sdhvoh (Jainendra-vyäk. 5.3.54) *baso bhas jhaṣaḥ sdhvoś caikācaḥ pratyaye (Śäkaṭāyana 1.2.76).
This shows that V. belongs to the Paninian tradition and uses the same vocabulary and techniques as the great teacher of Sanskrit grammar. The use of ca both in V. and Säkaṭāyana may mean that the sequence of

* Since he mentions Dinnaga (c. A. D. 480-560 or a few decades earlier), and also quotes from the Avasyaka-niryukti, he is best dated to the latter half of the sixth century A. D.-Editors.

Page #306

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
295
sūtras was similar in both works and implies that the mention padānte, which has to be applied through recurrence from 1.2.67 in Śākatāyana, is also valid in V. The wording of V. can thus be rendered : "Before the voiced aspirate consonant (jhas = jha, bha, gha, dha and dha) of a monosyllabic root, instead of the non aspirate voiced consonant (baś = ba, ga, da and da), there will be the corresponding voiced aspirate consonant (bhas = bha, gha, dha and dha), also in front of s and dhy (i.e. at the end of a word as well as in front of s and dhv)”. The process described refers to forms such as bhotsyate or abhuddhvam from root budh, or to cases like godhuk37. It is of course purposefully that Jinavallabha selected for a riddle a sütra of such a high technical level where all the words belong to the grammatical metalanguage, being either pratyāhāras (bas, bhas, jhas)—and not very common ones—, pratyāhāra-based terms (ekāc) or endings (s-dhvoh).
12. In our body of narrative works, the only instance of sautra-jāti is found in Amradevasūri's ākhyānakamanikośavrtti (dated sam. 1190 = 1134 A.D.). A group of young men and a lady exchange riddles. All of them are rather complicated or even obscure. When the type illustrated by the stanza is indicated, it is a useful hint, as in the present case :
jai evaṁ suttaṁ ciya maha panhottaram imaṁ sunaha In this case, listen to my riddle, which is of the sūtra-type.
After this introductory Prakrit sentence, comes the riddle, in Sanskrit, like all those which are included in this text (except for one which is told by the lady of the group).
kā saukhyaikanibandhanaṁ tri-bhuvane ? kesāṁ mahad gauravam ? nīrug vakti, “janasya tättvika-ripuh kah ? kam ca babhrur dvişan ?” sangho vakti, "Sudarśanaṁ vada kare kesāṁ ?” svarāgryo 'bhidhāt "ko varno na-paro vitundati ca?38" kim sūtram purasyānañah ?
(Akhyānakamaņikośavrtti chap. 36, vss. 243-244)
As it often happens, the puzzled reaction of the audience is indicated, and this serves to enhance the intelligence of the hero who alone is able to find the answer. This becomes possible for him only when he has again taken into consideration the variety of the riddle which has been proposed to him :

Page #307

296
Nalini Balbir
Jambū-jyoti
navaram vinnāyam imam mai-sāyara-santiyam na kenāvi panhottara-gaya-suttam muniyam kumareņa tam tu imaṁ (vs. 245)
The solution then comes as ahimsārthānām ajvareh, a sequence which is not part of the verse and which is arrived at as follows:
What is the only basis for happiness in the three worlds ? --Non violence ahimsā What are the things one is very proud of ?-Richesarthânām
A man keeping good health says : "Who is the fundamental enemy of a human being ?- you who have no fever, it is love ajvara, Iḥ
Who is the one that the mungoose hates ?-The snake ahim
A group of people says: “Tell, in the hands of which beings is Sudarśana (carried) ?"-O group, (in) Visnu's hands sārtha, Ānām → sārthānām
The best vowel said : "Which phoneme acts with regard to n ?" - best vowel, (it is) i aj-vara (voc.), iħ39
And then, once the privative a standing in front is removed what is the sutra ? hiṁsārthānām ajvareh
The process to be applied in order to come to the solution is identical to what was seen in the VMM or in Jinavallabha's riddles. Like in the preceding case (§ 11.2), the sūtra represents a sort of climax of the riddle but is not the only grammatical item to discover. Here, the question just before the last one is rather technical and refers to Pān 7.1.58 : id-ito num dhātoh, "n is inserted after the last vowel of a root ending with mute i (in the Dhātupātha)”.
As to the final answer which forms a sūtra, the difference is that here no hint is given about the grammatical text where it can be traced. Yet the source can be identified as Kātantra 2.4.4040, a sūtra concerning the use of the genitive for referring to the object : sasthi is implied and forms a recurrent term to be taken from 2.4.37, karmani comes from 2.4.38 : "(The genitive is used for the object) in roots meaning to 'inflict pain', (but) not for the root jvar in the causative.” Examples given in the commentaries41 show that the genitive can alternate with the accusative and is not compulsory (anityam, Durgasiṁha) except for jvar. Verbs chosen are (caurasya/cauram) prahanti, nihanti, pranihanti, utkrāthayati, pinasti, rujati, āmayati, ujjāsayati, unnātayati. This shows that Kātantra's sūtra is in fact a blend of two sūtras which are kept independent by Pānini : rujārthānāṁ

Page #308

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
297
bhāva-vacanānām ajvareh (2.3.54), “(The genitive is used for the object) for roots meaning 'to pain' when they express a condition (i.e., when the subject is an abstract noun), except for the causative verb jvaraya" and jāsiniprahana-nāta-kratha-pisām hiṁsāyām (2.3.56), "The genitive is used for the object) for the roots 'to strike' in the causative, 'to kill' (when prefixed by) ni and/or pra, for nat in the causative, krath in the causative and pis, when meaning violence42.”
A reference to the Kātantra in a Jain work should not be too surprising : manuscripts of Durgasimha's vrtti are housed in Jain libraries, Jain commentators, whether svetāmbara or Digambara, also applied their scholarship to the explanation of this treatise, whereas, on the other hand, various literateurs took it as a basis for sophisticated poetic exercises; last but not least the Kātantra is also known to have had some impact on Hemacandra's grammar.
13. The last instance of a sautra-jāti riddle is provided by Ajitasena's Alamkāracintamani :
uktasya nuh parāmrstau kah sabdo ? bheda-vāci kim avyayaṁ ? kena nātoși ? sūtraṁ kim Prakriya-sthitam ? (AC 2.60) sahārthena. sautra-jātih. What is the word used in referring to a masculine already mentioned ? --"He" Sa(h) What is the indeclinable expressing differentiation ?--Ha ha43 What is it that does not bring satisfaction ?-Money arthena
What is the sūtra found in the Prakriyā ?_"With (words) having the meaning ‘along with'” sahārthena
On the basis of the general pattern of the sautra-jāti riddles, where the last question always refer to a grammatical work, it can safely be assumed that Prakriyā designates some treatise of this type. Since no work having only this title seems to be known, Prakriyā is probably an abbreviation. There are then two possibilities :
(i) Prakriyā refers to the Prakriyāsamgraha, a recast of Sākatāyana's Sabdānuśasana by Abhayacandrasūri, "a commentary of the Kaumudi - type"44, or even, by extension, to śākațāyana's work in Abhayacandra's recension, which is possible since a sūtra of the wording sahārthena

Page #309

298
Nalini Balbir
prescribing the use of the instrumental case (tṛtīyā) "(with words) having the meaning "with" is taught there :
sahārthena (1.3.129 = sūtra 20 in the vibhakti-section of Abhayacandrasūri's commentary)
Jambu-jyoti
ct. sahārthena yuktāt tṛtīya bhavati. putreṇa sahāgataḥ putreṇa saha sthulaḥ, putrena sārdham, putreņa sākaṁ, putreņa samaṁ, putreṇa satrā, putreṇāmā bhunkte45.
(ii) Prakriya designates one of the commentaries on the Jainendravyäkaraṇa, for instance Śrutakirti's Pañcavastuprakriyā or the Sabdarṇavaprakriyā based on Somadeva's Sabdārṇavacandrikā. This is not impossible because the sutra sahärthena is also attested in the Jainendra 1.4.30.
The solution could come from another verse of the AC, identified by the editor of the text as "a mangala-verse of Śākaṭāyana's Prakriyā”, but this verse is unfortunately not traceable in any of the sources consulted by me46.
As for the sūtra itself, a comparison of Śāk. with the corresponding aphorism in Panini saha-yukte 'pradhane (2.3.19) confirms F. Kielhorn's conclusions regarding the relation of the two works: Śākaṭāyana's "pathological concern for economizing the number of syllables", his way of incorporating material from the commentaries (Katyāyana or Patanjali), but, at the same time, his manner of simplifying the matter by removing a specification which he probably considered as having minimal importance (apradhāne). Similarly, a comparison with the corresponding sutras in the Candravyakaraṇa and in Hemacandra's work shows Śākaṭāyana's indebtedness to Candragomin (where sahārthena is sūtra 2.1.65) and Hemacandra's indebtedness to Śākaṭāyana (Hemac. 2.2.45 has sahārthe)47.
(V)
14. Although less frequently, metrics is like grammar a field of knowledge referred to in riddles. In the following instance
...
rucirā kā satām vṛtta-jātiḥ? (JP 69)
Which is the kind of metre that connoisseurs find beautiful ?, the selection of the right answer among many possibilities, namely mālinī, is determined by the next question.

Page #310

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
299
ko vā diksu prasarati sadā kantha-kāndāt Puräreh ? (JP 69)
And what is it that always spreads in all directions from the place of Śiva's throat ?
where the answer should be nīlimā, i.e. the same word read in a reverse order so that it fits with the type of riddle here illustrated, namely the manthānāntara-jāti48.
In the question
āmantasu anta-guruṁ ... (sasankam; Dhaneśvara, Surasundaricariya 16.53)
Call the one that ends with a long (syllable),
the point is to test basic knowledge of the technical terminology relating to metrical science. The answer is sa, vocative of the technical term sa referring to a gana of the form vu–, and immediately comes to the mind of those who remember the relevant samjñāsūtras or kārikās beginning any chandaḥśāstra49.
15. The variety corresponding to the sābdīyajāti of grammar (above S 9) is termed vrttanāmajāti. There is no illustration of it in any of the Jain narrative woks considered in our investigation. But it is both defined and illustrated in the second chapter of Mahākavi Ajitasena's Alamkāracintāmani. Once more, Ajitasena's definition appears as a clear rewording of Dharmadāsa's Vidagdhamukhamandana. Compare
vrtta-nama bhavet praśna-vrttanāmottarād hi yat (AC 2.52cd)
It would be a vrttanāman, because it has as an answer the name of the metre of the question
and
(yatra) vrttanāmottaraṁ prstam bhavet tad vrttanāmakam (VMM 2.34cd)
(Where) the question has as its answer the name of the metre it would be a vrttanāmaka.
However, Ajitasena's awkward formulation includes an element which is not explicitly mentioned by Dharmadāsa: not only does the final answer give the name of a metre, but the riddle-stanza should itself be composed "by the way of mudrā” in this very metre which is to be guessed50. A look at

Page #311

300
Nalini Balbir
the three illustrative verses available both in the VMM (2 verses) and in the AC (1 verse) shows that it is actually the case:
Metre of VMM 2.35 sikhariņi / Answer to the riddle: sikhariņi (< sikharini + 1)
Metre of VMM 2.36 mālinī / Answer to the riddle : mālinī (< mā + alini)$1
Jambu-jyoti
Metre of AC 2.54 indramälä (see below) / Answer to the riddle: indramālā.
But Ajitasena's definition has the advantage of making this feature a structural element specific to the variety and not a matter of chance. It is both an additional challenge for the one who asks the riddle and a hint for the one who is to answer it, provided he is decently trained in recognizing the metre of a stanza read to him.
Ajitasena's example reads:
sambodhanam kim suralokanathe ? bhramad-dvirephä surabhi-sphuță
mālā
kā ?
Kā yāti nākāj Jinapüjanärtham? vṛttam kim äbruhy upajäti-lakṣma ? Which word is used to address the lord of the world of gods? Indra! What is it that is famous for its fragrance, where bees turn around? -A garland of flowers-mālā
Who comes from the sky to worship the Jinas ?-A line of Indras Indra

What is the metre that has the characteristic of an upajati ? indramālā
The pattern of the riddle-verse agrees with what we find in the VMM : in the vṛttanämajäti, the first two or three questions can relate to any topic, but the last one always gives an indication about the structural pattern of the metre to be guessed (... a metre having nine light and eight heavy syllables. for the śikhariņi in VMM 2.35, ... a metre having the same number of light syllables as the number of mountains [ 8 ] and the same number of heavy syllables as the number of oceans [ 7] for the mälini in VMM 2.36). Here also the metrical pattern of the stanza fits with the hint given about the metre: three indravajräpadas (a, c and d) and one. upendravajrapada (b) makes an upajati, since this syllabic metre of 11 syllables is precisely made of the combinations of these two varieties, in any
=

Page #312

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
possible type of mixture. As for the word indramālā, it is probably not by chance that Ajitasena makes use of it. This synonymic designation of upajāti is not attested in all metrical treatises, but precisely in three works which come from South India, as Mahākavi Ajitasena himself, and which, for two of them, have Jain authors52.
(i) The earliest reference is found in the Ratnamañjūṣā, an anonymous Jain work on Sanskrit metrics which is one of the oldest existing Indian chandaḥśāstras53:
tristubh (5.24)
indravajra śare (5.25)
upendravajra şare (5.26)
indramālā dvayam (5.27); ct. yadīndravajrāupendravajre sahaikasmin sloke bhavataḥ, bhavati indramālā nāma54.
(ii) The wording of Janāśrayi's Chandoviciti (end of 6th cent. A.D.) recalls the Ratnamañjūṣā, although the technical designations of the ganas used by this author are peculiar to him :
Variety No. 1
Variety No. 2
Variety No. 3
Variety No. 4
Variety No. 5

indravajra bejṛ (4.34)
upendravajra kejr (4.35)
ubhaya-misrendramālā (4.36)55.
The author goes a step further, stating that there are fourteen different varieties of indramālā (să caturdaśa-bhedā, 4.37), as other metricians also do56. But he is one of the rare who provides illustrative stanzas for these varieties, namely twelve of them (the two remaining ones, the ākhyānikā and the viparītākhyānikā, which he has already treated separately in 3.7 and 3.8, are not repeated) :
301
Indravajrapada(s)
ab
cd
ad
bc
a

Upendravajrapada(s)
cd
ab
be
ad
bcd

Page #313

302
Nalini Balbir
Jambu-jyoti
Variety No. 6
b
acd
abd
Variety No. 7 Variety No. 8
abc
Variety No. 9
bcd
acd
Variety No. 10 (corresponds to the pattern of the above verse of AC)
abd
Variety No. 11 ( = Janakīharana 1.37)
Variety No. 12
abc
d
+ (Akhyānikā
ac
bd
Viparītākhyānikā
bd
ac)
(iii) Finally, Jayakīrti, a Digambara Jain from Karnataka who lived about 1000 A.D., gives the following definition in his versified Chando'nuśäsana edited on the basis of a unique palm-leaf manuscript from Jaisalmer :
upendravajrā-sphurad indravajrāpädau vimiśrau yadi tau bhavetām nānā-vikalpair upajātir esā prakalpitāryaih kvacid indramālā (2.117) 57.
Because of common sectarian affiliation, this could well have been the book which was the source used by Mahākavi Ajitasena.
The above investigation should have contributed to make clear that Jain authors are extremely fond of all types of games connected with the manipulation of language and that their proficiency in the fields of knowledge pertaining to language (grammar, lexicography and metrics) is of a very high level. For them, as for other Indians, erudition is not boring, on the contrary it serves the games of intelligence and as such is valuable.

Page #314

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
303
Annotations : 1. For a convenient list of such dictionaries see C. Vogel, Indian Lexicography.
Wiesbaden, 1979, p. 369-371. 2. This has rightly been underlined by L. Sternbach, Indian Riddles. A forgotten chapter
in the history of Sanskrit Literature. Hoshiarpur, 1975, $ 132ff. 3. Sri Siddhahemacandra Sabdānuśāsana. With the Auto-commentary Laghuvrtti.
Patan, 1994. 4. Representatives of the first category are Uddyotanasūri's Kuvalayamālā,
Maheśvarasūri's Nānapancamīkahā, śāntisūri's Puhaicandacariya, Dhaneśvarasūri's Surasundaricariya or an anonymous Jinadatta-ākhyāna. Second category:
Dharmopadeśamālāvivarana Sk.: 3 Pk.: 2 Manipaticarita Sk.: 2 Pk.: 3 Akhyānakamanikośavrtti Sk.: 8 Pk.: 1
Kahārayanakosa Sk.: 4 Pk.: 2 Third category : e.g. Samarāiccakahā with 4 riddles, all in Sanskrit. This is just a sample of references. More details about the corpus will be given in an extensive
study on riddles found in Jain narrative works (in preparation). 5. Partly for lack of space, riddles belonging to the category where a verbal form
(kriya) or a nominal form corresponding to any of the grammatical cases (kartro, karma', karanao, etc.) is concealed Cogupta) in a given verse and is to be detected, are left out. See VMM 4.33ff., or Kuvalayamālā and Samarāiccakahā for examples
in Jain works. 6. Mentioned in L. Sternbach's monograph Indian Riddles $ 120, but with more
information about the author's career than about his work itself. 7. Description and extracts from the praśastis in Catalogue of Sanskrit and Prakrit
Manuscripts. Muniraja Shri Punyavijayaji's Collection. Ahmedabad, 1968,
p. 432, Serial Nos. 3384 and 3385. 8. See New Catalogus Catalogorum under Praśnāvalī and the list of Municandra's
works in e.g., H. R. Kapadia, introduction to Haribhadra's Anekāntajayapatākā
(commented upon by Municandra). Baroda, 1940 (G.O.S. 88), p. XXX. 9. Available evidence is carefully examined by M. Kraatz, VMM 1968, vol. I,
p.XI-XIV, and his conclusion is very cautious (perhaps excessively so). 10. See for instance H. D. Velankar, Jinaratnakośa. Poona, 1944, p. 355; Pandit
Ambālāl Pre. Shah, Jain Sahitya kā Brhad Itihās, vol. 5: Läksanik Sāhitya. Varanasi, 1969, p. 127-129.

Page #315

304
Nalini Balbir
11. See also below § 13. Other instances of riddles providing answers of Jain or Digambara Jain colouring are: Tirthakaraḥ (AC 2.11), Akalankaḥ (2.13), Vidyanandaḥ (2.109), paramesthi (2.110).
12. It is not mentioned in Sternbach's monograph.
Jambu-jyoti
13. In this section and the next, only the parts of the verses which contain grammatical riddles will be quoted and considered. The verbal sequence forming the answer to the full riddle will be given because it serves as a hint to direct the reader in cases where there could be several possibilities, but it will not be extensively explained: the more questions, the more problems, a detailed discussion of which would lead to unnecessary digressions.
14. For a modern reader, the "alphabetical Index of meanings with corresponding roots (also arranged alphabetically) as given in the different Dhätupäthas" found in Palsule 1955 is a perfect tool.
15. This riddle and another one (JP 33) are also found in Devabhadrasūri's Kaharayanakosa (p. 280a).
16. Ct.: ada psa bhakṣane attīti at kvip adam läti dadätiti allas tat-sambodham he 'lla (mss A1, A2).
17. Antasthāsv antya-varnaś ca kaḥ prasiddho mahitale?
18. Ct.: a-kärät paro 'c i-kāraḥ aparāc tasyāyaḥ kṣayaḥ (Ed.).
19. Ct.: atrottaram : aś ca jāś ca maś ca daś ca haś ca taś ca bhāś ca ajāmadahatabhās te purve yasya maḥ ajamadahatabhā-purvaḥ tatha me muja-sabda-sambandhi ma-kāre kṛte ne na-käre kṛte sati etävatā muja-sthāne nuja iti jāte ādau ajādișu varnesu datteşu yathakramaṁ anuja 1 jānuja 2 manuja 3 danuja 4 hanuja 5 tanuja 6 bhanuja 7 iti sabdah bhavanti. Hanujah antyadaṁstra bhānujaḥ śanih, seṣā spaşță eva (mss A1, A2).
20. Ct.: tvar samudalasaḥ samullasitavān athava sam sämastyena ut präbalyena alasaḥ śabditavän tus hras las sabde las ity asya rupam; but las with this meaning is not recorded in Palsule s.v. sabde.
21. This is perhaps what is actually meant by the reading kidrvikam found in two mss. of the AC.
22. Translations of Pan. are based on S. C. Vasu, The Ashṭādhyayi of Panini, 1891, Reprint Motilal Banarsidass, 1962 and O. Böhtlingk, Panini's Grammatik. Leipzig,
1887.

23. Ct.:ktvä-pratyayaṁ praty uttara-dātā vakti: bhavatas tava ktva-pratyayasya sthäne yo 'sau yap ity adeśo bhavad-yab-adeśas tam apekṣya vimäyeti bhavati, ayam atra

Page #316

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
bhavaḥ: yadṛśam nirdambha-sabdenarthato rūpam abhidhiyate tādṛśam vipūrvän mīnāteḥ ktvā pratyayasya yavādeśe sati, tathā hi nirdambha-śabdena nirmāya ity ucyate anenapi vimayeti sa evärthah.
24. The difference between ba and va is never relevant in the context of riddles. In this answer one should read ba, while in the two other answers of the same riddlestanza one should understand va (respectively bhavad yavā(ḥ) deśam and Bhava, dya vāde 'sam).
305
25. Abhyankar 1961, p. 63-64.
26. See further Abhyankar 1961 p. 304 and Kraatz's commentary on VMM 2.61 (vol. 2 p. 191).
27. For instance, in the Berlin manuscript "Ms. or. fol. 1034" (Weber, Verzeichnis II, 1 p. 285 No. 1727) it is added in the margin by another hand.
28. See M. Kraatz's observations in his commentary of VMM (vol. 2 p. 192).
29. Ct.: he bandho svajana adhikarane pāpa-vyāpāre bandhaḥ kathitaḥ, kidṛśe adhikarane 'dhikaranam yatra tat tasminn adhikarane... (mss A1, A2); after papavyāpāre the avacuri of the printed edition reads: kimvisiste ? adhikarane adhikam ranam samgramam yatra tat tatha tasminn adhika-rane.
30. See Poona Dictionary p. 1551, meaning 6.
31. See respectively Pt. Sukhlalji's Commentary on the Tattvärtha Sutra, Ahmedabad, 1974 (L. D. Series 44), p. 239 and N. Tatia's translation of TS, That Which Is. London, New York: Harper Collins, 1994, p. 154.
32. Abhyankar 1961, p. 109.
33.
Pujyapāda Devanandin's Jainendra-vyakarana 2.4.28 (Ed. with the Jainendra mahāvṛtti of Ac. Abhayanandi. Ed. Pandit Shambhu Nath Tripathi. Kashi, Bharatiya Jnanapith, 1956 [Jnanapitha Moorti Devi Jain Grantha Mala, Sanskrit Grantha No. 17]).
34. Kätantra, ed. J. Eggeling, Calcutta 1874 (Bibliotheca Indica 297-298), p. 299. Quoted by S. K. Belvalkar, An account of the different existing systems of Sanskrit grammar. Poona, 1915, p. 27 n. 2; see also p. 84-85. Kätantra's recension commented upon by the Digambara Bhāvasena Traividya (see below n. 41) does not include the sutra under consideration. It ends with guroś ca nisthāyām seṭaḥ 4.5.81 in the recension commented upon by Durgasimha and edited by J. Eggeling. 35. On the part played by ca in "offering an abbreviative interpretation" in this sequence of sutras see S. D. Joshi and Saroja Bhate, "The Role of the Particle ca in

Page #317

306
Nalini Balbir
Jambū-jyoti
the Interpretation of the Astādhyāyi': Proceedings of the International Seminar on Pānini. University of Poona. Pune, 1983 (CASS E, 9), p. 180-181. - The corresponding sūtra in the Jainendra-vyakarana does not apply to the root jan: idah s-dhve
(5.1.136). 36. Some information on V. can be found in the following sources : Abhyankar 1961,
s.v. Visrantavidyādhara, with the quotation of a popular verse (p. 336); F. Kielhorn, “Indragomin and other grammarians”, Indian Antiquary 15 (1886), p. 182 and n. 4(= Kleine Schriften, p. 243): quotations from Hemacandra's Nyasa on his own Sanskrit grammar, and references to the Ganaratnamahodadhi; H. R. Kapadia, Jaina Samskrta Sāhitya no Itihāsa Vol. 1. Baroda, 1956, p. 23-24 of the second
chapter : Convenient collection of whatever information is available. 37. TheAmoghavrtti on sākatāyana (ed. by Pt. Shambhu Nath Tripathi Kashi, Bharatiya
Jnanpitha, 1971 [Jnanapitha Moorti Devi Jain Grantha Mala, Sanskrit Grantha No. 37) quotes both verbal and nominal forms, whereas Abhayacandrasūri's commentary
(ed. by G. Oppert. Madras, 1893) takes instances from the stemgo-duh-only. 38. Correction suggested by Prof. P. S. Filliozat (see also below). Ed. vitundati na is
probably wrong. The hints provided by the Indian editor for this part of the riddle
are not helpful at all. It seems he missed the point. 39. I am extremely thankful to Prof. P. S. Filliozat, without whom I was at a complete
loss to understand this question and its answer. His help has also proved invaluable
for solving a few other points connected with this paper. 40. See n. 2 p. 297 in the edition of the Akhyānakamanikośavrtti. 41. Commentary (vrtti) by Durgasimha in ed. J. Eggeling. Calcutta, 1874 (Bibliotheca
Indica 297-298), translated in B. Liebich, Zur Einführung in die einheimische Sprachwissenschaft. I. Das Kätantra. Heidelberg, 1919, p. 48; commentary (called Rupamālāvrtti) by the Digambara writer Bhāvasena Traividya, ed. with Hindi translation by Ganini Āryikā Śrī Jñānamatī mātāji. Hastinapur, 2nd ed. 1992. In
this edition, the sūtras have a continuous numbering. Our sütra is No. 411. 42. Similar wording in the Jainendra-vyāk.: rujarthasya bhava-vācino 'jvari-santāpyoh
(1.4.61) and jāsa-niprahana-nāța-krātha-pişāṁ hiṁsāyām (1.4.63); in Sākatāyana : rujo 'jvarisantāpyoḥ kartari bhāve (1.3.113) and himsāyām jāsanātakrāthapisanipradhnām (1.3.114); in Hemacandra : rujärthasyajvarisantāper bhāve karttari (2.2.13), jāsa-nāta-krātha-piso hiṁsāyām (2.2.14) and ni-prebhyo ghnah (2.2.15). There does not seem to be anything comparable to these sūtras in the Candra-vyāk.

Page #318

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
307
43. Cf. ha vinirgrahe according to Medini, quoted in the Amaravyakhyāsudhā
(information provided by Prof. P. S. Filliozat). 44. R. Birwé, introduction to sākatāyana's grammar (e.d. by Pt. Shambhu Nath
Tripathi. Kashi, 1971), p. 3. 45. This is Abhayacandrasūri's commentary, ed. by G. Oppert. Madras, 1893, p. 75;
the Amoghavrtti (ed. by Shambhu Nath Tripathi. Kashi, 1971) is more extensive. 46. The verse in point, clearly of Jain origin, is :
jayati jagadīsa-mastaka-maņi-kirana-kalapa-kalpitārgha-nidhi Jina-carana-kamala-yugalaṁ ganadhara-gananīya-nakha-keśarakam (AC 5.301), identified by the editor as “Sākatāyana Prakriyā kā mangala padya" on p. 365. What the editor exactly means is not clear to me, since neither Abhayacandrasūri
nor the Amoghavrtti include this verse as their mangalas. 47. See F. Kielhorn, "On the grammar of Śākatāyana", Indian Antiquary 16 (1887),
24-28 and "Die Śākatāyana-Grammatik", Göttinger Nachrichten 1894, 1-14 = Kleine Schriften, p. 246-250 and 276-289 (“jenes fast krankhafte Streben nach
möglichster Kürze", p. 285). 48. This variety of riddle is akin to citrakāvya and can be best represented as a cross,
the centre of which is occupied by a syllable common to all the answers of the riddle. There is then one horizontal answer which can be read in both directions, a vertical answer which can also be read in both directions. A circular reading ending in the centre makes the last answer. E.g., in the present case :
nā
mă lini
па
1) mālini/nilimā; 2) nālina / Nalinā; 3) mānānīnam āli. There are several such instances in JP (32, 74, 143, 145, 152, 154), but this variety does not seem to have
been very popular outside this work, and the VMM does not seem to know of it. 49. See e.g., Kedārabhatta's Vrttaratnākara 1.8, Hemacandra, Chando'nuśāsana 1.2. 50. See M. Kraatz's translation of VMM : "(Wenn ein Rätselvers als Antwort den
Namen (seines) Versmaßes hat - das ist vottanāmaka benannt nach dem Versmas". 51. Let us note, by the way, that this riddle is quoted with its source in the Pali
grammar of the Burmese monk Aggavamsa from the 12th century : tathā hi Vidaddhamukhamandanatīkāyām mālinī ti padass' attham vadatā (mā vuccati Lakkhi, alini ti bhamarī' ti vuttam (Saddanīti. Ed. H. Smith. Lund, 1928, p. 244, lines 19-21).

Page #319

308
Nalini Balbir
Jambū-jyoti
52. The matter is treated here in some details because all the relevant books are not
easily available, and these technicalities are not very well known. See further note
54.
53. On its importance in the development of metrical science see C. B. Tripathi,
“Ratnamañjūsā and 'Chandoviciti”: Beiträge zur Indienforschung (E. Waldschmidt
zum 80. Geburtstag gewidmet), ed. H. Härtel. Berlin, 1977, p. 549-560. 54. Ratnamañjūsā with Bhāsya by some unknown Jain authors on Sanskrit prosody.
Ed. with A Critical Introduction and Notes by Prof. H. D. Velankar. Kashi, Bharatiya Jnanapith, 1949 (Jnanapitha Moorti Devi Jain Granthamala, Sanskrit Grantha No. 5) : "Indramālā : Another name of the Upajāti: Mandāramarandacampū (Kāvyamālā ed. 1895, p. 8 line 7) calls it upendramālā; but every other writer that I know of calls it upajăti". (Velankar's note p. 59, to be revised in the light of
the material collected here). 55. Jānāśrayi Chandoviciti. Published by the Curator, The University Manuscripts
Library. Trivandrum, 1949 (Trivandrum Sanskrit Series No. 163). 56. See e.g., Prākrtapaingala 2.119 and 2.121 for the fourteen designations of
the varieties of upajātis : one of them is called mālā, a word which is anyway quite common in names of metres (cf. vidyunmālā, ūrmimālā, candramālā, etc.).; Hemacandra's Chando'nuśāsana 2.156 : etayoh parayoś ca saṁkara upajātiś caturdaśadha.
57. Edited in Jayadāman. A collection of ancient texts on Sanskrit Prosody and A
Classified List of Sanskrit Metres with an Alphabetical Index. Ed. by H. D. Velankar. Bombay, 1949.

Page #320

Grammatical Riddles from Jain works
309
ABBREVIATIONS
Abhyankar 1961 = K. V. Abhyankar, A Dictionary of Sanskrit Grammar. Baroda, 1961 (G. O. S. 134).
J.
AC = Alamkāracintāmani of Mahākavi Ajitasena. Ed. by Dr. Nemi Chandra Shastri. Delhi : Bharatiya Jnanapitha, 1973 (Jnanapitha Moorti Devi Grantha Mala : Sanskrit Grantha No. 43); see $ 1.3.
JP = Jinavallabha's Praśnottara-sasti-ekasata (see § 1.1).
P = Municandra's Prašnāvali (see § 1.2).
Palsule 1955 = G. K. Palsule, A Concordance of Sanskrit Dhātupathas (with Index of meanings). Poona, 1955 (Deccan College Dissertation Series 14).
V. = Viśrāntavidyādhara (see § 11.2).
VMM = Dharmadāsa's Vidagdhamukhamandana. The editions used are :
* śrī Dharmadāsasūripranītam svopajñavyākhyāsamalaňkrtam idam Panašīkaropāhva-Laksmanātmaja-Vasudevašarmanā samsodhitam. Bombay, 1905.
* Vidagdhamukhamandanam of Dharmadāsa Sūri. With 'Chandrakalā' Commentary and Hindi translation. Editor and Translator Āchārya Sesarāja Śarmā. Varanasi-Delhi : Chaukhambha Orientalia, 1984.
* Das Vidagdhamukhamandana des Dharmadāsa (Ein Lehrbuch der Rätselkunde) 1. und 2. Kapitel. Inaugural dissertation ... Philipps-Universität zu Marburg vorgelegt von Martin Kraatz. Marburg/Lahn, 1968, 2 vols.
ODO

Page #321

'Antarvyāpti’ Interpreted in Jainism
Atsushi Uno
The term "antarvyāpti” used in the syllogism of Jaina logic is, together with the opposite term "bahirvyāpti", found in the Jaina and the Buddhist texts alone. Among scholars, there is a great divergence of opinions on the first user of the term. To the best of my understanding, the Nyāyāvatāra of Siddhasen. Divākara (the 8th century)* was the first to use the term. The Nyāyāvatāra (abbr. Nya), a short manual of Jaina logic cast in 32 verses, mentions the antarvyāpti immediately after two verses treating two kinds of drstāntas.
antarvyāptyaiva sādhyasya siddher bahir-udāhstih
vyarthā syāt tad-asadbhāve'py evam nyāya-vido viduh ||20||
[Running rendering] When the establishment of probandum (sādhya) is secured exclusively by internal variable concomitance (antarvyāpti), the citation of external example (bahir-udāhrti) will be useless. And such will also be the case even when internal concomitance is absent (or unknown). Thus say those who are conversant with logic.
The NyA has a sole commentary Vivrti by Siddharsi (c. A. D. 906) and it has a sub-commentary Tippana by Devabhadra (the latter half of the 12th century) scarcely referring to the verse under consideration. Among the subsequent Jaina works which developed the theory of antarvyāpti on the basis of the NyA and the Vivrti are : the Pramānanayatattvāloka (abbr. PNT) by Devasūri (1080-1169), its auto-commentary the Syādvādaratnākara (abbr. SyR), its abridged commentary the Ratnākarāvatārikā (abbr. RaA;
* Siddhasena Divākara, as recent researches show, was not the author of the Nyāyāvatāra but of Nayavatāra. He was either Siddharsi alias Siddhasena (late 9th - early 10th cent.) or may be some other pre-medieval Siddhasena. - Editors.

Page #322

'Antarvyāpti' Interpreted in Jainism
311
by Ratnaprabha), and the Pramānamīmāmsā (abbr. PrM) by Hemacandra (1089-1172). The description of antarvyāpti in the NyA has been taken over in the PNT almost ad verbatim, yet it may hardly be possible to grasp the meaning of the verse without the help of commentaries. It is due to the ambiguity of the expression that came to allow different interpretations about the verse.
Though the idea of antarvyāpti took its rise in Jainism, it is a wonder that the term itself disappeared in later Jaina works. However, Ratnākaraśānti of the later Buddhist logic employed this term antarvyāpti. His way of using the antarvyāpti is somewhat different from that of Jainism and it is, as it were, a modified "kevalānvayi” inference of the NyāyaVaiseșika school.
This thesis aims at having a general look at the Vivrti and later Jaina works in order to clarify the purport of Siddhasena's antarvyāpti. Before entering the main issue, I would like to give an outline of the syllogistic form of Indian logic and my opinion of antarvyāpti.
- Technical terms used for the definition of antarvyāpti will be understood in the following way. Antah (internal example) indicating paksa or the subject of argument, and vyāpti residing in the antah is antarvyāpti. Opposite term for “antarvyāpti” is “bahirvyāpti” (or bāhyavyāpti : external invariable concomitance), residing in the bahiḥ. The bahih (external example; the basis other than paksa) refers to the twofold example, which is to be cited as the third member of the syllogism. When one accepts the function of the antarvyāpti, the mention of bahir-drstānta (the external example) as well as of bahirvyāpti (external variable concomitance) is cumbersome. That is, the external example (bahih) is useless.
Inference is divided into two : inference for oneself (svārthānumāna) and inference for others (parārthānumāna). The former, being useful for oneself and primarily non-verbal, functions in one's consciousness only. That is, inferential knowledge of probandum (sādhya), secured by the cognition of probans (hetu; smoke) and of invariable concomitant
+ He was the disciple of Devasūri of Brhad-gaccha. The date of Ratnākarāvatārikā is c. A. D. 1165. - Editors.

Page #323

312
Atsushi Uno
(vyāpti). The latter, however, primarily verbal (vacanātmaka) in nature, being useful to convince the opponent (prativadin) of the knowledge of the probandum (sādhya). But each school of Indian logic came to tend to decrease the number of syllogism in later times, though such decrease depends on the faculty of opponents.
(i) pratijñā (argument): the mountain has fire,
The argument itself is called pakṣa, and the subject (mountain) is also called paksa. Fire which is predicate of the argument is called probandum (sādhya), and the mountain possessing fire (dharmin; Sp) is sometimes sādhya.
Jambū-jyoti
(ii) hetu (reason): because of smoke.
Generally "reason," which enables one to obtain the inferential knowledge, is expressed by the ablative case of hetu (e.g. smoke) as a phrase. It is also called sadhana or sadhaka.
However, how does the opponent (prativadin) act upon hearing pratijñā and hetu succeedingly? Does he not show any effect or response, saying to himself "what about smoke ?" It may be because he does not know invariable concomitance (vyāpti) between smoke and fire, or he may come to know the vyapti only after he is shown any example like a kitchen. [Three cases, on the part of the opponent, will be introduced later.]

