Page #1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ KALIKALA-SARVAJNA ACARYA HEMACANDRA A RE-APPRAISAL Vasantkumar M. Bhatt I Long after the passing away of Jina Mahavira, under the chairmanship of Devarddhi Gani Ksamasramana, the Jaina spiritual leaders of the Northern Church met at Valabhi (Saurastra, Gujarat State) in A. D. 503/516 and collated the earlier two versions, the one fixed at the Mathura Synod and the other at Valabhi Synod 1, both around the middle of the fourth century A. D. The present version of the Jaina agamas was then committed to writing. Six centuries after that event, king Siddharaja Jayasimha of the Caulukya dynasty (A. D. 1096-1142) ruled in Gujarat at Anahillapattana (North Gujarat, District Banasakamtha). In his assembly, learned discourses were also held besides the usual political transactions. It is on record that Devasuri, the Svetambara pontiff, defeated the Naiyayika Kumudacandra, a Digambara holyman, in a doctrinal debate at this assembly in A. D. 1125. The incident was delineated in the play, the MudritaKumudacandra by Yasascandra, which is believed to be closer in time to the event. A very important chapter in the history of the literary activities in Gujarat was added. when Hemacandra graced the assembly of Siddharaja Jayasimha. In those days Hemacandra led the intellectual arena by producing a large number of works, all single-handed. A list of his learned productions will attest to the vast canvas, sweep, and importance of his writings. He had, for instance penned (1) the Siddhahemasabdanusasana, (2) the Abhidhanacintamani, (3) the Desinamamala, (4) the Kavyanusasana, (5) the Chandonusasana, (6) the Pramanamimamsa (incompletely available), (7) the Sanskrit Dvyasraya-mahakavya, (8) the Prakrit Dvyasaraya-mahakavya or the Kumarapalacarita, (9) the Trisasti-salakapurusa-carita, (10) the Mahavira-carita and the parisista-parva, (11) the Yogasastra, and (12) five hymns including the Vitaraga-stotra. Thus he wrote on grammar, kosa-class of dictionary, poetics, metrics, epistemology, logic, philosophy, as also on biographical, and the kathd and stotra (narrative and hymnal) literature. So, he was given the honorific title Kalikalasarvajna-the Omniscient of the Iron Age by later Svetambara Jaina writers. However, in our own times, when his contribution was evaluated, P. V. Kane wrote : "The Kavyanusasana is a compilation and exhibits hardly any originality. It borrows. wholesale from the Kavyamimamsa of Rajasekhara, the Kavyaprakasa, the Dhvanyaloka, and from Abhinavagupta's works'." But, on the opposite side, R. C. Parikh, who wrote on the cultural history of Gujarat in the introductory volume to his critical edition of the Kavyanusasana, observes that Gujarat entered into competition with Malava not only in the political arena, but also in the spheres of learning and art2. T. S. Nandi has suggested that Hemacandra, in his Kavyanusasana, tried to follow and promulgate the Kasmira School in poetics, so as to push back the Malava-school of Bhoja".
