Parmatmaprakash

Author(s): Yogindudev, A N Upadhye
Publisher: Paramshrut Prabhavak Mandal
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/001524/1

Page #1

श्रीमद्-योगीन्दुदेव-विरचितः परमात्मप्रकाशः
(परमप्पपयासु)
अंग्रेजी प्रस्तावना, अपभ्रंशमूल, पाठान्तर इत्यादि
-संपादक - डॉ. आ. ने. उपाध्ये प्राध्यापक, राजाराम कोलेज
कोल्हापुर
प्रकाशक
श्री परमश्रुत प्रभावक मण्डल श्रीमद् राजचंद्र आश्रम, अगास
Jainucation international
Forpmajespergnalupply
www.alne library.org

Page #2

श्रीविक्रम संवत् २०४४

श्रीमद राजचन्द्र जैन शास्त्रमाला
श्रीमद् - योगीन्दुदेव - विरचित परमात्मप्रकाश
( परमप्पपासु )
अंग्रेजी प्रस्तावना, अपभ्रंश मूल, पाठान्तर इत्यादि
संपादक
आदिनाथ नेमिनाथ उपाध्ये
प्रकाशक
श्री परमश्रुत प्रभावक मण्डल श्रीमद राजचन्द्र आश्रम, अगास
मूल्य रू.
५/

ईस्वी सन्
१९८८

Page #3

प्रकाशक मनुभाई भ० मोदी, अध्यक्ष श्रीपरमश्रुतप्रभावक मंडल, श्रीमद् राजचन्द्र आश्रम, स्टेशन अगास, वाया आणंद, पोस्ट बोरिया-३८८१३० (गुजरात)
द्वितीयावृत्ति विक्रम संवत् २०४४ ईस्वीसन १९८८ प्रतियाँ ५००
मुद्रक
हिंदी विभाग महावीर प्रेस भेलूपुर वाराणसी-२२१०१०
अंग्रेजी अंश
राजीव प्रिन्टर्स,
'सी १/३०८ GIDC विट्ठलउद्योग नगर ३८८१२१

Page #4

जोइंदु-विरइउ
परमप्प.पयास
1) जे जाया झाणग्गियएँ कम्म-कलंक डहेवि । _णिच्च-णिरंजण-णाण-मय ते परमप्प णवेवि ।।१।। 2) ते वंदउँ सिरि-सिद्ध-गण होसहि जे वि अणंत । ___ सिवमय-णिरुवम-णाणमय परम-समाहि भजंत ॥२॥ 3) ते हउँ वंदउँ सिद्ध-गण अच्छहिं जे वि हवंत ।
परम-समाहि-महग्गियएँ कम्मिधणई हुणंत ॥३॥ 4) ते पुणु वंदउँ सिद्ध-गण जे णिव्वाणि वसंति । __णाणि तिहुयणि गरुया वि भव-सायरि ण पडंति ॥४॥ 5) ते पणु वंदउँ सिद्ध-गण जे अप्पाणि वसंत ।
लोयालोउ वि सयलु इहु अच्छहिँ विमलु णियंत ॥५॥ 6) केवल-दसण-णाणमय केवल-सुक्ख-सहाव ।
जिणवर वंदउँ भत्तियए जेहिं पयासिय भाव ॥६।। 7) जे परमप्पु णियंति मुणि परम-समाहि धरेवि ।
परमाणंदह कारणिण तिण्णि वि ते वि णवेवि ॥७॥ 8) भावि पणविवि पंच-गुरु सिरि-जोइंदु-जिणाउ ।
भट्टपहायरि विण्णविउ विभलु करेविणु भाउ ।।८।। 9) गउ संसारि वसंताह सामिय कालु अणंतु।
पर मइँ कि पि ण पत्तु सुह दुक्खु जि पत्तु महंतु ॥९॥ 1) TKM झाणग्गिये; AKTM °णाणमया; B misses this doha and gives in its place the opening mangala verse ferii etcwhich is numbered as 1; C numbers the same mangala verse as I and this doha as 2, 2) This doha is wanting in TKM ; A ते हउं वंदउं, होसहि, °णाणमया 3) Wanting in TKM; AB°महग्गियइं for महग्गियएं. 4) Wanting in TKM: AC णाणे. 5) Wanting in EKM; A लोयालोय, while in the com. लोउ c वसंति; AC णियंति, while in the Co.... of A णियंता. 6) Wanting in TKM; A वदउ; B भत्तियई. 7) Wanting in TKM: c परमाणंदहं. ४) Wanting in TKM. 9) Wanting in TKM.

Page #5

जोइंदु-विरइउ
[ 10:१-१०10) चउ-गइ-दुक्खहँ तत्ताहं जो परमप्पउ कोइ ।
चउ-गइ-दुक्ख विणासयरु कहहु पसाएँ सो वि ॥१०॥ 11) पुणु पणु पणविवि पंच-गुरु भावे चित्ति धरेवि ।
भट्ट पहायर णिसुणि तुहुँ अप्पा तिविहु कहेवि (वि ?) ॥११॥ 12) अप्पा ति-विहु मुणेवि लहु मूढउ मेल्लहि भाउ ।
मुणि सण्णाणे णाणमउ जो परमप्प-सहाउ ॥१२॥ 13) मूदु वियक्खणु बंभु परु अप्पाति-विहु हवेइ ।।
देहु जि अप्पा जो मुणइ सो जणु मूढ़ हवेइ ॥१३॥ 14) देह-विभिण्णउ णाणमउ जो परमप्पु णिएइ ।
परम-समाहि-परिट्टियउ पंडिउ सो जि हवेइ ॥१४॥ 15) अप्पा लद्धउ णाणमउ कम्म-विमुक्के जेण ।
मेल्लिवि सयलु वि दव्वु परु सो परु मुणहि मणेण ॥१५॥ 16) तिहुयण-वंदिउ सिद्धि-गउ हरि-हर झायहि जो जि ।
लक्खु अलक्खें धरिवि थिरु मणि परमप्पउ सो जि ॥१६॥ 17) णिच्च णिरंजणु णाणमउ परमाणंद-सहाउ ।
जो एहउ सो संतु सिउ तासु मुणिज्जहि भाउ ।।१७॥ 18) जो णिय-भाउ ण परिहरइ जो पर-भाउ ण लेह ।
जाणइ सयलु वि णिच्चु पर सो सिउ संतु हवेइ ॥१८॥ जासु ण वण्णु ण गंधु रसु जासु ण सद्द. ण फासु ।
जासु ण जम्मणु मरणु ण वि गाउ णिरंजणु तासु ॥१९॥ 20) जास ण कोहु ण मोहु मउ जासु ण माय ण माणु।
जासु ण ठाणु ण झाणु जिय सो जि णिरंजण जाण ॥२०॥ 21) अत्थि ण पुण्णु ण पाउ जसु अस्थि ण हरिसु विसाउ ।
अस्थि ण एक्कु वि दोसु जसु सो जि णिरंजण भाउ ॥२१॥तियलं । 10) Wanting in TKM. 11) Wanting in TKM; AB भाविं. 12) TKM लहुं;A मिल्लहि, TKM मेल्लवि; सण्णाणि, TKM सण्णाणे; KM णाणमओ 13) C मूढ; TKM मूढविलक्खणु बम्ह. 14) A °विभिण्णउं, C देहहु भिण्णउ, B णाणमउं, KM णाणमओ; TKM णिएहि, but in the commentary of K it is repeated as णिएइ, T पंडिय; TKM सोज्जि. 15) Mणाणमओ;
B विमुक्कि, TKM विमुक्के; A मिल्लिवि; c दवु तह, TKM दब्बु 16) Wanting in TKM. 17) TKM संत, मुणिजिसू; M भाओ. 18) TKM परु;c सिव for सिउ. 19) cवण्ण; AC गंध: B जमणु; TK पासु for फासु. 20) Wanting in TKM. 21) K misses the text of this doha, but it is, however, explained in the commentary; TM हरुसु; M विसाओ; A इक्क वि, c इक्कु वि; TM सोज्जि and भावि for भाउ.

Page #6

32:१-३२]
परमप्प-पयासु
22) जासु ण धारण धेउ ण वि जासु ण जंतु ण मंतु ।
जासु ण मंडलु मुद्द ण वि सो मुणि देउँ अणंतु ॥२२॥ 23) वेयहि सत्थहिँ इंदियहि जो जिय मुणहु ण जाइ ।
णिम्मल-झाणहं जो विसउ सो परमप्पु अणाइ ॥२३॥ 24) केवल-दसण-णाणमउ केवल-सुक्ख सहाउ। ___केवल-वीरिउ सो मुणहि जो जि परावरु भाउ ॥२४।। 25) एयहि जुत्तउ लक्खणहिँ जो परु णिक्कलु देउ ।
सो तहि णिवसइ परम-पइ जो तइलोयहं झेउ ॥२५॥ 26) जेहउ णिम्मलु णाणमउ सिद्धिहि णिवसइ देउ ।
तेहउ णिवसइ बंभु परु देहहं मं करि भेउ ॥२६॥ 27) जे दिट्ट तुटति लहु कम्मइँ पुन्व-किया।
सो परु जाणहि जोइया देहि वसन्तु ण काइँ ॥२७॥ 28) जित्थु ण इंदिय-सुह-दुहई जित्थु ण मण-वावारु ।
सो अप्पा मुणि जीव तुहुँ अण्णु परि अवहारु ॥२८॥ 29) देहादेहहि जो वसइ भेयाभेय-णएण। ___ सो अप्पा मुणि जीव तुहुँ कि अण्णे बहुएण ॥२९॥ 30) जीवाजीव म एक्कु करि लक्खण-भेएँ भेउ ।
जो परु सो परु भणमि मुणि अप्पा अप्पु अभेउ ॥३०॥ 31) अमणु अणिदिउ जाणमउ मुत्ति-विरहिउ चिमित्तु । ___ अप्पा इंदिय-विसउ णवि लक्खणु एहु णिरुत्तु ॥३१॥ 32) भव-तणु-भोय-विरत्त-मणु जो अप्पा झाएइ ।
तासु गुरुक्की वेल्लडी संसारिणि तुट्टेइ ।।३२॥
22) Wanting in TKM; C देउ for देउं 23) C वियहि, TKM वेयहि; C alone मुणहिं for मुणहु which is accepted by all other Ms. 24) TKM सोक्ख (written as 'रुख), °वीरिय जो; TKM सोज्जि for जो जि. 25) BC लक्खणिहिं; C णिवसहि; TK परमपये, M°पए; B° लोयहो, C जो तिहि लोयह; with AB I have corrected the old reading सेउ to झेउ, Creads उउ but is corrected as झेउ, TK छेउ (the Kannada gloss translates it as शिखरा),M has something like देउ which may stand for धेउ. 26) AB सिद्धिहि; T तेह सुणिवसइ; TKB बम्हु; BC म for मं. 27) AB जि दिट्टि, TKM जें दिढे....लहुं, AC जाणहिं. 28) Wanting in TKM; B परि for परि. 29) Wanting in TKM; A देहादेहहि, वसई. 30) Wanting in TKM: BC भावि for भणमि. 31) Wanting in TKMB C मात्तिरहिउ चिम्मेत्तु. 32) Wanting in TKM: c वेलडी, संसारिण. प. ४१

Page #7

जोइंदु-विरइस
[33:१-३३ 33) देहादेवलि जो वसइ देउ अणाइ-अणंतु ।
केवल-णाण-फुरंत-तणु सो परमप्पु णिभंतु ॥३३॥ 34) देहे वसंतु वि णवि छिवइ णियमें देहु वि जो जि |
देहें छिप्पइ जो वि णवि मुणि परमप्पउ सो जि ॥३४॥ 35) जो सम-भाव-परिट्ठियहं जोइह कोइ फुरेइ ।
परमाणंदु जणंतु फुडु सो परमप्यु हवेइ ॥३५।। 36) कम्म-णिबद्ध वि जोइया देहि वसंतु वि जो जि ।
होइ ण सयलु कया वि फुडु मुणि परमप्पउ सो जि ॥३६॥ 37) जो परमत्थे णिक्कल वि कम्म-विभिण्णउ जो जि।
मूढा सयलु भणंति फुडु मुणि परमप्पउ सो जि ॥३७॥ 38) गयणि अणंति वि एक्क उडु जेहउ भुयण विहाइ ।
मुक्कहँ जसु पए बिंबियउ सो परमप्पु अणाइ ॥३८॥ 39) जोइय-विदहिणाणमउ जो झाइज्जइ झेउ ।
मोक्खहं कारणि अणवरउ सो परमप्पउ देउ ॥३९॥ 40) जो जिउ हेउ लहेवि.विहि जगु बहु-विहउ जणेइ ।
लिंगत्तय-परिमंडियउ सो परमप्पु हवेइ ।।४।। 41) जसु अभंतरि जग वसइ जग-अब्भंतरि जो जि ।
जगि जि वसंतु वि जगु जि ण वि मुणि परमप्पउ सो जि ॥४१।। 42) देहि वसंतु वि हरि-हर वि जं अज्ज वि ण मुणंति ।
परम-समाहि-तवेण विणु सो परमप्पु भणंति ॥४२॥ 43) भावाभावहिं संजुवउ भावाभावहि जो जि ।
देहि जि विठ्ठउ जिणवरहि मुणि परमप्पउ सो जि ॥४३॥
33) TKM देहादेउले जो वसयि, B देउलि; A देउं अणाई. 34) A णियमि, TKM णियमे; TKM जोज्जि for जो जि; ABC देहि; TKM जोज्जि for जो वि, and सोज्जि for सो जि. 35) TKM समभावे; BC जोइहि, TKM जोइह. 36) TKM देहे, जोज्जि and सोज्जि for जो जि and सो जि; c confuses the first Pada of 36 and 37, and loses doh No. 37. 37) TKM जोज्जि and सोज्जि; in the Mss. TKM जो जि and सो जि are uniformly written as जोज्जि and सोज्जि, so hereafter these variants will not be noted. 38) Wantiog in TKM; B: एक्कु; AB भुवणि, C भुवणु; AC पइबिंबियउ, B पयः; A अणाई. 39) A जोइयविंदह, B° विदहि, TKM बिंदहि; BC कारणु. 40) TM विहिं, K विहि; C लिंगत्तइ°; TK° परमंडियउ. 41) Wanting in TKM; C अब्भतरु, AC जगु अभंतरि; hereafter many pages in B are rubbed and the letters cannot be read. 42) TKM देहे; जो for जं; C तवेणु विग सो परमप्प. 43) Wanting in TKM; C संजुवहि.

Page #8

- 54 : १-५३ ]
परमप्प-पयासु
44) देहि वसंते जेण पर इंदिय - गामु वसे ।
उव्वसु होइ गएण फुडु सो परमपु हवेइ || ४४॥
45 ) जो जिय-करणहिँ पंचाहिँ वि पंच वि विसय मुणे । पंचहिँ वि सो परमप्पु हवेइ ॥ ४५ ॥ बंधु गवि जोइय ण वि संसारु ।
पंच
46) जसु परम
सो परमप्पड जाणि तुहुँ मणि मिल्लिवि ववहारु ॥ ४६ ॥ 47 ) जो जाणइ सो जाणि जिय जो पेक्वइ सो पेक्खु । अंबुत वि जंपु चइ होउण तुहुँ णिरवेक्खु ॥ ४६१ ॥ 48) याभावे विल्लि जिम थक्कड़ णाणु वलेवि । पबिउ परम- सहाउ भणेवि || ४७|| 49) कम्महिँ जासु जणंतहिँ वि णिउ णिउ कज्जु सया वि । fe पि ण जणियउ हरिउ णवि सो परमप्पउ भावि ||४८ || 50) कम्म बिद्धु वि होइ गवि जो फुडु कम्मु कया वि ।
मुक्क
कम्मुवि जो ण कया वि फुड सो परमप्पड भावि ॥ ४९ ॥ 51) किवि भणति जिउ सव्वगउ जिउ जडु के वि भणति ।
किवि भणति जिउ देह समु सुष्णु वि के वि भांति ॥ ५० ॥ 52) अप्पा जोइय सव्व-गउ अप्पा जडु वि वियाणि ।
अप्पा देह - पमाणु मुणि अप्पा सुण्णु वियाणि ॥ ५१ ॥ 53) अप्पा कम्म-विवज्जियउ केवल-णाणे जेण ।
लालउ वि मुणइ जिय सव्वगु बुच्चइ तेण ॥ ५२ ॥ 54) जें जिय-बोह - परिट्ठियहँ जीवहँ तुट्टइ णाणु । इंदि-जणियउ जोइया ति जिऊ जडु बि विषाणु ॥ ५३॥
44) Wanting in TKM; A देह; C देहे ; C इंदियगाउ 45 ) A पंचहं for the last पचहि. 46 ) TKM परमत्थे, मुणइ तुहुं for जाणि तुंहुं, मणे; A मिल्लाह, TKM मेल्लवि, in the commentary of Brahmadeva and in A as well मिल्लाह, so it retained there. 47 ) Only in TKM. Kannada gloss reads पेच्छइ for पेक्खइ; in T जंपु appears like जप्पु and बहुंतु like ag; fa and sig I have read separate following the Kannada gloss, which takes अंतुबहुंतु वि and translates as amtaramgpa-bahir mga rupemappa K reads होऊण हु. 48 ) Wanting in TKM; AC णेयाभावि; C जिम्व, for जिम. णाणबलेवि. 49 ) C कम्मइ, T जणितिहि TKM .... हरिउ हि for हरिउ णवि. 50 ) TKM read second line, first pada, thus; कम्तु णिजो (or is it कम्मुणि जो ?) ण कया वि पुणु; ८ कम्मु ण जो वि कया etc. 51 ) TKM केइ for कि fa and के वि; C सन्वु गउ. 52 ) C जज विवियाणु; C सुण्णु वि जांण, TKM विजाणि. 53 ) TKM कम्मुविवज्जिउ केवलणाणे; AC लोयालोय वि; TKM सब्बगु बुज्झइ तेण 54 ) T जे...परिट्ठियहं; c ते; for ति, ... वियाणि, but K बियाणु.

५

Page #9

जोइंदु-विरइउ
[55:१-५४55) कारण-विरहिउ सुद्ध-जिउ वड्ढइ खिरइ ण जेण।
चरम-सरीर पमाणु जिउ जिणवर बोल्लहिँ तेण ।।५४।। 56) अट्ठ वि कम्मई बहुविहइँ णवणव दोस वि जेण |
सुद्धहँ एक्कुवि अस्थि णवि सुण्णु वि वच्चइ तेण ॥५५।। 57) अप्पा जणियउ केण ण वि अप्पें जणिक ण कोइ ।
दव्व-सहावे णिच्चु मुणि पज्जउ विणसइ होइ ॥५६॥ 58) तं परियाणहि दव्वु तुहुँ जं गुण-पज्जय-जुत्तु ।
सह-भुव जाणहि ताहँ गुण कम-भुव पज्जउ वुत्तु ॥५७।। 59) अप्पा बुज्झहि दव्वु तुहुँ गुण पुणु दंसणु णाणु ।
पज्जय चउ-गइ-भाव तणु कम्म-विणिम्मिय जाणु ॥५८।। जीवह कम्मु अणाइ जिय जणियउ कम्मु ण तेण ।
कम्में जीउ वि जणिउ णवि दोहि वि आइ ण जेण ।।५९।। 61) एहु ववहार जीवडउ हेउ लहेविणु कम्मु ।
बहुविह-भावे परिणवइ तेण जि धम्म अहम्मु ॥६०॥ 62) ते पुणु जीवहँ जोइया अट्ठ वि कम्म हवंति ।
जेहि जि झंपिय जीव णवि अप्प-सहाउ लहंति ॥६१॥ 63) विसय-कसायहि रंगियह जे अणुया लग्गंति ।
जोव-पएसह मोहियह ते जिण कम्म भणंति ॥६२।। 64) पंच वि इंदिय अण्णु मणु अण्ण वि सयल-विभाव ।
जीवह कम्मइ जणिय जिय अण्णु वि चउगइ-ताव ॥६३।। 65) दुक्खु वि सुक्खु वि बहु-विहउ जीवह कम्मु जणेइ ।
अप्पा देक्खइ मुणइ पर णिच्छउ एउ भणेइ ॥६४॥ 55) C सुद्ध जिउ; K खिणइ, M खिणइ for खिरइ ; C पमाण; c बुल्लहि TKM बोल्लिहिं. २०) TKM कम्मइ बहुविहई, बुज्झइ for वुच्चइ. 57) ACTKM अप्पि; AC दव्वसहावि, TKM दव्वसहावे, TKM पज्जइ for पज्जउ; C कोई, M सोइ for होइ. 58) AC परियाणहि; TKM दब्ब; C मज्जइजुत्तु; C सहभुय; TKM गुणं, पज्जय बुत्तु. 51) TKM बुज्झइ दब्बु जिय (for तुहुँ), पुण for पुणु; for तणु. 60) A कम्म...जिया; C कम्मि, TKM कम्मे. 61) AC ववहारि, TKM ववहारे; AC बहुविहभावि, TKM° भावे परिणमइ; TKM तेहि वि धम्माहम्मु for तेण जि etc; c धम्माहम्म. 62) TKM ते पुण जीवह; T अट्ठ हि for अट्ठ वि; TKM जेहि वि 63) TKM रंगियहि, C रंजियह; TKM जेयणुगा C अणुआ; TM °पएसहि, K°पयेसहि, in the commentary of Brahmadeva °पए सिहि TK कम्मु for कम्म
64)C विभाउ, TKM सयलु विभाउ; TKM जीवह कम्मे. 65) TK दुक्ख वि सोक्ख वि, M दुक्ख वि ... सोक्खु वि, दुक्ख वि सुक्ख वि; C देषइ for देखइ.

Page #10

-76 : १-७४ ]
परमप्प-पयासु 66 ) बंधु वि मोक्खु वि सयल जिय जीवह कम्मु जणेइ ।
अप्पा किंपि वि कुणइ णवि णिच्छउ एउँ भणेइ ॥६५॥ 67) सो पत्थि त्ति पएसो चउरासी-जोणि-लक्ख-मज्झम्मि ।
जिण-वयणं ण लहंतो जत्थ ण डुलुडुल्लिओ जीवो ॥६५६१ ॥ 68) अप्पा पंगुह अणुहरइ अप्पु ण जाइ ण एइ ।
भुवणत्तयहँ वि मज्झि जिय विहि आणइ विहि णेइ ॥६६॥ जप्पा अप्पु जि परु जि परु अप्पा पर जि ण होइ ।
परु जि कयाइ वि अप्पु णवि णियमें पभाहं जोइ ॥ ६७ ॥ 70) ण वि उप्पज्जइ ण वि मरइ बंधु ण मोक्खु करेइ ।
जिउ परमत्थे जोइया जिणवरु एउँ भणेइ ॥ ६८॥ 71) अत्थि ण उम्भउ जर-मरणु रोय वि लिंग वि वण्ण ।
णियमि अप्यु वियाणि तुहुँ जीवहँ एक्क वि सण्ण ॥ ६९ ॥ 72) देहहँ उन्भउ जर-मरणु देहहँ वण्णु विचित्तु ।
देहहँ रोय वियाणि तुहुं देहहँ लिंगु विचित्तु ॥ ७० ॥ 73) देहहँ पेक्खिवि जर-मरणु मा भउ जीव करेहि ।
जो अजरामरु बंभु परु सो अप्पाणु मुणेहि ॥ ७१ ॥ 74) छिज्जउ भिज्जउ जाउ खउ जोइय एहु सरीरु ।
अप्पा भावहि णिम्मलउ जि पावहि भव-तोरु ॥ ७२ ॥ 75) कम्महँ केरा भावडा अण्णु अचेयणु दन्वु ।
जीव-सहावहँ भिण्णु जिय णियमि बुज्झहि सव्वु ।। ७३ ॥ 76) अप्पा मेल्लिवि णाणमउ अण्णु परायउ भाउ ।
सो छंडेविणु जीव तुहुँ भावहि अप्प-सहाउ ॥ ७४ ।। ____66) Wanting in TKM; no readings in others. 67 ) Wanting in BCTKM, 68) Wanting in TKMB C जोइ for एइ; A reads in the comm. अणुहरई, जाई and एइं, 69) B णियमि; TKM पभणइ जोइ. 70) TM अण वि उप्पज्जइं; A उप्पज्जईएम for एउं 71) TKM रोउ वि लिग वि वण्ण,णियमे, सण्णु (for सण्ण). 72) TKM देहहः C gives only the first pada of this doha 73) KM देहहि पेच्छवि, AB पिक्खिवि; TKM जीउ for जीव; T बम्ह, KM बम्हु, [ In TKM here come five döhās which in our text occupy the numbers II, 148; 11, 149%; II, 1503; II, 151; II, 182. Their various readings are noted under those numbers. 74)A भावहिं....पावहि; C जे पावहि, TKM जं पावहिं. 75) Wanting in TKM; C केरउ. for केरा 76) AC मिल्लवि; TKM मेल्लवि; TKM परावउ for परायउ.

Page #11

जोइंदु-विरइउ
[77:१-७५77) अहँ कम्मह बाहिरउ सयलहँ दोसहँ चत्तु ।
सण-णाण-चरित्तमउ अप्पा भावि णिरुत्तु ।। ७५ ॥ 78) अप्पि अप्पु मुणंतु जिउ सम्मादिट्टि हवेइ ।
सम्माइट्ठिउ जीवडउ लहु कम्मइँ मुच्चेइ ॥ ७६ ।। 79) पज्जय-रत्तउ जीवडउ मिच्छादिठ्ठि हवेइ ।
बंधइ बहु-विह-कम्मडा जे संसारु मेइ ।। ७७ ।। 80) कम्महँ दिढ-घण-चिक्कणइ गरुव समाई।
णाण-वियक्खणु जीवडउ उप्पहि पाडहिँ ताई ।। ७८ ॥ 81) जिउ मिच्छत्तें परिणमिउ विवरिउ तच्च मुणेइ ।
कम्म-विणिम्मिय भावडा ते अप्पाण भइ ॥ ७९ ॥ 82) हउँ गोरउ हउँ सामलउ हउ जि विभिण्णउ वण्णु ।
हउँ तणु-अंगउ थूलु हउँ एहउँ मूढउ मण्णु ॥ ८० ॥ 83 ) हउँ वरु बंभणु वइसु हउँ हउँ खत्तिउ हउँ सेसु।।
पुरिसु णउसउ इत्थि हउ मण्णइ मूढ विसेसु ॥ ८१ ।। 84) तरुणउ बूढउ रूयडउ सूरउ पंडिउ दिन्छु ।।
खवणउ बंदउ सेवडउ मूढउ मण्णइ सव्वु ।। ८२ ।। 85) जणणी जणणु वि कंत घर पुत्तु वि मित्तु वि दन्तु । __माया-जालु वि अप्पणउ मूढउ मण्ण इ सव्वु ॥ ८३ ॥ 86) दुक्खहँ कारणि जे विसय ते सुह-हेउ रमेइ ।
मिच्छाइट्ठिउ जीवडउ इत्थु ण काई करेइ ।। ८४ ।। 87) कालु लहेविणु जोइया जिमु जिम मोहु गलेइ ।
तिमु तिमु सणु लहइ जिउ णियमे अप्पु मुणेइ ॥ ८५ ॥ ___77) TKM अट्ठहे कम्महे (sometimes हे looks like हि), सयलहि दोसहि, जाणि for भावि. 78) TKM अप्पे, C अप्पई for अप्पि; TKM BC सम्माइट्ठि. TKM कम्महि. 79) KM मिच्छाइट्ठि T'fufco; TM agfafe #FATGT, put t has the same reading as adopted in our Text; for 0 AB जिं, जिणि and TK चिरु. 80) TKM गुरुवइ, BC अप्पहि for उप्पहि; TKM पाडइ ताइ. 81) A0 मिच्छत्ति; TKM परिणमइ; TKM भावाडा. 82) Wanting in TKMB C सावलउ. 83) Wan ting in TKM; A मूढ 84) TKM बुड्ड [६] उ; BCTKM रूवडउ; K खमणउ' ABC खवण; TKM बुद्दउ [बुद्धउ] for वंदउ C मूढ विमण्णइ सव्वु 85) c मायाजाल; KM मूढ विमण्ण इ सव्यु T has a corrupt reading. 86) BC TKM कारण; C विसइ; TKM मिच्छाइट्ठि; TKM एत्थु for इत्त्थु; BC काs for काई. 87)A जिम्व जिम्व C जिम जिम, TKM जेव जेव; for तिमु too ihe readings are similar in these Msa.:A णियमि.

Page #12

- 99 : १–९७ ]
परमप्प-पयासु
88) अप्पा गोरउ किण्डु ण वि अप्पा रत्तु ण होइ ।
अप्पा विलु ण वि जाणिउ जाणें जोइ ॥ ८६ ॥ 89) अप्पा बंभणु वसु ण वि ण वि खत्तिउ ण वि सेसु ।
पुरिस उंसर इत्थि ण वि णाणिउ मुणइ असेसु ॥८७॥ 90) अप्पा बंदउ खवणु ण वि अप्पा गुरउ ण होइ ।
अप्पा लिंगिउ एक्कु ण वि णाणिउ जाणइ जोइ ॥ ८८ ॥ 91) अप्पा गुरु णवि सिस्सु णवि णवि सामिउ णवि भिच्चु । सूरज कायरु होइ गवि गवि उत्तमु वि णिच्चु ॥ ८९ ॥ 92) अप्पा माणुस देउ ण वि अप्पा तिरिउ ण होइ ।
अप्पा णारउ कहिँ वि णवि णाणिउ जाणइ जोइ ॥ ९० ॥ 93 ) अप्पा पंडिउ मुक्खु णवि णवि ईसरु णवि णीसु ।
तरुणउ बूढउ बालु णवि अण्णु वि कम्म-विसे ॥ ९१ ॥ 94) पुण्णु वि पाउ वि कालु णहु धम्माधम्मु विकाउ ।
एक्कु वि अप्पा होइ गवि मेल्लिवि चेयण भाउ ॥९२॥ 95) अप्पा संजम सीलु तउ अप्पा दंसणु णाणु ।
अण्ण
97)
अप्पा सासय- मोक्ख-पउ जाणंतर अध्याणु ॥९३॥ 96 ) अण्णु जि दंसणु अस्थि ण वि अण्णु जि अस्थि ण णाणु । जि चरण अस्थि जिय मेल्लिवि अप्पा जाणु || १४ || अष्णु जि तित्थुम जाहि जिय अण्णु जि गुरुउ म सेवि । अणु जि देउ म चिति तुहुं अप्पा विमलु मुवि ॥ ९५ ॥ 98) अप्पा दंसणु केवलु वि अण्णु सब्बु ववहारु । एक्कु जि जोइय झाइयइ जो तइलोयहँ सारु ॥९६॥ 99) अप्पा झायहि णिम्मलउ कि बहुएँ अणेण । जो झायंत परम-प लब्भइ एक्क-खणेण ॥ ९७ ॥
88) KM गउरउ, अप्पा सुहुमु ण for सुहुमु वि; ABC णाणि for जाणें; Brahmadeva has an additional reading णाणिउ जाणइ जोई in the last pāda 89 ) TK बम्हणु; TKM परिसु ण सण; AC णाण मुणइ. 90 ) TKM बुद्धउ for वंदउ, खमणु, गुरुउ, लिंगउ, सोइ for जोइ. 91 ) T सिस्सि, C सीसु; TM भेडु, K भेउ for होइ. 92 ) TKM कोइ ण वि for देउ etc.; C कह वि for कहि वि; TKM णाणिउ णाणे जोइ as the pāda 93 ) Wanting in TKM; A तरुणउं 94 ) Wanting in TKM; AC facfa. 95) No various readings in Ms., but Brahmadeva notes some alternanative readings: सासय मुक्खपहुं, सासय सुक्खपउ 96 ) TKM मेल्लवि. 97 ) TKM जाइ for जाहि; चितवहि for चिति तुहुं. 98 ) TKM अणु सब्बउ ववहारु; C जोइया 99 ) TKM कि अण्णे बहुएण; A इक्क, TKM एक्कु.

Page #13

जोइंदु-विरइउ
[ 100:१-९८100) अप्पा णिय-मणि णिम्मलउ णियमें वसइ ण जास ।
सत्थ-पुराणइँ तव-चरणु मुक्खु वि करहिं कि तासु ॥९८।। 101) जोइय अप्पे जाणिएण जगु जाणियउ हवेइ ।
अप्पहँ केरइ भावडइ बिबिउ जेण वसेइ ।।९९।। 102) अप्प-सहावि परिहियहँ एहउ होइ विसेसु ।
दीसइ अप्प-सहावि लहु लोयालोउ असेसु ॥१००।। 103) अप्पु पयासइ अप्पु परु जिम अंबरि रवि-राउ ।
जोइय एत्थु म भंति करि एहउ वत्थु-सहाउ ॥१०१।। 104) तारायणु जलि बिबियउ णिम्मलि दीसह जेम।
अप्पए णिम्मलि बिंबियउ लोयालोउ वि तेम ||१०२।। 105) अप्पु वि पर वि वियाणइ जै अप्पे' मुणिएण।
सो णिय-अप्पा जाणि तुहुँ जोइय णाण-बलेण ।।१०३।। 106) णाणु पयासहि परमु महु कि अण्णे बहुएण ।
जेण णियप्पा जाणियइ सामिय एक्क-खणेण ।।१०४।। 107) अप्पा गाण मुणेहि तुहुँ जो जाणइ अप्पाणु ।
जीव-पएसहि तित्तिडउ णाणे गयण-पवाणु ।।१०।। 108) अप्पहें जे वि विभिण्ण वढ ते वि हवंति ण णाण ।
ते तुहुँ तिण्णि वि परिहरिवि णिमि अप्पु वियाणु ॥१०६॥ 109) अप्पा णाणहँ गम्मु पर णाणु वियाणइ जेण ।
तिणि वि मिल्लिवि जाणि तुहुँ अप्पा णाणे- तेण ॥१०७।। 110) णाणिय णाणिउ णाणिएण णाणिउँ जा ण मुणेहि ।
ता अण्णाणि णाणमउँ कि पर बंभु लहेहि ॥१०८।। 100) B तवयरणु, TKM सत्युपुराणे तउचरणु; TKM मोक्खु जि करइ किं तासु for the last pada. 101) Wanting in TKM; B अप्पि for अप्पें; C बिबउ....वसंति. 102) Wanting in TKM; अप्पि सहावि; Brahmadeva notes on alternative reading दीसइ अप्पसहाउ लहु. 103) Cजिम्व, TM जेव ( K जेउ) अंबरे. 104) TKM जले for जलि, णिम्मले....जेव; BC अप्पई, TKM अप्पए णिम्मले; A लोयालोय, TKM लोयालोय वि तेव. 105) TKM वियाणिजइ; Bfजं अप्पि, TKM जे अप्पे; TKM सो णिउ अप्पा मुणहि तुहं. 106) Wanting in TKM; B कि अण्णि. 107) TKM जीवपएसहि तेत्थडउ, ABC तित्तडउ, Brahmadeva has an alternative reading जीवपएसहि देहसमु; Cणाणिं, BC पमाणु, TKM गाणे गयणपमाणु. 108) Wanting in TKM, and no readings in others. 109) TKM परु, मुणहि तुहुँ for जाणि etc., मेल्लवि. 110) Wanting in TKM; C मुणेई and लहेइ.

Page #14

-12! : १-११९]
परमप्प-पयासु
111) जोइज्जइ ति बंभु परु जाणिज्जइ ति सोई।
बंभु मुणेविणु जेण लहु गम्मिज्जइ परलोइ ।।१०९।। 111) मुणि-वर-विदह हरि-हरहूँ जो मणि णिवस देउ ।
परह जि परतरु णाणमउ सो वुच्चइ पर-लोउ ।।११०॥ 113) सो पर वुच्चइ लोउ परु जसु मइ तित्थु वसेइ ।
जहिं मइ तहिँ गइ जीवह जि णियमें जेण हवेइ ॥१११॥ 114) जहिं मइ तहिँ गइ जीव तुहुँ मरणु वि जेण लहेहि ।
ते परबंभु मुएवि मइँ मा पर-दवि करेहि ॥११२।। 115) जं णियदव्वहँ भिण्णु जडतं पर-दव्वु वियाणि ।
पुग्गल धम्माधम्मु णहु कालु वि पंचमु जाणि ॥११३॥ 116) जइ णिविसङ्घ वि कु वि करइ परमप्पइ अणुराउ ।
अग्गि-कणी जिम कट्ठ-गिरी डहइ असेसु वि पाउ ॥११४।। 117) मेल्लिवि सयल अवक्खडी जिय णिच्चितउ होइ ।
चित्त णिवेसहि परम-पए देउ णिरंजणु जोइ ॥११॥ 118) जं सिव-दंसणि परम-सह पावहि झाण करंतु ।
तं सुहु भुवणि वि अत्थि णवि मेल्लिवि देउ अणंतु ॥११६।। 119) जं मुणि लहइ अणंत-सुहु णिय-अप्पा झायंतु ।
तं सुहु इंदु वि णवि लहइ देविहि कोडि रमंतु ॥११७।। 120) अप्पा-दंसणि जिणवरह जं सुहु होइ अणंतु ।
तं सुह लहइ विराउ जिउ जाणंतउ सिउ संतु ।।११८।। 121) जोइय णिय-मणि णिम्मलए पर दोसइ सिउ संतु ।
__ अंबरि णिम्मलि घण-रहिए भाणु जि जेम-फुरंतु ।।११९॥
111) TKM ते बम्हु परु; C तव for ति, TKM ते सोइ; Brahmad va has an alternative reading पर for परु. 112) Wanting in TKM. 113) TKM बुज्झइ for वुच्चइ, परिवुच्चइ; TKM तेत्थु, जीवह वि. 111) TKM have no naral signs; c परदव्यु for °बंमु; TKM लहेइ and करेइ, पर बम्हु, दब्बे. ।।5) B अण्णु for भिण्ण, BTK पोग्गल, C पोग्गल 116) TK कोइ करइ णियअप्पए अणुराउ; TKM अग्गिकणि जेव, C जिव. 117) TKM मेल्लवि सयल: BC णिवेसिवि; C देव. 118) TKM पावइ, पावइ. झाण: TKM मेल्लवि. AC मिल्लिवि ।19) BCTKM अणंतु सुह; TKM देविहि कोडि. 120) Wanting in TKM: C मिव. for सिउ.121) Wanting in TKM; G णिम्मलइ, सिव.

Page #15

जोइंदु-विरइउ
[ 122 : १-१२०___122) राएँ रंगिए हियवडए देउ ण दीसइ संतु।
दप्पणि मइलए बिबु जिम एहउ जाणि णिभंतु ॥१२०॥ 123) जसु हरिणच्छी हियवडए तसु णवि बंभु वियारि ।
एक्कहिँ केम समंति वढ बे खंडा पडियारि ।। १२१।। 124) णिय-मणि गिम्मलि णाणियह णिवसइ देउ अणाइ।
हंसा सरवरि लीण जिम महु एहउ पडिहाइ ।।१२२॥ 125) देउ न देउले गवि सिलए णवि लिप्पइ णवि चित्ति ।
अखउ णिरंजणु णाणमउ सिउ संठिउ सम-चित्ति ॥१२३॥ 126) मणु मिलियउ परमेसरह परमेसरु बि मणस्स ।
बोहि वि समरसि-हूवाह पुज्ज चडावउँ कस्स ।।१२२*२।। 127) जेण णिरंजणि मण धरिउ विसय-कसायहिँ जंतु । मोक्खह कारणु एत्तडउ अण्णु ण तंतु ण मंतु ।।१२३*३।।
[ २. बिज्जउ अहियारु] 128) सिरिगुरु अक्खहि मोक्खु महु मोक्खह कारणु तत्थु ।
मोक्खह केरउ अण्णु फलु जे जाणउ परमत्थु ॥१॥ 129) जोइय मोक्ख वि मोक्ख-फलु पुच्छिउ मोक्खह हेउ ।
सो जिण-भासिउ णिसुणि तुहुँ जेण वियाणहि भेउ ।।२।। 130) धम्महँ अत्थह कामह' वि एयह- सयलह मोक्खु ।
उत्तमु पभणहि णाणि जिय अण्णे जेण ण सोक्खु ।।३।। 131) जइ जिय उत्तमु होइ णवि एयह- सयलह- सोइ।
तो किं तिणि वि परिहरवि जिण वच्चहि पर-लोइ ।।४।। 132) उत्तमु सुक्खु ण देइ जइ उत्तमु मुक्खु ण होई ।
तो किं इच्छहि बंधणहि बद्धा पसुय वि सोइ ।।५।। 122) TKM रंगियहियवडये (ए ?) दप्पणे मइलए. बिंबु जेव, जाणु; C एहू for एहउ. 123) Wanting in TKM; B परियारि, पडिहारि for पडियारि. 124) TKM णियमणे णिम्मले, जेव for जिम, तुहु एहउ 125) BG देउलि सिलइ; TKM लेप्पइ. अखउ णिरामउ''संतिउ समचित्तें. 126) Wanting in TKM; B समरसहूयाइ. 127) Wanting in TKM. 128) Winting in TKM; C सोक्खहं for मोक्खहँ; B मुक्खह for second मोक्खह, जिम for जे. 29) TKM मोक्खु जि मोक्खु; c विआणिउ. 130) TKM have no nasal signs, उत्तिम अणि for अण्णें. 131) TKM; Brahmadava's reading सोवि; TKM वच्चइ; C परलोउ. 132) Wanting in TKM.; B ता for तो; C अच्छहिं बंधहिं; 8 पसुव वि c पसुवि वि.

Page #16

- 144 : २-१७ ]
परमप्प-पयासु
133) अणु जइ जगहँ वि अहिययरु गुण-गणु तासु ण होइ । तो तइलोउ वि किं धरइ णिय-सिर-उप्परि सोइ ।। ६ ।। 134) उत्तम सुक्खु ण देइ जइ उत्तम मुक्खु ण होइ ।
तो कि सलुवि कालु जिय सिद्ध वि सेवहिँ सोइ ॥ ७ ॥ 133) हरि-हर-बंभु वि जिणवर वि मुणि-वर-विंद वि भव्व ।
परम- णिरंजणि मणु धरिवि मुक्खु जि झायहिँ सव्व ॥ ८ ॥ 136) तिहुणि जीवहँ अस्थि णवि साक्खहँ कारण कोइ ।
मुक्खु मुएविणु एक्कु पर तेणवि चितहि सोइ ॥ ९ ॥ 137) जीवहँ सो पर मोक्खु मुणि जो परमप्पय-लाहु |
कम्म-कलंक - विमुक्का णाणिय बोल्लहिँ साहू ॥१०॥ 138) दसणु णाणु अनंत-सुहु समउ ण तुट्टइ जासु ।
सो पर सास मोक्ख फल बिज्जउ अस्थि ण तासु ॥ ११॥ 139 ) जीवहँ मोक्खहँ हेउ वरु दंसणु णाणु चरितु । पुणु तिणि वि अष्णु मुणि णिच्छएँ एहउ वृत्तु ॥१२॥ 140) पेच्छइ जाणइ अणुचरइ अपि अप्पउ जो जि ।
दंसणु णाणु चरितु जिउ मोक्खहँ कारण सो जि ॥१३॥ 141) जं बोल्लइ ववहार-णउ दंसणु णाणु चरितु |
तं परियाणहि जीव तुहुँ जें परु होहि पवित्तु ॥ १४ ॥ 112 ) दव्बई जाणइ जह-ठियाँ तह जगि मण्णइ जो जि । अहँ के भाव अविचल दंसणु सो जि ॥ १५ ॥ 113) दव्वइँ जाणहि ताइँ छह तिहुयणु भरियउ जेहिँ । आइ-विणास विवज्जियहिं णाणिहि पभाणियएहिं ॥ १६ ॥ 144 ) जोउ सचेणु दव्वु मुणि पंच अचेयण अण्ण ।
पोलु धम्माहम् हु कालें सहिया भिण्ण || १७||
133) Wanting in TKM; C सिर उप्परि. 134 ) TKM उत्तिमु....मोक्खु, C उत्तमसुक्ख; TKM सेवइ. 13 ) A बम्हु; C जिणवरहं, TKM परमणिरंजणु मोक्खु. 136 ) TKM तिहुवणे; BC सुक्खहं; TKM मोक्खु. 137) BC मुक्खु; TKM कम्मकलंके. 138) ATKM अणंतु सुहु; TKM मोक्खु फलु. 139 ) BC मुक्खहं C हेउ वर; TKM णिच्छउ एहउ जुत्तु. 140 ) BC णिच्छइ, TKM पस्सइ; CTKM अप्पे, Brahmadeva अप्पई. 141 ) Wanting in TKM; A बुल्लइ जि for जें. 142 ) Wanting in CTKM. 143) Wanting in BTKM; C तिहुयणि भरिया जेहि.... णाणिय. 144 ) TKM अचेयणु अण्णु, पोल, काले सहिया भिष्णु; ABC कालि.

Page #17

१४
जोइंदु-विरइउ
[145:२-१८_145) मुत्ति-विहूणउ णाणमउ परमाणंद-सहाउ ।
णिमि जोइय अप्पु मुणि णिच्चु णिरंजणु भाउ ॥१८॥ 146) पुग्गल छविहु मुत्त वढ इयर अमुत्तु वियाणि ।
धम्माधम्म वि गयठियहँ कारणु पभणहि णाणि ॥१९।। 147) दव्वइँ सयलई वरि ठियइँ णियमे जासु वसंति ।
तं णहु दव्वु वियाणि तुहुँ जिणवर एउ भणंति ॥२०॥ 148) कालु मुणिज्जहि दव्वु तुहुँ वट्टण-लक्खणु एउ।
रयणहँ रासि विभिण्ण जिम तसु अणयह तह भेउ ॥२१॥ 149) जीउ वि पुग्गल काल जिय ए मेल्लेविण दव्व ।
इयर अखंड वियाणि तुहुँ अप्प-पएसहि सव्व ।।२२।। 150) दव्व चयारि वि इयर जिय गमणागमण-विहोण । ___जीउ वि पुग्गलु परिहरिवि पभणहिणाण-पवीण ।।२३।। 151) धम्माधम्मु वि एक्कु जिउ ए जि असंख-पदेस ।
गयणु अणंत-पएसु मुणि बहु-विह पुग्गल-देस ॥२४॥ 152) लोयागासु धरेवि जिय कहियई दव्वई जाइँ ।
एक्कहि मिलियई इत्थु जगि सगुणहिं णियसहि ताइँ ॥२५।। 153) एयइ दवइ देहियह णिय-णिय-कज्जु जणंति ।।
चउ-गइ-दुक्ख सहत जिय ते संसारु भमंति ॥२६॥ 154) दुक्खहँ कारण मुणिवि जिय दववह एहु सहाउ ।
होयवि मोक्खहँ मन्गि लहु गम्मिज्जइ पर-लोउ ॥२७।। 155) णियमें कहियउ एह मई ववहारेण वि दिट्ठि । ___ एवहि णाणु चरित्तु सुणि जे पावहि परमेट्टि ॥१८॥
145) TKM विहणिउ, णियमे. 146) TKM पोग्गल, धम्माहम्मु वि गइठिदिहि, A गइठिएहि; Ms. A has no commentary on 18-19, but the saune added in a different hand on the marginal space. 147) TKM change the order of 147 and 148; TKM दव्वइ सयलुदरिट्ठियई; Brahmadeva उवरि; BC णियमि; TKM एहु for एउ. 148) C वट्टणु; TKM एहु for एउ, जेव तसु अणुवह. 149) TKM पोग्गलु, अखंड मुणेहि तुहं. 150) TKM पोग्गलु. परिहरवि पभणइ णाणपवीणु, AB णाणिपवीण. 151) TKMBC धम्माहम्म; TKM एज्जि, गयण, पोग्गल'; Brahmadeva has another reading पुग्गल तिविहु पएसु. 152) TKMBC लोयायासु, TKM धरेइ ठिया, एत्थु जए. 153) TKM देहियहि, C देहियई; TKM णियणिउ, सहंतु BC सहति 154) TKM णादु for मुणिवि, एउ for एह, मग्गे; C होइवि. 155) B णियमई; TKM मुणि for सुणि; BC जि.

Page #18

-166: २-३७]
परमप्प-पयासु
156) जं जह थक्कउ दव्वु जिय तं तह जाणइ जो जि ।
अप्पहं केरउ भावडउ णाणु मुणिज्जहि सो जि ॥२९।। 157) जाणवि मण्णवि अप्पु परु जो पर-भाउ चएइ ।
सो णिउ सुद्धउ भावडउ णाणिहि चरणु हवेइ ॥३०॥ 158) जो भत्तउ रयणत्तयहँ तसु मुणि लक्खणु एउ। ____ अप्पा मिल्लिवि गुण-णिलउ तासु वि अण्णु ण झेउ ॥३१॥ 159) जे रयणतउ णिम्मलउ णाणिय अप्पु भणंति ।
ते आराहय सिव-पयहँ णिय-अप्पा झयंति ॥३२॥ 160) अप्पा गुणमउ णिम्मलउ अणुदिणु जे झायंति ।
ते पर णियमें परम-मुणि लहु णिव्वाणु लहंति ॥३३॥ 161) सयल-पयत्यहं जं गहणु जीवह अग्गिम होइ ।
वत्थु-विसेस-विवज्जियउ तं णिय-दसणु जोइ ॥३४॥ 162) दसण-पुव्वु हवेइ फुडु जं जोवहँ विण्णाणु ।
वत्थ-विसेसु मुणंतु जिय तं मुणि अविचलु णाणु ॥३५।। 163) दुक्खु वि सुक्खु सहंतु जिय णाणिउ झाण-णि लोणु ।
कम्महँ णिज्जर-हेउ तउ वुच्चइ संग-विहीण ॥३६।। 164) कायकिलेसे पर तणु झिज्जइ
विणु उवसमेण कसाउ ण खिज्जइ । ण करहिं इंदिय मणह णिवारणु
उग्गतवो वि ण मोक्खह कारणु ॥३६*१।। 166) अप्प-सहावे जासु रइ णिच्चुववासउ तास ।
बाहिर-दब्वे जासु रइ भुक्खुमारि तासु ॥३६*२।। 166) बिणि वि जेण सहंतु मुणि मणि सम भाउ करेइ ।
पुण्णहं पावह तेण जिय संवर-हेउ हवेइ ॥३७॥
156) TKM जो and सो for & and तं, मुगिज्जइ. 157) TKM मण्णइ; C चरण. 158) TKM मेल्लवि, तासु जि. 159) TKM रयगत्तयणिम्मल उ, णिउ अप्पा 160) TKM जे अणुदिणु, तं परु for ते पर; c णिब्वाणि. 161) C जीवहु; TKM सयलविसेसु. 162) BC दंसणु पुचु; C मुणंति. 163) C दुक्ख वि सुक्ख; TKM सोक्खु, झाणे, बुज्झइ for बुच्चइ. 164) Only in P; किलेसं. 165) Only in P. 166) TKM बेण्णि....सहंति, मणे; c तेणि for तेण.