If the opponent is, after hearing the hetu, aware of the fact that there is fire wherever smoke occurs, he is compelled to construct in his mind the idea of vyapti. However, this vyāpti is not expressed verbally by either the speaker (vādin; instructor) or the opponent (prativādin). This vyāpti is not installed in the syllogism as an independent member, though happening after the two members. Some are of the opinion that this vyapti is included in the third member "udāharaṇa" (or dṛstanta), but I do not accept this opinion. For dṛṣṭānta should be literally an instance of basis on which to affirm the vyapti. However, the paksa (subject of the argument; e.g. mountain) eventually comes to be regarded as the locus of the vyapti, and the inference finishes. Thus any school of Indian logic beginning with the Nyaya-Vaiseṣika generally accepts the dṛstanta as any locus outside the paksa, but does not consider the pakṣa to be a dṛṣṭānta.

Page #324

'Antarvyāpti' Interpreted in Jainism
313
There is almost no material referring to the function of drstānta, but it is used as the third member, convincing the [dull-minded] opponent of the locus of vyāpti which comes from the preceding two members. The ambiguous character of the drstānta is originally derived from other reasons, which will be referred to later.
However, is the drstānta an indispensable member to the opponent of slow understanding in the inference for others ? I shall show some instances of establishing the probandum (inferential knowledge) even without the help of drstānta. (1) In the three-membered syllogism of Western logic, the major premise
(equivalent to vyāpti; M - P) and the minor premise (roughly equivalent to paksadharmatā; S. M) are necessary for acquiring the conclusion (inferential knowledge; S - P), dispensing with any example.
(2)
In the case of Indian logic, later Buddhism, the Mimāmsaka, and the śānkara-Vedānta accept vyāpti (hetu → sādhya) and paksadharmatā (hetu + paksa) only for acquiring inferential knowledge, omitting drstāna. [The antecedent here is meant to occur in the consequent.)
(3) The Nyāya-Vaiśesika accepts parāmarśa by combining the above
mentioned two elements into one. That is, vyāpti-viśistapaksadharmată-jñānam (the knowledge of paksadharmată possessed of vyāpti).
As has been shown above, to accept the existence of the vyāpti in the antaḥ (pakşa) exclusively is antarvyāpti, without approving of the function of bahih and bahirvyāpti as the main cause (gamaka) of inferential knowledge.

Drstānta (or udāharana), the third member of the syllogism, was originally set forth in the Nyāyasūtra (abbr. NS) and the Nyāyabhāsya (abbr. NBh), and was quite different in nature from what generally has been understood in later schools of logic.

Page #325

314
Atsushi Uno
Jambū-jyoti
In the NS and the NBh, the dharmin of pratijñā (e.g. mountain) is compared with either homogeneous example (e.g. kitchen) or heterogeneous example (e.g. pond) by virture of sādharmya (e.g. smoke) or vaidharmya (e.g. -smoke) between the two (dharmin and drstānta), one analyses in the dharmin fire. Inference in the NS and the NBH is, strictly speaking, not inference, but analogy in nature, and has nothing to do with vyāpti in the process of thinking.
NS 1.1.34 :
Whatever establishes the probandum (Sp or p), on the basis of the similarity with the shomogeneous) example (in accordance that probandum possesses similarity with the example) is the probans (hetu; M).
NBh l.i.34: Whatever establishes the probandum i.e., dharma (S or Sp) in
accordance with the similarity with the example is probans (hetu, smoke). By perceiving a certain dharma (e.g. smoke) in the probandum (subject; mountain) and the same dharma in the example (e.g. kitchen), what describes that it (smoke) establishes the probandum (Sp or P) is probans (hetu).
[Comment] Accoding to the NBh, probandum (sādhya) is used in two ways, by indicating first S, and then Sp or P.
NS 1.1.35: In similar manner, whatever establishes the probandum (Sp
or P) is the probans (hetu), on the basis of the dissimilarity with the [heterogeneous) example (e.g. pond) (in accordance that probandum (mountain) does not possess similarity with
example). NS 1.1.36: On the basis of the similarity with probandum (sādhya;
dharmin; S, mountain), whatever things possess the dharmas (e.g. smoke) of the probandum (mountain) is (homogeneous] example.
NS 1.1.37 :
On the basis of the dissimilarity with probandum (sādhya; dharmin; S, mountain), whatever things possess things other than the dharmas (e.g. smoke) of the probandum (mountain) is [heterogeneous) example.

Page #326

'Antarvyapti' Interpreted in Jainism
(1)
(2)
II
NyA, Vivṛti
Here a summary of Vivṛti will be introduced.
based on Vivṛti :
When the opponent remembers the Vyapti, since the probandum (sādhya) is established by antarvyāpti (vyāpti in the pakṣa), external example (bahiḥ) is useless to mention.
I.
Even when the vyāpti is not known to the opponent, since antaryāpti is absent (or not known) external example (bahiḥ) is useless to mention. Thus the expert on logic says. (20)

[Running rendering] When the opponent forgets the vyapti, example is mentioned for him. Otherwise (if he does not forget the vyapti) it is not the case (example is not mentioned). "Otherwise" means (1) the opponent remembers the vyāpti (is versant with the vyāpti) or (2) he is ignorant of the vyapti. In the case (1), the example is not mentioned. For when the opponent remembers the hetu (probans) which is avinābhāvin of the probandum (inseparable from probandum), he knows the probans (hetu) in the pakṣa also. He necessarily comes to know the probandum in the paksa.
315
Thus the vyapti in antaḥ (pakṣa) establishes invariably probandum, and the vyāpti outside the pakṣa (bahirvyāpti) is useless to mention. In the case (2), antarvyāpti is either absent or unknown and it is useless to mention the "bahiḥ" (external example). For an observation of the coëxistence in a certain place cannot entail the establishment of the vyapti (coëxistence) in all places, vyabhicāra being observable. Thus when the opponent (student; prativādin) is ignorant of the vyapti, the vyāpti is first to be grasped by means of tarka (as pramāṇa), and then comes the sadhya-siddhi.
[Comment] According to the Vivṛti, the opponents are divided into two groups, and example is considered useful or useless in conformity to these divisions :
One who forgets the vyāpti (vismṛta-sambandha)
External example is useful to mention.

Page #327

316
Atsushi Uno
Jambu-jyoti
II.
One who does not forget the vyāpti (avismsta-sambandha) (a) One who remembers the vyāpti (smaryamāna-sambandha)
External example (or external vyāpti) is useless, since the antarvyāpti here functions.
(b) One who is ignorant of the vyāpti (agrhīta-sambandha)
Pramāna "tarka" is first necessary to enable the opponent to know the vyāpti. So bahirvyāpti is useless, and antarvyāpti does not function.
Vivrti regards antarvyāpti as principal. It rather neglects bahirvyāpti, than regards it as subordinate. In accordance with antarvyāpti under varied conditions, bahirvyāpti is taken cumbrous or impossible and eventually useless (vyartha). Even in the case (1), the Vivrti does not even refer to the dull-minded opponent. Vivrti's view-point may be diagrammed as follows : [0 = obtainable, * = unobtainable) (1) The first “useless”
(a) antarvyāpti (0) bahirvyāpti (0) cumbrous useless
(b) antarvyāpti (0) bahirvyāpti (X) impossible useless (II) The second “useless”
(c) antarvyāpti (X) bahirvyāpti (X) impossible useless Rendering
As for the problem under consideration, the NyA does not describe directly remaining members "upanaya”, “nigamana", and "corroborative five members”, because this treatise aims at brevity, yet they may be conjectured by the sharp-minded on the basis of the described those members. For so far as the form and the number of members are concerned, the description may be divided into three : the lowest (jaghanya; simple), the middle (madhyama; ordinary) and superior (utkrsta; detailed). The lowest is the description of the hetu only, the middle is the description of two members and so forth, and the superior is the description of all the ten members. Here the middle description of members are described directly, and the lowest (simplest) and the superior (detailed) descriptions of members are indirectly suggested, because there is proof.

Page #328

'Antarvyäpti' Interpreted in Jainism
[Comment] Though three kinds may be based on the form and number, these three kinds may be applicable to opponents' intelligence in the reverse order. "Śuddhi" (corroboration; correctness) in the five corroborative members such as "pratijñā-śuddhi' etc., is referred to by the NBh and the Nijjutti of Bhadrabahu (5th cent. A. D.). Five members being added by five corroborative members, they may have eventually accepted tenmembered syllogism. It is doubtful whether ten members withstood the practical use.
Later Works PNT (SyR, RaA), PrM
After the Vivṛti's opinion, I would like to introduce antarvyāpti's theory taught in the later Jaina works. The NyA and the PNT are substantially almost the same. In the NYA primary cause of "sadhyasiddhi" (inference) is antarvyapti, while in the PNT it is the probans (hetu) and the sub-cause is regarded as antarvyapti. In the PNT the term "bahirvyapti” appears for the first time. [It is worth to note the next points. In the later Nyāya school the karana of inferential knowledge has undergone change in the following order hetu→ vyāpti → vyāpti-jñāna → parāmarśa.]
When, on the basis of antarvyapti, the probans (hetu) can or cannot establish the probandum (sādhya), it is useless to mention the bahrvyāpti. (antarvyāptyā hetuḥ sadhya-pratyāyane śaktāśaktāu ca bahirvyāpter udbhavanaṁ vyartham iti //111.37//)
(I)

III

If the probans establishes the probandum, based on antarvyāpti exclusively, bahirvyāpti is useless. [It mentions three examples.]
"Here is fire." (asty atrāgniḥ)
"Where there is fire, there only exists (is intelligible). (saty-evāgnau dhūmopapattiḥ)
(II)

317

"That my son is speaking outdoors" (mat-putro 'yam bahir-avasthito vakti)
"Otherwise such voice is unintelligible." (anyathaivam bhūta-svaraupapattiḥ]

Page #329

318
Atsushi Uno
Jambū-jyoti
When by only using such either (positive vyāpti) or (negative vyāpti), sharp-minded (vyutpanna-mati) opponent can establish probandum (inference). (III) “This woman's unborn baby is a boy.” (etasyāḥ strio
garbhātyam pumān) "because of being her baby." (etad-apatyatvāt) "Like other babies who are known as boys."
(prasiddha-pumstvetatarāpatyavat)
For in these examples, even if in the presence of bahirvyāpti antarvyāpti is not obtainable, probans (hetu) is not considered to be the main cause (gamaka) of the probandum (inferential knowledge).
In the third example, "saty-eva pusstve etat-apatyatvāt" should be valid probans (hetu). So, such valid antarvyāpti is doubted. Bahirvyāpti produced from such doubt, though determined, cannot produce anything (useless).
[Comment] I would like to test three examples one by one. Syllogisms mentioned in the first two examples are right. In the first example, hetu "smoke” is here omitted. The vyāpti being reducible to the form is antarvyāpti, residing in the paksa (here; mountain?). Here antarvyāpti being taken as principal, instructor (vādin) didn't dare to mention drstänta. Since the hetu (probans) is gamaka of inference, bahirvyāpti is useless so far as the form is concerned. It is a good example to show how antarvyāpti or bahirvyāpti functions in accordance with the absence of the presence of drstānta, in relation to two syllogisms having two members in common.
In the second example, vyāpti being shown in the form <~sādhya > ~hetu> is (negative vyāpti). <~hetu> is "otherwise unintelligibility of such voice" (anyathā evambhūta-svarānupapatti), and <~sādhya> is "if he is not speaking outdoors" (bahir-vacanābhāva). Here any heterogeneous example is purposely neglected, and accordingly bahirvyāpti is not mentioned. Thus antarvyāpti existing in the paksa is functioning, the hetu is gamaka of inference.
In the third example, the hetu is apparently “asiddha-hetu” as well as "sopādhika-hetu”, and this hetu is not the cause (ghațaka) of inference.

Page #330

'Antarvyāpti' Interpreted in Jainism
319
If one is forced to say, the valid hetu should be "being boy" and "being her baby." Thus bahirvyāpti is useless.

(In the beginning of the RaA is mentioned a verse, which is a compromise between the NyA (20) and the PNT (111.37). The maincause of inferential knowledge is considered to be antarvyāpti, and the term "bāhya-vyāpti" is mentioned instead of "bahirvyāpti.)
antarvyāptiḥ sāddhya-śaktau bāhyavyāpter varņam vandhyam eval antarvyāptih sāddhya-āśaktau bāhyavyāpter varnam vandhyam eva ||
When on the basis of antarvyāpti the establishment of probandum is possible, the mention of bāhyavyāpti is useless. When on the basis of antarvyāpti the establishment of probandum is impossible, the mention of bāhyavyāpti is useless.
(1)
(Like the SyR, the RaA mentions two examples.) "That my son is speaking outdoors” (mat-putro 'yam
bahir avasthito vakti)
"Otherwise such voice is unintelligible." (anyathaivam
bhūta-svarāupapattih] In this case though bahirvyāpti does not exist, antarvyāpti is accepted as gamaka of inferential knowledge.
(II)
"He (the unborn boy) is black.” (sa śyāmah)

"Because of being her baby." (tad-putratvat)
“Like her other boys.” (itara-tat-putratvat)
In this case, however, even though bahirvyāpti exists, it is not regarded as the main cause (ghataka) of inferential knowledge. (Comment] The first example is the same as the second one of the SyR. The second example is almost the same as the third one of the Syr. In the first example, the description seems misleading. Bahirvyāpti (vyatireka-vyāpti) and heterogeneous example do exist, though they are not described obviously.

PNT further describes two kinds of vyāpti (111.38, 39).

Page #331

320
Atsushi Uno
Jambū-jyoti
Invariable concomitance of the hetu (M) with the sādhya (P) existent in the very object which is considered paksa (S) is antarvyāpti. On the other hand, invariable concomitance existent elsewhere is bahirvyāpti. (pakșikrta eva visaye sādhanasya sādhyena vyāptir antarvyāptih; anyatra tu bahirvyāptih)
[Comment] Vyāpti being synonymous with vyāpyatā, it is a nature or a relation possessed by a pervaded (vyāpya). Therefore I translated “hetu's vyāpti with sādhya" etc.
For example :
(1) "Entity (vastu) is made up of many natures." (vastu
anekāntātmakam) [ "Because it is sat." (sattvāt) This is not expressed.] "Only when the entity is of many natures (sādhya), then
sattva (hetu) is intelligible.” (tathopapatti) (II) “This place has fire.” (ayam deśo'gnimān)
"Because it has smoke.” (dhūmavattvät) "Whatever possesses smoke has fire." (sa evam sa evam) “Like a kitchen” (yathā pākasthānam)
[Comment] These two examples show antarvyāpti and bahirvyāpti respectively.
Syllogism (1) is lacking in drstānta, because entity (vastu) is highest connotation being synonymous with existent (sat) in Jainism. The sādhya is and the hetu is , and the vyāpti holding between such two notions is nothing but antarvyāpti, residing in the paksa (= vastu) only and not elsewhere.
Syllogism (2) is equipped with three members : pratijñā, hetu, drstānta, and positive-vyāpti existent in the outer example (bahirdrstānta), i.e., kitchen is bahirvyāpti.
Antarvyāpti has much to do with drstānta. Hemacandra in PrM first defined drstānta in three sūtras, discussed it in his own commentary and concluded that it is by no means indispensable to inference, and eventually referred to antaryāpti.

Page #332

'Antarvyāpti' Interpreted in Jainism
321
"Drstānta is not the cause (anga) of inference" (1.1.18).
"Because inferential knowledge is established by the probans (sādhana) exclusively" (1.11.19). For inferential knowledge is produced from the cause (sādhana; hetu) which lacks drstānta and is inseparable from probandum (sādhya). So drstānta is by no means the cause of inference. For, drstānta is mentioned for the purpose of (1) getting the knowledge of the probandum, or (2) getting the knowledge of the vyāpti, or (3) making the opponent remember the vyāpti ? It is not the case (1), because the establishment of the probandum is secured by the above-mentioned probans (hetu) exclusively. And it is not the case (2), because the knowledge of the vyāpti is produced from the denial (exclusion of the hetu in the heterogeneous example (vipaksa; vyatireka; what has not the probandum). And any drstānta is individual. How can individual drstānta totally communicate us the general vyāpti ? For other cases of vyāpti, another vyāpti is to be sought. Since that drstānta is also individual in nature, the decision of the whole is impossible, because drstānta being sought one by one may lead to regressus ad infinitum. And it is not the case (3). For those who are familiar with the vyāpti, the vyapti is to be remembered at the sight of the probans (hetu). For those who are ignorant with the vyāpti, the vyāpti cannot be remembered even at the sight of drstānta. For remembrance presupposes previous knowledge (fire) smoke : ~fire )-smoke).
“Drstānta is the basis on which to show the opponent the vyāpti" (1.11.20)
[Question] If the drstānta is not the cause of the inferenial knowledge, why do you dare to give it a definiton ?
[Answer] For in order to satisfy the opponent's wish in the inference for others, exceptional drstānta will be allowed. And even in the field of inference for oneself, the definiton of drstānta is not entirely inappropriate in view of the fact that there may be a person who is helped to arrive at the knowledge of antarvyāpti from the observation of bahirvyāpti found in an example.
[Comment] it is the NS that showed the general definion of drstānta. However, the drtānta of later product in other schools being quite different in nature, is necessarily connected with the vyāpti. The definition of drstānta

Page #333

322
Atsushi Uno
Jambū-jyoti
was hardly touched by Jaina and Buddhist texts, with an exception of Hemacandra and Devasūri. Frankly speaking, antarvyāpti is the vyāpti which is accepted directly in the paksa, not through the medium of any dřstānta.
IV
The Naiyāyikas accept three lingas, upon which they put forth conventionally three kinds of inference. Among these is "kevalānvayi anumāna”. It is explained in the Tarkasamgraha (* 48) as follows:
The linga which has vyāpti only positively (anvayenaiva) is called “kevalānvayi linga”. For example, “A pot is nameable (abhidheya)”. “Because of knowableness (prameyatva)” “Like cloth (patavat)", In this case, between the probandum (= abhidheyatva) and the probans (prameyatva) there is no negative vyāpti, because all things are nameable as well as knowable.
In the Naiyāyika's tradition, drstānta cannot be paksa, and when the paksa happens to be all things indicated by etc., any drstānta is not obtainable. In the above syllogism, the Naiyāyika might have purposely limited to “pot" etc. as the subject instead of or , in order to evade the difficulty of unavailability of drstānta. In the above-mentioned example (PNT 111.39) "sat is made up of many natures” will be considered to be a modified syllogism of the Naiyāyika's "kevalānvayi anumāna”. Ratnākarśānti, a later Buddhist logician, holds antarvyāpti's doctrine for interpreting ksana-bhanga. That is, in the argument "Everything is momentary (Vastu kşanikam)" he could not but seek for vyāpti in the paksa i.e., antarvyāpti. As has been explained, the establishment of probandum is eventually secured by confirmation of the vyāpti in the pakşa. However, this problem being quite different in nature from the question whether antarvyāpti or bahirvyāpti, here will not be taken into consideration.
To sum up,
(1) When vyāpti is sought in the paksa, without accepting drstānta as a member, antarvyāpti functions.
(2) When vyāpti is sought in the drstānta, bahirvyāpti operates. (in order to make the opponent of slow understanding remember the vyāpti.)
(3) Even in two similar syllogisms (e.g. of smoke and fire), a) when it is furnished with drstānta bahirvyāti functions (PNT 111.39, the second

Page #334

'Antarvyāpti' Interpreted in Jainism
323
example), b) when it lacks drstānta antarvyāpti functions (SyR the second example).
(4) Syllogism is lacking in drstānta, (i) because it is dependent on the prativādin's arbitrary (in
accordance with the opponent's faculty), and not necessarily
determined physically. (ii) when positive vyāpti is unobtainable (SyR the second example,
RaА the first example). (iii) when the paksa happens to be 'sarva', 'sat' etc., indicating
the highest connotation (PNT 111 39, the first example; Buddhist's antarvāpti-theory).
000

Page #335

Some Jain Versions of the 'Act of Truth' Theme
Paul Dundas
Scholars of Hindu and Buddhist narrative have long been familiar with the authoritative verbal action which takes the name "act of truth" or "truth act" from the Pāli expression saccakiriya. Having its origins in the Veda and deriving its force from the perception that truth (satya) is closely connected both ontologically and etymologically with existent reality (sat), an act of truth effects its result for the person activating it through the magic power of words which enunciate something indubitably true, at least for the utterer. According to George Thompson, who has recently put the subject on a more sophisticated footing in terms both of general theoretical background and exegesis of specific Vedic examples, an act of truth is "an act of personal authority, an assertion that rests on the power of the performer to accomplish sometimes very remarkable things....by the mere utterance of certain words, and in a recognisably regular and formal way". Thompson goes on to mention that all earlier scholarly accounts of the Vedic act of truth have pointed to the occurrence within it of a phrase corresponding to "by (that) truth...", i.e. satyena, or in early Vedic versions ṛtena, sometimes prefaced by tena2. Use of the word "truth" seems then to have been an integral part of this verbal action at the outset.

However, just as attitudes towards the authority and status of the Veda did not remain fixed in ancient Indian society, so the literary context of the truth act also changed, even to the extent, so Brown suggested, of its migrating to the Near East and being employed in mutated form in a famous episode in the life of Jesus occurring in the Gospel of St. Matthew3. If the Vedic vision of the near cosmic power of truth gradually weakened, alternative visions of what constituted truth emerged in the non-brahman

Page #336

Some Jain Versions of the 'Act of Truth' Theme
325
śramana milieu. Renate Söhnen-Thieme has argued that the act of truth (which she also calls "truth-spell") disappeared in the post-Vedic Brähmanas, where its function was replaced by an appeal to what had come to be percewed as the more efficacious powers of knowledge and asceticism, while it continued in narrative literature such as the Buddhist Jätakas (as well as, of course, the two great epics)4.
Unfortunately, although the Buddhist versions of the act of truth have often been referred to, little attention has been paid to the possibility of the occurrence of acts of truth in Jain literature. Bloomfield's description in his lengthy analysis of the late sixteenth century Bhāvadeva Sūri's Pārsvanāthacarita of such an act (in this case called satyaśrāvanā), in which a queen obtains passage across a river and back again by declarations of the truth of her husband's fidelity and an ascetic's sanctity, seems to have been the only Jain example noticed by earlier scholars working in this areas.
Certainly, the Jain scriptural canon, unlike its Buddhist equivalent, does not seem to have proved fertile ground for this narrative theme. The early Jain scriptural view of truth was that it was interlinked with restraint and nonviolence and without any obvious magical powers. However, this is not in itself reason to discount the possibility of Jain versions of the act of truth, even in the canon6. In a recent paper, Professor Colette Caillat has drawn attention to the fact that the well-known chapter 12 of the Uttarādhyayana Sūtra, in which the Jain monk Harikeśa, the true brahman, is supernaturally protected from physical violence at the hands of a group of sacrificing brahmans, evinces what "amounts to “an Act of Truth" " performed by the purohita's wife who bears formal witness to his genuine asceticism?. John Cort has also drawn attention to at least one other act of truth in Hemacandra's version of the life of Mahāvīra in his Trisastiśalākāpuruşacarita. These do suggest the possibility that there may be rather more examples, albeit in slightly altered shape, of Jain acts of truth than scholarship has yet allowed. Without in any way intending to be exhaustive, I draw attention here to a few of these, taken from medieval narrative literature, in the hope that they may be of some interest to the great scholar who is being honoured by this volume.
Of the examples I will describe, most are connected with marital fidelity. One example, however, refers to the truth of the Jain religion and

Page #337

326
Paul Dundas
Jambū-jyoti
might best be treated first. It occurs in the tenth century Digambara Harisena's Brhatkathākośa, a story collection intended to illustrate the verses of śivārya's Bhagavatī Ārādhanā' Story fifty-four of this anthology, "The Enlightenment of Rudradatta by his Wife (Rudradattapriyaprabodha)" exemplifies the virtue of not giving up one's religion, the context being the relationship between the Saiva and Digambara Jain communities 10. The Saiva Rudradatta ostensibly abandons his religion in order to marry the pious Jain girl Jinamati but then reverts to Saivism after the wedding. Although his wife suggests to him that they each follow their separate religious paths, he refuses to allow her to practise Jainism and tries to force her to convert to saivism. One day, the city in which they live is set on fire by attacking barbarians and their house threatened by the conflagration. The couple agree that they will both follow whichever deity protects the house. To this end, they each perform an act of truth. Rudradatta faces north and, after calling upon the guardian deities, affirms the supremacy of Śiva, by whose will the world proceeds, the saiva path and initiation into it, calling upon the god for protection, if these claims are indeed soli,
But “although he invoked the true name of Śiva” (mahādevasya sannāma grhnato'py asya), the fire burns all the more fiercely, and continues to do so even when Rudradatta invokes other Hindu gods. In response to his plea to call upon the Jina to protect them, Jinamati, "having ritually undertaken an act of abstention" (pratyakhyānam vidhaya), enunciates her act of truth with the words, "If the Jinas are endowed with omniscience, free from passion, without mishap, lacking in passion or mishap, if the religious path of nonviolence taught by them is concerned with compassion for all creatures and is the basis of the happiness of heaven and earth, if the Jain ascetic initiation removes rebirth, then let it quickly protect me and my husband and sons”12. She then made an offering to the Jina and stood in the kāyotsarga position and, while she was carrying out this observance "with firm mind” (sthiramanasā), the fire ceased and the barbarians fled in fear. As a result of this miracle, Rudradatta became a Jain.
The second example occurs in story seven (the Vimalakaha) of Maheśvara Sūri's (first half of eleventh century) Nānapamcamikahão, a narrative collection illustrating the benefits of observing the Jñānapañcamī festival day!3. The early part of the story describes

Page #338

Some Jain Versions of the 'Act of Truth' Theme
Vimala's previous births. He was originally a brahman, deeply preoccupied with the necessity of purity of food, who cut off his affectionate wife's hands on learning that she had been secretly mixing milk into his meals in order to increase his strength. Despite his remorse, he was subsequently reborn himself without hands in a poor family as Tumtaa ("Handless") 14. Then through acknowledging the power of the Jñanapañcami day he was reborn as Vimala in Benares (Väränasi) with magical healing power in his hands. The queen of the city became smitten with adulterous passion for him, but he did not respond to her advances, claiming that a secret wrong could not go unhidden in the world,15 since the five gods of the directions. would see it. In anger, the queen falsely told her husband the king that she had been raped by Vimala (v. 76), as a result of which he cut off Vimala's hands (v. 89). Vimala then in front of the onlookers fixed his thought on the Jina and "without his hands" (ujjhiyatumți) made an act of truth (vv. 93-4): "My fate is thus (?). If I have no fault with regard to what the king in his anger says about me, then let my hands grow as they were before". Then immediately the goddess who had been Vimala's wife in his existence as a brahman restored his hands, making them glow with shining light to awaken the assembled people to the Jain religion.
327
The next two examples occur in the Bṛhatkathākośa (nos. 88-90) dealing with female chastity in illustration of Bhagavati Aradhana v. 999.
The first of these is the story of Rohini, the wife of Vasudeva, and is connected with the Kṛṣṇa cycle. The scene is the city of Sauri at the border of Śūrasena. Because of Rohini's great affection for her son, the ninth Baladeva, it is popularly but falsely (v. 6 satyena parivarjitām) assumed they are lovers. Vasudeva curses his wife and gets her to stand in the kayotsarga position in the middle of the river Yamuna when it is in spate. Rohini gets the river to stop its course and the people acknowledge her purity. She then makes an act of truth (v. 21), requesting the Yamuna, if she is indeed pure, to flow to the north of the city instead of the south". The river heard the voice of Rohini "which was endowed with truth and firmness" (satyadhairyasametäyäḥ) and flowed on the north side of the city, which because of her statement (väkya) it does even now. As a result of this miracle (prätihärya), many pure minded men and women became Jains.

Page #339

328
Paul Dundas
Jambu-jyoti
The second example (Brhatkathākośa 89) is a highly condensed version of the story of Sītā. Here she is simply depicted in upright terms, whereas an earlier retelling of the Rāmāyana in the Brhatkathākośa has presented the violence of the story of Rāma's war against Rāvana and the demons as her responsibility (84.57) 18.
The scene is the city of Sāketa in the region of Vinītā19. Rāma ignites a fire to test Sītā's purity (suddhyartham), whereupon (v. 4) she makes an act of truth : "If I have desired any man other than Rāma even in my mind, oh people (!), then burn me, fire; otherwise do not do so"20. Having spoken thus, Sītā, urged on by Rāma, entered the fire which then became a great lotuspond. Immediately after this miracle (prātihārya) devised (prakalpitam) by the gods, Sītā took dīkņā (v. 7).
According to Kulkarni,21 the source for Sītā becoming a nun is Ravisena's (seventh century) version of the Rāmāyana, the Padmapurāna, and it might be worth juxtaposing Harisena's version with the more formal and elaborate example of the act of truth given by Ravisena which actually uses the word "satyam"22. Sarga 105 of the Padmapurāņa deals with Sītā's entering the fire. Firstly, she assumes the kāyotsarga posture for an instant, praises the Jinas, the siddhas and all monks (vv. 21-2) and then performs an act of truth (vv. 25-8) : "I do not even in a dream exalt (? param.... samudvahāmi) in deed, thought (or) speech any other man except Rāma. This is my truth (satyam). If I speak this falsely (anrtam), then let this fire consume me instantaneously even though I have not entered it. If I do not even in my thoughts exalt any other man than Rāma, then let this fire not burn me, pure as I am. This fire can burn me (if I am) heretical, evil, low and unchaste but should not do so, as I am chaste and dutiful”23. She then entered the fire, whereupon it became water.
We might at this juncture ask on the basis of the examples given above whether there is such a phenomenon as a standard Jain version of the act of truth. The Jain examples clearly share a common shape (whether or not the gods of the directions are invoked) with their Hindu and Buddhist equivalents by utilising the formula of the type "if something is the case, then let this be the result". However, the Jain versions (with the exception of the Padmapurāna) clearly do not feel it necessary to integrate the word satya into the utterance. What is more marked is the linkage with some

Page #340

Some Jain Versions of the 'Act of Truth' Theme
329
sort of specifically Jain observance, such as the kāyotsarga posture and/or mental concentration on the Jina. It is as much the power and truth of Jain practice as of truth itself that effects the desired miraculous result and the ensuing conversion of many witnesses to Jainism.
This can be seen quite clearly in story ninety of the Brhatkathākośa which follows immediately after the stories of Rohini and Sītā described above, serving almost as a commentary upon them. Jinadatta falsely accuses (abhyākhyānam dadau) his wife Jinadāsī of adultery as they are travelling to Mithilā through a forest. Because of this she performs kāyotsarga near a lion "with the aim of (establishing) the purity of her conduct" (svacăritravisuddhyartham). The lion pays homage to her with triple pradaksiņā as she performs the pratimā and goes off without harming her. “Having purified herself carefully there through this ritual” (anena vidhină tatra sodhayitvā svam ādarāt) she took to asceticism, having paid homage to the tīrthankara Sumati. Many men in the caravan became Jains (Jinadharmam prapedire) after seeing such a miracle (v.7). Here the context of accusation and miraculous justification remains the same as in the earlier examples, except that the result is now gained exclusively through the reconfirming of pure Jain behaviour.
My final example shows how the act of truth theme could be recast in a rather different narrative context. It occurs in the first chapter of the Pañcatantra, not normally thought of as a Jain text, situated as it is in a more general world of folklore, nītiśāstra and brahman lore. Although attempts to establish the supposed originals of Indian narrative collections are problematic, Edgerton's reconstruction of the text has come to be the version in general scholarly use24. Nonetheless, the Jain monk Pūrņabhadra Sūri's recension dating from the end of the twelfth century has remained an important version through which the Pañcatantra has been mediated to an English-reading audience25. Although it is a particularly good example of the Jain appropriation of pan-Indian literary genres and texts, no study seems to have yet been dedicated to elucidating to what extent Purnabhadra's version of the Pañcatantra might have a specifically Jain flavour compared to Edgerton's reconstructed original. However, one passage does throw interesting light on the treatment of the act of truth theme and the manner in which it could be varied.

Page #341

330
Paul Dundas
Jambu-jyoti
The story in question is one of the most cynical in Sanskrit narrative literature. It involves a weaver, his adulterous wife and her gobetween, a barber's wife. The two women have changed places to deceive the weaver and enable his wife to go and meet her lover. In a fit of drunken rage, the weaver mutilates the gobetween, thinking it was his wife, by cutting off her nose. The weaver's wife returns and the wretched gobetween goes back home with her nose in her hands. When the weaver, having emerged from his stupor, starts to upbraid his wife again, she, who is of course unmutilated, performs a spurious act of truth to convince him of her chastity : "To hell with you, evil man ! Who is capable of mutilating me, an extremely virtuous woman ? Hear me, guardian deities of the directions If I have not known even in my thoughts any man other than the husband I married when young, then by this truth (anena satyena) let my face become whole.”26 The result is that the weaver on seeing his faithless wife's face, nose and all, is duped into reconciliation with her.
Falk, in his study of the sources of the Pañcatantra, has shown how the original author of the text (whether or not he was a brahman called Visnuśarman) adopted ethically positive stories and themes from the Jātaka collection and the Mahābhārata but adapted and reshaped them to fit a new narrative context of cynical and selfish worldly wisdom and counteracting quickwittedeness27. The episode of the weaver and his wife, while not referred to by Falk, exemplifies this excellently. Here we have an almost audacious reversal of the act of truth theme designed to demonstrate the cleverness of the wicked and the gullibility of the slowwitted. Its force in the Pañcatantra, or at least this version of it, could only come from a prior familiarity with earlier "standard" examples of acts of truth employing the word satya and intended to effect a miraculous result through affirmation of a moral or religious truth.
The Jain Purnabhadra's version, while not in any way squeamish about the narrative theme, does away with the specific invocation of truth found in Edgerton's reconstructed version and instead makes the weaver's wife ascribe the "miracle" to the gods of the directions being compelled to restore her nose by the power of her chastity28. In this respect, Pūrnabhadra seems to follow the structure of the acts of truth found in the Brhatkathākośa and Nānapamcamikahão described above.