Page #2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ 36 Vasantkumar M. Bhatt Nirgrantha The historical data provided by Prabhacandra of Rajagaccha in the Prabhavaka-carita (A. D. 1277) reveals that, perhaps the task of carrying Gujarat in lead in the intellectual arena, was handed over to Hemacandra by Siddharaja. Manuscripts from Kasmira as also from other parts of the country were then made available to Hemacandra. What is more, after defeating the Paramara potentate Yasovarma of Malava, the library of Dhara (which included the manuscripts of Bhoja's works), was brought to Gujarat. Siddharaja Jayasimha looked at the collection of works from Malava through green eyes of jealousy and asked Hemacandra to compose a new grammar that would bring prestige to Gujarat. The result was the Siddha-Hemasabdanusasana, a Sanskrit-Prakrit grammar. In Merutungacarya's Prabandha-cintamani (A. D. 1305), there is the third canto called "Siddharaja prabandha," in which this grammar is eulogized in fulsome terms: bhrAtaH saMvRNu pANinipralapitaM kAtantrakanthA vRthA mA kArSIH kaTu zAkaTAyanavacaH zUdreNa cAndreNa kim / kaH kaNThAbharaNAdibhirbaThasyatyAtmAnamanyairapi zrUyante yadi tAvadarthamadhurAH zrIsiddhahemoktayaH / / Thus, by penning the Siddha-Hema-sabdanusasana, Hemacandra had endeavoured to smear the Astadhyayi of Panini as also the Sarasvati-kanthabharana of Bhoja besides other grammars composed between the two in time. On the evidence of verses from the Prabhavaka-carita, in the times of Hemacandra, the Kalapaka vyakarana was much in vogue and the Brahmins did not teach the Paninian system of grammar to non-brahmins as it was a Vedanga. Thus, for the benefit of the people at large, Hemacandra composed his Siddha-Hema-sabdanusasana. In it he removed the Vaidika portion of the Astadhyayi and replaced it with the grammar of the Prakrits such as Magadhi, Sauraseni, Paisaci, Maharastri, Arsa (Ardhamagadhi of the Jaina canon), Apabhraiba etc. Thus Hemacandra provided intellectual leadership not only to Gujarat but also to the whole of India of his times. The Vaidika mantras were used only in the context of Yajna-rituals, but the Prakrit dialects that were spoken in different parts of the country, and the literary compositions that were written in Prakrits, were duly recognised by Hemacandra. As a result, he thought it useful to add grammar of these Prakrits which was perhaps the need / demand of the time. Thus he gave the first clear and positive evidence of his intellectual leanings. III As noted in the foregoing section, Hemacandra wrote on different subjects. But this paper attempts to highlight and evaluate his genius in the field of grammar alone. His all-encompassing study of language becomes clear by looking into his following works : (i) the Siddha-Hema-sabdanusasana :- It contains grammar of both Sanskrit and Prakrits. He had also written shorter and longer (79 and 6) commentaries on this grammar. In addition, he had written a third commentary called the sabda-maharnava or the Brhannyasa, today available only in fragments. (ii) the Unadi-sutra : This, too,
Page #3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ Vol. II-1996 Kalikala-sarvajna.... was composed by Hemacandra with explanatory notes. (iii) the Dhatupatha, with svopajna vrtti, (iv) the Linganusasana, and (v) the Ganapatha were also written by him. Thus we may say that he has given a Pancangi or fivefaced vyakarana. No less noteworthy are his lexicons, namely (i) the Abhidhana-cintamani, (2) the Anekarthakosa, (3) the Nighantu concerning herbs, (4) the Desinamamala, and (5) the two Dvyasraya Kavyas. These were composed, not unlike the Bhatti-kavya, to illustrate the sutras from his own grammar. Thus he has provided an all-embracing study of Sanskrit and Prakrits by writing the sutras, the vrtti, the appendices, the lexicons and the laksanakavya. In this way he scored over the