Page #19

जोइंदु-विरइउ
[167 : २-३८ 167) अच्छह जित्तिउ कालु मुणि अप्प-सरूवि णिलीणु ।
संवर-णिज्जर जाणि तुहुँ सयल-वियप्प-विहीणु ।।३८।। 168) कम्मु पुरक्किउ सो खवइ अहिणव पेसु ण देइ ।
संगु मुएविणु जो सयलु उवसम-भाउ करेइ ॥३९।। 179) दंसणु णाणु चरित्तु तसु जो सम-भाउ करेइ ।
इयरह एक्कु वि अत्थि णवि जिणवरु एउ भणेइ ॥४०॥ 170) जाँवइ णाणिउ उवसमइ तामइ संजदु होइ ।।
होइ कसायहँ वसि गयउ जीउ असंजदु सोइ ॥४१॥ 171) जेण कसाय हवंति मणि सो जिय मिल्लाह मोह ।
मोह-कसाय-विवज्जयउ पर पावहि सम-बोहु ।।४२।। 172) तत्तातत्तु मुणेवि मणि जे थक्का सम-भावि ।
ते पर सुहिया इत्थु जगि जहरह अप्प-सहावि ॥४३॥ 173) बिण्णि वि दोस हवंति तस जो सम-भाउ करेइ ।
बंधु जि णिहणइ अप्पणउ अणु जगु गहिल करेइ ॥४४॥ 174) अण्णु वि दोसु हवेइ तसु जो सम-भाउ करेइ ।
सत्तु वि मिल्लिवि अप्पणउ परह णिलोणु हवेइ ॥४५।। 175) अण्णु वि दोस हवेइ तस जो सम-भाउ करेइ ।
वियलु हवेविण इक्कलउ उप्परि जगह चडेइ ॥४६॥ 176) जा णिसि सयलह देहियह जोग्गिउ तहि जग्गेइ। ___जहि पुणु जग्गइ सयलु जगु सा णिसि मणिवि सुवेइ ॥४६*१॥ 177) गाणि मुएप्पिणु भाउ समु कित्थु वि जाइ ण राउ ।
जेण लहेसइ जाणमउ तेण जि अप्प-सहाउ ।।४७।। 178) भणइ भणावइ वि थुणइ णिदइ णाणि ण कोइ ।
सिद्धिहि कारण भाउ समुजाणंतउ पर सोइ ॥४८।।
167) C जितउ, TKM जेतिउ, अपसरूवे. 158) पुरिविकउ, TKM कम्म पुराइउ andप इसु for पेसु. 169)C णहु for णवि, एम for एउ; TKM णिच्छ उ for जिणवरु. 170) TKM जाव हि and ताच हि, AB जाम्वइ, C तावइ; TKM वसगय उ; C होइ for सोइ. 171) TKM मणे; TKMC मेल्लहि 172) TKM मो, समभावे, एत्यु (Calso); जगे अप्पसहावे. 171) Wanting in TKM. 174) c दोस; TKM मेल्लवि. 175) Some Da anagari Mss. hesitate between जि and वि; BTKM हवेप्पिणु. CTKM एक्कलउ. 176) Wanting in TKM; BC भणिवि for मणिवि. 177) CTKM मुएविणु, केत्यु; TKM लहेसहि. 178) c कारणि; TKM भावसमु.

Page #20

-190 : २-६०]
परमप्प-पयासु 179) गंथ, उप्परि परम-मुणि देसु वि करइ ण राउ ।
गंथहँ जेण विवाणियउ भिण्णउ अप्प-सहाउ ॥४९॥ 180) विसयहँ उपरि परम-मुणि देशु वि करइ ण राउ ।
विसयह जेण वियाणियउ भिण्णउ अप्प-सहाउ ।।५०।। 181) देहहँ उप्परि परम-मणि देस वि करइ ण राउ।
देहहँ जेण वियाणियउ भिण्णउ अप्प-सहाउ ॥५१॥ 182) वित्ति-णिवित्तिहिं परम-मुणि देस वि करइ ण राउ।
बंधहँ हेउ वियाणियउ एयह जेण सहाउ ॥५२॥ 183) बंधहँ मोक्खहँ हेउ णि उ जो णवि जाणइ कोइ ।
सो सर मोहिं करइ जिय पुण्णु वि पाउ वि दोइ ।।५३।। 184) सण-णाण-चरित्तमउ जो णवि अप्पु मुणेइ ।
मोक्तहँ कारणु भणिवि जिय सो पर ताई करेइ ॥५४॥ 185) जो णवि मण्णइ जीउ समु पुण्ण वि पाउ वि दोइ ।
सो चिरु दुक्खु सहंतु जिय मोहिं हिंडइ लोइ ॥५५॥ 186) वर जिय पावई संदरइँ णाणिय ताइँ भणति ।
जीवहँ दुक्खइँ जणिवि लहु सिवमइँ जाइँ कुणंति ।।५६।। 187) मं पुणु पुण्णइँ भल्ला िणाणिय ताई भणंति ।
जोवहँ रज्जई देवि लहु दुक्खइ जाइ जणंति ॥५७।। 188) वर णिय-दसण-अहिमुहउ मरणु वि जीव लहेसि ।
मा णिय- सण-निम्मुहउ पुष्णु वि जीव करेसि ||५८।। 189) जे णिय-दसण अहिमहा सोक्खु अणंतु लहंति ।
ति विणु पुण्णु करंता वि दुक्खु अणंतु सहति ॥५९॥ 190) पुण्णेण होइ विहवो विहवेण मओ मरण मइ-मोहो ।
मइ मोहेण य पावं ता पुण्णं अम्ह मा होउ ॥६०॥
179) Wanting in TKM. 180) Wanting in TKM; C बंधहु हेउ for विसयहं जेण. 181) Wanting in TKM. 182) Wanting in TKM; Brahmal va has an alternative reading for the 2nd lin: भिण्णउ जेण वियाणियउ एयह अप्पसहाउ. 183) A णिरु for णिउ, TKM मोहे....जिउ, लोइ fo: दोइ. 134) ABC सिद्धिहि कारणि; TKM मुणवि for भणिवि 185) B जीव सम; C दोवि. TKM बेइ; TEM मोहे. 186) TKM जणेइ for जणिवि3; BC सिवगइ. 187) TKM रज्जुइ....लहुं. 188) TM णियदंसणे, सहेसि for लहेसि ( B लहीसि ); TKM मं for मा; BTKM करीसि. 189) AC सुक्खु; TKMB तें; B करंताह, TKM करेंताई. 150) Wanting in BC; TKM अइमोहो । अइमोहेण वि.

Page #21

जोइंदु-विरइउ
[191 : २-६१191) देवह सत्यहं मुणिवरहँ भत्तिए पुण्णु हवेइ ।
कम्म-क्खउ पुणु होइ णवि अज्जउ ति भणेइ ॥६१॥ 192) देवह सत्थह मुणिवरह जो विद्देसु करेइ ।
णियमें पाउ हवेइ तसु जै संसारु भमेइ ।।६२॥ 193) पावेणारउ तिरिउ जिउ पुण्णे अमरु वियाणु ।
मिस्ते माणुस-गइ लहइ दोहि वि खइ णिव्वाणु ॥६३।। 194) वंदणु णिदण पडिकमण पुण्णहँ कारण जेण ।
करइ करावइ अणुमणइ एक्कु वि णाणि ण णेण ॥६४॥ 195) वंदणु णिदण पडिकमणु णाणिहिं एहु ण जुत्तु ।
एक्कु जि मेल्लिवि णाणमउ सुद्धउ भाउ पवित्तु ॥६५॥ 196) वंदउ णिदउ पडिकमउ भाउ असुद्धउ जासु ।
पर तसु संजमु अस्थि णवि जं मण-सद्धि ण तासु ॥६६।। 197) सुद्धहँ संजमु सोलु तउ सुद्धहँ सण णाणु ।
सुद्धहँ कम्मक्खउ हवइ सुद्धउ तेण पहाणु ॥६७॥ 198) भाउ विसुद्धउ अप्पणउ धम्म भणेविणु लेहु ।
चउ-गइ-दुक्खहं जो धरइ जीउ पडतउ एहु ॥६८॥ 199) सिद्धिहिँ केरा पंथडा भाउ विसुद्धउ एक्कु ।
जो तसु भावहँ मुणि चलइ सो किम होइ विमुक्कु ॥६९॥ 200) जहिं भावइ तहिं जाहि जिय जं भावइ करि तं जि ।
केम्वइ मोक्खु ण अत्थि पर चित्तहँ सुद्धि ण जं जि ॥७०॥ 201) सुह-परिणामे धम्मु पर असहे होइ अहम्मु ।।
दोहि वि एहि विवीज्जयउ सुद्ध ण बंधइ कम्मु ॥७१।। 202) दाणि लब्भइ भोउ पर इंदत्तणु वि तवेण ।
जम्मण-मरण-विवज्जियउ पउ लब्भइ णाणेण ॥७२॥
193) A पावि....मिस्सि; TK पुण्णे सुरवर होइ; T and K have the second line thus : माणुसु सिस्से मुणहि (K मुणिहि) जिय दोहि विमुक्कउ जोइ। 194) A C पडिकवणु; T and M करहि करावहि अणुमणुहि. 195) c interchanges the places of 194 and 195; Tणाणिहे Brahmadeva णाणिहु; C एउ for एहु; TKM मेल्लवि. ! 6) TKM वंदणु जिंदणु पडिकमणु; C पडिकवउ, B पडिकम्बउ. 197) TM दंसणाणु; c कम्मह खउ. 198) TKM लेउ for लेहु. 199) TKM सिद्धिहि केरउ पंथडउ, B सिद्धि हि केरउ पंथा; TKM कह for किम 200) Wanting in TKM; भावहि for भावइ; BC केमइ. 201) TKM पम्म परु असुहइ; A असुहिं 202) TKM दाणे....परु; BC दाणे,

Page #22

-213 : २-८२]
परमप्प-पयासु 203) देउ णिरंजणु इउँ भणइ णाणि मुक्खु ण भंति ।
णाण-विहीणा जीवडा चिरु संसारु भमंति ।। ७३ ।। 204) णाण-विहीणहँ मोक्ख-पउ जीव म कासु वि जोइ ।
बहुएं सलिल-विरोलियई करु चोप्पडउ ण होइ ॥ ७४ ।। 205) भव्वाभन्वह जो चरणु सरिसुण तेण हि मोक्खु ।
लद्धि ज भव्वह रयणत्तय होइ अभिण्णे मोक्खु ।। ७४*१ ॥ 06) जं णिय-बोहहं बाहिरउ णाण वि कज्जु ण तेण ।
दुक्खहँ कारणु जैण तउ जीवहँ होइ खणेण ॥७५ ॥ 207) तं णिय-णाण जि होइ ण वि जेण पवड्ढइ राउ।
दिणयर-किरणहँ पुरउ जिय किं विलसइ तम-राउ ॥ ७६ ॥ 208) अप्पा मिल्लिवि णाणियहँ अण्णु ण सुंदरु वत्थु ।
तेण ॥ विसयह मणु रमइ जाणंतह परमत्थु ॥ ७७ ॥ 209) अप्पा मिल्लिवि णाणमउ चित्ति ण लग्गह अण्णु ।
मरगउ जे परियाणि यउ तहुँ कच्चे कउ गणु ॥ ७८ ॥ 210) भुजंतु वि णिय-कम्म-फलु मोहई जो जि करेइ ।
भाउ असुदरु वि सो पर कम्मु जणेइ ॥ ७९ ॥ 211) भुजंतु वि णिय-कम्म-फलु जो तहिँ राउ ण जाइ ।
सो गवि बंधइ कम्मु पुणु संचिउ जेण विलाइ ॥ ८० ।। 212) जो अणु-मेत्तु वि राउ मणि जाम ण मिल्लइ एत्थु ।
सो णवि मुच्चइ ताम जिय जाणंतु वि परमत्थु ।। ८१ ।। 213) बुज्झइ सत्थई तउ चरइ पर परमत्थु ण वेइ ।
ताव ण मुंचइ जाम णवि इहु परमत्थु मुणेइ ॥ ८२ ।।
203) TM एहु, K येहु, B एउ for इउं; TKM णाणे मोक्खु नि (णि) भंतु; C भंतु for भंति 204) Wanting in TKM; B वहुयई सलिलविलोलियइ. 205) In TKM only. 206) AC जि for वि. 207) Wanting in TKM.; 280) T, K and M change the order of 208 and 209; TKM मेल्लिवि, विसयहि; C जाणंतहु. 209) TKM चित्ते, चित्त; TKM & for जें; B तह कच्चि; TK को गण्णु. 210) C, T, K and M interchange 210; and 211; BC मोहिं जो जि कम्मु जणेइ. 211 ) Bण हि for णवि. 212) A अणुमित्तु वि; TKMB मणे; TKM जाव ण मेल्लवि...,ताव; BC मुंबइ, 213) TKM ताव....जाव; BC मुच्चइ; TKM एह for इहु.
३

Page #23

जोइंदु-विरइउ
[214 २-८३214) सत्थ पढंतु वि होइ जडु जो ण हणेइ वियप्पु ।
देहि वसंतु वि णिम्मलउ गवि मण्णइ परमप्पु ।। ८३ ॥ 215) बोह-णिमित्तै सत्थु किल लोइ पढिज्जइ इत्थु ।
तेण वि बोहु ण जासु वरु सो किं मूढ ण तत्थु ॥ ८४ ॥ 216) तित्थई तित्थु भमंताहँ मूढहँ मोक्खु ण होइ।
णाण-विवज्जिउ जेण जिय मुणिवरु होइ ण सोइ ॥ ८५ ॥ 217) णाणिहिं मूढह मुणिवरहं अंतर होइ महंतु ।
देहु वि मिल्लइ णाणियउ जीवहँ भिण्णु मुणंतु ॥ ८६ ।। 218) लेणहँ इच्छइ मूढ पर भुवणु वि एहु असेसु ।
बहु-विह-धम्म-मिसेण जिय दोहिँ वि एहु विसेसु ॥ ८७ ॥ 219) चेल्ला-चेल्ली-पुत्थियहि तूसइ मूढ णिभंतु ।
एयहि लज्जइ णाणियउ बंधहँ हेउ मुणंतु ।। ८८॥ 220) चट्टहिँ पट्टहिं कुंडयहि चेल्ला-चेल्लियएहिं ।
मोहु जणेविणु मुणिवरहँ उत्पाहि पाडिय तेहिं । ८९ ॥ 221) केण वि अप्पउ वंचियउ सिरु लुचिवि छारेण ।
सयल वि संग ण परिहरिय जिणवर-लिंग-धरेण ।। ९० ।। 222) ते जिण-लिंगु धरेवि मुणि इट्ठ-परिग्गह लेंति।
छदि करेविणु ते जि जिय सा पुणु छद्दि गिलंति ॥ ९१ ॥ 223) लाहहँ कित्तिहि कारणिण जे सिव-संगु चयति ।।
___ खीला-लग्गिवि ते वि मुणि देउल्लु देउ डहति ।। ९२ ।। 224) अप्पउ मण्णइ जो जि मुणि गरु यउ गंथहि तत्थु ।
सो परमत्थे जिणु भणइ णवि बुज्झइ परमत्थु ।। ९३ ॥
214) TKM देहे वसंतउ. C देह वसंतु. 215) Wanting in TKM; C तेण विबोहणु जासु. 216) T तित्थे भमंताह; Band c have अक्खरडा etc. between 215 and 216. 217) Wanting in TKM; C मुणिवरहिं. 218) Wanting in TKM; C दोहि वि AB दोहिमि. 219) A चिल्लाचिल्ली, TKM; चेल्लाचेल्लियपोत्थियहिं; T दूसइ; for तूसइ; B मिल्लइ for लज्जइ. 220) TKM गुंडियहिं; AB चिल्लाचिल्लियएहिं. 221) TKM सिरु लुंचुवि, सयलु वि, परिहरइ.222) A लिति; TKM छड्डि for छद्दि, तेज्जि for ते जि. 223) c किंत्तिहं BCTKM कारणेण; TKM सिव (उ) मग्गु; TKMC खीलालग्गवि. 224) TKM जोज्जि for जो जि, गंथहि गरुवइ तत्थु; Cणउ for णवि.

Page #24

- 235 : २-१०४ ]
परमप्प-पयासु
225) बुज्झत परमत्थु जिय गुरु लहु अस्थि न कोइ । जीवा सयल वि बंभु परु जेण वियाणइ सोइ ॥ ९४ ॥ 226) जो भत्तउ रयण-त्तवहँ तसु मुणि लक्खणु एउ | अच्छउ कहि विकुडिल्लियइ सो तसु करइ न भेउ ।। ९५ ।। 227) जीवहँ तिहुयण-संठियह मूढा भेउ करंति !
केवल-णाणि णाणि फुडु सयलु वि एक्कु मुणंति ॥ ९६ ॥ 228) जीवा सयल वि णाण मय जम्मण-मरण- विमुक्क ।
जीव-पएसहि सयल सम सयल वि सगुणहि एक्क ।। ९७ ।। 229 ) जीवहँ लक्खणु जिणवरहि भासिउ दंसण - णाणु ।
तेण ण किज्जइ भेउ तहँ जइ मणि जाउ विहाणु ॥ ९८ ॥ 220) बंभ भुवणि वसंताहँ जे गवि भेउ करंति ।
ते परमप्प-पयासयर जोइय विमलु मुणंति ॥ ९९ ॥ 231) राय-दोस बे परिहरिवि जे सम जीव नियंति ।
ते सम भावि परिट्टिया लहु णिव्वाणु लहंति ॥१००॥ 232) जीवह दंसणु णाणु जिय लक्खणु जाणइ जो जि ।
ह - विभेएँ भेउ तहं णाणि कि मण्णइ सो जि ॥ १०१ ॥ 233) देह - विभेयइँ जो कुणइ जीवहँ भेउ विचित्तु |
सो व लक्खणु मुणइ तहँ दंसणु णाणु चरितु ॥ १०२ ॥ 234 ) अंग सुमइँ बादरद्द विहि-वसि होंति जे बाल ।
जिय पुणु सयल वि तित्तडा सव्वत्थ वि सय-काल ॥१०३॥ 235) सत्तु वि मित्तु वि अप्पु परु जीव असेसु वि एइ । एक्कु करेविणु जो मुणइ सो अप्पा जाणे ॥ १०४ ॥
225) TKM जीया सयलु वि बम्ह" विजाणइ. 226 ) TKM परमप्पयहं for रयणत्तयहं; A कहिमि for कहिवि. 227) TKM तिहुवणे; BC केवलणाणइ; TKM केवलणाणे; TKM पुणु for फुडु; B इक्कु . 228) TKM सलु (everywhere ); C णाणमइ. 229 ) TKM तहि for तहं, मणे for मणि. 230 ) Wanting in TKM; B बम्हहं 231 ) TKM रायद्दोस बे; A परिहरेवि, TKM; परिहरवि; TKM जे समु जीवु, समभावपरिट्टिया 232 ) TKM देहिहि भेयइ भेउ तहि णाणि कि मण्णइ सोज्जि. TKM C दंसणणाणचरितु. 234 ) TKM विहिवसे C विहिवसि; TKM तेत्थडा Wanting in B ; C भसेस वि एउ, गाणे for जाणेइ
233) Wanting in for तित्तडा 235 )

२१

Page #25

२२
जो इंदु-विरइ
236 ) जो णवि मण्णइ जीव जिय सयल वि एक्क-सहाव । तासु ण थक्कइ भाउ समु भव- सायरि जो णाव ।। १०५ || 237) जीवहँ भेउ जि कम्म- किउ कम्मु वि जोउ ण होइ ।
जेण विभिण्णउ होइ तहँ कालु लहेविणु कोइ ॥ १०६ ॥ 238) एक्कु करे मण बिण्णि करि मं करि वण्ण-विसेसु । इक्कइँ देवइँ जे वस तिहुयणु एहु असेसु ॥ १०७ ॥ (239) परु जाणंतु वि परम- मुणि पर- संसग्गु चयंति ।
पर-संगई परमप्यहँ लक्खहँ जेण चलति ॥ १०८ ॥ 240) जो सम-भावहं बाहिरउ तिं सहु मं करि संगु ।
चिता - सायरि पडहि पर अण्णु वि डज्झइ अंगु ॥ १०९ ॥ (241) भल्ला विणासंति गुण जहँ संसग्ग खलेहिँ ।
वइसारु लोहहँ मिलिउ तें पिट्टियइ घणेहिं ॥ ११० ॥ 242) जोइय मोहु परिच्चयहि मोहु ण भल्लउ होइ ।
महासत्त सलु जगू दुक्खु सतउ जोइ ॥ १११ ॥ 243) काऊण जग्गरूवं बीभस्सं दड्ढ-मडय-सारिच्छं ।
अहिलससि किं ण लज्जसि मिक्खाए भोयणं मिट्ठ ॥ १११*२ ॥ 244) जइ इच्छसि भो साहू बारह - विह-तवहलं महाविउलं ।
तो मण वयणे काए भोयण-गिद्धी विवज्जेसु ।। १११*३॥ 245) जे सर्रास संतुट्ट-मण विरसि कसाउ वर्हति ।
ते मुणि भोयण-धार गणि णवि परमत्थु मुणंति ॥। १११४ ॥ 246 ) रुवि पयंगा सद्दि मय गय फासहि णासंति ।
अलिउल गंधइ मच्छ रसि किम अणुराउ कति ॥ ११२ ॥
(236) A इक्क, TKM भवसायरे जिव णाव. 237 ) TKM भेउ वि दर्ताह, TKM तहुं for तहं. 238) TKM करि मं; B एक्कि देवि, TKM एक्के देवे जे; TKM एउ for एहु. 239 ) TKM परसंगहि. (240) TKK ते सह मक्करि, चिंतासायरे परिपडहि अण्णु; A सहो for सहु. 241 ) TKM भल्लाहि वि णासंते; BC खलेण and घणेण. 242 ) TKM भल्ला 243 ) Wanting in TKMBC ; Brahmadeva बीभत्थं (च्छं ? ) 244 ) Wanting in TKMBG ; A तवहं फलं 245 ) Vanting in TKM. 246 ) TKM रूवे, सद्दे....पासहि, ABC फासइ; TKM किव तहिं संतु रमंति for किम अणुराउ करंति.

[ 236 : २-१०५

Page #26

-257 : २-१२३ ]
परमप्प-पयासु
२३
247) जोइय लोहु परिच्चयहि लोहु ण भल्लउ होइ ।
लोहासत्तउ सयलु जगु दुक्खु सहतउ जोइ ॥११३॥ 248) तलि अहिरणि वरि घण-वडणु संडस्सय-लुंचोडु ।
लोहहँ लग्गिवि हुयवहहँ पिक्खु पडतउ तोडु ॥११४॥ 249) जोइय णेहु परिच्चयहि णेहु ण भल्लउ होइ।
णेहासत्तउ सयलु जगु दुक्खु सहंतउ जोइ ॥११५॥ 250) जल-सिंचणु पय-णिद्दलणु पुणु पुणु पोलण-दुक्खु ।
हहँ लग्गिवि तिल-णियरु जंति सहंतउ पिक्खु ॥११६॥ 251) ते चिय धण्णा ते चिय सप्पुरिसा ते जियंतु जिय-लोए।
वोद्दह-दहम्मि पडिया तरंति जे चेव लीलाए ॥११७।। 252) मोक्खु जि साहिउ जिणवरहिँ छंडिवि बहु-विहु रज्जु ।
भिक्ख-भरोडा जीव तुहुँ करहि ण अप्पउ कज्जु ॥११८॥ 253) पावहि दुक्खु महंतु तुहुँ जिय संसारि भमंतु ।
अट्ठ वि कम्मइँ पिद्दलिवि वच्चहि मुक्खु महंतु ११९॥ 254) जिय अणु-मित्तु वि दुक्खडा सहण ण सक्कहि जोइ ।
चउ-गह-दुक्खहँ कारणई कम्मई कुणहि किं तोइ ।।१२०॥ 255) धंधइ पडियउ सयलु जगु कम्म' करइ अयाणु ।
मोक्खहँ कारणु एक्कु खणु णवि चितइ अप्पाणु ॥१२१॥ 256) जोणि-लक्खइँ परिभमइ अप्पा दुक्खु सहंतु ।
पुत्त-कलत्तहिँ मोहियउ जाव ण णाणु महंतु ।।१२२॥ 257) जीव म जाणहि अप्पणउँ घरु परियणु इछ ।
कम्मायत्तउ कारिमउ आगमि जोइहिं दिठ्ठ ।।१२३।।
247) c सयल जग दुक्ख. 248) Wanting in TKM; C पिक्ख. 249) Wanting in TKM%B C परिच्चयह, भल्ला. 250) Wanting in TKMB C दुक्ख and पिक्ख. 251) BC सउरिसा: TKM चोद्दहदकम्मे पडिया; Brahmadeva वोदह. 252) TKM छड्डवि बहुविहरज्जु. (A also); TKM भिक्खु भरोडा काइ जिय करहि ण अप्पण कज्जु । 253) TKM संसारे; A णिद्दलेवि. TKM णिद्दलवि; AB पावहि for वच्चहि; TKM अणंतु for महंतु. 254) TKM अणुमेत्त वि, सहणु ण सक्कइ लोउ, कम्मइ करहि जि ताइ. 255) TKM दंदे (धंधे ?), अजाणु. 256) TKM जोणिहि लक्खहि. BC जोणिहि लक्खइं, TKM ताण ण बोह महंतु (last foot). 257) TKM जिय मं नाणहि जाणिहि; TKM आगमे.

Page #27

जोइंदु-विरइउ
[258 : २-१२४258) मुक्खु ण पावहि जीव तुहुँ घरु परियणु चितंतु ।
तो वरि चितहि तउ जि तउ पावहि मोक्खु महंतु ॥१२४॥ 259) मारिवि जीवहँ लक्खडा जं जिय पाउ करीसि ।
पुत्त-कलत्तहँ कारण तं तुहुँ एक्कु सहीसि ।।१२५।। 260) मारिवि चूरिवि जीवडा जं तुहुँ दुक्खु करीसि ।
तं तह पासि अणंत-गुणु अवसइँ जीव लहोसि ॥१२६॥ 261) जीव वहंतह गरय-गइ अभय-पदाणे सग्गु ।
बे पह जवला दरिसिया जहि रुच्चइ तहि लग्गु ॥१२७॥ 262) मूढा सयलु वि कारिमउ भुल्लउ मं तुस कंडि ।
सिव-पहि णिम्मलि करहि रइ घरु परियणु लहु छडि ॥१२८॥ 263) जोइय सयलु वि कारिमउ णिक्कारिमउ ण कोइ ।
जीवि जति कुडि ण गय इहु पडिछंदा जोइ ॥१२९॥ 264) देउलु देउ वि सत्थु गुरु तित्थु वि वेउ वि कव्वु ।
वच्छु जु दोसइ कुसुमियउ इंधणु होसइ सव्वु ॥१३०॥ 265) एक्कु जि मेल्लिवि बंभु पर भुवण वि एहु असेसु ।
पुहविहि णिम्मिउ भंगुरउ एहउ बुज्झि विसेसु ॥१३१॥ 266) जे दिवा सूरुग्गमणि ते अत्थवणि ण दिट्ठ ।
तें कारणि वढ धम्मु करि धणि जोव्वणि कउ ति? ॥१३२।। 267) धम्मु ण संचिउ तउ ण किउ रुक्खें चम्ममएण ।
खज्जिवि जर-उद्देहियए परइ पडिव्वउ तेण ॥१३३॥ 268) अरि जिय जिण-पइ भत्ति करि सुहि सज्जणु अवहेरि ।
ति बप्पेण वि कज्जु णवि जो पाडइ संसारि ॥१३४॥ 269) अरे जिउ सोक्खे मग्गसि धम्मे अलसिय ।
पक्खे विण के व उड्डण मग्गेसि मेंडय दंडसिय ।।१३४*१॥ 258) मोक्ख, TKM मोक्खु; TKM चिंतेतु ता परु चिंतहि, पाविय णेहु महंतु. 259) c कारणिण, K कारणेण. 260) TKM मारवि चूरवि, अवसे जीव लहेसि. 261) AB अभयपदाणि; TKM भावहि for रुच्चइ, 262) Wanting in TKM; C मा for मं. 263) Wanting in TKM; A जीवे जतें. 264) AC सत्थ गुरु. 265) TKM मेल्लवि बम्हु परु भुवण वि; c वरु for परु; TKM पुहुइविणिम्मिउ....बुज्झ. 266) TKM अत्थवणे, कारणे वढु, धणे जोब्बणे. 267) TKM णरए पडणउ तेण. 268) Wanting in TKM. 269) Only in BC.

Page #28

-280 : २-१४३ ]
परमप्प-पयासु 270) जेण ण चिण्णउ तवयरणु णिम्मलु चित्तु करेवि ।
अप्पा वंचिउ तेण पर माणुस-जम्मु लहेवि ॥१३॥ 271) ए पंचिदिय-करहडा जिय मोक्कला म चारि।
चरिवि असेसु वि विसय-वणु पुणु पाडहि संसारि ॥१३६।। 272) जोइय विसमी जोय-गइ मण संठवण ण जाइ ।
इंदिय-विसय जि सुक्खडा तित्थु जि वलि जाइ ॥१३७।। 273) सो जोइउ जो जोगवइ दसणु णाणु चरित्त ।
होयवि पंचहँ बाहिरउ झायंतउ परमत्थु ॥१३७%५॥ 274) विसय-सुहई बे दिवहडा पुणु दुक्खहँ परिवाडि ।
भुल्लउ जीव म वाहि तुहुँ अप्पण खंधि कुहोडि ।।१३८।। 275) संता विसय जु परिहरइ बलि किज्ज हउँ तासु ।
सो दइवेण जि मुंडियउ सीसु खडिल्लउ जासु ॥१३९॥ 276) पंचहँ णायकु वसिकरहु जेण होंति वसि अण्ण ।
मूल विट्ठइ तरु-वरहँ अवसई सुक्कहिं पण्ण ॥१४०।। 277) पण्ण ण मारिय सोयरा पुणु छट्टउ चंडालु ।
माण मारिय अप्पणउ के व छिज्जइ संसारु ॥१४०*१॥ 278) विसयासत्तउ जीव तुहुँ कित्तिउ कालु गमीसि ।
सिव-संगमु करि णिच्चलउ अवसई मुक्खु लहीसि ॥१४१॥ 279) इहु सिव-संगमु परिहरिवि गुरुवड कहिँ वि म जाहि ।
जे सिव-संगमि लीण णवि दुक्खु सहंता वाहि ॥१४२॥ 280) काल अणाइ अणाइ जिउ भव-सायरु वि अणंतु ।
जीवि बिणि ण पत्ताइँ जिणु सामिउ सम्मत्तु ।।१४३॥
270) Wanting in TKM, C तवचरणु. 271) Wanting in TKM%B C असेस वि. 272) Wanting in TKM; A संठवणु, BC बलि बलि तित्थु जि जाइ. 275) Wanting in TKMB. 274) Wantnig in TKM; C अप्पा खंधि. 275) Wanting in TKM; Brahmad va जो for जु,c दइवेणु. 276) Wanting in TKM; 277) Only in P, P अप्पणु 278) In TKM Ihis Comes after 280; BC अवसई मोक्ख. 279) Wanting in TKM; BC एहु for इहु. 189) TKM जीवे बेण्णि ण पत्ताइ सिउ संगउ सम्मत्त ; C जिणसामिउ, Brahmad va सिवसंगमुसम्मत्तु .

Page #29

२६
जोइंदु-विरइउ
281) घर-वासउ मा जाणि जिय दुक्किल-वासउ एहु । पा डिउ अविचल निस्संदेहु || १४४ ॥ 282) देहु विजित्यु ण अप्पणउ तहि अप्पणउ कि अण्णु । पर- कारणि मण गुरुव तुहुँ सिव-संगम अवगण ।। १४५ ।। 283) करि सिव - संगम एक्कु पर जहि पाविज्जइ सुक्खु ।
जोइ अण्णु म चिति तुहुँ जेण ण लब्भइ मुक्खु || १७६ || 284) बलि किउ माणुस - जम्मडा देवखंतह पर सारु ।
जइ उटुब्भइ तो कुहइ अह डज्झइ तो छारु ॥ १४७॥ 285) उव्वलि चोपडि चिट्ठ करि देहि सु-मिठाहार ।
देहहँ सयल रित्थ गय जिमु दुज्जणि उवयार ॥१४८॥ 286) जेहउ जज्जरु गरय-घरु तेहउ जोइय काउ ।
res frरंतरु पूरियउ किम किज्जइ अणुराउ || १४९ ॥ 287 ) दुक्ख पावइँ असुचियाँ ति-हुयणि सयलई लेवि ।
एयहिँ देहु विणिम्मियउ विहिणा वहरु मुणेवि ।। १५० ।। 288 ) जोइय देहु घिणावण उ लज्जहि किं ण रमंतु ।
णाणि धम्में रह करहि अप्पा विमलु करंतु ॥ १५१ ॥ 289 ) जोइय देहु परिचच्चयहि देहु ण भल्लउ होइ ।
देह - विभिण्णउ णाणमउ सो तुहुँ अप्पा जोइ ।। १५२ ।। 290) दुक्ख कारण मुणिवि मणि देहु वि एहु चयंति ।
तित्थु ण पावहिं परम-सुह तित्थु कि संत वसंति || १५३ ॥ 291) अप्पायत्तउ जं जि सुहु तेण जि करि संतोसु ।
पर सुहु वढ चिताह हियइ ण फिट्टइ सोसु ॥ १५४॥ 292) अपह णाणु परिच्चयवि अण्णु ण अत्थि सहाउ ।
इउ जाणेविणु जोइयहु परहँ म बंधउ राउ ।। १५५।।
[ 281 : २-१४४
281) Wanting in TKM; C पास कियंति, BC णीसंदेहु. 282) Wanting in TKM;
तिह अप्पणउ कि. 283) Wanting in TKM. 284 ) Wanting in TKM. 85) TKM चोन्बलि चेटूठ; TKM सयलु वि देहे णिरत्थ गय जिव दुज्जण उवयारु also दुज्जगउवयारु. 286 ) TKM क किज्जइ तह राउ. 287 ) TKM तिहुवणे. 288 ) TKM लज्जइ; C धम्मइ, Brahmadeva धम्मि; TKM मुणंतु for करंतु 289) Wanting in TKM; B भल्ला. 290) Wanting in TKM; G पावई 291 ) Wanting in TKM. 292) Wanting in TKM.

Page #30

-304 : २-१६६ ]
परमप्प-पयासु 293) विसय-कसायहिँ मण-सलिलु गवि डहुलिज्जइ जासु ।
अप्पा णिम्मलु होइ लहु वढ पच्चक्ख वि तासु ॥ १५६ ॥ 294) अप्पह परह परंपरह परमप्पउह समाणु ।
परु करि परु करि परु जि करि जइ इच्छइ णिव्वाणु ॥ १५६११ ॥ 295) अप्पा परहें ण मेलविउ मणु मारिवि सहस त्ति ।
सो वढ जोएँ कि करइ जासु ण एही सत्ति ॥ १५७ ।। 296) अप्पा मेल्लिवि णाणमउ अण्णु जे झायहिँ झाण ।
वढ अण्णाण-वियंभियह कउ तह केवल-णाणु ॥ १५८ ।। 297) सुण्णउँ पउं झायंताह वलि वलि जोइयडाह ।
समरसि-भाउ परेण सह पुण्णु वि पाउ ण जाह ।। १५९॥ 298) उव्वस वसिया जो करइ वसिया करइ जु सुण्णु ।
बलि किज्जउ तसु जोइयहिं जासु ण पाउ ण पुण्णु ॥ १६० ॥ 299) तुट्टइ मोहु तडित्ति जहिं मणु अत्थवणहं जाइ।
सो सामिय उवएस कहि अण्णे देवि काइँ ॥ १६१ ॥ 300) णास-विणिग्गउ सासडा अंबरि जेत्थु विलाइ ।
तुइ मोहु तड त्ति तहिं मणु अत्थवणहँ जाइ ॥ १६२ ।। 301) मोहु विलिज्जइ मणु मरइ तुट्टइ सासु-विसासु ।
केवल-णाणु वि परिणमइ अंबरि जाह णिवासु ॥ १६३ ।। 302) जो आयासइ मणु धरइ लोयालोय-पमाणु ।
तुट्टइ मोहु तड त्ति तसु पावइ परह पवाणु ॥ १६४ ।। 303) देहि वसंतु वि णवि मुणिउ अप्पा देउ अणंतु ।
अंबरि समरसि मणु धरिवि सामिय गठ्ठ णिभंतु ।। १६५ ॥ 304) सयल वि संग ण मिल्लिया णवि किउ उवसम-भाउ ।
सिव-पय-मग्गु वि मुणिउ णवि जहिं जोइहि अणुराउ ।। १६६ ॥
___293) c विसयकसायह; TK मणु सलिलु, उहुणिज्जइ, जि तासु. 294) Only in p, जो for जह. 295) Wanting in TKM; B मोलविउ परह ण मेलिविंउ. 296) Wanting in TKM: C झावहि. 297) Wanting in TKM; C सुह for सहु. 298) Wanting in TKM%BC जोइयहं. 299) Wanting in TKMB C जिहं for जहिं, B अत्थवणहो. 300) Wanting in TKM; B अत्थवणहो. 301) Wanting in TKM; B जाहिं for जाहं. 302) Wanting in TKM. 303) Wanting in TKM; C धरवि. 304) TKM मेल्लिया, last pada किव होसड़ सिवलाहु.

Page #31

जोइंदु-विरइउ
[305 : २-१६७305) घोरु ण चिण्णउ तव-चरण जं णिय-बोहहं सारु ।
पुण्णु वि पाउ वि दड्ढ णवि किम छिज्जइ संसारु ॥ १६७ ॥ 306) दाणु ण दिण्णउ मुणिवरह ण वि पुज्जिउ जिण-णाहु ।
पंच ण वंदिय परम-गुरु किम होसइ सिव-लाहु ।। १६८ ।। 307) अद्धम्मीलिय-लोयणिहिँ जोउ मि झंपियएहि ।
एमइ लब्भइ परम-गइ णिच्चितिं ठियएहि ॥ १६९ ।। 308) जोइय मिल्लहि चित जइ तो तुट्टइ संसारु ।
चितासत्तउ जिणवरु वि लहइ ण हंसाचारु ।। १७० ॥ 309) जोइय दुम्मइ कवुण तुहं भव-कारणि ववहारि ।
बंभु पवंचहिँ जो रहिउ सो जाणिवि मणु मारि ।। १७१ ।। 310) सव्वहिं रायहि छहि रसहि पंचहि रूवहिं जंतु ।
चित्तु णिवारिवि झाहि तुहुँ अप्पा देउ अणंतु ।। १७२ ।। 311) जेण सरूवि झाइयइ अप्पा एहु अणंतु ।
तेण सरूवि परिणवइ जइ फलिहउ-मणि मंतु ॥ १७३ ॥ 312) एहु जु अप्पा सो परमम्पा कम्म-विसेस जायउ जप्पा ।
जोमइँ जाणइ अप्पें अप्पा तामइँ सो जि देउ परमप्पा ।। १७४ ।। 313) जो परमप्पा णाणमउ सो हउँ देउ अणंतु ।
जो हउँ सो परमप्पु परु एहउ भावि णिभंतु ॥ १७५ ।। 314) णिम्मल-फलिहहँ जेय जिय भिण्णउ परकिय-भाउ |
अप्प-सहावत तेम मुणि सयलु वि कम्म-सहाउ ।। १७६ ।। 315) जेम सहावि णिम्मलउ फलिहउ तेम सहाउ ।
भंतिए मइलु म मणि जिय मइलउ देक्खवि काउ ॥ १७७ ।। 316) रत्तं वत्थे जेम बह देहु ण मण्णइ रत्तु ।
देहि रत्ति णाणि तह अप्पु ण मण्णइ रत्तु ।। १७८ ॥ 305) Wanting in B; TKM जेण ण संचिउ तवचरणु, किव तुट्टइ संसारु (last foot). 306) Wanting in TKM. 307) Cझंपिउ एउ; TKM एवहि for एमुइ, णिच्चितें. 308) TKM मेल्लहि चिंतु जइ ता, सव्वजग for जिणवरु वि. 309) TKM कवण तुहँ भवकारणे ववहारु: कवण: TKMC जाणवि. 310) Ia TKM हिं is reprented by इ in this verse, and the last line is अप्पा परमु मुणतु. 312) TKM जावहि जाणिउ....तावहिल जाणे for जाणइ. 313) जो हं for जो हउं, TKM पर for परु, णिरुत्तु for णिभंतु, 314) TKM जेव, परकिउ, तेव, 315) TKM जेव and तेव; BTKM सहावें; A दिक्खिवि, TKM देक्खुवि. 316) Wanting in TKM.

Page #32

-328 : २-१९०]
परमप्प - पयासु
317) जिणि वत्थ जेम बुहु देहु ण मण्णइ जिष्णु । देहि जिणि णाणि तहँ अप्पु ण मण्णइ जिष्णु ॥ १७९ ॥ (318) वत्थु पणट्ठइ जेम बहु देहु ण मण्णइ ठु ।
ट्ठे देहे णाणि तहँ अप्पु ण मण्णइ णट्ठ ॥ १८० ॥ 319) भिण्णउ वत्थु जि जेम जिय देहहँ मण्णइ णाणि ।
देवि भण्उँ गाणि तहँ अप्पहँ मण्णइ जाणि ॥ १८१ ॥ 320) इहु तणु जीवड तुज्झ रिउ दुक्खई जेण जणेइ ।
सो पर जाहि मित्तु तुहुँ जो तणु एहु हणेइ ॥ १८२ ॥ 321) उदयहँ आणिवि कम्मु महाॅ जं भुंजेवउ होइ हो ।
तं स आवि उ खविउ मइँ सो पर लाहु जि कोइ ॥ १८३॥ 322) णिट्ठर - वय, सुणेवि जिय जइ मणि सहण ण जाइ ।
तो हु भावहि बंभु परु जि मणु झत्ति विलाइ ।। १८४।। 323) लोउ विलक्खणु कम्म-वसु इत्थु भवंतरि एइ ।
चुज्जु कि जइ इहु अपि ठिउ इत्थु जि भवि ण पडेइ ॥ १८५ ॥ 324) अवगुण - गहण महुतणई जइ जीवहं संतोसु ।
तो तहँ सोक्ख उ उ इउ मण्णिवि चइ रोसु ॥१८६॥ 325) जोइ चिति म कि पि तुहुँ जइ बोहउ दुक्खस्स ।
तिल - तुस- मित्तुषि सल्लडा वेयण करइ अवस्स ॥ १८७॥ 326) मोक्खु म चितहि जोइया मोक्खु ण चितिउ होइ ।
जेण णिबद्धउ जीवडउ मोक्खु करेसइ सोइ ॥ १८८ ॥ 327) परम-समाहि-महा-सरहिँ जे षड्डहिँ पइसेवि ।
अप्पा ress विमलु तहँ भव-मल जंति वहेवि ।। १८९ ।। 328) सयल-वियहँ जो विलउ परम-समाहि भणंति ।
ते सुहासु भावडा मुणि सयल वि मेल्लंति ॥ १९०॥
317) Wanting in TKM. 318) Wanting in TKM; A चेम्व for जेम 319) Wanting
in TKM. 320)TKM एहु, B एउ C इउ for इहु. 321 ) TKM आणवि, तं जइ आयउ; c वि for जि. 322) TKM निरवयणइं सुणवि, मणु सहणु; B जिट्ठरु; Cजउ for जिं; TKM झडिदि for झति 323) Wanting in TKM; C विअक्खणु, BC एत्थु, चोज्जु. 324) TKM गहणहि महुणहं, एउ मण्णवि चइ दोसु. 325) TKM किंचि for कि पि; भीहहि, मेत्तु वि. 326) G करीसइ; TKM सोवि. 327 ) 0 सरिहि; TKM पविसेनि, तहि for तहं. 328 ) TKM भावडउ, सयलु वि.

Page #33

जोइंदु-विरइउ
[329-:२-१९१329) घोरु करंतु वि तव-चरणु सयल वि सत्थ मुणंतु ।
परम-समाहि-विवज्जियउ णवि देवखइ सिउ संतु ॥१९१॥ 330) विसय-कसाय वि णिद्दलिवि जे ण समाहि करंति ।
ते परमप्पहँ जोइया णवि आराहय होति ॥१९२॥ 331) परम-समाहि धरेवि मुणि जे परबंभु ण जंति ।
ते भव-दुक्खइँ बहुविहह कालु अणंतु सहति ॥१९३॥ 332) जामु सुहासुह-भावडा णवि सयल वि तुटुंति ।
परम-समाहि ण तामु मणि केवुलि एमु भणंति ॥१९४॥ 333) सयल-वियप्पहँ तुट्टाहँ सिव-पय-मग्गि वसंतु ।
कम्म-चउक्कइ विलउ गइ अप्पा हुइ अरहंतु ॥१९५॥ 334) केवल-णाणि अणवरउ लोयालोउ मुणंतु ।
णियमे परमाणंदमउ अप्पा हुइ अरहंतु ॥१९६।। 335) जो जिणु केवल-णाणमउ परमाणंद-सहाउ ।
सो परमप्पउ परम-परु सो जिय अप्प-सहाउ ।।१९७।। 336) सयलहँ कम्महँ दोसह वि जो जिणु हेउ विभिण्णु ।।
सो परमप्प-पयासु तुहुँ जोइय णियमें मण्णु ॥१९८॥ 337) केवल-दसणु णाणु सुह वीरिउ जो जि अणंतु ।
सो जिण-देउ वि परम-मुणि परम-पयासु मुणंतु ॥१९९॥ 338) जो परमप्पउ परम-पउ हरि हरु बंभु वि बुद्धु ।
परम-पयासु भणंति मुणि सो जिण-देउ विसुद्ध ॥२००॥ 339) झाणे कम्म-क्खउ करिवि मुक्कउ होइ अणंतु ।
जिणवरदेवई सो जि जिय पणिउ सिद्ध महंतु ॥२०१॥ 329) B तवयरणु; TKM सयलुवि सत्थु पढंतु; TKM देक्खइ, C देषइ. 330) TKM णिद्दलवि. 331) TKM परबम्हु. 332) AB जाम्ब, एम्व (for एमु); TKM जाव, भावडउ, केवलि एहु. 333) TKM तुट्टाहिं °मग्गे; चउक्क इ TKM चउक्के विलउ गए; ATKM होइ. 334) TKM ‘णाणे, Cणाणई C णियमई; TKM होइ. 335) Wanting in TKM; BC परमाणंदमउ. केवलणाणसहाउ After this C has an additonal verse which is the same as the one quoted in the Com. on this verse. 336) TKM सयलहिं कम्महि दोसहि; A जिणदेउ; C णियमि. 337) BC °दसणणाणु; TKM सुई वीरिय जोज्जि. 338) Wanting in TKM. 339) AC झाणि; TKM कम्मह खउ करिवि, जिणवरदेवें, भणियउ for भगिउ.