Page #342

Some Jain Versions of the 'Act of Truth' Theme
331
Annotation : 1. George Thompson, “On Truth-Acts in Vedic", Indo-Iranian Journal (forthcoming).
Cf. also Alex Wayman, "The Hindu-Buddhist Rite of Truth-An Interpretation”, in Bhadriraju Krishnamurti, Studies in Indian Linguistics (Professor M. B. Emeneau Sastipūrti Volume), Deccan College, Poona University and Annamalai University, Annamalainagar : Centre of Advanced Study in Linguistics 1968, pp. 365-69 who wishes to translate kiriyā/kriyā as “rite". Cf., more recently, Catherine WeinbergerThomas, Cendres d'Immortalité : La crémation des veuves en Inde, Editions de Seuil 1996, pp. 31-2. Although she does not deal specifically with the satyakriyā, Weinberger-Thomas offers an apt characterisation of truth in the Indian context as something which has the capacity to create by virtue of emanating from that
quality which is itself true (sat). 2. Thompson op. cit. 3. See W. N. Brown, The Indian and Christian Miracles of Walking on the Water,
Chicago-London 1928, for a treatment of possible parallels in the accounts of Christ and the Buddha walking on water. For further discussion, see Norbert Klatt, Literarkritische Beiträge zum Problem Christlich-Buddhistischer Parallelen, Köln:
E. J. Brill 1982, pp. 182-98. 4. Söhnen-Thieme, “On the Concept and Function of satya ("truth”) in Ancient Indian
Literature", International Conference on Sanskrit and Related Studies : September 23-26, 1993 (Proceedings), Cracow : The Enigma Press 1995, p. 240. The act of truth theme was still being used as late as the sixteenth century. For a Telugu version occurring in Allasāni Peddana's Manucaritramu, see David Shulman, “First Man, Forest Mother : Telugu Humanism in the Age of Krsnadevarāya" in David Shulman (ed.), Syllables of Sky: Studies in South Indian Civilisation in honour of
Velcheru Narayana Rao, Delhi : Oxford University Press 1995, p. 135. 5. Maurice Bloomfield, The Life and Stories of the Jaina Savior Pārsvanātha, Delhi :
Gian Publishing House 1985 (reprint), pp. 80-1. This is referred to by W. Norman Brown, “The Metaphysics of the Truth Act (* Satyakriya)”, in Mélanges d’Indianisme à la Mémoire de Louis Renou, Publications de Institut de Civilisation Indiennes
Vol. 28, Paris : Editions E. de Boccard 1968, p. 176. 6. See Colette Caillat, “The Rules Concerning Speech (Bhāṣā) in the Ayāranga-and
Dasaveyāliya-Suttas”, in M. A. Dhaky and Sagarmal Jain (ed.), Pt. Dalsukhbhai Malvania Felicitation Volume 1 : Aspects of Jainology Vol. III, Varanasi : P. V. Research Institute 1991, pp. 7 and 10. Jain philosophical and linguistic views on

Page #343

332
Paul Dundas
Jambū-jyoti
the nature of truth are described by Sāgarmal Jain, Jain Bhāṣā-Darśan, Dilli/ Pāšan: Bhogīlāl Lehercand Bhāratiya Samskrti Saṁsthān 1966, pp. 87-100. Peter Flügel, “Power and Insight in Jain Discourse" (forthcoming), discusses Jain attitudes to language and truth from a sociological perspective.
Although this is not the context in which to discuss cross-cultural notions of truth, it might be worth drawing attention, in passing, to the remarkable account of the nature and function of truth as employed by the Charans (Cāraṇas) or bards in traditional Rajasthan given by Denis Vidal, Violence and Truth: A Rajasthani Kingdom Confronts Colonial Authority, Delhi: Oxford University Press 1997, pp. 100-04. According to Vidal (p. 103), “....the truth-function of the bards cannot be directly defined in terms of values which simply contrast truth with fiction and celebrate the power of the true over the false. The full value of a bard's words was acknowledged, not so much because it enabled truth to overcome falsehood, as because it embodied the much more awe-inspiring capacity to make either “truth”
or "falsehood" prevail, by lending them the power of ritual inspiration". 7. Colette Caillat, "The Beating of the Brahmins (Uttaradhyayana 12)", in Nalini
Balbir and Joachim K. Bautze (ed.), Festschrift Klaus Bruhn, Reinbek : Studien zur
Indologie und Iranistik 1994, pp. 255-66. 8. John E. Cort, Liberation and Wellbeing : A Study of the Svetambar Murtipujak
Jains of North Gujarat, Harvard University Ph. D. dissertation 1989, pp. 419-20. The specific example referred to is of deities burning down a house after an act of truth asserting the genuineness of Mahāvīra's asceticism by Makkhali Gosāla who has been angered by being given stale alms food. According to Cort, there are several acts of truth in this portion of the Trisastiśalākāpurusacarita. I refrain from
referring further to this text as I do not have access to the original Sanskrit. 9. Harisena, Brhatkathākośa, Ed. A. N. Upadhye, Simghi Jain Series, Vol. 17,
Bombay : Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan 1943. (The text is precisely dated to ś.s. A.D. 93,- Editers.
10. It might be noted that P. S. Jaini, The Jaina Path of Purification, Delhi/Varanasi/
Patna : Motilal Banarasidass 1979, p. 300 note 43, cites this story in passing,
albeit without reference to it containing an act of truth. 11. Vv. 50-2 : bho bho śrnuta me vākyam lokapälā manoharam
lokapālanakodyukto Rudradatto jagau tadā || yadi mäheśvaro dharmo devo paramah Sivah | tasyecchayā pravarteta jagat sarvam hrdi sthitam || yadi

Page #344

Some Jain Versions of the 'Act of Truth' Theme
333
nirvāṇadīksā syān nirmalā 'vadyavarjitá sa devo raksatān māṁ ca sarvam lokam
sabandhavam || 12. Vv. 60-2: kevalajñānsampannā vītarāgā gatāpadah | rāgamohaparityakta yady
arhanto bhavanty ami || ahimsālakṣano dharmaḥ sarvasattvadayāparah | lokadvayasukhādhāras tadukto vidyate yadi || yadi nirvāṇadiksă syāt
saṁsārocchedakāriņi tato mām patiputrādisamyuktām raksatu drutam || 13. Maheśvarasūri, Nānapaṁcamīkahão, Ed. A. S. Gopāni, Simghi Jain Series Vol.
25, Bombay : Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan 1949. 14. For Prākrit turta and a variety of words connected with it, see R. L. Turner,
A Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages. London: Oxford University
Press 1966, entry 5468. (cf. the Gujarāti word 'thuộthā (Landless) - Editors. 15. Here there is an echo of the earlier secret giving of milk, described as gūdhāim
kajjaim in v. 18.
16. Vimalo vi jaņasamakkhaṁ hiyae thaviūna jinavaram devam | pabhaņai ujjhiyatumti
evam ciya majjha divvam tu || jai natthi majjha doso jam rāyā bhanai kohagayacitto
'to nisaraṁtu hatthā jaha puvvim hoṁtayā āsi ||| 17. yady -ahań śuddhim āyātā daksinasyā diśah purah tao vrajottarām āśāṁ Yamune
mama väkyataḥ || 18. Cf. V. M. Kulkarni, The Story of Rama in Jain Literature, Ahmedabad : Saraswati
Pustak Bhandar 1990, p. 148. 19. For Jain usage of the names Sāketa and Vinītā, see Hans Bakker, “Ayodhyā :
le nom et le lieu", Revue de l'Histoire des Religions 203 1986, pp. 59-60. 20. Rāmadevam vihāyānyanaraṁ me yadi vāñchitam | manasā 'pi janā vahne tato
mām daha mā 'nyathă || 21. Op. cit. p. 151. 22. Ravisena, Padmapurāna, Vol. 3, Ed. Pannālal Jain, Jñānapitha Mürtidevī Jaina
Granthamālā Vol 26, Kāśī : Bhāratiya Jñānapītha 1959. 23. karmaṇā manasā vācā Rāmam muktvā param naram | samudvahāmi na svapne
fpy anyaṁ satyam idam mama || yady etad anstaṁ vācmi tadā mām eșa pāvakah | bhasmasädbhāvam aprēptām api prāpayatu ksaņāt || atha Padmān naraṁ nänyam manasā 'pi vahā[m]y aham | tato 'yaṁ jvalano dhākṣin mā mām śuddhisamanvitām || mithyādarśaninīm pāpāṁ kşudrikāṁ vyabhicāriņīí | jvalano mām dahaty esa satim vratasthitam tu mā ||

Page #345

334
Paul Dundas
Jambū-jyoti
The equivalent passage in the critical edition of the Rāmāyana 7. 88. 10, prior to Sītā's rescue by the goddess of the earth, is comparatively abrupt and does not employ the word satya : yathāham Rāghavād anyam manasā 'pi na cintaye | tathā me Madhavi devi vivaram dātum arhati || However, the apparatus gives a variant somewhat similar in shape to Ravisena's version : manasā karmanā vācā yathā Rāmaṁ samarthaye yathaitat satyam uktam me vedmi Rāmāt param na ca ||
According to Söhnen-Thieme, op. cit. p. 241, there are no real attestations of an act of truth in the original main stories of both epics, however often the motif occurs in subordinate tales and legends : “Sītā's satyakriya, which she uses to disappear forever, is a quite pessimistic and unheard of use of the "truth act”,
perhaps reflecting the lateness of book seven of the Rāmāyaṇa.” 24. See Franklin Edgerton, The Panchatantra : Volume 1. Text and Critical Apparatus,
New Haven : American Oriental Society 1924. Patrick Olivelle, The Pañcatantra : The Book of India's Folk Wisdom, Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press 1997 is a recent translation of Edgerton's reconstructed text. The bibliography of this book should be consulted for the scholarly literature voicing scepticism concerning Edgerton's methodology. For the problems entailed in the reconstruction of another narrative text, see Donald Nelson, "Brhatkathā Studies : The Problem
of an Ur-text”, Journal of Asian Studies 37 1978, pp. 663-76.. 25. See Johannes Hertel, The Pañchatantra : A Collection of Hindu Tales in the Recension,
called Panchākhyānaka, and dated 1199 A. D., of the Jaina Monk, Purnabhadra, Harvard Oriental Series Vol. 11, Cambridge, Mass : Harvard University 1908. For a recent English version of Purnabhadra's recension, see Visnu Śarma :
The Pañcatantra, translated by Chandra Rajan, Penguin Books 1993. 26. See Edgerton op. cit. p. 55: are papa ko mām mahāsatīm virūpayitum samarthah.
śrnvantu me lokapālāh, yady ahaṁ kaumāram bhartāram muktvā n'ānyam
parapuruşam manasā 'pi vedmi, tad anena satyenā 'vyangaṁ mukham astu. 27. Harry Falk, Quellen des Pañcatantra, Wiesbaden : Otto Harrassowitz 1978. 28. Hertel's edition, p. 30 (punctuation added) : "tad yadi mama satītvam asti, tad ete
devā bhūyo 'pi tādrgrūpāṁ nāsikāṁ kurvantu. atha vä manasāpi parapuruso bhilasitah, tan mām bhasmasān nayantu" iti. evam uktvä bhūyo 'pi tam äha, bho durātman, paśya, me satītvaprabhāvena tādrg eva nāsikā saṁjātā”.
DOD

Page #346

Sanskrit Sub-story and Subhasitas in the Prakrit Paümappahasāmi Cariyam of Siri Devasūri
N. M. Kansara
The Svetambara Jaina Acārya Devasūri, who studied under Devendrasūri, was a disciple of Dharmaghoṣasuri, whose preceptorial geneology went back to Balacandrasūri of the Jālihara-gaccha, through Sarvānandasūri the author of the Pārśvanatha-carita, and Gunabhadrasūri1. He flourished in the last quarter of the 12th century A. D., during the reign of the Caulukya monarch Bhimadeva II of Gujarat2. In the year 1254 of the V. Era (A. D. 1197) he composed his Prakrit carita-kāvya entitled Paümappaha-sami-cariya in response to a request by a Jaina mendicant named Viddaya, while stationed in a vasati of Pajjunna Setthi, in the city named Vaddhamāņa (modern Vadhvāņ3 near Surendranagar in Saurashtra).
This work is in the form of a Prakrit biographical epic divided into four prastāvas. The First prastāva comprises 1735 gāthās, a Sanskrit sub-story in mixed prose and verse and entitled the 'antaramga-katha,' followed by 37 gāthās: The second prastava consists of 721 gāthās; the third contains 2130, while the fourth carries 1384 gāthās followed by the author's encomium from gāthās 1385 to 1403. The manuscripts close the work proper with the words. 'Iti śrīmat-Padmaprabha-caritam samaptam', and mention the total number of gāthās to be 72324.
As would be surprising in the case of a Prakrit work, we find in the first prastāva, a sub-story in Sanskrit containing an autobiographical account of mahāmuni Arindama narrated by him in reply to a question by king Aparajita who wanted to know the circumstances that led the Acarya to

Page #347

336
N. M. Kansara
Jambu-jyoti
take to the Jaina monastic order and got himself initiated to that end. This sub-story starts just after the gathā No. 1735 (p. 136) with which the story of prince Surasundara illustrating a case of bhāvanā comes to an end. It is called 'Anta-ranga-kathā' (pp. 136-162).
It thus narrates the sub-story comprising the autobiography of the Muni named Arindama : Having listened to the discourse of the Muni who propounded the importance of the excellent religious duties pertaining to charity etc., the king and others readily accepted it in toto. At the end of the discourse, king Aparājita respectfully requested him to oblige him by telling him as to why did he take to renunciation in young age. The Muni asked him to come next day, since the account was expected to take some more time than was then available. The king came back the next day in the morning and repeated the request. Muni Arindama then started his narration with the remark that the reason which led him to renounce worldly life was instrumental to a similar result in the case of all other's too, including himself, as also the king. There was a city named Asamvyavahāra, where lived innumerable people called Anădi-vanaspati. Their feudal lord was named Tivra-mohodaya, and his minister who was an expert in worldly ways was known by the name Atyantabodha. Through these two, king Karma-parināma had promulgated an ordinance that people lived in such a way that it seemed they were sleeping or swooning or dead, being bereft of any activity whatsoever. Once a messenger named Niyoga arrived and informed the king about a city named Mañuja-gati, surrounded by a castle called Mānusottara-naga encircled by a circular ditch in the form of oceans named Puskaroda etc. There were in this city temples in the form of five Merus, a number of market places named Mahāvideha with rows of palaces named Bharata, Airāvata, Haimavata and others. And there were two suburbs named Jambūdvīpa and Dhātakikhanda. This was the very city in which were born all the 63 Salākā-purusas, comprising Cakravartis, Jinas, and others. And here then ruled the king Karma-parināma. He had a queen named Karma-parinati. Both of them were engrossed in enjoying the dramatic performances and playing the parts of various transmigratory beings on the stage of the world sporting the forms of gods, human beings, creatures of hell, birds, handsome, ugly, melodious, harsh, happy, and unhappy et cetera.

Page #348

Sanskrit Sub-story and Subhāṣitas in the Prakrit....
337
Once their prince, named Mahāmoha, respectfully informed the king about the calamity that had befallen his kingdom. The calamity was that Prince Santosa, the son of king Cāritra had kidnapped innumerable citizens of his kingdom to his city named Sivapurī, with the assistance of his minister named Samyag-darśana and thus though accompanied by his whole army he was defeated. Thereupon the king ordered his army to uproot the Viveka fortress of king Căritra and throw the king into the ocean. At that moment the minister named Mithyādarśana requested him to delegate Prince Mahāmoha in his company to capture Prince Santosa alive and bring him there. Lokasthiti, the sister of the king also supported the plan of the minister. The king, therefore, agreed and sent a messenger named Tanniyoga to fetch as many of the citizens as were led away by Prince Santosa. On the other hand, the Prince and the minister of king Karma-parināma camped on the bank of the river named Pramattată in the forest named Cittavrtti. Tanniyoga was accompanied by Tīvra-mohodaya who showed him numerous palaces in which were innumerable apartments in which were housed countless citizens. Then Tīvramohodaya asked the minister how he should attract the citizens. The minister suggested that they have a beloved named Bhavitavyatā, having numerous forms, and having full control over all of them, who should be consulted as to which of the citizens should be transported. At this, Bhavitavyatā was summoned and consulted in the matter. She advised that she would despatch Sāṁsāri-jīva and others like him. Then, she operated from the Saṁvyavahāra city and wandered in the Sadhārana-vanaspati street along with Tīvra-mohodaya and Anantābodha attracting the citizens and despatched them to innumerable births of innumerable species. Now, the beloved of Bhavitavyatā, called Saṁsārijīva, wandered from birth to birth in these innumerable species of plants and enjoyed or suffered so much that it would be beyond human calculations. When he was at last tired of all this, his wife Bhavitavyatā told him, by way of consoling, that he would have a better luck in due course and then led him in the species of cow, and he was born as a bull. He was yoked to a cart to carry heavy burdens. In due course he broke up and sank in pain. His owner, the caravan-leader Kāmadeva took pity on him, and two munis uttered the Pañca-paramesthi mantra in his ear; this was as per the prediction of Bhavitavatyā. Bhavitavatyā reminded him that this was the excellent mantra she had predicted about. The bull listened to the Munis

Page #349

338
N. M. Kansara
Jambu-jyoti
and gladly accepted the mantra. Consequently, after death, the bull was reborn as a son named Vardhanakuñjara of king Vairasimha and queen Nandadevī. In this new embodiment he happened to make friends with two reliable twin brothers named Punyodaya and Dhumadhvaja. Vardhanauñjara mastered 72 arts and crafts. In view of his progress in education and other good qualities, king Vairasimha consulted an astrologer who also was an expert palmist, with regard to the prince's suitability for inheriting the responsibility of kingship after himself. The astronomer warned that, despite all the education and good qualities, the prince was getting perverted due to the influence of his bad companion named Vaiśvānara. The king was rather dejected, but the palmist assured him that the prince will part company with this companion when he is married to princess Kṣānti, the daughter of king Subhapariņāma and queen Niṣprakampatā ruling in the city named Citta-saundarya. Then, the king proposed to depute the astrologer to king Subhaparināma with an offer of his daughter's marriage with his prince, but the astrologer asked him to wait for proper time and not to hurry. And, prince Vardhanakuñjara used to quarrel and fight due to instigation from his bad companion. Once, when the king was about to mount an attack on a troublesome feudatory Kālasena, the prince took initiative himself and captured the feudatory alive, who was presented before the king and the latter released him after imposing heavy fine on him, From that day, the prince regarded Vaiśvānara as his well-wisher and a favourite friend.
Once the prince went to a forest named Svadeha with his twin friends and there he saw a man standing on an anthill named Uccaya and with a noose and about to commit suicide. The man bound his head in the noose and released himself from the branch, in the presence of the prince. But the prince cut off the noose and saved him. Even then the man tried to attempt suicide once again. When asked for the reason for his rashness and desperation, the man related the following account about his misfortune.
The man, whose name was Sparśana, said: 'I had a very dear and close friend named Jantu who always conducted himself in a manner totally to my liking. Once, deceived by a man named Susamaya, he began to look upon Sparśana as a dangerous person and, being instigated by Susamaya, he would resort to picking up my hair, making me sleep on bare ground,

Page #350

Sanskrit Sub-story and Subhāşitas in the Prakrit....
339
moving in hot sunshine etc. I thought he has deserted me, but due to affection for him I continued to follow him. In due course he scolded and deserted me and went away to the city named Nirvrti. Now, since I cannot bear separation from this friend any longer, I want to die.'
Prince Vardhanakuñjara consoled him and promised that he would make friendship with him. At that moment Sparśana entered the body of the prince by his mystic power. Vaiśvānara disliked this new friendship, while Punyodaya recommended it. The prince returned to his palace and treated his new friend with lavish luxuries. After a few days a messenger brought the news that a princess of the king of the Kalinga country was seeking his permission to come to marry the prince out of her own choice, impressed as she was by the qualities of the prince. The prince asked him about the distance at which the country was situated from his place. When the messenger told that it was at a distance of 2000 yojanas, the prince challenged him to prove the statement. At this juncture it was decided to measure the distance, and one who proved wrong should be punished. The messenger told him that it was not necessary to measure the distance afresh since the milestones were already been erected on the way. The prince took it as his insult and was enraged. But king Vairasimha intervened. Even then the prince could not be pacified and in his rage he killed both the king and the messenger. There was considerable unrest in the city when this mishap was known by the citizens. When queen Nandādevī tried to ward him away, the prince tried to kill her too under the instigation of Vaiśvānara, and she was beheaded. All the feudatories and inmates of the royal household were aghast at this and they overpowered the prince and threw him in a dark room and locked it from outside. At night when the citizens and the queens with their paraphernalia were resting after performing the obsequies and profuse lamenting after the royal couple, the prince conspired with his sinful friend, broke open the doors, came out, and threw fire in every house of the city and left with a bow and arrow in his hands. After some time he reached a village named Kuśasthala, and being thirsty he went to the bank of a lake just outside the village. There he saw a beautiful Cândāla woman taking bath. At this moment his friend Sparsa inspired him to enjoy her touch, and the prince entered into the water and started embracing her. She too got interested in him and coöperated. But, by misfortune, her husband who was a king of the mlecchas,

Page #351

340
N. M. Kansara
Jambū-jyoti
arrived there to join his beloved in her water-sport, and on seeing her in such a situation challenged the prince and his friends. In the end all of them died in a battle. The prince and his friends were thus consigned to the sixth hell, where he suffered for a very long time. After that their souls wandered from birth to birth in the species like fish, serpent, lion, falcon etc. At last, when his sins were exhausted, he was born as prince Mahāpadma, the son of king Ghanaratha and his queen Prabhāvatī in the city of Vārāṇasī. There he made friendship with Sāgaraka, the son of Rāgakesarī, and was educated in a number of arts and crafts. Then, prince Vicaksana, the son of king Subhodaya and queen Nijacărutā, too, happened to be his friend. This latter prince was married to a princess named Buddhi, the daughter of king Kalmasaksaya and queen Sundaratā, by way of her own choice. Her father was much worried and sent his son Vimarsa to inquire about her well being. And, Vimarsa stayed for long with his sister. In due course Buddhi gave birth to a son who was named Prakarsa.
Then once both Mahāpadma and Vicaksana went to a forest named Vadanakoțara. There they saw a beautiful young maiden. Mahāpadma was spellbound, but Vicaksana led him away. Seeing them go away, her maidservant cried that her mistress was dying for want of a resort and a master. Having heard this, Mahāpadma returned and Vicaksana followed him due to his insistence. On seeing them the maiden regained consciousness and welcomed them. They asked for her identity, and the maid-servant replied that she is the famous Rasanā and she herself was named Lalitā. Mahāpadma was happy at this and took the maiden along with her maidservant to his residence, while Vicaksana pretended that both these ladies were alone in the forest. The prince presented her to king Subhodaya. The king consulted his family and then asked Vicaksana to test her nature. The latter suggested that his brother-in-law Vimarśa should do it, and he was allowed a period of a year to accomplish the task. When Vimarśa started to go, his nephew Prakarsa, too, was sent with him due to the latter's insistence to go with his maternal uncle. Both of them went to Campā, Srāvasti, Vinatā, Rājagrha, etc., and roamed for six months but could not find her purity; hence they entered the city named Rājasa-citta, which they found almost empty. They enquired of a soldier named Mithyābhimana why it was empty. He replied that since you are born in the island you should pursue this matter. They replied that since they were just travellers he should not be

Page #352

Sanskrit Sub-story and Subhāṣitas in the Prakrit....
341
offended. Then he disclosd the reason as follows : 'This city is ruled by the king named Rāgakesarī. Once he ordered his minister Visayābhilāsa to manage in such a way that the whole world would accept his orders, and would never think of any other master. The minister promised to accomplish it within a few days, and ordered his five sons named Sparśana, Rasanā, Ghrána, Caksu and Srotra to conquer the world. They implemented his orders in a few days. But after some days the officers of the king got a report that the wicked Santosa had defeated the king's servants and kidnapped some people to the great city named Mukti. The king was all rage and started for war and marched so long as a messenger named Visaya-vyäsanga met him and informed that king Mahamoha has already started from the Karma-pariņāma country with a great army for punishing Santosa. Hence, the king Rāgakesarī should immediately join the forces. At this point the king thought that he has already started, and now the country of Moharāja, too, has been caught in similar situation. Thus, Rāgakesarī, too, mounted, along with Visayābhilāsa and started for the battle. This is why the city is empty.'
Then, Vimarśa asked as to the whereabouts of the army. Mithyābhimāna took them to be spies and replied that the king was in Tamasacitta with his army. They took leave of him and went further. While going, Vimarśa told Prakarsa that they have found at least some purity of Rasanā. For full information they should enquire with Visayābhilāsa. Gradually, they arrived at the Tamasacitta city. When they were entering it, they saw there a smokecomplexioned guard surrounded by a few persons named Dainya, Akranda, Rodana, and others. When they asked as to who was the king, the guard replied that the ruler was named Dvesagajendra, a younger brother of Rāgakesarī. He also has mounted an attack on Santosa, and at that moment his army was camping on the bank of the river Pramattatā in a great forest named Cittavrtti, and has attacked the enemy. Then they reached the said forest and saw the river on the bank at which the army of Moharāja was making much noise. Their eyes then fell upon a big pandal named Cittaviksepa. And, in it they saw king Mahāmoha, surrounded by feudal chieftains, sitting on the throne named Viparyaya, possessing very fearful limbs called Avidyā, repeatedly stroking his mustache full of tufts of hair in the form of bad obstinacy, looking at the three worlds through his two eyes in the form of Rajas and Tamas, having a dark-coloured body comparable

Page #353

Jambu-jyoti
to a multitude of Tamala trees, given to self-possessiveness, and victor of the gods and demons. Having seen him even Vimarśa and Prakarṣa were purturbed and stood at a distance and did not enter the hall. Then Prakarsa asked Vimarśa to describe to him the nature of each of the feudal chieftains. Vimarśa then pointed out to the highly plump queen named Mahāmūḍhatā, to the chief minister Mithyādarśana sitting close to the king on the seat of wrong apprehensions and authorised for all actions to be implemented. capable of shouldering the responsibility of inventing all the heretic and controversial tenets, raising the series of hail-storms of controversies, and observing the whole world through his cruel and crooked eyes, to Rāgakesarī sitting on a throne called Pranaya to the right of the king, possessing the triple form of desire, affection, and love-at-first-sight, master of the city of Rajasa-citta, and having an extremely red complexion. Then, he informed him about his prince named Lobha and princess named Māyā, both of whom absent in the hall, since they might have gone out for conquering the world. Next he drew attention to Dveṣagajendra sitting to the left of the king, to his two absent princes named Vaiśvānara and Śailaraja, to the rear bodyguard Makaradhvaja, to the minister Viṣayābhilāsa the father of Rasanā, to the minister's servants named Hasya, Arati, Bhaya, Jugupsã, etc., to the feudal chiefs named Jñānāvaraṇa, Darśanavaraṇa, Antarāya, Avidya, Āyus, et cetera. At last, he advised Prakarsa to quickly leave the place, go to Vicakṣaṇa, and report to him all that they have seen.'
342
N. M. Kansara
The narration in prose here comes to an end, but the story continues as the metrical account consisting of 119 verses, as follows. Both Vimarśa and Prakarṣa reported to Vicakṣaṇa. He ordered that Rasana should be appointed as a queen and put in charge of speaking truth, with the provision of restraining her from lust, so that she will not back out from her promise. Thus, prince Mahāpadma who was informed about the purity of Rasanā, could not know the true nature of things, and pleased her by enabling her to enjoy wine, meat, etc., and took only her to be the essence of this worthless, terrible, transmigratory world. He would not be satisfied with ample luxuries bestowed by the king, and was under the control of Lobha, the son of Ragakesarī. Lobha inspired greediness in him, and Māyā entered into him. Both of them instigated the prince to kill or capture his father and snatch the kingdom from him. Thereafter, Lobha advised the prince to kill all the sons, lest they may snatch power from him in future like him.

Page #354

Sanskrit Sub-story and Subhāṣitas in the Prakrit....
But a far-sighted minister Taitali informed the queen Manorama about all this, and took away a new-born son and replaced him by his own daughter named Mantrapriyä just after his birth to his place since both the queen and minister's wife gave birth to their children on the same day. Having known that the newly born child was a daughter, the king did not kill her, and his son named Padma began to grow as the son of the minister and gradually mastered all the arts and crafts in due course. The queen Rasană used to fondle her son secretly, but when asked by the king Mahāpadma she spoke the truth to him, Now, once the father king Megharatha broke loose from the captivity and rushed to kill his son, and in the fight both of them killed one another, and roamed in the cycle of transmigration. Then, the Samsāri-jīva was born as a daughter named Lakṣmīvati of Dhanyā in the city of Viśālā. But just after her marriage, she became, by ill-luck, a widow. In view of her consideration about blame and character, she studied numerous works about the Jaina tenets, and consequently the enemies like Krodha and Lobha etc., left her and she became steadfast in Samyaktva, controlled her senses, ever enthusiastic for listening to Jainistic tenets and performing religious vows. If she continues in this way she will, after death, go to the city of Nirvṛti or Anuttara-vimāna.
343
When this report was given to king Moharāja, he stroke his moustache and challenged his feudal chieftains to come forward to capture the widow and make her obedient to him. All of them remained quiet, but there arose. a mystic woman named Vitatha and took up the gauntlet, and she was entrusted with the task. She went to Lakṣmivati and entered her body. As a result, Lakṣmīvati was totally changed in nature, and started leaking political secrets, criticising the conduct, dress, language, environment, etc. of various countries irrelevantly and indulging in gossip. And she forgot the study of the scriptures and all knowledge that she had acquired. Once she talked about an impossible scandal pertaining to king Viśvasena, and it spread among people. Ultimately it reached the ears of the king who traced its source to her, and the enraged king punished her by cutting off her ears and lips, and excommunicated her. While roaming in a forest, she was bitten by a snake and she died, and was born as a being in the Fourth Hell. Then, this same Samsäri-jiva was born as a prince named Narasundara, the son of king Rājasimha. In young age he studied arts and having listened to religious discourse of a well-wishing preceptor, became detached and

Page #355

344
N. M. Kansara
Jambū-jyoti
got initiated in Jaina monastical order. He studied all the Jaina scriptures, and this pleased the preceptor who conferred on him in due course the title of an 'ācārya'. He followed proper conduct, engaged himself in doing good to people, and defeated the debaters. Then, with all his army of religious merit, he went out of his fortress to fight out with king Moharāja to the finish. There was a fierce battle and ultimately the king was vanquished, and he accepted the life of restraint. The army of king Cãritra was afraid and ran away to a mountain fortress named Viveka. The Samsāri-jīva of Moharāja, on the other hand, got lazy in vows of restraint, meditation and vow of silence and neglected religious duties, thinking himself to be a learned man, an authority, a topmost poet, and took pride in having a multitude of disciples, and gradually slipped into luxurious way of living; when the disciples were sitting for listening to his discourse, he would indulge in sleep without worrying about his responsibilities. And, after some time, he lost all his knowledge of the scriptures. After death, he again subjected himself to roaming in the cycle of transmigration getting born in various species of insects, birds, and animals.
King Aparājita was highly astonished by this account of the Samsārijīva, and was curious about his whereabouts and fate at the moment. At this the Muni replied that he himself was the same saṁsāri-jīva. When the king asked him how he reached this state, he informed him that his soul was in due course born as Prince Arindama, the son of the Vidyādhara, king Bhānu in the city of Gaganavallabha. He mastered all lores and arts and out of curiosity went to Mahāvideha country where he happened to listen to a story of Tirthankara at the feet of Bhadrankara. When he came to recall his past births, he undertook a vow and, due to inspiration from his beloved Bhavitavyatā mounted an attack under the leadership of king Caritradharma, and routed Moharāja. Finally, the Muni revealed that all this is his own autobiographical account. And, he assured the king of his
ht future on the path of Kevala-jñana. And the king ruled for long time and prospered. Here the Sanskrit metrical narration also ends.
It is clear from the above story that the poet-author of the PPC has composed this allegorical sub-story in Sanskrit to invest it with an aura of a noble narrative related by an equally noble soul in a matching refined language, perhaps keeping in mind the ancient custom of Sanskrit-Prakrit

Page #356

Sanskrit Sub-story and Subhasitas in the Prakrit....
345
dramas wherein noble character speaks in Sanskrit. Further, he may have resorted to showing off his bilingual poetic skill inasmuch as such a feat was prestigious and popular among the poets and known among the rhetoricians as the Manipravāla style, which is adopted also by our poet's predecessors like Vardhamāna-sūri and Sri-candrasūri. In fact almost all the classical Sanskrit dramas are originally composed in this style, since different characters use different languages like Sanskrit and various Prakrits. Rājasekhara has prescribed the mastery of various languages and skill in depiction of various sentiments as essential for a supreme poet (kavirāja)', and all the classical poets naturally strived to exhibit their poetic competence to reach up to this standard, long before Rājasekhara and subsequent to him. This was because both Sanskrit and Prakrit existed side by side and both generally were popular and understood by people at large and specifically the élite. The Manipravāla style comprises in composing parts of the text of a work in different languages, here Sanskrit and Prakrit, much in the same way as a goldsmith or a jeweller would string together a necklace of coral (pravāla) by interspersing it with gems (mani), to enhance its beauty and charm.
The sub-story presents an allegorical narrative which is a very brief resumé of the story, much in the style, of the famous Upamiti-bhavaprapañcā-kathā of Siddharşi (A. D. 906), in which the author's intention is that the reader should compare himself with the hero Samsāri-jīva (transmigratory soul), and thus as it were be warned of the dangers lurking in transmigration. The idea is to present the vices, virtues, and neutral principles of life in typical characters, which the reader may use as a standard of comparison (upamiti) to judge his own life. The Jaina understanding of life and of the universe of transmigration is presented here and the aim is to teach the way to release (moksa) or bliss (nirvana). It is shown further that the vices produce unhappiness and the virtues the happiness even in transmigration, besides being respectively obstacles and aids to escape from it. The idea of an allegory arises from the personification of the vices, virtues and so on as characters in the story, as for instance, here the Saṁsāri-jīva himself is such an allegorical character, being typical of all such souls?.
Now about the Subhasitas. Devasūri has inserted about 24 Subhasitas, out of which some have been authored by others and merely quoted by him.

Page #357

346
N. M. Kansara
Jambu-jyoti
The Subhāsitas utilised in the PPC are the following ones :
1. Pariksya satkulam vidyāṁ śīlam sauryaṁ surūptāṁ /
vidhir-dadāti nipunaṁ kanyām-iva daridratām //1.410. p. 32.8
This is quoted (utkaṁ ca) in support of the point that good people are generally very poor. (It also occurs in the Sārngadhara-paddhati (405).) 2. Aksi-paksma kadā luptam chindyante'tha śiroruhāḥ /
vardhamānātmanām eva prasanginyo vipattayah // 1.672, p. 53.
This confirms the idea that only great men normally are subject to calamities.
3. Yadi bhavati dhanena dhani ksititala-nihitena bhoga-rahitena/ vasmād vayam api dhaninah tisthati nah kāñcano Meruh //
1.1038, p. 81.
This verse shows the uselessness of merely accumulating wealth and not using for even one's own comforts. It occurs in the Pañcatantram (1.192).
4. Rajyam vă vanavāso vā dhanam vä nidhanam tathā /
jānāhi janakādhīnam sarvasatputra-cestitam //1.1038, p. 82.
This verse is quoted in connection with the excommunication of Prince Samarasimha by his father king Purusacandra, for the former's generous nature.
5. Sakhyā buddhyā na yat sādhyam sahasā sāhasena ca / tat syād vacanamātrena kāryaṁ punyavātaṁ dhruvam//
1.1053, p. 83. This is quoted with reference to the incident of verbal help rendered by prince Samarasimha to alchemists to accomplish their task of transforming metals like copper into gold.
6. Rajye säram vasudhā vasudhayāṁ puram pure saudham /
saudhe talpam talpe varāngana'nanga-sarvasvam //1.1136, p. 89.
This is quoted in support of the proposal of princess Rayanamañjarī to marry with the prince Samarasimha. It occurs in the Kävyālamkāra of Rudrata (7.97) and has been quoted by Mammata also in his Kāvyaprakāśa (10,37) as an illustration of the sāra figure of speech.

Page #358

Sanskrit Sub-story and Subhāṣitas in the Prakrit....
7. Sattvānāṁ caritam citram vicitrā karmaṇāṁ gatiḥ/ nārī-purusa-toyānāṁ śruyate c-antaram mahat //
1.1155(1154?) p. 90.
This verse has not been quoted as somebody else's verse, as it is not introduced by the words 'uktam ca', but rather as verse (siloga) uttered by a bard.
8. Bhava-sudhir-manuṣyasya vijñeyā sarva-vastuṣu/
anyatha" lingyate kāntā bhāven duhita 'nyathā //1.1284, p.100.
This is quoted by way of emphasising the importance of attitude and different results accruing from the same action performed with different attitudes.
9. Yat sarva-viṣayā-kārkṣodbhavaṁ sukhaṁ präpyate sarāgeṇa / tad-ananta-koti-gunitaṁ mudhaiva labhate vītarāgaḥ //
1.9(1784 ?) p. 162.
347
This is quoted to support the superiority of detachment to attachment in point of obtaining the amount of happiness, here or hereafter.
10. Rātrau jānur divā bhānuḥ kṛśānuḥ sandhyayor dvayoḥ/
loke nītam iti śītam jānubhānukṛśānubhiḥ //2.327, p. 190.
This verse is quoted in the context of describing the condition of Padmaprabha after he left home and lived like a poor man. It occurs in the Bhojaprabandha (233), with the reading 'Paśya śītam mayā nitam' in the third quarter.
11. Punar-api sahaniyo duḥkha-pātas tavāyaṁ na hi bhavati vināśaḥ karmaṇāṁ sañcitānām/ Iti saha ganayitvā yad yadāyati samyak sad-asad iti viveko 'nyatra bhūyaḥ kutas te //
2.665, pp. 216-217.
This verse is quoted to emphasise that one who shoulders the responsibility of kingship has to incur many sins and has to suffer accordingly.
12. Yadicched vipulām prītim tṛīņi tatra na kārayet / vivādaṁ artha-samrambhaṁ parokṣe dāra-darśanam //

3.62, p. 226.