writers of the Candra of Candragaumi (5th cent.), the Jainendra of Pujyapada Devanandi, (C. A. D. 650), the sabdasastra of Sakatayana, (c. A. D. 850), and the Bhoja-vyakarana (c. A. D. 1030-1050) ascribed to Parmara Bhoja of Dhara. IV I will now attempt to evaluate Hemacandra as a grammarian, his approach towards language, and as a structuralist with a particular style of marshalling his material. That he removed the Vedic grammar from his scheme is not because he was a Jaina but the truth was that the Vedic language was employed only in the ritual ceremonies and the teaching of its derivation had become obsolete in his times. On the other hand, a large variety of Prakrits were still used in literary circles who composed in people's language. Thus, by replacing the Vedic portion by the Prakrit portion, he has shown the awareness of the need of the hour, maturity of intellect, and consequently a right and realistic approach. It must be noted that, even though he removed the Vedic grammar from his scheme, he had paid due attention to the derivation of taddhita-words used in the Vedic context : e.g. (i) walezi ad H . 9. E-3-823 chol: 1 ash: (ii) faferflocagarfuSnaig $4901 E-3-828 ofer: 1 araweiten: 1 (iii) 374df High Schoo l E-3-869 3erfuch - 3400: Thus did he demonstrate a sensible orientation toward the problem : as a result, his works may be studied not only by the Jainas but also by the Brahmins. Had he neglected the taddhita formations having Vedic context, his grammar would have been of limited scope and sectarian in outlook. We notice that, in the post-Paninian era, there is a sea-change in the use of written Sanskrit, both in literary compositions and in the puranic context. It is a narrow-minded approach to call such a usage as 'a-Paniniya' and therefore 'a-sadhu' or faulty. The laksanatheory should be in conformity with the laksya, i.e. written literature. That language comes first and grammar follows is a universal axiom. Thus it is a rare intellectual effort on his part to promote and accept such usages as are, so to say, un-Paninian, i.e. falling out of Panini's discipline. This, in point of fact, is a commendable happening. However, his originality in laying down new grammatical and sastric works has to be
Page #4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ 38 Vasantkumar M. Bhatt Nirgrantha properly evaluated, because works in those directions by Panini, Gautama, Kanada etc. were for certain available. What is then, Hemacandra's original contribution ? He himself has answered this question. He inquires as to whether even prior to Panini, Pingala, or Kanada, sutras of the subjects they dealt with existed or not. This indeed is a pertinent point he had raised. Now, these lores of grammar, logic, philosophy etc. apparently are beginningless. Who has brought forth expansion or contraction in what field and how ? Only on the basis of a critical consideration of such a querry the originality of a particular author may be evaluated. Again, the nouns and verbs used in a given language have got to be identical and fixed. We may, for instance, resort to 'La'-karas such as te (Lat) etc., with reference to 4 - Bhu - and derive forms such as safa etc. by suffixes such as fry etc., substituted as adesas. Or, we may straight away place the suffix ti to bhU (root) and derive bhavati / In either case, 'bhavati' remains 'bhavati' ! There can be two different methods of deriving forms or word-formation but the output, namely safa, is to remain the same ! Thus, whether we study Candra, or Bhoja, or Haima-vyakarana, 7-:- 14 - 11:and watch - G: - Tefal are to remain as they are the same. Because of this Bhattoji says : 344furter 34P 39c4afea: (416h01TUAR poteffa-EV) i.e. for attaining upeya--the goal-upayas i.e. methods can be different We cannot insist on just one methodology. Thus any number of new fa-Paninian' grammar were welcome. The thrust of