Page #34

-351 : २-२१२ ]
परमप्प-पयासु 340) अण्णु वि बंधु वि तिहुयणहँ सासय-सुक्ख-सहाउ ।
तित्थु जि सयलु वि कालु जिय णिवसइ लद्ध-सहाउ ॥२०२॥ 341) जम्मण-मरण-विवज्जियउ चउ-गइ-दुक्ख-विमुक्कु ।
केवल-दसण-णाणमउ णंदइ तित्थु जि मुक्कु ॥२०३॥ 342) अंतु वि गंतुवि तिवणहँ सासय-सोक्ख-सहाउ ।
तेत्थु जि सयलु वि कालु जिय णिवसइ लद्ध-सहाउ ॥२०३* १।। 343) जे परमप्प-पयासु मुणि भावि भावहि' सत्थु ।
मोहु जिणेविणु सयलु जिय ते बुज्झहि परमत्थु ।। २०४॥ 344) अण्णु वि भत्तिए जे मुणहिँ इहु परमप्पपयासु ।
लोयालोय-पयासयरु पावहिं ते वि पयासु ।।२०५।। 345) जे परमप्प-पयासयहं अणुदिणु गाउ लयंति ।
तुट्टइ मोहु तड त्ति तह तिहुयण-णाह हवंति ॥२०६॥ 346) जे भव-दुक्खहँ बीहिया पउ इच्छहि णिव्वाणु ।
इह परमप्प-पयासयहँ ते पर जोग्ग वियाणु ॥२०७॥ 347) जे परमप्पहँ भत्तियर विसय ण जे वि रमंति ।
ते परमप्प पयासयहँ मुणिवर जोग्ग हवंति ॥२०८॥ 348) णाण-वियक्खणु सुद्ध-मणु जो जण एहउ कोइ ।
सो परमप्प-पयासयहँ जोग्गु भणंति जि जोइ ॥२०९।। 349) लक्खण-छंद-विवज्जियउ एह परमप्प-पयासु ।।
कुणइ सुहावई भावियउ चउ-गइ-दुक्ख-विणासु ॥२१०॥ 350) इत्थु ण लेवउ पंडियहि- गुण-दोसु वि पुणरुत्तु ।
भट्ट-पभायर-कारणइँ मइँ पुण पुणु वि पउत्तु ।।२११॥ 351) जं मइँ कि पि विजंवियउ जुत्ताजुत्तु वि इत्थु ।
तं वर-णाणि खमंतु मढु जे बुज्झहिं परमत्थु ॥२१२॥ 340) TKM अंतु वि गंतुवि, सोक्ख; c सासइ for सासय; TKM तेत्थु जि. 341) TKM णंदउ तेत्थु विमुक्कु. 342) Only in p, P. गंतु जि 343) TKM भावे भावइ सत्थु; c भावइ; TKM बुज्झइ. 344) Wanting in TKM; C एहु for इहु A पाम्वहि. 345) Wanting in TKM; C तिहं for तह. 346) Wanting in TKM. 347) Wanting in TKMB C विसइ ण. 348) Wanting in TKM: C भणंतु वि.349) Wanting in TKM. 350) Wanting in TKM. 351) Wanting in TKM; C नं मा कि पिग जंपियन; BC वियत्यु for वि इत्यु.

Page #35

३२
जोइंदु-विरइ
[352 : २-२१३352) जं तत्तं णाण-रूवं परम मुणि-गणा णिच्च झायंति चित्ते
जं तत्तं देइ-चत्तं णिवसइ भुवणे सव्व-देहीण देहे । जं तत्तं दिव्व-देहं तिहुवण-गुरुगं सिज्झए संत-जीवे
तं तत्तं जस्स सुद्धं फुरइ णिय-मणे पावए सो हि सिद्धि ॥२१३॥ 353) परम-पय-गयाणं भासओ दिव-काओ
मणसि मुणिवराणं मुक्खदो दिव्व-जोओ । विसय-सुह-रयाणं दुल्लहो जो हु लोए जयउ सिव-सरूवो केवलो को वि बोहो ॥२१४॥
352) A दिनदेहे; AC गुरुवं; B गुरवं; B खो हु. 353) TAM कोइ for को वि.

Page #36

98
77
68
89
340
209
परमात्मप्रकाशदोहादीनां वर्णानुक्रमसूची। Here is an alphabetical Index of all the Dõhas of P.-prakasa, The English numerals in the first column refer to the serial numbers of all the Dōhās which are printed separately in this edition. The D van, gar numerals refer to the Adhikära and the number of the Dhy therein. Those numbers which are accompanied by p and TKM are also fo d quoted in the Introduction on PP. 4-6. अ. दो.
अ. दो. अच्छइ जित्तिउ 167 २-३८ अप्पादंसणि
120 १-११८ अट्ठ वि कम्मई
56
१-५५ अप्पा दंसणु केवलु अट्टहं कम्महं
१-७५ अप्पा परहं ण
294
२-१५७ अणु जइ जगहं
133
अप्पा पंगुह अण्णु जि तित्थु म
97 १-९५ अप्पा पंडिउ मुक्खु
93 १-९१ अण्णु जि दंसणु
96 अप्पा बंभणु वइसु
१-८७ अण्णु वि दोसु
174 २-४५ अप्पा बुज्झ हि
59 १-५८ अण्णु वि दोसु 175 २-४६ अप्पा माणुसु देउ
92 अण्णु वि बंधु वि २-२०२ अप्पा मिल्लिवि
208
२-७७ अण्णु वि भत्तिए 344 २-२०५ अप्पा मिल्लिविणाणमउ
२-७८ अत्थि ण उब्भउ
71 अप्पा मेल्लिवि
76 १-७४ अत्थि ण पुण्णु
21 १-२१ अप्पा मेल्लिवि णाण 295
२-१५८ अद्भुम्मीलियलोय णिहिं 307
२-१६९ अप्पायत्तउ जंजि
291 २-१५४ अप्पउ मण्णइ जो 224 २-९३ अप्पा लद्धउ
१-१५ अप्पसहावि 102 ९-१०० अप्पा वंदउ
90
१-८८ अप्पसहावि जासु 165 P-२-३६२२ अप्पा संजमु सील
95 १-९३ अप्पह परह 294P-२-१५६२१ अपि अप्पु मुणंतु
78 अप्पहं जे वि 108 १-१०६ अप्पु पयासइ
103 १-१०१ अप्पहं णाणु 292 २-१५५ अप्पु वि पर वि
105 १-१०३ अप्पा अप्पु जि १-६७ अमणु अणिदिउ
31१-३१ अप्पा कम्मविवज्जियउ 53 १-५२ अरि जिय जिणपइ
268 २-१३४ अप्पा गुणमउ 160 २-३३ अरे जिउ सोक्खे
269P-२-१३४५१ अप्पा गुरु णवि १-८९ अवगुणगहणई
324 २-१८६ अप्पा गोरउ किण्ह
88 १-८६ अंगई सुहमई
234 २-१०३ अप्पा जणियउ केण १-५६ अंतु वि गंतु
341P-२-२०३१ अप्पा जोइय
१-५१ अप्पा झायहि
१-९७ इत्थु ण लेवउ पंडिहिं 350 २-१११ अप्पा णाणहं गम्म १-१०७ इहु तणु जीवउ
२-१८२ अप्पा णाण मुणेहि १-१०५ इहु सिवसंगमु
279
२-१४२ अप्पा णियमणि 100 १-९८ उत्तमु सुक्खु ण
132 २-५ अप्पा तिविहु 12 १-१२ उत्तमु सुक्खु ण
134
२-७
15
69
320
109 107

Page #37

जोइंदु-विरइउ
321
उदयहं आणिवि कम्म उव्वलि चोप्पडि उव्वस वसिया जो
10 220 219
74 244 131 248
अ. दो. १-१० २-८९ २-८८
१-७२ २-१११२३
एक्कु करे मण विणि एक्कु जि मेल्लिवि ए पंचिंदियकरहडा एयई दव्वई एयहि जुत्तउ एहु जो अप्पा एहु ववहारें
85
१-११४ १-८३ २-२०३ २-११६
61
36
अ. दो.
२-१८३ चउगइदुक्खहं 285 २-१४८ चट्टहिं पट्टहिं 298 २-१६० चेल्लाचेल्लीपुत्थियहिं
छिज्जउ भिज्जउ 238 २-१०७
जइ इच्छसि भो 265 २-१३१
जइ जिय उत्तम 271
जइ णिविसद्ध 153 २-२६
जणणी जणणु वि 25 1-25
जम्मणमरणविवज्जिउ 312 २-१७४ १-६०
जलसिंचणु पयणिद्दलणु
जसु अब्भंतरि 80 १-७८ जसु परमत्थे
जसु हरिणच्छी 50 १-४९ जहिं भावइ तर्हि 75
जहिं मइ तहि 49 १-४८ जं जह थक्कर 168 २-३९
जणियदव्वह 283२-१४६ जियबोड 243 २-१११*२
जं तत्तं गाणरूवं 164 P-२-३६२१
जं बोल्लइ ववहार55 १-५४
जं मई कि पि विजंपियउ 280 २-१४३
जं मुणि लहइ 148
जं सिवदंसणि 87 १-८५
जाणवि मण्णवि 51 १-५०
जा णिसि सयलहं 221 २-९०
जामु सुहासुहभावडा 334
जांवइ णाणिउ १-२४
जासु ण कोहु ण 337 २-१९९ जासु ण धारणु
जासु ण वण्णु ण
जिउ मिच्छत्तें 38 १-३८
जिण्णिं वत्थि जेम 179 २-४९
जित्थु ण इंदिय २-१४४
जिय अणुमित्तु वि 329 २-१९१
जीउ वि पुग्गलु 305 २-१६७ जीउ सचेयणु
341 250 41 46 123 200 114 156 115 206 352
कम्मई दिढघण कम्मणिबद्ध वि कम्मणिबद्ध वि कम्महं केरा भावडा कम्महिं जासु कम्मु पुरक्किउ सो करि सिवसंगम काऊण पग्गरूवं कायकिलेसें पर कारणविरहिउ कालु अणाइ अणाइ कालु मुणिज्जहि कालु लहेविणु कि वि भणंति केण वि अप्पउ केवलणाणि अणवरउ केवलदसणणाणमउ केवलदसणणाणमय केवलदसणु णाणु
141
१-१२१ २-७० १-११२ २-२९ १-११३ २-७५ २-२१३ २-१४ २-२१२ १-११७ १-११६ २-३० २-४६५१ २-१९४ २-४१ १-२० १-२२ १-१९
351 119 118 157 176 332 170 20
२-२१
24
गउ संसारि गयणि अणंति गंथहं उप्परि
19 81 317
28 254 149
281
घरवासउ मा जाणि घोरु करंतु वि घोरु ण चिण्णउ
२-१७९ १-२८ २-१२० २-२२ २-१७

Page #38

दोहासूची
२-२
257 261
60 227 232 237 139 229 137
30 228
236
जीव म जाणहि जीव वहंतहं णरय जीवहं कम्मु अणाइ जीवहं तिहुयण जीवहं दसणु णाणु जीवहं भेउ जि जीवहं मोक्खहं हेउ जीवह लक्खणु जीवहं सो पर जीवाजीव म जीवा सयल वि जे जाया झाणग्गियएं जे जिलिंगु धरेवि जेण कसाय हवंति जेण ण चिण्णउ जेंण णि जणि जेण सरूवि झाइयइ जे णियबोहजे दिट्ठा सूरुग्गमणि जें दिळें तुटुंति जे परमप्पपयासह जे परमप्पपयासु जे परमप्प भत्तियर जे परमप्पु णियंति जे भवदुक्खहं बीहिया जेम सहावि णिम्मलउ जे रयणत्तउ जे सरसिं संतुट्ठजहउ जज्जरु णरयजेहउ णिम्मलु जो अणुमेत्तु जो आयासइ मणु जोइज्जइति जोइय अप्पें जोइय चिति म जो णियदसणजोइय णियमणि जोइय णेह परिच्चयहि
222 171 270 127 311 54 266
27 345 343 347
अ. दो. २-१२३ जोइय दुम्मइ कवुण ५-१२७ जोइय देहु १-५९
जोइय देहु २-९६ जोइय मिल्लहि २-१०१
जोइय मोक्खु वि २-१०६
जोइय मोहु परिच्चयहि २-१२
जोइय लोहु परिच्चयहि २-९८ जोइय विसमी जोय२-१० जोइय विदहिं १-३०
जोइय सयलु वि २-९७
जो जाणइ सो १-१
जो जिउ हेउ
जो जिण केवलणाण२-४२
जो णवि मण्णइ २ १३५
जो णवि मण्णइ १-१२३*३
जो णियकहिं २-१७३
जो णियभाउ ण १-५३
जोणिलक्खई २-१३२
जो परमत्थे १-२७
जो परमप्पउ परम२-२०६
जो परमप्पा णाणमउ २-२०४ २-२०८
जो भत्तउ रयणत्तयह
जो भत्तउ रयणत्तयह २-२०७ जो समभावपरिट्ठियह २-१७७ जो समभावहं २-३२ झाणे कम्मक्खउ २-१११२४ ण वि उप्पज्जइ २-१४९ णाणवियक्खणु सुद्धमणु
णाणविहीणहं २-८१ णाणिय णाणिउ २-१६४ गाणि मुएप्पिणु भाउ १-१०९
णाणिहिं मूढहं
णाणु पयासहि २-१८७
णासविणिग्गउ सासडा २-५९ णिच्चु णिरंजणु १-११९ णिठ्ठरवयणु सुणेवि २-११५ णिम्मलफलिहहं
अ. दो. 309 २-१७१ 288 २-१५१ 289 २-१५२ 308 २-१७० 129 242 २-१११ 247
२-११३ 272 २-१३७
39 १-३९ 263 २-१२९ 47 TKM-१-४६२१
40१-४० 335 २-१९७ 185 २-५५
२-१०५ 45 18 १-१८ 256 २-१२२
37 १-३७ 338 २-२०० 313 २-१७५ 158 २-३१ 226 २-९५
१-३५ 240 २-१०९ 339 २-२०१
70 १-६८ 318 २-२०९ 204 २-७४ 110 १-१०८ 177 २-४७ 217 २-८६ 106 १-१०४ 300 २-१६२
१-१७
२-१८४ 314 २-१७६
346
35
315
159 245 286 26 212 302 111 101
325
17
189 121
322
249
२-११
परिच्चयहि

Page #39

३६
परमात्मप्रकाशः
अ. दो.
124 155 48
१-१२२ २-२८ १-४७ २-४३ १-८२ २-११४
191 192
14 233 181
अ. दो. २-६१ २-६२ १-१४ २-१०२ २-५१
172
84 248
72
207 58
11 । ।
33
104
१-५७ १-१०२ २-८५
216
16 136 299 251 62
२-९ २-१६१ २-११७
१-४
___5
णियमणि णिम्मलि णियमें कहियउ णेयाभावे विल्लि तत्तातत्तु मुणेवि तरुणउ बूढउ तलि अहिरणि वरि तं णियणाणु जि तं परियाणहि दबु तारायणु जलि तित्थई तित्थु तिहुयणवंदिउ तिहुयणि जीवहं तुट्टइ मोहु तडित्ति ते चिय घण्णा ते ते पुणु जीवहं ते पुणु वंदर्य ते पुणु वंदउं ते वंदउंसिरिसिद्ध ते हवंद दव्वइं जाणइ दव्वइं जाणहि दव्वई सयलहं दव्व चयारि वि दसणणाणचरित्त दसणु णाणु अणंत दसणु णाणु चरित्तु दसण पुन्बु दाणि लब्भइ भोउ दाणु ण दिग्णउ दुक्खई पावई दुक्खहं कारणि दुक्खहं कारणु दुक्खहं कारणु मुणिवि दुक्खु वि सुक्खु दुक्खु वि सुक्खु देउ ण देउले देउ णिरंजणु देउलु देउ वि सत्थु
142 143 147 J50 184 138 169 162 202 306 287
१-३ २-१५ २-१६ २-२० २-२३ २-५४ २-११ २-४० २-३५ २-७२ २-१६८ २-१५० १-८४ २-२७ २-१५३ १-६४
देवहं सत्थहं देवहं सत्थहं "जो देहविभिण्णउ देहविभेयइं जो देहहं उप्परि देहहं उन्भउ देहहं पेक्खिवि देहादेवलि देहादेहहिं जो देहि ससंतु वि देहि वसंतु वि णवि देहि वसंतें देह वि जित्थु देहे वसंतु वि धम्महं अत्थहं धम्माधम्म वि एक्कु धम्मु ण संचिउ धंधइ पडियउ पज्जयरत्तउ जीवडउ पण्ण ण मारिय परमपयगयाणं परमसमाहि धरेवि परमसमाहिमहासरहि पर जाणंतु वि पंच वि इंदिय पंचहं णायक पावहि दुक्खु महंतु पावें णारउ पेच्छइ जाणइ पुग्गल छन्विहु पुणु पुणु पणविवि पुण्णु वि पाउ वि पुण्णेण होइ विहवो बलि किउ माणुसबंधहं मोक्खह बंध वि मोक्ख बंभहं भुवणि बिण्णि वि जेण
29 १-२९ 42 १-४२ 303 २-१६५
44 १-४४ 282 २-१४५
34 १-३४ 130 २-३ 151 २-२४ 267 २-१३३ 255 २-१२१ 79 १-७७ 277 P-२-१४०*१ 353 २-२१४ 331 २-१९३ 327 २-१८९ 239 २-१०८
64 276
२-१४० 253 २-११९ 193 २-६३ 140
२-१३ 146 २-१९ 11 १-११
१-९२ 190
२-६० 284 २-१४७ 183 २-५३
86
94
154 290
65 163 125
66
203 264
१-१२३ २-७३ २-१३०
230 166
२-३७

Page #40

अ. दो.
186 188 318 196 194 195 182 330
63 293
32
२-५६ २-५८ २-१८० २-६६ २-६४ २-६५ २-५२ २-१९२ १-६२ २-१५६ २-१३८ २-५० २-१४१ १-२३
274
180 278
23
दोहासूची
अ. दो 173
२-४४ वर जिय पावई 213 २-८२ वर णियदसण225 २-९४ वत्थुपणइ जेम 215 २-८४ वंदउ णिदउ 178 २-४८ वंदणु णिदणु 241 २-११० वंदणु णिदणु
१-३२ वित्तिणिवित्तिहिं 205 TKM-२-७४५१ विसयकसाय वि 198 २-६८ विसयकसायहि १-४३
विसयकसायहि 8 १-८ विसयसुहई बे 319 २-१८१ विसयह उप्परि 211 २-८० विसयासत्तउ जीव 210 २-७९ वेहि सहि 126 १-१२३+२ 187 २-५७ सत्त वि मित्तु वि 260 २-१२६ सत्थु पढंतु वि 259 २-१२५ सयलपयत्थहं
सयलवियप्पहं 112 १-११० सयलवियप्पहं जो १४५
२-१८ सयल वि संगण 262
२-१२८ सयलहं कम्महं १-१३ सबहिं रायहि
१-११५ संता विसय जु 252 २-११८ सिद्धिहि केरा
२-१८८ सिरिगुरु अक्ख हि 301 २-१६३ सुण्णउं पउं 122 १-१२० सुद्धहं संजमु 316 २-१७८ सुहपरिणामें 231 २-१०० सो जोइउ जो जोगवइ
२-११२ सो पत्थि त्ति पएसो २-२१० सो पर वुच्चइ २-९२
२-८७ हरिहरबंभु वि 323 २-१८५ ह वरु बंभणु 152 २-२५ हउंगोरउ हर
235 214
बिणि वि दोस बुज्झइ सत्थई बुज्झंतह परमत्थु बोहणिमित्तें भणइ भणावइ भल्लाहं वि णासंति भवतणुभोय भव्वाभब्वह जो भाउ विसुद्धउ भावाभावाहिं संजुवउ भावि पणविवि भिण्णउ वत्थु जि भुंजंतु वि....जो भुजंतु वि णियमण मिलियउ मं पुणु पुण्णइं मारिवि चूरिवि मारिवि जीवह लक्खड़ा मुक्खु ण पावहि मुणिवरविंदहं मुत्तिविहूणउ मृढा सयलु वि मूढु वियवखणु मेल्लिवि सयल मोक्खु जि साहिउ मोक्खु म चिंतहि मोहु विलिज्जइ मणु राएं रंगिए रत्तें वत्थें जेम रायदोस बे रूवि पयंगा लक्खणछंदविवज्जियउ लाहहं कित्तिहि लेणहं इच्छइ लोउ विलक्खणु लोयागासु धरेवि
161
258
333 328 304 336 310
13
117
275
२-१०४ २-८३ २-३४ २-१९५ २-१९० २-१६६ २-१९८ २-१७२ २-१३९ २-६९ २-१ २-१५९ २-६७ २-७१ २-१३७*५ १-६५*१ १-१११
199
326
128
297 197 201 213
67 113
246 349
223 218
135 83 82
२-८ १-८१ १-८०

Page #41

संस्कृतटोकायामुक्तानां पद्यानीनां वर्णानुक्रमसूची
पृष्ठाङ्काः
आगम, [ कुन्दकुन्द, प्रवचनसार १-१६ ].
[ रामसिंह, दोहापाहुड ८४]
कुन्दकुन्द, मोक्षप्राभृत [ ७७ ]. [कुन्दकुन्द, पञ्चास्तिकाय ७ ]. [ रामसेन, तत्त्वानुशासन ८३ ]. [ रामसिंह, दोहापाहुड १९ ].
१२४ अइसयमादसमुत्थं १६२ अकसायं तु चरित्तं २०४ अक्खरडा जोयंतु ठिउ
२७ अक्खाण रसणी १५८ अज्ज वि तियरण१४८ अण्णोण्णं पविसंता ९२ अत्रेदानी निषेधन्ति २६३ अथिरेण थिरा ६० अनादितो हि मुक्त-- २८ अन्यथा वेदपाडित्य २०० अपरिग्गहो अणिच्छो
५ अभूदपुव्वो हवदि ३३ अरसमरूवमगंध १६४ अस्त्यामानादिबद्धः १५३ आत्मानमात्मा
३७ आत्मानुष्ठाननिष्ठस्य १२१ आत्मोपादानसिद्ध २२७ आनन्दं ब्रह्मणो
९९ आभिणिसुदोहि १७८ आर्ता नरा धर्मपरा २९६ आसापिसाय
१६ इत्यतिदुर्लभरूपां १७९ ऊर्ध्वगा बलदेवाश्च १४३ एगणिगोदसरीरे २६८ एदम्हि रदो णिच्चं १४३ ओगाढगाढणिचिदो २६० कषायैरिन्द्रियैः १९२ कंखिदकलुसिदभूदो
२२ कः पण्डितो १५८ चरितारो न सन्त्यद्य २६६ चंडोण मुयइ २५२ चित्ते बद्ध बद्धो १२९ र्ज पुण सगयं
[ कुन्दकुन्द, समयसार २१० ]. [ कुन्दकुन्द, ] पञ्चास्तिकाय [२०]. [ कुन्दकुन्द, ] (भाव-) प्राभूत [ ६४; पञ्चास्तिकाय १२७]. पूज्यपाद, [ सिद्धभक्ति २]. पूज्यपाद, [ सिद्धभक्ति ४ ]. [ पूज्यपाद, इष्टोपदेश ४७ ]. [ पूज्यपाद, सिद्धभक्ति ७].
[ कुन्दकुन्द, समयसार २०४ ].
परमागम, [ नेमिचन्द्र, गो० जीवकाण्ड १९५]. [ कुन्दकुन्द, समयसार २०६ ]. [ कुन्दकुन्द, पञ्चास्तिकाय ६४ ].
[ अमोघवर्ष, प्रश्नोत्तररत्नमाला ५]. [ रामसेन, तत्त्वानुशासन ६ ]. [ नेमिचन्द्र, गो० जीवकाण्ड ५०८ ].
[ देवसेन, तत्त्वसार ५ ].

Page #42

टोकोक्तश्लोकसूची
कुन्दकुन्द, पञ्चास्तिकाय [९८]. कुन्दकुन्द, [प्रवचनसार २-२]. [कुन्दकुन्द,] पञ्चास्तिकाय [३५]. [कुन्दकुन्द,] समयसार [१५]. [कुन्दकुन्द,] मोक्षप्राभूत [१५]. [कुन्दकुन्द,] मोक्षप्राभृत [१०३]. [कुन्दकुन्द,] समयसार [२०५]. [शिवाय, भ० आराधना २६२].
[अमृतचन्द्र, पु. सिद्धयुपाय २१६].
[कुन्दकुन्द, प्राकृत सिद्धभक्ति].
[कुमार कार्तिकेयानुप्रेक्षा ४७६].
पृष्ठाङ्काः ३०२ जीवा जिणवर १४० जीवा पुग्गलकाया ७६ से पज्जएसु हिरदा ५४ जेसिं जीवसहावो ९४ जो पस्सइ अप्पाणं ७६ जो पुणु परदव्वं ३० णमिएहिं जं १०० णाणगुणेहि विहीणा १६३ तं वत्थु मुत्तन्वं २३५ तावदेव सुखी २६८ तिणकट्ठण व २११ त्यक्त्वा स्वकीय
९१ दर्शनमात्मविनिश्चिति १०८ दह्यमाने जगति २९४ दुक्खक्खउ २५६ देवागमपरिहाणे १९० धम्मो वत्थुसहावो २६० न गृहं गृहमित्याहुः" ३०४ नामाष्टकसहस्रण ३१७ पंडवरामहि
६ पदस्थं मन्त्रवाक्यस्थं २५ परमार्तनयाय १४५ परिणाम जीव १८५ पावेण परयतिरियं १३४ पुढवीजलं च छाया १७४ पुव्वमभाविदजोगो १०७ बन्धवधच्छेदादेः २७८ मणु मरइ पवणु
६० मुक्तश्चेत्प्राग् १३० मूढत्रयं मदाश्चाष्टौ १५७ यत्पुनर्वज्रकायस्य १४० यावरिक्रयाः प्रवर्तन्ते २८४ येन येन स्वरूपेण २५७ येनोपायेन शक्यत २०९ रम्येषु वस्तुवतादिषु १२७ रयणत्तयं म
[?,
आप्तस्वरूप ५५].
[कुन्दकुन्द, पञ्चास्तिकाय ७६* १]. [शिवार्य, भ० आराधना २४]. [समन्तभद्र, रत्नकरंड ७८].
[सोमदेव, यशस्तिलक पृ. ३२४]. [रामसेन,] तत्त्वानुशासन [८४]. [जटासिंहनन्दि ?] . [अमितगति, योगसार ९-५१].
[गुणभद्र, आत्मानुशासन २२८]. [नेमिचन्द्र, द्रव्यसंग्रह ४०].

Page #43

परमात्मप्रकाश
[गुणभद्र, आत्मानुशासन २३७].
पृष्ठाङ्काः १७३ रागद्वेषौ प्रवृत्तिः २४२ रागादीणमणुप्पो १६५ लोकव्यवहारे? १८० वरं नरकवासोऽपि २५१ विसयह कारणि २०४ वीरा वेरग्गपरा २९८ वैराग्यं तत्त्ववित्रानं २५, ३१० शिवं परमकल्याणं ९२ षोडशतीर्थकराणां २१२ सग्गो तवेण १८२ सत्यं वाचि
७५ सद्दन्वरओ १९० सद्वृष्टिज्ञान १७२ सपरं बाधासहिय १३६ समओ उप्पण्णपद्धंसो ११३ समसत्तुबंधवग्गो
६१ सम्मत्तणाणदंसण १२६ सम्मइंसण
६ सव्वे सुद्धा १६० सम्यमेवादराद्भाव्यं २३७ सिद्धिः स्वात्मोपलब्धिः १८९ सुद्धस्य य सामण्णं २४३ स्वयमेवात्मना११ १३१ हस्ते चिन्तामणिः १११ हावो मुखविकारः १७३ हिंसानृत
[?, आप्तस्वरूप २४]. बृहदाराधनाशास्त्र. [कुन्दकुन्द, मोक्षप्राभृत २३]. [गुणभद्र, आत्मानुशासन २१८] कुन्दकुन्द, मोक्षप्राभृत [१४] | समन्तभद्र, रत्नकरण्ड ३; रामसेन, तत्त्वानुशासन ५१]. [कुन्दकुन्द प्रवचनसार १-७६]
[कुन्दकुन्द, प्रवचनसार ३-४१]. [कुन्दकुन्द, प्राकृत सिद्धभक्ति २० [नेमिचन्द्र द्रव्यसंग्रह ३९]. [नेमिचन्द्र,] द्रव्यसंग्रह [१३]. [पद्मनन्दि, पञ्चविंशति...]. [पूज्यपाद, सिद्धभक्ति १]. कुन्दकुन्द, प्रवचनसार ३-७४]
[उमास्वाति, तत्त्वार्थसूत्र ७-१].
१ देखो अनगारधर्मामृतटीका पृ. २६२. २ देखो यशस्तिलक ५-२५१. ३ देखो अनगारध. टीका पृ. ४०३. देखो षट्प्राभूतटीका पृ. ३४२. ५ देखो नीतिवाक्यामृत ३१-३१. ६ देखो षट्प्राभृतटीका पृ. २३६. ७ देखो ज्ञानार्णव पृ. ९३. ८ देखो अमृताशीति ६७. ९ देखो ज्ञानार्णव प. ४१५ १० देखो जयधवला पृ. १३ आराकी प्रति. ११ देखो सर्वार्थसिद्धि ७-१३.

Page #44

Page #45

Page #46

Introduction
I. Paramatma-Prakasa
a) Earlier studies and the present edition Popularity of Paramatma-prakasa-Paramappapayasu, or as it is usually known by the Sk. form of its name, Poramātma-prakāša, is a very popular work with religious-minded Jainas, both monks and laymen. It is mainly addressed to the monks, and it is no wonder that it is read and re-read by them. The discussions are not at all sectarian; so it is studied by all the Jaina monks, though it is more popular with those of the Digambara section. Various reasons have contributed to the popularity of this work. There is an attraction about its name itself; the subject-matter is not made heavy with technicalities; major portions of it are composed in a simple style; and it is written in a popular dialect like Apabhramśa, the predecessor of Old-Hindi, Old-Gujarati, etc. It is addressed to console and enlighten the suffering soul of Bhatta Prabhakara. The problem of the misery of life, which was before Bhatta Prabhākara. faces many aspiring souls; and as such P.-- Prakāśa is sure to be a favourite book with believers. Old commentaries in Kannada and Sanskrit also point out to its popularity.
My Study of Yogendu's Works-After discovering a new Apabh. work, viz., Dohäpähuda attributed by the Ms. to Yogendra, I wrote a short article in Anekanta, Vol. I, 1930. In an editorial note on this article the learned editor Pt. Jugalkishore announced the discovery of another work of this author and further indicated that Rāmasimha was the author of Dhäpähuda according to a Delhi Ms. Later, I contributed a paper, Joindu and his Apabhramsa works, to the Annals in which I took a review of the works of Joindu or Yogindu and collected some evidence on his date2. The publication of this paper was sufficiently fruitful. Two works, viz., Dõhāpāhuda and Sāvayadhamma-dōhā from which lengthy extracts were given in my paper, are edited now with the help of additional material and translated into Hindi by Professor Hiralal who is doing so much for the publication of Apabh literature. A few verses from my paper have been translated into Marāthi as well.3
1 2 3
Anekanta. Vol. I, pp. 544-8 and p. 672. Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol. XII, ii, pp. 132-63. P. D. Kanitkar : Maharastra-Sahitya-patrikā.

Page #47

Paramatma-prakāla
Value of P.-prakasa in Oriental Studies-The study of Apabh. dialect sheds abundant light on the history and growth of North-Indian languages including Marathi. P.-prakala is the earliest complete Apabh. work so far known and the first to have been published, though earlier editions did not reach the hands of orientalists. So far as I know, P. D. Gune was the first to list it as an Apabh. work in his Introduction to Bhavisayattakaha. Hemacandra, whose grammar treats Apabh. exhaustively. quotes from P.-präkala; thus this work preserves to us specimens of pre-Hemacandra Apabh. literature actually used by him. Besides this linguistic aspect there is another point of interest in this work. Due to imperfect acquaintance with Jaina literature Jainism is criticised by some scholars as a mere bundle of rules of ascetic discipline or a system metaphysically barren. P.-Prakasa clearly shows what part mysticism plays in Jainism and how it. is worked out in the back-ground of Jaina metaphysics. The Jaina mysticism is sure to be all the more interesting, if we remember the facts that Jainism is polytheistic and denies the creative function of God. These aspects are discussed in detalls in this Introduction.
2
Published Editions, etc., of P.-prakasa-In 1909 Babu Suryabhanu Vakil, Devabanda, published P.-Prakata with Hindi translation. The title of the book is Sri Paramatma-prakala Prakṛta Grantha Hindibhaşa arthasahita. The text is inaccurately printed. The editor says in his Prastavana that the Mss. of this work found in Jaina temples are very inaccurate, and it is difficult to restore the correct text by consulting even a score of Mss. An English translation of this work by R. D. Jain is published from Arrah 1915; but this translation is far from being faithful and critical. Then P.-prakata with Brahmadeva's Sk. commentary and Daulatarama's Bhasa-tika (rewritten into modern Hindi by Manoharlal) was published by the Rayachandra Jaina Sastramālā, Bombay, 1916. It was a good edition for all practical purposes, though the Apabh. text needed improvements in many ways.
Nature of this Edition-Though officially this is the second edition in the Rayachandra, J. Sastramala, it will be seen that it is thoroughly revised and enlarged. This Introduction is an additional speciality of this edition. As desired by the publishers the Apabh. text is given as preserved in the Commentary of Brahmnadeva with which it is accompanied. The text and the Sk. commentary are carefully checked with the help of Ms. A; and it will be easily seen that many improvements are made in the text to facilitate an easy understanding. Besides the correction of many slips in the text, hyphens are added in compound words and distinction is made between anunāsika and anusvara. The Sk. shade in this edition is at times independent of Brahmadeva. Orthographical uniformity, etc., have been

Page #48

Introduction
introduced in the commentary. The Hindi portion of the first edition has been retouched here and there.
The Text and the Linguistic Deductions - The present edition claims to give the text of Brahmadeva, but it should not be ignored that even the Mss. of the text of Brahmadeva show minor differences. With a view to study the text-tradition of P.-prakasa I have studied some ten Mss. hailing from different parts of India, six of which are collated and their variants are given at the end. Though I have followed the text of Brahmadeva in discussing the philosophy, mysticism, etc, of this work, the linguistic deductions set forth in the Introduction are based more on a close study of the various Mss. and their readings than on the text printed here.
b) On the text of P.-prakasa
Brahmadeva's Text-Brahmadeva divides P.-prakåsa into two Adhikāras. In this edition the verses in each Adhikara are separately numbered, though Mss. have continuous numbering. Apparently Brahmadeva's text contains 126 verses in the first and 219 in the second book including the interpolatory verses' of which he has two classes; one he class praksepaka2 (included in his numbering) and the other sthala-saṁkhya-bahya. prakşžpaka(i.e., out of place and not included in his numbering). The text shaped by Brahmadeva has remained intact, as it is borne out by his remarks on the text-analysis and the actual number in Ms. A, etc. His text can be shown thus in a tabular form: Book 1
Details.
Totai Text Regular :
I. 1-27, 33-123
118 Praksepaka :
J. 28-32
123 Sthala-samkhyā-bāhya-praksepaka. 1. 65*1, 123*2 & 123*3
126 Book II Text Regular :
II. 1-214
214 Sthala-samkhya-bāhya-praksepaka: II. 46*1, 111*2, 111*3, 111*4
& 137*5 5
219 All this means that the text of P-prakāśa, which reached Brahmadeva's hands, was much inflated. Five verses (1. 28-32) which he found to be of doubtful authenticity he accepted by calling them Praksepaka. But eight other 1 See his remarks at the close of the two Adhikäras. 2 See his introductory remarks on I. 28. 3 See his introductory remarks on 1. 65*1, etc. and II. 46*1 etc.

Page #49

Paramātma-prakasa
verses (I. 65*1, 123*2-3, II. 46*1, 111*2-4 and 137*5) he comments on possibly considering them to be useful to the readers; but he does not include them in his text, because they are not numbered with other dohās. We do not know the exact extent of the inflated text that was before Brohmadeva; but it is imaginable that it contained many more verses which Brahmadeva could not include in his either interpolatory group.
B, C and S Based on Brahmadeva's Text-Mss. B, C and S (see section IV below) do not represent any independent text-tradition at all; they are various attempts to copy out only dohās of P-prakasa from Mss. containing the text and Brahmadeva's commentary. When one is copying out only the verses from a crowded Ms. with text and commentary closely written, various errors are likely to be committed; first, due to want of sufficient attentiveness and consequently due to the difficulty of spotting out the text from the body of commentary (for instance II. 104, 167 in B); secondly, due to haplographical deception, i.e., when two verses begin with similar words either one is missed (for instance II. 16 in B and II. 15 in C), or they interchange their places (for instance II. 64 & 65 and 79 & 80 in C); and so on. Then there will arise some cases of conscious omission : if a verse is in a different dialect (for instance II, 60 B, S and C, II, 111*2-3 in B & C), or if it is called Praksepaka, etc., by the commentator (for instance I. 65*1 in B, C & S, II. 137*5 in B, II, 111*2-4 in S). These are not in any way hard and fast rules, but they merely indicate how verses are likely to be dropped by copyists. Then the apparent additions in these Mss. (akkharada, etc., after II. 84 in B, C & S visayaha karani, etc., after II. 134 in B & C, and jivă jinavara, etc,, after II. 197 in Calone) are all found to be quotations in Brahmadeva's commentary in those places; it means that the copyist mistook these quotations, especially the first two being in Apabh., for the text of P.-prakāśa. The manner in which our Mss. are written is mainly responsible for such errors. Of these three, S is much carelessly copied, and hence so many verses are omitted but added in the margin possibly by the same copyist at the time of revision.
Balacandra's Text-Maladhāre Balacandra has written a Kannada commentary on P-prakäsa which is represented by Ms. P described below. At the outset he plainly tells us that he has consulted the Sk. Vrtti of Brahmadeva. Balacandra's text has six additional verses not found in Brahmadeva's text. As Bālacandra admits his indebtedness to Brahmadeva and still shows these additional verses there are two alternatives : either Brahmadeva's text along with the commentary is pruned further after Balacandra, or Balacandra had before him a longer text and quite consciously he retained some more verses, though his Kannada commentary was based on Brahmadeva's Sk
1 Generally Balacandra follows the analysis of Brahmadava. In the second Adhikara,

Page #50

Introduction
one. The first alternative cannot be accepted for the following reasons: first, the text of Brahmadeva's Vitti contains many analytical remarks scattered all over 1, and these remarks confirm that the text is not at all mutilated later; secondly, mere verses can be dropped or missed, but it is least probable that verses with the commentary can be dropped; and lastly, Brahmadeva, scrutinizing as he is, must have left some verses which he thought spurious but which Bālacandra with more eclectic zeal included in his Kannada Vrtti. Though Bālacandra included six verses more, it should not be supposed that Bālacandra's is the longest recension of P.-prakāśa, and that he did not exclude any verses as spurious. I am inclined to believe that the text of P-prakasa which was before Balacandra was longer than the one he accepted, and possibly he too excluded some verses and shaped his text. It will be seen from the genealogy of Mss. given below, that I have postulated a Ms. P', which was the source of Brahmadeva and Balacandra; and each pruned it in his own way. The following are the additional verses of Balacandra's recension; they are given here with minor corrections : 1-2. Two verses after II. 36, introduced with the words, praksēpakadva
yamam paļdaparu :
कायकिलेसे 2 पर तणु झिज्जइ विणु उवसमेण कसाउ ण खिज्जइ । ण करहिं इंदिय मणह णिवारणु उग्गतवो वि ण मोक्खह कारणु ।।
P-II. 36*1. अप्पसहावे जासु रइ णिच्चुववासउ तासु । बाहिरदब्वे जासु रइ भुक्खुमारि तासु ।।
P-II. 36*2. 3. After II, 134, introduced with the words, uktam ca :
अरे जिउ सोक्खे मग्गास धम्मे अलसिय । पक्खे विण के व उडुण मग्गेसि मेंडय दंडसिय (?)3 ॥
P-II, 1341, 4. After II. 140:
पण्ण ण मारिय सोयरा पुणु छ ?उ चंडालु । माण ण मारिय अप्पणउ4 के व छिज्जइ संसारु॥
P-II. 140*1.
however, Bālacandra explicitly admits 224 (225?) verses; he is aware of the additional verses not included by Brahmadēva; and here his analysis is differently worded see p. 204 of Ms. P Some of the important analytical remarks are found in his commentary on the following dohās: 111 25-6, I. 123*3, II. 1, 66, 214, etc. There are some two slips in his analysis : on p. 2 he notes a group of six verses "atha jivasya, etc., appa jõiya ityādi sūtrașatkam'; but in fact the group begins with ki vi bhanamati (1, 50) on p. 49. Then on p. 81 he notes a group 'jivu micchatte it yadi sūtrașatkena'. but that group begins with pajja yarattaü (1. 77) as noted by himself on p. 2. These
slips do not affect the total in any way. 2 Preads kilèsam. 3 Balacandra interprets the last two words thus : dhūrtane sähasiye. 4 P reads appaņu.

Page #51

Paramātma-Prakasa
5. After II. 156. introduced with the phrase, prakṣepakaṁ :
अप्पह परह परंपरह परमप्पउह समाणु । 96 #fT 45 #ft te foT #f 31 35 fotoata il
P-II. 156*1. 6. After II. 203; perhaps through oversight it is not numbered but duly commented on:
__अंतु वि गंतुवि तिहुवणहँ सासयसोक्ख सहाउ । तेत्थु जि सयलु वि कालु जिय णिवसई लद्ध सहाउ ॥
P-II. 203*1. Shorter Recension :- It will be seen from the genealogical table of Mss. that T, K and M form a group having their source in a postulate K', which we have called Shorter Recension. 3 So far as the number of verses is concerned they have no disagreement among themselves; but as compared with Brahmadeva's text, TKM-group has not got the following verses : Book I. 2-11, 16, 20, 22, 28-32, 38, 41, 43-44, 47, 65, 65*1, 66, 73, 80-81, 91-92, 99-100, 104, 106, 108, 110, 118-19, 121. 123*2-3.
=42 Book II. 1, 5-6, 14-16, 44, 46*1, 49-52, 70, 74, 76, 84, 86-87, 99, 102.
111*2-4, 114-16, 128-29, 134-37.137*5,138,140. 142, 144-47,
152-55, 157-165, 168, 178-81, 185, 107, 200, 205-12. =70 Besides the omission of the above verses TKM-group transfers five verses (namely, II. 148, 149, 150,151 & 182) of the second Adhikāra to the first after I. 71, : and some verses interchange their positions (II. 20 & 21, II 77 & 78, II. 79 & 80, II. 141 comes after II. 143). A more significant and important feature of TKM-group is that it contains two verses which are not found either in Brahmadeva's or Balacandra's recension. I give them here with some minor corrections : 1. After I. 46 :
जो जाणइ सो जाणि जिय जो पेक्वइ सो पेक्ख । ____ अंतुबहुंत वि जंपु चइ होउण तुहुँ णिरवेक्खु ॥
TKM-I. 46*1. 2. After II. 74 :
भव्वाभव्वह जो चरणु सरिसु ण तेण हि मोक्खु । लद्धि ज० भव्वह रयणत्तय होइ अभिण्णे मोक्ख ।।
TKM-II. 761 Some Genuineness of TKM-group.-The immediate question that confronts us is about the genuineness of this group which is wanting in 112 verses as compared with Brahmadeva's text (including the praksepakas) and 118 as compared with that of Bālacandra. It is not an easy job to explain 1 P reads jo, but Comm. jaï. 2 P reads gamtu ji. 3 For the description of these Mss. see below the section IV of this Intro. 4 K reads pecchaï. 5 R reads jiya. 6 Rreads atthi laddhi ja.

Page #52

Introduction
this difference in a satisfactory manner; but we can try to gauge the amount of genuineness behind this group. It appears to me that there is some genuine tradition behind TKM-group for the following reasons : first, the Kannada K-gloss which accompanies this Shorter Recension is independent of Brahmadeva and perhaps earlier than his Commentary; secondly, not even by mistake a single verse called interpolatory by Brahmadeva is accepted by this group; thirdly, this Shorter Recension contains two more verses not recorded by Brahmadeva and not even by Bālacandra; and lastly, an alternative reading noted by Brahmadeva is practically identical with the reading preserved in TKM-group; in II. 143 Brahmadeva accepts the reading Jinu samiü sammattu and records a variant sivasagamu sammattu, the reading in TKM-group being siü sangaü sammattu. This means that there is an amount of texttradition behind this group, though this should not be taken to mean in any way the justification of the absence of so many verses in TKM-group.
An Objective Scrutiny of the so-called Interpolatory Verses-In a work like P.-prakāśa which is full of repetitions, and which is explicitly meant to be so by the author himself (II. 241), it is very difficult to detect an interpolatory verse on such criteria that it does not suit the context, etc. P.-prakaša is written in Apabh. dialect, but it contains seven verses which are not in Apabh., namely, I. 65*1, II. 60,1 111*3, 117, 213, 214. We can understand the change of dialect in II. 213-14, which are concluding verses written in high-flowing Vrttas. 2 Of the remaining five Brahmadeva considers three to be interpolatory : 1. 65*1 is a slight improvement on Bhāvapähuda 47 from which source it must have been taken here. II. 60 and 117 are not called interpolatory by Brahmadeva, and especially because TKM-group preserves them it is possible that they were included in P.-prakasa from a pretty long time, and perhaps by the author himself. Beyond this dialectal approach, there is no other objective standard that can be applied to this text with the material that is available to us.
General Nature of the Verses Left by TKM-Group and the Net Effect :- The contents of verses absent in TKM-group deserve careful scrutiny, and I shall make a modest attempt to detect certain underlying tendencies. We may not take into account those verses which are called interpolatory by Brahmadeva and are not found in TKM as well. More than once Brahmadeva mentions the name of Bhatta Prabhākara to whom, as the text itself admits (II. 211), P.-prakasa was addressed; but by the absence of
1 With II. 60 compare Tiloyapannatti (Sholapur 1951) IX. 52. I feel like presuming that
Joindu is indebted to Yati Vrşabha; and to suit the tone of his work, he has put
the last expression in the first person. 2 II. 213 is Sragdhara and II. 214 Malint; II. 174 is called Catuspädika by Brahmadeva,

Page #53

Paramåtma-prakāša
I. 8, 11, 104, II. 1, 211 in TKM we lose all direct and indirectre references to Bhatta Prabhākara. Then some of the verses so absent mention non-Jaina deities like siva, Hari, Hara, Brahman, see for instance : 1.1 6, 108, 110, 118-119, 121, II. 99, 142, 145-6 & 200. I should not, however, ignore the fact that there are a few verses which have names of non-Jaina deities as above and are still retained by TKM-group, see for instaece : I. 109, II. 141. Some of the verses so left have a strong smell of non-Jaina doctrines, see for instance : I. 22 (Tântricism). I 41 (Vedānta), I. 65-66 (Sāmkhya) II, 99 (Vedānta) etc., though the application of various Nayas, i.e., the points of view, can explain them in accordance with Jaina tenets. Then some of the absent verses are extremely spiritual (I. 80-1, an attack on caste-exclusion; II. 84, futility of scriptures) and philosophical (I. 99-100) some-times to the extent of ignoring practical effects. Some of them are deeply mystical (II. 76, 157-65) and some highly cryptic (I. 43, 47, II. 44) Then some apparent repetitions and mechanical compositions that could be left without much loss of contents are also absent, for instance : I. 2-11, II. 49-52, II. 205-12. Some verses might have slipped through haplographical error, for instance I. 20. In spite of all these explanations there remain still many verses (I. 38, 44, 73, 91-2, 106, II. 5-6, 14-16, 70, 74, 86-7, 102, 114-16, 128-29, 134, 135-37, 138-40, 144 147, 152-55, 168, 178-81 185 & 197) for the absenee of which no apparent reason could be given. Some of these verses (1 33, 11.5-6, 114-16, 136, 139-40, 137, etc.) would bring credit to any spiritualistic poet. From all this survey I am inclined to believe that TKM-recension is a mutilated version, though the presence of some two additional verses shows some genuineness behind it. Perhaps a scrupulous commentator, possibly the author of our postulate K', rather of strong Jaina inclinations and poor mystic equipments prepared a personal digest of P.-prakaša now represented by TKM-group, by avoiding repetitions that were meant for Bhatta Prabhākara, by excluding verses containing references to non-Jaina deities and by ignoring extremely spiritualistic, mystical and cryptic verses. No doubt, Yogindu's Text has suffered inflation like anything; but it is impossible to believe that TKM-text is the same as that of Joindu, because TKM-group shows the absence of some nice verses and some highly mystical and above-sectarian utterances worthy of Joindu. That they are worthy of Joindu is quite clear from his another work, viz., Yogasāra where he uses the names of non-Jaina deities for his Paramāt. mana, and many of the ideas dropped by TKM-recension are expressed by Joindu3 in that work. 1 I, 138 and 168 do not suit the spiritualistic atmosphere of P-prakāša. 2 See Yogasära 9, 104 3 I have used both the forms of his name Joïn du and Yogindu. 4 Compare for instance, P.-prakasa II. 84 with Yogasära 52 etc.

Page #54

Introduction
Another Tempting Theory-Against the above view that the TKMrecension is only a mutilated version of Joindu's text, more inflated than original, another theory might be put forth like this : Joindu's original text is represented by TKM-group of Mss.; and the text accepted by Brahmadeva and others is only a redaction of it by some pupil of Joindu. possibly by Bhatta Prabhākara himself, who shaped it to show that it was addressed to him by his Guru. This redaction, it might be further argued, is inade probable by the facts that Joindu calls himself as Jina (1. 8) and the work is too much glorified in the concluding verses (II. 205-12); and these things cannot be expected from a modest author like Joindu. This is a very fascinating theory, but it is not in any way supported by facts, T. K & M are traced back to one source, possibly a South-Karnātaka Ms. with a Kannada gloss, our postulate K'; therefore differences especially of omission, can be better explained on the ground of mutilation than of genuine tradition. All this takes for granted, or at least implies, that Joindu was a southerner and the text went on getting inflated in the North as seen from B. C. etc.; but there is no evidence at all to say that he belonged to the South. Then we have seen above that certain tendencies are working under this Shorter Recension shaped possibly by a Kannada commentator; and these tendencies are not without significance in South India where Jainas had to put a stiff fight against Vedāntic schools and saivites at the time of Sankarācārya, Rāmānuja, Basava etc., and where the Jaina community is more for casteexclusion than in the North. If Joindu as a spiritual mystic above sectarianism could use the names of other deities for his Paramātman in his Yogasära, he must have used the same more freely in P. prakāśa which is a bigger work than Yögasära. This shows that there is no justification at all for TKM-recension to leave these verses, etc. The name Sri Yögindu- jinaḥ indicates no vanity to necessitate the hypothesis that it might have been used by some pupil, when we remember that we have many names like Akalanka-deva ending with -deva; and further Brahmadeva qualifies him as Bhagavān. Siri-Joindu-ji nàu can be interpreted in another way also. Sri-Yoginduh eva nämā, i.e., Sri-Yogindu by name; and this way of interpretation is hinted by Brahmadeva as well (Sri-Yogindra-deva nämá bhagavân). Then as to the glorification of this work in the concluding verses, I think that this work deserves more praise than that; and moreover the word paramappa-pa yasu is used with a double meaning, as it is suggested more than once by Brahmadeva.2 So however tempting this theory might be, it is not at all backed by any cogent evidences.
1 See I. 8, further this text gives the form ņāu-nama (I. 19. II. 206), 2 See his remarks on 205-7 etc.