Page #359

348
N. M. Kansara
Jambū-jyoti
This is quoted in the context of an incident of a quarrel that arose among friends.
13. Na viśvase grāma-kūtasya jivi(? va)to 'pi mệtasya vā /
eka-grdhrāparādhena sarve grdhrāḥ nipātitāḥ //3.80, p. 227.
This is quoted as the essence of an animal-folklore of vultures, narrated in connection with not putting one's trust in statements that are contrary to the tenets of religious duties, the folklore runs from Gāthās 3.70-79.
14. Patitam vismstań nastañ sthitam sthāpitam-āhitam / adatta nādadīta svaṁ parakiyam kvacit sudhih //
3.745, p. 279. This verse is cited in connection with the remark expressing repentance for entertaining greediness for the lost wealth.
15. Kallolād api budbudād api calad-vidyud-vilāsād api
jimutād api marutād api tarat-tärksyorddhva-pakṣād api Citram citram ayam calā tribhuvane kim srir-na te semukhi naivaṁ kim khala-sangatir na na nanu strī-jātir asyai namah //
3.1049, p. 303. This verse is quoted in connection with a statement that even gods, who know all the arts amd crafts, fail to know even the least about the conduct or character of woman-folk.
16. ślok-ārddhen-aiva tad vaksye yad-uktas grantha-koţibhiḥ / trsnā ca samparityaktā prāptam ca paramaṁ padam //
3.1596, p. 346.
This verse is cited for stressing the supreme importance of uprooting the creeper of avidity. It is modelled on, and hence reminiscent of, the famous verse of Sankarācārya the second half of which runs as 'Brahma satyam jagan-mithyā jīvo brahm-aiva nāparah'.
17 Samprāpyam mokşa-saukhyaṁ
yatibhir-asilatā-vāsa-tulyais tapobhir matvaivaṁ visva-vettā nami-vinamibhujā-danda-nistrimśa-yaştau / Śanke sankrānta-murtis-carati gurutapo yaḥ svayam moksa-hetum

Page #360

Sanskrit Sub-story and Subhasitas in the Prakrit....
349
pratyūha-vyūha-nāśaṁ diśatu (sa) bhagavān ādimas- tirtha-nāthah // 3.1756-57 (3.1756 ?), p. 358.
This verse is a prayer and it is introduced with the words 'Tathā hi'. It seems to be the composition by the author himself, resorting to Sanskrit in view of the noble occasion and purpose.
18. Bhuyo yojana-bhima-durgama-tamaṁ nirgamya yaḥ prāntaram
pratyaksi-kurute jagat-traya-patiṁ viśva-priyam bhāvukaḥ / Śrīman-Nābhi-narendra-gotra-tilakam devam dhruvaṁ vīksite moksas tena tu (sam-) vyatītpa (? tya) rabhasā samsāra
kaksāntaram // 3.1758-59 (1757?), p. 358.
This is also a prayer in continuation with the previous verse, and clearly authored by the poet himself.
19. Huyate na tapyate na diyate vā na kiñcana /
aho amülya-kriteyam sāmya-mātrena nirvrtih // 4.491, p. 426. This verse is quoted in support of the statement that ‘siddhi' is obtained only by equanimity (samabhāva), even without performing meditation, charity, yoga, or austerity.
20. Upadhyāyād daśācaryā ācāryāņām śataṁ pitä /
sahasram tu pitur-mātā gauravenātiricyate // 4.491, p. 429.
This is quoted to justify the honour given to his mother by a son. This verse occurs in the Manusmrti (2.145) with a slight variation, namely 'upādhyāyān' and 'pitrn'..
21. Bījina eva hi bijam ksetram bhavatiha tadvatām eva /
durlalitaṁ ahināthe nirnayam enam svayam cakre // 4.547, p. 430.
This verse is but almost a Sanskrit version of a previous similar gāthā in which the author says : 'Loë pasiddhañ eyam biyam nanu hoï biyavastassa / khittas tu khettiyassa itha vi ittham viciṁteha // (4.542).
22. Śreyo visam upabhoktum ksamam bhave krīditum hutāśena /
samsārabandhana-gatair na tu pramādah ksamah kartum //
23. Tasyām-eva hi jātau naram upahanyäd visaṁ hutāšo vā /
asevitah pramado hanyāj janmāntara-satāni // 4.731-732, p. 445.

Page #361

350
N. M. Kansara
Jambu-jyoti
These two verses are quoted in support of the statement to the effect that one should not be unwary in one's efforts on the path of liberation.
24. Dāne tapasi śaurye ca vijñāne vinaye naye /
vismayo na hi kartavyo bahu-ratnā vasundharā // 4.787, p. 449.
This is quoted to emphasize that even though one may be possessed of fortitude, bravery, cleverness, and good characteristics, one should not be unduly proud of it. This verse occurs in the Sārngadhara-paddhati (1477).
25. Yat paraloka-viruddhaṁ yal-lajjākaram-ihaiva jana-madhye / antyāvasthāyam-api tad-akaranīyam na karaniyam //
4.1021, p. 468.
This is quoted in connection with a mental reservation on the part of a prince when a kāpālika asks him to kill a maiden.
26. Apāya-sata-labdha-sya prānebhyo'pi gariyasah /
Gatir-ekaiva vitta-sya dānam-anyā vipattayah //
27. Grāsadd-ardham-api grāsam-arthibhyaḥ kim na dīyate / icchānurūpo vibhavah kada kasya bhavisyati //
4.1059-1060, p. 471.
These two verses are quoted in support of the Jaina vow of Atithisamvibhāga or sharing the food with a guest or supplicant mendicant. Out of these two verses, the first is a composition of the famous Bhartrhari' with a slight variation, namely, 'Ayäsa-' at the start of the quarter, while the second verse occurs in the Pañcatantra (2.73).
28. Vayam bālye dimbhāms-taruņimani yūnaḥ parinatāv
apicchāmo vrddhān parinaya-vidhau naḥ sthitir iyam / Tvayā 'rabdhaṁ janma ksapayitum amārgena vidhină na me gotre putri kvacid api sati-lāñchanaṁ abhūt //
This is quoted in connection with the incident of a maiden who has retained the memory of her beloved of the previous birth and consequently does not take interest in any young man in this birth; it is meant to denigrate the ideal of marital fidelity and promote the practice of free-love. This verse occurs in the Sārngadhara-paddhati (3761), with slight variation, namely, -bālān' for 'dimbhān’in the first quarter, and 'anenaikapatinā' for 'amārgena vidhinā' in the third quarter.

Page #362

Sanskrit Sub-story and Subhāṣitas in the Prakrit....
351
29. Asraddheyam na vaktavyan pratyaksam yadi drsyate /
tathā vānara-sangītam tathā tarati sa silā // 4.1193, p. 481.
This is quoted to emphasize that one should not talk about impossible matters to elders, even though one might have seen them with their own eyes. This verse has been preserved in the Subhāṣita-ratna-bhāņdāgāra (p. 162, no. 416) with some variations, namely, 'Asambhavyam'at the beginning of the first quarter,'api for'yadi' in the second quarter, and silā tarati pāniyam'and'gitam gāyati vānarah' with the exchange of the third and the fourth quarters.
30. Jivantyām api yady upaiti dayito manye kalankas tadā
tasmin snigdha-jane viyogini katham prāṇān nidadhyām aham / Mrtyus-cen na hi tat-samāgama-sukham tasyāpi mrtyur-dhruvam kastam tad-viraho vikalpa-bahulam dolāyate me manah //
4.1211, p. 483.
This is quoted by way of a reflection by Anangasenā when her companions try to lure her to a life of a free-lancer.
31. Hasati hasati svaminy-uccai rudaty-atiroditi
krta-parikaraṁ svedodvāri pradhāvati dhāvati / Guna-samuditam dosopetam pranindati nindati dhana-lava-parikrītam jantum pranrtyati nrtyati //
4.1275, p. 488. This is quoted to condemn those who have made their selves subservient to their masters for the sake of a few bucks.
32. Ārādhya bhūpatim-avāpya tato dhanāni
bhoksyāmahe kila vayam satataṁ sukhāni / Ity āśayā bata vimohita-mānasānām kālah prayāti maranāvadhir-eva pumsām // 4.1277, p. 488.
This is quoted in connection with the reflection of a son who finds his father suffering even after serving a king for a long time. This verse occurs in the Subhasitāvali (3258) of Vallabhadeva, with some variations, namely, 'bhuñjāmahe' for 'bhoksyāmahe' and 'vayam iha' for 'kila vayam' in the second quarter, and 'jagama' for 'prayāti' in the last one. 33. Kartuṁ na prakațāṁ sphuran-nava-nava-praudhārtha-drstim mayā
no tattvāni nivestum atra bhagavat-siddhānta-siddhāni vā /

Page #363

352
N. M. Kansara
Jambū-jyoti
Naiva khyāpayituí vyadhāyi caritam rītim vidarbhodbhavām bhaktim kintu punah punar na gaditam sri-padma-laksma
prabhoh // 4.1399, p. 498. This verse is meant to express the author's intention behind undertaking the composition of this Carita-mahākävya, and is a part of the Prasasti composed in Prakrit Gāthās.
34. Tarkān adhitya devendra-guroh siddhāntam-āditah /
Śri-Haribhadrasūribhyas-caritaṁ nirmame mayā // 4.1401.
This verse is also a sort of acknowledgement about his teachers by the author, and forms a part of the Prakrit Prasasti, which is not composed separately, but rather as a part of the Fourth Prastāva, from Gāthās 1378 to the last one, i.e. 1403. It is noteworthy that this fashion of incorporating Sanskrit Subhasitas was popular with our author's predecessors like Vardhamānasūri and Candrasūri alsolo. And, further, it is noteworthy that the poet seems to have given the colophones, marking the intervening substories, in Sanskrit, as for instance 'Iti dāna-dharme Haṁsapāla-kathānakam' (p. 35), 'Iti tapasi Rohinīkathā samāptā' (p. 99), 'Ity-antaranga-kathā samāptā’ (p. 162), 'Iti śrī-Padmaprabha-caritam samāptam' (p. 499), etc. At the end of the work, the final Prasasti by the Samgha and the scribe is also in Sanskrit.
Annotations : 1. Siri Devasūri's Paumappahasāmi Cariyam (PPC), L.D. Institute of Indology,
Ahmedabad 1995 (L.D. Series 116), Ed. Rupendrakumar-Pagariya, Prastāvanā (Hindi), p. 25. Śri-Haribhadrasūribhyas-caritam nirmame mayā // Balacando ... (4.1385) ... Gunabhaddasūri guruno ... (4.1386) ... Savānaṁdaguru ... (4.1387) cariyam siri-Pāsāsāmissa ... (4.1388)..siri-Dhammaghosapahune .. (4.1389) ... Tappayapayatthiehiṁ kaihim siri-Devasūri-nāmehim / Paumappahassa pahuno cariyam raiyam kayacchariyaṁ // 4.1391; 4.1401 : Tarkan adhitya Devendraguroh
siddhāntam aditah/ 2. Ibid., 4.1393 : ...veri-Bhima-bhīmassa / Calukka-vamsa-munino niravajje rajja
samayammi // 3. Ibid., 4.1392 : Veya-sara-sūra-paramiya (1254) varise niva-Vikkamassa varisão/
4.1394 : Siri-Vaddhamāna-nayare thiena Pajjunna-setthi-vasahihë/ Siri

Page #364

Sanskrit Sub-story and Subhāşitas in the Prakrit....
353
Paumappaha-cariyam padipunnam iņam mae vihiyam //; Colophon - Krtir iyam śrī-jālihara-gaccha-mamdana-śri-dharmmaghosasūri-sisyasridevasūrinām iti
bhadraṁ/ Śrth // 4. (PPC), the editor's Prastāvanā in Hindi; ibid., p. 499. 5. PPC, p. 136: Atha dharma-deśanā-paryanta-prastāve sādaram Aparājitamahārajas
tam mahämunim aprākṣīt ../ 6. Rajasekhara - Kävya-mimāṁsā, Ed. Kedarnath Sharma Sarasvat, Bihar Rashtra
Bhasha Parishad, Patna 1954, p. 48: Yas tu tatra tatra bhāṣā-visese tesu tesu
prabandhesu tasmins-tasmins-ca rase svatantrah sa kavirājah / 7. A. K. Warder, Indian Kavya Literature, Vol. V, Motilal Banarasidass, Delhi 1988,
pp. 713-714. 8. The page numbers of PPC here and hereafter refer to the above-noted 'Siri Devasūri's
Paumappahasāmi Cariyam' Ed. Rupendrakumara Pagariya, Ahmedabad 1995. 9. D. D. Kosambi, Bhartrhari-subhāsita-samgraha, Singhi Jaina Series, No. 400
Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, Mumbai 1948. 10. Vardhamānasūri's Jugār-jiņiṁda-cariyam, Ed. Pt. Rupendrakumar Pagariya, L. D.
series Ahmedabad 1987, pp. 2, 35, 52, 58, 59, 65, 71, 72, etc.; also Śrī-candrasūri's Siri Muņimda-suvvaya-caryam, Ed. Pt. Rupenrakumar Pagariya, L. D. series Ahmedabad 1989, pp. 173, 174, 175, 323, 324, 331, 332, etc.
OOD

Page #365

1.0
1.1
Significance of New Inscriptions from Koppala, Karnataka
Hampa Nagarajaiah

PREAMBLE
Koppala, in the newly formed district bearing its name in the State of Karnataka, is an ancient Jaina centre and in importance next only to Śravanabelgola, from the late centuries of B. C. Reputed as 'Adi-tirtha' and 'Mahā-tirtha,' one of the holiest pilgrimage places, it continued to be a centre of eminence for almost 1500 years. Kopaṇa, Kopaṇādri, Kopaṇagiri, Kupaṇācala, and Kopaṇatīrtha are the variant applications that figure in the inscriptions.
"Inscriptions hailing from the Mysore state speak of the usually large number of Jaina temples, which was a characteristic feature of this holy place. Reminiscence of this past phenomenon is still preserved in a local saying which avers that the town contained 772 Jaina temples and was regarded by the Jaina community as sacred as Kāśi-Kṣetra or Banares, the famous holy place of the Hindus." [P. B. Desai 1957; 203; also cf. B. A. Saletore 1938 190; and C. Krishnamacharlu. 1935: 14; N. B. Sastry: 1954 :]
1.1.1. Out of the hundreds of Jinālayas that traditionally existed at Koppala, only the following names, each bearing a cognomen, are reported in the inscriptions: Arasiya-basadi (temple of the queen), KuśaJinālaya, Candranatha-basadi, Jayadhira-Jinälaya, Timabbarasiyabasadi, Tīrthada-basadi, Daṇṇāyaka-basadi, Nāgadevana-basadi, Neminatha-Jinālaya, Puspadanta-Jinālaya, śāntinātha-basadi, and Sātaladevīya-basadi. ('Basadi' is the Kannada form of the Sanskrit 'vasati', meaning a Jinālaya. Incidentally, Jayadhīra-Jinālaya was

Page #366

Significance of New Inscriptions from Koppaļa, Karnataka
355
constructed by the famous general Sankara-ganda-dandanāyaka in A. D. 960. [Desai, : 1957 : 372; Hampa. Nagarajaiah : 1998 A : 165]).
1.1.2. "With its caverns inhabited by śramanas and the two huge rocky
hillocks in close proximity as an abode of peace and penance, Koppala attracted monks and nuns. Particularly, the Nirgrantha friars had always a preference for such secluded places and obviously Koppala became a major Jaina resort, a sacred hillock of excellences. Koppaļa was completely overrun by Jainism. Besides, on account of its geographical position Kopana seems to have been placed in very congenial circumstances, especially political, that contributed to its rapid growth as a Mahā-tīrtha." [Desai : 1957 : 157]
1.2
Because Koppala was a preëminent place and a treasure-house of Jaina art, sculpture, architecture, and literature, it has, through the ages, produced an immense wealth of significant archaeological and art historical material. Hundreds of Jaina shrines, monasteries, feeding houses (satras), friaries [muni-nivāsas) in this principal town, ranging in date between the seventh and the 16th century, attracted men and women votaries. "We note that in the seventh century A. D. Kopana was essentially a Jaina tīrtha. Epigraphic evidence prove this. In the Halageri inscription of the western Chalukya king Vijayaditya [A. D. 696-733] mention is made of this great Jaina sanctuary." [Saletore 192]
1.3
Though Koppala was reckoned as the foremost and supremely sacred tirtha, a holy resort of Jaina order, solid and valid proof to establish it as an historical truth was lacking. Koppala has not yet been properly surveyed and examined with extensive and intensive field work, the researches conducted since the days of B. L. Rice are scanty and meagre.
NEW MATERIAL DISCOVERED
2.0
In the year 1992, unprecedented clouds burst occurred at several parts of the Karnataka State in general and at Koppala in particular. As a result, a portion of the old-Fort at Koppala collapsed. Surprisingly enough, a hoard of inscriptions on slabs and pillars,

Page #367

356
Hampa Nagarajaiah
Jambu-jyoti
2.1
about 70 in number, fell out of the Fort-Wall. Curiously, all of these inscriptions, without a single exception, are Jaina epigraphs, that too nisidhikās, some of which throw fresh light on the historical facts of Koppaļa as a Jaina centre. Coming to know about this fortunate happening, I visited the site, took estampages of all these newly exposed epigraphs, deciphered and read the content of text, and next edited all the inscriptions and published. (Nagarajaiah, Hampa : 1998-A.). I next studied these inscriptions in the context of the known southern Nirgrantha tradition and other available contemporaneous supporting evidence before arriving at the conclusions.
2.2
2.2.1.
The epigraphs under discussion abundantly speak for the powerful and pervasive influence wielded by Jainism. The present discovery adds fresh material, augmenting the mass of the already known information and thus must help revise some of the supposedly wellestablished facts, positions, and postulates. These inscriptions endorse that Koppala was a place of sanctity par excellence, informatively reporting about the monks and mendicants, nuns, and lay disciples of various ascetical orders who continually conducted their religious sessions and who ceremoniously ended their life by sanyasana i.e. sallekhanā. These inscribed memorial columns have a special place in the ethos of Jaina culture and tradition, and are an abiding element vital to the religious history of Jainism in southern India, more precisely epitomizing the quintessence of syādvāda. Their impressiveness, even in ruins, bear testimony to the past glory of Jainism in Karnataka. With the availability of this new material, Koppala can now be said to possess many more post-mortem memorial stones (niśidhikās] giving details of the purpose for which they were set up; some of these bear a caityalaya motif. They also reveal certain significant socio-historical and cultural issues.
CHRONOLOGICAL SPAN These new epigraphs belong to different periods, covering a fairly wide range of five centuries, from the ninth to the 13th to be precise. And they beyond doubt prove that Koppala served for ten centuries
3.0

Page #368

Significance of New Inscriptions from Koppala, Karnataka
357
as one of the primary centres of disseminating Jaina teaching of ahiṁsā, non-injury.
RELIGION
4.0
As already mentioned in para 2. 0., all the new records without exception belong to Jainism, and all of them are nisidhi memorials. There are only a few casual references to any particular primordial works of canonical nature, but the apostles and pontiffs of the Jaina church are remembered and a number of friars and preceptors are mentioned. Koppal itself was a big friary-centre for the Jainas and also was a seat of the Yāpanīya sect. The present Koppala hoard also provides reliable and useful information about some of the friars and cohorts of the Yăpaniya ecclesiastical institution. Indeed, much new material is available for reconstructing the hagiography of some Jaina ācāryas which praise the virtues of sterner monastic order. Asceticism was held in high esteem, its votaries firmly believed in the cycle of births and rebirths, and the inexhorable operation of karma in successive births.
5.0
POLITICAL HISTORY Main purport of these new epigraphs is not to deal with the political affairs. Of course, the present collection does afford casual references to some of the royalties and noble men of those centuries in Karnataka, among them the Gangas being the main. Though the kings traditionally were duty bound to support all religions, their active patronage of a particular sect can also be clearly perceived. Although a pro-Jaina dynasty, the Western Gangas evinced equal respect for other religious sects. Under their protection and patronage, Jainism flourished without let or hindrance. Gangas declared their devotion to Jainism from the beginning, taking as they did the rôle of a saviour. As a consequence, it turned out to be the period of Jaina ascendancy and soon it became one of the few dominant creeds in Karnataka in all walks of life. Thus Gangas gave a signal contribution to the prevalence of Jainism.
5.1
5.1.1. Historians, while discussing the controversy regarding
the authenticity of some of the Ganga copper plates, have by and

Page #369

358
Hampa Nagarajaiah
Jambu-jyoti
5.2
large accepted that most of them are geniune records. Besides a large number of copper plates charters, there are some stone epigraphs found at different places (Ramesh, K. V. (Ed): 1984). Albeit, nowhere, until the present discovery, the number of Ganga inscriptions exceed a score and more. A close perusal of the present epigraphical references clearly establish, in fact substantiate and corroborate, the credibility of the Jaina oriented statements in early copper plates; hence, much weight will be attached to the historical information of these charters. A large number of mendicants and their lay followers constituted a significant force at Koppala. Jainas had an easy access to the machinery of political power. Koppala was echoing the voice of samavasarana, assembly of listners to the Jina's sermon. Banners of ahimsā were fluttering atop temples and friaries. Integration of lay followers (upāsakas] of all ranks into the religious life is very clearly present in the nisidhi inscriptions now discovered.
LITERATURE 6.1. The tenth and 11th centuries were an epoch-making period, of
staunch advocates of anekāntamata, in all walks of life including political, social, religious, and cultural sphere. A cursory glance at the present collection of the new charters is enough to substantiate
this statement. 6.1.1. Besides, the period between the tenth and the 12th century is
characterised by intensive literary activity. Most of the major Kannada campu epics and other classics embodying the lives of the salākāpuruşas were composed during this period. It is under the stimulus of Jainism that remarkable advances were registered in art and architecture, sculpture and painting. The religious impulse freely flowed into the numerous branches of knowledge which
generated a powerful cultural impact. 6.2. Most of these newly discovered inscriptions at Koppla are not lengthy
records; on an average, the number of lines in each inscription is around 25. Though the language of most of the epigraphs is Kannada, the regional language of Karnataka, there also are some inscriptions in Sanskrit. These epigraphs look heterogeneous from the point of

Page #370

Significance of New Inscriptions from Koppaļa, Karnataka
359
6.3.
view of style; yet there is a common, recognized, standard pattern as far as the subject matter is concerned; the language and the style are cast in an archaic mould which also include a few verses. Some of the inscriptions vouchsafe the poetic genius of those who composed them, who indeed had a sound knowledge of the Jaina tradition and the skills at handling prosody. Many of these inscriptions contain Jaina invocatory verses, but none of these show any imprecatory phrases, because these are all nisidhi memorials. Medieval Jainism in Karnataka saw stormy centuries. The alien Colas and the local Saivaites demolished Jinālayas and Jaina monasteries, and ransacked their treasures. Therefore, the strong walls of the Nirgrantha fort were hit hard. With all this devastation, Jainism had an innate strength to sustain and did manage to survive and thrive at other centres. What remains today in and around Koppala are the scattered ruins which are like a picture book for recalling the significant events of the past history, of the syādvāda consistency in ancient Karnataka.
7.0
7.1.
It is somewhat difficult to determine the exact date of the destruction of Jaina temples and the nisidhi columns at Koppala. It is equally difficult to state whether the destruction was the result of a single catastrophe or due to a series of incidents. But it is neither the callousness nor the handiwork of art-robbers that is responsible for the disappearance and physical ruin of the significant irreplaceable art-historical evidence. The only reliable hint for the dilapidation and final annihilation of the Jaina monuments is from the statement made in a Persian inscription [AREP 1963-64. No. 173. 1779 C. E), which states that the main fort at Koppala was constructed in the shape of a battery in the European fashion along with two gateways; one more epigraph, in a chronogram recording the date of construction of a burj [bastion) in the year 1785-86 C. E (ibid., No. 174], also endorses it.
7.2
These two records help surmise that a complete or final destruction of the then existing Jaina monuments, including the present postmortem memorial stones, took place during the last two decades of

Page #371

360
Hampa Nagarajaiah
Jambu-jyoti
the 18th century. Obviously, the fort-builders started their operations of constructing the bastion with the material pilfered from the Jaina temples. Moreover, the carelessness on the part of the masons involved in the construction was to such an extent that they recklessly cut and damaged these archaeological documents of sterling significance.
CONTENTS
8.0
8.1
I shall now take a bird's eye view of the contents of the new epigraphs; the number in the brackets indicate the number of the concerned inscription in the printed text; e. g. K. 1. = Koppala No. 1. [K. 1] Nayanandi Bhattāraka of Kundakunda-anvaya, Desiga-gana, had two lay disciples, Cinnakabbe and her son Dilīpa (?), dandanāyaka (general), who had a number of titles; satya-saucasampannam, kali-kala-Karnan, äśrita-kalpavrksam, patikāryadakşam, piridittu-marevam, naya-mummerevan, pati-hitāñjaneyam, gunada-bedangam, niti-parāyanam, gadiyankamallam, gandapracandam, kirtige-nallam, and paricchedi-gandan. He was a bee at the lotus feet of Jina the Conquerer and an ocean of virtues : and he worshipped the three jewels of Jaina faith. He died in Saka 953 [1032 C. E) at Koppala by the religious rite of Vira-sanyasana-vidhāna (ritual death by fasting and while in meditation). This inscription belongs to the period of the Kalyāna Cālukya king Jagadekamalla-Jayasimha (1016-42].
8.1.1. An undated and a fragmentary inscription [K. 61] states that Dorayya
was an ardent worshipper of Jinendra, the destroyer of all sins, and a lay disciple of Śrīdhara-deva. Dorayya was also the father of Bonthādevi and father-in-law of Jayasimha-deva, an ornament of the emperors (cakreśvara-abharanam]. It is obvious that the Cālukya king Jagadekamalla Jayasimhadeva had married Bonthā-devī; this is the only inscription giving this information not earlier known. Dorayya mentioned elsewhere (MAR. 1915. No. 19. 1050; EC. V.
Hassan. 185) is different from this Dorayya. 8.2. [K.2) In the year Śaka 913 [990. C. E.], a nun by name Jakkiyabbe
kanti and another nun [whose name is lost), both disciples of

Page #372

Significance of New Inscriptions from Koppala, Karnataka
8.3.
8.4.
8.5.
a.
b.
C.
361
Nemicandra-Bhaṭāra of Balātkāra-gaṇa, attained sanyasanamarana. Revabbe, respected by the three worlds, erected a nisidhi
stone.
[K.3] Gandavimukta-ācārya of Balagāra (Balātkāra-gana), a profound scholar, gained the abode of mokṣa-lakṣmi (emancipation from the cycle of births and deaths) in the year Śaka 899 (977 C. E). His lotus feet had the dust of the crown of māṇḍalikas; his character was so transparent that he was praised by the world at large.
This ācārya is identical with the Gandavimukta-deva mentioned in the later inscriptions of Gavarwad [E1. XV. 23. 1071-72. C. E], Mugud [S11. XI-i. 78. 1045 C. E] and of Bodan [ARIE 1961-62. B-113. 1041 C. E].
[K. 4] Devanandi-Bhaṭāra, a disciple of Vimalacandra-Bhaṭāra of Krāṇūr-gaṇa, attained the world of gods in the year Śaka 926 (1004. C. E); Deyakabbe-kanti, a nun in obeisance to her teacher, erected this post-mortem memorial column.
Krāṇur-gana is one of the prominent cohorts (ganas) of friars and nuns of the Yapanīya-sangha; Kānūr, Kaṇḍūr, Käḍur are the other variants for that gaṇa. [Nagarajaiah : 1997 -B- : 234-48].
[K. 5] This epitaph records the death of three different persons on three different dates :
In the Śaka year 946 (1024 C. E), Revasetti of Kellengere achieved ratnatrayas, holy death, the day synchronising with the auspicious day of the parinirvāṇa-mahākalyāṇa, one of the five sacred events in the life of a Tirthankara : Parinirvāṇa is the final emancipation of an enlightened being followed immediately by salvation (mokṣa). Madurantaka-setti, the son-in-law of Nolambasetti, died in meditation in the year 1023 C. E. He was a repository of humility, birth place of pleasentness, a heap of religious merit, an asylum of knowledge, the first in the path of Manu.

Nolamba-setti was the son of Revasetti, a bee at the lotus feet of Nemicandra-Siddhantadeva. He was courteous, mild, just, liberal, worthy of merits, and of impeccable character. At the time of his

Page #373

362
Hampa Nagarajaiah
Jambû-jyoti
death he went to the Jinagrha (Jaina temple), and at the feet of his revered teachers attained the holy death in the year 1039 C. E.
8.5.1. It is important to note that Revasetti voluntarily went to the caityagrha
six months prior to his death, practiced the vow of gradual suspension of aliment unto death, listening to the reading of the Arādhanā text, and thus carried out the ritual prescription under the supervision of his teachers. With the consecrated act of sallekhanā, renunciation of all profane possessions and associations, Revasetti was considered a mahāpurusa, a noble-minded eminent person. He was a disciple of Abhayanandi-panditadeva who is identical with Abhayanandipandita mentioned in SB inscriptions (EC. 11 (R) 51 (48), 156 (127) and 173 (140) ).(It is astonishing how a good number of lay-followers also, indeed courageously and comprehendingly undertook the vow of Sanyasta-dharma for attaining salvation.)
8.6.
Abhayanandi-pandita was one of the foremost Jaina mendicants in the Gangavādi 96000 region (K. 9). He was a disciple of Traikālyayogi and a grand disciple of Gollācārya (EC. II (R) 51 (48) IIth cent. C. E. P. 17; ibid., 156 (127). p. 94; ibid., 173 (140) P. 119]. All these pontiffs accomplished the three-jewels by observing the ritual of meditation and fasting unto death at Koppala.
9.1.
[K. 6 and K. 27] These two inscriptions of Koppala vividly describe Kundanarasi alias Kundana-somidevi, elder daughter of Būtugapermādi II (938-61 C. E). Koppala inscription No. 6 is undated and fragmentary but on palaeographic grounds it can be assigned to the end of the tenth century. Kundanarasi, a caladankagärti, by totally renouncing food and drink, patiently awaiting her inevitable end, achieved the three-jewels and entered the world of gods. This is the summary of the four lines traceable in the above nisidhi.
9.1.1. Another inscription (K. 27) is dated Śaka year 929 (1007 C. E), but
that is the year of the death of Cangala-devi alias Cangambe who was a contemporary of Kundana-somidevi. As recorded in the epitaph, both of them died by undertaking sallekhanā rite and were renowned personages during the second half of tenth century. Maladhārideva was the teacher, Rāya was the master, Mācana was the son, the best religion of the Lord Jina the Victor was the religion

Page #374

Significance of New Inscriptions from Koppala, Karnataka
363
consciously chosen by Cangambe. She was regularly distributing charities at will. Her name indeed was justified, her birth was accomplished. Considering that there are no takers in the heaven, she had the refined taste of charitable disposition. By folding both the lotus-like hands, she went to the higher world. With the passing away of the virtuous women like Kundana-somidevi and Cangaladevi, who were even famous with the aerial nymphs dwelling in the sky, the very words of charity and righteousness also disappeared from the face of earth.
9.1.2. Kundasāmi (Kundana-somi, Kundanarasi) a charming lady of beauty
and benevolence, daughter of Būtuga II (E1. XXXVI. PP. 97-110; MAR 1921 PP. 8-16; EC. VIII (BLR) Nagara 35), younger sister of Maruladeva II (MAR 1921, Kudlūr plates; E1. XXVII], elder sister of Mārasimhadeva II (EC. IV (R), 138.965. CE SII. XI. 42/43 970. CE] and wife of Rājāditya is introduced at length in the Kukknūr copper plates (AREP 1969-70. Nos. 4-5, 968-69 C. E; IWG; 1984 : No. 159, p. 504]. A beautiful bronze image of Mānikya-Jina with an inscription on its back, of about 970 C. E, gifted by her to some temple, was discovered in a coffee estate of Crawford saheba, is preserved in the Jaina Matha-temple at ŚB [EC. IX (R) Sakaleśpur 31 (V Manjrābād 67) 10C. C. E. Bāllu (Hassan Dt/Sakaleśpur Tk) P. 519]. It is one of the rare and early (Jaina) metal images in Karnataka. With the discovery of these two new inscriptions, now a fuller biographical sketch of Kundana-somidevi, from cradle to grave, is available.
9.2.
[K. 12] Bāsa-bhūpati, the son of Caladanka-Ganga-mahipa (Būtuga II), had the impeccable fame equal to that of Kupanācala (Koppala). His wife was Kāvanabbarasi. Their daughter Rambaladevi alias Rambhā a gem of a woman, a beautiful nymph, had the charm of a plaintain tree. Rambhā was a goddess of learning and her benevolence knew no bounds.
There is a pun in the use of this name Rambhā, which was also the name of an apsaras, consort of Nalakübera, and she was considered the most beautiful celestial lady in the paradise of Indra.

Page #375

364
Hampa Nagarajaiah
Jambū-jyoti
9.2.1. Rambaladevi's husband, Bīrala-deva, a prince of the illustrious
Cālukya-vamsa, a head-jewel of kings and a submarine (fire) in the sea of enemies. Rambaladevi was the disciple of the preceptor Śrī Candra-Bhattāraka. She observed the vow of fasting unto death; while meditating the holy feet of the spiritual victor (Jina); like the fragrance of the flower, she departed from this mundane world only to be born as the best of celestial beings.
9.2.2. This inscription of poetic excellence is of historical importance.
The name of Bāsa, as a son of Būtuga (II) is not mentioned in any inscription except this one. Of course, one of the inscriptions mentions the name of Vāsava as the last son of Būtuga II [EC. VII (BLR) Nagara 35. 1077 C. E.). This Vāsava's wife's name is mentioned as Kancaladevi; Vāsava and Kañcaladevi had two sons, Rakkasaganga (=Govindaradeva) and Arumuļideva. It is quite possible that Bāsa and Vāsava are one and the same person; but, whether Kancaladevi and Kāvanabbarasi stand for one and the same lady or not, is still a problem which requires more corroborative evidence to decide.
[Nagarajaiah, 1997-A : 107-10) 9.3. [K. 39] The accomplished Pallava-rāma-mahīpāla was a scion of
royal stock. His three consorts—Pariyabbarasi, Asagabbarasi, and Revakayye-embellished with the three jewels of right faith, right knowledge, and right conduct, were gems of amiable disposition among the virtuous women folk.
9.3.1. These three queens of the king's seraglio constructed Jaina temples,
arranged festivals to worship Jina, consecrated and anointed the images of Jina, and in the same vein showed devotion to Jaina ascetics. All the three spouses joined the ascetic order at Koppala, renouncing the mahiși-pada, the first properly consecrated queenship
of a mandalesvara-duke, and preferred the mahendra-pada. 9.3.2. Revakayye listened to the three ritualized confession, sitting on
the thighs, one leg being on the other, a heroic posture practiced by ascetics of higher hierarchy, breathed her last. Even the gods celebrated Revakayye's holy death by singing and dancing, repeatedly uttering 'Jayajaya-nanda-vardha' (victorious-auspicious). Drums and other rare instruments of heaven made the sacred sound to

Page #376

Significance of New Inscriptions from Koppala, Karnataka
365
the rhythm of the mellifluous music of Tumburu the Gandharva and Nārada the Devarsi, to the tune of which the apsarases danced and thus, the paradise above rejoiced the festival of the arrival of Revakayye-āryikā from the earth below.
9.3.3. Pariyabbarasi, also accepting the difficult vows of the willing
submission to the inevitable death, engrossed in deep meditation,
walked into the company of deities in the year Saka 911 (989 C. E.) 9.4.
[K. 40] The renowned Padmabbarasi, consort of Ganga-GāngeyaPermādi-Būtuga II, an ideal lay votary of Jaina order, reached Kopana (Koppala), and amidst the all around applause and admiration, embraced the rite of sallekhanā. Her teacher Maladhārideva administered the ritual, and Padmabbarasi, while in meditation, passed away in the year Śaka 894 (973 C. E). Padmabbarasi had also built a Jaina temple at Naregal and endowed
it with several gifts (SII. XI-i. 38. C. E. 950 Naregal, PP. 23-24] 9.7. [K. 44] Revakanimmadi, consort of Būtuga II (939-61 C. E), had
patronised and popularised Jainism on such a generous scale that it was she whose good deeds were considered on par with those of Būtuga, Sankaraganda, Mārasimhadeva, Maru!adeva, Cāmundarāya, Rājamalla, and gunadankakārti Attimabbe. Revakanimmadi, in the prescribed manner of sanyasana-vidhana, died at Koppala in the Saka year 953 (1030 C. E)
9.5.1. [K. 44] Revakanimmadi was one of the four consorts of Būtuga II,
the other three being Padmabbarasi and Kallabbā (E1. XV. 23. 107172. PP. 337-48; SII. XX. 35. 1055; EI. XXXVI. PP. 97-110;IWG: 1984 : No. 139. 962 C. E and ibid., No. 138; El. VI. P. 71; El. IV. P. 352; Fleet, DKD p. 304;EC. VIII (1902) Nagara 35. 1077]. And Dīvalāmbā who commissioned a Jinālaya at Südi (Sündi) and her spouse Būtuga made a donation of land in C. E. 938 (IA. Vol. III. p. 184. C. 960 C.E.] Koppala inscription no. 40 has recorded the death of Padmabbarasi (vide paras no. 9, 4). Būtuga II, too, may have passed away at Koppala by persuing the path of sallekhanā.
9.5.1.1. Regarding the identity of Revakanimmadi [K. 44] there is a problem
which needs clarification. In the text of the inscription, this

Page #377

· 366
Hampa Nagarajaiah
Jambu-jyoti
Revakanimmadi is compared to a well-known lady of the same name (i. e. the wife of Būtuga); besides, the date of the death of this Revakanimmadi is 1030 C. E. It is impossible for the Revakanimmadi, wife of Būtuga, to live up to that period. Hence, Revakanimmadi of K. 44 may be a namesake and hence a different lady.
9.5.1.2.There are three Revakas mentioned in the present collection :
Revakayya-Revakayye (K. 39), Revakabbe (K. 45) and Revakanimmadi; all these three are separate persons and also died on different dates.
9.6.
[K. 47] Ganga-māndalika Rājamalladeva, a bee at the lotus-feet of Arhat-Parameśvara, was a chief disciple of Ajitasena-muni. He had crushed his enemies with his valour, washed off Mandalesvaras with his matchless bravery, annexed the kingdom of his opponents. Even Hari and Hara of the eternal-trinity, happily joined Rājamalladeva and such was his prowess, an elephant in rut.
9.6.1. Kañcabbarasi, wife of Rājamalladeva, an ornament to the glorious
royal family, upheld her magnificence and lost all terrestrial interest after the death of her husband. She approched the stainless Ajitasenamunīśvara, listened to his sermon on the good consequences of the virtuous life, voluntarily took to austerities, achieved the most coveted three jewels, and walked into the eternal world in the year Śaka 945 (1023 C. E.)
9.7.
[K. 53] Gonambe, daughter of Ereganga of the Ganga dynasty, wife of the valiant Ajavarmā, and mother of Ksatriya-Rāma, relinquished the profane life and took to the hard life of a nun. After practising severe austerities, she died in the year Saka 914 (992 C. E) at Koppala.
9.7.1. Ereganga is mentioned in other inscriptions (IWG : 1984 : No. 120 :
PP. 337-78; MAR. 1921. PP. 8-16. 962 C. E.; EC. IV (R) Chāmarājanagara 354. 962-63 C. E.]. Ajavarmā is identical with the Ajavarmā of Kudlūr inscription (MAR 1921. PP. 8-16.962 C. E). Ereganga is the son of Būtugendra and Candrobalabba.
9.8.
[K. 60] Bijjámbikā (Bijjāmbarsi), daughter of Būtuga Permādi II and Padmāvati (Padmabbe), elder sister of Mārasimha II, wife of Hariga-Mallapa and a lady disciple of pontiff Sridhara-deva, earned

Page #378

Significance of New Inscriptions from Koppaļa, Karnataka
367
the appreciation of scholars and poets. After freely distributing her entire property, said adieu to every day worldly life. She took the vow of sallekhanā, achieved the three jewels, and met her end in the manner precribed in the Ārādhanā text at Koppala in the year Saka 931 (1009 C. E).
9.8.1. [K. 60] This is the first and the only inscriptional reference to
Bijjāmbikā as the daughter of Būtuga and Padmāvati (Padmabbe). Padmāvati is elsewhere mentioned as Padmabbarasi (SII. XI-i. 38. 950 C. E]. So far, it was known that Būtuga had only one daughter (Kundana-sāmidevi), who was elder to all his children except Maruladeva, who was the eldest among all his six children. But the present inscription has supplied an extra information that Būtuga had one more daughter (Bijjāmbă).
9.8.2. Both mother Padmăvati (Padmabbarasi, K. 40) and daughter
Bijjāmbikā (K. 60) had died at Koppala by the rite of sallekhanā. Sisters Kundanasāmidevi and Bijjämbikā, and the co-wives Padmāvati and Revakanimmadi, similarly have met with the coveted end at Koppala. (The royal ladies, as is surprisingly clear, were equally firm-willed in ritually meeting the death as prescribed by the sacred text.)
9.9.
Paragraphs from 9.1 to 9.8.2 provide reliable historical information casting fresh light on the history of the Ganga family, facilitating an authentic reconstruction of the family tree of Būtuga. There were a good number of luminaries in the royal house of the Gangas who heralded the glory of Jainism. Būtuga bequeathed a rich legacy for his successors to emulate and keep the lamp of syādvāda burning bright.
9.9.1. Būtuga himself was well-versed in Nirgrantha religion. His consorts
and his daughters were the benefactors of the Nirgrantha Church [IWG : 1984 : No. 138 : 962 C. E. PP. 411-28]. Būtuga's sons, Maruladeve II alias Punuseya-ganga [EC. VIII (1902) Nagara 35. 1077, Hombuja (Shimoga dt); El. XXXVI. No. 13. 963. C. E.; MAR 1921. PP 8-16, 962-63 C. E], Mārasimha II [SII. XI. 42. 970. Savadi. P. 28.; EC. IV (R) Ch. 138. 965; ibid., No. 79. 971-72; EC. II (R)=64=(59). 975. PP. 20-22 etc), Rājamalla [EC. VIII (BLR). Nr. 35.