examining could be only the process with which a particular grammarian derives a particular form. Is it that he uses the same procedure in deriving both a nominal form and a verbal form ? At least one would expect similarity in style with any structuralist. Viewed from this angle, I may say that Hemacandra has not stuck to identical methodology in his Siddha-Hema-Sabdanusasana e.g., while dealing with nominal formation, he has taken the 21 case-terminations as basic morphemes and has presented the allo-morphemes in consonance with the structure of a given basic nouno. To put it in a technical jargon, we may say that he has explained the nominal formations by the device, namely "a particular adesa takes shape in place on a particular sthanin". On the other hand, the 18 terminations (9 Parasmaipada + 9 Atmanepada) that are attached to a verb are taken as basic morphemes and has not explained the allo-morphemes that take shape later. What is surprising, Hemacandra has placed in all 180 terminations expressing ten tenses and moods as basic morphemes". As against this, Panini had used an identical device of Sthanya-desa-bhava in the formation of nouns and verbs (=Subanta and tinanta). So it can be said that, while Panini has been able to observe structural identity, Hemacandra had not, which, from a purely intellectual point of view, sounds less appealing. Of course, one may explain away this defficiency by suggesting that the factor of simplification was involved here. But then the question remains as to why was this simplification not attempted by Hemacandra with reference to nominal formations. This question then, remains unanswered. VI In Panini's scheme, the statement of various Karakas proceeds and prescription of
Page #5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ Vol. II-1996 Kalikala-sarvajna.... 39 vibhakti-affixes follows. Then is described how the whole thing is represented at the surface level phonologically. Again, any nominal formation has to be explained with reference to some verb only. Thus, Panini has given a grammar of sentence-level; i.e. the vakya-samskara-paksa has been followed by Panini. In Hemacandra's grammar, such single and detached forms as 19., 18:, are to be derived without verbal context and therefore without consideration of the sentence level. This is absolutely illogical. In Hemacandra's grammar the sutras such as fie: teft. . 1. 8-8-8, T aerufi 8-8 and 2-5 Hifti 8-8-4 come first and then f5415c: I P-2- 716: gertati P--38 etc. follow. It thus becomes clear that Hemacandra has not promoted the natural vakya-samskara-paksa or sentence-level and has promulgated the pada-samskara-paksa which is not a natural phenomenon. Third, one who studies Paninian system of grammar has to study the varttikas and the Bhasyesti-vacanas separately, and has to harmonize them all. But Hemacandra has taken those varttikas and has placed the same as sutras in his work. So, for a student of the Siddha-Hema-sabdanusasana, only the study of sutras (sutrapatha) is sufficient. However Hemacandra has not freed his sutrapatha from the requirements of a prakriya-grantha. If a grammarian attempts a new grammar with a view on simplification, then he has to lay down grammar which follows topics methodically without the necessity of the rearrangement of prakriya-grantha. But Hemacandra has failed to provide this, e.g. in the 7th chapter, 4th pada of the Siddhahemasabdanusasana, he has provided meta-rules e.g. (i) R fafe ref . 1. 19-8-808 (ii) url I 1-8-80EUR (iii) HR TREI 1-8-8044 (iv) 4 1 10-8-886 (v) -8-889 etc. Thus he has placed the paribhasa-sutra, i.e. meta-rules concerning how to explain a noun-phrase ending in fifth case or seventh case, at the end, or also rules-as to which sutra is to be taken as more powerful in case of a conflict between two sutras-are also placed at the end of his grammar ! Actually, these explanations should have been in the beginning of a work and not at the end ! Thus as a structuralist his arrangement of the sutras, too, is imperfect. VII Hemacandra's originality and his being exceptional, however, are borne out by his adding the Prakrit grammar and writing the Dvyasrayakavya to illustrate it. But it will be interesting to know Hemacandra's views on whether Prakrit was derived from Sanskrit or was Prakrit the original language at the root of Sanskrit ? He on sutra 372 prAkRtam / 8-1-1 writes prakRtiH saMskRtam / tatra bhavaM tata AgataM prAkRtam ? saMskRtAnantaraM prAkRtamadhikriyate /