Page #55

10
Paramātma-Prakasa
Any Light Thrown by Q and R-Q and R stand midway between the two extremes showing influence from both the sides. Q, for instance, shows two extra-additional verses (jo jāņai etc. and bhayvābhavvaha etc.) which are found only in TKM-group; and further it shows acquaintance with Brahmadeva's commentary as it carefully leaves all the verses called praksepaka by Brahmadeva and as it includes a verse (jiva jinavara etc.) which is a quotation in the Sk. commentary. R occupies a very queer position; it includes two extra-additional verses (jo jāņai etc. and bhavvăbhavvaha etc.) special to TKM-group, also two verses from Balacandra's recension (kāyakilesa etc. and appasarūva etc.) and a quotation (påvena naraya etc.) from Brahmadeva's commentary. Though by themselves Q and R do not shed much light on the problem, they indicate by their compromising position the existence of other types of Mss. showing different text-traditions.
Our Position with regard to Joindu's Text--It is well nigh impossible, with the material that we have before us, to restore the original text of Joindu. Joindu's popularity has led to the multiplication of Mss. and to the inclusion of corresponding verses in P-prakása. Balacandra shows one extremity and TKM-group the other. Much more light can be shed on this Text-problem by collating many more Mss. and by the discovery of some pre-Yogindu Apabh. works of similar contents. Brahmadeva appears to have had sufficient justification to call some verses praksepaka Joindu's text (so far as the number of verses is concerned) appears to have been nearer the Text (minus praksepaka verses) of Brahmadeva than that preserved by TKM-group.
c) Detailed Summary of the Contents of P.-prakasa Nature of this Summary-This detailed summary of the contents of P-prakasa, given in the following paragraphs, is expected to be a substitute for an English rendering of the Text. In a work like this, repetitions have their signiticance; and to get an idea of the working of author's mind it is necessary that his various statements should be closely followed. If sometimes I am found to be vague, the reason is that still there are many ideas and expressions which I have not clearly grasped. In such cases I have given a literal translation, so that I might not misrepresent the author. I have confined myself mainly to the text; and it is only in a few places that I have adopted some suggestions of Brahmadeva. In the arrangement of paragraphs I am chiefly guided by the analysis of Brahmadeva, though I have made many changes here and there. This free exposition of the contents, I hope, would be of some use when a critical translation of the Text is attempted. Book 1
Salutations to Souls Supreme (Paramātman) that have become etern

Page #56

Introduction
ally stainless and constituted of knowledge after burning the spots of Karman with the fire of meditation.
Then salutations are offered to hosts of Siddhas (i.e., the liberated souls) who are the embodiments of bliss and unparalleled knowledge, who have consumed the fuel of Karmas with the fire of great meditation, who dwell in Nirvāna never falling back into the ocean of transmigration though supremely weighty with Knowledge, and who being self-established clearly visualize everything here both the physical and superphysical existence. The devotional obeisance to great Jinas who are the embodiments of omniscience, omnivision and omnibliss and by whom all the objects of knowledge are enlightened. Lastly salutations to three classes of Saints, viz., Preceptors (Ācārya), Teachers (Upādhyāya) and Monks (Sadhu), who, being absorbed in great meditation, realize the vision of Paramātman. (1-7)
After saluting the five divinities Bhatta Prabhākara, with a pure mind, addresses Yogindu : "Sir, since infinite time we are in this Samsāra, i.e., the round-of-rebirths; not a bit of happiness is attained, but a lot of misery has fallen to our lot. We are tortured by the miseries of the four grades of existence, viz., divine, human, sub-human and hellish states of existence; so you instruct us about Paramātman, i.e., the Soul Supreme or Paramapada, i.e., the lofty status of liberation that would put an end to our miseries."(8-10)
Then Yogindu asks Bhatta Prabhākara to attend closely to his discourse that follows: The Ätman, i.e., the soul, the principle of life is of three kinds, viz., external soul, internal soul and the supreme soul. One should give up attachment for the external and then by knowing oneself realize the soul supreme which is an embodiment of knowledge. He is an ignoramus who takes the body for the soul. But he is a wise man who considers himself as an embodiment of knowledge distinct from the body and being engrossed in great meditation realizes the Paramātman. Realization of the self as an embodiment of knowledge and as free from Karman after quitting everything external : that is Paramātman. Thus it is the Internal by leaving everything External that becomes the Supreme. (11-15)
One should concentrate one's mind on the Soul Supreme that is respected in all the three worlds, that has reached the abode of liberation, and on which meditate Hari and Hara. Paramātman is eternal, untainted by passions and consequent Karman. He is peace, happiness and absolute bliss. He does not leave his nature and get changed into something else. He is Niranjana, i. e, untainted, having no colour, no smell, no taste, no sound, no touch, no birth and no death. He is not subjected to anger, delusion, deceit and pride; nor is there anything like a specific place and object of meditation for him who is all by himself. He is not amenable to merit and demerit, nor to joy

Page #57

12
Paramātma-prakāśa
and grief. He has not a single taint or flaw, so he is Niranjana. He is an eternal divinity in whose case there is no devotional control of breath (dhāraņā), no object of meditation, no mystical diagram, no miraculous spell and no charmed circle. That eternal Paramātman, who is the subject of pure meditation or contemplation, is beyond the comprehension of Vedas, sāstras and senses. His is the highest state, dwelling as he is at the summit of three worlds, representing unique or absolute vision, knowledge, happiness and power. (16-25)
The divinity that dwells in liberation, being free from Karman and constituted of knowledge, is essentially the same as the spirit or the soul in the body; really speaking there is no difference between the two. It must be known that Paramātman is already there in oneself; and by realizing this the Karmas accumulated since long time are shattered away. The self should be realized as immune from pleasures and pains of senses and mental activities; and everything else must be avoided. Though the soul dwells in the body the former should not be identified with the latter, because their characteristics are essentially different. The soul is mere sentiency, non-corporal and an embodiment of knowledge; it has no senses, no mind, nor is it within sense-perception. The lengthy creeper of the round-of-rebirths is crippled by him who meditates on his self with his mind indifferent to worldly pleasures. One that dwells in the temple of body is doubtlessly the same as Paramātman, the eternal and infinite divinity with his constitution brilliant with omniscience. Though he dwells in the body, there is no mutual identity nor connection between himself and the body. It is Paramātnian that is revealed, giving supreme bliss, to saints who are established in equanimity (sama-bhava). (26-33)
It is the ignorant that understand Paramātman as a composite body (sakala), but indeed he is one whole, separate from the Karmas, though he is bound by them and though he resides in the body. Like a star in the infinite sky the whole universe is reflected in the omniscience of Paramātman on whom, as an object of meditation, the saints always concentrate their attention in order to obtain liberation. It is this very Paramātman, when he is in the grips of various Karmas, that assumes various forrns of existence and comes to be endowed with three sexes. The universe is there in the Paramātman reflected in his omniscience; and he is in the universe, but he is not convertible into the form of) the universe. The Paramātman dwells in the body, but even to this day he is not realized by Hari and Hara, because they are devoid of the highest meditation and austerities. (36-42)
So far as modifications are considered Pararnātman is said to be coupled with origination and destruction ; but in fact from the realistic point of vieu

Page #58

Introduction
13
he is above them. With his presence the sense-organs function, otherwise the body becomes desolate. Through the sense-organs he knows the objects of sense, but he is not known by them. Really speaking there is no bondage nor transmigration for Paramātman; so the ordinary view-point TM (vya ahara) should be given up. The supreme characteristic of Paramātman is that his knowledge, like a creeper, stretches as far as the objects of knowledge are there. With reference to him the Karmas fulfil their own functions, but the Paramātman neither loses nor gains anything. Though bound by Karmas, he is never transformed into Karmas. (43-49)
Some say that the soul is omnipresent; some hold it to be devoid of knowledge; some say that it has bodily size; and some others say that it is void (sünya). The Ātman is all-pervading in the sense that, when free from Karmas, he comprehends by his omniscience physical and superphysical worlds. Sensitive knowledge no more functions in the case of souls who have realized spiritual light; and in this sense the soul is devoid of knowledge. The fure scul, there being no cause, neither expands nor contracts, but it is of the same size as that of the final body; and in this sense the soul is of the bodily size. He is void in the sense that, in his pure condition, he is not amenable, to any of the eight Karmas and eighteen faults. (50-56)
The Ātman is not created by anybody, nor is anybody created by the Ātman. As a substance the soul is eternal, but only its modifications appear and disappear. Substance is that which is endowed with quality and modification (guna and paryaya). Qualities are co-born (sahabhuva) with the substance, while modifications present themselves in succession on the substance. The Ātman or soul is a substance; insight and knowledge (darsana and jñana) are the qualities; the appearances in the four grades of existence are the modifications caused by Karman. (57-58)
The association between Jiva and Karman has no beginning in time, and further one is not created by the other; so both of them have no beginning in time. The embodied soul, because of its previous Karman, develops various conditions, and thus becomes virtuous or otherwise. The soul, thus obscured by eight Karmas, will not realize its own nature. Karman represents (subtle) atoms (of matter) that stick into the space-points (pradasa) of souls that are infatuated and tinted with sense-pleasures and passions. Really speaking the five sense-organs, the mind, the tortures in the four grades of existence and all other conditions (rögödi-vibhāva-parinämäh) are, in fact, separate from the nature of the soul : they are fashioned by Karman for the soul. Various kinds of pleasures and pains and all the conditions such as bondage and liberation are brought about by Karman; the soul does

Page #59

14
Paramåtma-prakaś a
nothing beyond mere seeing and knowing that is the realistic view. There is not a single region, in the eighty-four lakhs of births, which has not been visited by the soul wandering without obtaining the instructions of
he Ātman can be compared to a lame person; by himself he neither comes nor goes; it is the force of Karman (vidhi) that drags about the soul in the three worlds. (59-66)
The Atman is himself, and he can never be anything else; that is a rule. So far as his real nature is concerned, he is not born he does not die; ror does he bring about anything like bondage or liberation. Various terms like birth, old age, death, disease, gender and colour do not, in fact, refer to the soul but only to the body. (67-70)
Ātman is Brahman without old age and death which refer only to the body; So one should not be afraid of them. To reach the other end of Samsāra one should meditate on the pure spirit without minding whether the body is cut, pierced or destroyed. The soul is essentially different from attachment etc. which are occasioned by Karmas and from other insentient substances. The soul is an embodiment of knowledge, and everything else is foreign. The soul must be meditated on as independent of eight Karmas, as free from all the faults and as an embodiment of Darśana. Jñāna and Caritra. (71-75)
When the Ātman realizes himself by himself, he becomes Samyagdrsti, i.e., possessed of Right Faith or spiritualistic attitude, and gets rid of Karmas; but if he pursues the modifications his view is perverted, and he incurs the bondage of many Karmas and wanders long in Saṁsāra. Sticky and hard Karmas lead the soul astray in spite of the acquisition of knowledge. When the Atman develops perverted attitude, he grasps the reality in a perverted manner; and the conditions created by Karman he begins to identify with himself. Then he begins to say: "I am fair, I am black, I am of some other colour; I am slender, I am fat; I am a Brāhmana, a Vaiśya, a Kşatriya or the rest; I am a man, a neuter, a woman; I am a Digambara, a Buddhist or a svetāmbara: it is an ignorant fellow that speaks thus. Mother, father, wife, home, sons, friends and wealth : this is all a magical network of unreality, and a fool claims all this as his A being of perverted attitudes does nothing else than enjoying the objects of pleasure which are the causes of misery ” (76-84)
Samyagdarśana or Right Faith or insight is attained by the Ātman, when finding an opportune time, delusion is destroyed; thus necessarily the Ātman is realized. The wise man should realize that Atman is neither fair, nor red, nor black; he is neither subtle nor gross; he is neither a Brāhmana, a Vaisya, a Ksatriya nor the rest; he is neither, a man, a neuter,

Page #60

Introduction
15
nor a woman; he is neither a Buddhist, a Digambara nor a Svetāmbara; and the soul possesses none of the ascetic characteristics. The soul is neither a teacher nor a pupi!; neither a master nor a servant; neither a hero nor a coward; neither high nor low; neither a man, a god, a sub-human being nor a denizen of hell; neither learned nor foolish; neither rich nor poor; neither a youth, an old man nor a child (85-91).
Ātman, besides his essential nature of sentiency or consciousness, is not to be identified with merit, demerit, time, space, principle of motion and principle of rest. Ātman is control (samyama), chastity and austerity; Ātman is faith and knowledge; and Ātman is the seat of eternal liberation, when he is realized. Different from Ātman, there is nothing as faith, knowledge and conduct. Ignoring the pure self one should not search after some holy place, serve some other teacher, and think of some other divinity. Ātman represents absolute Darśana, and all other descriptions are formal, being true from the ordinary point of view only; when the pure Ātman is realized, the highest state of liberation is reached within a moment. Religious treatises, sacred works and austerities do not bring liberation for him whose mind is not occupied with (the reflections on) the pure self. When the self is known, the whole world is known; because it becomes reflected in the knowledge of the self. That both physical and super-physical worlds are seen (reflected) nitheir Ātman is a privilege of those who are merged in selfrealization. Undoubtedly it is a natural phenomenon that the Ātman enlightens himself and others like the light of the Sun in the sky. The vision of the world reflected in the self is like that of stars reflected in clear water. The saint by the strength of his knowledge should realize his self whereby he knows himself and others. 192-102)
When Prabhakara requests that he should be instructed in the great knowledge, he is thus addressed. Ātman is knowledge, and he who knows his Ātman pervades the whole space with his knowledge, even though ordinarily he is limited to the body. Whatever is different from the self is not knowledge; so leaving aside everything one should realize the selt which is a fit subject for knowledge, As long as a Jñānin does not know the self, which represents knowledge by means of knowledge, he will not, being an Ajñāpin, realize the highest. Brahman who is an embodiment of knowledge. By knowing one's self Para-Brahman is visualized and realized whereby the highest realm of liberation is reached (103-108).
When Brahman is seen and realized, the world other than Samsāra (paraloka) is reached. The lofty divinity, the embodiment of knowledge, residing therein is meditated on by saints. Hari and Hara. One reaches that condition on which one's mind is set; one should not, therefore, direct

Page #61

16
Paramåtma--prakāśa
one's attention towards other foreign stuff than the status of Para-Brahman. That which is non-sentient and separate from the self is the foreign stuff consisting of matter, the principle of motion, the principle of rest, space and time. One who is devoted towards Paramātman, even for half a moment, burns the whole lot of sin, as a spark of fire reduces a heap of logs to ashes Setting aside all thoughts, one should peacefully concentrate on the highest status of liberation and thus realize the divinity. The highest bliss, which is attained by visualizing Paramātman (Śiva) in course of meditation is nowhere attained in the world of Samsāra. Even In dra, who sports in the company of crores of nymphs, does not get that happiness which the saints attain when meditating on their self. The soul which is free from attachment, when realizing the self termed as Śiva and śānta, attains that infinite happiness realized by great Jinas by visualizing the self. Paramātman is visualized in the pure mind like the brilliant Sun in the cloudless sky. As no figure is reflected in a mirror with soiled surface, so indeed the God, the Paramātman, is never visualized in the mind (hrdaya) unclean with attitudes of attachment etc. There can be no place for Brahman, when the mind is occupied by a fawn-eyed one : how can two swords occupy the same scabbard ? It appears to me that the eternal divinity dwells in the clear mind of a Jñānin like a swan on the surface of lake. God is not there in the temple, in the statue, in the plaster nor in the painting; but he dwells in the equanimous mind as an eternal and stainless embodiment of knowledge. When the mind and Parameśvara have become identical, nay one, where is the question of any worship? To concentrate the mind that is running towards pleasures and passions on the Paramātman free from the stains of Karman; that is the means of liberation, but not any mystic syllable nor mystic practice. (109-123*3) Book II
Then Prabhakara asks what is Mokşa, what are the means and what is the fruit of attaining Moksa. Joindu then expounds only the views of Jina. Moksa or Liberation is superior to Dharma. Artha and Kāma which do not give absolute happiness. That the Jinas attain Moksa alone by avoiding the remaining three shows that Moksa is the best of the four. The world or Samsāra means bondage. Even beasts in bondage want to get release or Mokşa, then why not others ? That the realm of liberation is at the top of the world is a sign of its superiority. Moksa represents the best happiness, that is why Siddhas stay in liberation all the time. Hari. Hara, Brahman and Jinavara and great saints; all these meditate on Moksa concentrating their minds on the pure Paramātman. It must be realized that in the three worlds there is nothing else than Moksa which brings happiness to souls. The wise sages have said that Moksa consists in the realization of Paramātman by being free from all the Karman. (1-10)

Page #62

Introduction
The highest and eternal fruit of Moksa is that there is infinite Darśana (faith or vision), knowledge, happiness (and strength) without being lost even for a moment. (11)
The souls attain liberation through Right Faith (or vision), Knowledge and Conduct which really speaking consist respectively in seeing, knowing and conducting oneself by oneself. From the ordinary point of view Right Faith, Knowledge and Conduct constitute the means of Moksa, but really speaking the soul itself is all the three. The Ātman sees, knows and realizes himself by himself; therefore the Ātman himself is the cause of Mokşa. Proper knowledge of the soul constituted of Right Faith, Knowledge and Conduct leads to spiritual purity. (12-14)
Samyagdarśana or Right Faith consists in the steady belief in the true nature of Ātman resulting from the knowledge of various substances exactly as they are in the universe. Those are the six substances which fill these three worlds and which have no beginning and end. Of these six, Jiva or soul is a sentient substance; and the remaining five, namely, Pudgala or matter, Dharma or the principle of motion, Adharma or the principle of rest, Äkāśa or space and Kāla or time are insentient and separate from the soul. Really speaking (so far as its essential nature is concerned) the soul is non-corporal, an embodiment of knowledge, characterised by supreme bliss and (one that can achieve) an eternal condition of purity. Matter, in its six types, is corporal or concrete (mūrta, i. e., having sense-qualities and thus amenable to sense-perception); while others, along with Dharma and Adharma or the principles of rest and motion, are non-corporal. That is known as Akāśa or sky in which all the remaining substances exist, i.e., which gives room to all the remaining substances. Kāla or time is a substance characterised by vartană, i.e., continuity, being an accessory cause of change when things themselves are undergoing a change; the moments of time are individually separate like jewels in a heap of jewels. Excepting Jiva (soul), Pudgala (matter) and Kala (time), the remaining substances, namely, Dharma (the principle of motion). Adharma (the principle of rest) and Äkāśa (space) are indivisible and homogeneous wholes. Besides Jiva (soul) and Pudgala (matter), the remaining four substances. namely, Dharma, Adharma, Akāśa and Kāla have no movement. Dharma, Adharma and a soul occupy innumerable space-points, Akāśa occupies infinite space-points, and Pudgala or matter has manifold space-point. Though the six substances exist together in the physical space, they exist in fact in their own gunas or qualities or attributes. These various substances fulfil their on functions for the embodied beings which wander in Samsāra suffering the miseries of four grades of existence. The very nature of these substances has been the cause of misery; so one should follow

Page #63

18
Paramātma-Prakāśa
the path of liberation that he might reach that realm other than this Samsāra. (15-28)
The condition or state of the self which understands the substances exactly as they are is known as knowledge. (29)
Cultivation of that genuine and pure state of the self after fully realizing and discriminating the self and the other (than the self) and after giving up (attachment for) the other, is known as Right conduct. (30)
The devotee of the three jewels will not meditate on any other thing than the self which is an abode of great merits. To identify the three jewels with the self is to meditate on oneself with the condition of liberation in view; and gradually meditating on the self day to day they attain liberation. (31-33)
Jivas have first Darsana which consists in the general comprehension of all the things devoid of particular details. Thus clearly Darśana comes first, and then, in the case of Jivas, authentic knowledge follows when the particulars or particular details are known. The Jiva without any attachment, putting up with pleasures and pains and sunk in the austerity of meditations, becomes the instrument of the shedding of the stock of Karmas. Treating merit and demerit alike (from the point of view of liberation) when the soul is equanimous the fresh influx of Karman is stopped. As long as the saint, with no distractions, remains submerged in meditation on the nature of the self, the fresh Karmas are stopped and the stock is being exhausted. The old Karmas he destroys, and the fresh ones he does not admit: giving up all attachment he cultivates peace. And Right Faith, Right Knowledge and Right Conduct belong to him who has equanimous peace and to none else; So the great Jina has said. Self-control is possible, where there is peace of mind; self-control is lost when the Jivas become the victims of passions. Infatuation, which gives rise to passions, must be given up. Knowledge devoid of attachment and aversion is possible, when one is free from delusion and passions. Those, who understand what is real and what is otherwise, and who are equanimous taking pleasure in their spiritual nature, are happy in this world. An equanimous person has two faults: he destroys his bandhu (meaning brother, also bondage), and makes the world gahilu (meaning foolish, also possessed). He has a third fault as well; he leaves his enemy (sattu) and becomes engrossed in para (enemy, also Paramātman). There is another fault; being vikala (without stains, also without body) he rises up to the top of the earth. And the last fault is that when all the beings are asleep at night, he is awake; and when the world is awake, he sleeps. (46*1) He neither speaks nor opens a discussion; he neither praises nor blames anybody; but he realizes equanimous attitude which leads one to liberation. The saint, realized as he has that paraphernalia, pleasures, body, etc., are

Page #64

Introduction
foreign to his self, has neither attachment nor aversion for (internal and external) paraphernalia, pleasures and body, etc. The great saint feels no attachment and aversion for vetti and nivetti, because he knows them to be the cause of bondage. (34-52)
19
Not knowing the causes of bondage and liberation and not realizing Atman as Right Faith, Knowledge and Conduct, one incurs through delusion both merit and demerit as though they lead one one to liberation. The soul that does not treat merit and demerit alike suffers misery all along and wanders in the round-of-rebirths being deluded. The wise say that even demerits or sins (papa) are beneficial, when they immediately give pain and leave the soul free to attain liberation; and even the Punyas are not beneficial when they bestow kingdoms and consequently bring lots of misery. Better court death that leads to self-realization than merits that lead astray. Those that march towards self-realization attain infinite happiness, but others that have missed the same suffer infinite miseries in spite of meritorious deeds. Merits lead to prosperity, prosperity to vanity, and vanity to intellectual perversity which further leads to sin; therefore merits are not desirable. (60) Devotion to Gods, scriptures and saints leads one to merit, but never to the destruction of Karman: so says venerable Santi. Contempt of the same however however necessarily leads to sin to sin whereby one wanders in Samsara. Papa leads the soul to hell and sub-human world, Punya to heaven, and the admixture of both to the human world; but when both are destroyed, there results Nirvana or liberation. Worship, selfreprobation and repentance with correction: all these bring merit or Punya; so a man of knowledge will not devote himself to these by leaving meditation on the pure and holy Atman, the embodiment of knowledge. (53-65)
A man of impure manifestation of consciousness has no self-control, and his mind is not pure. Pure manifestation of consciousness is the best, because it is attended by self-control, character, righteousness, Faith, Knowledge and the destruction of Karman. Pure manifestation of consciousness is the Dharma which supports the beings falling in the miseries of four grades of existence. Pure manifestation of consciousness is the unique path leading to liberation one that goes astray can never be liberated. : One may go anywhere and do whatever he likes; but liberation can never be attained unless the mind is pure. Auspicious manifestation of consciousness leads to piety, the inauspicious one to implety, and the pure one, which is free from both, is immune from Karman. (66-71)

Dana (i.e., donation, or or giving gifts to proper persons, etc.) brings pleasures, austerities bring the status of Indra, but knowledge brings that state of existence which is free from birth and death. To know one's self is to get released, otherwise without this knowlege one has to wander in

Page #65

20
Paramātma-prakāša
Saṁsāra. Without this knowledge nobody has attained liberaton: by churning water the hands would not be greasy. That knowledge, which is not self-knowledge, is of no avail; and even austerities, which are not conducive to self-knowledge, are simply painful. In the presence of self-knowledge there is no scope for attachment (râga) : darkness cannot spread before the rays of sun. For men of knowledge, there is no other object of attachment than the self; so when they realize this reality, their mind finds no pleasure in objects of senses. Their mind cannot be concentrated on any other object than the self: he who knows emerald ( marakata) attaches no value to a piece of glass. (72-78)
When experiencing the fruits of his Karmas, he who entertains, through infatuation (or delusion), auspicious or inauspicious attitude, incurs Karmas again; and if he has no attachment or infatuation the fresh Karman is not incurred and the old stock is exhausted. Though the highest reality is being studied, even a particle of attachment proves a hindrance. If the self is not realized, study of scriptures and the practice of penances will not rescue anyone. A man studying the scriptures may still remain dull, if his doubts are not cleared, as long as he has not realized pure Paramātman residing in the body. Scriptures are studied for self-enlightenment; and if one has not attained that highest knowledge thereby, is he not a fool ? A tour to holy places will not rescue anyone from Saṁsāra, if he is devoid of Atmajñāna. (79-85)
There is a vast difference between foolish and wise saints: the wise forsake the body realizing the soul to be independent thereof, while the foolish wish to possess the whole world with the pretext of practising various virtues. The foolish take pleasure in their pupils—male and female and in books; but the wise are ashamed of these knowing them to be the cause of bondage. Mat, board (or garment), bowl and male and female disciples attract a monk and carry him astray. It is a self-deception, if a saint wearing the emblem of great Jinas pulls out his hair with ashes but does not give up attachment for paraphernalia. To receive desired paraphernalia even after being a monk (with Jina-linga) is to swallow back the vomit. Those monks, who give up the pursuit of liberation for the sake of worldly profit and fame, are burning a temple in fact for a nail. The rnonk who considers himself great because of his possessions never realizes the reality. To those who have realized reality no one is great or small : all souls are the great Brahman. The devotee of three jewels makes no distinction between souls and souls, whatever bodies they might be occupying. The souls in the three worlds are mutually distinguished by the ignorant, but in omniscience they are of one type. All the souls have knowledge as their essence; they are free from birth and death; they are alike with regard to

Page #66

Introduction
their spatial extent; and they are similar with regard to their charateristics. Dārśana and Jñāna are their essential attributes: if the mind is enlightened, no distinction should be made between various souls. Those that make no distinction between the (potential) Brahmans in this world realize the pure light of Paramātman. By leaving attachment and aversion and (consequently being established in equanimity (sama-bhāva) those that treat all souls alike easily attain liberation. The distinction between various bodies should not be attributed to the souls which are essentially characterised by Darśana, Jñāna and Caritra, Bodies, small or big, are fashioned by Vidhi, i.e., Karman, but the souls are all alike everywhere and always. He who considers friends, foes, himself, others and the rest all alike knows himself. He who does not realize the one nature of all the souls cannot develop the attitude of equality which is like a boat in the transmigratory ocean. The distinction between souls and souls is occasioned by Karman which is not to be identified with the soul and which will be separated from the soul when there is an opportunity. All the souls should be treated alike without dividing and without distinguishing them according to Varnas; as is the God Paramātman, so are these three worlds. (86-107)
The great saints know what is other than the self and give up their association therewith, because that association distracts their concentration of Paramātman. Association with a person who is not equanimous should be avoided, because that makes him anxtous and uneasy. Even the good lose their virtues in the company of the wicked: fire, for instance, is hammered because of its company with iron. Infatuation does no good, and uniformly it brings misery; so one should get rid of it. (108-111)
It is a matter of disgrace that a nude monk with hideous physical appearance should desire for sweet dishes. The monk, if he wishes for abundant fruits of his twelve-fold penance, should give up greed for food in thoughts, words and acts. To love savoury food and to detest the tasteless one is gluttony that comes in the way of realizing the reality. (111 *2-4)
Moths, deer, elephants, bees and fish are ruined respectively by light, sound, touch, scent and taste : so one should not be attached to these. (112)
Greed and attachment bring no good, but uniformly they bring misery: so one should get rid of them. Fire in the company of Loha (greed, and
also iron) is picked up by a pair of tongs, placed on the anvil and struck by a hammer. Sesame seeds, because of Sneha (oil, and also attachment) are sprinkled with water, pressed under feet and crushed repeatedly. Successful and virtuous are those persons who easily swim across, when they have fallen in the pond of youth. The great Jinas abdicated their thrones and reached liberation, then how is it that persons who are maintaining them

Page #67

22
Paramātma-prakasa
selves by begging should not achieve their spiritual good ? The souls wandering in Samsāra have suffered great miseries, and hence by destroying eight Karmas they should achieve liberation. The beings cannot put up with a bit of misery : then how is it that they can afford to incur Karmas which bring manifold miseries in the four grades of existence? The whole world being entangled in the turmoil foolishly incurs Karman, and not a moment is devoted to the rescue of the self. Till the great knowledge, viz. omniscience is attained, the soul, suffering misery and infatuated with sons and wives, wanders in millions of births. The souls should never claim ownership over the house, relations and body: they are the creations of Karman as understood from the scriptures by the saints. Thoughts about residence and relations bring no release: the mind should be applied to austerities (which bring about the destruction of Karmas) that Moksa might be reached. (113-124)
One has to suffer for the sins that one has incurred by killing manifold beings for the benefit of his sons and wives. One has to suffer infinitely more pain than that one has inflicted on the beings by crushing and killing them. Harm unto living being leads one to hell and the shelter unto them to heaven; these are the two paths all that are available: one should select whichsoever one likes. (125-127)
Everything here is ephemeral : it is of no use to pound the husk, even the body does not accompany the soul; the mind, therefore, should be directed to the pure path of liberation without any attachment for relatives and residence. Temples, (images of) gods, scriptures, Teachers, holy places, Vedas (religious texts, and poems and the tree that has put forth flowers : all this shall be the fuel (in the fire of time). Excepting one Brahman, (i.e., Paramātman) the whole world is earthly and ephemeral, and this should specially be remembered. Those whom one meets in the morning are no more in the evening ; so Dharma should be practised without any greed for youth and wealth. No religious merits are amassed and no austerities practised by this tree covered with skin (i.e., the embodied being); hell then is the destiny after being eaten by the ants of old age. The soul should be devoted to the feet of Jina; and the relations, even the father, must be abandoned, because they simply drag the soul into Samsāra. It is a Selfdeception if austerities are not practised with a pure mind in spite of one's having obtained human birth. The camels in the form of five senses should not be let loose; after grazing the whole pasture of pleasures they will again hunt the soul into the round-of-rebirths. Unsafe is the course of meditation; the mind cannot be settled at rest as it repeatedly reverts back to the pleasures of senses. The Yogin cultivates (Right) faith, knowledge and conduct, and being exempt from the influence of five senses meditates

Page #68

Introduction
on the highest reality. The pleasures of senses last for a couple of days only, and then again follows the stream of misery; one should not be deluded, and one should not flourish the axe on one's neck, That man commands respect who gives up pleasures though they are at his disposal; the bald-headed fellow has his head shaved by destiny (for which he deserves no credit). By capturing the leader, viz., the mind, all others, (i.e., the senses) are captured; the roots being pulled out the leaves necessarily wither. A lot of time is spent in enjoying the pleasures of senses; therefore steady concentration on Siva, (.e., Paramatman) is necessary whereby liberation. is reached. Those who are engrossed in the concentration on Paramātman are never seen to suffer miseries. Time has no beginning, the soul is eternal, and the round of rebirths has no end; the soul has not secured two: the teacher, Jina and the religious virtue, Right faith. (128-143)
Family-life is full of sin; it is indeed a steady net decorated with death. When the body does not belong to oneself, there is no propriety in claiming other things by neglecting the concentration on Paramatman (called Śiva). Concentration on anything other than Siva will not lead one to the bliss of liberation. Apparently the body looks nice; but (as to its real nature) it gets rotten when buried, and it is reduced to ashes when burnt. Anointing. decorating and sumptuously feeding the body serve no purpose like obligations bestowed on the wicked. This body is like a delapidated Naraka-gṛha (filth-house) full of filth, and as such it deserves no attachment. As if with vengeance the fate has fashioned this body out of all that is miserable. sinful and filthy. It is shameful to enjoy the loathsome body; the wise should take delight in Dharma purifying their selves. The saints should not be attached to this body which brings no good to them: they should realise Atman which is an embodiment of knowledge separate from the body. Attachment can never bring eternal happiness. (144-153)
23
One should be satisfied with that happiness which entirely depends on one's self; pleasures from external accessories will never remove (further) desires. Ätman should be realized as essentially constituted of knowledge, and there should be no attachment for anything else. If the mental waters are not disturbed by pleasures and passions, the Atman immediately becomes. pure. Of no avail is that Yoga which does not separate the self from others after suppressing or curbing the mind at once. Omniscience cannot be atta~ ined by meditating on anything other than the self, the embodiment of knowledge. The saints who meditate on Sunya-pada (a point of meditation devoid of disturbances), who do not identify themselves with anything foreign, who have neither Punya nor Papa and who populate the (so far) deserted (attitude) and desert the (so far) inhabited (attitude), deserve all respect. (154-160)

Page #69

24
Paramātma-Prakāša
In response to Prabhakara's question the author says: There, in meditation, delusion is smashed to pieces and the mind sets into steadiness, when the breath issuing from the nostrils melts back into Ambara. When one dwells in the Ambara delusion melts, mental activities are no more, inhalation and exhalation are stopped and even omniscience develops. He who concentrates his mind, which is an extensive as the physical and superphysical space, on the Akāśa, has his delusion destroyed; and he is an authority to others. (161-164)
[Then possibly the pupil speaks in a mood of repentance.] The self, the infinite divinity, which is in the body, has not been realized; and it has all been waste to have held the mind in the equanimous Ambara. All the attachments are not given up; the attitude of detachment has not been cultivated; the path of liberation liked by saints has not been understood; severe austerities, which are the essence of sell-realization, are not practised; both merit and sin are not consumed; then how can the round-of-rebirths be terminated ?
Gifts have not been given to saints, the great Jina is not worshipped and the five great teachers are not saluted: then how can the liberation be attained (sivalabha ) ? (168)
Successful meditation does not consist so much in closing the eyes, half or complete, as in remaining steady, with the mind undisturbed whereby alone liberation, the best state of existence, is attained. If undisturbed concentration is attained, the round-of-rebirths comes to an end; even the great Jina will not achieve Haṁsācāra, if he is liable to disturbances and anxieties. It is indeed foolish to run after the world and its activities. Brahman who is above all this should be realized, and the mind must be set at rest. The mind must be curbed from all the attachments, six tastes and five colours, and then be concentrated on Ātman, the infinite Divinity (165-172)
This infinite Ātman assumes that form in which he is meditated upon like the crystal or Mantra. This Atman himself is Paramātman; but he remains as Ātman because of special Karmas; as soon as the Atman is realized by himself, then he is Paramātman, the divinity. One should meditate thus :1 am the same as Paramātman, the embodiment of knowledge and the infinite divinity, and the Paramātman is myself. Like the colours reflected in a transparent crystal all the Karmic associations are different from the nature of Ātman. By nature, like crystal Ātman is pure; the dirty appearance of the body is mistaken for that of the soul. The body should not be considered as red, old and worn out, when the clothes are red, old and worn out. Similarly red colour, old age and destruction of the body have nothing to do with the soul. As

Page #70

Introduction
25
clothes are separate from the body so body is separate from the soul. Body is the enemy of the soul, because it produces miseries; then he is a friend who destroys this body. It is indeed a great gain if the Karmas, which are to be made ripe for operation and to give fruit, become automatically ripe and exhausted. If the mind cannot bear harsh words, meditate on the Para-Brahman whereby the mind might be set at rest. Beings that are averse to their spiritual welfare wander in the round-of-rebirths pursued by Karmas; what wonder then, if they escape from Saṁsāra when they establish themselves in themselves. If others take pleasure in finding faults with you, then consider yourself as an object of pleasure for others, and give up anger. The monks, if they are afraid of misery, should not entertain any anxiety, for even a bit of it, like a subtle nail, necessarily causes pain. There should be no anxiety even for Mokşa, for anxiety will not bring Moksa : that which has bound the soul will rescue it. Those that sink in the great lake of meditation have their souls rendered pure, and the dirt of round-of-rebirth is washed off. Elimination of all the mental distractions is called the great meditation (Parama-samādhi); the saints, therefore, give up all the auspicious and inauspicious attitudes. Though severe penances are practised and though all the scriptures are understood, the śāntam Sivam' is not realized, if the great meditation is not practised. Realization of Paramātman cannot be accomplished, if meditation is not practised after destroying pleasures and passions. If the Parabrahman is not realized through great meditation. one has to wander infinitely suffering the miseries of Samsāra. The omniscient have said that the great meditation is not achieved unless all the auspicious and inauspicious attitudes are annihilated. The Ātman becomes Arahanta when all the mental distractions are stopped, and when, being on the path of liberation, the four (Ghātiya) Karmas are destroyed. Ātman becomes Arahanta, necessarily full of supreme bliss, who continuously knows the physical and super-physical worlds through omniscience. That Jina who is omniscient and whose nature is Supreme bliss is the Paramātman, the very nature of Ātman. The Jina who is separate from all the Karmas and blemishes should be understood as the very light of Paramātman The great saint, Jina, who possesses infinite revelation, knowledge, bliss and strength is the great light. It is the great and pure Jina, the Paramātman, that is variously designated as Parama-pada, Hari, Hara, Brahman Buddha and the great Light. The Jina, when he is absolutely free from Karmas through meditation, is called the great Siddha. (173-201)
Siddha represents self-realization : he is the brother of three worlds; and his nature is eternal happiness. He is not accessible to births and deaths; he is free from the miseries of the four grades of existence; and

Page #71

26
Paramatma-prakasa
he is free and blissful being an embodiment of absolute revelation and knowledge. (202-3)
The saints that sincerely study Paramātma-prakāśa overcome all delusion and realize the highest reality. The devotees of this Paramātma-prakāşa attain that spiritual light which enlightens the physical and super-physical worlds. Those that daily meditate on Paramātma-prakāśa have their delusion immediately smashed, and they become the lords of three worlds. The competent students of Paramātma-prakāśa are those who are afraid of the miseries of Sarisära, who abstain from the pleasures of senses, whose mind is pure, who are devoted to Paramātman, who are intelligent in self-realization and who wish to obtain liberation (204-9).
This text of Paramātma-prakåsa, which is composed not (much) minding the rules of grammar and metrics, if sincerely studied, destroys the misery of the four grades of existence. The learned should not mind here the merit or otherwise of repetition; ideas are repeated for the sake of Bhatta Prabhākara. The learned, who have realized the highest reality, should forgive the author for whatever is said here, reasonable or otherwise. (210-12)
He attains liberation when flashes forth in his mind that Highest Principle, which, as an embodiment of knowledge, is meditated upon by great saints, which having no body dwells in the bodies of embodied beings, which is an embodiment of celestial knowledge, which deserves worship in three worlds, and which represents liberation.
Glory to that blissful omniscience which is a celestial embodiment of effulgence to those that have attained the highest status, which is a celestial and liberating light in the minds of great saints, and which cannot be obtained here by people who are given to pleasures of senses. (213-14)
d) Critical Estimation of P.-prakasa Occasion of Composition and Reference to some Historical PersonsBasing our conclusions on Brahmadeva's recension of the text, we find it definitely stated that P.-prakāśa was composed by Yogindu in response to some questions of Bhatta Prabhākara (1. 8: II. 211). Once Bhatta Prabhakara is addressed by name (I, 11) and often as vadha ( = vatsa according to Brahmadeva) and Jõiya (yõgin); and there are some indirect references to him as well which are made clear by Brahmadeva (1. 104, II. 1). Beyond that he was a pupil of Yogindu, we know nothing about Bhatta Prabhākara. Bhatta and Prabhākara are not two different names of two separate individuals as Pt. Premi passingly implied, but it is one name as Bhatta-Prabhākara, Bhatta being possibly a title. To quote a parallel case, Akalanka, the author
1 MDJG., vol. XXI, p. 17 of the Introduction.

Page #72

Introduction
of Sabdānusasana, (1604 A. D.) a Kannada grammar, is uniformly known as Bhattākalanka. Bhatta Prabhākara's questions and Yogindu's address to him indicate that he was a Jaina pupil, necessarily a monk, of Yogindu; and his name has nothing to do with Prabhakara Bhatta (c. 600 A.D.), the famous Purva-Mimāṁsā philosopher. Besides the names of Yogindu and Prabhakara, the text quotes the opinion of one Arya śānti that devotion to gods, scriptures and saints leads to merit but does not destroy Karmas (II. 61) Q-gloss modifies that name as śāntanandācārya, while K-glossi takes it as Sāntinātham. No doubt, śānti is the name of some early author, but in the absence of any more information he cannot be identified with known authors whose names begin with śānti.
The Aim of Writing this Work and how far Fulfilled-As the text stands, Bhatta Prabhākara complains that he has suffered a lot in Saṁsāra, and he wants that light which would rescue him therefrom, Yogindu first analyses the subjective personality, indicates the need of realizing Paramātman, and gives some symbolical descriptions of mystic-religious experience. Then he explains to him the meaning of liberation, its fruit and its means. Discussing the means he gives many moral and disciplinary lessons with illustrations. What was the need of Bhatta Prabhākara is the need of many aspiring souls; and as the title indicates and as the contents show, this work really sheds light on the problem of Paramātman in a popular manner.
Method and Manner of Subject-treatment, etc--As Brahmadeva's text shows, the work is definitely divided into two parts by the author himself in response to two questions of Prabhākara : first, about Atman and Paramātman (1 8-10); the second, about Liberation and its means (11.2). The first section is built more compactly than the second, of which only portions here and there are compact (for instance II. 11-30), but the major portion of it is loosely built with repetitions and side-topics. At times the author himself raises certain questions and answers them by the application of various view.points (see for instance I. 50-54). In some places he shows the tendency of mechanically building the verses with a few words changed. (see for instance I. 19-22, L. 80-81 and 87-91, II. 113 and 115, 178-9) P.-prakása is full of verbal repetitions of which Yogindu is quite aware; and he explains his position that he had to say things repeatedly for the sake of Bhatta Prabhākara (II. 211). Repetitions have a decided value in works of meditational character There is no question of one argument leading to the other and thus arriving at a conclusion as in logical works. But here the author has at his disposal a capital of ideas. moral and spiritual; and his one aim is to create taste for these ideas in his readers. So he goes 1 For remarks on these Glosses see below the section on the Commentaries on
P.-prakasa.

Page #73

28
Paramätma-Prakasa
on repeating them in different contexts, at times with different similes, to make his appeal effective. Brahmadeva also defends this repetition by saying, 'atra bhāvanāgranthe Samadhisatakavat1 punaruk taduṣaṇam nästi', etc., and further welcomes it as beneficial (see his remarks on. II. 211).
Similes and their Use-A moralist always uses similes, metaphors and illustrations in his discourses to make his lessons very effective and if these are drawn from every-day life the readers and hearers feel all the more convinced. That is why Drstanta plays an important part in the syllogism of Indian logic. A mystic, by the very nature of his subject, has to use all these more necessarily than a theologian, a moralist or a logician. A mystic attempts to convey to his hearers and readers the glimpses of the incommunicable realization which he himself has experienced. If mystics differ in their modes of expression and methods of exposition, it does not invalidate their experience, but it only proves that this transcendental experience cannot be rightly, and oftentimes adequately, expressed in words. The mystic visions are always symbolically put. This explains very well why works on mysticism are full of parables, similes, metaphors and illustrations. Yogindu connot be an exception to this, as he combines in himself a moralist and a mystic. The Great meditation, for instance, Yogindu compares with a lake (II, 189), and the vision of Paramatman is like that of a swan on the lake-surface (I, 122). Once the Once the mystic vision is likened to the light of sun in a cloudless sky (I. 119). Atman is said to imitate a lame man and it is Vidhi or Karman that leads him everywhere (I. 66). Body is compared once with a temple; once it is called a tree covered with skin and once it is likened to filth-house (I. 33, II. 133. 149). Family life is called a trap decorated by Death (II. 144). Twice he treats creeper as an object of comparison: when he compares. with Samsara (I. 32) its extensive growth is the common property, and when he compares it with knowledge (I. 47) the common property is that both of them need some support : knowledge being a transitive process needs an object of knowledge. A passionate heart is compared with a mirror of soiled surface (I. 120). Sometimes he develops a Dṛṣṭānta Drstänta taking advantage of a word with double meaning (loha-greed and iron; sneha attachment and oil); so a greedy man and a man of attachment suffer like iron the anvil and like sesame seeds in the mortar (II. 112-14). Senses are likened to camels (II. 136): and the author notes the cases of moth, deer, elephant, bees and fish that suffer because of their excessive attachment for respective senses (II. 112). Some of his Drstäntas are very vivid and appealing in I. 121 he says. that Brahman and woman cannot occupy the same heart, for two swords are never accommodated in one and the same scabbard; in II. 74 he puts
1 It is a Sanskrit work of Pajyapada; its influence on P.-prakala is discussed below.

=

Page #74

Introduction
29
that without real knowledge liberation cannot be attained, for the hand does not become oily, i.e., besmeared with butter, by churning water. The last simile is used by Basavannal also in a similar context.
Style of P.-prakasa-Barring the repetitions due to which this work, as an academic treatise, gives tiresome reading, it is composed uniformly in an easy and vivid style. In spite of the Jaina technicalities used here and there (especially II. 12-16, etc) there is a popular flavour about all his discussions. What strikes one is his earnest and spiritualistic enthusiasm and his sincere desire to help Bhatta Prabhākara, and consequently the readers of P.-prakasa in general, to get out of this Samsāra. Most of his utterances are of an objective nature, and as in the Vacanas of Basavanna2 and others we do not find here personal complaints and contemporary social and religious touches. At times but rarely Yogindu is obscure, and his statements require some additional words for a correct interpretation (I. 43, II 162, etc). Not very successfully he uses some words with double meaning to convey significant sense out of apparent contradiction (II. 44-46). Indeed P.-prakāša gives a refreshing freading for a believer; and that is why it has a strong hold on the minds of Jaina monks. Nowhere the author tries to parade his learning; and throughout the work he takes the reader into his confidence and sincerely preaches in a homely manner without much arguing. The writer, with a characteristic modesty, requests the reader not to mind his metrical and grammatical slips (II. 210-12).
Metres in P.-prakasa-A metrical analysis of 345 verses in Brahmadeva's recension shows that five are gāthās (1. 65*1, II. 60, 111*2, 111*3 and 117), one is a Sragdharā (II. 213), one is Malini (II. 214) and their dialect is not Apabh; one is a Catuspādikā (II. 174); and the remaining 337 verses are dohās. This name does not occur in P.-prakāša; but in Yogasära, the other work of Joindu, the word dohā is used twice (Nos. 3 & 107). Yögasara contains 104 dohās; two Soralhas (Nos. 38 & 44) and one Caupäi (No. 39). Both the lines of a dohā are of uniform constitution; each line is divided into two parts with a definite metrical pause interven1. Many of his Vacanas, generally addressed to his personal deity Küdala Sangama
deva, are included in Vacanaśāstrasára, vol. I, edited by F. G. Halakatti, Belgaum 1923. Recently a small book. Sayings of Basavanna, is published from Gadag; it contains the Kannada text of some selected sayings with an English rendering by M. V. Iyengar. The Vacana referred to above runs thus : "Chew the bamboo leaf; all you get is the chewing itself and no juice, Churn water, all you get is the churning and no butter. Spin sand, all you have is to spin merely; you get no rope. Bend to gods other than God Kudala Sangama; you have merely hurt your hand by pounding much bran". The simile of pounding bran is found also in
P-prakāša. II. 128 2. See Vacanašāstrasāra mentioned in the above note.