Page #379

368
Hampa Nagarajaiah
11.1.
9.9.2. To put it in a nut-shell, these new inscriptions unambiguously prove that the Gangas were devout Jainas. It was because of the sustained support of the stalwarts of the Ganga dynasty that Jainism could flourish and attained unparalleled magnitude in Karnataka. On the luminous spectrum of the Ganga royalties, prince Būtuga shines like a pole star.

Jambu-jyoti
1077], Nītimārga-Goyindara [ibid], Vasava [ibid] alias Bāsa [K. 12.]-all the five vigorously followed Jainism. [Nagarajaiah : Säntararu-ondu Adhyayana: 1997-A]. Rambaladevi, grand daughter of Būtuga, Rakkasa-ganga-Goyindaradeva II, and Arumulidevagrandsons of Būtuga-were ardent protagonists of Jainism. Caṭṭaladevi, a great-grand-daughter of Butuga and wife of Kaḍuvetti, built Jinālayas, patronised and encouraged the clergy of Jaina faith [ibid].
10.1. While elucidating the socio-cultural prominence of the present anthology, some of the achievements and active participation of women of all ranks, from the lay votaries to the queens, in the religious acitivites deserve prominent place. On par with men, Jaina ladies made liberal grants to temples, took part in religious ceremonies, followed the path of renunciation, and embraced the hard discipline of recluses. Women of the Ganga family always were in the forefront in perpetuating the light of the Jaina church. 10.1.1. Like monks, the nuns, too, used to change their personal names on the sacred occasion of their initiation to the nunhood; however, the change of nomen was not obligatory. Women were never restricted from entering nunhood in Jainism. Ladies of the Ganga household, by and large took the vow of sanyasana. Some of them had renounced the worldly interests in their early age to practice yoga, meditation, and the methodical study of scriptures. This fact is lucidly illustrated in the corpus of Koppal inscriptions.
An added interesting point of the recently discovered epigraphs is that most of them contain graphic portraits of some illustrious preceptors who were held in high reverence by their contemporary ruling class, particularly the Gangas, the Rāṣṭrakūtas, and the Kalyāṇa Calukyas.

Page #380

Significance of New Inscriptions from Koppala, Karnataka
11.2. These friars were master exponents of Nirgrantha philosophy. Through their austerity, simplicity, and transparent character they commanded instant respect. They inspired their devotees by thought, word, and deed. Most of the monks mentioned in these memorial columns were the preceptors of the Ganga rulers.
11.3. Among the holymen mentioned, the following were outstanding pontiffs of those times Abhayanandi pandita, Ajitasena muni, Ganda-vimuktadeva, Gollācārya, Maladhari-deva, Maunibhaṭṭāraka, Meghacandra, Nayanandideva, and NemicandraSiddhantadeva; also Padmanandi-Siddhantadeva, Śrīdharadeva, Indranandideva, Siddhasena-Bhaṭāra, Trikāla-yogi, and Tribhuvanacandra Bhaṭāra. More, indeed considerable information à propos of the spiritual pedigree of these ācāryas, is available from other inscriptions, particularly from Śravanabelagola.
369
11.3.1. Some of these friars are either confrères or contemporaries or belong to the successive generation as teacher and disciples. Among them only a few were the pontiffs of Koppala diocese.
SALLEKHANA OF SOMADEVA-SŪRI
11.4.
Till today the exact date and place of the death of Somadeva sūri of the Yasastilaka fame and of Gauda Samgha (eastern India) was not known. But Koppla inscription No. 34 has supplied this information; following is the summary of that incomplete inscription :
'Vādībha-Pañcănana' was a teacher to poets and to the emperor. A terror to the disputants was Mahendradeva, a disciple of Nemideva, whose disciple was the famous Somadeva-sūri. Victory to Somadeva who with his prudence became the emperor of logicians. Even Kṛṣṇarāja (Rāṣtrakūta Kṛṣṇa III) had praised Somadeva (-suri) who was also the preceptor of Nolambāntaka (Mārasimha-deva II, son of Būtuga II).
11.4.1. Somadeva was conversant with poetry, dramaturgy, natya-săstra, and grammar. He was a king among poets; never before and never after, a talented person so deserving as Somadeva existed. Tarkikacakravarti Somadeva-panditadeva passed away at Koppala in the year 984 C. E.

Page #381

370
Hampa Nagarajaiah
11.4.2. Somadeva suri and his classic Yaśastilaka are famous [vide Krishnakant Handiqui's Yasastilaka and Indian culture (1949)]. Somadeva earlier was patronised by Arikesari, vassal of the Raṣṭrakūtas. Somadeva suri completed his work at Gangadharam [Andhra-Pradesh] in the year 959 C. E. The aforementioned Arikesari, who was a Vemalavāda-Calukya prince, after washing the feet of Somadeva suri, made a gift of a village in the year 966 C. E., to the Subhadhāma-Jinālaya built by his father. Earlier, Somadeva sūri had composed another work, the Nītivākyāmṛta when he was at the court of the Pratihāra potentate Mahendrapala II. The date of composion of this work is sometime before 949 C. E. 11.4.3. Samadevasuri was a contemporary of another great Jaina poet, Pampa (940 C. E.), who had composed two Epics-the Adipurāṇa and the Vikramārjuna- vijaya-campu-kāvaya-both in Kannada. Pampa, too, was a court poet of the above-noted Calukya Arikesari. 11.4.3.1.Pampa's younger brother Jinavallabha constructed Tribhuvanatilaka-Jinālaya in the year 950 C. E; He had also composed the text of an inscription containing Sanskrit, Kannada, and Telugu verses which is engraved on the Rṣabhagiri hill at the outskirts of the village Kurkyāl, very near Gangadharam of Somadeva sūri [I. A. P. Karimnagar dt No. 3. C. 950 C. E]. On the same Rṣabhadri is carved in bas relief a huge figure of the Cakreśvarī and the images of six Jinas, three on the right and three on the left side of the yakṣi, each being six feet tall. This shows that the area in and around Gangadharam associated with Somadeva süri was a Jaina centre. Inspite of it, the great ācārya had selected Koppala for his final destiny, implying thereby that Koppala was considered a more important site among the sacred places for attaining the Samadhimarana, indeed a site on par with Śravanabelagola.
NIRGRANTHA VESTIGES AROUND KOPPALA
12.

Jambu-jyoti
A cursory glance at the surrounding Jaina places of pilgrimage will justify in assuming the existence of a strong nucleus at Koppala. Within the radius of about 100 kms with Koppala as a central point, exist a good number of other ancient and major centres, clearly showing that Jainism had a firm foothold in the region. Towards

Page #382

Significance of New Inscriptions from Koppala, Karnataka
north-west are Aihole, Pattadakal, Bādāmi, Annigere, Ådür, Laksmeśvara (Puligere), Hungund (Ponnugunda), Gadag, Ron etc; towards north-east are Lingasûr, Mäski (Piriya-Mosangi) etc. These were the nerve centres of the 'ism' of non-absolutism (anekānta). A bronze image from Lingasūr (No. 16) has been dated to the sixth century C. E. [U. P. Shah, "Jaina Bronzes-a brief survey," in Aspects of Jaina Art and Architecture, Eds., U. P. Shah and M.A. Dhaky, Ahmedabad 1975, pp. 269-98]. Apart from an active movement of Jaina missionaries, many champions of Jainism were holding sway over these parts for several centuries, and Jainism thus continually. had received a powerful stimulus. An extensive and systematic survey of the scattered Jaina vestiges in and around these sites is still a desideratum. Because of the lack of such a consistent and methodical study of the available epigraphical, literary, and archaeological data, much remains to be known about the nature of the growth and spread of the Nirgrantha religion. This paper is an attempt in this direction to show that this hoard of nisidhikās offer indubitable proof of the resurgence and supremacy of Nirgrantha cult at Koppola.

371

Page #383

372
Hampa Nagarajaiah
Jambū-jyoti
Abbreviations
AREP
ARIE
Annual Report on Epigraphy Annual Reports on Indian Epigraphy Benjamin Lewis Rice Edition
BLR
Ch
CKI
Chāmarājanagara Corpus of Kadamba Inscriptions, 1985 Dynasties of Kanarese Districts
DKD
EC
Epigraphia Carnatika
EL IAP
Epigraphia Indica Inscriptions of Andhra Pradesh Inscriptions of Western Gangas, 1984
IWG
MAR
Nr
Koppala Mysore Archaeological Report Nagara (Hosanagara) Śravanabelago!a South Indian Inscriptions
SB
SII

Page #384

Significance of New Inscriptions from Koppala, Karnataka
373
Reference Works
P. B. Desai
1957, Jainism in South India, Sholapur C. Krishnamachari
1935, The Kannada Inscriptions of Kopbal, Hyderabad Hampa Nagarajaiah
1995, Śāsanagalalli Eradu Vaṁśagalu, Bombay 1997, A Säntararu-Ondu Adhyayana, Hombuja 1997, B Candrakode, Hampi
1998, A Koppala śāsanagalu (-Corpus of Koppala Inscriptions), Mysore
1998, B Sāsanagalalli-Bāsadigaļu, Mysore K. V. Ramesh
1984, Inscriptions of Western Gangas, (Ed.), ASI, Delhi B. A. Saletore
1938, Medieval Jainism, Bombay N. B. Sastry
1938, Kopana-Koppala-in Cannada-Sahitya Parisat-Patrike,
Vol.XXII-No. 3., Bangalore K. A. N. Sastry
1958, A History of South-India, Madras (sec. ed.)
000

Page #385

Hemaraj Pande's Caurāsī Bol
Padmanabh S. Jaini
In 1956, Professor Hiralal R. Kapadiya published an article called "Dikpata Caurāsī Bol [Pratyukti]: (84 Bol Vicara) Rekhādarśana," describing the contents of an important metrical Hindi work by Upadhyaya Yaśovijayji1. At the end of this text we learn that it is a refutation of the [Sitapata] Caurăsi Bol, i.e., Eighty-Four Points of Controversy between the Digambaras and the Śvetāmbaras, a composition by Hemaraj Pande :

हेमराज पांडे किये, बोल चुरासी फेर,
या विधि हम भाषा वचन, ताको मत कियजेर. (१५८)
Professor Kapadiya informs us that he had asked a Svetambara monk Candanasägaragani to search for a manuscript of this Digambara work. A handwritten paper manuscript of it indeed was found in Surat and was identified as the original work of Hemaraj Pande. However, Professor Kapadiya received from Surat only the first four and the last five verses of this manuscript, which he reproduced in his article. At the end of the fifth verse the author's name appears as Kavi Hema, who composed it for the benefit of one Kaurapal in the city of Agra. Unfortunately, the Surat manuscript was never fully edited or published, and we hear nothing more about it.
My search in the catalogues of Jain bhandaras in Rajasthan, prepared by Dr. Kasturchand Kasliwal2, yielded several entries for this important manuscript. I am indebted to Mr. Subhash C. Jain of Jaipur who, with the kind help of Dr. Kasliwal, obtained for me a xerox copy of one of these manuscripts, together with correct readings of several obscure words in it. The manuscripts, listed as No. 320, has a total of 9 pages copied in Samvat 1723 (=A. D. 1666). Verse number 24 of this manuscript, which lists the 18 defects (dosas) that are absent in a kevalin in the Digambara tradition,

Page #386

Hemaraj Pande's Caurāsi Bol
375
appears as a quotation in Upadhyāya Yaśovijayjī's composition (verse no. 19). Thus it can be safely assumed that this work is identical with the one that formed the pūrva-paksa for the Švetāmbara refutation.
The author of the Caurāsi Bol, Hemaraj Pande, is the same person who wrote the Hindi Pravacanasāra Bhāsā Tīkā called Bālāvabodha, published in the Pravacanasāra of Kundakunda, edited by Dr. A. N. Upadhye?. This work was completed in Agra in Samvat 1709 (=A. D. 1653) when Shah Jahan was on the throne of Delhi. We learn from a biography of Hemaraj, written by Dr. Kasturchand Kasliwal, that he was also the author of some 15 additional works, several in verse, including the Caurāsi Bol, which was completed in the same year as the Bālāvabodha*.
At the end of his brief article, Professor Kapadiya had expressed a wish that these two texts should be edited, translated, and compared to arrive at a better understanding of these two ancient Jain traditions :
आम प्रस्तुत कृतिनुं अनेकविध महत्त्व होवाथी... अनो विशेष प्रचार अने अभ्यास थवो घटे. आ माटे आ कृतिनुं समीक्षात्मक संस्करण तैयार करावी प्रकाशित करावु जोई. अमां पूर्वपक्ष तरीके हेमराज पांडेनी सितपट चौर्यासी बोल नामनी कृतिने स्थान आपq घटे. विशेषमा प्रस्तुत कृतिनो गुजराती अनुवाद पण आपवो जोई. साथे साथे सामसामी अपायेली दलीलो केटली सबक अने प्राचीन छे ते दर्शावq जोई.
The present edition of Hemaraj Pande's Caurāsi Bol thus takes one more step in furthering a critical study of the manifold issues that separate the Digambara and the Svetāmbara traditions. As is well known, two major issues, namely, kevali-bhukti (whether a kevalin, i.e., an Omniscient Being, partakes of food or not) and stri-mukti (whether a woman may attain moksa in that very life or not) dominate that debate. The Strīnirvāna Kevalibhuktiprakarane, edited by Muni Jambuvijayjis, is a most comprehensive collection of original and commentarial material available on these two topics. This has facilitated a good amount of modern research, notably, an article entitled, "Food and Freedom: The Jaina Sectarian Debate on the Nature of the Kevalin," by Professor Paul Dundas, and my own book Gender and Salvation : Jaina Debates on the Spiritual Liberation of Women?. But the remaining issues are not less important and call for scholarly attention. Professor Kapadiya in his article takes note of some 27 major topics and puts together a longer list from the headings that appear in Upādhyāya Yaśovijayjī's "Pratyukti" published in the Gurjara Sahitya Sangraha!

Page #387

376
Padmanabh S. Jaini
Jambū-jyoti
Hemaraj Pande's work contains eighty-four (caurāsī) points (bol) presented in a composition of ninety-one verses in varieties of Hindi meters. The number eighty-four seems to have been deliberately chosen by him to match with the eighty-four hundred thousand varieties of yonis into which a jīva may repeatedly be reborn in the course of samsāra (see verse no. 88). He is suggesting thereby that those who hold these views may not escape samsāra. In the absence of any prior Digambara work on this topic, we might assume that he himself drew up this list and composed his verses accordingly.
Upādhyāya Yaśovijayajī's refutation has one hundred sixty-one verses and yet his response seems to be limited to only some fifty-one topics. I list here in serial order the eighty-four points attributed by Hemaraj to the Svetāmbaras. The Svetāmbara refutation does not follow the same order of items nor does it address all the points and hence is given in a separate
list.
A brief outline of the eighty-four disputed views (vādas) attributed to the “vetāmbaras by the Digambara śrāvaka Hemaraj Pande [numbers refer to the verses) :
Introductory verses with a brief account of the beginning of the Svetāmbara sect during the time of ācārya Bhadrabāhu. (1-18) 1. The Kevalin partakes of food by morsel (kavala-āhāra). (19-24) 2. The Kevalin needs to answer the calls of nature (nīhāra). (25-27)
3. The Kevalin is subject to the suffering of disease (roga). (28)
4. The Kevalin may suffer attacks (upasarga), such as that which
happened to Mahāvīra at the hands of Gośāla'. (29)
5. The Jina (like Vardhmana) attends school although he possesses
avadhijñāna at the time of his birth. (30-31)
The Jina, prior to abandoning the household, distributes gifts for an entire yearl. (32)
7. The Jina gives up clothes at the time of his renunciation but Indra,
the King of Gods, places a length of cloth over his shoulder (devadüşya)12 (33)

Page #388

Hemaraj Pande's Caurasi Bol
8. In the absence of the ganadharas-the only human beings who can interpret the divya-dhvani-the Jina (Mahāvīra) preached his first sermon to the gods only13. (The Digambara point seems to be that if this were the case, then it would be wasted as the gods could not take any vratas. They believe that the Jina maintained silence for sixty-six days until Gautama, the first ganadhara-to-be, appeared in the samavasaraṇa.)14 (34--35)
9. Mahāvīra's mother (Triśala) was not his natural mother because he was conceived in the womb of the brahman Devanandā15. (36a)
377
10. The first Tirthankara. Ādinātha, was born with a twin sister (yugaliyā), and they became husband and wife. (36b)
11. In addition to his twin-wife, Adinatha married Sunanda, a second wife, who had become a widow (i.e., vidhava-vivaha)16. (37-38)
12. Mahāvīra was first conceived in the despicable family of a brahman. (39)
13. By the orders of Indra, Harinegameśi transferred that foetus into the womb of Trisala and this is called (by the Svetämbaras) a miracle (achera, i.e., aścarya)17. (40-45)
14. The belief that only two Jinas, namely, Malli and Nemi, were unmarried, while in fact there were five. (According to the Digambaras, Vāsupūjya, Pārśva, and Mahāvīra were also kumāras, i.e., unmarried). (45)
15. The belief that a Kevalin (for example, Bahubali) would respectfully greet another kevalin, like Rṣabha18. (46-47)
16. A Kevalin like Mahāvīra unknowingly suddenly sneezed (which suggests that the Kevalin's body still has impurities). (48)
17. Gaṇadhara Gautama paid respects to a non-Jaina mendicant [named Khandaka]. (49-50)
18. A woman may attain mokṣa in that very life (strī-mukti). (51-53) 19. Tirthankara Malli was [not a man but]a woman. (54-58)
20. A yugala (male and female twins) born in [the continent of] Harivarṣa was snatched by a heavenly being (deva) and brought to'

Page #389

378
Padmanabh S. Jaini
Jambu-jyoti
the continent of Bharata where he made their bodies small (to suit the Bharata region, i.e., against the rule that a bhogabhūmi person cannot come to the karmabhūmis) 19. (59)
21. They were anointed as king and queen in Mathurā, where they ate
meat and were reborn in hell (i.e., when in fact a person born in the bhogabhūmi is reborn only in heaven). For this reason, the Svetāmbaras consider this a miracle (acherā). They maintain that the lineage of the Haris (Harivamsa) derives from this family. (In the view of Digambaras, this story violates the rules pertaining to the twins born in a bhogabhūmi). (60-64)
22. A muni does not break the aparigraha-mahāvrata even when he keeps
14 requisites (upakaranas, such as pātras for collecting food and water, clothes, blanket, and so forth). (65-67)
23. Kāla is not a separate dravya. (68-69) 24. The ganadhara of Tirthankara Munisuvrata was a horse20. (70) 25. A muni may partake of meat under some special conditions. (70) 26. A muni should beg food from different houses and eat that food at his
place of residence. (70) 27. It is not a sin if one beats up a person who reviles your doctrine. (70) 28. Bharata was Brāhmi's brother, and yet he wanted to make her his
wife. (71) 29. Bharata became a kevalin while still living in the household21. (71) 30. Draupadī was a virtuous wife but yet she had five husbands. (71)
31. A mendicant disciple attained kevalajñāna while carrying his teacher
[called Candarudrācārya]on his shoulders. (72) 32. Mahāvīra was married22. (72) 33. Mahāvīra's son-in-law, called Jamāli, disputed with him23. (72) 34. Kapila was a kevalin and yet he danced24. (72)
35. Vasudeva (the father of Krsna) had as many as seventy-two thousand
wives. (73)

Page #390

Hemaraj Pande's Caurāsi Bol
379
36. Bāhubali was taller even than five bow-lengths. (73)
37. A muni may receive food from a member of the sūdra caste. (73)
38. Heavenly beings (devas) can have conjugal relationships with human
females. (73) 39. A woman called Sulasā produced thirty-two sons from one
foetus25. (73) 40. The first Vāsudeva called Triprstha was born from a nānati (?)26. (73) 41. Mahāvīra visited non-aryan regions27. (74) 42. Mahāvīra preached to the mlecchas even in the fourth time period. (74) 43. There is no fault if a person who is fasting takes medicine. (74) 44. A cakravarti can have sixty-four thousand wives. (74) 45. The nudity of a Jina in the samavasarana remains invisible. (75) 46. The sky-cladness (i.e., nudity of a muni) is a cause for producing
passions. (75) 47. A yati may keep a [walking] stick. (75) 48. A yati may have ear ornaments (doubtful reading). (75) 49. Marudevi (the mother of Jina Rsabha) attained moksa while riding on
an elephant28. (75) 50. There is no fault if a weak muni takes food other than at the fixed
times. (75) 51. A householder may attain kevalajñāna without undergoing the formal
act of renunciation. (76) 52. A person born as a cāndāla may become a muni and attain moksa. (76) 53. It is acceptable to worship an ornamented image of the Jina.(76) 54. Moksa is possible without giving up clothes and ornaments. (77) 55. The sun and moon in their original form came to greet Mahāvīra. (77)
56. The Digambara list of the eighteen faults from which a Jina is free is
changed into a different list. (For example : They do not consider a kevalin to be free from hunger and thirst.) (78)

Page #391

380
Padmanabh S. Jaini
Jambū-jyoti
57. They also make changes in the list of thirty-four atisayas of
a Tirthankara. (78)
58. Camara, the king of the Vyantaras, went to conquer the king of
the Saudharma heaven29 (79)
59. Seeing his adamantine stick, Camara then came to take refuge at
the feet of Mahāvīra. (79)
50. When a Jina attains nirvāna, his body does not evaporate entirely like
a lightning (contrary to the Digambara belief). (80) 61. If a householder sees a muni who is suffering from lust, he may offer
a woman to him so that he does not abandon his mendicant life. (80)
62. Even the body of a kevalin can cause destruction of beings. (80)
63. When Mahāvīra died, the gods gathered together and worshipped his
jawbone30. (81)
64. At the janma-kalyānaka of Mahāvīra, he shook Mount Meru (with his
toe). (81)
65. There are only fourteen dreams, not sixteen (as the Digambaras hold),
that foretell the birth of a Tirthankara31. (81)
66. Gangādevī lived for fifty-five thousand years. (82) 67. Cakravarti Bharata merely followed the ways of the world (i.e., he was
unattached like a monk while still ruling his kingdom). (82)
68. There are not ninety-six bhogabhūmis. (83)
69. There is no fault in taking water from a leather bag. (83)
70. There is no fault in taking a meal prepared with ghee kept in a leather
bag. (83) 71. There is no fault in eating food that has become stale. (83)
72. There is no fault in eating a whole (sāre ?) fruit. (83) 73. The goddess Nīlāñjanā did not dance in front of Rsabha to make him
renounce the world (doubtful reading). (84)
74. Vardhamāna resolved while still in the womb of his mother that he
would not renounce the world as long as his parents were alive32. (84)

Page #392

Hemaraj Pande's Caurasi Bol
75. Bahubali was born as a twin (yugala) (doubtful reading of lines 4 and 5). (84)
381
76. Nabhi and Marudevi were twins (yugala) and Ṛṣabha was born to them. (85)
77. All yugalas have impurities in their bodies. (85)
78. All śalākā-purusas (included in the list of sixty-three) have nihāra (they respond to the calls of nature). (85)
79. There are not one hundred Indras, but only sixty-four Indras. (86) 80. There are only twelve abodes of heaven, and not more. (86)
81. The Yadavas, although they followed the path of the Jinas, partook of meat. (86)
82. A human being can go beyond the mountain called Manuṣottara. (86)
83. There are not twenty-four kāmadevas. (86)
84. In the nine uppermost heavens, there is no minimum age limit (i.e., they all have the same age ?) [The last line of verse 87 is missing. The meaning of the third line is not clear.] (87)
Concluding verses :
These are the eighty-four points [corresponding, that is, leading to rebirth in] eighty-four hundred thousand yonis. Those who believe in these indeed are sporting in the ocean of samsara. (88)
In the city of Agra, there lives the wise and learned Kaurapal. For his sake Kavi Hema composed this poem. (89)
I have not composed this work with any grudge [against the Svetambaras] nor have I done this just to support my own view. This is a preaching consisting of truth. May it make good people happy. (90)
May these words of mine, which reveal the truth, illuminate the hearts of all. May they tear the cover of darkness in the form of doubt. Let there be an increase of knowledge and happiness. (91)
Thus ends the Caurāsī Bol, the Eighty-Four Points of Controversy.

Page #393

382
Padmanabh S. Jaini
Jambū-jyoti
I give below a list of the items found in Upādhyāya Yaśovijayjī's [Dikpata] Caurāsi Bol (Pratyukti] based on the headlines appearing in the Gurjara Sahitya Sangraha, vol. 1, pp. 572-597. (Numbers at the end refer to verses.)
Introductory verses give an account of the origin of the Digambara sect in Vira-nirvāna samvat 609, as narrated in the story of a muni called Sāhasamalla, a disciple of ācārya Krsna. (1-17). 1. The [Śvetāmbarallist of the eighteen defects (dosa) that are not found
in a Kevalin differs from that of the Digambaras. (18-19)
2. The Kevalin does eat food by morsel (kevali-bhukti). (20-23)
3. The Tîrthankara's body has the same seven components (sapta-dhātus)
as any other human being. (20-23)
4. The Kevalin is subject to 11 kinds of hardships (parīşahas). (24-33) 5. The Kevalin's speech consists of articulated words. (34) 6. All salākā-purusas have nīhāra. (35-37) 7. Human beings may go outside the boundary of the Mānusottara
Mountain. (38-39)
8. Cakravarti Bharata attained kevalajñāna while still in the state of
a householder. (40-42)
9. Moksa is possible even of those possessing non-Jain mendicant insignia
(anyalinga-mukti). (43)
10. It is possible for a woman, for example Malli-kumārī, to attain moksa
(strīmukti). (44-47) 11. Even after becoming a kevalin, Bāhubali greeted respectfully (vinaya)
Jina Rsabha. (48)
12. Tirthankaras do indeed give gifts of wealth for an entire year prior to
their renunciation. (48)
13. Kapila, a kevalin, danced (in order to convert five hundred thieves to
the holy path of mendicancy as narrated in his story, and hence there is no fault in it]. (48)

Page #394

Hemaraj Pande's Caurāsi Bol
14. Malli and Nemi were the only two Jinas who did not marry. (49)
15. Draupadi did marry all the five Pāṇḍava brothers. (50)
16. A muni should collect alms by going from house to house (and not take his meal standing in one house as is the custom among the Digambaras). (50)
383
17. It is proper to worship an image of a Jina with items such as musk (kasturi), etc. (51)
18. A naked image of a Jina is not auspicious; it is proper to worship an image of a Jina with ornaments. (52-53)
19. A Jina's nudity is not visible to anyone as Indra places an ambara (a piece of cloth) on his shoulder. (54)
20. The ganadhara Gautama did honor a parivrājaka, a mendicant of a non-Jaina order, for the sake of dharma. (55)
21. It is proper to make a sthāpană of a Jaina monk (guru) in his absence similar to the image of a Jina. (56-57)
22. Śatruñjaya is a holy place (tīrtha). [This item is missing in the Digambara list.](58)
23. A Jain monk may give initiation (diksă) and even preach a sermon (both of which are auspicious activities) while still maintaining the suddha-upayoga. (59-63)
24. Vasudeva (father of Kṛṣṇa) had seventy-two thousands wives (i.e., more than a cakravarti. This is similar to Bahubali being stronger than Bharata). (64-65)
25. Jamāli was the son-in-law of Jina Mahāvīra and he did start a wrong view (kumata, i.e., a nihnava). (66)
26. A disciple of Candarudräcärya attained kevalajñāna (while he was carrying his sick teacher on his shoulders). (67)
27. The vyavahāra naya is as important as the niscaya naya. (68-76)
28. The dravyarthika and the paryäyärthika nayas are equally important. (77-87)

Page #395

384
Padmanabh S. Jaini
Jambū-jyoti
29. Time (kāla) is not a dravya. (88-92)
30. Mahāvīra shook Mount Meru (with his toe) at the time of his
janmakalyānaka. (93-94) 31. The ganadhara of Jina Munisuvrata was not a horse, contrary to what
the Digambaras have alleged. (The true story is that a horse, a friend of the Jina in a former life, at the time of his death, received the teachings from him. He was reborn in heaven and he established an image of that Jina at Bhrgukaccha. That place came to be called Aśvaavabodha). (95 102)
32. The pañca namaskāra mantra consists of sixty-eight syllables. (This
item is not found in the Digambara list.] (103-107) 33. The Tīrthankara teaches in Ardhamāgadhī. (108-109) 34. In the heavens the gods worship the jawbone of
the Tirthankaras. (110) 35. One can attain moksa even if born in low families. (111-114) 36. There was the transfer of the embryo of Mahāvīra. (115)
37. The transfer of embryo does not result in Mahāvīra having two fathers.
(116-121)
38. Bāhubali having attained kevalajñāna performed circumambulation
(pradaksiņā) to the Jina Rsabha, a proper thing to do. (122-123) 39. Mahāvīra sneezed. (124)
40. The bringing of the yugaliyas to Mathurā from Harivarsa to establish
the Harivamsa is a form of acherā. Such things do happen once in a while in the infinite time cycle. (125-129)
41. Camara arrived in the heavenly abode called Saudharma. (130)
42. Mahāvīra did wander in the non-aryan regions. (131)
43. Gods may have sexual relations with human females. (131) 44. The first preaching of Mahāvīra took place soon after his attaining
kevalajñāna—and not after a silence of sixty-six days as believed by the Digambaras. (132-136)

Page #396

Hemaraj Pande's Caurāsi Bol
385
45. The mother of a Tirthankara witnesses only fourteen dreams-not
sixteen as believed by the Digambaras. (137) 46. The thirty-four atiśayas of a Tirthankara are correct as they are listed
by the Svetāmbaras. (The Digambaras are wrong in including "absence
of hunger” as an atiśaya.) (138) 47. There is nothing wrong with taking water stored in a leather bag.
(139)
48. It is not improper for a monk to receive food prepared from ghee that
has been stored in a leather bag. (139)
49. Marudevi and Nābhi were twin brother and sister from whom Jina
Rsabha was born. There is nothing improper in this considering the time when it took place. (140-141)
50. It is proper for a sādhu to keep pātras for collecting food and water,
clothes, and other requisites (upakaranas). (142-155) 51. The Jaina Āgamas are indeed still in existence (a fact disputed by
the Digambaras). (156-157) Concluding verses :
Hemaraj Pande has composed Eighty-four Points (Caurāsī Bol). Accordingly, we also have refuted them in this spoken language (bhāsā). There are in the words of Digambaras a hundred more faults, but why waste time on them ? (158-159)
A learned person has faith in that which is truthful, while a fool delights in falsehood. But if he were to trust only the true words and keep the company of saints, he would surely enjoy unbroken happiness. Thus says the Vācaka (i.e., Upadhyāya) Jasa (i.e., Yaśovijaya). (160-161)
I give below a copy of the manuscript of Caurāsī Bol (by Hemarāja Pānde) described above without any emendations as only a single manuscript was available for this edition. Doubtful readings are indicated by (?).