Page #6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ Vasantkumar M. Bhatt Nirgrantha Thus for him Sanskrit is the original wofa, language. Prakrit is that which is derived from (the root language) Sanskrit. Some scholars are of the opinion that the Prakrit spoken at popular level as parallel to Vedic Sanskrit was the origin of Sanskrit. But, for a grammarian who attempts a descriptive grammar, it becomes easier to delineate Prakrit by taking Sanskrit as the root language and explaining Prakrit forms by rules of phonological changes in letters. So, Hemacandra's approach seems practical and to the context. One more aspect of Hemacandra's Prakrit-grammar is that it was he who had started for the first time taking notice of differences in forms following differences in meaning. e.g. (i) 4841 fH. . 1. (-2-86 (cfa:) yfergi ada yafe '3040' at l afa fetim? 'GY : (ii) 0 Bradfa. . 2--70 (afr:) og 307affet hy they rafat I got !1 367 sfa form - at (iii) agat: o fe. 1. 6-3-838 (afer:) aqzf: F o gt yafe i fore I tapi il (iv) arcuts affhe . 6-3-837 (afa:) aigzfafenea faqe e PT ogt at afat 11 aki dar || Here the Sanskrit word (7) ksama has two types of modifications in Prakrit e.g. chama (SH) and khama (CH) : but there is difference in connotation. Same is the case with ksana (01), which becomes chana (394) and khana (C) in Prakrit with two different meanings. Vararuci, in his Prakstaprakasa, does not take note of such cases. Here it is noted that, in Prakrit, the sixth (possessive) case is used for fourth (dative) case. But Hemacandra is the first to pass a note that only the fourth case ending takes the shape of the sixth case ending which denotes a recipient, and the fourth case ending which denotes tadarthya continues as the fourth case ending in Prakrit. Thus, also, as a Prakrit grammarian, Hemacandra is very watchful and clear in his treatment which is the result of his vast aquaintance of Prakrit literature. His equipment as a grammarian, thus is highly laudable. Conclusion Hemacandra, as a grammarian, shows considerable originality. Precisely because of this, along with the Pancangi Vyakarana, he has also given lexicons and the Laksana-kavyas. He gave sastric recognition to such un-Paninian usages that followed Panini's era, and thus has sanctioned the growth and development in the field of language. He has left out Vedic grammar in consideration of the practical reasons. These are his scintillating achievements. On the other hand, he is not up to the standard as a structuralist and does not seem to abide by the outlook of the vakya-samskara-paksa. He has given a grammar which is based on the pada-samskara-paksa. He has not maintained identical approach in the case of both verbal and nominal forms which can be both simplification as well as a structural failure. Even with this limitation, his achievements are great enough to proclaim him as fichichesthe Omniscient of the Iron Age.
Page #7