Page #75

30
Paramåtma-prakasa
ing; and an objective scanning of a line shows almost uniformly that the first part contains 13 mātrās and the second 11. But when we read the dohā, or try to sing it, it appears that we need 14 mātrās, the last mātrā of a part being necessarily lengthened. So it would be more accurate to state that each line of a dohā contains 14 and 12 mätrās with a definite pause after the 14th mātrā. P-prakáša, however, shows 31 cases in all where the first part of the line has 13 mātrās even when the last syllable is long. In the light of Virahānka's definition, noted below, one will have to accept that some syllable is to be lengthened in these lines. That the dohā line really contains 14 and 12 mätrās is clear from the following definition given by Virahāńka. 2
fafuur JiTT TT373773 fa-c91971 FUOTI
Jag 31-978 à fa ha a 42T3 O TUTTI IV. 27 Remembering the technical terms of Virahānka that turanga=4 mātrās, nära-one guru, paikka-4 mātrās and kannu-two gurus, the definition prescribes 14 and 12 mātrās for a doha..line. Both the lines have the same structure, and often e and o are short in Apabh: thus an objective scanning of even this illustrated dohā shows 13 and 11 mātrās. So Virahānka means that a dohā line has really 14 and 12 though in writing it might show 13 and 11 mātrās. There are other later metrical works like Kavidarpana (II. 15), Prakrta Paingala (I. 66 etc.), Chandahkösa (21) etc., which plainly state that a dohā-line contains 13 and 11 mātrās. Hemacandra, however, takes 14 and 12 mātrās. This means that Virahāňka and Hemacandra take into account the acoustic effect of the flow of a dohā-line, while others adopt the objective scanning. That dohā is pre-eminently an Apabh. metre is
attested by the facts that Virahānka composes his illustration in Apabh. and that Rudraga composes his illustrations of slesa of Sanskrit and Apabh. in dohā metre. The two lines of dohā exhibit rhyme at their close even in Sanskrit as seen from Rudrata's verses. The etymology of the word dohā needs some reflection. Joindu, we have seen, calls it dohā, but Vir a hänka writes its name Duvahaa. If dohā (in Hindi, Rajasthāni, Dūhā) has a Sanskritic origin, it might be derived from the word dvidha indicating thereby i) that a line of dohā is definitely divided into two parts, or ii) that in dohā metre the same line occurs twice. Virahānka appears to favour the second 1 See I. 27c, 32, 36a, 53c, 61a, 680, 73a 77, 79, 85a, and 115a, II. 59a, 69a,
73c, 100c, 103c, 125a, 126, 127c, 136, 137, 138a, 147a 162a, 166a, 187, 188a,
190c, 192a, 194a and 207a. 2 H. D. Velankar: Vịttajātisamuccaya of Virahanka JBBRAS 1929 and 1932; Chandah
kofa in the appendix to his paper 'Apabhramía Metres' in the Journal of the
University of Bombay, Nov 1933; Kavidarpana in the Annals of the B. O, R. I. 1935 3 In view of the Nom. Sg. termination in Apabhramsa, we expect the reading nèüraü. 4 Kavyalankāra IV. 15 and 21.

Page #76

Introduction
31
when he says: dö påă bhannai duvahaü (II. 4). So far as we know, Virahanka, whom Prof. H. D. Velankar puts earlier than 9th century A.D.. Is the earliest metrician to deline dohā. Later metricians have given some varieties of dohā as well.
Eclectic Character of P.-prakasa-Unless there is temperamental handicap, the spiritualistic mystics, as a class, have a very tolerant outlook; and it is thus', as Prof. Ranade puts it that the mystics of all ages and countries form an eternal Divine Society'. They may weave out their mysticism with the threads of any metaphysical structure; but they always try to go behind the words and realize an unity of significance. Yogindu is a Jaina mystic as it is clear from the opening Mangala and other references; and from the technical details adopted by him it is seen that he bodily accepts Jaina metaphysics, especially the Jaina concepts of Atman, Karman, their relation in the light of other substances, Paramātman, etc. But his catholicity of outlook has given an eclectic touch to his work and almost a non-sectarian colour to most of his utterances. Intellectual tolerance is seen at its best in Yogindu. Vedāntins claim that the Ātman is all-pervading (sarvagata); Mimāṁsakas say that the soul in liberation exists without cognition; the Jainas take the soul to be of bodily size; and Buddhists say that it is sünya (1. 50 etc.). Yogindu never feels offended by this variety of conflicting views. In the light of Jaina metaphysics and with the help of Nayas he goes behind the words and notes their significance. The interpretations offered by him may not be accepted by those respective schools; but this way of approach brings before us the personality of Yogindu as a patient mystic with a tolerant outlook. Yogindu would only smile at polemic logicians like Dharmakirti, Akalanka, .Sankara, etc., and pity them that they have in vain wasted their words and energies by raging a warfare of mutual criticism for centuries together. As contrasted with this attitude, Saraha, a Buddhist mystic, who has many ideas common with Yogindu, severely attacks the practices of nude Jaina monks.2 Yogindu holds a definite conception of Paramātman, but never does he insist on a particular name thereof. Thus with a non-sectarian spirit he designates his Paramātman as Jinadeva, Brahman, Para-Brahman, Sānta, Siva, Buddha, etc., (1. 17, 26, 71, 109, 116, 119, II. 131, 142. 200 etc.) Then very often he has harnessed non-Jaina terminology to serve his purpose; and here we find the echoes of many patent concepts of other systems of Indian philosophy. I shall note here only a few glaring cases. In I. 22 he uses many Tantric
1 Belvalkar & Ranade : History of Indian Phil., vol. VII. Mysticism in Maharashtra,
Preface, p. 2. 2 M. Shahidulla : Les chants mystiques de Kanha et de Saraha, Döhäkösa of Saraha
verses 6-9.

Page #77

32
Paramatma-prakaša
terms like Dhāranā Yantra, Mantra, Mandala, Mudrā and says that the Paramātman is beyond the predication of these. His way of expression in I. 41 and II. 107 approaches very near that of Vedānta; and II, 46* 1, which is considered as interpolatory by Brahmadeva and other Mss., reminds us of a similar verse in Gita (2. 69). Jainism and Sāmkhya have many points of similarity,' and our author with the help of Niscaya-naya compares Ātman with a lame man and delegates all activity to Karman which is called Vidhi here (II. 65-66),2 In II. 170 the word Hamsācāra is used, and Brahmadeva takes Hamsa to mean Paramātman; this reminds us of some Upanisadic passages where Hamsa is used in the sense of Atman and Paramātman.3 It may be noted here passingly that one of the mystic vision of Paramātman according to Yogindu is that of a swan on the surface of lake. This work, leaving aside a few groups of verses that give technical details of Jaina metaphysics, can be read with devotion by all students of mysticism who want to raise their individuality to a higher plane of divinity.
Yogindu's Place in Jaina Literature: Influence of Earlier Works, etc., on him-A mystic is not necessarily a man of learning, and further he is not a professional writer trained for that purpose with years' grounding in grammar, logic, etc. The experience of self-realization forces speech out of him at the sight of suffering humanity; and he goes on expressing himself not minding the rules of grammar, etc. So it is not without significance that Yogindu selects Apabhramśa language, the popular speech of his day, ignoring Sanskrit and other Prakrits 4 which were used in learned works; and this is exactly what is done by some of the later mystics of Mahārāstra and Karnātaka Jñānadeva, Namadeva, Ekanātha, 5 Tukārāma and Rāmadāsa proudly expressed their experiences in Marāthi and Basavanna and scores of Viraśaiva Vacanakāras in Kannada, so that they might be understood by a larger number of people. What earlier authors expressed in Prākrit and sanskrit Yogindu puts in a popular manner in a popular dialect of his time. It is to Kundakunda and Pujyapāda, so far as I have been able to study earlier Jaina works, that Yogindu is greatly indebted. A few agreements might be noted here. Yogindu's discussion of three 1 A. N. Upadhye : Pravacanasāra (RJS), Intro. p. 63 etc. 2 This is the famous Saṁkhya analogy, see Sänkhyakarikå 21 & 62. 3 See for instance Svētās vatarōpanişad i. 6. iii. 18, vi. 15. 4 The two concluding verses are not in Apabh, but I think they are composed by
Yogindu himself. 5 How proudly and confidently Ekanātha says:
mājhi Marathi bhāșă cokhadi
Para-Brahmi phalali gadhi 6 These Vacanas are beautiful specimens of Kannada prose. They are simple and
homely as distinguished from the classical prose passages in earlier Campū works.

Page #78

Introduction
33
Ātmans (I. 121-4) closely agrees with that in Mökkhapähudai 4-8. The definitions of Samyagdrsti and Mithyā-drsti (1. 76-77) almost agree with those given by Kundakunda in Mökkhapähuda 14-5; and rightly indeed Brahmadeva quotes those gāthās in explaining these dohās. Besides, the following parallels also deserve notice : Mökkha-pähuda 24 & P.-prakäsa I. 86; Mp. 37 & Pp. II. (partly); Mp. 51 & Pp. II. 176-77; Mp. 66-69 & Pp. II. 81; etc. It is not without significance that Srutasägara in his Sanskrit commentary on Mõkkhapahuda, etc. quotes many dohās from P.-prakasa though this may not have historical justification. A closer comparison would reveal that Yogindu has inherited many ideas from Kundakunda of venerable name. Turning to Samadhisataka2 of Pujyapāda, P.-Prakāša agrees with it very closely; and I feel no doubt that Yogindu has almost verbally followed that model. For want of space I could not quote the parallel verses here, but I give only references from both the works that have close agreement. Samadhisataka 4-5 & P.-prakasa I. 11-14; $s. 31 & Pp. II. 175, I. 123*2; Ss. 64-66 & Pp. II, 178-80 (very close agreement); $s. 70 & Pp. I. 80; Ss. 78 & Pp. II. 46*1. Şś. 87-88 & Pp. I. 82 (amplified); etc. There are many common ideas besides these close agreements. But there is a vast difference between the styles of Pujyapāda and Yogindu. Pūjyapāda is a grammarian; and we know, as the popular saying goes, that a grammarian is as much happy on the economy of words as on the birth of a son. Pūjyapāda is concise in his expressions, chaste in his language and precise in his thoughts; but Yogindu's style, as seen above, is full of repetitions and general statements. The very virtues of Pujyapāda have made his work very stiff, and it can be now studied only by men of learning. Perhaps Yogindu thought of propounding in a popular language and manner the important ideas of Samadhišataka which, being written in Sanskrit often in sūtra-style, could not be understood by all Yogindu's work appears to have attained sufficient popularity, and commentators like Jayasena, Srutasāgara and Ratnakirti quote from his works.3 Passingly I might note here that there are some close similarities between P.-Prakáša and Tattva-sära4 of Devasena : Pp. II. 38 & Ts. 55; Pp. II. 79-81 & Ts. 51-53; Pp. II, 97-8 & Ts. 37-8; Pp. II. 156 & Ts. 40; Pp. II. 183 & Ts. 50. Here and there Devasena shows Apabhramśa influence in his works; he has put some Apabhraíśa verses in his Bhavasa ngraha, 5 and he uses words like bahirappå (Ts. 40) in spite of the fact that he opens 1 Ed. Şat-Prabhstādi-sangraha MDG., vol. XVII. pp. 304-379. This ed, is accompanied
by Srutasagara's Sk. commentary on six Pahudas. 2 Ed. SJG., vol. I Bombay 1905. pp 281-296.
Jayasina in his commentaries on Pañcastikaya and Samayasära, Śrutasagara on Six
pähudas and Ratnakirti on Arādhanāsära of Devasèna (MDJG., vol. VI). 4 Ed. MDJG, vol. XIII. pp. 145-51. 5 Ed. MDJG., vol. XX.

Page #79

34
Paramātma-prakasa
Tattvasara with a slightly different division. For these reasons and in the light of the context, I think, it is Devasena that follows Yogindu and not otherwise.
Yogindu, Kanha and Saraha-Kāpha and Saraha are Buddhistic mystico-moralists. Their works belong to the later phase of Mahāyāna Buddhism, especially Tantricism; and they have some common traditions with Saivite Yogins ? Dr. M. Shahidulla puts Kānha about 700 A.D., while Dr. S. K. Chatterji puts him at the end of the 12th century. Saraha lived about 1000 A.D.2 Dohákosas of these two authors breathe the same spirit as that of P.-Prakāša. Unlike P.-Prakaša they are not uniformly composed in dohās; but they have a variety of metres, though they are called Dohakoša. Excepting a few peculiarities, which might be due to local influences, their Apabhramśa is similar to that of Yogindu though forms here and there show some advancement towards simplification. Mystico-moralists have often inherited a common stock of ideas and terminology which appear and re-appear in the mystical works of different religions. The terms of address Vadha, Putta. etc., are found in these texts as well. Kanha and Saraha very often mention their names in their verses, thus stamping them with their individualities. This is conspicuously absent in the verses of Yogindu. Marāthā saints like Tukārāma have mentioned their names like this, and the Saivite Vacanakāras of Karnataka have mentioned their mudrikas : for instance, the mudrika of Basavanna is Kūdala-sangama-deva, that of Gangamma is Gangesvaralinga and so forth. Especially the Dohākośa of Saraha has many ideas, phrases and modes of expression common with P.-prakāša. I note here a few parallels selected at random : P.-prakaša.l. 22 & Dohä-koša of Saraha 25; Pp. II. 107 & Dk. 28: Pp. II. 112 & Dk. 73; Pp, II 161-62 & Dk. 48, Pp. II. 163 & Dk. 32; Pp. II. 174 & Dk. 107. Also compare Pp. & Dk. of Kānha 10; Pp. I. 22 & Dk. 28.
e) Philosophy and Mysticism of P.-prakasa 1. The Two Points of View: Vyavahara and Niscaya, or Practical and Realistic- The Ātman is really Paramātman (1 46). It is true from the ordinary or practical point of view that the Atman, because of Karmic association, undergoes various conditions (I 60); but from the real point of view, upheld by the great Jinas, the Ātman simply sees and knows: Ātman does not bring about bondage and liberation which are caused by Karman for him. (1. 64, 65, 68). Atman is omniscience; and every other predication about him is true from the practical point of view (I. 96). Really speaking 1 S. K. Chhatterji The Origin and the Development of the Bengali Language, Intro.
pp. 110-23. 2 M. Shahidulla : Les chants mystiques de Kanha et de Saraha, Paris 1928 pp. 28,
31 etc.

Page #80

Introduction
35
Ātman himself constitutes Right Faith, Knowledge and Conduct which are ordinarily stated as the means of liberation (II. 12-14, 28, etc).
Author's use of these Points of View-It is a patent fact from the history of Indian literature that very often the commentator is a better authority to enligthen us on the contents of a text, howsoever misleading and fantastic his etymological explanations might be. What is true in the case of Sayana on rgvéda is much more true in the case of Brahmadeva on P.-prakaša. In explaining the text Brahmadeva has repeatedly takan resort to Niscaya and Vyavahāra points of view. It is just possible that he might have exaggerated some other subtle differences; but that such a distinction is accepted by Joindu himself is clear from the above paragraph. So we cannot ignore these two points of view in studying P.-prakaša.
Necessity of such Points of View-Taking a synthetic view Dharma or Religion in India embraces in its connotation on the one hand spiritual and transcendental experience of a mystic of rigorous discipline and on the other a set of practical rules to guide a society of people pursuing the same spiritual ideal.1 It is this aspect of the situation that necessitates such points of view; and in Jainism, whose approach to reality is mainly analytical, they occupy a consistent position. Vyavahāra view-point refers to the loquacious level of rationalism, while Niscaya refers to intuitional experiences arising out of the deeper level of the selt. According to Jainism a householder and a recluse have their spheres dependent on each other and supplementing each other's needs with the ultimate spiritual realization in view; so are Vyavahāra and Niscaya points of view. Just as every householder submits himself to Sannyāsa or renunciation and realizes his spiritual aim, so ultimately Vyavahāra is discarded in favour of Niscaya.2
Similarities Elsewhere-Mundaköpanişad (I. 4-5) says that there are two kinds of knowledge : Aparā vidyā and Parā vidyā; the former consists in the knowledge of Vedas and the latter in the apprehension of Imperishable Brahman. This distinction amounts to the difference between intellectual and intuitional apprehension of reality, and can be favourably compared with
1 Amptacandra, in his Commentary on Samayasara 12, quotes a beautiful verse from an unknown source which indicates the relative importance of these view points :
jaï Jinamayam pava jjaha tå må vavahāra-niccha ya muyaa
ekkēņa viņă chijjaï tittham annēna una taccam 11 This very verse is quoted by Jayasena with some dialectal difference on Samayasara 235 (RJS. Ed. p. 328). In early Jaina literature, both canonical and pro-canonical, this distinction is already accepted (see my Intro. to Pravacanasära p. 86 and foot-notes). Sometimes Yogindu uses the word Paramartha for Niscaya which word is already used by Kundakunda in his Samayasara 8.

Page #81

36
Paramatma-prakala
the above points of view. Buddhism accepts the distinction of partial truth. (samveti-satya or vyavahara-satya) and absolute truth (paramartha-satya). Sankaracārya too often appeals to Vyavahara and Paramartha points of view. Echoes of such a distinction are seen in some modern definitions of religion. which William James recognizes two aspects, viz, Institutional and Personal.
Their Relative Values-Vyavahara view-point is useful and essential so far as it leads to the realistic view-point. Vyavahara by itself is insufficient and can never be sufficient. The simile of a cat can serve our purpose as long as we have not seen the lion. As to their relative value Amṛtacandra nicely puts it thus: Alas, the Vyavahara point of view may be perchance a support of the hand for those who are crawling on the primary stages of spiritual life, but it is absolutely of no use to those that are inwardly realizing the object, the embodiment of sentiency, independent of anything else.3
2. Three Aspects or Kinds of Atman-Atman is of three kinds: External (bahiratman), Internal (antaratman) and Supreme (paramatman). It is ignorance to take the body for the soul So a wise man should consider himself as an embodiment of knowledge distinct from the body, and thus being engrossed in great meditation should realize Paramatman. It is the Internal by leaving everything External that becomes Supreme (I. 11-15).
The Threefold Individuality-The subjective personality demands as much patient study from a mystic as the objective existence from a scientist. A mystic projects his process of analysis inwards, and therein he realizes the reality of his self by eschewing everything else that has a mere appearance of it. Taking the individual for analysis what is more patent or what strikes an observer is his physical existence, his body; but the real individual is not this body Body is merely a Body is merely a concrete figuration temporarily acquired by the soul or spirit; it is merely the external of the individuality To realize the individuality one has to go inwards and try by the process of meditation to apprehend the sentient personality, which is the internal individuality. There is a huge multitude of internal spirits, the destiny of each determined by the Karman which is crippling its abili ies. When all the Karmas are completely destroyed by penances, the Atman, the internal Individual, reaches the plane of supreme individual, eternal and characterised by infinite knowledge and bliss. Supreme individuality is a type, a level of spiritual freedom. The various Atmans retain their individualities even when they reach this level there is no question of the loss of individuality any time. The body is rot Ain an; and every Atman when absolutely free from Karman, becomes a Paramatman which condition is the culmination of
1 ERE, IX, p. 849. X. p. 592; Dasgupta: A History of Indian Phil, vol II p. 3 etc. 2 The Varieties of Religious Experience. p. 28.
3 Samayasara-kaleda on Samayasara, 12.

Page #82

Introduction
37
spiritual evolution never to revert. This three-fold division is based on the idea that spirit and matter are two independent categories though associated with each other since eternity.
Earlier Authors on this Division-Yogindu is not the first to give this division. In many of his passages Kundakunda (c. beginning of the Christian era) has this division in view which is discussed by him in his Mökk hapähudai Then Pajyapāda (c. last quarter of the 5th century A.D.) discusses this very subject in his Samadhisataka in a very lucid manner.2 Then many of the later authors like Amrtacandra, Gunabhadra, Amitagati etc., have always this division in view in their discussions about Ātinajñāna,
Counterparts Elsewhere-The doctrine of Ātman plays an important part in Upanişads, though it is conspicuously absent in earlier stages of Vedic literature. Outside the circle of the priests, who devoted all their energies to sacrificial ritual, there was a class of hermits and ascetics who devoted much of their time to this Ātmavidyā for which great zeal is shown in Upanisads and later literature. An earnest search after Ātman was instituted, and we find various attempts to analyse the individuality. It is in the Upanişadic texts of Group Three that a serious pursuit of Ātmavidyā, i.e., the introspective knowledge of Ātman, is seen. Taittiriyopanişad speaks of five sheaths, each called an Ātman one within the other : Annarasamaya, constituted of focd-essence ; Prānamaya, constituted of vital breath; Manomaya, constituted of thought; Vijñānamaya, constituted of consciousness; and Anandamaya, constituted of bliss. Then Kathopanişad (I. iii, 13) enumerates three kinds of Atman; Jñānātman, Mahadātman and Santātman possibly with Sāmkhya terminology in view. Deusson, with Chandog ya 8. 7-12 in view, deduces three positions of the Atman : the corporal self, the individual soul and the supreme soul. More than once Upanişadic passages distinguish the body from the soul. The distinction of Jivātman and Paramätman in Nyāya Vaiseşika is quite famous, Coming to later period, Rāmadāsa speaks of four kinds of Ātman : Jivātman, one limited to the body; Sivātman, one that fills the universe; Paramātman, one that fills the space beyond universe; and NirmaTātman, one who is pure intelligence without spatial connotation and without taint of action; but all these, according to Ramadāsa, are ultimately one. 4
3. Spiritual Knowledge-Knowledge of Ātman, when achieved, puts an end to the round-of-rebirths (1. 10, 32). Everything that is foreign must be given up, and Ātman must be known by Ātman whereby Karman is destroyed (I. 74, 76). By meditating on the pure Atman liberation is immediately 1 Ed. MDJG, vol. XVII, pp. 304-79, gåthås 5-8 etc. 2 Ed SJG, vol. I, pp. 281.96. 3 Belvalkar & Ranade : History of Indian Phil., vol. II, p. 370, also p. 135. 4 Ibidem, vol VII, Mysticism in Maharashtra, p. 386.

Page #83

38
Paramatma-Prakasa
attained. Without self-realization, study of scriptures and practice of penances are of no avail. When the self is known, the whole world is known reflected in the self (I. 98, etc.). This knowledge of the self, as an embodiment of knowledge, destroys Karman and leads to infinite happiness (II. 76, 158,etc.)
Nature of Atman or Spirit-Atman, though dwelling in the body, is absolutely different from the body: clothes are not the body, so body cannot be the spirit (I. 14, 33, II. 178. etc.). Atman is nothing but sentiency. (1.92). Of the six substances Jiva or soul is the only sentient entity: it is nonconcrete (amürta), an embodiment of knowledge and of the nature of great bliss (II. 17-8, I. 73). Atman is eternal and uncreated though undergoing different modifications (I. 56). Atman is a substance; Dariana and Jñana are his qualities; and the conditions in the four grades of existence are his modifications occasioned by Karman (I. 58). Atman is like a lame man. It is Vidhi or Karman that sets him in motion. (I. 66). It is the presence of the soul in the body that is the spring of activity of senses (I. 44). Birth. death, disease, sex, caste, colour, etc., belong to the body and not to the soul which is really ageless and deathless (I. 70, etc.). Atman is omnipresent in the sense that his omniscience functions everywhere; he is jada (ie., without any functions) in the sense that his senses do not function after selfrealization; he is of the same size as that of the body, because finally he is of the same shape as his last body; and he is fanya in the sense that he is void of all the Karmas and other faults (I. 50-6). Atman in view of the space-points is co-extensive with the body, but by his knowledge he pervades the whole space (I. 105). Atman should be meditated upon as being outside eight Karmas, as free from all the faults and as an embodiment of Daršana, Jnana and Caritra (1. 75). Souls should not be differentiated from each other; all of them are embodiments of knowledge, all of them really free from birth and death, all of them equal so far as their spatial extension is concerned, and all of them are characterised by Darśana and Jnana(II. 96-8).
Nature of Paramatman or Super-spirit-Paramatman dwells in Liberation at the top of three worlds, and Hari and Hara meditate on him. he is eternal, stainless and an embodiment of knowledge and bliss. He is above sense-perception and free from merit and demerit or Punya and Papa (I. 16, 25 etc.). Pure meditation alone can realize him. The meditating saints. when they are established in equanimity, have this Paramatman revealed to them giving great bliss (I. 35). Paramatman cannot be visualized in a heart. or mind tainted with attachment like an image in a mirror with soiled surface (I. 120). He represents infinite vision, knowlegde, bliss and power (I. 24). Paramätman is in the world (at the top of it); and the world is there (reflected) in him (i.e., in his omniscience) and thus he visualizes both physical and super-physical worlds. (I. 41, 5). There is no difference bet

Page #84

Introduction
39
ween Brahmans (Brahman=Paramātman) that form one class or type having the same characteristics such as absolute Darsana and Jñāna (IT. 99, 203). Paramātman is neither perceived by senses nor understood by the study of scriptures (Veda and Sastra); but he is the subject of pure meditation (1.23). This Paramātman is also called Brahman, Para-Brahman; Śiva, śānta, etc. (I. 26, 71, 109, 116, 119, II. 131, 142. etc.).
Nature of Karman-Karman represents (subtle) atoms (of matter) that stick into the space-points of souls that are infatuated with and tainted by sense-pleasures and passions (1. 62). Ātman and Karman have not created each other, but they are there already united from beginningless time (I 59.) It is this Karman that brings about the various conditions like bondage, etc., for the soul; and it is Karman that fashions body and other accessories of the spirit (I. 60, 63, etc.). There are eight kinds of Karmas that obscure the nature of and mislead the spirit (1. 61, 78) The stains of Karman are burnt by the fire of meditation (1. 1, 3).
The Spirit and Super-spirit--The Atman himself is Paramātman, but he remains as Ātman because of special Karmas; as soon as Ātman is realized by himself, he is Paramātman, the divinity (II. 174). In view of their essential nature the ego and the Paramātman are the same (I. 26, II. 175, etc.). Though Paramātman lives in body, he will never be one with the body (I. 36). When Ātman becomes free from Karman, which is of eight kinds, he develops infinite happiness which is not obtained by Indra even in the company of crores of nymphs (1. 61, 118).
Atman and Brahman in Upanisads-Ātman, which indicated breath in early Vedic literature, implies in the Upanişads a Universal soul of which the individual soul is merely a miniature. Then follows the conception of unitary Ātman which is the source of everything else. 1 Ātman is as much a cosmic principle as the Brahman both of which are used as synonyms in many passages. Ātman is conceived as the Reality, everything besides being an illusion only. At times the acual agency etc. are attributed to Bhūtātman who under the influence of Praksti becomes manifold. As a lump of iron, when buried in the bosom of earth, is reduced to earth, so the individual Atman is merged into Brahman. It is through delusion that the human self, the self within us, considers itself as an individual; but in fact it is identical with Brahman, the impersonal absolute. There is neither the duality nor the plurality of the self, but every personal self and impersonal Brahman are one and the same. Brahman is a magnanimous and allpervading presence which permeates the self as well as non-self. Brahman is the only All-personality; he represents an universal, abstract and impersonal presence. This Brahman originally meant a Vedic hymn, the powerful 1 Chandogya, VII. 26.

Page #85

40
Paramåtma-prakasa
prayer; so Brahman later on came to represent a mighty power that creates, pervades and upholds the whole range of universe. Though repeatedly attributes are denied of him, no doubt Brahman is conceived as a pure Being absolute, infinite, immutable and eternal from whom everything else derives its reality. Thus Brahman in turn is Ātman, infinite, ageless and eternal.1
Yogindu's Super-spirit Compared with Upanisadic Brahman-Joindu's reflections on Ātman and Paramātman which have been constructively summarised above, deserve to be compared with Upanişadic utterances whose spirit is sufficiently imbued by our author, even though his details are set in the metaphysical frame-work of a heterodox system like Jainism The word Brahman has a consistent history in Vedic literature; and in the Upanişads Brahman is conceived as the Absolute, one without a second. Joindu freely borrows that word and repeatedly uses it in this wotk. Even Samantabhadra, a staunch propagandist of Jainism, uses the word Brahman in its generalised sense, viz., the highest principle, when he says : ahiṁsā bhūtānāṁ jagati viditam brahma paramam.2 In the Upanişads the word Paramātman is not of so much frequent occurrence as the word Brahman, though both are taken as synonyms in texts like Nộsimhöttaratapani. 3 In Indian philosophical texts identity of words may not necessarily imply the identity of their sense-content. Brahman and Paramātman are used as synonyms, because they represent the concept of an ultimate reality. According to Jainism, Paramātman is a super-spirit representing the ultimate point of spiritual evolution of Ātman by gradual destruction of Karman through penances, etc. Each Ātman becomes a Paramātman and retains his individuality. The Upanişadic Brahman is a cosmic principle, which idea is not associated with the Jaina conception of Paramātman. Brahman is one and one only according to Upanişads. Joindu, however, speaks of many Brahmans, i.e., Paramātmans, which represent a type and therefore should not be distinguished from each other (II. 99). According to Jainism Paramātman has nothing to do with the world beyond that he knows and sees it, because it is his nature to see and to know; while Brahman according to the Upanişads is the very source and support of everything else. Though many attributes are common between Upanisadic Brahman and Jaina Paramātman their implications often differ. The word Svayambhū, for instance, means self-created and self-existent in the case of Brahman, but in the case of Paramātman it means self-become, i.e., the Ātman has become Paramātman.4 1 ERE. various articles on Atman Brahman, etc. Paul Deussen : The Philosophy of
the Upanişads; Hume: The Thirteen Principal Upanişads, Intro; R. D. Ranade :
A Constructive Survey of Upa. Phil., etc. etc. 2 Bịhat-Svayambhū-stötra 119 3 G. A. Jacob : Upanişad-vākyakõsah under Paramātman. 4 See my Intro, to Pravacanasāra p. 92. foot-note 2

Page #86

Introduction
41
How Yogindu Proposes Unity--Inspite of the above difference Joindu speaks just almost in the Upanişadic tone, of the identity between Paramātmans by appealing to aspirants not to distinguish one Paramātman from the other, because they form a type. Upanişadic identity is of an uncompromising type, but Joindu's identity is only in name. But when Joindu speaks of the identity between Atman and Paramātman he is fully justified, because according to Jainism Ātman is Paramātman. Paramātman was called Atman only because of Karmic limitations. It is by realizing this essential likeness of all the Ātmans that Jainism has faithfully stood as a champion of Ahimsā, Harmlessness, universal compassion in thought, word and deed. In this context the Jainas like the Sāmkhyas are Satkāryavādins accepting that the effect is potentially present in the material cause. Upanisadic Brahman has a monistic and pantheistic grandeur which we miss in the Jaina conception of Paramātman. Jainism looks at the world analytically, and Atman, moving along with the path of penance and meditation, evolves into Paramātman, where the race of the round-of-rebirths comes to a full stop; while Upanisads look at the world as a fundamental unity one with Brahman who is all-in-all,
Yogindu's Atman compared with that in Upanisads-Joindu's conception of Atman which is the same as that of Kundakunda and other Jaina authors, is like this: Ātman is a migrating entity of sentient stuff associated with Karmic energy since eternity. The world contains infinite Ātmans, the transmigratory destiny of each being determined by its Karmas. Ātman is immaterial as distinguished from Karman which is a form of matter. Though the soul assumes different bodies and acquires other physical accessories, it is essentially eternal and immortal. Its transmigratory journey comes to a stop, when Karmic matter is severed from it through penances, etc., and the Ātman is realized and becomes Paramātman. Even in liberation the soul, with all its potential traits fully developed on account of the absence of Karmic limitations, retains its individuality. So there will be infinite liberated souls. The very idea of the infinity of souls allows no question to be raised that the world might one day be empty when all the souls have attained liberation. All such souls, as dogma would require, which have become light by the destruction of Karmic weight, shoot forth to the top of the universe and stop there permanently in eternal bliss with no possibility of further upward motion as there is no medium of motion in the super-physical space. Though these details touch here and there the Upanişadic concepts of Ātman especially in the Group Three, there are fundamental differences. In Jainism both spirit and matter are equally real; the number of souls is infinite; and each soul retains its individuality even in Immortality. In the Upanişads there is nothing real

Page #87

42
Paramåtma-prakasa
besides Atman which is conceived as an impersonal pervasion identical with Brahman, the cosmic substratum. The Ātman in Jainism is not a miniature of any universal soul as in Upanişads, but it carries with it the seeds of Paramātman which status it will attain when freed from Karmamatter. In the Upanişads and Bhagavadgita Karman stands for good or bad act, while in Jainism it is a subtle type of matter which inflows into the soul and determines its career in the round-of-rebirths. In terms of modern philosophy the soul and God according to Jainism are identical in the sense that they are two stages of the same entity, and thus each and every soul is God; while the world, which is eternal without being created by anybody, is a scene of many souls working out their spiritual destinies. But in Vedānta the soul, the world and the God are all in one, the Brahman.
The Two Distinct Tendencies—Upanişads represent synthetically an 'absolute pantheism' by merging together the Ātman theory and Brahman theory. Really these are two independent tendencies, one pluralistic and the other monistic; and one can hardly develop out of the other. The former accepts an infinite number of souls wandering in Saṁsāra due to certain limitations, but when these limitations are removed and their real nature realized, there is rescue, there is liberation, there is individualistic immortality; every Ātman becomes a Super Ātman. Super-Ātmans are infinite, but they represent an uniform type possessing the same characteristics like infinite vision, infinite knowledge, infinite bliss and infinite power. This Super-Ātman enjoys ideal isolation, and he has nothing to do with creation, protection and the destruction of the world. On the other hand Brahman-theory starts with Brahman as a great presence out of which everything comes and into which everything is drawn back like threads in the spider's constitution. The individual souls are merely finite chips of the infinite block of the great Brahman. Sāṁkhya and Jainism pre-eminently stand for Atman-theory, while the Vedic religion stands for Brahman-theory : Upanişads bring these two together and achieve the unity of Ātman and Brahman, a triumph of monism in the history of Indian religious thought.
4. Paramatman or the Super-spirit as the Divinity-Paramātman is the eternal Deva, divinity, that dwells in liberation at the top of three worlds never to come back in Samsāra (1. 4, 25, 33, etc.). There are infinite Siddhas, i.e., the liberated souls, who have attained self-realization and are to be meditated upon with a steady mind (I. 2, 16, 39); there are then Arahantas, the same as Tirthankaras, who are on the point of attaining liberation with their four Karmas destroyed, whose words are to be accepted as authoritative, and who are to be worshipped (1- 62, II. 20, 168, 195-96. etc.); and lastly there are three classes of monks (muni) who practise great meditation and realize Paramātman in order to achieve the great bliss

Page #88

Introduction
43
(I. 7). It is these five Paramagurus, i.e, the great spiritual preceptors, that are to be saluted, and to whom the prayers are to be offered (I. 11, II. 168).
The Conception of Divinity Explained-Ātman to Paramātman is a course of spiritual evolution; and it is the duty of every aspiring soul to see that it reaches the stage of Paramātman. There are various stages on the path worked out according to the destruction or partial destruction of different Karmas. Paramātman is the God not as a creative agency, but merely as an ideal to all the aspirants. Paramātman is latent in the Ātman, therefore the Ātman must always meditate on the nature of Paramātman that the potent powers thereof might be fully manifested. Paramātmans form a class, all equal, with no classes among themselves. But a devotee, when he is studying this course of evolution, deifies first a monk, or monks as a class, who has given up the world and its ties and who has completely absorbed himself in the study of and meditation on Ātman; secondly, the teacher who gives the aspirant lesson in the realization of Paramātman; thirdly, the president of an ascetic community; fourthly, an Arhat, a Tirthankara, who has destroyed the four Ghāti-Karmas, who is an omniscient teacher and who attains liberation and becomes a Siddha at the end of the present life; and lastly the Siddha, the perfect soul, that has reached the spiritual goal. It is to these five collectively or to Arhat, or to Siddha, that the Jainas offer reverence. According to Jaina dogma the number of Arhats in each cycle of time is limited, i.e., twenty-four. A soul can attain Siddha-hood without being an Arhat. Every Arhat becomes a Siddha, but not that every Siddha was an Arhat. Arhat or Tirthankara in his life, just preceding liberation where he becomes a Siddha, devotes some of his time to teach the path of liberation to the aspiring souls. That is why the world of aspirants feels more devotion to Arhats. Neither Arhat nor Siddha has on him the responsibility of creating, supporting and destroying the world. The aspirants receive no boons; no favours and no cures from him by way of gifts from the divinity. The aspiring souls pray to him, worship him and meditate on him as an example, as a model, as an ideal that they too might reach the same condition.
5. The World and Liberation or Samsara and Moksa-Since infinite time the soul is dwelling in Saṁsāra experiencing great misery in the four grades of existence (I. 9-10). The association of Karmas has no beginning, and all the while heavy Karmas are leading the soul astray (1. 59, 78). Developing false attitudes the soul incurs Karmic bondage and wanders in Samsära always feeding itself on false notions of reality (I. 77, etc.). It is the Karman that creates various limitations for the soul and brings about 1 See Davvasangaha 50-54, also commentary thereon by S. C. Ghoshal. SBJ. vol. I,
pp. 112 etc.

Page #89

44
Paramātma-prakaša
pleasures and pain (I. 63, etc) Moksa, Nirvana or liberation consists in getting released from the Karmas, both meritorious and demeritorious (II. 63). The souls that have attained liberation dwell in the abode of Siddhas at the top of the world (II. 6, 46, etc). Moksa is the seat of happiness wherein the liberated soul possesses all-vision, all-knowledge, etc.; and it is the best object of pursuit (II, 3, 9-11, etc). Saṁsāra is destroyed by the vision of Paramātman and Nirvāna attained; so the mind should always be set on Ātman who is potentially (saktirūpina) Paramātman (II 33, I. 32, I. 26, see also I. 123*3). One must rise above attachment and aversion and be engrossed in one's self to stop the influx of Karmas (II. 38, 100, 141, etc.). Penance is quite necessary to des
Explanatory Remarks—Samsāra and Moksa are the two conditions of the Ātman, and they are opposed to each other in character : Saṁsāra represents unending births and deaths, while Moksa is the negation of the same. In the former state the soul being already in the clutches of Karman is amenable to passional and other disturbances; and there is constant influx and bondage of Karman which makes the soul wander in different grades of existence, namely, hellish sub-human, human and heavenly. As opposed to this there is Moksa, sometimes called the fifth state of existence, which is reached by the soul, passing through the fourteen stages of Gunasthānas, when all the Karmas are destroyed. In Samsāra the various Karmas were obscuring the different potent powers of the self; these powers are manifested in liberation where the Ātman, now called Paramātman, dwells all by himself endowed with infinite vision, knowledge, bliss and power.
6. The Means of Attaining Moksa-Right faith, Right knowledge and Right conduct really speaking consist respectively in seeing, knowing and pursuing oneself by oneself. Ordinarily these might be taken as the cause of Mokşa, but in fact Atman himself is all the three (II. 12-4). From the practical point of view Right faith consists in steady belief in the true nature of Ātman resulting from the knowledge of various substances exactly as they are in the universe (II. 15); that condition or state of the self which understa nds the substances exactly as they are is known as knowledge (II. 29); and lastly the cultivation of that genuine and pure state of the self after fully realizing and discriminating the self and the other (than the self) and after giving up (attachment for) the other is known as Right conduct (II. 30). Ultimately these three jewels are to be identified with one's self, and one should meditate on one's self by oneself which results in self-realization amounting to the attainment of liberation (II. 31).
Explanatory Remarks-Here Joindu mentions the so-called three jewels of Jainism which from the Vyavahăra point of view constitute the path of liberation. These three are to be developed in the Ātman himself and not

Page #90

Introduction
outside; therefore that condition itself from the Niścaya point of view is the cause of Mokṣa. This condition is a spiritual attitude which tolerates no more any contact with Karmic matter, and thus the Atman is Paramätman without being anything else.
45
7. The Great Meditation-The great Meditation (Parama-samadhi) is defined as the elimination of all the mental distractions; and therein the aspirant is above auspicious and inauspicious attitudes (II. 190). In the absence of this great meditation severe practices of penances and the study of scriptures will not lead one to self-realization (1. 14, 42, II. 191). By submerging oneself in the pond of great meditation, the Atman becomes pure, and the dirt of round-of-rebirths, (i.e., Karman) is washed off (II. 189). As long as one is plunged in this meditation there is the stoppage of the influx and the destruction of the stock of Karmas (II. 38). Successful meditation does not so much consist in closing the eyes, half or complete, as in remaining steady without being prone to disturbances (II. 169-170); and it should be distinguished from mere utterance of Mantras, etc., (I. 22). The great meditation, which belongs to great saints, is like a huge fire in which are consumed the faggots of Karman (I. 3, 7); therein all the anxieties are set at rest and the pure (niranjana) divinity is realized (I.115). There are two stages of this great meditation the first that of Arahantas, wherein the four Ghati Karmas are destroyed and where the soul possesses omniscience and all-bliss, etc.: and then the second, that of Siddhas, where all the Karmas are destroyed at a stretch, where infinite Darśana, Jnana, Sukha and Virya are developed, and where one deserves such designations as Hari, Hara, Brahman, Buddha, etc., (II. 195-201, etc.).
Mystic Visions-Undoubtedly the constitution of Paramätman shines with the light of omniscience like the light of the sun enlightening itself and other objects: and the saints who are established in equanimity experience great bliss for which there is no parallel elsewhere (I. 33-35, 101, 116). Within a moment after self-realization there flashes forth a great light (I. 104). The speciality of self-realization is that the whole world is seen in the Atman (I. 100). The great divinity is seen to dwell, like a swan on the surface of lake. In the pure mind of the Jaanin (I. 122). The Paramätman shines forth like the sun in a cloudless sky (I. 119).

Explanatory Remarks on the Great-Meditation-Here we get an enthusiastic description of Mahasamadhi without the technical details which we find in works like Jäändrṇava, Yogašastra, Tattvamusasana. etc. To achieve such a meditation in which Atman is realized as Paramätman the steadiness of mind is absolutely necessary: there should be no delusion, no attachment for Also compare Davvasamgaha 37 and Ghoshal's commentary thereon.

Page #91

46
Paramātma-Prakasa
pleasant feelings and no aversion from unpleasant ones. The mind, speech and body should cease to function, and the Atman should be concentrated on himself. In this course two stages are noted : Siddhahood and Arhatship. A soul may reach the condition of a Siddha by destroying all the Karmas at once, and majority of souls are destined for this. The Tirthankara devotes some of his time for preaching the religious doctrines, while Siddha has minded his own business of spiritual realization; the former thus is of greater benefit to the society. The difference between these two types of self-realized souls somewhat corresponds to that between activistic and quitistic tendencies of mystics.
8. Some Aspects of Mysticism-It is not easy to define mysticism exactly in plain terms. First to a great extent, it denotes an attitude of mind which involves a direct, immediate, first-hand, intuitive apprehension of God.'2 It is the direct experience of the mutual response between the human and the divine indicating the identity of the human souls and the ultimate reality. Therein the individual experiences a type of consciousness of perfect personality. In the mystical experience the individual is 'liberated and exalted with a sense of having found what it has always sought and flooded with joy.' Secondly, mysticism, if it is to be appreciated as a consistent whole, needs for its background a metaphysical structure containing a spirit capable of enjoying itself as intelligence and, bliss and identitying itself with or evolving into some higher personality, whether a personal or an impersonal Absoulte. Thirdly, if mysticism forms a part of a metaphysico-religious systein, then the religious system must chalk out a mystic course of attaining identity between the aspirer and the aspired. Fourthly, the mystic shows often a temperamental sickness about the world in general and its temptations in particular. Fifthly, mysticism takes for granted an epistemological apparatus which can immediately and directly apprehend the reality without the help of mind and senses which are the means of temporal knowledge. Sixthly, religious mysticism always prescribes a set of rules, a canon of morality, a code of virtues which an aspirant must practise. And lastly mysticism involves an amount of regard to the immediate teacher who alone can initiate the pupil in the mystical mysteries which cannot be grasped merely through indirect sources like scriptures, etc. 3
Mysticism in Jainism-An academic question whether mysticism is
1 Compare Davvasamgaha 48 and 56. 2 R. D. Ranade : Mysticism in Maharashtra, Preface. 3 William James: The Varieties of Religious Experience, especially the chapter on
Mysticism; ERE, the article on Mysticism etc. Belvalkar and Ranade : History of Indian Phil. vol. VII, Mysticism in Maharashtra; Rudolf Otto : Mysticism, East and West; etc etc.

Page #92

Introduction
47
possible or not in a heterodox system like Jainism is out of court for the simple reason that some of the earliest author-saints like Kundakunda and Pujyapada have described transcendental experiences and mystical visions. 1 It would be more reasonable to collect data from earlier Jaina works and see what elements of Jainism have contributed to mysticism, and in what way it is akin to or differs from such a patent mysticism as that of monistic Vedānta. To take a practical view the Jaina Tirthankaras like Rşabhadeva, Neminātha, Pārsvanātha, Mahāvira, etc., have been some of the greatest mystics of the world; and rightly indeed Professor Ranade designates Rşabhadeva, the first Tirthankara of the Jainas, as 'yet a mystic of different kind, whose utter carelessness of his body is the supreme mark of his God-realization'? and gives details of his mystical life. It would be interesting to note that the details about Rşabhadeva given in Bhagavata practically and fundamentally agree with those recorded by Jaina tradition.
Various Elements of Mysticism in Jainism-Monism and theism, rather than theistic monism, have been detected as the fundamental pillars of mysticism. In the transcendental experience the spirit realizes its unity or identity with something essentially divine. Mystical states of mind in every degree,' William James says, 'are shown by history usually though not always, to make for the monistic view.' Thus mysticism has a great fancy for monistic temperament; and in Vedānta it is seen at its best in the conception of All-in-all Brahman, who represents an immanent divinity. Spiritual mysticism of Jñānadeva, however, reconciles both monism and pluralism by preserving 'both the oneness and manyness of experience.'3 The Jaina mysticism turns round two concepts: Ātman and Paramātman, which we have studied above. It is seen that Paramātman stands for God, though never a creator, etc. The creative aspect of the divinity, I think, is not the sine qua non of mysticism. Ātman and Paramātman are essentially the same, but in Saṁsāra the Ātman is under Karmic limitations, and therefore he is not as yet evolved into Paramātman. It is for the mystic to realize this identity or unity by destroying the karmic encrustation of the spirit. In Jainism the conception of Paramātman is somewhat nearer that of a personal absolute. The Ātman himself becomes Paramātman, and not that he is submerged in the Universal as in Vedānta. In Jainism spiritual experience does not stand for a divided self achieving an absolute unification, but the bound individual expresses and exhibits his potential divinity. Early texts like Kammapayadi, Kasaya- and Kamma-pähuda, Gõmmatasära, etc., (with their commentaries) give elaborate tables with minute details how the soul, follo
1 Especially in his Samaya-sära; see my remarks on it. Pravacanasära Intro. p. 47 etc. 2 R. D. Ranade : Mysticism in Maharashtra p. 9. 3 Mysticism in Maharashtra p. 197

Page #93

48
Paramätma-prakasa
wing the religious path, goes higher and higher on the rungs of the spiritual ladder called Gunasthānas, and how from stage to stage the various Karmas are being destroyed. The space does not permit me to give the details here, but I might only note here that the whole course is minutely studied and recorded with marvellous calculations that often baffle our understanding. 1 Some of the Gunasthānas are merely meditational stages, and the subject of meditation too is described in details. The aspirant is warned not to be misled by certain Siddhis, i.e., miraculous attainments, but go on pursuing the ideal till Ātman is realized. The pessimistic outlook of life, downright denunciation of the body and its pleasure and hollowness of all the possessions which are very common in Jainism indicate the aspirant's sick-minded temperament which is said to anticipate mystical healthy-mindedness. In the Jaina theory of knowledge, three kinds of knowledge are recognised where the soul apprehends reality all by itself and without the aid of senses : first, Avadhijñāna is a sort of direct knowledge without spatial limitation, and it is a knowledge of the clairvoyant type; secondly. Manahparyāya-Jňāna is telepathic knowledge where the soul directly apprehends the thoughts of others; and lastly, Kevala-jñāna is omniscience by the attainment of which the soul knows and sees everything without the limitation of time and space. The last one belongs only to the liberated souls or to the souls who are just on the point of attaining liberation with their Jňānāvaraniya-Karman destroyed, and thus it is developed when Ātman is realized. Jainism is pre-eminently an ascetic system. Though the stage of laity is recognised, everyone is expected to enter the order of monks as a necessary step towards liberation. Elaborate rules of conduct are noted and penancial courses prescribed for a monk:2 and it is these that contribute to the purity of spirit. A Jaina monk is asked not to wander alone lest he might be led astray by various temptations. A monk devotes major portion of his time to study and meditation; and day to day he approaches his teacher, confesses his errors and receives lessons in Atmavidyā or Ātma-Jõāna directly from his teacher. The magnanimous saint, the Jaina Tirthankara, who is at the pinnacle of the highest spiritual experience, is the greatest and ideal teacher: and his words are of the highest authority. Thus it is clear that Jainism contains all the essentials of mysticism. To evaluate mystical visions rationally is not to value them at all. These visions carry a guarantee of truth undoubtedly with him who has experienced them, and their universality proves that they are facts of experience. The glimpses of the vision, as recorded by Yogindu, are of the nature of light or of white brilliance. Elsewhere too
1 We can have some idea about these details from Glasenappa's Die Lehre vom Karman
in der Philosophie der Jainas nach den Karmagranthas dargestellt, Leipzig 1915. 2 In works like Acărānga, Mülācāra, Bhagavati Aradhana etc.