Page #397

386
Padmanabh S. Jaini
Jambu-jyoti
चौरासी बोल
(१) ॐ नमः सिद्धेभ्यः ।
छप्पय छन्द
सुनय पोष हत दोष मोक्ष मुख शिव पद दायक गुण मणि कोष सुघोष रोषहर तोष विधायक। एक अनंत सरूप सन्त वन्दित अभिनन्दित निज सुभाव परभाव भाव भासेइ अमंदित ।। अविदित चरित्र विलसित अमित सर्व मिलित अविलिप्त तन । अविचलित कलित निज रस ललित
जय जिन विदलित कलिलघन ॥१॥ इकतीसा सवैया
नाथ हिम भूधर से निकसि गनेश चित्त भूपरि उतारी शिव सागर लौ धाई है। परमत वाद मरयाद कूल उन्मूलि अनुकूल मारग सुभाय ढरि आई है। बुध हंस सेइ पापमल कौं विध्वंस करै सुरवंश सुमति विकासि वरदाई है। सपत अभंग भंग उठै है तरंग जामैं ऐसी वानी गंग सरवंग अंग गाई है॥२॥
दोहा
सेतंबर मत की सुनी जिनते है मरजाद । मिलहि दिगंबर स्यों नहीं जे चौरासी बाद ॥३॥ तिन्ह की कछु संछेपता कहिए आगम जानि। पढत सुनत जिनिके मिटै संसै मत पहिचानि ॥४॥ संसय मत मैं और है अगनित कलपित बात।
कौन कथा तिन्ह की कहै कहिए जगतविख्यात ।।५।। चौपाई
जगत रीति सौजे न मिलाही, कहे अछेरे जिनमतमाही । जामै कथा कही बहुतेरी, संसय उपजावन भव बेरी ॥६॥ ता सेतंबर मत चाले, संसयमती जानि निरबले भद्रबाहु स्वामी के बारै, बारह वरस काल हुवसारै ।।७।।

Page #398

Hemaraj Pande's Caurăsi Bol
दोहरा -
तहां भयो इनको अंकुरौ, क्रम क्रम बढत बढत हुवपूरौ । कहवति कौं यह जैन कहावै, भोजन सविस नाम ज्यौं पावै ॥८॥
जो नर नांहि वस्तु का खोजी, सो न सुमत अमृतरस भोजी । अंतरदृष्टि होइ घट जाकै, भेदबुद्धि परकासै ताकै ॥९॥
आकदुम्धू अर गोदुग्ध, इनमें बडौ विवेक । एक घटावै दिष्टि कौ, तेज बढावै एक ॥१०॥
कहा भयौ जौ पीत है, पीतल कनक न होइ । परगट करै निदग्ध लखि, मुगध न जानै सोइ ॥ ११॥
कहत यथारथ सो लखै, जाकै होइ सुदिष्टि । कहा लखै रवि कै उदय, जो नर अंध निकिष्टि ॥ १२ ॥
सुनै कछु होत नहि, जाकै घट परकास । सोइ नर निज अक्ष सौं, लखै सुलक्ष विलास ॥१३॥
जौं कठोर पाषान परि, वरसै मूसलधार । तौ भी मेघ न करि सकै, कोमलता गुनसार || १४ ||
तावत ज्यौं प्रगट करै, अगनि सुदर्ब कुदर्व्व । त्यही बुध सत असत का, भेद करतु है सर्व ॥ १५ ॥
भूसि उठतु स्वान ज्यौं, दुर्जन सुनि सुनि बात । तभी सत्यारथ कहै सुधी सदा अवदात ॥ १६ ॥ कहा करै सविता पिता, सबही कौं सुख देइ । आधासीसी युक्त नर, सो दुख सहज लहेइ ॥ १७॥
यथारथ कल्पित है, जे नर अंध कुबुद्धि ।
बंधन करि भव वन भमहि, लहहि न कबहु न सुद्धि ॥१८॥
वीतराग दूषनरहित, भूषन भूकुल (?) जास। जिस जग भूषन देव कै, कहहि अहार गरास ||१९||
सवया इकतीसा -
केवली आहार करै मानत ही लागतु है दूषन अठारै महाप्रमाद मोहियै । मोहकर्म नास कारि बीरज अनंत धारी ताहि भूख लगे ऐसे कहतन सोहियै ॥ भुंजत अनंत सुख भोजन सौ कौन का

387

Page #399

388
Padmanabh S. Jaini
Jambū-jyoti
आदितके वंदे कहीं कहा दीप वोहियै । काहू परकार ईस कौन कबल आहार जे कहे है तिन्हकै जग्यो है पा[प] कहिये ।।२०।। मोहनी करम नासै वेदनी को बल नासै विस के विनासै ज्यौं भुजंगम की हीनता । इंद्रिनि के ग्यान सौ न सुख दुख वेदै जहाँ वेदनी को स्वाद वेदै इंद्रीयी अधीनता ।। आतमीक अंतर अनंत सुख वेदै जहाँ बाहिर निरंतर है साता की अछीनता । तहां भूख आदिक असाता कहा बल करै विस कणिका न करै सागर मलीनता ॥२१॥ देव मानसी कही अहार से तृपति होइ नारकीक जीवनि कौं कर्म कौं अहार है। नर तिर्यंच कैं प्रगट कवला आहार एक इंद्री धारक के लेप को आधार है ।। अंडे की विरधि होइ ओजाहार सेवन तै पंखी उर ऊषमा तै ताकी बढवार है। नोकर्मवर्गना को केवली कै है आहार थितिकारक है जो न सविकार है ।।२२।।
दोहरा
और जीव को लगत नहि, तनपोषक सुखदाइ। समय समय जगदीप कौं, लगें वरगना आइ ॥२३॥
छपय
क्षुधा त्रिषा भय दोष रोग जर मरणजनम मद मोह खेद परसेद नीद विस्मय चिंता गद रति विषाद । ए दोष नहि अष्टदश जाकै केवलग्यान अनंत दरसन सुख वीरज ताकै नहि सपत धातु ।। सब मल रहित परमौदारिक तन सहित अंतर अनंत
सुख रस सरस सो जिनेस मुनिपति सहित ।।२४॥ दोहरा
जिहां आहार बनै नहीं, तहां कयौं होइ निहार । परगट दूषन देखि यै, इसमै कौन विचार ॥२५॥ कलपि विकलपी कहतु है, और दोष विकराल । निर्मल केवलिनाथ के. है निहार मलजाल ॥२६।।

Page #400

Hemaraj Pande's Caurāsī Bol
389
चौपइ
जौ मुनि तपवी रिद्धि के धारी, गहत अहार ते न नीहारी ।
क्यौं करि सकल जगत के स्वामी, करै निहार अमलपदगामी ।।२७|| दोहरा
जाकै देखि मिटै विकट घोर उपद्रव वर्ग।
दोष होइ ताकौं कहै रोग और उपसर्ग ।।२८।। सवैया इकतीसा
कहै कोउ क्रोध साला (?) हुवौ है गोसाला मुनि तिनितेजोज्वालमाला छोडी परजलती। वीरके समोसरणि दाहे जिन दोइ मुनि ताकी झाल स्वामीहू को पहुची उछलती ॥ तहां भयो उपसर्ग नाही उषमा तै फिरि उदर की व्याधि लइ आमलो प्रज्वलती । परगट दोष जांनि तजै औसौ सरधान
ज्ञानवान जिनिकै सुजोति जगी बलती ।।२९।। दोहरा
जनमत ही मति श्रुति अवधि, तीन ग्यान घट जास । कहै पढ्यौ वट साल सों, वर्धमान गुनवास ॥३०॥ कहै और सितवास सब (?) जब जिन होइ विराग । एक वरस लौ दान दे, अंत करै घरत्याग ॥३१॥ जिन वैराग दसा धरत, त्याग सब पर भाव । कहा जानि आपनौ करों, पाछै दान बताव ॥३२।। धरै दिगंबर दसा जिन, पाछै अंबर आनि ।
इंद्र धरै जिनकंधपरि, यह संसयमति मानि ॥३३।। चौपइ
गनधर विना वीर की धनी निफल, खिरी न काहू मानी।
समकितव्रत का भया न धारी, कोउ तहां कहै सविकारी ॥३४|| दोहरा
कै न खिरै जौ खिर, तौ होइ सफल तहकीक।
खिरै फलविना जे कहै, तिनकी वात अलीक ॥३५।। अडिल्ल
लोकनाथ सो जिनवर जाकौं पूत है, तिस माता स्यौ कहै और परसूत है। अदिनाथ को प्रगट कहतु है जुगलीया, तिनहींकौं फिरि कहै भए ते पतितिया ॥३६।।

Page #401

390
Padmanabh S. Jaini
Jambu-jyoti
चौपइ
कहै जुगलीया कोउ मुंवौ ताकी तियन रंडापौ हुवौ ।
सोई रिषभदेव घरि आनी, भई सुनंदा दूजी रानी ॥३७॥ सोरठा
करै न निंदित काज जो समानिक होइ जन । क्यौं करि श्री जिनराज करै अकारज विधिकरन ॥३८॥ कहै कोउ कहै कोउ रिषभ थौ विप्र तिसूं देवानन्द तिय ता गभि जिन वीर उतर्यो । दिन असी तिनिल (?) बस्यौ तिहां तब इंद्र समर्यो हीन जाति दुज कुल विषै महापुरुष अवतार
जोगि नांहि तातै करौं और गरभ संचार ॥३९॥ सोरठा
कीयौ इन्द्र आदेस हिरनगवेषी देवको।
कीधौ तास परवेस त्रिसला के तिनि गर्भमें ॥४०॥ चौपइ
पहिलै गर्भ क्यों न हरि लीनौ, आसी दिन बीतै क्यों कीनौ।
पहिलै कहा जानै हौ नाही, कहौ विचारि धारि मनमांहीं ॥४१॥ अडिल
दिज घरवासि सिद्धारथ घर जब संचरिउ। गरभ कल्यानक कहौ कहां जिन को कर्यो ।। जौ दुज घरि तौ हौइ हीनता इसकी सिद्धारथ घरि कीया न बनै हदीस की ॥४२।। जौ दोनौ घरि तौ कल्यानक छह गनौ । जौ दोनौ कै नाहि तुछ पौँ हीलनौ । सीलभंग तौ होइ जिनेश्वरमात का
जातै वीरज नांहि सिद्धारथ तात का ॥४३॥ चौपइ
जहां बात का नांहि निबेरी(रा), तहां कलपि करि कहै अछेरा।
ऐसी बानी मूढ बखानै, दरसन मोहे लीन सरद्यानै ॥४४।। दोहरा
पंच कुमार जिनेस है सत्यारथ मत मांहि । मल्लि नेमि एइ कुमर कहै दोइ अरु नांहि ॥४५|| तीर्थकर जिन कौं नमै सामानिक जिन होइ । कहै बाहुबलि केवली नयौ(म्यौ) रिषभ के पाइ ॥४६।।

Page #402

Hemaraj Pande's Caurāsi Bol
391
सवैया इकतीसा
अरिहंत पद वंदि वंदक सरूप मेरौ, ऐसे भाव परमाद गुनताइ बहे है। सातमी धरातै आगै आतमीक रस जागै, तहां वंद्यवंदक विभाव नांही रहे है। साधकदसा मै जहां बाधक है ऐसे भाव, तहां जिन जिन वंदै मंद कैसै कहै है।
पूरन सरूपधारी वीतराग अविकारी, वंदनीक एकै मांनी ग्यानी सरदहै है ॥४७॥ सवैया तेईसा
केवलग्यानविषै जिनवीर कहै अनजान अचानक छींक्यौ। सो न बनै तब छींक उठै जब वात कफामय पित्त जीकौ ।। धातु विवर्जित निर्मल इ(ई) स सरीरविषै नही रोग रती को।
छीक कलंक अडंकित अंकित सुद्ध दसा तहि दोष नहीं कौ ॥४८॥ अडिल्ल
तिरदंडी तापसी कुलंगी भेस रचै आवत सुनि जिन वीरनाथ उपदेसयौ(?) । गौतम स्वामी गनधर व्रत धरै जैन कौं
वाकी सनमुख गयौ भवाति सौं लेनकौ ॥४९।। दोहरा
अविरत सम्यकदरसनी, करै न कुमती मन । क्यों करि गनधर पूज्य पद, करै सुभ गति विधान ।।५०।। जाकी सोलहस्वर्ग तें आगै नाही गम्य ।
तिस नारी को यौ कहै रम्यै(?) मोक्षपद रम्य ॥५॥ सवैया इकतीसा
जाकै सब मलद्वार धारे है निगोद भा(?)र कबहूं न अविकार हिंसा तै रहतु है। सिथिल सुभाव लिए परपंच सब किए लाज कौ समाज(?) धरै अंबर बहुत है । छट्ठा गुनथांन नांहि थिरता न ध्यान माहि मास मास रितु ताहि संकता लहतु है। जगत विलंबिनी कौं हीनदसा लंबिनी कौ यात ही नितंबिनी को मोख न कहतु है ॥५२।।

Page #403

392
दोहरा —
चौपड़
दोहरा -
चौपड़
दोहरा -

Padmanabh S. Jaini
मुकति कामिनी कौ रमै न कामिनि x x x x x x होइ (?) परगट ही देख ॥५३॥ समयविरोधी देखीयै परगट चित न विचार । मल्लिनाथ जिन कौ कहै मल्लिकुमारि नारि ॥५४॥
अडिल्ल - स्वर्गभूमि पाताललोक मै देखियौ, नारी नायक सुनौ कहूं न विसेषियै । जगतबंधु अरिहंत देवपद कौ धेरै, पर अधीन जो हीन निंद पद आचरै ॥५५॥
जौं नारी कौं जनपद मानौ तौ ताकी प्रतिमा करि जानौ ।
पुरुष आकार एक ही बंदौ, नारीरूप क्यौं न अभिनंदौ ॥५६॥
जौ नितंबिनी बन सोहै, कुचरूपादिक मंडित हो है ।
तौ लज्जा करि कामिनी रूपी, क्यौं करि जिनवर होहि अनूखी ॥५७॥
जाके दरसत परसत रागादिक मिटि जाइ ।
तिस नररूपी ईस कौं वंदौ सीस नवाइ ॥५८॥
कहै युगल हरिखेत निवासी, काहू देव हयौं सविलासी । पूरब बैर जानि दुख दीनौ, अवगाहन करि छायौ कीनौ ॥५९॥
सोइ भरतखंड फिरि आन्यौ, मथुरानगर राज दे मान्यौ ।
पापी करि तिनि मांस खवायौ, नरक नगर के पंथ चलायौ ॥६०॥
तिसके कुलि हरिवंस बखानै, सत्यारथ उपदेस न मानै । जुगल सर्व ही सुरगतिगामी, नरक न सेवहि तिरियु (?) परिणामी ॥ ६१ ॥
दोइ कोस की तिसकी काया, सुर क्यौं करि लघु रूप बनाया। जौ तुम ईसहि अछेरा मानौ तौ भी नाहि बनै मनि आनौ ॥६२॥
काल अनंत अनंत गए तै, एक एक ही युगल गहे तै । सब हरिखेत भूमि का खाली, व्हैकै मिटै जुगल परनाली ||६३॥
सब गणती के युगल है घटे बढै नहीं कोइ । मरणकाल ही जुगल कैं आइ युगलीया होई ॥६४॥
राखत चउदह उपकरण मुनि कौ नाही दोष । परिग्रहत्यागदसा विषै करिहि परिग्रह पोष ॥६५॥
Jambū-jyoti

Page #404

Hemaraj Pande's Caurāsi Bol
393
जहिं परमाणु समान नहि परिग्रह ग्रह को संच।
तहां कहौ क्यों करि बनै वस्त्रादिक परपंच ॥६६॥ सवैया इकतीसा
काल पाय मैले होइ आसा होइ धोवन की धोयें नासै संसय में और भविस तारे(?) है। नास भये मांगने को त्रास होइ नासने के डरतें सुध्यान विषै थिरता विसारे है। देह दुति मंडन है ब्रह्मचर्य खंडन है जिनलिंग लंडन है तातै पट डारै है। संवर धरनहार अंबर से अविकार होइ को निरंबर दिगंबर ही धारै है ॥६७।।
दोहरा
समयादिक परजाय कौ काल हरषं(?) समुझाहि ।
काल अणू जाणै नही ते असंख्य जगमाहि ॥६८।। छप्पय
काल अणू जौ नाहि समय तौ होइ कहो ते सुथिर । वस्तुविन नांहि नास उतपत्ति तहातै असन(?) जनम ।। जै होइहो उषर(?) -श्रम जगत में वृद्धि होउ परधान(?) । और क्षणभंगुरमत मै नहि सधै वस्तु सीमा चित्र(?) । प्रल[य] जनम नास थिरभाव बिना थिरता निमित्त ।
समयादि की काल अण जगि कहहि जिन ॥६९॥ सवैया इकतीसा
मानै जो मुनिसुव्रत कौ गनधर घौरौ भयौ काहू काज के निमित्त मांस मुनि गहे है। घरि घरि विहरि अन्न मांगि मांगि कहै मुनि थान आनि भोजन को लहै है। निजमतनिंदक कौ ठौर मारै पाप नही निर्दय सुभाव धरि काहू की न सहै है। साची वात झूठी कहै वस्तु को न भेद लहै हठ रीति गहै रहै मिथ्या वात कहे है ॥७०॥ भरत नै ब्राह्मी बहनि कहै नारी कीनी महासती दोष लाइ भववास चहै है। ग्रहवास वसतै ही केवली भरत भयौ आरसीकै मंदिर में मानि निरवहे है ।

Page #405

394
Padmanabh S. Jaini
Jambu-jyoti
द्रौपदी सती कौ कहै भइ पंच भरतारी अंधबंध भारीकरि संकट मै फहै है ।। साची वात झूठी कहै वस्तु को न भेद लहै हठ रीति गहि रहै मिथ्यावात कहै है ॥७१।। कोउ मुनि कंध परि पंथ मै गुरु कौ लिए चलें जात केवली भयो है सरहै है। कहै है जमाइ वीरनाथ को जमाली नामा वीर है कुमारौ सुनि लरने कौ खहै है ।। कबक ध्रवक करि केवली कपिल नाचौ मूरख रिझावने को ऐसी मानि रहै है। सांची वात झूठी कहै वस्तु को न [भेद] लहै हठ रीति गहि रहै मिथ्यावात कहै है ॥७२॥
छपय
कहै बहुत्तरि सहस भइ वसुदेव बधूगन धनुष पंच सै उच्च बाहुबलि कहिहि धर्यो तन । सूद्रजाति घरि असन करत मुनि दोष न पावै देवमनुष्यणी भोग भोगवै हि सुरत वधावै(?) ॥ एक गरभ मांहि सुलसा धरै सुत बत्तीस बने नहि(?) पहिलै त्रिपिष्ट वसुदेव की नानति(?) उतपति मानहि ॥७३।। मानै वीर विहार अनारज देस भूमि पर कहिहि मलेछ चतुर्थकाल सारे हुये(?) भरि(?) । देवलोक तै चारि कोस कौ कहि अवधारै प्राण जात व्रतभंग करत नहि पाप विचारै ।। उपवास मांहि ओषध लभत व्रती न धारै दोष मल चौसठि हजार नारी राखै चक्रवति धरि तन नवल(?) ||७४॥ समोसरण जिन नगन नांहि दीसै परवानैं(?) अविक्र तन(?) नभवस्त्र राग कारन सरधानहि। लाठी राख जती कहे अरु कर्ण वधावहि(?) जग(गज) उपरि ही मुगति गइ मरुदेवि बतावहि ।। नारी अगम्य दुरधर कठिन पंच महाव्रत पग धरहि।
न हि लहहि दोषबलहीन मुनि वारवार भोजन करहि ।।७५।। गीता छन्द
दरवित्त कि क्रिया बिन भावलिंग गृहस्थ केवल पद धरे । चंडालादिक जाति तहि मुनि मुकति तनव(?) बसि करै।। आभर्ण सहित जिनेसप्रतिमा रागकारण मानते। अनमिल बखानहि और मानहि कलपना सरधान ते ॥७६।।

Page #406

Hemaraj Pande's Caurāsi Bol
दोहा -
अडिल्ल
साभरण बसन मुगति चाहै मानि परिग्रह हठ गहै। रवि चंद मंडल मूल आया वीर वंदन कौ कहै ॥ सासुती गति मरजाद मेहि सूर ससि की जानते । अनमिल बखानहि और मानहि कलपना सरधान तै ॥७७॥

दूषन अठारह माहि बदलै कहै और सवारिकै ।
चौतीस अतिसय बदल केई गहहि और विचारिकै ॥ जिनिम (?) तै विनासी सौं (?) लरहि मुनि दोष रंच न बानतै (?) अनमिल बखानहि और मानहि कलपना सरधान तै ॥७८॥
सोधरम सुरपति जीतने कौ चमर वितरपति गयौ । तसु वज्रदण्ड विलास पंडित कहिहि वीर सरनि भयौ ॥
कर पूषत(?) मरि गयै न खिरै युगल तनु परवान तै। अनमिल बखानहि और मानहि कलपना सरधान है ॥ ७९ ॥
निरबान होत जिनेस काया खिरै दामिनि बत ही ।
वर नारि दे थिर करै श्रावक देखि कामी मुनि कही ॥ केवली तनु तै जीवबध है कहै मत मदपान तै। अनमिल बखानहि और मानहि कलपना सरधान तै ॥ ८० ॥
सुर मिले जिन दाढ पूजहि इंद्र जिन जब सिव गमै । जिन वीर मेरु अचल चलयौं जनम कल्यानक समै ॥ जिनजनम सूचक सुपन चौदह और नही मन आन तैं I अनमिल बखानहि और मानै कलपना सरधान तै ॥ ८१ ॥
गंगा देबी स्यौ है पचपन्न वर्ष हज्जार ।
चक्रवर्ति भरतेस नै कियो लोग व्यवहार ॥८२॥
भोगभूमि छानवै न गनहि उछेदि कै, चर्म नीर मै दोष न लागै वेदि कै ।
घृत करि साधित वासी भोजन लेतु है, सारे फल कौ भुंजत दोष न देतु है ॥८३॥ सवया इकतीसा -
रिषभ विरागता निमित्त नीलंजना नृत्य
मानै नही देव देवी की (?) कीनी विधान की ।
माता पिता जीवतैं विरागता कौं नाहि धरै
वीर वर्धमान औसी गर्भवास आन की ॥ बाहूबल कौ कहै कि युगल सरूपधारी हाड पूजै कौडे (?) थापि कहै परिवान की ( ? ) । नाभि मरुदेवी कैं जुगल धरम मानतु है । तिनहीतै जिन उतपत्ति सरधान की ॥ ८४ ॥

395

Page #407

396
Padmanabh S. Jaini
Jambu-jyoti
चौपइ
होहि जुगलीया सब मलधारी, कहै सलाका पुरुष निहारी। चौसठि इन्द्र न अधिके जाने, बारह देवलोक ही मानै ।।८५।। जे जादौ (=यादव) जिन मारग पक्षी, तिनको कहै मांस के भक्षी।
मनुज मानुषोत्तर के आगै, जाहै कहै न दूषन लागै ॥८६।। रोडक
कहै नाही नाही काम चउवीस अरु नवै नवोत्तरे लघु समुद्र मांन नाही। ऐरापति नर तजि खेत एक सों साठि मांही [one line missing?- -[८७]।। चौरासी लख जोनि है ए चौरासी बोल।
जै मानै ते मानि है भवसागर कल्लोल ॥८८।। दोहा
नगर-आगरा मैं वसै कौरपाल सग्यान । तिस निमित्त कवि हैम नै किर्यै कवित्त परवांन ।।८९।। दोष भाव धरि नहिं कियो, कियो न निज मत पोष। सत्यारथ उपदेस यह, कर्यो सुजन संतोष ।।९०॥ सत्यारथ वानी प्रगट, घटघट करौ उदोत। संयम(संसय) तिमिर पट[ल] फटौ, बढ्यौ ग्यान सुख होत ॥११॥ इति चतुरासीतिर्वादः सर्व पाखंड... इति चौरासी बोल समाप्तः ।।। लिखतं स्वामी वेणीदास अवरंगावाद महि संवत् १७२३ पोस सुदि पंचमी । यह पोथी का पत्र ९ अंक पत्र नव छै। या पोथी साह जो x x x x x x वाकी छै ।। ग्रंथाग्रंथ संख्या ।।....||मुकाम सांगानैर मध्ये॥
Annotations :
1. Jain Satya Prakāśa, vol. 21. I would like to thank Dr. John Cort for providing me
with a copy of this article. 2. Kasturchand Kasliwal, ed., Rajasthan ke Jain Sastra Bhandarom ki Grantha-suci, ___Jaipur 1957, part 2, entry # 320. 3. Pravacanasāra of Kundakunda, ed. A. N. Upadhye, Rājacandra Jaina Šāstramālā,
Agas 1964, pp. 105-106.

Page #408

Hemaraj Pande's Caurāsü Bol
397
4. Kasturchand Kasliwal, Kavivar Bulakhichand Bulakidas, evaṁ Hemaraj, Śrī
Mahāvīra Grantha Akādami, Jaipur 1983, pp. 205-228. 5. Strīnirvana-Kevalibhuktiprakarane of Śākatāyana, ed. Muni Jambūvijayjī, Jaina
Ātmānanda Sabhā, Bhavnagar 1974. * 6. Paul Dundas, “Food and Freedom : The Jaina Sectarian Debate on the Nature of
the Kevalin." Religion, vol. 15, London 1985, pp. 161-198. See also P. S. Jaini, "Kevalibhuktivicāra of Bhāvásena : Text and Translation," Researches in Indian and Buddhist Philosophy : Essays in Honour of Professor Alex Wayman, ed. R. K.
Sharma, Delhi 1993, pp. 163-178. 7. P. S. Jaini, Gender and Salvation : Jaina Debates on the Spiritual Liberation of
Women, Berkeley 1991.
8. It may be noted here that Upadhyāya Meghavijaya (of the Tapāgaccha, c. 1653
1704), a contemporary of Upādhyāya Yaśovijaya, in his Sanskrit Yuktiprabodha Svopajña-výtti has also responded to the eighty-four points raised against the Svetāmbaras by Hemaraj. This work appears not to have come to the attention of Professor Hiralal Kapadia. Hiralal Kapadiya, Gūrjara Sāhitya Sangraha, part 1, 1936, pp. 572-597. An earlier edition of this appears in Śrī Prakaraṇa-ratnākara, Nirnayasagara Press 1903, part 1, pp. 566-574.
नव्याशाम्बरा वाराणसीयाः श्वेताम्बरगीतार्थेभ्यो व्याख्यानं श्रृण्वन्तोऽन्यजनस्य तच्छासनश्रद्धाविभंगाय चतुरशीतिं जल्पान्...चकुः, तनिबन्धोऽपि कवित्वरीत्या हेमराजपण्डितेन निबद्धः ।
(p. 172 ff., published by Rishabhadeva Kesharimal Svetāmbara Samstha, Ratlam, 1928).
9. Helen M. Johnson, trans., Trisastisalākāpurusacaritra, 6 vols., Oriental Institute
of Baroda 1931-1962, vol. 6, p. 227. Henceforth TSPC. 10. TSPC, vol. 6, p. 33. In fact, however, according to Hemacandra, the Jina teaches
grammar to Indra. 11. TSPC, vol. 6, p. 37. 12. TSPC, vol. 6, p. 38. 13. TSPC, vol. 6, p. 125. 14. TSPC, vol. 6, p. 127. 15. TSPC, vol. 6, p. 25. 16. TSPC, vol. 6, p. 38-40. 17. TSPC, vol. 6, p. 26.

Page #409

398
30. TSPC, vol. 6, p. 352.
31. TSPC, vol. 6, p. 29.
32. TSPC, vol. 6, p. 28.
Padmanabh S. Jaini
18. TSPC, vol. 1, p. 326.
19. For the Digambara version of this story, see Harivamsa Purana of Jinasena, ed. Pannalal Jain, Delhi 1962, sarga 15, pp. 230-235.
20. TSPC, vol. 4, p. 86.
21. TSPC, vol. 1, pp. 376-378.
22. TSPC, vol. 6, pp. 34-36.
23. TSPC, vol. 6. pp. 193-195.
24. TSPC, vol. 6, p. 299.
25. TSPC, vol. 6, pp. 142-143.
26. TSPC, vol. 6, p. 10. He was born to an incestuous marriage of a king to his daughter.
27. TSPC, vol. 6, p. 84.
28. TSPC, vol. 1, p. 197.
29. TSPC, vol. 6, pp. 106-109.

ᄆᄆᄆ
Jambu-jyoti

Page #410

How Jains Know What They Know :
A Lay Jain Curriculum
John E. Cort
In a fieldwork entry dating from 1985, the late Kendall W. Folkert gave a list of what he called “lay readings' according to Munijī.” At the time Folkert was researching the Svetāmbara Jain scriptural canon with an eye to understanding it from a performative perspective. He sought to understand the Svetāmbara canon as it is shaped or vectored by actual ritual performance (in this case pratikramana), rather than by any abstract theoretical framework'. Folkert had obviously asked Muni Jambūvijayjī, with whom he was studying as part of this research, what Munijī thought would make up a lay Svetāmbara Mūrtipūjaka Jain canon. The lay canon listed by Muni Jambūvijayjī is not shaped exclusively by ritual performance, but rather is a reading list that would tell a lay Jain what he or she needs to know, both to perform a number of key Jain rituals and to understand the cosmological, theological, and philosophical assumptions that underlie those rituals. What is immediately noticeable about this list is that it does not include many of the texts one might expect, texts found in most introductory accounts of the Jains, such as the 11 Svetāmbara angas. The texts on this list are not the "original canon" of early Jainism, but rather medieval textbooks designed for the systematic study of Jain doctrines and practices in their developed and mature forms. Most of the texts on this list are missing from almost all overviews of Jainism in any language, even the excellent recent English ones of Jaini (1979) and Dundas (1992). The list is as follows:
1. Panca Pratikramana (= vernacular for avasyaka)
II. Nine Smaranas (poems used as mantras)

Page #411

400
III. Four Prakaraṇas
John E. Cort
1. Jivavicara of Säntisüri
2. Navatattva
3. Dandaka (24 kinds of jivas)
4. Sangrahani (slokas by Haribhadra on geography and astronomy)
IV. Tribhasyas by Devendrasūri
1. Caityavandana
2. Guruvandana
3. Paccakkhana (fasting, vows, not sallekhanā)
V. Six Karmagranthas
VI. Two Brhadsangrahaṇīs
1. Maladhārī Candrasuri (most read)
2. Jinabhadra

Jambu-jyoti
VII. Two Bṛhadṣetrasamāsas (different authors)
VIII. Tattvärthadhigamasutra
There is no evidence that Folkert followed up on this list, except for his unfinished research on pratikramana. In this essay I will fill in that gap, by surveying why it is that a respected Jain monk-intellectual might present this as a curriculum for lay Jain study. This list forms what in another. context I have termed a "Canon-near", in contrast to the usual sets of texts studied by scholars of Jainism, which in some ways form "Canons-far." As I defined these two concepts, "In a Canon-near text, primacy and authority are defined by praxis and the resultant contextualized understanding, whereas in a Canon-far text primacy and authority are located in some intrinsic ontological value of the texts themselves" (Cort 1992 175). While I doubt if any but a very small number of Jain laity actually study these texts, for the list is really much closer to what one. would expect of a curriculum for either mendicants or lay pandits, it nonetheless provides us with a textual entrée into Jainism that is an alternative to the usual ones of the 45 Svetambara Agamas or other such lists.

Page #412

How Jains Know What They Know: A Lay Jain Curriculum
Pañca Pratikramaņa
In its narrowest form, pratikramana refers to a specific ritual in which the individual dissociates him or herself from any intention behind all karmacreating actions, and thereby seeks to minimize the karmic bondage resulting from actions. It is performed as a requirement by all mendicants twice daily, and laity are expected to perform it at least once annually, on the occasion of Paryusana (Folkert 1993: 189-211). There are five slightly varied liturgies, for use daily in the morning and evening, every fortnight, every four months, and every year. But the term also has a wider meaning, covering what is otherwise denoted by the six avaśyakas or six daily rituals obligatory for all mendicants (Williams 1963 184-215, Balbir 1993). In terms of lay Jainism, this wider meaning is quite nicely summarized by Folkert (1993: 92):
The Pratikramaņa Sūtras is essentially a manual for Jain daily religious ritual, and consists of excerpts from canonical texts, rearranged into patterns for ritual recitation, plus devotional poetry and chants. This material is usually in Prakrit, the Jain classical language, but it is commonly translitered into Gujarati script [in Gujarati] so that laypeople can read and pronounce the older material. This literature is accompanied by Gujarati [or other vernacular] explanations and detailed instructions for the ritual actions that are to be performed as the Prakrit passages are read or sung. The Pratikramaṇa material forms the major part of all the religious literature, or scripture, that the Jain layperson knows. This form of transmission is the dominant mode, and has been for the last 500 years, of "scriptural" use by Jains.
401
Printed texts of the pratikramana are readily available, and found in the houses of most Jains, as well as in large numbers in the collections of local congregations. There are both shorter editions containing the two daily pratikramaṇa liturgies (devasia and rāïa), and longer editions containing all five liturgies. In addition to the pratikramaṇa liturgies, these manuals contain the liturgies for paccakhāna (Sanskrit pratyakhyāna), in which one resolves to perform certain austerities in order to wear away accumulated karma and to avoid karmic influx; guruvandana, in which laity venerate mendicants; caityavandana, in which the person venerates a Jina image; sāmāyika, a vow of meditative equanimity for a restricted

Page #413

402
John E. Cort
Jambū-jyoti
period; posadha, a vow of temporary mendicancy; and other ascetic rites. Some manuals also contain the texts of the Nine Smaranas (discussed below), and other hymns in Sanskrit, Prakrit and vernacular languages. Thus, like a book of common prayer or missal in orthodox Christian contexts, these manuals provide a pious Jain with all the hymns and liturgies needed for an orthoprax religious life.
The Nine Smaranas
The nine "remembrances" are a set of Prakrit and Sanskrit hymns in which the individual eulogizes the Jinas and the cardinal teachings of Jainism. The first of these is the Navakāra Mantara (Namokkāra Mangala), the nine-line universal Jain mantra in which the individual pays homage to the spiritual hierarchy of the Jinas, other liberated souls, mendicant leaders, mendicant teachers, and all other mendicants.
The other eight texts are longer hymns, several with a distinctly Tantric flavor, in which the individual pays homage to a specific Jina, and thereby actualizes the salvific and world-enhancing virtues symbolized by that Jina. The five-verse Prakrit Uvasaggaharaṁ Stotra is attributed to Bhadrabāhu (5th-4th c. B. C. E.)*, who composed it to remove (hara) the obstacle (uvasagga) of plague from the Jain congregation of Ujjain by praising Pārsvanātha. The 14-verse Prakrit śāntikaram Stotra was composed by the Tapā Gaccha Ācārya Somasundarasūri (1380-1447) to remove plague from a local congregation in Mewar by praising Santinātha. The 14-verse Prakrit Tijayapahutta Stotra is attributed to Mānadevasūri (c. 4th c.)+, who composed it to prevent hostile vyantara gods from causing problems for the Jain congregation in Takshashila; in it he invokes the 16 Tantric vidyādevis (see Cort 1987 : 237-40). The 24-verse Prakrit Namiūna Stotra, also known as the Bhayahara Stotra, is attributed to Mānatungasūri (c. 4th c.)*; the recitation of this hymn to Pārsvanātha is said to cure many kinds of disease. The 40-verse Prakrit Ajitaśānti Stotra alternates verses to Ajitanātha and Santinātha; it is attributed to Nandisena Ācārya, who is
* c. B. C. 325-297 - Editors.
+ Either by Mānadeva I (c. 9th cent. A. D.) or by Mānadeva II (c. latter half of the 11th cent. A. D.) — Editors.
xc. 6th-7th cent. A. D. - Editors.