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ Vol. II-1996 Kalikala-sarvajna.... ANNOTATIONS : The paper originally was read at the National Seminar on "Intellectual leaders in Sanskrit, Prakrit and Pali" (27-29 March, 1996), organized by the Department of Sanskrit, University of Poona, Pune. Since unpublished, with some revisions, it has been given for the Jagadishcandra Jain commemorative number of the Nirgrantha. 1. History of Sanskrit Poetics, Delhi 1961, pp. 288-289. 2. Actually, even earlier, from the time of the Bhimadeva 1, keen rivalry between Gujarat and Malava, had started and rulers Bhima and Bhoja were not only political but also keenly intellectual. The poets and dialecticians from different parts of India used to visit this capital of Gurajaradesa where their literary and dialectical talents were put to test. See : Kavyanusasana, Vol. II, "Introduction" Rasiklal C. Parikh, Bombay 1938, p. ccxlii - ccxliii. 3. "analakRtI punaH kvApi" were Maminata's words, which were replaced by Hemacandra, by sAlaGkArI E a more positive approach. This brings him closer to earlier poeticists. But, even with this unconfirmity, Hernacandra was a great exponent of the Dhvani-School and followed Mammata at every step. He saw to it that the Ananda-Abhinava based Kasmira tradition in poetics took roots in Gujarat through his Kavyanusasana, the Alankaracudamani, and the Viveka commentaries, and thus almost routed the Malava tradition of Bhoja from Gujarat. Vide Bharatiya Sahitya Sastra ni Vicaraparampardo (Gujarati), Ahmedabad 1984, p. 51. 4. kimetaditi papraccha svAmyapIti vyajijJapat / bhojavyAkaraNaM hyetacchandazAstraM pravartate // 75|| bhUpAlo'thAvadat kiM nAsmarakoze zAstrapaddhatiH / vidvAnko'pi kathaM nAsti deze vizve'pi gUrjare // 79 // sarve saMbhUya vidvAMso hemacandraM vyalokayan / mahAbhaktyA ca rAjJAsAvabhyarthya prArthitaH prabhuH / / 8 / / zabdavyutpattikRcchAstraM nirmAyAsmAnmanoratham / / pUrayasva maharSe tvaM vinA tvamatra kaH prabhuH // 8 // -draSTavyam : candraprabhasUripraNItaM prabhAvakacaritam, saM. hirAnanda zarmA (prathamo bhAgaH), muMbaI 1909, pR. 300, 5. merutuGgAcAryakRtaH prabandhacintAmaNiH, saM. rAmacandro dInAnAtha zAstrI, muMbaI 1888, pR. 148. 6. saMkSiptazca pravRtto'yaM samaye'smin kalApakaH / lakSaNaM tatra niSpattiH zabdAnAM nAsti tAzI // 82 // pANinerlakSaNaM vedasyAMgamityatra ca dvijAH / avalepAdasUyanti ko'rthastairunmanAyitaiH // 83 / / yazo mama tava khyAti: puNyaM ca muninAyaka / vizvalokopakArAya kuru vyAkaraNaM navam // 84|| ityAkAbhyadhAt sUrihemacandraH sudhInidhiH / kAryeSu naH kiloktirvaH smAraNAyaiva kevalam // 85
Page #8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ 42 Vasantkumar M. Bhatt Nirgrantha zrIhemasUrayo'pyatrAlokya vyAkaraNavrajam / zAstraM cakrurnavaM zrImatsiddhahemAkhyamadbhutam 186 -draSTavyam : prabhAvakacaritam (pR. 300-302) 7. See : Rte dvitIyA ca 1 si. he. za. 2-2-114 (laghuvRttiH) Rtezabdena yuktAd dvitIyA paJcamI ca syAt / Rte dharma dharmAt kutaH sukham ||-siddhhemshbdaanushaasnm, saM. muni himAMzuvijayaH, ANandajI kalyANajI peDhI prakAzitam, ahamadAbAda 1950 A. D. (pR. 86). 8. nanu yadi bhavadIyAnImAni jainasiddhAntasUtrANi tarhi bhavataH pUrvaM kAni ki mIyAni vA tAnyAsamiti ? atyalpamidamanvayukthAH / pANini- piGgala-kaNAdA-kSapAdAdibhyo'pi pUrva kAni kimIyAni vA vyAkaraNAdisUtrANItyetadapi paryanuyujhva ! anAdaya evetA vidyAH saMkSepavistaravivakSayA navanavIbhavanti tattatkartRkAzcocyante |-drssttvyaa : pramANamImAMsA, saM. paNDita suravalAlajI, prakAzana : siMghI jaina granthamAlA, ahamadAbAda 1939 A. D. (pR. 1). 9. See : upeyapratipattyarthA upAyA avyavasthitAH-iti nyAyena vyAkaraNabhedena sthAnibhede'pi na kSatiH, dezabhedena lipibhedavaditi dik ||-prmlghumnyjuussaa, caukhambA saMskRta sIrIjha, vArANasI 1974 A. D. (pR. 5). 10. syaujasamauzasTAbhyAMbhisGe bhyAMbhyasGasibhyAMbhyasGasosAmyossupAM trayI trayo prathamAdiH |-si. he. za. 1-1-18 -De GasyoryA''tau / 1-4-6 (De > ya, rAmAya) -sarvAdaH smaimAtau / 1-4-7 (De >smai, sarvasmai) -Apo GitAM yaiyAsyAs / 1-4-17 (De > yai, mAlAyai) etc. ante, se Athe dhve, e vahe mahe || si. he. za. 3-3-6 hastanI div tAm an, siv tam ta, amv va ma, ta AtAm anta, thAs AdhAm dhvam, i vahi mahi }] si. he. za. 3-3-9 parokSA gav atus us, thav athus a, Na va ma, e Ate ire, se Athe dhve, e vahe mahe // si. he. za. 3-3-12.