Page #94

Introduction
49
we find similar experiences. It may be noted in conclusion that the excessive rigidity of the code of morality prescribed for a Jaina saint gives no scope for Jaina mysticism to stoop to low levels of degraded Tāntricism. It is for this very reason that we do not find the sexual imagery, so patent in Western mysticism, emphasized in Jainism, though similes like muktikāntā are used by authors like Padmaprabha. Sex-impulse is considered by Jaina moralists as the most dangerous impediment on the path of spiritual realization, so sensual consciousness has no place whatsoever in Jaina mysticism. The routine of life prescribed for a Jaina monk does not allow him to profess and practise miracles and magical feats for the benefit of householders with whom he is asked to keep very little company,
9. Dogmatical and Philosophical Accessories of Author's Discussion - Jiva and Ajiva are essentially different from each other, and one should not be identified with the other (1. 30). The pure Jiva has no mind and no senses; it is mere sentiency and an embodiment of knowledge; it is nonconcrete and above sense-perception; and different from this is the non-sentient class of substances, namely, matter, Dharma, Adharma, time and space (l. 31, II. 18, 1. 113). From eternity the soul in Samsära is in union with Karman (of eight kinds) which represents subtle matter of the non-sentient class (1.55, 59, 61, 62, 75, 113). There are two kinds of worldly Jivas : Samyag-drsti; and Mithyādrsti; the former, the faithful one, realizes himself by himself and thus beco. mes free from Karmas; while he latter, an Ugly soul, is aitached to Paryāyas (i.e., modes or appearances of things) and thereby wanders in Saṁsāra incurring the bondage of various Karmas (1.77, 78). The three worlds stand compact with six substances, nainely Jiva, Pudgala, Dharma, Adharma, Kāla and Akāśa, which have neither beginning nor end. Of these Jiya alone is sentient and the rest are non-sentient. Pudgala or matter is concrete and of six kinds, while the remaining are non-concrete. Dharma and Adharma are the neutral causes of conditions of motion and rest of the moving bodies. Nabhas or space accommodates all the substances. Kāla or time is a substance characterised by continuity or being; it is an accessory cause of change when things themselves are undergoing a change; and it is of atomic constitution with separate units. Dharma, Adharma and Akāśa are indivisible and homogeneous wholes. Jiva and Pudgala alone have movement and the rest are static. Ātman, Dharma and Adharma occupy innumerable space-points; Ākāśa, which gives accommodation to all the substances, has infinite spacepoints; while Pudgala or matter has manifold space-points. Though they
1 R D. Ranade : Mysticism in Maharashtra p. 7. 2 Prof Ranade remarks Spirituality is gained not by making common cause with
sexuality, but rising superior to it' (Ibid. p. 10)

Page #95

50
Paramātma-Prakasa
exist together in the physical space (lokākāśa)they really exist in and through their attributes and modes. These various substances fulfil their own functions for the embodied souls that are wandering in Samsāra (II. 16-26).1
10. Evaluation of Punya and Papa, or Merit and Demerit-Paramātman is above Punya and Papa (1. 21). Punya results from devotion to deities, scriptures and saints, while Pāpa results from hatred towards the same (II. 61-62). By treating both alike one can stop the influx of Karman; it is infatuation that makes one pursue one or the other (II. 37, 53). Punya ultimately results into Pāpa. So one should not be after it (I. 60). Pāpa leads to hell and sub human births; Punya leads to heaven; and the admixture of both leads to human birth. When both Punya and Pāpa are destroyed there is Nirvana (II. 63). To choose between the two, Pāpa is preferable, because tortures in hell, etc., might induce one towards liberation; the pleasures given by Punya ultimately terminate in misery (II. 56-7, etc.). Repentance, confession, etc., bring only merit (II. 64). Punya and Pāpa have their antecedents in the auspicious and inauspicious manifestations of consciousness; but a Jñānin, a man of knowledge. rises above these two and cultivates pure manifestation of consciousness which incurs no Karmic bondage at all (II. 64, 71 etc.).
Explanatory Remarks-Activities of mind, speech and body set in a sort of vibration in the very constitution of the self (atma pradesa-parispandah) whereby the Karmic matter inflows into the soul. This influx, it it is subha or auspicious, brings Punya, meritorious Karman;2 if Aśubha or inauspicious, it brings Pāpa, demeritorious Karman. Whether there is Punya or Pāpa. it mears that the presence of Karman is there. So the aspirant, who aims at liberation from Karmas by realizing himself, cannot afford to be attached even to Punya which leads the soul to heavens that are a part of Samsāra. Punya is compar.d with golden fetters and Pāpa with iron ones, it is a very significant comparison. One who hankers after freedom makes no distinction between golden and iron fetters: he must cut both in order to be free. In that temperament which leads to liberation the very concert of virtues,' in the words of Plotinus, 'is over-passed'.
11. Importance of Knowledge-Ātman is an embodiment of knowledge which flashes forth in full effulgence in the state of Paramātman (I. 15. 33). Knowledge is the differentia of the Ātman (1. 58). When Ātman is known, everything else is known: so Ātman should be realized by the strength of knowledge (1. 103). Ajñāna can never know Paramātman, the embodiment of knowledge (I. 109). Like stars reflected in clear water the
other systems of Indian
1 For a comparative study of these details with those in
philosophy. see my Intro to Pravacanasara pp 62 ff. 2 Tattvärthasūtra, VI. 1-4

Page #96

Introduction
51
whole universe is reflected in the knowledge of Paramātman (1. 102). No doubt, liberation is attained by knowledge; souls devoid of knowledge wander long in Samsāra. The seat of liberation is not accessible without knowledge; the hand can never be greasy by churning water (II. 73-4). Attachment, etc., melt away by the knowledge of self like darkness by Sun-rise (II. 76). Ātman, the embodiment of knowledge is the highest object for concentration; he who knows emerald will never pay attention to a piece of glass (II. 78).
Attitude Towards the fruit of Karman-The various Karmas, when they are ripe, give their fruits. When the fruits are being experienced. he who develops auspicious and inauspicious attitudes incurs the bondage of fresh Karmas. But that equanimus saint, who does not develop any attachment when experiencing the fruits of Karmas, incurs no bondage and his stock of Karman melts away (II. 79-80).
12. Mental and Moral Qualifications of an Aspirant-This body, which is absolutely different in nature from the soul, deserves nothing but, criticism (I. 13, etc., 71-2). It is all impure and easily perishable; it gets rotten when buried and is reduced to ashes when burnt; so nourishment and toilet are a mere waste (II. 147-48, etc) It brings no happiness, but only misery, so an aspirant must be completely indifferent towards this body which is an enemy of the self (II. 151-53, 182, etc.). Attachment for everything external must be given up, and one must be completely engrossed in the nature of Atman (1. 15, 18). Vanity of physical and communal or social specialities has sway over only a foolish person (I. 80-3). All paraphernalia (parigraha), external and internal, like mother, house, pupil, etc., and like infatuation, etc., is a deceptive net-work that entraps and leads the Ātman astray (l. 83, II. 87, etc). To accept any paraphernalia after once it is given up is like eating the vomit (II. 91). Pursuing the paraphernalia with infatuation. the Ātman revolves in Saṁsāra (II. 122, etc). When the body does not belong to oneself, what to say of other things; family is a net-work neatly decorated by Death (II. 144-45). Everything else such as body, temple, idol, scripture, youth, house, attendants, etc., besides the Ātman is transitory; and as such one should not be attached to things other than the self (II. 129-32). Non-attachment is the highest virtue for a spiritual aspirant; so the mind must be curbed back from attachment, tastes and sights, etc., and concentrated on Paramātman (1 32, II. 172). The aspirant, the great monk, should be free from attachment and aversion; even a particle of attachment hinders self-realization; the attitude of equa. nimity (samabhava), which easily leads one to liberation, consists in eschewing these two (II. 52, 80-81, 100, etc.). It is merely a self-deception to pull out hair with ashes, if attachment is not given up (II. 90). Attitude of equanimity is a source of spiritual bliss, and it arises out of right comprehen

Page #97

Paramätma-prakāla
sion of reality (II. 43, etc.). One who is endowed with this attitude treats all beings alike (II. 105). Even the company of a person who is not equanimous is harmful (II. 109). Addiction to the pleasures of senses involves Karmic bondage (I. 62). There can be no place for Brahman when the mind is occupied by a fawn-eyed one; two swords cannot occupy the same scabbard (I. 121). Moths, deer, elephants, bees and fish are ruined respectively by light, sound, touch, scent and taste; so one should not be attached. to these (II. 112). The camels of five senses knock the soul down into Samsara after grazing the pasture of pleasures (II. 136) A great monk is absolutely indifferent to sense-pleasures for which he has neither attachment nor aversion (II. 50). These pleasures last for a couple of days only, so their leader, namely. the mind should be brought under control whereby they are all captured (II. 138, 140, etc.). Pleasures of senses and passions ruffle the mind, and then the pure Atman cannot be realized (II 156). The soul under the sway of passions loses all self-control and renders harm unto living beings which leads the soul to hell (II. 125-127). Infatuation and consequent passions must be given up (II. 41-42). Infatuation and greed are the fertile sources of misery (II, III-13, etc.) Mere outward practices. such as reading scriptures, the practice of austerities and visiting holy places by ignoring self-control, are of no avail (I. 95 II. 82-3, etc.). Dangerous are the activities of mind, speech and body: the mind should be brought under self-control and Bhavaśuddhi, i.e., the purity of mind, must be cultivated (II. 137). It is by cultivating pure manifestation. of consciousness that the soul develops various virtues and ultimately destroys Karman (II, 67) This body is useless if Dharma in its practical and realistic aspects is not practised (II. 133-34).
f) Apabhramsa of P-Prakasa and Hema's Grammar
Apabhramsa and its General Characteristics-By the term Apabhramsa we mean a typical stage of Indo-Aryan speech, as described by Hemacandra in his Prakrit grammar, which takes Prakrit for its basis, which is older than Indo-Aryan modern languages, and which possesses many traits that have been inherited by Indo-Aryan speeches of the present-day, though there. are no sufficient evidences to suppose that every where it was a necessary step towards the formation of modern languages and that there. many Apabhramŝas as there are languages ar present. From the available specimens of Apabhramia literature it appears that Apabhramsa was accepted as a language fit for popular poetry, and as such it appears to have. had local variations besides some common characteristics. Hemacandra optionally accepts many Prakrit features in his Apabhramsa. Some of his illustrative quotations in Apabhramia are really in Prakrit excepting for a
52

as

Page #98

Introduction
53
word or a form However, there are clear indications that attempts are made in Apabhramsa to simplify Prakrit in various ways which would be partly clear by noting the special features of Apabhramsa. i) In Apabh. vowels are interchanged and an amount o! liberty is taken with regard to the quantity of vowels : this explains the termination like ha' or hu and he or hu for one and the same case and the shortening of Nom.sg. 7 of the standard Prakrit into u which comes to be added to many words in Apabh. as seen from words like punu, vinu, sahu, etc. ii) There is a less masculine pronunciation of m which often becomes nasalised v. iii) There is a tendency to change s into h in the Declensional terminations. This explains some of the queer forms: Nom pl. form dēvaho noted by Markandeya and others is either to be traced back to Vedic devāsah or it is a generalisation from forms like candramasah; davaha from Pk. davassa; taha from tassa simplified as tāsa whose counterpart tasu also is used in Apabh.; tahi from tamsi; and ahu from aso. Sanskrit s is seen as h in Awesta and in Iranian dialects. This change is noted by Hemacandra in a few Präkrit words, and it is in Māgadhi alone that it is seen in Gen. terminations. Even at present a Gujarāti dialect uniformly reduces s to h. It is possible that this change is a racial characteristic that came to be generalised later on. iv) Prākrit conjucts a often smoothened to simplify pronunciation. v) Case terminations are dropped in Nom. Acc. and Gen; here is a tendency to become non-inflexional. vi) The phonetic changes iniluence the conjugational forms which are being simplified and reduced in number. vii) Indeclinables and particles have changed their forms often beyond recognition, and in some cases they cannot be traced back to Sanskrit through Prakrits possibly being drawn from vernaculars or Deśabhāṣās. viii) Svārthe or pleonastic affixes like ka, da, la, etc., are seen in many words. ix) And lastly there is an abundance of Desi words and Dhātvädeśas.
Attraction of Apabh. Speech-On the whole there is a liquidity and smoothness about the flow of Apabh. verses which show many new metres based not on the number of syllables but on the quantity of mātrās, which can be better sung: and which are characterised by plenty of rhyme. It is no wonder, therefore, that Apabh. was a favourite medium of popular poetry as early as 6th century A.D. if not even earlier. Guhasena of Valabhi, whose epigraphic records range from 559 to 569 A.D., is said to have composed poems in Sanskrit, Prākrit and Apabh. Uddyotanasūri (778 A.D.)
1 See, for instance, sõsaü ma, etc on iv 365; kheddayam, etc., on iv. 442; Ludwig
Alsdorf : Bemerkungen zu Pischel's Materialien, etc., in Festschrift M. Winternitz,
pp. 29 36 2 See i. 262-3, iv 229-300; Pichel's : Grammatik der Präkrit-sprachen 8264. 3 The Sanskrit style of poets like Jayadēva betrays Apabhrama influence.

Page #99

Paramatma-prakaša
holds Apabh. in great estimation, and his remarks on these languages are worth noting. In his opinion, Sanskrit with its long compounds, indeclinables, prepositions, cases and genders is dangerous for survey like the heart of a villain. The association with Präkrit, like that with the words of good people, is a happy one: it is an ocean of worldly information crowded with the waves of discussion about various arts: it is full of nectar-drops that are oozing out on account of its being churned by great persons and it is composed with nice arrangements of words. Apabhramia is a balanced and pleasing admixture of the waves of pure and impure Sanskrit and Präkrit words: it is even (or smooth) as well as uneven (or unsmooth); it flows like a mountain river flooded by fresh rains; and it captures the mind like the words of a beloved when she is coquettishly angry. These remarks of Uddyotana, himself a classical author having high admiration for earlier Sanskrit writers like Jatila and Ravisena, 2 clearly show how Apabh. was already considered as an attractive medium of composition as early as 8th century AD.
54
Hemacandra Indebted to P.-prakasa-Of all the available Prakrit grammars Hema.'s grammar deals exhaustively with Apabh. and the speciality of his discussion lies in the fact that he quotes verses after verses illustrate his rules. For a long time no sources of any of these verses were traced Pischel said, 'One gets the impression that they are taken from an anthology of the kind of Sattasal. From the inherent dialectal divergences and the variety of religious terms including the names of deities, etc., exhibited by these quotations, it is certain that they are not drawn from a single source but from a wide tract of literature with works belonging to different geographical regions and different religions. It was shown by me that Hema. is indebted to P.-prakata for a few quotations, and Prof. Hiralal has pointed out that some versess are taken from Dohāpāhuḍa 5 One thing is now clear that these verses are not composed by Hema himself, and a study of Apabh. works and a survey of Old-Rajastan and Old-Gujarat songs might reveal the sources of other quotations as well. Hema. draws the tollowing quotations from P-prakasa :
i) On sütra iv. 389 Hema. quotes:
संता भोग जु परिहरइ तसु कतहो बलि कीसु । तसु दइवेण वि मुडियउँ कसु खाल्लहडउँ सीसु ॥
1 This is a free rendering of the extracts quoted by L. B. Gandhi in his Intro. to Apabhramsakāvyatrayi. pp. 97-8 (G O. S. Vol. 37); see also Apabhramsa-paṭhāvali by M. C. Modi. p. 86 of the Notes.
2 See my paper on Varangacarita in the Annals of the B. O R I., Vol. XIV, i-ii., pp. 61, etc.
3
Pischel Grammatik, etc. §29.
4
Annals of the B. O. R. I., Vol XII, ii, p. 159, etc.
5 See his Intro. of Pahuḍadōhā, pp 22-3 (KJS, III).

Page #100

Introduction
This is an intelligent improvement on P. prakata II. 139 which runs thus : संता विसय जु परिहरइ बलि किज्जउँ हउँ तासु । सो दहवेण जि मुंडियउ सीसु खदिल्लड जासु ॥
The change of kijjau to kisu is quite intelligible, if we look at the sutra and its commentary: kriyah kisu kriya ity atasya kriyapadasya apabhram! kisu ity ādētā va bhavali kijjas is admitted as an optional form, and we get the illustration bali kijjud süanassu
ii) On iv. 427 Hema. quotes:
जिब्भि दिउ नाय वसि करहु जसु अधिन्न इँ अन्नई । मलि विणद विणिहे असे सुवकहिं पण्ण ॥
In spite of some differences there is no doubt that it is based and improved on P-prakata II. 140 which runs thus:
पंचहँ णायकु वसि करहु जेण होंति वसि अण्ण । मूल विण तरुवर अवसई सुक्कहिँ पष्ण ॥
Some of the differences are caused by the purpose for which it is quoted, and Pischel notes av, 1. mala which is the reading of P-prakata. The consecutive numbering of these two dohas in P.-prakata is not without some significance; and if any inference is possible therefrom, it indicates that Hemacandra has quoted these verses directly from P.-prakāŝa.
iii) On sutra iv 365 Hema quotes आवहो दट्ठ-कलेवरहो नं बाहिउ तं सार । जर उट्टब्भइ तो कुहइ अह उज्झ इ तो छारु ॥
The doha from P. -prakasa II. 147 runs thus :
55
बलि किउ माणुस - जम्मा देखतहँ पर साथ जई उट्ठब्भड तो कुहइ अह उज्झइ तो छारु ॥
line is exactly the same; and the first line is changed idama ayah' is to be illustrated.
The second because the sutra
iv)
Then on 1. 80 Hema quotes a short sentence 'vadraha-drahammi padia' which forms a part of P-prokala II. 117 that runs thus :

ते चिय धण्णा ते चिय सप्पारसा ते जियंतु जियलोए । वोहदहम्मि पडियण तरंति जे चैव लीलाए ।
It is an important difference that Hema. retains in the conjunct group which is not shown by any of our Mss. This verse is not in Apabh., and moreover it is introduced with the words uktam ca: so its genuineness in our text can be suspected. I think, it might have been included in the text by Joir.du himself, because even the shortest even the shortest recension of P-prakata con
tains this verse
Comparison of Hema.'s Apabh, with that of P.-prakasa-It is clear from the above paragraph that Hema. has used P. prakata, and forms, etc. from it must have been useful to him in composing his Apabhramia rules.

Page #101

56
Paramåtma-prakāśa
So it will be necessary and interesting to compare and contrast Hema's Apabh. with that of p-prakasa and see first, what features of the dialect of P.-prakáša are recorded by Hema.; secondly, what features of it are not represented in Hema's grammar; and lastly, what points noted by Hema. have not got their counterparts in P.-prakāša.
On the Homogeneity of Hema.'s Apabh.-Hemacandra does not explicitly mention the dialects of Apabh. as it is done by Markandeya and other later authors It has been already detected, and a careful study of his remarks and rules would show that his Apabh. is not a homogeneous one and that he has mixed together different dialects. By his remark "prāyôgrahamid yasyāpabhramsē višēşö vakşyatē tasyäpi kvacit prākstavat šaurasēni vac ca kāryam bhavati" (iv. 329) understood in the light of iv. 396 and 446 as distinguished from other features noted throughout, it is clear that he accepts two bases for his Apabh., namely, Prakrit and Saurasenia whose characteristics he has discussed in his previous sections. The illustrations on and the Sutras iv. 341, 360, 372, 391, 393, 394, 398 (especially its alternative concession), 399, 414, 438, etc., show elements of an Apabhramsa which is not in tune with the dialect described by him in other Sütras. Some of these characteristics, when studied in the light of Prakrit dialects discussed by Hema., are mutually so conflicted that they are not possible in a homogeneous dialect.
Hemacandra's Apabh. Compared and Contrasted with that of P.-prakasa-Hemacandra's Sūtra 'svarānāṁ svarâh prayo pabhramše' should not be understood as a licence for violent vowel changes; but it only means that in the Apabh. literature analysed by Hema. much liberty was taken in vowel-changes which could not be canonised in short, and hence this rule. In P.-prakasa we do not find such vowel-changes as would obscure the sense. A bit of liberty is taken in some forms: parim (V. 1. pari) =paramil 28), vatthu as the Loc. or Inst. sg. form (II. 180); at times the case termination u appears even where it is not needed as in vinu (II. 59), sahu (11. 109); and very often the quantity of vowels, short or long, is ignored as in jiü=jivah (I. 40). niccu=ņicaḥ (1 89), vivariü=viparitan (1. 79). At times a compensatory long vowel is obtained by simplifying the duplicate remnant of a conjunct group : isaru, nisu (1. 91), būdhaü (I. 91), phásai v. 1. påsat (II. 112); against this tendency we have kacca = kāca (II. 78), also note mibhamtu (II. 88). Hema. has noted (iv. 410) that often e and o are to be pronounced short. In our text they are necessarily short before a conjunct with the effect that North-Indian Mss.
1 Pischel : Grammatik, etc. $28. 2 Mr. Manomohan Ghosh of the University of Calcutta in his interesting paper
‘Maharaştri a later form of Sauraseni' (Journal of the Department of Latters Vol. XXII. 1933, Calcutta University) shows that Präkta means pre-eminently Sauraseni, the language of the Indian Midland, of which Maharaştri is only a later phase.

Page #102

Introduction
57
show great variations often changing them to { and u. The Kannada Mss. are uniform in showing ě and ở: and that appears to be an earlier feature. It is this tendency that gives rise to forms like põggalu.
Turning to consonants, Hama, states (iv. 396) that intervocalic k, kh, t, th, p and ph are generally changed to g, gh, d, dh, b and bh in Apabh.; but this rule is violated by many forms in his illustrations. P.-prakáša does not follow this rule, but the consonantal changes agree with Hēmacandra's rule for Prakrit (i. 177) that intervocalic k. g. c, j, 1, d. p. y, and v are generally dropped. P.-prakaša introduces ya srutii if the udvștta vowel is a or å. Some typical illustrations might be noted here. Changes of k : Paha (bha) yara (1. II, 11. 211), loyaloya (1. 52, II. 205), vinäsayaru (1. 10), sayalu (1. 36); in only one word k is retained, viz. nayaku (ll. 140), but it is softened to g when Hēmacandra quotes this verse in his Grammar; once k is changed to g: maragai (11. 78). Once Brahmadova reads agăsu (II. 25), but all other Mss read āyasu. Changes of g: anurāü (11. 112, 149), gayana (1.39), jāi (1.35, 11. 171), joz" (11. 157), bhoya (1 32), viräü (1 118), sayara (Il. 105). It is only in two cases, namely, jagu (
140-1. II. 6, 44) and savvagu (1.52) that g is retained; by this retention the author wants perhaps to avoid confusion with other Sk. words like jaya and sarvatah Changes of c: it is always dropped as in muya for muc (1. 95, 112 etc.), viyakkhanu (1. 13, 78); it is only in two words that c is seen to be retained: avicalu (II. 15, 35, 144) and asuciyar" (II. 150) possibly to avoid confusion with the equivalents of Sk. words like vikala šruti, etc. Changes of j: It is generally dropped as in niya (I. 98), pariyāņa (1. 57); only once it is retained bhajamta (1.2). Changes of t: it is usually dropped as in kayara (I. 89), kiya i" (1. 27), gal (I. 111), cēyaņu (l. 73. II. 17), etc.; but in patana, as in Prakrits, it becomes d - vadana (II. 114). Changes of d: it is generally dropped as in kayà (1. 36), ja! (II. 5), paēsa (I. 105), al (II. 16). There are some cases of d retained: in padēsa, v. 1. paēsa (11. 24) possibly to rhyme with the line-ending puggaladēsa, in padāna (11. 127) perhaps to avoid confusion with prayana, and in samjadu and asamjadu (II. 41). Changes of p: it is usually changed to vas in ghanavadana (11. 114), vi from api (II. 96). Initial yi is changed to j: jēna, jāma, etc. Changes of v: it is at times retained and at times dropped as in kēvala (Il. 96). jiya (1. 23, etc.), tihuyana (1, 16. II. 16). Generally intervocalic kh, gh, th, dh, ph and bh are changed to hsuhu (11. 199); lahu (11. 100); uppahi (1. 78); ahammu (1. 60), samahi (l. 14); nahu (11. 20), sahaü (II. 197). It is only in a few cases that bh is retained : abhaya (II. 127). Thus we see that there is a general tendency to drop the intervocalic consonants rather than to soften them; and their retention in a few cases is meant perhaps to avoid confusion with similar words. Coming to the treatment of nasals, Hēmacandra's Grammar, according to the editions of Pischel, 2 Pandit-and-Vaidya. 3 retains initial n; Pischel, however uniformly adopts ņ, both initial and medial. in his revised edition of Apabh. verses. 4 Our text uses n alone everywhere. It is only Ms. B that retained n at times. Kannada Mss. are almost uniform in having n. Hēma, has generalised the change of m into nasalised v (iv. 397), for which there is phonetic justification. P.-prakása has some cases where m is shown as v; it should not be ignored that the various readings waver between m and v: atthavana (11. 132). nava (I. 1), nāü (I. 19, II. 206). 1 There is a case of the development of v possibly due to the preceding u, vari
uvari=udarē (II. 20). 2 Hēmacandra's Grammatik der Prakrit-Sprachen, Halle 1877. 3 Kumārapalacarita Appendix. Bombay Sk, and Pk, series LX. Poona 1936. 4 Materialien zur Kenntnis des Apabhramsa, Berlin 1902.

Page #103

Paramåtma-prakasa
As to the conjuncts, there is a tendency, already seen even in Prakrits (Hēma, i. 43) to smoothen the double remnant by lengthening the preceding vowel; isaru (l. 91.) karimă (II. 123), būdhaü (1. 91); at times conjuncts are smoothened without any compensation : akhaü (I, 123), nibhastu (1. 120, II. 88) By some of his rules (iv. 398, etc.) Hema. allows the retention of ļ and that of r as a second member in a conjunct group, but in P,-prakasa r is necessarily assimilated. To show that r is retained at times in Präkrit Hema. quotes a line 'vodraha-drahammi padiya' (ii. 80) possibly from out text, but all our Mss. uniformly show assimilation. I might note here a few cases of typical conjuncts: acchi - akşi (i. 121), apparātman (1. 51, etc.). kārima-kstrima (II. 123), chara= kşāra (II. 90), jhệu - dhyeya (1. 25), tittha = tsnā (II. 132), desu = dveşa (II. 49), Bambhu, Kannada Mss. uniformly have Bamhu for Brahman (1. 13, etc.) rukkha and vaccha-vīksa (II. 130, 133).
Morphology or Declension - As noted by Hema. (iv. 445), there is much confusion of genders of words; and the predominant tendency is to reduce all words to the a-ending type by adding pleonastic ka, etc., for instance, silae loc. sg. from šila (1. 123). năniyahao - jñaninām (1. 122, dehijaha (ll. 26), etc. According to Hema. the terminations of Nom., Acc. and Gen., both sg. and pl., are often dropped (iv. 344-45). Our text shows some forms of Nom. and Acc. without terminations : Nom. sg, vihi (1. 66); pl. pasuya (II. 5), muni (1l. 33), rõya (1. 69), linga (I. 69). Acc. sg. appā (1. 58), tanu (I, 58), veyana (II. 187). sayala (1. 115): pl. jinavara (1. 6), roya (1. 70). I have not been able to detect any instances where Gen. terminations are dropped. The termination + u appears in Nom & Acc. sg., and once only in Nom. pl Hari-Hara-Bamhu (Il. 8) which is peculiar to our text. Neuter Nom. pl. termination is il as in darvaio (1l. 15), punnai (Il 57). In the Inst. sg. a-ending nouns show three, if not five, types of terminations: i) + ena or + ina as in tavena, v. 1., tavenu (1 42), vavahārena (11. 28), kõranina (1. 7); ii) + è or + im (ēm?) as in appe (1. 99), niyame (1l. 62), pariname (II. 71), appim (1. 76, note the variants), nānim (11 73) niyamim (1. 69. 106, etc) danim (11. 72); and iii) what I might call + ai°i as in kammat" (I. 63, 76), möhai (11 79), samsaggaio (II. 108, note the v 1). Nouns ending in i show -ē or ě with or without svärthe ka, in the Inst. sg. : aggiyae (1.1). bhatti (II. 61), bhattiyač (l. 6). Hema. notes the terminations + e and + ena (iv. 333 & 342), but some of his illustrations show + ina and + im (iv. 357, 366). Inst pl. termination is -hi as in dõhi" (11 71), paesahi" (II 22), vittinivittihio (!l. 52). According to Hemacandra Abl. terminations are : sg. -he also -hu and pl hu (iv 336, 341, 350); but our text has only hao both for singular and plural : gamthaha (II. 49), ji vaha (I! 86); sayalaha" skammaha dosaha (11. 198) Hema. gives Gen terminations thus: sg -su, -ho, - Su and pl ha for a-ending nouns; but our text uses only hao both for sg. and pl.2 : sg cittahao (11 70), dehaha (1.71), rayanatta yaha (II. 95); pl nåniyaha (1 122). jivuha“ (II. 106), mukkaha" (l. 47). For pure i-stems the Gen. termination is hio in P.-prakasa which according to Hema is -he in sg. and -hu" in pl.: sg. siddhihi" (II. 48, 69); pl. jõihi (II. 166), nānihi" (II. 30); also note in this context the forms jõi yahi" (
1160), pomguha (1 66) For Loc sg. and pl. Hema. has -e and -hio respectively for a-stems, and -hi and -hu respectively for i-stems and u-stems. P prakāša shows + i. or +e, 3 or even what might be called + až in sg, and his in pl : tihuyani ( 4), samsari (1. 9); appaě (I, 102), silaě (l. 123); pl. kasiyahi (I. 123*3), puhavihi" (II. 131) Jõiya for yôgin and jiya for jiva are the Voc. sg. forms.
1 It might be taken as i'with svärthe ka. 2 Once Brahmadeva wants - ho for Gen sg. (II. 12); and Ms. B reads -ho in some places
(II 161-62). 3 Kannada Mss, show e uniformly.

Page #104

Introduction
59
We do not get many forms of personal Pronouns in P-prakasa hau" and tuhu" are quite usual; and we get mahu (Gen. sg ) and mahư tanal=madiyena (II. 186). Some important forms of the demonstrative pronouns are noted below for example :
Nom.
sg. ihu or čhu, ehaü; ku or ko; ju or jo; so.
pl. e or ei; je; te; ki or ka' Acc.
sg. kõ; jo; sõ. Ins.
sg. jim. je, jena; tim, te tena. Gen.
sg. jasu, jāsu; tasu. tāsu, tahu” (II. 78)
pl. jäha, jähao; taha, taha. P.-prakāsa uses kavuna or kavanu (11.171). kāi" (1. 27) and ki (l. 98) for Interrogative kim; and anyat is changed to annu (II. 45) and anu (11 44).
Verbal Forms-Some typical verbal forms may be noted here to get an idea of the forms used in P.-prakāša. Present : 1st p. sg. vaṁdaü" (I. 4), kahēvi (-mi ? I. 11), bhanami (1. 30); 2nd p. sg měllahi (1. 12), hõhi (II. 14); 3rd p. sg. vilat (II. 80), văi (il. 82), havēt (l. 13), pl. acchahi" (1. 5), vaccahi" (II. 4), li (12) mti (!I. 91), huộti or hõmti (11. 103). Some Imperative forms that are available : 2nd p. sg. jāni (1. 107, II. 38), joi (Il. 34), sēvi (l. 95), jānu (1. 94, etc.) laggu (II. 127). Typical Future forms that are available : 2nd p. sg. karisi (ll. 125), gamisi (II. 141), lahisi (II. 141), sahtsi (Il. 125); 3rd p. sg. karēsal (II. 188), lahēsal (II. 47), hõsal (II. 130, 168). Hēmacandra has noted all the available Present and Imperative forms of this text (iv. 382-3, 385, 387). The socalled 2nd p. sg. forms of the Future noted above are at times treated as those of Present and at times of Future by Brahmadeva. Their nature is much uncertain. If they belong to Present, they are to be deduced from the forms like karēsi in Prakrit; if to Future, they are contractions from forms like karihisi of the Prakrit. Though not generalised by him, forms like karisu, pāvisu are met with in Hēma.'s illustrations (iv. 396); and the Sk. shade takes them as Future 1st p. sg. forms. The Absolutive terminations in this text are -vi,
+ ivi, + ēvi, + avi, and + ēviņu as in dēvi (II. 57), měllivi (1. 92), dharēvi (!l. 25), pariharavi (II. 4), muēvinu and lahevinu (ll. 9, I. 85); and there is only one form showing the termination + eppinu, muēppiņu (II. 47). Besides the above ones, Hēma. gives + i, + iü, +ěppi, as the Absolutive terminations, but they are not found in this text. The typical forms of the Infinitive of purpose are: sahana or sahaņu (ul. 120), samthavana (II. 137). lēnaha (II. 87), munahu (1. 23). Excepting munahu which occurs only once in our text, all others are generalised by Hema. (iv. 441) with whom some Gerund terminations also are used for Infinitive.
Indeclinables, etc.-In this paragraph all the Indeclinables, etc. are noted with their Sk. counterparts alphabetically arranged. atra = itthu or étthu (1. 101, 11. 211); idrsi = thi (II. 157); ava-ji (1. 96, etc.); avam - Omu (1. 65) or eu or iuo (Il. 73); katham = kēma or keva (1. 121); kiyat = kéttiü or kittiü (II. 141); kutra - kštthu or kitthu (II. 47), also kahi" (I. 90); jhațiti = jhatti (11. 184); naiva = navi (1. 31, etc.); tatra = tõtthu or titthu (1 111, II. 137), also tahi" (II. 162); tatha = tēma or tima, tēmu or timu, or even nasalised v for m (1. 102, 85. etc.); tada (?) - tämal or tavai (II. 41, 174); tad sa - tēhaü (II. 149); tavat - tå, täma, also ta va or tāmu (1. 108. II. 81); tavanmátra - těttadaü or tittidaü (1 105); punar - punu (ll. 211); mā=mā, man, mana (1 101, II. 107, 109); yatra and yatha correspond

Page #105

60
Paramātma-prakaša
to tatra and tatha; yada (?) - jämai, jā"val (II. 41, 174); yàdīša - jahai (I. 26); yāvat=jāma, jāmu, jāova (Il. 81, 194); yavanmátra - jittiu (II, 38); vină = viņu (1. 42). All these indeclinables, etc. ignoring slight phonetic variations, are found in Hema.'s illustrations; and for some of them he has special rules. Forms corresponding to Hema.'s jéttula and tęttula (iv. 435) are not found here. As to the use of api, or text once uses kimpi vi (I. 65); perhaps it is a mistake for kimct vi which suits the context better. P.-prakasa repeatedly uses svärtha ka and da, but their combinations (iv. 430) are not met with here; at times ka appears doubled as in 'gurukki vělladi' (I. 32). Of the tadarthya nipätas (Hema. iv. 425) only tana is used here, and the rest are not found in this text. The forms kerai, etc, used by Hema. in his illustrations on iv. 359 (see also Hema. ii. 147) are used in this text: kērå (. 73, II. 69), kēraï (I. 99) kēraü (II. 29). Though ji, etc., are repeatedly used, the occurrence of ca is a rarity in these döhäs.
Important Words, etc.-P.-prakäsa uses many words which might be called Desi due either to their non-Sanskritic etymology or non-Sanskritic significance. But most of them are already recorded in Päïasadda-mahannavā; so I shall note only a few of them which are not recorded there or which require some explanation.
avakkhadt (I. 115)—Brahmadeva explains thus 'dēša-bhāṣayā cinta'. khadillaü (II. 139)-Brahmadeva equates it with khalvāțań. Hema. quotes
this verse but his reading is khallihadaü. Our form is a case of
metathesis from the Prākrit form khallida noted by Hema. (i. 74). khavaņu or khavanaü (I. 82, 88)-Brahmadeva equates it with kșapanakah, a
Digambara. I think, this Sk. rendering has no etymological justification though it occurs in Pañcatantra, etc.; the word should be
traced back to samana, Sk. framana.' gurau (I. 88)-Brahmadeva remarks ‘gurava-sabda-vācyah Svētāmbaraḥ'. catta (II. 89)-Brahmadeva does not explain it, but I think it means in that
context 'a mat'; cf. cațai. javala (II. 127)—Brahmadeva equates it with Sk. samipē, and the word is
current in Marāthi in this sense. I think, it should be traced back to Sk, yamala, Pk, jamala, a pair; and therefore those that are near
each other. This sense is more suitable in that context. dhandha (II. 121)—Brahmadeva gives a Sk. word dhāndha which is not
known to classical Sanskrit. The Kannada gloss reads daṁde, and
takes damda = Sk. dvandva. There is a Prākrit word dhāṁdha = shame. padichamda (Il. 129)-It has the sense of similarity, and it is used here
for dĩšļānta. padiyara (I. 121)-A scabbard. Brahmadeva is uncertain about its Sk.
equivalent; so he suggests once pratikära and a second time pratihära. Hemacandra, in his Abhidhāna-cintamani, gives pratyäkära-khadgapidhanakam which appears to be the correct equivalent of padiyara. He

Page #106

Introduction
gives another word parivāra (Martya-kānda 447).1 vadha (II. 19, 154, etc.)-This word is repeatedly used in this text, and
Brahmadeva explains it usually as vatsa, but once as bata (1. 121). Hemacandra (iv. 420) equates it with müdha (I think, in the sense of möhita, deluded, misled). It may be noted that mūdha is also used once in our text (II. 128). It is recorded in Păiasadda-mahannayo as a Desi word meaning dumb, one incapable of speech. vadha or badha is used as a term of address by Saraha as well; he uses putta also
(38, 53) as a term of address. vali vali (II. 137)—Brahmadeva takes it as 'punak punah': compare våra
vāram. võddaha (II. 117)-Hema. quotes this phrase but reads võdraha meaning
taruna-puruşa (ii. 80)2 Brahmadeva interprets as yauvanam; the Kannada K-gloss takes it as stri-sarira; but Q-gloss reads coddaha (perhaps orthographical confusion between c and v in medieval Devanāgari)
and gives the same meaning as that given by Brahmadeva. vamdaü (I. 82, 88) -Brahmadeva comments, vandakaḥ= Bauddhaḥ. The etymo
logy of the word is obscure. Some Kannada Mss. read Budd (hjaü. Important Roots, etc.-Many dhātvādeśas are used in this text; but I note only those which are not directly traced in the list given by Hemacandra; Uvvalaud vart (II. 148), cf. Hema. uvvělla - ud vèst. Guruva (II. 145) muh, Cūra (II. 126) to powder from cūrna. Chanda (1. 74; Chadda according to Hema). to abandon. jõa (1. 109, II. 34) to see; it is used in Hema.'s illustrations (iv. 422). Jhampa (I. 61) to cover. dahula-kşubh (II. 156; cf. Marāthi dhavalane". Pěkkha or Pikkha (I. 71, II. 114) to see. Vaha (II. 142) to see; it may be derived thus Pāsa > pāha > yāna.
Peculiarities of Kannada Mss-The Kannada Mss., which are described in section IV below. have certain peculiarities some of which such as d for dh, absence of any discrimination between short and long vowels arise out of the nature of Kannada script. There are others which are uniformly shown by Kannada Mss. (excepting S which is a mechanical copy of Brahmadeva's text, but that also is subjected to some marginal corrections); and they shed some light on the phonology of Apabhramśa. The Devanāgari recension, represented by Brahmadeva's text and by the Mss. A, B and C, 1 For this reference I am thankful to Mr N. R Acharya, Shastri department, Nirna
yasagar Press, Bombay. 2 To judge from Païasadda-mahannavõ, the word is not extensively used in literature.
The earliest occurrence, therefore, is in Paiyalacchi-namamāla (Ed. by G. Buhler, Gottingen 1879), the Präkrit Lexicon of Dhanapala (972-3 A.D.); and in giving the meaning of this word Hēmacandra has in view Dhanapala's definition bodraho tarunõ' (verse 62).

Page #107

62
Paramātma-prakasa
shows a good deal of vacillation between i and e in the Inst. sg. forms such as deve" or devis and käranena or karanina; in the Loc. sg. forms such as deve or devi; and in forms like ke vi or ki vi, je va or jima, te va or tima, etc. But the Kannada Mss. uniformly accept e which may be short or long as required in the context. Even Hemacandra's Grammar shows this vacillation in forms like hatthin. Secondly, Devanāgari Mss. vacillate between i and e before the conjuncts as in mukkha or mõkkha, ēkka or ikka, bõlla or bulla, etc.. The Kannada Mss. uniformly show e and o and not i and u. I think, this vacillation is due to the fact that Sanskrit e. o are always long; to show them short, as we want short e and o in Apabh. (Hema. iv, 410), they were reduced to i and u. In Kannada e is both short and long, so the Kannada Mss. felt no need of changing it to i. If we look to the corresponding counterparts in Sanskrit and Prākrit, we find that e is preferred. So e appears to be really the earlier stage, and being short in pronunciation it came to be changed to i. The same is the case with o. Then these Kannada Mss. uniformly read sõ ji and iö ji as sõjji and jöjji; Bambhu is always shown as Bamhu which might be allowed by Hema. (iv 412); but sõjji and jöjji cannot be adequately explained.
Value of their Tradition-There is another explanation also for this vacillation. Apabhramsa was once a popular speech allied to Old-Rājasthnai, Old-Hindi, Old-Gujaräti, etc., which are the earlier stages of the presentday Hindi, etc. So copyists and reciters did make vowel changes, etc., in the light of contemporary pronunciation as it is clear from the manner in which works like Ramayana of Tulasidasa have undergone dialectal changes. What the copyists and even reciters minded were the contents and not the dialectal features. Even the Hindi commentary, printed in this edition, though attributed to Daulatarāma, does not represent the very language of Daulatarāma, as I have shown below. The Kannada Mss. therefore, are likely to be of use for the following reasons : some of the Mss, are sufficiently old and are copied from pretty older Mss.; and as they were preserved in a country where the spoken languages were completely different from Apabh., there was no scope for such changes as it happened in the North. So a critical edition of P.-prakasa should prefer e and o, short or long as needed by the context, in the above cases, because such readings are supplied by Kannada Mss. some of which preserve text-tradition even earlier than Brahmadeva.
Results of the above Comparison and Contrast-The Apabhramsa dialect of P.-prakasa is a homogeneous one. The forms that we have taken for comparison, excepting the Inf. of purpose form munahu and the Gerund in šppinu which occur only once, are repeatedly met with in our text. Hemaca1 in Devanagari Mss. o is often represented by u with a vertical stroke on its head,
and the copyists at times took it for u only.

Page #108

Introduction
63
ndra has taken quotations from P.-prakāśa with certain improvements; and that he might have analysed our text and incorporated sufficient material from this work is borne out by many common points noted in the above paragraphs. Even after ignoring minor variations of vowels and individual forms not recorded by Hema., there remains a substantial residue of fundamental differences between the Apabhramśa of P.-prakāśa and that of Hema.'s
grammar despite the majority of common points noted above. The Sauraseni basis of Hemacandra's Apabh. explicitly stated and further confirmed by the softening of consonants in his illustration is almost completely unknown to our text. Then the retention of , and of unassimilated r, which is required by some of the rules of Hema. and which is illustrated by some of his quotations, is unknown to our text. There are some other aspects of Hema.'s Apabh. not found in this text: dropping of the Gen. termination and the Gen, termination -ho; most of the Abl. terminations noted by Hema; absolutive forms in + i, + iü + ēppi; majority of the tadarthya-nipātas; the form sahu for Sarva; many of the equivalents of iva; etc.
Additional Tract of Literature Used for his Grammar-The above points clearly indicate that Hema. drew his material from many other works whose Apabhranía differed in certain respects from that of P.-prakasa. There is no evidence to say that the conjuncts with r, preservation of g Sauraseni basis and other dialectal features of P.-prakasa have been modified. The Mss. studied do not warrant any conclusion or conjecture like this. From the comparatively small number of Hema.'s quotations which have Sauraseni characteristics and which retain r, as against the features of this text, it appears that many of the works used by Hema. represented the Apabh. similar to that of P.-prakása; and a few works he might have used which retained conjuncts with r. Words like dhõla, some common verses, the retention of r in a conjunct group in early Rājasthāni poems might indicate that Hema. has drawn some of his illustrations from what might be called Rājasthāni Apabhraíśa, the predecessor of Old Rājasthāni
Apabhramsa with Unassimilated r-Undoubtedly there was a type of Apabhramśa which allowed unassimilated r. The number of words retaining 1 On iv 352 Hema. gives a quotation which runs thus :
वायसु रडावंतियए पिउ दिट्ठउ सहस त्ति ।
अद्धा वलय महिहि गय अद्ध फुट्ट तड त्ति ।। This quotation of Hema. has not only the common idea but also some common words with the following verse in present-day Rajasthant;
काग उडावणधण खडी आया पीव भडक्क ।
आधी चडी काग-गळ आधी गई तडक्क ॥ Either these two verses indicate a common source, or the old Apabh. verse gradually drifted to his form passing through dialectal changes (see Dhola Marūra Dahā p 476)
•

Page #109

64
Paramātma-Prakasa
ice of Alle relics Prakrit
unassimilated r is negligibly small in Präkrit. Some twenty illustrative stanzas of Hema. preserve ! or r in conjuncts. Turning to other grammarians, 2 Kramadiśvara takes preservation of r, when it is the first member of the conjunct group, as the feature of Vrācata Apabh. Mārkandeya prescribes the retention of r optionally for Nagara and generally, with some exceptions, for Vrācada Apabh. All this means that the grammarians are aware of an Apabh. dialect which retained and conjuncts with r. Further Dr. Jacobi has pointed out that two bhāṣāšleșa stanzas from Rudrata's Kavyalankara show that the Apabh. illustrated by Rudrata contained unassimilated r as a second member of the conjunct.3
This Difference not exactly Chronological but Regional-and-Dialectal-On the basis of the quotations from Rudrata and Anandavardhana Dr. Jacobi concludes that the Apabh. stanzas containing , and unassimilated r belong to the older stage of Apabh.; and his main argument appears to be that these are the earliest datable relics of Apabh. literature. There is no doubt that Apabh. mainly draws on the Prakrit vocabulary, and the negligibly small number of words with unassimilated r in Prākrit militates against taking it as a chronological criterion. Secondly, from the Asokan Rock edicts found in seven places it is clear that Prakrit had dialectal differences in different parts of India. Kalsi, Dhauli and Jaugada edicts assimilate or lose r in the conjunct group, while those at Mansehra and Shahbazgarhi retain r as the second member of the group, the r as the first member often changing its place with the preceding vowel. It may be noted that Girnar edict too at times retains r either as the first or the second member of the conjunct group. All these edicts are incised at the same time and possibly drafted from the court-language. These differences cannot be taken as chronological but they are regional-and-dialectal. Thirdly, a glance at the works belonging to the earlier stages of present-day spoken languages like the Rāsas in Gujarāti, Mahānubhāva works in Marāthi, texts like Dhola- Mārūra dūha in Rajasthāni, 4 Kirtilata and Padāvalis of Vidyāpati in Maithili, etc., which belong to different parts of India, show that even Apabhramśa might have had slight differences in different regions. Fourthly, Rudrata is perhaps a Kashmirian; so a quotation of his, that too meant to illustrate bhāşå-sleșa, should not be taken as a representative of Apabhramsa current in different parts of India. Lastly, a good deal of Prakrit literature has come to light, and there is no appreciable tract of Prakrit literature in
1 Hema. ii. 80; Pischel : Grammatik § 268. 2 See also Praksta Laksana of Canda III. 37. 3 H Jacobi : Sanatkumāracaritam Intro. Munchen 1921. 4 Published by Nāgari Prachárini Sabha. Benares, Samvat 1991, 5 Ed. by Kumar G. Sinha, Patna, Samvat 1988.

Page #110

Introduction
65
which conjuncts with r are current External influences may be accepted, but Prakritic basis of Apabhraṁsa is a fact. Rudrata belonged to the 9th century A. D., and we know earlier Apabh. passages in which r is assimilated. Apabh. verses from Kalidasa's Vikramörvasiyam' assimilate r even in
1 By questioning the genuineness of Apabhrar a verses in Vikramõrvasi yam the ear
lier scholars meant that they could not be attributed to Kalidasa. The following are the arguments adduced by Pandit and others : The commentator Käțayavēma knows nothing of these verses; the South-Indian Mss. do not include them; the king being an Uttamapātra cannot utter verses in Prakrit; most of the verses are tautological repeating the substance of Sanskrit verses in that context; there is a vagueness of allusions and references in these verses; several of them interrupt the sentiment expressed by Sk, verses; and lastly Apabhramsa passages are not found like this in other dramas of Kalidasa. All these arguments have for their background a hesitation to take back Apabh. verses to such an early age, especially because a scanty amount of Apabh. literature was known to scholars at the beginning of this century. This hesitation must be given up now for the following reasons: Apabhrama forms are traced in Paümacariya of Vimala (not later than 3rd century A. D.): we have an epigraphic record that Guhasēna of Valabhi (55969 A. D.) composed poems in Apabh; and lastly by the last quarter of the 8th century (see above Uddyotana's remarks on p, 53) Apabhramfa is already recognised as a popular and forceful medium of poetry. In the light of these facts it is not in any way improbable that Kalidasa (c. 400 A.D), whose Maharastri songs are some of the best specimens, might have composed some Apabh, verses to be sung by the mad king. That Katayavēma and Southern Mss, do not include these verses is not a conclusive argument. It may be noted that Northern Mss. have got these verses and Ranganatha does comment on them. The South, it must be remembered is well-known for its stage-adaptations of Sk, dramas. In the South Apabhramsa had no connection, as in the North, with the contemporary popular speech, so naturally these verses must have failed to impress the Dravidian audience: this also might explain the exclusion of these verses. No doubt, the king is an Uttamapātra and he speaks in Sanskrit in all other acts. But in the fourth act the king is gone mad, and Natyašāstra allows bhāṣā- vyatikrama for Uttamapátras on certain occasions. It is also suggested by Pandit himself that these verses were perhaps to be chanted by some one behind the curtain, when the king is moving hither and thither searching for his wife; and there is some justification for these songs that they make the whole 'scene romantic and solemn' and that, as Prof. R. D Karmarkar remarks in the Intro. to his edition, they give to the actor, representing the king, occasional rest'. As to the arguments of tautology, vagueness and inconsistency. they are subjective considerations; and they can be explained, if we remember that these songs are the outbursts of a mad monarch. Even in the present-day dramas meaningless songs are introduced; they do not advance the plot in any way but they are songs merely to amuse the audience. Any one acquainted with the phonology of Apabh. will readily accept that it is perhaps the best medium for songs. The last one is a negative argument and thus it proves nothing. The mad king, with whom the Apabh, songs are associated, does not figure in other dramas of Kalidasa. Students of Kalidasa's works will agree that the imagery projected by these verses is worthy of the genius of Kalidasa. All this means that there is a strong case for the genuineness of these verses, and the question requires to be taken up once more for discussion.