Page #414

How Jains Know What They Know : A Lay Jain Curriculum
403
said to have been contemporaneous with Mahāvīra3. The 44-verse Sanskrit Bhaktāmara Stotra devoted to Ādinātha is attributed to Mānatungasūri, who composed it in the royal court at Banaras to win a contest of the powers of mantra-poetry to free the poet from oppression. The 44-verse Sanskrit Kalyānamandira Stotra dedicated to Pārsvanātha is attributed to Siddhasena Divākara, who is said to have composed it in the first century B. C. E. in Ujjain; by reciting it he caused an image of Pārsvanātha to burst forth from a śiva linga, by which means he converted King Vikramāditya to Jainism*. The ninth Smarana is the Sanskrit (with some Prakrit) mixed prose and verse Brhacchānti Stotra attributed by Vädivetāla Säntisūri (d. 1039); it is chiefly addressed to śāntinātha, and invokes peace upon all beings in the cosmos.
Some collections add other similar hymns to this group. These include the Atmaraksā Navakāra Mantra, an 8-verse Tantric version of the Navakāra Mantra in which the reciter extends it onto his own body for protection; the 19-verse Sanskrit Laghu śānti Stava, attributed to Mānadevasūri, who composed this hymn to śāntinātha to remove a cholera epidemic; and the 102-verse Sanskrit Rsimandala Stotra, attributed to Mahāvīra's first disciple Gautama Svāmī, which describes a complex Tantric mandala for invoking a large array of Jain deities in order to protect the worshippert.
Many of these hymns are recited daily by Jains, both lay and mendicant. Some of them, such as the Bhaktāmara Stotra, have been among the most popular of all Jain texts for centuries. Several also find a place in the pratikramana and other liturgies. Neither bhakti nor tantra have been adequately studied in their Jain contexts; we see here that both play important roles in everyday Jain practice. In most of these hymns the two
* The hymn in question was composed by the Digambara poet and dialectician Kumudacandra in c. A. D. 1100-1125 - Editors. (However, see clarification on the issue of dates' by Cort in this paper under his annotation 2.)
+ It is a medieval composition --Editors.
N. B. What John Cort described are the Navasmaranas as incorporated in the tradition of the Tapā-gaccha. Those of the Kharatara-gaccha is the Saptasmarana or seven hymnal compositions which include those by their own medieval hymnists, namely Jinavallabha sūri (c. A.D. 1060-1119) and his successor Jinadatta sūri.–Editors

Page #415

404
John E. Cort
Jambū-jyoti
are intertwined: the author's and singer's devotion to the Jina, based on samyagdarśana or correct faith in the basics of the Jain worldview, is what makes these hymns efficacious; and the Tantric power of the words themselves in these hymns, each of which is understood to be in its entirety a mantra, is what generates the worldly results. We also see in these hymns a concern not for liberation (moksa) from the rounds of rebirth, but rather a concern for improving one's wellbeing within rebirth.
Four Prakaranas
The four medieval Prakrit textbooks give the basic Jain teachings on metaphysics, ontology, and cosmology. They have served as the introductory texts for studying these subjects for hundreds of years. Only the more ambitious Jain intellectuals move on from these textbooks to tackle the more difficult earlier texts, both those in the Svetāmbara "canon" and the systematic treatments of the early Jain philosophers. The commonlyavailable editions of them are sārth or "including explanation": in addition to the Prakrit root text, they provide word-by-word Prakrit-to-vernacular glosses, Sanskrit trots, and extensive vernacular explanations, for ease of comprehension. These scholarly aids are the modern reflections of the copious medieval commentaries on many of these texts.
The 51-verse Jivavicāra is attributed to the same 11th century Vādivetāla śāntisūri mentioned above, but there is not a scholarly consensus in support of this attribution (Mehtā and Kāpadiyā 1968: 166). It provides an extensive catalogue of Jaina ontology, in particular the various forms in which unenlightened souls can embody : from single-sensed through five-sensed bodies, and in the four realms of possible rebirth of humans, heavenly beings, hellish beings, and plants and animals.
Neither the author nor the date of the 30-verse Navatattva are known. This text provides a basic overview of the nine verities (tattva) that are the building blocks of Jain metaphysics : (1) sentient soul (jīva); (2) insentient nonsoul or matter (ajīva); (3) influx of karma into contact with the soul (äsrava); (4) bondage of the soul by karma (bandha); (5) meritorious forms of karma (punya); (6) demeritorious forms of karma (pāpa); (7) blockage of this karmic influx (samvara); (8) dissociation of the soul from karma (nirjarā); and (9) liberation (moksa, nirvana). There are hundreds of copies of the Navatattva in Jain manuscript libraries, and

Page #416

How Jains Know What They Know: A Lay Jain Curriculum
more than half-a-dozen commentaries written between the 14th and 17th centuries (Mehta and Käpaḍiyā 1968: 182).
The Dandaka Prakaraṇa, also known as the Vicarachattīsiyāsutta and the Laghusangrahaṇī, is a 44-verse Prakrit text authored in the 16th century by Gajasāra Muni (Mehta and Kāpaḍiyā 1968: 173-74), that partly overlaps in subject material with the Jivavicara. In it the author details the physical and mental qualities and abilities of living beings in the 24 possible life forms (dandaka): (1) hellish beings, (2-11) ten forms of heavenly beings, (12-16) five forms of single-sensed beings (with bodies of earth, water, fire, wind, and plant), (17-19) two-, three-, and four-sensed beings, (20) wombborn animals, (21) womb-born humans, and (22-24) vyantara, jyotiṣī and vaimānika deities.
405
The fourth Prakarana is the 29-verse Jambūdvīpa Sangrahaṇī, also known as the Laghu Sangrahaṇī, attributed to Haribhadrasūri, although quite likely this is not the same as the one (or two) famous Haribhadras who lived in the formative years of Śvetambara philosophy. It provides an introduction to Jain geography, discussing the features and dimensions of the various lands, mountains, rivers, and other features in the middle, human-inhabited section universe.
These four texts together provide the reader with a detailed portrait of the physical universe as understood according to the Jain worldview. Much of the subject matter here is rather abstruse, consisting of long lists of categories and sub-categories that can make for tiresome reading. But without a firm grasp of these aspects of the Jain physical universe, the Jain moral universe and its expression in Jain praxis cannot be adequately understood.
Tribhāṣyas
The subject of Jain praxis is the next one treated in this reading list. The Tribhāṣyas, also known as the Bhāṣyatraya, are Prakrit commentaries by Devendrasuri on three of the avaśyakas, the daily rituals obligatory for all mendicants and recommended by many Jain intellectuals for the laity as well. Devendrasūri (d. 1271) was the disciple of Jagaccandrasūri, the founder of the Tapa Gaccha. It was Devendrasūri who established the intellectual foundations of the gaccha, and his texts remain central to

Page #417

406
John E. Cort
Jambū-jyoti
the Tapā Gaccha intellectual tradition today?. In the 63-verse Caityavandanabhāsya, he explains the rite of veneration of the Jinas; in the 41-verse Guruvandanabhäsya, he explains the rite of veneration of the mendicant gurus; and in the 48-verse Pratyakhtanabhāsya, he explains the rite of stating one's intention to perform austerities, as well as many of the details of Jain ascetic and dietary practice.
Six Karmagranthas
These textbooks on Jain Karma theory are also largely the work of Devendrasuri. In a total of 304 Prakrit verses, he wrote revised versions of five of the six classical Karmagranthas. His set was therefore known also as the Navya Karmagranthas. The titles of these five, which were the same as the titles of the classical texts, are Karmavipāka, Karmastava, Bandhasvāmitva, Sadasīti, and Sataka. While Devendrasūri himself wrote Sanskrit commentaries on these five texts, most modern popular editions are accompanied instead by a vernacular commentary. Most editions are also completed by the 91-verse Prakrit Saptati, the sixth of the classical Karmagranthas, attributed by Candrarși Mahattara®. Together these texts provide a thorough, albeit often dense, treatment of the Jain karma doctrine.
Two Brhadsangrahaņīs
These are two more texts on Jain cosmology. One is a 318-verse Prakrit text by the 12th century Candrasūri, disciple of the great commentator Hemacandrasūri Maladhāri (not to be confused with his contemporary namesake Ācārya Hemacandra (1089-1172], known as Kalikālasarvajña or "the omniscient one of the dark age"). The other is a 367-verse Prakrit text by Jinabhadragani Kşamāśramana (c. 6th c.). Folkert's notes indicate that, according to Muni Jambūvijayjī, the former is more widely read. It is certainly more widely available, as several popular editions of it have been published, whereas the latter exists only in out-of-print editions from early in the century.
Two Brhadksetrasamāsas
These are still further cosmological texts. One is in 637 or 655 verses, and composed by the same Jinabhadragani Ksamāśramana mentioned above (Mehtā and Kāpadiyā 1968: 168-69). Folkert's notes do not indicate who the author of the second of these texts might be; Mehtā and Kāpadiyā

Page #418

How Jains Know What They Know: A Lay Jain Curriculum
(1968: 167-70) list several other texts by the same name, none of which is very widely known.
Tattvärthasūtra (Tattvärthädhigamasutra)
The 350-verse Sanskrit Tattvärthasūtra by Umāsvāti (c. 4th century) is the most famous of the texts on this list, and the one that clearly would be included in anybody's reading list of essential Jain texts1o. This was the first systematic presentation of Jain doctrine (and in fact went a long way toward creating this systematization) for a pan-Indian audience in the pan-Indian scholarly language of Sanskrit and the pan-Indian genre of sastra, and so provides a suitable summary of the basics of that doctrine. Starting out with a definition of Jainism as the path to liberation (mokṣamārga) consisting of correct faith, knowledge, and conduct (samyagdarśana, samyagjñāna, and samyakcäritra), Umäsväti then proceeds to outline the Jain understandings of cosmology, ontology, karmic bondage, and liberation. The text itself consists of short, cryptic aphorisms, and so is nearly unintelligible without a commentatory. Dozens of them have been composed over the centuries, starting with one that the Svetämbara tradition ascribes to Umāsvāti himself. Almost every edition of the text will contain one or more commentaries, some of them older, well-known commentaries in Sanskrit, others more recent vernacular commentaries. Each commentator has leaned heavily on the preceding commentaries, and so any given edition essentially comprises over one thousand years of accumulated tradition. Concluding Comments
407
This curriculum provides the reader with everything he or she needs to be both an orthodox Jain, who has both samyagdarśana or correct faith in the verity of the Jain worldview, and samyagjñāna or a correct intellectual understanding of the technical specifics of that worldview. It also provides everything needed to be an orthoprax Jain, who is engaged in samyakcäritra and so performs correct ritual conduct in response to that worldview.
By reading the Tattvärthasūtra and the Navatattva, one will gain an understanding of Jain metaphysics. By reading the various Sangrahaṇī and Kṣetrasamäsa texts, in addition to the Tattvärthasutra, one will learn the complex Jain theories of cosmology; this Jain vision of a vast universe of souls in bondage underlies the urgency with which Jain teachers urge

Page #419

408
John E. Cort
Jambū-jyoti
the individual to seek liberation. This vision is further explained by reading the texts that explain Jain theories of ontology, the Jivavicāra, Dandaka, Tattvārthasūtra, and the Karmagranthas. These last two also provide one with an analysis of the causes and mechanisms of karmic bondage, in other words, the Jain explanation for the imperfect and unsatisfactory human condition. Finally, the other texts in this curriculum provide one with a practical way to respond to this growing understanding of human
ndage and suffering. The Pañca Pratikramana Sūtras explain the āvaśyakas, those rituals encumbent upon mendicants as daily practice to advance along the path to liberation. The Tribhāsyas also explain the daily practice, as oriented in three directions: devotion to the Jir the exemplars of the possibility of perfecting and liberating the soul, devotion to the gurus as those who are travelling the path of liberation, and the various forms of asceticism that coupled with devotion make up the Jain path. The Navasmarana hymns are not explanatory texts, but rather ritual actualizations of the powers inherent in the Jain path, the performance of which both advance one along the path and provide the mundane protection needed to sustain the Jain community.
This curriculum is specifically a Svetāmbara Mūrtipūjak one. A similar curriculum for a Digambara, Sthānakavāsī, or Svetāmbara Terāpanthi layperson would consist of different texts. The topics covered in such a curriculum would be broadly the same, although there would some difference in both specific doctrines and practices and in the overall tenor of the curriculum. This curriculum is in some ways even more specifically Tapā Gaccha, and so a curriculum for a layperson in the Kharatara, Añcala, Tristuti, Pārsvacandra, or other gacchas would also include some different texts. This very specificity indicates that the careful study of the intellectual history of Jainism needs to pay attention to issues of sectarian affiliation. The portrayal of Jainism as a single set of teachings that is the same regardless of time, place, or sect results in the portrayal of a reified entity that exists more in the scholar's study than it ever has on the ground in India.
I noted at the outset of this essay that this curriculum provided at Folkert by Muni Jambūvijayji has a distinctively mendicant cast to it. While many of these are texts that most Mūrtipūjaka mendicants study, it is only the most committed layperson who would have much familiarity with any

Page #420

How Jains Know What They Know : A Lay Jain Curriculum
409
of these texts except for the Navasmaranas. Nonetheless, one will find copies of some of these texts in a large number of Jain households, and these are the texts to which a Jain interested in learning more about the intellectual foundations of his or her religious tradition would turn. With the exception of the Tattvārthasūtra, this curriculum contains none of the scriptural canon of "original” Jain texts with which Jainologists usually begin their explications of Jainism. But, as Kendall Folkert (1993 : 35-94) so clearly demonstrated, the scholarly predilection to focus exclusively upon "original” texts when studying a religious tradition itself betrays one of the origins of the academic study of religion in Protestant Biblical Studies, a tendency inherited by many scholars who themselves are not Protestant Christians'l. But it is not these original texts to which Jains turn when they want to learn about their own tradition, and so it behooves scholars to pay attention more to what Jains might actually read if they want to understand how Jains know what they know.
Annotations :
This essay is dedicated to the memory of Kendall W. Folkert, through whom I was
first introduced to Muni Jambūvijayjī. 1. See Folkert 1993 : 41-94, especially 91-94.
2. Information on the Smarana texts is derived from a variety of popular sources, in
particular the introductions found in Navāb and the unattributed 1972 Ahmedabad edition. Traditional dates and attributions of authorship for several of these hymns are clearly improbable. My discussion reflects a Jain self-understanding of the history of these texts and authors, what I have elsewhere (Cort 1995) called a "localized
history", not the voice of text-critical historicist scholarship. 3. Another tradition says he was a contemporary of Neminātha. (His real date seems
c. late 5th early 6th cent. A. D.)*
4. For introductions to these topics, see Cort forthcoming-a, Dundas 1998, and Jain
1997.
5. The dynamic tension and interplay between the ideology of the path to liberation
(moksamārga) and the religious value of wellbeing is the subject of Cort forthcoming
-b. * See Dhaky, “The Date of Ajita-śānti-stava," in which

Page #421

410
John E. Cort
Jambū-jyoti
6. Mehta and Kāpadiyă 1968 : 170-71. On the theory that there were two principal
Haribhadras, in addition to later authors by the same name, see Williams 1965. (There are no two early Haribhadra-s as was envisaged by Williams. This point is now becoming increasingly clear. The problem is being discussed elsewhere -
Editors.) 7. In addition to the Tribhāsyas and the Karmagranthas discussed herein, Devendrasūri
was the author of a commentary on the Pratikramana Sūtras, the Vandāruvrtti; a manual of lay conduct, the Srāddhadinakrtya; as well as several books on various topics in Jain metaphysics, praxis, and mytho-history such as the Siddhapañcāśikā, Siddhadandikā, Dānādikulaka, Dharmaratnatikā, and Sudarsanācaritra (Mehtā and Käpadiyā 1968 : 129 and 185). A thorough study of this giant of medieval Svetāmbara intellectual history is needed. (He also had composed a few fine hymns in Sanskrit.) - Editors.
8. Some scholars are of the opinion that its author was Śivaśarmasūri; see Mehtā and
Kāpadiyā 1968: 128. The length of the text also varies; the edition in the bibliography has 91 verses, Mehtă and Kāpadiyā (112) say it has 75 verses, and von Glasenapp (1942 : xiii) mentions manuscripts containing 70, 75, 77, 89, and 93 verses. ("Śivaśarma' could be Vācaka Sivanandi (c. 5th cent. A. D.] who had commented
on the Jyotisakarandaka of Pādalipta sūri I of the mid Kusāna period.) — Editors 9. Mehta and Kāpadiyā (1968: 172-3) refer to a 273-verse version. 10. There has been extensive scholarly discussion of the date of the author and whether
the author was Svetāmbara or Digambara. See Dhaky 1995 and Johnson 1995 : 46-7, and the references therein. (In reality, Umāsvāti was never Svetāmbara or Digambara, nor Botika- Ksapanaka or Yapanīyā. He belonged to the main Northern Indian Nirgranth stream in which mendicants maintained nudity but kept minimum possession a piece of cloth in hand, a single bowl, and the broom. As such, he
recognized and respected the agamas, the doctrines, and the dogmas.)- Editors 11. See also Cort 1990.

Page #422

How Jains Know What They Know: A Lay Jain Curriculum
SOURCES CITED
SANSKRIT AND PRAKRIT TEXTS
I have given readily-accessible modern Gujarati editions of the texts whenever possible, rather than more scholarly critical editions, since the former are what a lay reader is likely to encounter. Dates reflect the copies in my personal collection; most of these texts are regularly reprinted.
411
Bhāṣyatraya of Devendrasūri. Mehsana : Śrīmad Yasovijayji Jain Samskṛt Pāṭhśāļā ane Śrī Jain Śreyaskar Mandal, 1977 (4th printing).
Bṛhatsangrahanī of Maladhārī Candrasūri. With Gujarati translation by Pandit Amṛtlal Purusottamdās, Ahmedabad: Śrī Jain Prakāśan mandir n.d. Bṛhatsangrahani of Jinabhadragani Kśamāśramaṇa. With Vivṛti of Malayagiri. Bhavnagar, 1917.
With Vivṛti of Malayagiri and Gujarati translation by Kunvarji Anandjī. Jain Dharm Prasārak Sabhā, 1935.
Dandaka Prakarana of Gajasara Muni. Mehsana : Śrīmad Yasovijayji Jain Samskṛt Pāṭhśāļā ane Śrī Jain Śreyaskar Mandal, 1981 (5th printing).
Devasia-Raïa Pratikramana Sutro. Mehsana : Śrīmad Yasovijayji Jain Samskṛt Pathśālā ane Śrī Jain Śreyaskar Mandal, 1976 (10th printing).
Jambudvipa Sangrahaṇī (Laghusangrahani) of Haribhadrasūri. Mehsana : Śrīmad Yasovijayji Jain Samskṛt Pāṭhśālā ane Śrī Jain Śreyaskar Mandal, 1981 (5th printing).
Jivavicāra of Vadivetāla Säntisūri. Mehsana Śrīmad Yasovijayji Jain Samskṛt Pāṭhśāļā ane Śrī Jain Śreyaskar Mandal, 1985 (10th printing).
Karmagrantha of Devendrasūri. With Stubakārth of Muni Jinavijay. 3 volumes. Mehsana : Śrīmad Yasovijayji Jain Samskṛt Pathśālā ane Śrī Jain Śreyaskar Mandal, 1977 (4th printing).
Kṣetrasamāsa of Jinabhadragani Kṣamāśramaņa. Edited by Nityanandvijaygani. 2 volumes. Cambay : Sanghvi Ambālāl Ratnacand Jain Dharmik Trust, 1978-79.

Mahāprabhāvika Navasmaraṇādi Stotra Sangraha. Ahmedabad Jain Prakāśan Mandir, n.d.

Page #423

412
John E. Cort
Jambū-jyoti
Mahāprabhāvika Navasmarana. Edited by Sārābhāi Manilal Navāb. Ahmedabad : Sārābhāi Manilāl Navāb, 1961. Shree Jain Prachina Sahityoddhar Granthavali Series 6.
Navasmarana Mūlapāțha. Ahmedabad : Śrī Rājendrasūri Sāhitya Prakāśan Mandir, 1972.
Navatattva Prakaraṇa. Mehsana : śrīmad Yasovijayjī Jain Samskrt Pāțhaśālā ane Śrī Jain Śreyaskar Mandal, 1993 (15th printing).
Pañca Pratikramaņādi Sūtro : Mehsana : śrīmad Yaśovijayjī Jain Saṁskṛt Pāțhśālā ane Śrī Jain Śreyaskar Mandal, 1983 (15th printing).
Tattvårthasūtra of Umāsvāti. With Gujarati Vivecana by Muni Rājsekharvijay. Edited by Pandit Pukhrāj Amīcand Kothārī. Mehsana : śrīmad Yasovijayjí Jain Saṁskṛt Pāthśālā ane Śrī Jain Śreyaskar Mandal, 1976.
MODERN WORKS
Nalini Balbir, 1993. Āvaśyaka-Studien : Introduction générale et Traductions. Stuttgart : Franz Steiner. Alt-und Neu-Indische Studien 45, 1.
John E. Cort, 1987. “Medieval Jaina Goddess Traditions,” Numen 34, 235-55.
1990. “Models of and for the Study of the Jains," Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 2:1, 42-71.
1992. "Svetāmbara Mürtipūjak Jain Scripture in a Performative Context," Jeffrey R. Timm (ed.), Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia, 171-94. Albany: State University of New York Press.
1995. “Genres of Jain History,” Journal of Indian Philosophy 23, 469506.
Forthcoming-a. "Bhakti in the Early Jain Tradition : Understanding Devotional Religion in South Asia," History of Religions.
Forthcoming-b. Liberation and Wellbeing in Jainism : Ritual, Ideology, and Religious Values. New York: Oxford University Press.
M. A. Dhaky, 1995. "Umāsvāti in Epigraphical and Literary Tradition," L. K. Śrīnivasan and S. Nāgāraju (eds.), Śrī Nāgābhinandanam : Dr. M. S. Nāgāraja Rao Festschrift, 505-22. Bangalore : Dr. M. S. Nagaraja Rao Felicitation Committee.

Page #424

How Jains Know What They Know: A Lay Jain Curriculum
Paul Dundas, 1992. The Jains. London: Routledge.
1998. "Becoming Gautama: Mantra and History in Śvetämbara Jainism," John E. Cort (ed.), Open Boundaries: Jain Communities and Cultures in Indian History, 31-52. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Kendall W. Folkert, 1993. Scripture and Community: Collected Essays on the Jains. Edited by John E. Cort. Atlanta: Scholars Press.
413
Helmuth von. Glasenapp, 1942. The Doctrine of Karman in Jain Philosophy. Translated by G. Barry Gifford. Bombay Bai Vijibai jivanlal Panalal Charity Fund.
Sagarmal Jain, 1997. Jaindharm aur Tantrik Sadhanā. Vārāṇasi : Pārsvanath Vidyapith.
Padmanabh S. Jaini, 1979. The Jaina Path of Purification. Berkeley: University of California Press.
W. J. Johnson, 1995. Harmless Souls: Karmic bondage and Religious Change in Early Jainism with Special Reference to Umäsväti and Kundakunda. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Mohanlal Mehta and Hīräläl Ra. Kāpadiyā. 1968. Jain Sahitya kā Bṛhad Itihas, bhag 4: Karma-Sahitya va Agamik Prakaran. Väränasi : Pārsvanath Vidyasram Sodh Samsthän.
R. Williams, 1963. Jaina Yoga. London: Oxford University Press. 1965. Haribhadra. Journal of the School of Oriental and African Studies 28, 101-11.

000

Page #425

Two Unpublished Caitya Paripātīs on
Citod-tīrtha
Jitendra Shah
The tīrthamālās and the caitya-paripāțīs are the two distinctive types of metrical compositions in Jaina medieval literature. Of the two, the caityaparipātis concern with the pilgrimages undertaken to the Jaina holy places, the routes followed, and what was noticed at the tirtha-sites by the authors. These refer to the then existing caityas, their enshrined Jinas, and other concomitant information besides the numerical count of the caityas and in some cases the connected notable events and other details such as the names of the founders and the dates of foundations. Although the brief descriptions given—these usually are not important from literary viewpoint—they are invaluable as historical records of the Jaina places of Worship in medieval times. By editing such unpublished works preserved in the Jaina libraries of manuscripts, the scholars in the past like Vijayadharma sūri, Pandit Bechardās Doshi, Hirālal Rasikdās Kāpadiā, Mohanlāl Dalichand Deshāi, Sārābhāi Nawāb, Munivara Kalyānavijayjī, Agarchand Nahātā, Vidyadhara Johrāpurkar, and Madhusudan Dhāṁki (M. A. Dhaky) have attracted attention to them. A large number of those compositions describe the most revered holy places such as Satruñjaya with Pālitānā, Girnāra with Junāgadh, also Amdāvād (Ahmedābād, medieval Aśāpalli-Karnāvati), Pātan (Anahillapātana), and Khambhāt (Śtambhatīrtha) besides many, many other sites. Several of such works also refer to such other holy places like Idar, Abu, Serisā, et cetera, these psalms were composed mostly in Old Gujarātī. It is possible that several such works, hitherto unpublished, are still lying in the Jaina manuscripts libraries. An attempt here is made to publish two such paripātīs which so far were unpublished. These relate to the 'Citod' or 'Citradurga-tīrtha' in the Mevād area of south-western Rajasthan. For the purpose of comparison, I also include here the earlier published "Citod Paripātī," composed by the disciple of one Jayahemal.

Page #426

Two Unpiblished Chaitya Pariptis on Citod-tīrtha
415
The subjects of tīrthamālās and caitya-paripāțīs
The tirthamālās, as a class of literature, originated in time before the caitya-paripāțī class. They continued to be composed in later centuries as well. The earliest can be traced from c. mid 11th century A. D. These compositions fill in the gaps in the knowledge of history regarding the Jaina tīrthas, their temples, the Jinas to which they were sacred, and sometimes also give small but significant bits of information, otherwise unknown from other sources.
Generally speaking, the other class of Jaina literature rarely informs us on rulers and the holy places. But the tīrthmālās exclusively concentrate on Jaina holy places and often are fairly informative on them. Even from the viewpoint of deciding the true geographical location of a place, antiquity of a notable caitya, history of the language, history in general, also the trade routes, the prosperity of the towns and cities that lied on the route, etc. This class of literature provides a valuable source for knowing the status of Jainism in the particular centuries and regions. Besides this, these tirthmālās are often the only source of information on Jaina holy places and the temples that subsequently were destroyed by the invaders and sometimes abandoned after the migration of the Jainas from the concerned places. They, at times, also give information about the Jina images that were moved from their original sites to other sites in a particular period. Afterwards, another class of such compositions, the caitya-paripātīs, as aforenoted, developed in old Gujarāti (also called Maru-Gurjara-bhāsā). Earlier, the languages employed in composing the tīrthmālās were Sanskrit and Prakrit. The two paripātīs edited here are in old Gujarati language. Two Citod-tirtha Caitya-paripāțīs
As explained in the foregoing, a caitya-paripāti describes the travels of a congregation proceeding on a pilgrimage to a holy place or places from a certain town or city. It describes the route they followed for their destination, and also the towns or villages, or any other holy place or Jaina temples they visited on the way. The two Citrakūta-caitya-paripātīs presented here describe the path taken for reaching Citod, the visit on the way to the Jaina temples and the Jinālayas and the Jina images enshrined therein. The First Caitya-paripāți
The author of the first work is the disciple of Bhāvsågara sūri. He has not mentioned his own name, the last line reads as this follows:

Page #427

416
J. B. Shah
Jambū-jyoti
"E Vidhaï paksa ganadhara Bhāvsägarasūri anucara im Bhanai"
Meaning : The disciple of Bhāvsāgara sūri who is the leader of the Vidhipakşa, has composed this (paripāti).
We have no other information about the author. Only a single manuscript of this work is available and is preserved in the Lalbhai Dalpatbhai Institute of Indology, Ahmedabad, (numbered 16682). It was obtained originally from the collection of the Nagarseth of Ahmedabad. The date of the manuscript is c. 17th century. It has two pages, each containing 15 lines. Each line has about 42 letters. The date of composition is Samvat 1562 (A. D. 1506). The language employed is simple and hence easy to follow. This composition briefly describes the path from Pāțan to Citrakūta / Citod, and the caityas and villages they visited on the way pilgrimage route.
Second Citrakūta paripāți :
We find no mention of the name of the author of this Paripātī, nor do we find the designation of his gaccha or his guru's name in the colophon. Besides, the initial 35 stanzas are missing. Some years ago, Prof. Dhaky hac procured its transcript from the Oriental Institute, Baroda, and given it to me for editing. No information was recorded on the transcript about the particulars of the manuscript. However, from the language and description, its date of composition may be placed at the end of 16th or the beginning of 17th century.
Citod
As one of the main townships of Mevād, Citod was, and is, a famous site. It has a reputation as the land of heroes since the medieval times. Its hill-fort rises from the ground to about 500 feet, and is known as Citodgadh. It is of ancient founding. Citrāngada (a later Maurya king), according to the tradition, renovated it and so it came to be known after him as Citrakūta. According to Triputi Mahārāja, this fort-town was settled by Amarsimha Rānā in Saṁvat 902 (A. D. 846). (Jaina Tirthono Itihāsa, pt., p. 385). In the late Prabandhas, we notice that Siddhasena Divakara (c. earlier half of the 5th cent. A. D.) was also connected with Citod. Besides, Citod was the place of birth as well as of literary activity of the famous Haribhadra sūri (c. A.D. 700-784), Hemchandra (active c. 1130-1172) has included this holy place in a hymn, the Sakalārhat-stotra :

Page #428

Two Unpiblished Chaitya Pariptis on Citod-tīrtha
417
Vaibhāra Kanakācalo-rbudgiri śrī Citrakūtādaya | Tatra śrī Rishabhādayo jinavara kurvantu vo mangalam
Inc. A.D. 1110, at the instance of Jinavallabha sūri, two Jaina temples belonging to the Vidhipaksa were founded. These likewise were consecrated by him. Here Viśāla Śrāvaka had performed the setting up ceremonies for the holy images in Samvat 1439/A. D. 1383. Then, in Samvat 1444/A. D. 1388, for the Ādinātha image of the local temple, consecration rites were performed by Jinarāja sūri and in Samvat 1489/A. D. 1433, the Pañcatīrtha rites were performed in Citod by Somsundara sūri. Saranavāljā, the Prime Minister of Mahārānā Mokala, also had several jinālayas constructed. About three centuries before all of these happenings, in the medieval times proper (c. first decade of the 12th cent. A. D.), Ācārya Jinvallabha sūri had got constructed two Vidhicaityas at Citod. The famous Mānastambha and the Jinamandira beside it are of the late last quarter of 13th century A. D. Both of these belong to the Digambara sect. All other extant Jaina temples are of the Svetāmbara sect. Karmā Sāh Osvāla (early 16th cent.), who reëstablished the prestige of Satruñjaya-tīrtha, was also a resident of Citod. Thus, Citod at one time was one of the main Jaina religious centres as also a Jaina place of pilgrimage.
Several Jaina Sanghas had visited this place from western Indian cities and towns. From the two paripātis annexed here, we get descriptions of two such congregations. In the first paripātī, as earlier noted, the disciple of Bhāvasāgara has given a brief but fine description of the journey from Pātan to Citod. The paripātī thus begins :
Pranamasiuṁ pahiluń Päsa Jinanda, caitya-pravādī karis ānandi | Śrī Citod tani Jinayātrā, kariya karuniya nirmala gātra ||1||
Meaning : At the outset, I offer obeisance to Pārsva Jineśvara (and next) I shall, with delight, undertake the pilgrimage to Citod and shall cleanse my body (by this pilgrimage). Thus, we find, in this poem, the description of the pilgrimage from Pāțan to Citod.
The Second paripāți describes the pilgrimage to Citod from Urandi. The villages on the route from Urandi to Citrakūta are mentioned in it. Thus, the theme of both the works is the description of pilgrimage of a large congregation of devotees—Sangha-to Citrakūta. In this paripātī, too, we get the description about the route to Citod and the villages, towns, as well as the prosperity of some of these as the pilgrims saw while they passed through these on the way to their destination.

Page #429

418
J. B. Shah
Jambū-jyoti
પાટણ કુતિગ્મ પુર ઈલમ પુર રૂપપુરિ ચાણસ્મા ધીણુરિ પાટિ મહેસાણા વાલંબ
લોદ્રા
કાસ
વિસલિ નગર, વીસનગર વડનગર ઉડકે ઈડર નગર પાલિ ડુંગરપુર આતરી વડુદ્રિ બંભોરિસ્ટંગ માણારી ચિત્રકૂટ કાકરિવાડી/કરડા. દેલવાડા નાગદ્રહી પલ્લાસણ પલાણ સાદડી જીતવાડ નવૂલાઈ ધાણરહ કુંભણ મેર વસુદિપુરી ઊંગતપુરી રાણકપુર મુહારણ વરાણા વાહાણી
પાંચ જિનાલય એક જિનાલય એક જિનાલય એક જિનાલય બે જિનાલય એક જિનાલય આઠ જિનાલય એક જિનાલય એક જિનાલય બે જિનાલય બે જિનાલય બે જિનાલય બે જિનાલય ત્રણ જિનાલય બે જિનાલય ચાર જિનાલય એક જિનાલય એક જિનાલય એક જિનાલય એક જિનાલય બત્રીસ જિનાલય એક જિનાલય દસ જિનાલય પાંચ જિનાલય એક જિનાલય એક જિનાલય એક જિનાલય એક જિનાલય સાત જિનાલય એક જિનાલય ઓગણીસ જિનાલય
રાહબરી ઊથમણી પાલડી કોલરી સીરોહી ચપટ
ચાર જિનાલય
એક જિનાલય વીરવાડી
બે જિનાલય ઝાડૂબી
એક જિનાલય બ્રાહ્મણવાડી
એક જિનાલય નાદીયા
એક જિનાલય લોટાણા
એક જિનાલય તેલપુર
એક જિનાલય નાણા
એક જિનાલય બાલદા
એક જિનાલય સીરોહી
એક જિનાલય સીઘલુદ્રિ
એક જિનાલય હમ્મીરપુર
એક જિનાલય ટોકરી
એક જિનાલય અર્બુદગિરિ
એક જિનાલય ઢેલવાડા
બે જિનાલય અચલગઢ
ત્રણ જિનાલય હુડાદ્રિ
એક જિનાલય ડાકપુર
એક જિનાલય ભયણી.
એક જિનાલય પીપલિથલી
એક જિનાલય ઘણેરી
એક જિનાલય દેતી અવાડિ (દાંતિવાડા) એક જિનાલય જીરાઉલા
એક જિનાલય વડગામ
એક જિનાલય પાલણપુર
એક જિનાલય સીદપુર
એક જિનાલય લાલપુર
એક જિનાલય વામાં મંગલપુર વાડી દુવંતપુર
એક જિનાલય એક જિનાલય એક જિનાલય એક જિનાલય

Page #430

Two Unpiblished Chaitya Pariptis on Citoq-tīrtha
419
(૧) અજ્ઞાત કર્તક ચિત્રકોટ ચૈત્યપ્રવાડી
ડઈ ગામિ, આદિ જિણંદની તોડએ નમી બિહુતિરિ સ્વામિ ૩૬ll સંભવ જિન માક્રોડઈ એ પ્રતિમા બંદીઈ બારમી ! ગેલિઈ જવ પહુવઇ ભલઈ મંડાણિ વિસ્તારિ I૩૭થી આદિ જિસેસર વાંદીઇ પહલઈ વરપ્રસાદિ ! પાંચસઈ અઠસઠિ જિનવરુ પૂજો તિજીય પ્રમાદ II૩૮|| બીજઇ સુમતિ જિનેસ્વરુ, ત્રીજઈ શાંતિ નિણંદ ! બાહૂએ પ્રતિમાઉં વાદીએ નવય અનોપમ વંદ //૩લા ચઉથઈ શ્રીપદમ પ્રભૂ દોસઈ બાણૂ દેવ જેહતણી ભગતિ કરી સારઈ સુરનર સેવ //૪૦ની ઉરડીઇ આદીશ્વરુ વંદૂ આઠ નિણંદ દેવાલઈ દોઇ જિનવરુ વિધિપૂજા આણંદ l૪૧ાાં આંગીય કીજઇ એ અભિનવ દીજઇ દાન અપાર ! ગીત ગાઈ માગત જન નાચઈ ભગત ઉદ્ધાર II૪રા એવું કારઈ જિનવરુ નવસય એકોહાતિર ! સ્વામિ શ્રીચિત્રકોટિ જાવા ભણી ગહગહીઈ સહુ તામ્ ૪૩ કોલરિ પહુચીએ હરષ સિકં દોઇ જિનભવન ઉત્તગ | વીર જિનેશ્વર વાંદી પ્રતિમા ચઊદમું રંગ //૪૪ો. બીજઇ ભુવનિ આદીશ્વર પ્રતિમા ત્રિણિ વિસાલા ચીર ઉથમણિ જિનવર નમીઇ ત્રિકાલ //૪પી. રડક્યુરિ શ્રીપાસજી પ્રતિમા નમીઇ બાવીસહ. મીરપુરિ સાંતીશ્વરુ પ્રતિમા નિઊ જગદીસ ૪૬ll ગોઢાણઈ એ અજિત નમૂ પ્રતિમા સારસુવીસ વાધોસણિ, શ્રી નેમિજી દસજિન નામ્ સીસ ! બીજઈ કોલરિ વીરજી પ્રતિમા વં(રૂB) દિય બાર, બીજાપુરિ સંભવ જિનપ્રતિમા પાંચ જિ સાર ૪શા

Page #431

420
J. B. Shah
Jambū-jyoti
વીર નિણંદ સણવાડીઈ જિન વ્યાસી યશુકાંતિ ! લાલલાઈઈ ત્રેવીસ જિનૂ મૂલનાયક શ્રી શાંતિ ૪૮ સૂડાણઈ એ શાંતીસ્વરુ જિનવર નમીઈ ચઉપન્નમા | દડીઇ જિન ત્રેવીસમા, નમીઇ એક સુજિજ્ઞ //૪૯ો. રાણગપુરિ હવઈ જાઈએ બંદે વીર સફેસ કલસ ધજાદંડ દેખીઆ ધન ધન તેહરિ દેસ //પવા
“ઢાલ ચૂલભદ્ર કેરી” રાણિગપુરમઝારિ પહુતા હર્ષસિઉં ચઉંમુખ દીઠો દીપતો એ બંદી આદિ જિણંદ વિહુપષિ બઇઠા એ ! સામોસરણિ જિમ અભિનવ એ ઊંચા મંડપ ચંગ ઇંગતિ
અડુ ચિહુ ભૂમિ કરિ વાહીદ મંડપ શ્રીમેઘનાદ પહેલો સોહઈ એ બીજો સિંઘનાદ ભલોએ //પગી વિજયનાદ તે સાર પૂર્વદિસિ બલી ભ્રમરનાદ દક્ષિણિવરૂ એ I ઐલેકદીપક નામ નવ ચુકી ભલી ચ્યારઈ ભદ્ર તે સુંદરુ એ આપણા નદીશ્વર અવતાર અષ્ટાપદ ગિરિ સેતુજ કેરી તે નમૂ એ.. સમેતશિખર વિચાર સાર શિરોમણિ જિનહિ નમી પાતક ગમૂ એ પરા એવં કારઇ દેવસઈ છવ્વીસ નઈ પ્રતિમા બાર સોહામણી | બીજઇ મંદિરિ સાર પાકિણેસર સિત્તરિ સઉ પ્રતિમા નમી એ //પ૩/ ત્રીજઇ રિસહ નિણંદ એકસો છવીસ પ્રતિમા વંદું દ્વિપતી ચઉથઈ નેમિ નિણંદ તરોત્તર સુ એ પ્રતિમા સસિકર જીપત્તી એ / મંદિરિ શાંતિ નિણંદ અઠત્રીસ જિનવરુ જૂનઈ જિનહર બાંદીઈ એ અઠ્ઠાવન જિનવિંદ પાસજિસેસર પ્રણમી મનિ આણંદીઇ //પ૪ો મોર નાગ જસ પાસિ સેવઈ અહનિસિ રિસહ નમૂ તે મન રેલીયા એવં કારઇ ત્રિણિ સહસ પંચિહુતિરિ નમીઇ જિનવર સહુ મિલી એ. આંગી અતિહિ ઝમાલ નાટિક નાવઈ ગુણ ગાઇ વર મગતા એ ! નરવર – સન્માન લાભાર્વલી દાનદયાલુ સુદેઅતા //૫પા.