Page #111

66
Paramatma-prakaa
typical words like priya, etc., illustrated by Hema. Prof. Hiralal puts Svayambha, the author of Palmacaria and Harivamsu between 700-783 A.D., and so far as I have seen the passages r is assimilated. Later Apabhramsa works that are recently brought to light assimilate r. And we would be only cutting the ground under our feet, if we suppose that all the Mss. are per force subjected to this assimilation at a later stage. So in the light of the above considerations the presence of assimilated or unassimilated r is not at all a chronological criterion, but it is only a regional difference which is quite possible in a continent like India. This further shows that Hema. has based his grammar on works in at least two different dialects possibly from two different regions.
II. Joindu: The Author of P.-prakasa
a) Yogindu and not Yogindra
Joindu and his Sanskrit Name-It is to be highly regretted that such. a great mystic as Joindu has left no details about his personal life. Śrutasägara calls him a Bhattaraka which should be taken only as an honorific term. There is not the slightest indication in his works about his age and place. His works reveal him as a mighty spirit resting on a higher latitude of the spiritual realm. He stands for no vanity of learning and no parade. of scholarship: he is an embodiment of embodiment of spiritual earnestness. P.-prakala mentions his name as Joindu. Jayasena quotes a verse from P.-prakala with the introductory phrase: tatha Yogindra-divair apyuktam. Brahmadeva than once mentions the author's name as Yogindra. Śrutasägara quotes a verse with the phrase: Yögindradeva-namnă Bhaṭṭārakēna. Some of the Mss. hesitate between Yogindra and Yogendra. Thus Yogindra as the Sk. form of his name has been pretty popular As proved by identical spirit, similar ideas and common phrases Yogasára is another work of Joindu. In the concluding verse the name of the author is mentioned as Jogicanda which cannot be equated with Yogindra. Therefore I have suggested that the form. Jo1ndu stands for Yogindu which is identical with Yogicandra; and we have instances where indu and candra are interchanged in personal names.
Dr. P. L. Vaidya, whose critical edition of Puspadanta's Mahapurana is in the Press, kindly informs me that a family of Mss. retains in some words. When this work is out, it will be a publication of monumental magnitude and importance in Apabhrasha literature.
2 This section, with additions here and there, is mainly based on my paper 'Joindu and his Apabhramsa Works' in the Annals of the B. O. R. I. XII, ii. pp. 132-63. The detailed contents of the works and some references that are omitted here will be found in that paper.
Samayasara (RJS.) p. 424.
4 Satprabhṛtādi-sangraha (MDJG., Vol. XVII), p. 39.

Page #112

67
Bhāgendu and Bhagacandra, Subhendu and Subhacandra. Through mistake it was Sanskritised as Yogindra which has been current now. There are many Prakrit words which have been wrongly, and oftentimes differently, Sanskritised by different authors. The editor of Yagasara had detected this discrepancy but funnily he writes a combined name 'Yogindra-candracarya-kṛtaḥ Yogasāraḥ.' If we take his name as Yogindu, everything will be consistently explained.
Introduction
b) Works of Yogindu
Various Works Traditionally Attributed-The following works traditionally attributed to Yogindu (usually mentioned as Yogindra): 1) P.-prakasa (Apabh.); 2) Yagasara (Apabh.). 3) Naukara-àravakacāra (Apabh.); 4) Adhyatmasamdoha (Sk.): 5) Subhasita-tantra (Sk.); and 6) Tattvarthatika (Sk.). Besides, three more works attributed to Yogindra have come to light: 7) Dahapahuda (Apabh.); 8) Amṛtasiti (Sk.); and 9) Nijatmästaka (Pk.). Of these we do not know anything about Nos. 4 and 5; as to No. 6, the name Yogindradeva is in all probability confused with that of Yogadeva who has written a Sk. commentary on Tattvarthasutra, 1
1) Paramatma-prakala:
Authorship, etc-In the preceding section the various aspects of P.-prakala have been studied in details. Undoubtedly it is the work of Joindu, and the proposal that it might have been compiled by a pupil of his is already rejected above. Joindu plainly mentions his name and says that the was composed for Bhatta Prabhakara. Then Śrutasägara, Balacandra, Brahmadeva and Jayasena have explicitly attributed the authorship of this work to Joindu. In fact, this is the biggest known work of Joindu, and on this rests his fame as a spiritualist.
work
are
2) Yogasora:
Contents, Authorship, etc-The subject-matter of Yogasāra is the

1 There is a Ms. (Dated Samvat 1863) of this work in the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona, In the opening remarks Yogadeva mentions the names of Pādapūjya and Vidyānanda. In the the concluding Prajasti he calls himself a Mahabhaṭaraka. He was a pupil of Pandita Bandhudeva, a contemporary of king Bhima and a resident of Kumbhanagara. The name of his commentary is Sukhabodha Tattvarthavṛtti. Madhava (c. 1350) refers to Yogadeva and his Vṛtti in his Sarvadarsana-sangraha, Chap. 3.
2 See p. 9 above.
3
For references see my paper in the Annals; see also the discussion of the date below. 4 MDJG. Vol. XXI, pp. 55-74. The contents are analysed in my paper in the Annals.
At Karanja there is a Sk. commentary on this work by Indranandi, the pupil of Amarakirti (Catalogue of Sk. and Pk. Mss. in C. P. and Berar, p.685); and there is a Hindi metrical rendering of it published under the name, Svānubhava-darpana by Munshi Nathuram, in 1899 A.D.; and on this Hindi rendering there is an exhaustive Gujarati commentary by Lalan, Bombay 1905.

Page #113

68
Paramātma-Prakāśa
same as that of P.-prakäsa. The self is to be realized as completely isolated from everything else. These dohās, says the author, are composed by the monk Jogicanda to awaken the self of those that are afraid of Samsāra and are yearning for liberation (Nos. 3 & 107). The author says that he composed it in dohās, but in the present text we have one Caupāi (No. 39) and two Sorathās (Nos. 38 & 46): this perhaps indicates that the text is not well preserved. The mention of Jogicanda (=Joindu-Yogindu) in the last verse, similar opening Mangalas, identical subject-matter and the spirit of discussion, and common phrases and lines indicate that one and the same Joindu is the author of these two works. The text, as it is printed, in not critical; and there are apparent errors. Making concession to these, even the dialectal form is practically the same. The only points of difference that strike one are: Gen. sg. with -hu (and also ha) which is whain P.-prakasa; Present 2nd p. sg. with-hu (and also -hi, but which is -hi alone in P.-prakāša); and the Absolutive with - viņa which is viņu in P.-prakāša. All these are slight vowel changes on which no conclusions can be based. Jayasena quotes a dohā from this work in his commentary on Pañcâstikāya.?
3) Naukāra-Srāvakācāra or Savayadhamma-doha. 2 Contents, etc. It is seen from the analysis 3 that this work deals mainly with the duties of a house-holder in a popular and attractive style. The exhortations are spiced with nice similes, and as compared with other manuals of this class the treatment is less technical. From the contents and metre it gets the name Śrāvakācāra dohaka; it is also known as Nava (Nau) kåra-Srävakācāra from its opening words; and Prof. Hiralal calls it Savayadhamma-dohā after much consideration.
Its Authorship-In my paper on Joindu I had pointed out how there are three claimants, namely Jogendra, Devasena and Lakşmicandra, or Lakşmidhara, for the authorship of this work. Since then some nine Mss. of this work have come to light, and the problem of its authorship has been discussed in details by Prof. Hiralal in his Introduction. Even as the facts stand Prof. Hiralal's view cannot be accepted; so it is necessary to state the position and see what should be the probable conclusion.
Joindu's Claims-His claims rest on these grounds : i) Traditional lists attribute a Navakara-Srävakācāra to him; ii) the concluding colophon of Ms. A calls it Jogendra-ksta; and a supplementary verse found at the close of Ms. Bha (after the concluding colophon) attributes the text to Yogindradeva.
1 RJS. ed., p. 61 2 Critically edited with Intro. and Hindi franslation by Hiralal Jain (KJS, Vol. II),
Karanja 1932; the Mss, and the views of Prof. Hiralal referred to below are from
this Intro. 3 Vide my article in the Annals XII. ii.

Page #114

Introduction
69
The forms Jogendra and Yogindra, it appears, are meant to imply the author of P.-Prakasa; and it must be seen how far these claims are justified. As in P.-Prakasa and Yogasära Joindu does not mention his name in the body of the text. Secondly, the high flights of spiritualistic fervour of Joindu are conspicuously absent here; and the subject-matter of Srāvakācāra is not quite in tune with the mystic temperament of Joindu. Thirdly, Prof. Hiralal finds this work more profound as a piece of poetry than other works of Joindu and brushes aside the possibility that Joindu might have composed it in his younger days. Fourthly, as I have already noted, despite some common ideas there are no striking phraseological similarities between this work and P-prakosa. Lastly, I might point out that Sävayadhamma-dõhà shows the termination -hu in Abl. and Gen. Sg.; but we have seen that P.-prakáša uniformly shows -haboth in the sg. and pl. So there is no strong evidence to attribute this work to Joindu. Perhaps it is the common Apabh. dialect and a few similar ideas that might have led some one to put the name of Yogindra in the colophon
Devasena's Claims--Prof. Hiralal upholds the claim of Devasena on the following grounds : i) Ms. Ka mentions 'Davasēnai uvadittha' in the last verse. ii) Sävayadhamma-dõha has many striking similarities with Bhāvasangraha of Devasena. iii) Devasena had a liking for composing dohās, and it was perhaps a new form of metre in his days. Thus he attributes this work to Devasena, the author of Daršanasāra. His arguments are not quite sound. i) Ms. Ka does not deserve so much reliance of the nine Mss. it is the longest so far as the number of verses is considered and the latest so far as its age is considered. The text itself (No. 222) says that there should be 220 or 222 verses the earliest known Ms. contains 224, while Ms. Ka contains 235 if not 236 verses. This plainly means that it is as inflated recension. Now the dohā which mentions the name of Devasena is not only corrupt but contains plain errors: the form Divasenai is very queer, and a similar form is not traced in the whole of the text; the phrase akkharumattā, etc., is meaningless as it stands: as I understand dohā, both the lines of this verse are metrically irregular; the concluding rhyme of the two lines, which is a regular feature of dohā and which is seen throughout this text, is conspicuously absent in this verse; and lasıly Prof. Hiralal himself does not include this verse in his settled text. Such a concluding verse, therefore, cannot be attributed to the author of Sāvayadhamma-dõha: and we cannot believe that Devasena, the author of Daršanošāra, might have composed it. Turning to the four Prākrit works of Devasena, in Bhāvasaņgrahahe mentions his name as Devasena, the pupil of preceptor Vimalasena; in Aradhanàsāra2 1 Ed. MDJG. Vol. XX, Bombay Sanvat 1978. 2 Ed. MDJG. VolVI, Bombay Samvat 1973

Page #115

70
Paramātma-prakasa
simply as Devasena; in Darsanasäral as Devasena-ganin, residing in Dhārā, and in Tattvasara2 as Muninātha Devasena. In the first three works the name Devasena is implied by the word Surasena in the opening Mangala. None of these indications is found in Savayadhamma-dõha. Thus the first argument loses its force and the other two can be easily explained. ii) It is a fact that there are some common topics between Bhavasaṁg raha and this work, but of the 18 parallel passages enumerated by Prof. Hiralal hardly more than three passages are really parallels. Unless there is a significant phraseological similarity common words and ideas prove nothing in a literature of traditional nature. That one verse is common is important. Some Apabh. verses are found in Bhavasangraha; Ms. kha stamps that verse as uktam ca; and the editor has shown how Mss. of Bhävasangraha have included verses from works even later than Devasena.3 It is not at all improbable, therefore, that some copyist might have taken this verse from Sävayadhamma döhalii) The third argument proves nothing. The beginning of the use of dohā is not fully studied as yet. I may, however, point out that Apabh. portions of Vikramõrvasiyam have one dohã,4 and that Rudrata, when illustrating the slēşa of Sk. and Apabh. composes two dohās (IV. 15 & 21) in his Kävyålankāra. Rudrata flourished before 900 A.D. or more probably in the earlier part of the 9th century. Anandavardhana (c. 850) also quotes an Apabh. dohā in his Dhvanyaloka.5 Even if it is accepted that Devasena had a liking for dohā, that he is the author of Sävayadhamma-dõhà cannot be proved. Thus the claim that Devasena is the author has to be given up now.
Laksmicandra's Claims-The colophons of Mss. Pa, Bha and Bha3 attribute this work to Lakşmicandra. Śrutasägara quotes nine verses from this work: one is attributed to Laksmicandra and another to Lakşmidhara. Thus Lakşmicandra alias Lakşmidhara is the author of Savayadhamma-dōhā according to śrutasāgara's information. His use of the words Guru and Bhagavāna with the name of Lakşmicandra, as I now realize,' should not be taken with any special significance, because Srutasāgara mentions Samanta
1 Critically edited by me in the Annals of the B. O. R. I. XV. iii-iv. Five Mss. read
surasēņa, while only one reads surasčni; though the latter suits the meaning better,
the former should be accepted with the majority of Mss. 2 Ed, MDJG. Vol. XIII, Bombay Samvat 1975. 3 See the editor's foot-note on p. 111 (verse No. 516); see also the Intro. p. 2. 4 S. P. Pandit : Vikramõrvasiyam, 3rd Ed., Appendix I, p. 113A a. 5 Pischel : Materialien zur Kenntnis des Apabhramsa, p. 45. 6 Şatprabhstadi-sangraha, pp. 144, 203 283, 284, 297, 349, 350; the numbers of the
verses quoted from this work are : 7, 105, 109, 110, 111, 112, 139, 148, 156. No. 139
on p. 203 is attributed to Lakşmicandra and No. 148 on p. 144 to Lakşmidhara. 7 In my paper in the Annals I had said ... he uses quite familiar terms like Guru,
Bhagavāna, as though Lakşmidhara is his immediate preceptor.

Page #116

Introduction
bhadra as Guru and Gautama and Pujyapāda as Bhagavāna. 1 Prof. Hiralal sets aside the claims of Laksmicandra, whom he takes to be the same Lakşmicandra, a contemporary of Srutasāgara, on the following grounds i) The last verse of Ms. Bha attributes the text of Yogindra, Pañjikā, to Lakşmicandra and Vitti to Prabhācandra. ii) Lakşmana, the pupil of I bhūşana, mentioned in the concluding remarks of Ms. Pa, is identical with Lakşmidhara, Laksmana being his name before entering the order of inonks. iii) The phrase 'Lakşmicandra-viracitë' in Ms. Pa is a scribal error; and it should have been either Sri-Lakşmicandra-likhiti' or Sri-Lakşmicandrartha-likhitē. iv) Lastly no other works of Lakşmicandra are known to us. It is true that Śrutasāgara attributes this work to Laksmicandra (or -dhara), but there is no evidence at all to identify this name with that of a contemporary of his. Jaina hierarchy contains identical names of teachers who lived at different times. i) The verse in Ms. Bha is a later addition for the following reasons: it comes after the concluding colophon 'iti Srävakācāra-dohakaṁ Lakşmicandrakytam samāptam sri', the contents of the verse are inconsistent with this colophon; a part of the verse claiming Yogindra as the author is not at all proved; and, as Prof. Hiralal himself has said, nothing is definite about the Pañjikā attributed to Lakşmicandra. ii) I have already stated above that there is no evidence to take Lakşmicandra to be the same as the contemporary of Srutasāgara. Even accepting, for the sake of argument, that Lakşmicandra (the contemporary of Srutasāgara) was known as Pt, Laksmana in his householder's life, Lakşmana and Lakşmicandra, mentioned at the close of Ms. Pa, are not identical. First we get 'iti Upāsakācāra acārya Sri Lakşmicandraviracitē döhaka-sūtrāņi samāptāni': then follows that this Döha-sravakācāra was written for Pt. Lakşmana, the pupil of Mallibhūşana, in Samvat 1555. Pt. Lakşmana, therefore, was a householder in Saniyat 1555; then how can he mention beforehand his forthcoming ascetic title, Lakşmicandra, when he still calls himself Laksmana ? The name, Lakşmicandra, is mentioned first; and then comes the copyist's mention of Pt. Laksmana. By comparing Mss. Pa and Bha3 it will be clear that the colophon quoted above belongs to the author himself; and the following lines in Pa are to be attributed to the copyist. iii) When the proposed identity of Laksmana and Lakşmicandra is not proved, and in fact disproved, there is no point in suggesting a correction in the actual reading. iv) The last argument does not stand by itself, and needs no independent criticism. Prof. Hiralal's arguments against Lakşmicandra's authorship are not conclusive, and his claim that Devasena is the author is already disproved. So, in conclusion, I have to say that the author of this Śrāvakācāra, in the light of the available material and on the authority of Śrutasāgara's statement, is Ācārya Laksmicandra. There is no evidence to
1
Satpråbhstädi-Sangraha, pp. 65, 77 and 93.

Page #117

Paramātma-prakasa
identify him with another Lakşmicandra who was a contemporary of śrutasāgara. All that we know about the age of this Lakşmicandra is that he was earlier than Srutasāgara and Brahma-Nemidatta (A.D. 1528).
7) Dõhåpāhuda :1 Name, Contents, etc.-Of the two Mss. of this work that have come to light one mentions the name as Dohāpähuda and the other Pahudadoha. Prof. Hiralal has explained the meaning of the title; and even according to his explanation the title should have been Dihapähuda. Despite his correct interpretation, ? I fail to understand, why he gave currency to the name Pahudadõha. Like P-prakāša this is a mystical work in which the author broods on the reality of Ātman. Undoubtedly the text, as it stands, is an inflated one; and that explains the presence of Sk. verses at the close and two gāthās in Mahārāştri after dohã No. 211, which mentions the name of Rāmasimha who according to the colophon of one Ms. is the author.
Joindu's Authorship-The concluding colophon of Ms. Ka attributes this to Yogendra, and this work has many common verses with P.-prakasa and Yogasära. But Yogindu's authorship is not well founded for the following reasons: i) As in P.-prakasa and Yõgasära he does not mention his name in the body of the text; and moreover verse No. 211 mentions the name of Rāmasimha. ii) In many places, even in common verses (Nos. 34, 35, 46, 49, 80, etc.), Dohäpähuda shows terminations -ho and -ho in the Gen. sg. of a-ending nouns, but P.-prakala has uniformly -ha'; the forms like tuhäraü, tuhäri, dõhim mi, dēhaham mi, kahim mi, (Nos. 56, 182, 55, 72, 132 and 197) are not found in P.-prakāša. ii) The Ms. Da has a colophon attributing this work to Rāmasimha, whose name occurs in dohā No. 211. In the beginning, with the Ms. Ka alone before me, I suspected whether the name of Rāmasimha, which does not occur in the last verse, might be that of a traditional author like śānti incidentally mentioned in P.-prakāša (II. 61). But now after a closer study of Dohāpāhuda I find that the evidences to prove Joindu's authorship are insufficient. So many common verses and the Apabh. dialect have perhaps led some scribe to put Yogendra's name in the colophon, though Rāmasimha's name is mentioned by the text itself.
Ramasimha as the Author-Rāmasimha's claim is based on two facts that according to both the Mss his name is found in one of the verses of the text and one Ms. mentions his name in the colophon. The only apparent objection against his authorship is that his name is not mentioned in the last verse. But I have remarked above that the present text is an inflated one, and many of the verses after 211 appear to have been added later on. Thus in 1 Critically edited with Intro. Hindi translation, etc., by Hiralal Jain (KJI. Vol. II).
Karanja 1933; see also Anekānta Vol. I and Annalsof the B.O. R. I. XII, ii., pp. 151, etc. 2 Intro, to his Ed. p. 13.

Page #118

Introduction
the light of the present material Rāmasimha should be accepted as the author. He is much indebted to Joindu, and one fifth of his work, as Prof. Hiralal says, is drawn from P. prakāša. Rāmasimha is plainly a lover of mystic brooding that might explain his use of verses from earlier authors. As to his age we can say only this much that he flourished between Joindu and Hemacandra. Verses from Dohāpāhuda are quoted by Srutasāgara, Brahmadeva, Jayasena and Hemacandra. That there are two common verses between Dõhāpāhuda and Savayadhamma-dõha is an important fact. But Devasena's authorship of Savayadhamma-dõha is disproved; and the compilatory character and the inflated nature of the text of Dohāpāhuda do not admit at present any objective criteria of textual criticism. Additional light can be thrown on this problem when more Mss. are available.
8-9) Amstafiti and Nijātmāştaka : 2 Amrtasiti-It is a didactic work containing 82 verses in different metres, groups of verses being devoted to different topics of Jainism. We do not know whether the colophon is added by the Editor or it was there in the Ms. The word Yogindra occurring in the last verse can be taken as an adjective of Candraprabha. There is no evidence at all to attribute this work to the author of P.-prakasa. This work includes some verses ascribed to Vidyānandi, Jațāsimhanandi and Akalankadeva. Some verses are common with the satakas of Bharthari. Three verses (Nos, 57, 58 and 59) from this Amrtašiti are quoted by Padmaprabha Maladhārideva in his Commentary on Niyamasära3 The same Vștti quotes one more verse thus :
तथा चोक्तं श्रीयोगीन्द्र देवैः । तथाहि+ मुक्त्यंगनालिमपुनर्भवसौख्यमूलं दुर्भावनातिमिरसंहतिचन्द्रकीर्तिम् ।
संभावयामि समतामहमुच्चकै स्तां या संगता भवति संयमिनामजस्रम् ।। But this verse is not found in the present text of Amrtasiti, and Pt. Premi conjectures that it might perhaps belong to Adhyātma-samdoha, another work traditionally attributed to Yogindra.
Nijatmastaka-This contains eight Prākrit verses in Sragdharā metre glorifying the nature of Siddha in a dignified manner. The text does not mention the name of any author, but it is the cocluding colophon in Sanskrit that mentions Yogindra's name. This is no sufficient evidence to attribute its authorship to the author of P.-prakāša.
Conclusion-After this long discussion we find that the traditional
1 Ibidem, p. 21. 2 MDJG, Vol. XXI, pp. 85-101 and 168-9. 3 Niyamasāra (Bombay 1916), pp. 38, 107 and 154. 4 Ibid. p. 86; Br. Shitalaprasadaji, however, quotes in his Hindi translation muktvala
satva etc.. (Amstäšiti 21) instead of this verse,
10

Page #119

Paramatma-prakafa
list of works attributed to Joindu is not quite authentic; and at present P.-prakasa and Yogasära are the only two works of Jolndu.
74
c) On the Date of Joindu
Nature of the Evidences and the Later Limit-From the two works of Joindu we get no clue that might shed some light on his age. So the only alternative left before us is to take a survey of the references to and quotations, etc.. from the works of Jotndu as found in other works. The text of P-prakata is swollen from time to time; the editions of the works, in which quotations, etc., are found, are not critical, and even if critical editions are available there is still scope for differences of opinion; and lastly, the periods assigned to these works and authors are often subject to modifications, because the studies in this branch of Indian literature are not much advanced. Thus the very nature of the material puts certain limitations to our conclusions. This attitude of scepticism, though critically justified, should not forbid us from collecting the various pieces of evidence that might be of use, in the long run, to settle the age of Jo1ndu more definitely. Let us try to ascertain the later limit for the period of Joindu in the light of the following evidences:
1) Śrutasagara, who flourished about the beginning of the 16th century A.D., quotes six verses from P-prakala (I. 78, 117, 121, II. 46*1, 61 and 117) two of which are explicitly attributed to Yogindra.1
ii) We have the Kannada commentary of Maladhäre Balacandra and the Sanskrit commentary of Brahmadeva on P.-prakata, and we have assigned them to c. 14th and 13th century A.D. respectively.2
iii) Jayasena who has written Sk. commentaries on Pañcastikāya, Pravacanasara and Samayasara of Kundakunda is sufficiently acquainted with Joindu and his two works. In his commentary on Samayasara he mentions P.-prakasa by name and quotes a verse (I. 68) explicitly attributing it to Yogindra. In his commentary on Pañcastikaya he quotes a verse which is the same as No. 56 of Yagasara. Jayasena belonged c. to the second half of the 12th century A. D.
iv) It is seen above that Hemacandra is acquainted with P.-prakāta: he has drawn some material from it; and in fact he quotes a few verses from this work with some changes here and there to illustrate his rules of Apabhramsa grammar Hemacandra was born in A.D. 1089 and died in 1173 A.D. "It is not an unusual phenomenon in the history of any language. that extensive grammars come to be composed only after a particular.
1 Satprabhṛtādi-sang raha, pp. 39, 297, 234, 315, 325, 332.
2 See section III below.
3
See p. 46 above.

Page #120

Introduction
75
language is fossilised in literary form either in traditional memory or in books. So there is no sufficient justification for the assumption that the Apabhraísa treated by Hemacandra is the same as the current language of his times. It is more reasonable to say that the Apabhramsa stage represented by his grammar was altogether fossilised in literary form, and it must have been at least the next previous, or even earlier, stage of the language current in his times. Grammars cannot be based on merely spoken languages: at the most we can appeal to this or that usage in the current language with such phrases as lokē". This means that Joindu can be put earlier than Hemacandra at least by a couple of centuries.
v) Hemacandra, it has been shown by Prof. Hiralali quotes some verses from Dohāpahuda of Rāmasimha who in turn has enriched his work by drawing bodily many dohās from P.-prakasa and Yogasära of Joindu. So Joindu is not merely earlier than Hemacandra, but the periods of these two are intervened by that of Rāmasimha.
vi) I have shown above how some verses of Tattvasära have close similarities with the dohās of P.-prakāša. It is not improbable that both might have drawn from some common source. But as the verses stand, in view of the reasons stated by me above I think, it is Devasena that follows Yogindu. Devasena has often utilised material from earlier works in his compositions. We know Devasena's date definitely. He finished his Daršanasara in Samvat 990, i.e., A.D. 933.
vii) The following two verses deserve comparison 1. Yogasära, 65:
विरला जाणहि तत्तु बुहु विरला णिसुणहि तत्तु ।
विरला झायहि तत्तु जिय विरला धारहि तत्तु । 2. Kattigžyānuppěkkha, 279
बिरला णिसुहि तच्चं विरला जाणंति तच्चदो तच्च ।
विरला भावहि तच्च विरलाणं धारणा होदि ।। Kattigēgānuppěkka3 of Kumāra is not written in the Apabh. dialect; so the Present tense 3rd p. pl. forms, nisunahi and bhāvahi (preferably -hi) are intruders there, but the same are justified in Yogasära. The contents of both the verses are identical. The fact that the dohā is converted into a gāthā does not admit the possibility that some later copyist might have taken it over from Yogasāra. In all probability it is Kumāra that is following the above verse of Joindu consciously or unconsciously. The personality of Kumāra is much obscured by certain mythical associations, and his age is
1 Intro, to. Dohāpāhuda p. 22. 2 On p. 28 3 Published with Jayacandra's Hindi Commentary, Bombay 1904.

Page #121

76
Paramātma-prakasa
not settled as yet. Oral tradition recorded by Pannalal says that Kumāra flourished some two or three centuries before the Vikrama eral, and the views of even some modern scholars appear to be influenced by this tradition.2 The only available Sk. commentary on this work is that of Subhacandra who composed it in A. D. 1556;3 as yet no references to Kumāra in earlier commentaries are brought to light; the order of enumeration of 12 Anuprekṣās followed by Kumāra is that of Tattvårthasūtra which is slightly different from that adopted by Vattakera, śivārya and Kundakunda. These points militate against the high antiquity claimed for Kumāra by tradition. There is no critical edition of Kattig yānuppěkkha, but as the text stands the dialectal appearance is not so old as that of Pravacanasära. The reference to Ksetrapāla in verse No. 25 shows that Kumāra belonged perhaps to the South where the worship of Kşetrapāla has been more popular. In the South some monks bearing the name Kumārasena have flourished. In the Mulagund temple inscription (earlier than 903 A. D.) one Kumārasenā is mentioned; 4 then one Kumārasvāmi is mentioned in an inscription at Bogadi of 1145 A.D.5; but mere similarity of name is not enough for identification. With
ts in view I do not want to assign Kumāra to any definite period, but what I want to point out is that the high antiquity traditionally claimed for Kumāra is not proved as yet; and there are sufficiently weighty reasons to doubt it. As to the relative periods of Joindu and Kumāra, the former in all probability is earlier than the latter.
viii) Canda quotes the following dohã in his Prāksta-laksanam to illustrate his sūtra: 'yatha tathā anayoh sthānē jima-timau :
कालु लहेविणु जोइया जिम जिम मोहु गलेइ ।
तिम तिम दंसणु लहइ जो णियमें अप्पु मुणेइ । This dohā is the same as I. 85 of P.-Prakasa with the difference that our text reads jimu and timu for jima and tima, and jiü for jo in the second line. It is a sad tale that the text of Caņda's grammar is not well preserved. 'The whole work has the appearance of half-arranged, miscellaneous jottings for
1 Ibidem Intro. 2 "The 'twelve Anuprekshäs' are a part of Jaina faith. Svāmi Kartikeya seems to be
the first who wrote on them. Other writers have only copied and repeated him. Even the Dvādaśanupreksha' of Kundakundācharya seems to have been written on its model. No wonder, if Svāmi Kārtikeya preceded Kundakundächārya. Any way, he is an ancient writer".-Catalogue of Sk. and Pk. Mss. in the C. P. and Berar, p. xiv;
also Winternitz: A History of Indian Literature, Vol. II. p. 577. 3 Annals, Vol. XIII, i., pp. 37, etc. 4 Journal of the Bombay Branch R. A. S. X, pp. 167-69. 190-93. 5 Epigraphia Carnatica IV, Nagamangala No. 100. 6 Ed. by A. F. Rudolf Hoernle, Part I, Calcutta 1880.

Page #122

Introduction
a work rather than a well arranged and finished treatise'. Hoernle has edited this work as early as 1880, when Prākrit studies were in their infancy, and nothing in fact was known about Apabhraíśa as a dialect commanding vast literature; his material was scanty: his was a difficult tak to rebuild a consistent text, with Pāli language and Asokan inscriptions in view, out of bewilderingly chaotic material. His rigorous method, about which he has sufficiently explained and against which Pischel and Gune have rightly complained, has led him to relegate this sūtra and the quotation to the appendix indicating thereby that they belong to Revisionists. The context in the Grammar, where the present sūtra with the illustrative verse
occurs in the company of ten other sūtras, all referring to Apabhramśa, is not a proper one this we will have to accept with Hoernle. But this does not forbid us from accepting them as genuine in other parts of the grammar, remembering that the sūtras appear to have been disturbed in their arrangerent. Canda recognises an Apabhramśa dialect in which r as the second member of the conjunct group is preserved. That this was a fact of an Apathramśa dialect is seen above. It is illustrated by Rudrata's slēşa verse and by some illustrations of Hemacandra. We expect that Canda could not have disposed of Apabhraíša in one sūtra; by accepting the above Sūtras more information is being added about Apabhramsa. It is natural that the grammarian might illustrate his sütras with quotations from literature. It is significant that this quotation does not occur in Hemacandra's grammar : that sets aside the suggestion that the Revisionists might have added it from Hemacandra's work. With Gune I am inclined to accept that the presence of these süfras, with the quotation, is quite natural in Canda's grammar,
Different views are held as to the date of Canda. Hoernle thinks that his reconstructed text, which mainly follows Ms. A, presents a very archaic phase of Prākrit language, and therefore Canda's work is composed probably scmeuhat later than the 3rd century B.C., the period of Asokan inscriptions, ard probably earlier than the beginning of the Christian era 'assuming of course that he was contemporary with that language'.2 According to Hoernle the present sūtra and the quotation belong to the Revisionists whom he puts later than Vararuci, but how much later he does not say anything. The approximate date assigned to Vararuci is 500 A.D. According to Gune Canda lived at a time when the Apabhraṁsa had ceased to be a mere dialect of the Abhiras and become a literary language, i. e., after the sixth century A.D. and not before'. Thus the revised form can be tentatively placed about 700 A.D.3 SO P.-Prakasa will have to be put earlier than Präkıta-lakşanam.
1 Dalal and Gune : Bhavisayattakahä Intro.. p. 62, Baroda 1923 2 Hoernle's Intro. pp. 1. 20, etc. 3 M. Ghosh : Journal of the Department of Letters (Calcutta University), Vol, XXIII, P.17

Page #123

78
Paramātma-Prakāša
Earlier Limit-It is shown above how Joindu inherits much from Mökkhapähuda of Kundakunda and how he closely follows Samadhi-dataka of Pujyapāda. P-prakása, in fact, is a popular elaboration of some of the fundamental ideas of Samadhi-sataka. Kundakunda belonged c. to the beginning of the Christian era, and Pūjyapāda lived a bit earlier than the last quarter of the 5th century AD.
Conclusion—In the light of the above discussion I tentatively put P.-prakasa between Samadhi-sataka and Praksta Lakşana;2 and in all probability Joindu flourished in the 6th century A.D.
III. Commentaries on P.-prakasa
1. A Kannada Gloss (k-gloss) op P.-prakasa Balacandra's Commentary and the Kannada Gloss in Ms. K.-It is reported 3 that (Adhyātmi) Bālacandra (c. beginning of the 13th century A.D.), who has written Kannada commentaries on the three works of Kundakunda, 4 has commented in Kannada on P.-prakasa as well. The Ms. K, described below, contains a Kannaga commentary on P.-prakasa; but one is not in a position to say whether it is the same as that of Bālacandra, because the Ms. K supplies no information and Mm. R. Narasimhacharya has not given any extracts with which the commentary in K could have been compared.
Nature of this Kannada Gloss-The Kannada gloss in Ms. K to be called K-gloss hereafter) is a very modest attempt to explain in Kannada the dohās of P-prakaša. Throughout the commentary, so far as I have read it here and there, no Sanskrit equivalents of Apabh. forms are given; but the author takes the Apabh. forms one after the other as Kannada syntax would need, and gives their meaning in Kannada. Some of the interpretations show the linguistic insight of the commentator who is very well grounded in the technicalities of Jaina philosophy. I have come across certain words
1 See pp. 32-3 above. 2 Mr. M. C. Modi, in his notes (pp. 76-9) on selections from P.-prakåsa in Apabhra
msa Pathāvali (Ahmedabad 1935) refers to my paper on Jõindu in the Annals and remarks that Jöïndu can be placed before Hēmacandra but it is not correct to put him earlier than 10th or 11th century of Vikrama era. The way of putting his conclusions reminds me of a statement of Max Muller, 'Chronology is not a matter of taste that can be settled by mere impressions'. An argument based on a word or so is not conclusive. Taking into consideration the nature of Apabh. phonology annu and anu can never be chronologicl stages. About javala, the meaning sami pē though given by Brahmadžva, does not suit the context as I have shown above. It is to be derived from Sk. yamala, pair; and the word jamala occurs even in the Ardha-mågadni Canon. The weakening of m into v is quite usual in Apabh. The
Marathi meaning is a secondary one. 3 R Narasimhacharya : Karnataka Kavicharite, Vol. I, Revised Ed., p. 253. 4 A. N. Upadhye : Pravacanasara (RJS) Intro. pp. 104-8.

Page #124

Introduction
79
whose plain and etymological meaning is missed by the commentator. His comments are lucid and simple, and he is very much faithful to the plain meaning of the dohās. There are no additional philosophical discussions, nor are there any quotations as in the Sk. commentary of Brahmadeva. To give some idea as to what this gloss is like and to facilitate its comparison with other glosses. I give here two dohäs with their comments, 1 P.-prakasa I. 1:
je jāya jhanaggiye kamma-kalamka dahevi
ņicca ņiramjaņa nānamayā te paramappa navevi i jhānaggiye nijātma-d[h]yānamemba kiccinimdami kamma kaļamkajñānāvaraņādi-karmmagalemba puliga!am | dahevi suttu nicca nityarum miramjana! niramjanarum nanamaya kevalajñāņādi-svarūparum jāyā jādaruje ārkkelambaru | tel amtappa | paramappa paramātmaṁge navevi | podavaduvem !! Ibidem I. 82 (No. 60 in TKM.) :
tarunaŭ budd[h]aü rūvadai sūrai pamdiü dibbu |
khamanaü2 budd[h]aü sevadaü müdhaü mannal sabbu | tarunaül tarunane budhdhaü3 vỉdd[hjane | rüvadaü celuvane | süraŭ Surane | dibbu atiśayamappa | pandiyaü" | pamditane | khamanaü | samanane budd[h]aü baudd[hjane sevadaü sevakane ) sabu (sabbu ?) idellamam tānemdu | müdhaü | bahirātmam | mannai | bagegum |||
This Gloss Independent of Brahmadeva's Commentary.--On many crucial points I have compared this K-gloss with Brahmadeva's Sk. commentary; and I accept the position that the author of this gloss is not acquainted with and has not used the Sk. commentary of Brahmadeva. If Brahmadeva's commentary was before him, we expected him to follow the longer recension adopted by Brahmadeva, to give Sk. equivalents of Apabh. forms like him, and to add supplementary discussion and quotations in his gloss as Brahmadeva has done in his commentary. To quote a parallel case, Bāacandra in his Kannada commentary on Pravacanasära inherits many details from the Sk commentary of Jayasena which he is following. Then there are some significant dissimilarities between the K-gloss and Brahmadeva's commentary which confirm the same conclusion. The recension of this K-gloss is very short as compared with that of Brahmadeva; in fact
1 These extracts are faithfully reproduced here. It should be noted that no distinction
is made here between 7 and X and ŏ and 7 following the Ms. For the convenience of the reader some hyphens are put; some aspirates are added in square brackets, as the Ms. does not distinguish d from dh; and for mutual distinction Kannada words
are not italicised like the Apabh. ones. 2 TM read Khavanaü. 3 In the text d is doubled, but here dh: that is due to the peculiarity of writing double
consonants with a nolli 4 Note how this form slightly differs from that in the text above.

Page #125

Paramatma-prakala
there is a difference of 112 verses. The K-gloss has preserved many important readings and. Interpretations independent of Brahmadeva. In the interpretation of the very first doha the K-gloss fundamentally differs from Brahmadeva in the K-gloss nicca, niramjana and nanamaya are separate words each to be taken in the Nom. plural, while with Brahmadeva they form a compound; then Brahmadeva takes navĕvi as a gerund form (pranamya) and connects this doha with the next, while the K-gloss, which does not contain dohas 2-11, takes nuvivi as 1st person Sg. of the Present, Sk. namami, vi being treated as the weak form of mi. In doha I. 82 Brahmadeva has a word vardai which he equates with vandakaḥ and translates as Bauddhah; but the K-gloss clearly reads budd[h]au, and renders as Baudd[h]ane. Then in the same doha there is a very significant mistake of the K-gloss which renders sevadaŭ as sivakane; while Brahmadeva rightly translates it as tapata h. In doha 1. 88 gura, (T and K read gurus, but in the commentary K has guras, ) is explained by Brahmadeva as gurava-labdavacyaḥ svetambaraḥ, but the K-gloss translates it as gauravanush (?). This K-gloss on the first line of II. 89 runs. thus caffahi gumdugalimdamuh pattahi manegalimdamum gundiyahi" | gumdigegalimdamum', Brahmadeva does not explain these words; perhaps they appeared to be quite easy to him being current in the contemporary languages. The Kannada commentator, being of course a southerner, commits a mistake that he renders cattahi as gundugalih lamun. Caya means mat (cf, catal) as I understand it; the Kannada commentator has perhaps confused it with a Kannada word caftige meaning an earthen pot. In II. 117 Brahmadeva's reading is vadahadahammi padiya for which T. K and M read coddahahadakamme padiya. Brahmadeva explains it thus vädaha-sabdina yauvanam sa ava drah mahāhradas tatra patitaḥ, while the K-gloss runs thus: coddaha stri-sariramemba dahakamme (note hada is read as daha) | karmmada maduvinolu." In II. 121 dhamhdhal (TKM read dande possibly for dhahdhe, as these Mss. have d often for dh) is explained by Brahmadeva as dhandi mithyatva--vişaya-kaṣaya-nimittätpanne durdhyanarta-raudra-vyasanga; but the K-gloss says; damde parigraha-dvamdvadolu' the use of the Sanskrit word dvandva shows the insight of the commentator in explaining Apabh. words independently. Instances like these. which show the independence of the K-gloss, can be easily multiplied. If the author of this K-gloss had used Brahmadeva's commentary, he would not have maintained such differences and committed the errors some of which are noted above.
80
On the Age of K-gloss.-The above conclusion implies another possible deduction that this Kannada gloss will have to be dated earlier than Brahmadeva. And from the following study of other commentaries it will be clear that K-gloss is perhaps the earliest known commentary on P.-prakasa. Its antiquity, to a certain extent at least, is confirmed by the comparative old

Page #126

Introduction
age of the Ms. K and by the presence of the earlier form of r in the gloss more regularly than in Q-gloss.
2. Brahmadeva and His Vrtti Brahmadeva and his Works—Brahmadeva gives no details about his personal history in his commentaries. His colophon of Dravyasamgrahatika simply mentions his name, Brahmadeva. Javaharlal, who reads his name as Brahmadevaji, suggests that Brahma is the title indicating that he was a Brahmacārin, i.e., a celibate, and that Devaji was his personal name. Though Nemidatta, 2 the author of Aradhana-kathakāša, Hemacandra, the author of Śrutaskandha3 in Prakrit etc. have used Brahma as their title, it does not seem probable that Brahma is a title in the name of Brahmadeva, because Deva is not an usual name but generally a name-ending and because there have been many Jaina authors bearing the names Brahmamuni, Brahmasena, Brahmasūri etc. So Brahmadeva should be taken as a name. According to a traditional list, noted by Javaharlal, the following works are attributed to Brahmadeva : 1) Paramātmaprakāša-tikā, 2) Brhad-Dravyasangraha-ţikā, 3) Tattvadipaka, 4) Jñanadipaka, 5) Trivarnācāra-dipaka, 6) Pratişthā-tilaka, 7) Vivāhapatala and 8) Kathakosa. Nothing can be said about Nos. 3. 4, & 7 unless their Mss, are available. Possibly it is due to the presence of the word Brahma in his name that (Aradhana-) Kathakoša of Brahina-Nemidatta and Trivarnācara (-dipakai? and Pratiştha-tilaka of Brahmasūri8 are attributed to Brahmadeva through mistake. Thus we have before us only two authentic works of Brahmadeva viz., Paramātma-prakāša-vịtti and Dravyasangraha-vștti 9
His Commentary on P-prakasa-Brahmadeva does not mention his name in the colophon of P.-prakāśa-vịtti. Bālacandra attributes a Sk. commentary to Brahmadeva; secondly, Daulatarāma plainly attributes the vitti to Brahmadeva; and lastly, the commentary on P.-prakāśa has much in common with the commentary on Dravyasangraha where he mentions his name. There 1 See his Intro. of Bihad-Dravyasangraha (RJS.) pp. 10-11. Some other views of
Javaharlal referred to below are from this Intro. 2 Peterson's Reports V, p. xl. 3 MDJG, Vol. XIII, p. 4 and pp. 152-60.
As in Akalankadava, etc. 5 According to Peterson's Reports, Vol. IV, p. 154, a commentary of Pancastikaya is
attributed to Brahmadēvaji, but I have already pointed (see my Intro. to Pravacanasära, p. 101, Foot-note 5) that it is the same commentary as the one attributed to
Jayasēna. The confusion remains still unexplained. 6 Peterson's Reports V. p. 40. 7 Reports of Sri Ailaka Pannālala Digambara Jaina Sarasvati Bhavana, Vol. I, p. 44. 8 I learn from my friend Pt. A. Shantiraj Shastri, Asthana Vidván, Mysore, that Mss.
of Pratisthå-tilaka of Brahmasűri are available. 9 Ed. in RJS, Bombay 1919 (2nd Ed.); also in SBJ. Vol. I.
11

4

Page #127

Paramatma-prakala
are many striking agreements such as almost identical passages, the same quotations, similar illustrations and parallel method of discussion.1 So there is no doubt that the same Brahmadeva has commented on these two works. Brahmadeva always gives a literal explanation of the dohas sometimes without repeating the words of the text. His aim is to explain the contents, and in only one or two places he explains grammatical forms. After the literal explanation, he gives some additional discussion rather in a heavy style; and here and there he quotes early authors. He is quite at home in the application of various Nayas or view-points: and his enthusiasm for Niścaya Naya and naturally spiritual knowledge is very great. The commentary on P.-prakata is not heavily loaded with technical details about Jaina dogmas like that on Dravyasamgraha, whose contents were mainly responsible for this. But for this commentary of Brahmadeva. P.-prakasa would not have been so popular.
82
Jayasena and Brahmadeva-The analysis, introductory remarks, the closing discussions and some other features of Brahmadeva's commentary remind us of Jayasena's commentaries. Brahmadeva closely follows Jayasena with whose commentaries he appears to be thoroughly conversant. Some discussions in the commentary of P.-prakasa are almost the same as those in the commentary of Jayasena on Pañcastikāya; compare, for for instance, P.-prakāśa on II. 21 with Pañcāstikāya on 23ff; Pp. on II 33 with P. on 152; and Pp. on II. 36 with P. on 146.
Brahmadeva's Date-Nowhere Brahmadeva informs us the age when he composed his works. 1) Daulatarama (2nd half of the 18th century A.D.) bases his Hindi commentary on Brahmadeva's Sk. tika, ii) Javaharlal has noted that Subhacandra, in his commentary on Kattigeyanuppakkha (A. D. 1556 borrows much from Brahmadeva's Vrtti of Dravyasamgraha. 11) Balacandra Maladhare plainly refers to Brahmadeva's commentary; but the date of Balacandra cannot be settled on independent grounds. iv) In the Jesalmere Bhandara there is a paper Ms. of Brahmadeva's Vrtti of Dravyasamgraha copied in samvat 1485, i.e., A.D. 1428, at Mandava in the reign of Rai Sri Candaraya. Thus these external evidences put a later limit to his period that he flourished earlier than 1428 A.D. We shall what chronological material we get from his works. i) Taking a review of the various quotations+
1 Compare, for instance, Dravya-samgraha-vṛtti, pp. 53-54 etc, with P. prakasa commentary on II. 21; Ds. p. 63 with Pp. on II. 23; Ds. p. 129 with Pp. on I. 9; Ds. pp. 213-14 with Pp. on I 68; Ds. p. 216-16 with Pp. on II. 99, also II. 94.
2 For instance see his commentary on II. 25.
Catalogue of Mss. at Jeselmere, (p. 49. No. 15), G.O.S. Vol. XXI, Baroda 1923. There are some 92 quotations (only a few mentioning either the author or the work) of which I have been able to trace the sources of some 50. I am very thankful to my friend Pt. Jugalkishore who kindly traced for me about a dozen quotations. A list of these quotations is given in the Appendix.
4

Page #128

Introduction
83
in P.-prakasa-tika Brahmadeva quotes from Aradhana of Sivärya; from Bhava- and Mokkha-pähuda Pañcâstikaya, Pravacanasāra and Samayasära of Kundakunda (c. beginning of the Christian era); from Tattvärthasätra of Umāsvāti, from Ratnakaranda of Samantabhadra (c. 2nd century AD.); from Sk. Siddhabhakti and Istopadēsa of Pujyapada (c. 5th century A.D.); from Kattigēyānuppěkkha of Kumāra; from Praènõttara-ratnamála of Amoghavarşa (c. 815-877 A.D.) from Atmānušāsana of Guņabhadra (who finished the Mahāpuräna on 23rd June 897 A.D.); possibly from Jivakanda of Nemicandra (10th century A.D.), and also from his Dravyasamgraha; from Puruşarthasiddhyupaya of Amrtacandra (c. close of the 10th century A.D.); from Yogasära of Amitagati (c. beginning of the 10th century AD.);1 from Yašastilaka-Campū of Somadeva (959 A.D.); from Döhāpähuda of Rämasimha (earlier than Hemacandra 1089-1173 A.D.); from Tattvanusāsana of Ramsena (earlier than Āsādhara who is put in the first half of the 13th century A.D.); from Pancavimšati of Padmanandi (earlier than Padmaprabha who flourished at the close of the 12th century A.D.).2 From this analysis of quotations what we can definitely state is that Brahmadeva is later than Somadeva who flourished in the middle of the 10th century. ii) In his opening remarks of Dravyasangraha-vịtti Brahmadeva narrates how Nemicandra first composed a small Dravyasangraha in 26 verses and the same was enlarged later on for Soma, a resident of Aśramapura and a royal-treasurer of Sripala Mandalesvara under the great king Bhoja of Dhārā in Malava country. As this is not proved to be a contemporary piece of evidence we may not accept as fact that Nemicandra was a contemporary of Bhoja of Dhārā and that Dravyasaņgraha was first a smaller work; but one thing is evident that Brahmadeva is sufficiently later than Bhoja of Dhārā whom he calls Kali-kala-Cakravarti. Undoubtedly he refers to Bhojadeva,. the Paramāra of Malwā, the celebrated patron of learning; the period of Bhojadeva is A.D. 1018-1060. Brahmadeva's reference to Bhoja indicates that he is sufficiently later than 11th century A.D. iii) It is shown above that Brahmadeva is much influenced by the commentaries of Jayasena, and even some passages of Jayasena are almost reproduced by 1 Amitagati, who completed his Subhāṣita-ratnasamdõha in 994 A.D., Dharmapariksa
in 1014 A.D. and Pancasangraha in 1017 A.D., gives the names of his predecessors thus: Virasina, Dīvasēna, Amitagati (I), Nēmisena, Madhavasına; and then gives his name Amitagati (II). Śrāvakācāra and Bhagavati Aradhana (in Sk. verses) are also composed by Amitagati II. But with regard to three other works, namely, Bhavanaadvätrimati, Sāmāyika-patha and Yogasära, in which the names of the predecessors are not given, it is rather difficult to say whether they are to be attributed to Amitagati I or Il. It appears to have been usual with Amitagati II to give the names of his predecessors in bigger works, but they are absent in Yogasära. Perhaps Yõgasära was composed by Amitagati 1 who is earlier than Amitagati II by two
generations. A detailed study of the style, etc, of Yogasāra would solve this question. 2 Besides these Brahmadēva mentions some other works too, Caritrasara, Sarvartha.
siddhitippanaka, Samadhisataka (see II. 33, 212.)