Page #432

Two Unpiblished Chaitya Pariptis on Citoù-tirtha
421
ધન ધન તે નરનારિ સકલ જનમ તસ પંચિંદ્રી એણું સફલીઇ એ જેણઈ દીઠો ! એહ મંદિર જિણ તણે ગર્ભવામિ અન્ય અછાં || ઈમ ભાવંતા જત્રે આવ્યા બાદડી પ્રભાતિ આધા ચાલિઇએ છોડઈ પાસનિણંદ સિત્તરિ પ્રતિમાઉ વંદી પાતક ટાલીઇ //પી
“ઢાલ: દર્શાર્ષભિદ્ર વારાહયની” નારદપુરીઈ આવીઆ દીઠલાય સાત પ્રાસાદ પ્રથમ પ્રાસાદિ આદીશ્વર એ એકસો એકાસી દેવ //પણી. દેવ અજિત નિણંદ બીજઇ બિંબ સતતાલીસ નમૂ | ચહુeઈ દીપતા પ્રણમીઇ સુપાર્શ્વ જિનૂ આંગીએ કારીઇ અતિ સુવિસ્તર ધજારોપણ સારીઇ નાટિક નાચી દાન દેઇ સકલ પાતક વારીઇ /પા. પ્રતિમા પાંચ સોહામણી વૃંગર કડણિ પ્રસાદ કે નેમિ નિણંદસુ વંદીઇ એ એકસુપન્નર બિંબ કે //પલા પાવમઇભવનિ સુપાસસ્વામી નમૂ સતસઠિ જિણવરુ શ્રીપાસ તીર્થંકર છઠઈ નમ્ ત્રાસી પ્રભુવરુ (કંરડીઇ ?) બારમો જિનવર બિંબચર પંચવીસ જસ પાય સેવે સયલ સુરવર તથા સકલ મુણીસા //૬Oી ત્રિણિ દેવાલા રૂઅડા એ પ્રથમ કેર સીમંધર સ્વામિ કે વિધિ કરીનઈ પૂજીએ એ પાસનિણંદ કે II૬૧. ત્રીજઇ રુઅડઈ વર દેવાલઈ શાંતિ જિણ જુહારી વિધિ-પૂજા કરી ખપ ધણુરી દેવી મનિસા ધારીઇ શ્રી પવિત્ર કોટિજા યવ સેવકો તણા મન ઉલ્હસઈ પછઈ સોમેસર જઈને સાથ સહુ વાસો વસઈ દરા તિહાંકણિ શાંતિ જિણસર એ પ્રતિમા પગટ ઠેર કેણીલવાડઈ ચંદપ્રભુ એ બિંબ નમૂ એકતાલ કેતિ //૬al જિPસરુ અ પલાસલીઈ દોઈ નમી હર્ષિસિલું કોટ દેથી દીપલ્સ સુહકો તણું મન ઉલ્હાસિલું

Page #433

422
J. B. Shah
Jambu-jyoti
ધિન દિન આજ સુસફલ વેલા ધિન ઘડી ધિન દિસ હવઇ જઇનિઈ પાસ પાએ નમેસિલું નિજ સીસ ૬૪ો. ઢાલ- સાતમી મૃજન સહુય મિલી નુરે નવરંગી ચડી ઊપરિ જમિ ઐત્ય પ્રવાડી ચાલીઇ તુ નવા દેવાજિ નામ છે પહલુ પાસ જિણેસ, તુપન વંદીજઇ જિનચંદ //૬પી. બીજઈ આદિશ્વર નમીઇ કુપન, રાજા સીહ દૂરિ | માણવીઇ મન ઉલ્હસઇ સુપન વસઇ બાવીસ જિન સાર પછઇ [5 A] શાંતિ જિણેસર તપન ૫ઊંચઇ પીઠિ. નિવેસ ચઉમુખિ ભગતિ વાંદી નુપન ત્રિણિય દોઇ જિનેસ //૬૬l નમીએ અજિત જિણેસર તપનપાચસઇ બિંબ જિસા ત્રીજઇ સોત્મસમો જિન તપન દેવઇ ગ્યારસઈ સોલ ૬થી ચઉમુખ બીજો અભિનવો સુપન નમીએ શાંતિ નિણંદ ચઉપન પ્રતિમા અડી ન એ વાંદજઈ અનોદિ II૬૮ અદબુદ મૂરતિ આદિ જિન્ન સુપન પ્રતિમા સત્તર તેહ જિમણાં પાસઇ વંદ પ્રભુ તપન ઉંગણ લીસ દેવ સીતલસ્વામી પ્રણમીઈ કુપન બિબ બિસઈ છઈ તળે જમલ્ય મુનિસુવ્રત જિન તપનો વીસા સુ દેવ દયાલા //૬૮ ઊંચો મંદિર અતિ ઘણું સુપન વીરજિનેસર માહિ બિસઈ છઇતાલીસ જિન નમૂ તપના બાંઠા પુણ્ય પ્રવાહિ જમણા પાસ સુપાસ નમૂ સુપન કામ ગીઆ અતિ ચંગ વ્યાસી બિંબ તિહાં કણિ તુપન વાઇ આણી રંગ પાકિણેસર પૂજી સુપના પ્રતિમા પાચસઈ બાર નમીઈ શાંતીશ્વરજી તુપન પાંચવિ પ્રતિમા સાર | સુમતિ જિણિંદ જુહારીઇ સુપન એ બિંબ અઠ્યાસી જાણિ મારગિ ચંદ્ર પ્રભુ નમુ કુપન પનર જિનવર મણિ II૭. સુમતિ જિણંદ સુધવીઇ સુપન એ તીર્થકર તેત્રીસ પાસ દેવલિઈ અભિનવઇ કુપન એ મૂરતિ છઇબ્દાલીસ વહરમાન સીમંધરુ તપન એ ઉગિણીસ બિંબસિ૬ તામ પંચમ ચક્રવર્તિ સુંદરી તુપન ખ્યાલીસ બિંબ પ્રણામ II૭૧)

Page #434

Two Unpiblished Chaitya Pariptis on Citod-tirtha
423
સુમતિ નિણંદ સુહ્યવી સુપન એ તીર્થંકર તેત્રીસ પાસ દેવલિઈ અભિનવ તુપન એ મૂરતિ છUળ્યાલીસ વહરમાન સીમંધર સુપન એ ઉગિણીસ બિંબ સિવું તામ પંચમ ચક્રવર્તિ સુંદરી સુપન થ્યાલીસ બિંબ પ્રણામ II૭૧// સુમતિ જિર્ણોસર વંદીઈ તપન. એકાદસ જિનરાજ પંચમ જિન સોલસ નમૂ તપનપૂજય કીજઇ કાજ તુ. ત્રીજો ચુમુખ ચંદ પ્રભુ તુપના એકસો બિંબ ચિઊઆલ સંભવસ્વામિ સોહઈ ભલા તુપન. સત્તરબિંબ કૃપાલ તીર્થંકર ત્રેવીસમો સુપન તેત્રીસ નમીઈ સ્વામિ બાસઠ જિન આદીસ્વરુ તુપનપાતક નાસઈ નામિ ! શ્રેયાંસ જિન કુહારી છે એ તુ બિંબ અસીનઈ સુમનિ નાથનાં દેહરઈ તુપના ત્રાંસઠ મૂરતિ સાર //૭૩ સોલસમો શાંતીસ્વરુ તપના બિંબ અઠ્યાસી- સો- વૃદ મંદિરિ | બીજાં શાંતિસ્વરુ તપન બાસઠિ જિનવર ચંદસ્કુણઈ સંભવ જિન તપ એ કુપન પ્રતિમ | ઉગણત્રીસ એવું એકત્રીસ જિન ભવને તુ ભગતિ નામ સીસ //૭૪ll એવં કારઇ જિનહરૂ સુપન એકત્રીસ ગણીય અપાર બિંબ પંચાવન સઇ ભલા ! તુપનપંચાવન અતિ સાર પહલીય પૂજા સત્તરભેદ કુપન ચઉમુખિ કરીઇ ચંગ બીજી પાસકિણેસર તુપના કુકમ ઘસી સુરંગ I૭પી. એણી પરિ પ્રાસાદે સઘલે તપનો પ્રણમીય પૂજય જાણ નું ગીત ગાન નાટિક હોઈ તુપના બાજઇ વર નીસાએ ઈમ પૂજી ત્રિભુવન ગુરુ તુપન જાઈ છે જિન મંદિરિ ચઉપટિ ચહુતઈ ચાર્તા તપન વાજઇ નુ ગલ ભેર I૭૬ll વીણા મદ્દલ વંશ તણા તુપન, સુણીય નઈ પ્રવર સુસાદ ઘરિ ઘરિ હોઈ વધામણા તુપના ઇંડીય સકલ પ્રમાદ ઇણી એ જિનશાસનતણી કુપન કરીય પ્રભાવ નવાનુ હેઠા કુત્તરીઇ એ પથ્થઈ તુ લાભીય રાય ના માનતુ //૭થી ક્રમ પલાસલિ નમી તુપનો જીહ લાવાડઈ ગામિ તુ સોમેસરિ શાંતિશ્વર તુપના નોડલાઈ ઇંદસ ઠામિ નાડોલિ પચવન જિન તપન સોલસમી જિનરાજ વર (વર) કાણાદિક તીર્થ નમી તુપના ભાવિ કરીઈ કાજ ૭૮

Page #435

424
J. B. Shah
Jambu-jyoti
ઢાલકુંભલમેરિ વાંદીઈએ એ માલ હાંતડે જિનહર સતર સહ ત આદિ જિણંદ ભુવનિ નમીએ મહંત; છત્તીસ બિંબ મહંત | ઋસહ જિસેસરુ એ મા બિંબ પન્નરસય એક પ્રતિમ ઈગ્યારિ જિ સુંદરુ એ મય જિન નમું બારમો છેક ||૭૮. પ્રૌઢ પ્રતિમા- ઋસફેસરુ એ મા સોલ તિહાં જિન રાજ જમલઈ ભુવનિ આદીસરુ એ મ. પૂજીય સારીઇ કાજ સતરોત્તર સુબિંબ ભલા મા ઉરડીઇ શ્રી શાંતિ એકસો પ્રતિમા પૂજીઇ એમપI સોહમાં નિરમલ કાંતિ /ટવા ઉત્તરિ દસિ ત્રિ@િ જિનહરુ એ મહાલ તેડ આદીસ્વરના સાર બિંબ અઠત્રીસ છિહુતિરુ એ મા એકસો દસ જિનરાજ શીતલસ્વામી ઉરડીઈ મ. પંચાણું જિનતાય !!૮૧) વર્ધમાન જિન પેખીઈ એ મ પંચસય ઉંગણીસ દેવ પ્રતિમ એકાવન નમૂ એ મશાંતિ જિણેસર સેવા સામલ બન્ન શ્રીપાસનીય મ કરહડા તણી સુસાર એકસો બાવન જિન નમૂ એ મા પાખલિ ગુણ-ભંડા !!૮રા શાંતિ જેણેસર નિરખીઇ એ મ. છપ્પન પ્રતિમા વંદ બિસઇયા ત્રીસ જિPસરું એ મવંદીએ નેમિ નિણંદ પીતલમય આદીસ્વરુ એ મ. તિહાં પ્રતિમા બિસઇ પાંત્રીસ એવું કારઇ અઢારસય મહા જિન પ્રતિમા પંચવીસ સ્નાત્ર માહા સ્તવ વર કરીય ધજ-આરોપણ રંગી આંગીયે છીય સુઅભિનવીય મ દેઈ ધ દાન મુદંગ નારદ પુરિ વલી આવીઈ એમ વિધિસિવું કરી સુજાત્ત પ્રભાતિ પાછા ચાલીઇ એમ હઉં નિરમલ નિજ ગાજૂ II૮૪ો.
Iઢાલો.
છોઈ પાસ નિણંદ સુડાણ શાંતિસ્વરુ એ લાલ લાઈ સિણ વાડિ વિજાપુરિનઈ કોલર રાડચ્છરિ શ્રીપાસઉધમણિ કોલરિ નવઈ સીરોહી જિન રાજ, મોહિલિ ગામિ ગયા હવઇil૮પા
બાવીસમો જિનિરાજ જિનથાલી સતિહા નમૂ એ, પાડલી ઇકું ધનારાઘ નવ જિન નમી પાતક ગયું એ, કોલડી જિનવીર પ્રતિમા અસ સુર્દી દઇ / એ રામસિણિ આદિનાથ જિનવર છપ્પન ભાવીઇ એ //૮દા.

Page #436

Two Unpiblished Chaitya Pariptis on Cito”-tīrtha
425
મંદિર દોઈ | ભીનમાલિ પહલઈ મંદિરિ વીરજિનબિંબ પંચાવન સાલ બીજઇ સોલસમો નિપુણ પ્રતિમા સિત્તરિ ચંગ દોઇ કાસગીઆ પ્રણમીઇ એ આંગી રચી ઉદરિ દાન દયાલ સુદીજીઈ એ II૮૭થી સાચોરિ શ્રી મહાવીર જિનવર છે નિત વાદીઈ એ, બીજઇ પ્રતિમા પંચ રિસહ નમી આણંદી એ, થરાદિ આદિ જિણંદ મુરતિ પાંચ સોહામણી એ વિધિ પૂજાષ પસાર ! તિહા કણિ દીસ અતિ ઘણી એll૮૮ી તઈ ખાડશી શ્રી શાંતિ નમીઇ ત્રિશ્મિ તીર્થંકર એવડલીઇ પાસનિણંદ બીજા શાંતિ જિસેસર એ નવપ્રતિમા ઉદ્ધાર આના વાડઇ પાસ જિન પ્રણમી ! અમનિ આનંદિયા ત્રઈ ભાવિ ઉંમલ્મ મન ૮૯થી એવં જિન પ્રસાદ એકસોચિઉંઆલીસ વર, ૨, અઢાર સહસ ય સાત તેરેઊણા જિન પરવ /૯૦ની. ભાહવઈ પત્ત નિપાઉં ધારીઈ એ સાહામાં સમોહ તાસ, સાતમીનઈ સમવાય લોક આવાં ગહગહતા વાજઇ, પંચસબદ નાદ નફરીય ભૂગલ ઘરિ ઘરિ દીઠ વધામાણા એ વલી ગાઈ મંગલ ll૯૧/ વીજઇ દાન અપાર સાર માગત સંતોષ દુર્ય દીનનઈ દુષીલોક તસ ધનનો પેષિ વંધા પાસનિણંદ વલી આણીમનિ હર્ષ નિરપી નથએ સાંતદેવ ઊપનૂ સુખ //૯રો યાત્રા કરતાં અવધિ કરી આશ તન બહુલી મિચ્છેદુ ક્વડમલ્મ તેહ વલી મેં ભાલીઇ ઇણી પરિ શ્રીચિત્રકોટ તણી યાત્રા વર કીજઇ, સાવ યસ્કુલ માણસો જન્મ વલી ઇમ સફલી જઈ ૯૩ ઇય ચૈત્ય પ્રવાડી પવર રોહાડી મન આનંદિ નીપજઈ જે વયણે ભણસઈ શ્રવણે સુણસિ તસ યાત્રફલ સંપજઇ ૯૪ll
ઇતિ શ્રી ચિત્રકોટ ચૈત્ય પ્રવાડિ સમાપ્ત .શ્રી
Transcript of the ms. Ac. No 4766 Name ત્રિલોદિત્યપ્રવાહી Folios 3-7 First two folios of the ms. are of some other Jaina work (not included in the transcript.) Language-old Gujarati, Script Devanagari. Transcript-pp. 1-15.

Page #437

426
J. B. Shah
Jambu-jyoti
(૨)
ભાવસાગર સૂરિશિષ્ય વિરચિત ચિત્રકૂટ-ચૈત્ય પરિપાટી
પ્રણમસિવું પહિલૂ પાસ નિણંદ ચિત્ય પ્રવાડિ કરિસ અ[આjણંદિ શ્રી ચીત્રોડ તણી જિન યાત્રા કરીય કરૂ નિય નિરમલ ગાત્ર ૧૫ પાટણ થકી મઝ ઇછા ઇસી ભાવ ભગતિ હવિ હઈડિ વસી કુતિગ્નપુરિ દેહરા છિ પંચ પ્રણમતા નવિ કરીઇ પંચ //રા ઈલમપુરિ અનોપમ એક જિણહર પૂજીજિ સવિવેક રૂપપુરિ શ્રી પાર્શ્વનાથ દીઠિ દ્રષ્ટિ હુઈ સનાથ lal ચાણસમિ જિણહર ચાહીઇ તવ મુઝ હેજ ન માઈ હઈઇ ધણજિ પ્રાસાદહ દોઈ એક પાગ્રુટિ જિણહર જોઈ જા, શ્રીમહિસાણે મહિમા ઘણુ આઠ ચૈત્ય અહિ ઉઠી થ[થણ એક વાલંબિ ઈક કાસે કહૂ જોતા જન્મ તણા ફલ લહું પાણી વિસલિનગરિ જિનમંદિર દોઈ અમર વિમાન નવિ એહવા હોઇ વડનગરિ શ્રી પ્રથમ નિણંદ ચરમનાહ દીઠ આણંદ ૬ll. ત્રીજુ દેહ ગિરુઉં ચાહિ બિંબ અસંખ્ય અછિ તેહ માહિ ઉ(ક?)ડે જિણહર જવા દોઇ દીઠ તવ નીય નયણે અમીય પઈઠ Iછા

Page #438

Two Unpiblished Chaitya Pariptis on Citod-tirtha
427
ભાષા
ઈડરનગરિ પહૂત તવ ત્રણિ દીઠા જિણભવણ વાંઘા બિંબ બહૂત પાલિ દોઇ પ્રાસાદ ભણું Iટી ડુંગરિપુરિ પુરિ પ્રાસાદ આરિ ચતુરપણિ અરચીઈ એ ભેરીય દુદભિ નાદ વાજિત્ર વાજિ અતિઘણા એ છે આતરીઇ અતરંગ રંગ સહિત સરિ શાંતિજ(જિ) પૂજ રચીજિ ચંગ જંગ જુગતિ કરિ જોઈઇ એ //૧ના વડુદ્રિ જિણ ગેહ ઇંગ ઇગ ગોલિ ભંભોરિન્ટંગ માણારિ નવનેહ દેહરાસરિ એગ પૂજઈ એ II૧૧ાા. હવિ જવ શ્રી ચિત્રકૂટ નયનયણે કરિ નિરપીઇ એ પોહતા પુહવિ અખૂટ અમીઆ રસાયણ કુંડ તવ II૧રા ગરિવર (ગિરવર ?) કેરુ રાય પુણવતલ નયન ઈગ બીજા લોચન કાજિ જપ તપ કરિ વસુંધરા એ /૧૩ બત્રીસ જિન પ્રાસાદ બત્રીસબધ નાટક તિહાં ગયણ સરીસી વાદ કરતાં કરતિથંભ જગ // ૧૪ો. શાલીવશાલા અપાર ત્રપતિ ન પામિ નરેષતા એ

Page #439

428
J. B. Shah
Jambu-jyoti
ધન ધન નરનારિ ચીત્રોડિ જે યાત્રા કરિ એ ૧પ
ભાષા
વિ કારિવાડિએ કરહડાનું અતિ પ્રૌઢ પ્રાસાદ તે જોઈ જૂનુ ઈગ થાસ ગામિ શિવસુહ દેખાડિ એક દસ [જિjણહર દેલવાડિ ૧૬ll નાગદ્રહિ પાંચ પ્રાસાદ પડ્યા પલ્લાસણિ એક દેવી હરણ્યા અહો એક અનોપમ જિણ પલાણિ એક મોહીય માનસિ મોદ આણિ /૧૭ નવીમા[સા]દડી ગામિ એક દેવગઢ જીલવાડએ વાધએ નવલનેહ નડૂલાઈએ નારદપુરીય નામ તિહાં સાત પ્રાસાદન કરુ પ્રણામ ૧૮ll ઘણી ભગતિ ઘાણુરહિ પૂજ કીજિ. ઈક જણહર નમીય ભવ સિ] ફલ કીજિ સાષિ સોહલિ કુંભલમેર દીઠ તવ મનિ ભવ હૂઉ અતિહિ મીઠી /૧ આબાલ ગોપાલ લોક બોલિ નહી અવર ગરિ અવનિય એહ તોલિ અતિ ઊલટિ અરચીઇ ઉગણીસ પ્રાસાદ જિન્ન પૂરવિ જગીસ ૨૦ના અતિ ભલિ ભાવસ્ય ભેટીઇ વીર દેવ વસુટિપુરિ સાર એ અમર સેવા મહા મા[સા]દડીઈ મહાન પૂરિ સદા સેવીઈ એક ઊગંતપૂરિ ૨૧
ભાષા
ધન ધન માનુ જનમ જેય લેષિ રાણગપુરિ જો લોચન પેષિ તેહ હોઇસ જસવાદ રૈલોક્યદીપક નામ ધરંતુ

Page #440

Two Unpiblished Chaitya Pariptis on Citoḍ-tirtha

કલ્પ કોટિ લલિંગ જજિંગ જયવંતુ ચુમ[ચમુખ] સુષિર પ્રાસાદ ॥૨૨॥
કો વિ ભૂતિલ એહ સરીયુ જેહ નિયણે એ નવિ નરપુ
ગર્ભવાસિ હજી તેય એક જીભ ગુણ કિમ બોલ્ એ સમવિહૂ કિઠિન તોફૂં કલિકલ્પ એહ ।।૨૩।
અવર જિકે છિ જે પ્રાસાદ
તે વંદી ટાલૂ વિષવાદ
બિંબસંષ્ય નવિ પાર મૂહાણિ જિણ વંદૂ શાંતિ
વરકાણિ મઝ લાગી પંતિ કીજિ પાસ જીહાર ॥૨૪॥
વાહાલીઈ વાહલુ જગનાથ
ફેરુઇ પૂજી હૂઆ સનાથ રાહબરિ શ્રીપાસ
એક ઊથર્માણ એક પાલડીઇ
કોલરિ દોઇ જિણહિર જવ ચડીઇ
તવ પૂગી વિ આસ ॥૨૫॥
પુહતા વિ જવ સીરોહી તવ રહીઉ મઝ માનસ મોહી અ(મ)રપુરી અવતાર ચુપટ ચ્યારિ જણાલય ચાહુ તે વંદી નિ લિઉ ભવ લાહુ ભરુ સુકૃત ભંડાર રહ્યા
લોદ્રીઇ ઇક દોઇ વીરવાડિ ઝાઝૂ()લી નિ બાભણવાડિ ઇક ઇક એક નાદી(યા)ઇ લોટાણિ નિ તેલપુર ગામિ નાણિનિરુપમ જીવતસ્વામિ બાલિદ એક વાંદીઇ એ ॥૨૮॥
429
ભાષા
વલી સીરોહી આવીઆ એ હઈડ હરષ અનંત તુ સીધશુદ્ધિ પછિ, પૂજીઇ એ જગદીસ૨ જયવંતુ ॥૨૯॥

Page #441

430
J. B. Shah
Jambū-jyoti
હમ્મીરપુરિ તિણિ જિણભવણ નમિ ટોકરિ નમિનાહ તુ તિહા અબ્દગરિ પેલીઉ એ ઉછવ હુઇ અબાહ તુ H૩૦ દેલવાડિ વસહી જૂઅલિ અનોપમ અમર નિવાસ તુ નરષતા નવિ ચેઈઇ એ ભૂષ તરસ તિનિ માસ તુ ૩૧// સતરભેદ પૂજા કરીય સફલ કરુ સંસાર તુ અવરદોઈણિ શાહરણ નિત નિતુ કરું પ્રણામ તુ ||૩રા સંબપજૂન સમોસરિયા એ કા(ઉ)સગીયા તિણજી ઠામિ તુ પૂજી પ્રણમી ચાલીઆ એ ચડ્યા અચલગઢ ગામિ ઊ ||૩૩ી તિહા ત્રિણિ જણહર પૂજીએ એ જિમ પૂજિ મન આસ તુ એણી પરિ જે જાત્રા કરિ એ તે નહિ (ગ?)ર્ભવાસિ ઊ //૩૪ હિવ હૂડાદ્રિ ડાકપુરે ભભિયણિ ગામિ તુ પીપલિથલિહિ ઘણેરીઇ એ ઇક ઇક (ક)રું પ્રણ[ણામ તુ રૂપા
ભાષા આવીઆ એ દેતીઅવાડિ પાડિ નહી કોઈ તેહ તણિ એ પૂજીઆ એ પારસનાથ જીરાઉલઉ જગિ જગિ ઘણુ એ દll સેવઈ એ સુરનર સ્વામિ કામિક કલિયુગ સવિ ફલિ એ દીકિ એ દુકુત દૂરિ તુઢિ સંકટ સવિ ટલિ એ //૩શા

Page #442

Two Unpiblished Chaitya Pariptis on Citod-tirtha
431
વંદીઇ એ વડવસગામિ સામિ મલ્યા શ્રી શાંતિજિણ પાલણપુરિએ પાલ(ણ)વિહાર સીદપુરિ તણિ જિણભવણ /૩૮ll લાલપુરિ એ વામઈઆ ગામિ પામિ મંગલપુરિ વરિ હરિષ વાડીઇ એ દુવંતપુરિ
એક જિણ દેવી જાઇ દુષ ll૩૯ll એકસ એ સત્તરિ સાઠ વાત કરિ જિણહર ભલા એ તિહાં વાંધા એ બિંબ પ્યાલીસ બરિસ બિંબહુ આગલા એ //૪ એણી પરિ એ તીરથ સરવ પૂરવ પુણ પસાઉલિ એ સંઘવી એ ઠાકરસિંહ સંઘ સાથિ ભેટા ભલી એ II૪૧૫ હિવ અણહલ એ પત્તનનયરિ ઘરિ આવ્યા આણંદ ભરી એ જિહા જિણહર પંચતાલીસ દસ ઊગતા જાહરીઈ એ જરા વંછિત એ દાનાં સમરથ તીરથભાલ વિવારે એમ કરી એ નિરમલ જીત્ત સંવત પનર બાસઢિ વરે Il૪૩ એ વ[વિધપક્ષ ગણહર ભાવસાગરસૂરિ અનુચર ઇન ભણઈ એ નરનારિ જે નિતુ ભાવ ભાવિ ઊ ભગતિ સંજાત્ત એહ યુણિસિ તેહ હુઈ પદિ પદિ સંયેલ સંપદ વિપદ સવિ દૂરિ ટલિ કલ્યાણ[મા]લ્લા કરિ કેલી વલિય મનવંછિત ફલ ll૪૪.
ઇતિ ચૈત્યપરિપાટી સમાપ્ત ..
લા. દ. ૧૬૬૮૨ (નગરશેઠ. ૧૭૨૬) ચિત્રકૂટ-ચૈત્ય પરિપાટીએ પત્ર ૨. ક, ભાવસાગરસૂરિશિષ્ય. ૨. સં૧૫૬૨. ક. ૪૪ પંક્તિ.૧૫ અક્ષર. ૪૨ લેક અનુ૧૭મું શ૦ ૨૬, ૬ X ૧૧. સે. મિ

Page #443

432
J. B. Shah
Jambu-jyoti
(३) जयहेमशिष्यकृत चितोड चैत्यपरिपाटी
२
गोअम गणहरराय पायपंकय पणमेवी, हंसगमणि मृगलोचणी ए सरसति समरेवी, पाए लागीनई वीनवु ए दिउ मझ मति माडी, चित्रकोट नयरह तणी ए रचउं चेत्रपवाडी. मालव गूजर मारूआडि दक्षिण नइ लाड, देस सवे माहे मूलगु ए मंडण मेवाड, एक लोचन पृथिवी तणुं ए चित्रकोट भणीजई, अवर न बीजुं जगह माहि इम वयण सुणीजइ. गढ मढ मंदिर मालिआ ए उंचा अति सोहई, सात पोलि ओलेइं भली ए देखी मन मोहइं, चउपट चिहुं दिसि च्यारि पोलि दीसईं अतिचंग, उत्सव रंग वद्धांमणां ए नितु वाजई मृदंग. द्राखपानना मंडवा ए सेलडी वाडी वन, वापी कूप खडोकली, ए दीसई राजभवन, कलस सोवनमय झगमगई ए कोसीसां-ओलि, कोरणिमंडित थंभश्रेणि घडीआला पोलि नयरसिरोमणि चित्रकूट उंचउ सुविशाल, धण कण कंचण भरिअ भूरि चउटां चउसाल, शिव जिन शासन देहरा ए मुनिवर-पोसाल, श्रावक श्रावी पुण्य करई मन रंगि रसाल. तिणि नयरि सीसोदिआं ए कुलमंडण जाण, गढपति गजपति छत्रपति सहु मानइ आण, बंदी जय ज उचरई ए वाजइं नीसाण, राज करइ रायमल्ल राण तेजि जिसिउ भाण.

Page #444

Two Unpiblished Chaitya Pariptis on Citod-tīrtha
433
वस्तु
गोयम गणहर गोयम गणहर समरि सरसत्ति, सुगुरू पसाय लही करी रचिसु चेत्रप्रवाडि सारीअ, चित्रकोट नयरह तणा गुण थुणइं बहु नरह नारीय, गढ मढ मंदिर झगमगइं वाजइं ढोल नीसाण, राज करई रायमल्ल राण तेजिं दीपइ भाण.
भाषा
स्वर्गपुरी लंका अवतार, व्यवहारिआ तणा नही पार, सारसिंगार करंति तु जयु जयु, राजई राजकुली छत्रीस, वासि वसईं वर्ण छत्रीस, बत्रीस जिण पूजंति. चालउ चेत्रप्रवाडि करीजई, माणसजन्म तणउं फल लीजइ, कीजइ निरमल काय, रंगि सहिअ समाणी आवु, चाउल अक्षित चुक पूरावु, गावु श्री जिनराउ. ९ पहिलुं श्री श्रेयंस नमीजई, त्रिणि काल जिणभगति करीजइ, असी बिंब पूजंति तु जयु जयु, आगलि सोम चिंतामणि पास, सुमति सहित त्रिणि सई पंचास, आस पूरइ एकंति १० थंभणि थाप्या वीर जिणंद, पय सेवई नरनारीवृंद, दंद सवे टालंति तु, चउपन्न बिब-सिउं आदि जिणेसर, हरखिइं थाप्या संघपति इसरि, केसरि पूज करंति तु. ११. मुगति-भगतिदायक बईठा प्रभु, एकसउ त्रीस-सिउं चंद्रप्रभ, चउमुख भुवण मझारि, नाभिराय-कुल-कमल-दिणंद, दस मूरति-सिउं आदि जिणिंद, वंदई बहु नरनारि. १२ संकट पास जिणेसर चूरइ, आकु-सामी प्रत्या पूरइ, पंत्रीसा सुबिंब, भवण देखी ऊपन्नी सुमति, तेर बिंब-स्युं भेविं]द्या सुमति, कुमति हरइ अविलंब. १३
वस्तु संघ चउविह मली मनरंगि, चत्र-प्रवाडि चालिआ आदि देव वंदउं श्रेयांस, चंद्रप्रभ आदिल जाणीइ, चिंतामणि पूरवइ आस, पास जिणेसर जागतु, आका-भुवण मझारि, सुमतिनाथ पूजी करी, रास रमई नरनारि. १४ वीर-विहार पुहुत्त जाम पावडिआं साठि, चडतां करम विषम तणीअ तिहां छूटई गांठि, कोसीसां कोरणिअ बारि मूलइ नही माठि, दीठे मागउं सामि पासि सेवानी पाठि. बालई साहिं ऊधरिउ ए विजयमंदिर प्रासाद, उंचपणइ दीसइ सिउ ए निरमालडी ए रवि-सिंउं मंडइ वाद; मणोर हीए.
१५

Page #445

434

J. B. Shah
पहरीय पीत पटूलडीअ खीरोदक सार, कस्तूरी चंदन घसीअ केसर घनसार, चंदन मरूउ मालतीय बहु मूल अपार, धामी धामिणि भाव - सिउंअ पूजइ सविचार, उसवंस - कुल-मंडणउ ए बालागर सुविचार; त्रिसलानंदन थापिउ ए निर० भरई सुकृतभंडार. त्रिणि सई अट्ठावीस बिंब, ते टालई शोक, तोरण शिखरह दंडकलस कोरणि अति रोक, धज-पताक ए इम कहइ, संभलज्यो लोक, वीर जिणंद न भेटसिहं, तेह जीविउं फोक, जिमणइ पासइ पोखिआ ए, सामी पास सुपास; रतनागरि रंगि थापीआ ए, नि० पूरवइ मननी आस. खेलामंडपि पूतलीअ नाचंती सोहई,
रंभा अप्सर सारखीअ कामीमन मोहइं, हुंबड पूना तणी धुअ तिणि ए मति मंडीअ, कीरतिथंभ करावि जात माहरी सूखडीअ, सात भुंहि सोहामणीइ बिंब सहस दोइ देखि, पेखी पाछा संचरिआ ए नि० वंदी वीर विशेष. पास जिदि दिगंबरई तिहां नव सई बिंब, चंद्रप्रभ च्यालीस - सिउंअ पूजई अवलंब, पनर बिंब - स्युं नाभिराय - सुत अर्बुद - सामिअ. मलधारई श्री चंद्रप्रभ पूरइं मन कामी, पनर बिंब पूजी करी ए सुराणईं सम चंद; सतर बिंब सोहामणइ नि० सामी सुमति जिणिद. वरहडीइ श्री सुमति देव उगुणपंचास, संघवीइं धनराजे जेह पूरी मनि आस, एकसउ चउत्रीस बिंब- सिउं पूजीजइ संति, डागलिई जिणदत्त साहि पूरी निय खंति, लोला- भवणि पेखीया ए संति जिणेसर पा[रा]य,
अटावन्न मूरति भली ए, नि० सेवुं अनुदिन पाय.
Jambū-jyoti

म० १६
म० १७
म० १८
म० १९
म० २०
वस्तु
वीर भवणि वीर भवणि करी महापूजि, सहसकोटि पेखी करी दिगंबरइ बहु बिंब पामीय,

Page #446

Two Unpiblished Chaitya Pariptis on Citod-tīrtha
435
चंद्रप्रभ दोइ अति भला, आदिदेव अर्बुदसामीअ, सूराणइ पूजा करी समरिआ सुमति जिणंद, पारेवु जिणि राखिउ, शरणइ शांति जिणिद.
२१
भाषा
हिव नागोरइ देहरइ तु, भमइरूली श्री मुनिसुव्रत सामि तु, एकस पंचवीस पूजीजइ तु, भ० नवनिधि लीधई नामि तु. २२ शीतल-सामी अंचलीई तु, भ० त्रिणि सई बिंब अट्ठतीस तु, नाणावालइ अठ्तीस तु, भ० मुनिसुव्रत जगदीस तु. २३ चउवीस बिंब पल्लीवालइ, भ० सीमंधर जयवंत तु, चित्रावालई च्यालीसइ तु, भ० पास जिणंद दयवंत तु. २४ कुमतिहरण श्री सुमति जिण तु, भ० पूनमीइ बावीस तु, खरतर वसही शांति जिण तु, भ० मूरति पंचतालीस तु. पास जिणेसर सामल तु, भ० सत्तरिसा दोइ सार तु, पंच सइ पनरोत्तर बिंब तु, भ० शत्तुंजय गिरनार तु. आदि जिणंद आराहीई तु, भ० मालवीई प्रासाद तुं, देहरी दीसइं दीपती तु, भ० घंटा पडह निनादि तु. चउमुख च्यारि मूरति भली तु, अष्टापद अवतार तु, आठ सईं सतहुत्तरि बिंब तु, भ० पूजीजइ सविचार तु. मुनिसुव्रत महिमा घणउ भ० सुकोसल गुफा मझारि तु, कीरतिधर बाधिणि सहीइ तु, भ० गिरूआ इणि संसारि तु. २९ आगलि गोमुख वाघमुख तु, भ० वारि झरइ अनिवार तु, कुंभई कुंभिगि थापीई तु, भ० कीरतिथंभ उदार तु. ३० नव भुई चडीइ निहालीइ तु, भ० सरोवर वन अभिराम तु, केलि खजूरी निबूइ तु, भ० चंपक केतकि नाम तु. ३१
वस्तु आदि जिणवर आदि जिणवर मुनिसुव्रत, शीतल सीमंधर सुमति शांति देव सोलमु अनुदिन, कामित तीरथ दीपतु, पास सामि वामानंदन, मुनिसुव्रत महिमा घणउ, सुक्कोसल अति सार, वाडी वन पेखी करी, हीयडइ हरख अपार. ३२.

Page #447

436
J. B. Shah
Jambū-jyoti
भाषा
हिव तिहांथी पाछा वल्या ए माल्हंतडे, कुंभेसर तव दीठ, सुणि सुंदरे, कुंभे० चउपट चउहटइ चाहतां ए मा० नयणडे अमि पइठ. सुणि० खरतर साह वेला तणु ए मा० चउमुख भवण वंदेस, सु० पोढी प्रतिमा पेखीइ मा० चंदनि पूज रचेसु. सु० शांति जिणेसर शीतलु ए मा० चउमुख भवण वंदेस, सु० सपतफणा मणि पास जिण मा० बिंब दोइ सइ पणवीस. सु० साहणइं साहिं थापिआ ए, मा० अजित जिणेसर राय, सु० पंचइ सई पंचासी0 ए मा० सेवई सुरनर पाय. सु० डुंगरि थाप्या शांति जिण मा० सत्तरि सु पणि पंच. सु० नव सई नउआनई नमु ए मा० वारवार विण पं[खं]च. सु० वसही बिंब पांत्रीस सु ए मा० संभव समरथ सार, सु० जे नर वंदई ते लहइं ए मा० सासय सुखभंडार. सु० बत्रीसई जिणहर थुणिआ ए मा० आठ सहस सतिताल, सु० दोई सई संख मई करी ए मा० ते वंदउं त्रिणि काल. सु० प्रह ऊठी जे भाव-सिउं ए नरेसूआ, करसिउं चैत्र-परिपाटि, तेहनुं जन्म सफल सही ए नरेसूआ, मुगति प्रधान[....]. चैत्र-परवाडि पढई गुणई ए नरेसूआ, अनई जे निसुणंति, ते दोइ तीस तीरथ तणुं ए न० निश्चई फल पार्मिति. सिरि तवगछनायक सिवसुखदायक हेमविमल सूरिंदवरा, तसु सीस सुखाकर गुणमणिआगर लबधिमूरति पंडित प्रवरा, जयहेम पंडितवर विद्या सुरगुरू, सेवीजइ अनुदिन चरण, सेवकजन बोलई अमिअह तोलइ, हरखिइं हरख सुहंकरण.
-ईति श्री चित्रउड चैत्य परिपाटी स्तवनं समाप्तं महोपाध्याय श्री आगममंडनगणिशिष्येण लिखितं श्रा० कपूरदे पठनार्थम्. श्री. (प. सं. ३-१२, दा. २४ सीमधर स्वामी भंडार, सुरत) (जैन युग, भाद्रपद-आश्विन १९८३, पृ. ५४-५७)
४३

Page #448
2 Brie 315 BEN Jain Education Intemational www.airtelbrary.org