Page #129

84
Paramātma-Prakasa
our author. Jayasen' e onged to c. second half of the 12th century A.D. 1 So Brahmadeva is later than 12th century. To conclude from these external and internal evidences, Brahmadeva is later than Somadeva (959 AD.), king Bhoja of Dhārā (A.D. 1018-60) and Jayasena (c. 12th century). So Brahmadeva2 might be tentatively put in the 13th century A.D.3
3. Maladhare Balacandra and his Kannada Commentary
Extract from the Commentary and its Authorship-The Ms. P, which is described below in Section IV, contains an exhaustive commentary in Kannada on the dohās of P. prakāša. I give below the opening portion of the commentary with some corrections :
nirupamacaritana vyaya-narujananadyamtanamalanätmasukha
karanadvaitanaghakşaya-karanarhaṁ nelasugěnna hștsarasijado!!! śri Yögimdra-dễvar madida Paramätmaprakāśam ěmba dohe cchandada gramthakke šri Brahmaděvar mādida Sanskītada vșttiyan nodiyapratibuddha-bõdhanartham Karnata-vșttiyam pelvě, gramtha-kartāram gramihada modaloļu istadēvutanamaskāramam māduttam ömdu dõheya sūtramam peldaparul 1 J2 jāya jhānaggiyue' etc. The concluding portion runs thus: sõ' haměmdimtu jagattraya kalatrayado?u kāya văn-mana-karanatraya-suddhiyim niscaya nayadimdella jiyamgaļumimtu niramtaram bhāvaněyam mādi padaüděmbudu šri Yögimdradevarabhiprayam || sri Kurkkuțāsana4 Maladhare Balacandradēva sthtram jiyat | From these extracts it is clear that this Kannada commentary is mainly based on Brahmadeva's Vitti, that there is sufficient reason to believe that Bālacandra is its author and that he styles himselí as Kukkuțāsana Maladhāre perhaps to distinguish himself from earlier and contemporary Bālacandras.
Comparison with Brahmadeva's Commentary-Balacandra plainly tells us that he composed this gloss to enlighten the unenlightened by consulting Brahmadeva's commentary. This frank admission shows that he has 1 See my Intro. to Pravacanasära, pp. 101-4. 2 One Brahmadeva of Mülasangha and Sürastagana is mentioned in an inscription of
1142 A D. (Epigraphia Carnatica IV, Nāgamangala 94). There is no sufficient evidence to identify this Brahmadeva, with our commentator. The same name is often borne
by many Jaina authors and monks. 3 In his commentary on Dravyasamgraha 49, Brahmadeva refers to a Pancanamaskara
grantha, of 12 thousand slõkas. I have not got any information about this work, Javaharlal, however, reads the name as Pañcanamaskāra Mahātmya; he attributes its authorship to Simhanandi, a Bhattāraka of Malava country; and he takes this Simhanandi as the one who was a contemporary of Srutasagara c. at the close of 15th century A.D. On the basis of this line of arguments Jawaharlal puts Brahmadeva at the close of the 15th century AD. (or in his own words about the middle of the 16th century Vikram era). This date is now invalidated by the fact that the Jesalmere Ms. of Dravyasamgraha-vrtti of Brahmadēva is written in 1428 A.D. Javaharlal gives no authorities for some of his facts; and I think, there must have been
some confusion in handling them. 4 Ms. reads Kurkkutasana.

Page #130

Introduction
85
mainly followed Brahmadeva. As compared with the text presented in this edition Bălacandra's text contains six verses more. In matters of Apabhramśa dialect of the dohās there is substantial agreement excepting the differences which are common with other Mss. in Kannada script. Brahmadeva's additional details and amplificatory remarks are very often suppressed. Explanation of the dohā word by word that appears to be the main aim of Bālacandra; and it is very rarely that he gives some additional remarks following Brahmadeva. The quotations of Brahmadeva are not included, but in some places Kannada verses are added.2 Balacandra at times gives textanalysis as well; some of his statements are inconsistent with his own numbering. At the close of the work he concentrates more attention on literal explanation ignoring Brahmadeva's supplementary discussions. After the verse Paídava-Ramahi etc., Balacandra gives another verse:
जं अल्लीणा जीवा तरंति संसारसाय रमणंतं ।
तं भव्वजीवसझं णंदउ जिणसासणं सुइरं + ॥ Immediately after this there is an additional Kannada verse :
nirupama-nijätma-sūcaka-vara Paramātmaprukāša-vịttiyanidanadaradimdõduva vodipa paramanākulakşaysukhakkě bhājanarappar ||
Maladhare Balacandra to be Distinguished from other BalacandrasRich contributions to Kannada literature by way of commentaries and original works have been made by many authors bearing the name Balacandra; and it is often difficult to distinguish one from the other due to the paucity of information that we get about them. Mm. R. Narasimhacharya shows four Bālacandras. 5 In a detailed discussion about Bālacandramuni, the preceptor of Abhinava Pampa, Mr, M. Govind Pai shows some nine Bālacandras. Because of his designation Kukkutāsana Maladhāre', our Bālacandra will have to be distinguished from other Bālacandras who have not mentioned this whole designation. The title Maladhāre has been used by some monks to distinguish themselves from others of the same name : Śravana Belgo! Inscriptions mention monks such as Maladhari Mallisena, Maladhāri Rāmacandra, Maladhāri Hemacandra. The designation was used both by Digambara 1 See pp. 4-5 above. 2 For instance on p. 191 of the Ms., i.e., on II. 116. The verse runs thus :
Annevaram jivam sukhi-yanněvaram snēhamilla manadolu mattam- |
tenněvaram snē ham nilkanněvaram duhkhaměmdanadhyatmadiram 3 Ms. reads sarūm. 4 This verse reminds me of Tattvasara 73 which runs thus :
जं तल्लीणा जीवा तरंति संसारसायरं विसमं ।
तं सव्वजीवसरणं णंदउ सगपरगयं तत्तं ।। 5 Kavicarite, Vol. I (Revised Ed. 1924), pp. 253, 321, 390 and 397; see also Vol. III.
p. 64 of the Intro and its Foot notes. 6 Abhinava Pampa (Dharwar 1934) pp. 12, etc.

Page #131

86
Paramåtma-prakasa
and svetāmbara monks. There was also one śvetāmbara Maladhāri Hemacandra to be distinguished from the encyclopediac author Hemacandra (A.D. 1089-1173).1
Date of Maladhare Balacandra-Beyond calling himself Kukkuțāsana Maladhāre this Bālacandra supplies no information about himself; and hence to settle his date is all the more difficult. Maladhārideva or Kukkutāsana Maladhārideva occurs in some inscriptions at Śravana Belgo! as a personal name. But there is no doubt that it is a designation with the name of our Bālacandra; perhaps it is the name of a famous preceptor used by the monks of that line. Turning to epigraphic records one Balendu (Balendu?) Maladhārideva is mentioned in Amarapuram Pillar Inscription of Saka 1200 (A.D. 1278) in which some pupils have given a donation to a Jaina temple. Our Balacandra cannot be identified with this Bālendu though in personal names indu and candra are often interchanged, because the title Kukkuțāsana is not found there and because this date of Bälendu is rather too early for our commentator.3 About the period of our author, the earlier limit is definite that he flourished after Brahmadeva whose commentary he follows; nd we have tentatively put Brahmadeva in the 13th century AD. We will have to take into consideration the conditions of travelling etc. in the 13th century. Bālacandra belongs to Karņātaka, possibly he lived near about Sravaņa Belgol. Brahmadeva in all probability belongs to the North. So we can expect naturally a difference of half a century at least between the two, so that the Sk. commentary of Brahmadeva might reach the hands of Bālacandra. Thus tentatively Bālacandra might be put in the middle of the 14th century A. D.
Adhyatmi Balacandra's Commentary-None of these three Kannada commentaries can be attributed to Adhyātmi Balacandra (c. beginning of the 13th century) to whom a Kannada commentary on P-prakása is attributed by Mm. R. Narasimhacharya. He kindly informs me that he possesses no more details than those recorded in Kavicaritě. It is not at all improbable that Adhyātmi Bālacandra might have written a Kannada commentary like his commentaries on the Prākrit works of Kundakunda; but one should not be dogmatic
1
2
Epigraphia Carnatica, Vol. II. Peterson : Reports VoI, IV.p. 140 ff, V. p. 85, etc., C.D. Dalal and L. B. Gandhi : Catalogue of Mss. in Jesalmere Bhandars (G. O S.) pp. 3, 8, 15, 18, 36, etc.; M. D. Desai : (Jaina Sahityano Itihasa (in Gujarati), p. 244 ff. M. S. R. Ayyangar and B. S. Rao: Studies in South Indian Jainism, part II, pp. 42, 45 and 50. A Guerinot in his Répertoire D' Epigraphie Jaina mentions one Balacandra Maladhari; but the Hire-Avali inscription (E. Carnatica, VIII, sorab No 117) which he refers to reads Maracandra which, I think, is perhaps a mistake for Rāmacandra. I am thankful to Pt. D. L. Narasimhachar, Mysore. who kindly pointed out this error to me.
3

Page #132

Introduction
87
on this point because the information supplied by Kavicaritě is very meagre and because there is the possibility of Bālacandra (Maladhāre) being mistaken for Bālacandra (Adhyātmi).
4. Another Kannada Gloss (Q-Gloss) on P.-prakasa The Kannada Gloss in the Ms. Q--As distinguished from the Kannada gloss contained in the Ms. K, here is another gloss accompanying the text of P.-prakasa in the Ms. Q which is described below. We do not get any information either about the author or the date of this gloss. There is a salutationary remark, at the close of the Ms., in which it is stated that the auspicious feet of Muribhadrasvāmi are a shelter. This indicates that either the author of this Kannada gloss or the copyist of this Ms. or its earlier original was a pupil of one Munibhadrasvämi.
Nature of this Gloss and the Need of such Glosses-This Q-gloss, like the K-gloss, gives merely the Kannada paraphrase of the dohās with no additional discussions. In matters of faithfulness etc. to the original, K-gloss appears to be superior to Q-gloss. That we come, across such anonymous vịttis, as we find in Mss. like K and Q, clearly indicates how P.-prakasa was very popular in the circles of devout Jaina ascetics and laymen; and it is imaginable that many novices, after they understood the meaning of dohās from their teachers, had their own study-notes by way of a literal paraphrase in their mother-tongue.
Comparison of Q-gloss with other Commentaries-A detailed comparison of this gloss with K-gloss on the one hand and with the Sk. commentary of Brahmadeva and its Kannada version by Maladhāre Balacandra on the other would settle its exact relation with others. I have carefully studied the gloss on some twenty dohās selected at random, and compared the same with K-gloss and Brahmadeva's commentary. A few typical cases I might note here. On I. 25 K-gloss and Q-gloss agree almost verbally. In I. 26 dēvu is rendered by K as paramātma dēvam, by Brahmadeva as paramārādhyaḥ, and by Q as paramāradhyanappa Siddha-paramışthi. In I. 46 samsāru is translated by K as caturgati-samsäramum, by Brahmadeva as dravya-kşetra - kala-bhava-bhāva-rūpah paramagama-prasiddhah pañca-prakärah Samsārah, by Balacandra as dravyādi-pamcavidhusamsāramum, and by Q-gloss as dravya-kşetra-bhava - bhāva-rūpamappa caturgati-samsāramum. In I. 46*1, which is not found in Brahmadeva's recension, Qgloss slightly improves on K-gloss and changes the order of words in the explanation. As against K-gloss on I. 82 noted above, Q reads vamdaü and explains it as Baudhanum; and sẽvadaü is interpreted by Q-gloss as $vētapatanumemde. In the same dohā tarunai is translated by Kas tarunane, by Brahmadeva as yauvanastho'ham, by Bālacandra as kumärane, and by Q as yavvananu. To compare with the extracts given in our study of K-gloss,

Page #133

88
Par amåtma-prakāśa
the first words of II. 89 are interpreted by Balacandra thus : cattahi ! guddugaļum pattahi manecakkaladigaļam | gumdiyahil gurdige-muṁtādupakaraņagaļum, while Q-gloss runs thus : cattahi 1 guddarum pattahi | manegaluṁ guîdiyahi | gumdigegaļum. The interpretations of coddaha dahammi (II. 117) by Q-gloss as yauvana-memba käladoļu and of dhamdhai or dhamdhë (read by Kannada Mss. as damde) in II. 121 as vyásamgadolu borrow words from and therefore agree with Brahmadeva rather than with K-gloss. Thus from the longer recension adopted by Q-gloss, as against the shorter one adopted by K-gloss, and from the comparisons drawn above I come to the conclusion that the Q-gloss is very much indebted to Brahmadeva's interpretations of the text; even words are the same sometimes as contrasted with the words in K-gloss etc. As the Q-gloss gives only a literal paraphrase, we do not find Brahmadeva's discussions there. It is just possible that the author of Q-gloss might have used K-gloss as well, as seen from some close agreements between the two. I have not come across any significant error and difference that might imply the independence of Q-gloss from Brahmadeva's commentary.
On the Date of Q-gloss-From the above comparison it is clear that this Q-gloss is later than Brahmadeva, and perhaps later than even Maladhāre Balacandra, if the author of this gloss is proved, with additional evidences, to be a pupil of Munibhadra, and if this Munibhadra is the same as the one whose death is recorded in the Udri inscription of about 1388 A.D.2 then the composition of this gloss might be roughly dated in the last quarter of the 14th century A.D. This Munibhadra appears to have had many eminent disciples whose deaths have been recorded in some inscriptions. 3
5. Daulatarama and his Hindi Bhasa-tika
The Commentary and its Original Dialect-Daulatarāma's Bhāṣā-tikā, which is presented in this edition, is only a substantial paraphrase in modern Hindi of Daulatarāma's original. The Hindi dialect as used by Daulatarama, and possibly as it was current in his place and at his time, has some differences with the present-day Hindi. With a practical view that it might be useful to Jaina house-holders and monks it was rewritten into modern Hindi by Manoharlal for the first edition (by adding Sk, words etc. into brackets), and the same has been slightly revised here and there for the second edition as well. I give here an extract from Daulatarāma's original text of the Commentary on I. 5, which would give us some idea of the form of Hindi used by him:
1 To distinguish from Apabh. words the Kannada words are not italicised. 2 E. C. VIII, Sorab No. 146. 3 E. C, VIII, Sorab Nos, 107, 116, 118, 119 and 153.

Page #134

Introduction
आप
" बहुरि तिनि सिद्धिनिके समूहिकूं मैं वंदू हूं । जे सिद्धिनिके समूहि । निश्चयनयकरी अपने सरूपविषै ति हैं । और विवहारितयकरि सर्वलोकालोककूं निसंदेहपण प्रतक्ष देष हैं । परंतु परिपदार्थनिविषै तनमयी नाहीं | अपने स्वरूपविषे तन्मयी हैं । जो परपदार्थनिविषै तन्मयी होई तौ पराए सुखदुखकरि सुखी दुखी होई सो कदाचि नाहीं विवहारिनवकरि स्थूलसूक्ष्मसफलिकूं केवलिज्ञानिकरि प्रतक्ष निसंदेह जाने हैं। काहू पदार्थं रागद्वेष नाही । रागिके हेतु करि जो काकू जानें तो रागद्वेषमयी होय । सो इह बडा दूषण हैं। ता तें यही निश्चय भया जो निश्चय करि अपने स्वरूपविर्ष तिष्ठे हैं। परविषे नाहीं । और अपनी शासक्ति करि सविकूं प्रतक्ष देखें हैं जाने हैं। जो निश्चयकरि अपने स्वरूपविष निवास कह्या सो अपना स्वरूपही आराधिये योग्य है यह भावार्थ हैं ||५|| "
।
This extract is copied by me from a recent Ms. from Sholapur, and it is checked by Pt. Premi with the help of an older Ms. from Bombay. Pt. Premi kindly informs me that still older Mss. may show certain dialectal differences, because it was always usual with learned copyists to change. the dialect of the text here and there to bring it nearer the then current dialect. This gives a very good lesson to students of Apabhramsa literature, and very well explains the vowel variations shown by different Mss. of an Apabh. text.
89
Nature of Daulatarama's Commentary-Daulatarama's Hindi ka has no claim to any originality: it is merely a Hindi translation of Brahmadeva's Sanskrit commentary. Some of the heavy technical details of Brahmadeva have been lucidly summarised in Hindi. Like Brahmadeva he gives first a literal translation, and then adds supplementary discussion in short following Brahmadeva. It cannot be ignored that it is this Hindi rendering that has given popularity to Joindu and his P.-prakasa Thus Daulatarama has done the same service to the study of P.-prakata as that rendered by Rajamalla and Pande Hemaraja to that of Samayasara and Pravacanasara. 2
Daulatarama and his Date-Daulatarama belonged to Khandelavala subsect, and his gotra was Kasalivala. Anandrama was the name of his father. He was a native of Basava but used to live in Jayapura where he appears to have been an important office-holder of the state. When we look at the nature of the works composed by Daulatarama, it is clear that he was wellversed in Sanskrit and was an ardent lover of his mother-tongue which he enriched in his own way by some of his translations. In Samvat 1795, when he finished his Kriyakata he was the Mantri of some king Jayasuta (as Pt. Premi interprets it, 'son of Jayasimha') by name and lived at that time in Udayapura. He mentions in his Harivamta, that the Diwans of Jayapura are generally from the Jain community; and Diwan Ratanchanda was his
1 Very often the Sholapur Ms. has for a correctly shown in the Bombay Ms. I have retained them as they are.
2 See my Intro. to Pravacanasära, p. 110, etc.
3 This biographical information is based on Pt. Premi's note on Daulatarāma, see Jaina Hitaishi, Vol. XIII, pp. 20-21.
12

Page #135

90
Paramātma-prakasa
contemporary. He finished Kriyākoša in Saṁyat 1795 and his Harivanša in Saṁvat 1829 ; so the period of his literary activities belongs to the second half of the 18th century A.D.
His works and their Importance--His Kriyakôša is mentioned above. It was at the request of Rāyamalla, a pious house-holder from Jayapura, that he rendered into Hindi prose Padmapurāna (Samvat 1823), Adipurāna (Samvat 1824) and Harivansa (Saṁvat 1829) and Sripalacarita. Then there is his Hindi commentary on P.-Prakasa based on Brahmadeva's Sk. commentary. Besides, he completed in Samvat 1827 the Hindi prose commentary on Puruşārtha-siddhyupāya which was left incomplete by Pt. Todaramalla. Pt. Premi remarks that his Hindi translations of the above Purānas have not only preserved and propagated Jaina tradition but also have been of great benefit to the Jaina community
IV. Description of Mss. Studied and their Mutual Relation
A. Described-This is a paper Ms. about 10,7 by 5 inches in size numbered as 955 of 1892-95, from the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poora. It contains 124 loose folios written on both sides, each page containing 13 lines. It is written in neat evanāgari hand in black ink; and the marginal lines, the double strokes on both sides of the number etc. the central spot which imitates the string-hole of the palm-leaf Mss., and the two marginal spots, horizontal with the central one, on one side of the folio, possibly for putting page-numbers, are in red ink. It contains dohäs as well as Brahmadeva's Sk. commentary of Paramåtma-prakāša. In the Sk. portion the Ms. is fairly accurate, and the Sk, commentary in the present edition is carefully checked with the help of this Ms. Somehow, possibly through oversight, the commentary on dohās II. 18-19 is lost, but the dohās are added in the margin in a different hand, There is a good deal of irregularity about the nasals in this Ms. : anunāsika and anusvāra are represented by the same sign. Sometimes there are dialectal discrepancies between the regular text and the text repeated in the commentary. After the Apabhramśa verse Pandava Rämahi etc., there is this closing passage reproduced as it is:
परमात्मप्रकाशग्रन्थस्य विवरण समाप्तं ।। ग्रन्थसंख्या ४००० सहस्रचारि ॥ संवत् १६३० मार्गशीर्षे सप्तम्यां रवौ लिषित रावतगोरा श्रीचौहाणवंशे लिषत्वा यो दादाति तस्य शुभं ।। कल्याणमाला करोतु नित्यं ॥ पंडित श्री धनपालेन आमपठनार्थ शिष्यार्थाय च शिवमस्तु श्री चतुर्विधसंघस्य ॥ ॥श्री: ॥ ॥
B. Described-It is a paper Ms. about 5.5 by 5 inches in size, belonging to the collection of Mss. of my uncle, the late lamented Babaji Upadhye of Sadalga, Dt. Belgaum. (See also Anikānta I. p. 545 and Pahudadohá Intro. pp. 10-13). It is included in a guţika- Ms. of country paper stitched at the left

Page #136

Introduction
91
end. The characters are Devanāgari with some lines in red and some in black ink in the major part of it; and some pages at the end are written in black ink alone. The appearance of the Ms. shows that it is badly handled. The first 8 leaves are lost; a dozen leaves at the end are halftorn; and the letters on many pages in the middle are rubbed away and cannot be read. As to the contents of this whole Ms.; Folios 9-10: Bhaktämarastötra of Mänatunga; ff. 10-13: Laghu-svayambhū of Devanandi; ff. 13-16 : Bhavanabartisi, i.e., Dvātrims ika of Amitagati; ff. 16-18: Balabhadrasvami-raüvi (? in old Hindi); ff. 18-20 Srutabhakti; ff. 20-35: Tattvärthasūtra (only sūtras, with some marginal corrections in Kannada characters); ff. 35-62; enumerative lists of Märgaņāsthānas etc. and some notes from Gommațasära etc.; ft. 63-81; Dõhāpähuda of Yögēndra; ff. 81-111: Paramātma-prakäša (only dohās); ff. (page Nos. are rubbed away) padikkammāmi and some Bhaktis; ff. 128-135 (?): Arādhanāsära of Devasena (Text only); ff. 136-139: Yogabhakti; ff. 139-148: Jinasahasranama of Ašādhara; then Sajjanacittavallabha etc. This Ms. is at least 200 years old. It is fairly accurate excepting for a few scribal errors. Here and there it retains n for n, but this is ignored in recording the readings. As seen above ff. 81-111 are occupied by the text of Paramātma-prakāša. The opening verse is cidanandaika etc., the same as the opening mangala of Brahmadeva's commentary, in place of the first doha, and it is numbered as one. Differences in the strength of the text have been recorded along with the various readings. In the middle there has been some confusion about the numbers, though the total number of dohās is shown as 342 at the end. Especially in this portion some pages are bored by worms: many letters have lost their ink; and many pages are rubbed away and the letters cannot be made out. It closes with the phrase :
fa qzAICHTETIT: Ahra: 11 1 HAFT 11
C. Described--This is a paper Ms., about 11 by 4.5 inches in size, numbered as 1446 of 1886-92 from the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona. It contains 21 loose folios written on both sides, each page containing about 9 lines. It is written in neat Devanāgari hand. It contains onlu dohās; the first two pages are crowded with interlinear and marginal notes giving the Sk. chayā of difficult words. The Ms. is fairly accurate, but the copyist has not been able to read his ādarśa correctly : paru is once represented by pattu and once by yattu; u and o are interchanged, and the deal of confusion about the presence or otherwise of the sign of anusvåra. In some places there are discrepancies of vowels. Differences in the number of dohās are noted in the various readings. The Ms. ends thus : इति श्रीपरमात्मप्रकाश]दोहा समाप्त ॥॥ शुभं भवतु ।। संवत् १७०५ वर्ष आसाडवदि १२ बुधवासरे ।।

Page #137

92
Paramātma-prakaša
P. Described- This is a paper Ms., abount 12.5 by 6.3 inches in size, with a label 'Paramātmaprakāśa Karnātaka ţikäsahita', new No. 223, from Jaina Siddhānta Bhavana, Arrah (Bihar). It covers loose folios Nos it forms a part of some bigger bundle of Mss. Hand-made paper with water-marks is used. It is written in Kannada characters on both sides of the leaf with some 18-20 lines on each page. It is a new Ms. perhaps something like 50 years old. It contains the text and the Kannada commentary of (Kurkkutāśana Maladhāre) Balacandradeva which is a Kannada rendering of the Sk. commentary of Brahmadeva.
Compared with Brahmadeva's text presented in this edition, this Ms. contains six additional verses. Two verses (kayakiļesim etc. and appasahave etc.) after II, 36, one dohā (are jiü sokkhe etc.) after II. 134; one dohā (panna na mariya etc.) after II, 140; one dohā (appaha paraha etc.) after II. 156; and one more (amtu vi gantu vi etc.) after II. 203. With these six additional verses we have 351 verses in all, and the last verse is serially numbered as 351. In his concluding remark Balacandra says that there are 350 verses in all, but this is not consistent with his own numbering. One or two such inconsistencies are found in his remarks in other places also.
This Ms. reached my hands very late, so I have not recorded the various readings from it. It has many scribal errors here and there. Dh is correctly written in this Ms., though with other Kannada Mss, it has certain common features : the presense of !, the use of nölli in the dohās, absence of any distinction between short and long vowels etc. Practically the text agrees with that of Brahmadeva, but throughout this Ms, there is a decided inclination towards form like Bamhu, käranena, bhāvem, mellavi, ke vi, jerva poggaļu, ekka jojji sojji rather than Bambhu, karanina, bhävim, millivi, kivi, jima, puggalu, ikka, jo ji, so ji etc.
This Ms. begins thus : sri Pårsvanāthaya namaḥ | Paramātmaprakäsa baruvadakke nirvighnamastu || subhamastu i nirupaman etc. The concluding passage runs thus, and it is reproduced without any emendations besides spacing: imti Paramātmaprakāśa mahāšāstra graṁtha samāptam bhūyat mangalamaha sri sri sri jalādrakse tailadrak şe rakşe Sitalabamdhanåt | kastena likhitam šástram yatnena pratipalayet |||
Q. Described, This is a palm-leaf Ms., about 20.2 by 2.1 inches in size with a label Paramātmaprakafa vrtti' new Nos. 190 and 345, from the Jaina Siddhānta Bhavana, Arrah (Bihar). This Ms, is not carefully preserved; it appears to have been exposed to smoke and moisture; the edges of some leaves are broken; and some leaves in the middle are mutilated. I think, it might be about 100 years old. The folios, as we have in it, are numbered 137 to 158; so it must have formed originally a part of a bundle of Mss. The first leaf is missing, so we begin from dohã No. 13. It is written in Kannada characters

Page #138

Introduction
93
on both sides of the leaves with eleven lines on each page. It contains dohās with a Kannada vrtti.
The readings from this Ms. have not been recorded. It has the usual peculiarities of Kannada Mss. (See, for instance T, K and M described below) such as the use of d and p for dh and ph etc., the presence of ! for I in dohās etc. Here yy is used as against other Kannada Mss. which prefer bb. In the Kannada vrtti some times old form of r is used. Excepting a few peculiarities like the inclination towards e ando rather than i and u and the forms such as jojji and Bamhu for jo ji and Bambhu etc., this Ms., on the whole, agrees with Brahmadeva's text. However it has a few important forms, here and there, which are common with the family of Mss, like T, K and M.
As compared with the strength of Brahmadeva's text, this Ms. is wanting in the following dohās: 1. 21-32, 1. 65* 1, I. 123*2-3, II 46*1, II. 111 *2-4, II. 137*5, and II. 185. Then there are some additional verses : one (ja jānai etc.) alter I. 46; one dohā (bhayvåbhavyaha etc.) after II. 74; and one (jiva jinayara etc.) after II 197. Thus 14 verses are wanting and 3 are additional. So we expect the total number to have been 334, but the Ms. serially numbers the last verse as 333, because No. 179 is numbered twice.
The concluding passage of the Ms., without any corrections, runs thus : Paramātmaprakasavịtti samāptaḥ !| sri vitaragaya namaḥ il sri sarasvatyai namaḥ fri Munibhadrasvåmigala sri pada padmañgale šaraņu 1l mamgamaha sri sri śri.
R. Described-This is a palm-leaf Ms., about 14 by 2 inches in size, with a label 'Paramåtmaprakāša müla', new No. 130, from the Jaina Siddhānta Bhavana, Arrah (Bihar). The Ms. is not very old; so far as I can judge, it does not appear to me older than 75 years. It contains only the dohās written in Kannada characters on both sides of the leaves with eight lines on each page. It contains leaves Nos. 1-16. The last page is half blank with a table of contents, written in a modern hand enumerating the names of anu preksās. This Ms.' like other Kannada Mss, described below, has d for dh, ! for I, bb for yy, and forms like sojji, and very often i and hi are confounded in the dohās. In a modern hand anvaya numbers are put between the lines; and some corrections and additions are made here and there. In the margin some additional verses are written in modern hand, and almost all of these verses are the same as those found in Brahmadeva's commentary.
As compared with Brahmadeva's text presented in this edition, this Ms. interchanges the positions of l. 4 and 1. 5, II. 20 and II. 21, II. 77 and and II. 78, II. 79 and II. 80, JI. 144 and II. 145-46. It does not include dohās nos. I. 28-32, 1. 65*1, II. 46*1, II. 111*2-4, II. 137*5, II. 185, and II. 209. Thus it is wanting in 13 verses as compared with Brahmadeva's

Page #139

94
Paramåtma-prakasa
text. But there are some additional verses : one dohā (jo jānai sē jāni etc.) after I. 46; two verses (kāyakilēse" etc. and appasarī về etc.) after II. 36; one dohā (bhabbábhabbaha etc.) after II. 74; and one dohā (pavēnanaraya etc,) is introduced with the phrase uktam ca after II. 127, and it is serially numbered. With the addition and subtraction of the above verses the total we get is 337 which is the last serial number according to the Ms. as well; but somehow the copyist adds a remark that the total is 340.
The various readings from this Ms, are not recorded. On the whole, I find, this Ms. agrees with Brahmadeva's text, though there are some cases where it has some common readings with TKM described below. There are some plain cases where it is corrected with the help of some Ms. belonging to the family of TKM. In matters of dialectal features e and o are more frequent than i and u in words like ke vi, mellavi, benni, jettiü, ketthu, poggalu etc. With regard to minor vowel-changes this Ms. has many discrepancies.
It opens with 'sri pamcagurubhyo namah', and then the first dohā follows. It is concluded with a phrase "amtu mūlagrantha 340' at the end of the verse paramapayagayanan which is numbered as 337.
S. Described–This is a palm-leaf Ms. about 15 by 2.1 inches in size, with a label 'Yogindra gatha', new Nos. 163 and 1065, from the Jaina Siddhānta Bhavana, Arrah (Bihar). This Ms. may be about 75 years old. It contains leaves Nos. 151 to 160; so it must have formed a part of a bigger bundle of Mss. It has only dohas written in Kannada characters on both the sides of the leaves with eight to ten lines in a page. Sometimes anvaya numbers are put between the lines; and some Sanskrit equivalents taken from the commentary of Brahmadeva are written in the margin. Possibly the copyist himself, when he revised this Ms. with the help of another Ms. has added, in the marginal space, many dohās which he found missing in the text. In one place a Kannada verse (annevaram etc.) is added in the margin; it is taken from the Kannada commentary of Balacandra. This Ms. is very defective in numbering: sometimes numbers are leaped over, because they are often put after three or five verses.
As in other Kannada Mss. we have here d for dh, bb for vv etc. In dialectal details this Ms, very closely agrees with the text of Brahmadeva printed in this edition. As against other Kannada Mss. it has forms like jama, tim, millivi, jitthu etc. Many forms which were first written as so ji, vaidai (in 1. 82 and 88), Bambhu, ihu, jitthu, tim have been corrected as sojji, buddaü, Bamhu, ehu, jetthu, tem etc. Of all the Kannada Mss. examined by me this is the only Ms. that is specially particular about the nasal sign which is represented by a small circular dot placed slightly above the line immediately after the letter to be nasalised. So far as I know, it is an innovation in the Kannada

Page #140

Introduction
95
script; and the copyist rightly understood the needs of Apabhramśa phonetics, and added this sign closely imitating the sign of anusvåra in Devanāgari.
I have no doubt that this Ms. is copied from a Devanagari Ms. aining the text and the commentary of Brahmadeva; and further possibly by the same copyist it is revised with the help of Kannada Mss., some predecessor of our P containing Maladhāri Balacandra's commentary and some Mss. of TKM-group.
As compared with our text the following dohās are missing in this Ms.: I. 33-4, I. 65*1, I. 117, II. 20, II. 60. II. 62, II. 111*2-4, II. 178, II. 180, II. 199; but all these verses are added in the marginal space possibly. by the same copyist. There is only one additional verse (akkharada etc.) after II. 84 which is serially numbered. Then some additional verses are found in the marginal space : on p. 155, two verses (kayakisest" etc. and appasaháva etc.) possibly after II. 36; then two verses (pavēna naraya etc. and bhabbábhabbaha etc.) possibly after II. 62; on p. 158 two verses( visayaha kärane etc. and pamca na etc.) and lastly on p. 159 one dohā (appaha paraha etc.).
The Ms. is concluded with the words 'Yogindragāthe samāptaḥ
T. Described This is a palm-leaf Ms., about 17.5 by 2 inches in size, from Sri-Vira-vāni-vilasa-bhavana, Müdabidri, South Kanara. It contains 8 folios written on both sides, and on the second page of the 8th leaf Ms K, which is described below, begins. There are 9 lines on each page with about 75 to 80 letters in each line. As usual in palm-leaf Mss. We have two string-holes with unwritten space squaring them. These spaces divide the written leaf into three distinct portions. It is written in OldKannada characters, and contains only the dohās of Paramātma prakāša. The Ms. is carefully inscrited, the letters being uniformly shaped. The edges of leaves are come-what broken here and there, though the Ms., on the whole, is well preserved. In a few places, not more than three or four, there are blank spaces for individual letters whenever the copyist has not followed his aduisa. The opening phrase is sri Sāntinathāya namah, and then the dohās follow.
K. Described- This is a palm-leaf Ms., about 17.5 by 2 inches in size, from Sri Viravāni-vilāsa-bhavana, Müdabidri, South Kanara. It covers leaves 8 to 36, the first 8 leaves being occupied by Ms. T which is described above. This Ms. begins on the second page of the 8th leaf; it ends on the second page of the 36th leaf; and after that we have a few Sanskrit verses written in a different hand. In general appearance, the number of lines etc., K closely agrees with T. The edges of leaves have become smoky, and are broken here and there. From the similarity in hand-writing it is clear that I ard K are written by one and the same person. It is plain from

Page #141

96
Paramātma-Prakāśa
the pagination that these two Mss. are expected to stand together. It contains dohas with Kannada explanation. It is written in Old-Kannada characters. As to orthographical peculiarities, the old r is used in the Kannada commentary; sometimes new r is written, but it is struck off and again substituted by the old form. The Ms. opens with sri Santināthaya namaḥ, and ends thus : Yogendra-gathe samāpta || sri Säntināthaya namah || etc. etc.
M. Described - This is a palm-leaf Ms., about 17.5 by 2 inches in size. It covers 8 leaves, Nos. 16 to 23. On the first page of leaf No. 16 a Kannada commentary on Mökşaprābhịta by Bālacandra is concluded, and then the dohās of Paramātmaprakaša follow with no introductory remark. not even the opening salutation. This Ms. contains merely the dohās. The handwriting is different here from the two previous Mss. It has 9 or 10 lines on each page, with some 75 letters in each line. The second page of leaf No. 23 is almost blank with one fourth of a line. From the uncertain shape of letters it is clear that the copyist is not sufficiently trained in writing on palm-leaves. Very often modern u is used in these Kannada characters. The surface of pages is besmeared with black powder making the inscribed letters quite visible. The text abruptly ends without any significant indication.
Additional Information about T, K and M-It is necessary to give some more information about the Mss. T, K and M. When I visited Mūda. bidri, in December 1935, on my way to Mysore to attend the Eighth All-India Oriental Conference, Pt. Loknatha Shastri took me to the Sri Virayāņi-vilāsa-bhavana, which, though a new Institution, contains many valuable Mss. As I wanted some Kannada Mss. of Paramätma-prakaša, he gave me a bundle of palm-leaves under wooden boards. Though the length is the same, some leaves are of different breadth. It is this bundle that contains the Mss. T. K and M described above. To indicate the heterogeneous character of this bundle, I think I should give here the names of works contained in it. Folios 1-8 dohīs P.-prakasa (T described above); ff. 8-36; dohās of the same with Kannada explanation (K described above); ff. 1-15 (different pagination and different handwriting) : Nagakumāracarita of Mallisena, and some stray Sk. verses on the remaining space of p. 15; ff. 16-7: Upasakasaṁskära of Padmanandi; ff. 18-21 : Nitisarasamuccaya also called Samayabhūşana, of Indranandi; ff. 22-5: a small upăsakācāra with religious and didactic contents, the first verse of which runs thus: srimaj Jinēndracandrasya sändra-vāk-candrikasritaḥ, hrşista (?) duştakarmişta-gharma-samtāpanašramam | durăcara-cayakranta-duḥkh-samdohašāntayê, bravimyõpasakācāram caru-mukti sukhapradam here some pages are missing; ff. 33-36 (the hand-writing is different here) the same Upåsakācāra again : ff. 1-2 (no pagination) Prašnõttara-ratnamālika, of

Page #142

Introduction
97
Amoghavarsa; ff. 2-4 ; Vrataphala-varnanam of Prabhācandra; then there is the Ms. M. containing the dohās only of P.-prakasa. Then there are stray leaves irregularly numbered and they contain portions of Prašnottararatnamalika, the Kannada commentary on Svarūpa-sambodhana, some verses on anuprēkşă, some remarks in Kannada on the lakasvarūpa. Thus this bundle is made of Mss. and leaves of Mss. carelessly collected possibly by a copyist and tied between two boards. The stray leaves collected here must have rendered their remaining portions incomplete elsewhere.
This bundle has a modern label in Kannada like this: No. (20) ke basti (in Devanāgari) 1) Nägakumara Yögëndragäthä. måla tatha. karnatakavyakhyāna. 2) Pranõttarsaratnamilika. Sansksta.' There is another No. 60 (in English) to the left of this label.
Common Characteristics of TKM-These three Mss., T. K. and M, have certain common characteristics which should not be taken as dialectal peculiarities, because they arise out of the nature of the script, viz.; Kannada and its phonetic traits, in which they are all written. In these Mss. I is uniformly shown as l; initial ! is often written wrongly as a; no distinction between anunâsika and anusvāra is made : the script does not possess separate signs for these two; long and short vowels are not distinguished; d and dh, p and ph etc. are not distinguished; d and dh are sometimes distinguished; very often i, u and e are represented by yi, yu and ye; the conjuncts are shown by a nõlli, i.e., a fat zero preceding a consonant indicating that the following consonant is to be duplicated; in fact the conjuncts, therefore, have values like ghgh, khkh, thth, dhdh etc.; very often v and vy are shown as b and bb. In noting the variants I have ignored cases of !; some important anusyāras have been noted; d or dh and p or ph etc; are ignored; long and short vowels are correctly shown; and the conjuncts are written accord - ing to Hemacandra's rule VIII, ii, 90. A few cases of bb are noted in the beginning; so ji and jo ji are uniformly written in these Mss, as sõjji and jöjji; so these readings are recorded in a few places in the beginning and then ignored
Relation between T, K and M-As to the relation between these three Mss., they form one family and ultimately, behind some generations of Mss., they are copied from one and the same Ms. preferably with a Kannada commentary, as it is clear from the order and number of dohās and from their agreement even in errors sometimes. After II. 8 T, K and M have a Kannada phrase : mokşamaṁ pēļdaparu. This phrase has some propriety in K. as it contains a Kannada commentary; but its presence in T only shows that it is also copied from an earlier Ms. having a Kannada commentary. Though T and K are written by the same copyist, they do not copy each other, but possibly they follow another Ms. having the text
13

Page #143

98
Paramātma-prakāśa
with commentary (corresponding to T and K), the text in the both being copied from some earlier source. The age of T and K is the same; and so far as I can judge they may be at least 200 years old. The leaves of T and K are brittle and show signs of being exposed to moisture and smoke. T is written first, and then K is written sometimes consulting the former. Mis a later Ms. though apparently it looks older because of the blackish colour of its pages. M is a mechanical copy of T even inheriting the errors therein. For instance, in II. 29 T has a decorative zero after the letter mu, which comes at the end of a line, in the word munijjai; but the copyist of M takes that decorative zero as nõlli and writes munntjjai. In II. 203 T writes caü, then there is space for a letter and then i, M writes caüi without blank space, while the reading of K is caügai. In II, 27 T leaves blank space for la in writing the word lahun; M does not leave that space, but la is added later on in the interlinear space, while K writes lahun. There are one or two cases where M improves on T possibly following K, but usually K is not consulted by M. The dohās wanting in these Mss. as compared with our text, are noted separately.
Relation between the Mss. described above-It would be a mistake to classify the above Mss. on the basis of locality, script etc., because they show cross influences in the addition and the omission of verses and in important various readings. The omission of dohās too cannot be a safe criterion, because when the scribes copied only the text from the body of Brahmadeva's commentary, they have committed errors in selecting the various dohās from a closely written Ms. of the commentary of Brahmadeya. It is always difficult to mark out the verses consecutively and to distinguish a verse of the text from a verse quoted in the commentary. In my classification I am guided by additional verses which are not found quoted in the Sk. commentary and by significant various readings which cannot be explained as due to the peculiarities of script. T, K and M form a distinct group which we might call Shorter Recension for the sake of convenience. M closely follows T, and T and K appear to be copied from an earlier Ms., say a postulate K, containing the text with a Kannada gloss. Maladhāre Bālacandra plainly says that he is following the Vștti of Brahmadeva but the text that was before him contained some more verses not admitted by Brahmadeva. This leads to the postulation of a Ms. P', containing a longer (and eclectic) recension of the text, which was used by Bālacandra. A and the text printed in this edition represent a shorter form of P' as accepted by Brahmadeva, by dropping some dohās. B, C and S (ignoring the marginal additions in S) are various attempts to copy out the bare text alone from the commentary of Brahmadeva. Q is nearer A, but it shows some influence of TKM group. R shows the influence of AP and TKM.

Page #144

Introduction
99
The relation between the Mss. is shown below in a genealogical form.
Joindu's Text
The relation between the Mos, is
Shorter Recension
An eclectic Text : Longer Recension
P
TK
Text of Balacandra's Text of Brahmadeva : Commentary A and the Text printed
in this Edition
B CS (Marginal Additions
ignored)
Various Readings on the text of the Paramatma prakasa are noted along with the text printed at the end of this volume. In noting the variants apparent scribal errors are ignored. A few typical forms of nasals are noted. In the case of readings from Kannada Mss., ! for I, bb for vy, khkh for kkh are practically ignored; the distinction between long and short vowels and between d and dh, which is not shown in Kannada Mss., is correctly shown here. There are two ways of preparing a Ms.: first, a scribe may directly copy from a Ms., and secondly, some one may dictate and the scribe may go on writing. In the first, there would be errors due to orthographical confusion etc.; and in the second, due to auditory confusion etc. Some of the variants might be explained in the light of these two sources of errors. If I have given readings more than necessary, I hope, I have erred on the safer side.
The Ms. A shows some differences here and there in the Sanskrit commentary. For instance, the concluding portion of it on dohā 4 runs thus तानपि कथंभूतान् । लोकालोकप्रकाशकेवलज्ञानेन त्रिभुवनगुरु कान् लोकालोकनं परमात्मस्वरूपावलोकनं निश्चयेन पुद्गलादिपदार्थानवलोकनं व्यवहारनयेन केवलज्ञानप्रकाशेन समाहितस्वस्वरूपभूते निर्वाणपदे तिष्ठन्ति यतः, ततस्तनिर्वाणमुपादेयमिति तात्पर्यार्थः ।
On dohā 5, the portion of the commentary after niyanta runs thus : 37Tcafe वसन्तोऽपि लोकालोकं समस्तमेषप्रत्यक्षीभूतं तथा षड्द्रव्यस्वरूपं विमलं निर्मलं अवलोकयन्त: निश्चयन्तः तिष्ठन्ति । इदानीं विशेषः ।
There are many verbal disagreements which do not affect the meaning. Here, in noting the readings, our attention is mainly concentrated on the Apabhramśa text.

Page #145

100
Paramatma-prakāta
V. Critical account of the Mss. of Yogasara Description of the Mss.-The critical text of Yagasara, included in this volume, is based on the following Mss. :
A (): It is a paper Ms., about 14 by 8.5 inches, from Jaina Siddhänta Bhavana, Arrah (Bihar), received through the kindness of Pt. K. Bhujabali Shastri. It contains 10 folios written on both sides, the first and the last sheets being blank on one side. It is a recent Devanagari transcript, made in Samvat 1992, from an older Ms. belonging to some Bhandara in Delhi. It contains verses and interlinear Gujarati translation (Tabba) written in columns of short lines. There are many scribal errors here and there. Even in mistakes this Ms. agrees with P described below. Opening: 11 st get नमः | End: इति श्री जोगसारग्रंथ समाप्तः ॥
P (4) This is a paper Ms., about 11 by 5 inches, from Patan Bhandara received through the kindness of Muni Śri Punyavijayaji Maharaj. It has 22 folios written on both sides. It contains verses and interlinear Gujarati translation written in columns of short lines. With negligible dialectal variations this translation is identical in A and P. In some places this Ms. shows initial and the absence of ya fruti.. Devanagari e and o are written in the padi-matra form. Separation of words in Dohäs is indicated by small spots in red ink at the top of lines. On the whole this Ms. is fairly accurate and sufficiently helpful in checking the scribal errors in A. It ends thus: इति योगसार समाप्तम् || The Tabba or the Gujarati translation gives the age of this Ms.: संवत् १७१२ वर्षे चैत्रशुदि १२ रवौ दिने लषीतं ॥
B (a): This is a paper Ms., about 12 by 5.5 inches in size, received from Pt. Nathuram Premi, Bombay. It contains only Dohas written folios, and the last page is blank. It is closely written in Devanagari characters each page having some 15 lines. Excepting a few scribal errors and lapses the Ms. is fairly accurate. This Ms. is somewhat particular about. anusvära, and shows preferably u in the Nom Sg. while others often have a. In some places the order of verses differs from the rest, see for instance verses Nos, 83-84 and 90-91. A portion of No. 48 is missing, but the omitted line is written on the margin in a different hand. The folios are brittle, and the edges are broken here and there. From its appearance it is the oldest Ms. of these four. I am told that the text of Yogasara printed in Manikachandra D. J. Granthamala was based on this Ms. It ends far
JH (): This is a paper Ms., about 11 by 5 inches in size, from Śri Ailaka Pannalala D. J. Sarasvati Bhavan, Jhalarapatan, received through. the kindness of Pt. Pannalal Soni. It contains only Dohas written on 5 folios, the first page being blank. It is written in neat Devanagari hand with regular red strokes indicating the lines. This Ms. contains many scribal errors. Some of its special readings agree with the printed text noted above.

Page #146

Introduction
101 Comparative Remarks—These four Mss. show two distinct groups : B stands by itself, while A, P and Jh form a family. A and P go back to a common predecessor containing Gujarāti Tabbā. Their textual agreements are quite close and the Gujarāti translation is common to both. The dialectal form of this translation in Pis older than that in A. As against B, which is the oldest of the four, Mss. A and P show the tendency of having a for u of the Nom.; they ignore anusvära; and ai is often written as au.
Present Text and Readings-An intelligent record of text tradition has been my aim in building the text of Yogasära. In editing an Apabhramsa text, especially when there are vowel variations between different Mss., it is often difficult to distinguish genuine variants from scribal errors. In representing the vowels I have mainly followed P and B often preference being shown to the latter. Even earlier Mss. have confused i and h; so in spite of their agreement I have made some changes in the text, of course with a question mark. I have given more readings merely to shed sufficient light on the textual variations. The readings of the printed text have not been noted for the following reasons: the basic Ms. of the printed text is collated; I suspect that the printed text has not got the authenticity of an independent Ms. as the text appears to be shaped eclectically without naming the sources of the readings; and lastly its readings are practically covered by A and P.
Sanskrit Shade-On principle I am against the procedure of giving Chāyā (i.e. Sanskrit Shade) to an Apabhramśa text: first, it is a mistaken procedure which has neither linguistic nor historical justification; secondly, the Chāyā so shaped is bound to be a specimen of bad Sanskrit, as Apabhramśa has developed modes of expression and styles of syntax which are not allowed in classical Sanskrit; and lastly it has a vicious effect that many readers satisfy their thirst for contents by reading Chāyā alone. This habit of giving Chāyā to Prākrit works has done positive harm to the study of Indian linguistics. Prākrit studies were ignored; dramas like Mrcchakatikam and Sakuntalam are looked upon as Sanskrit works even though their major portion is written in Prākrit by the authors themselves; and lastly as a consequence the modern Indian languages are being nourished with Sanskrit words, etc. ignoring the Prākrits. It is not the mother but the grandmother that is supplying the milk of words to the present-day languages. However I had to give the Chāyā with due deference to the persistent insistence of the Publisher. In the Chāyā I have given Sanskrit words for those in Apabhraṁsa at times with alternatives in brackets. The Chāyā is not to be judged as an independent piece of Sanskrit, but it is merely the shade of the original Apabhramsa. For the convenience of readers Sandhi rules are not observed. In many places my Chāyā differs from the one given with the printed text.
a

Page #147

102
Paramatma-prakasa
i) Post Script:
When this Indroduction was nearly complete in print, Rajasthanara Duha, part I (Pilāņi-Rajasthāni Series No. 2, Delhi 1935) compiled and edited by Prof. Narottamdas Svami, M.A. reached my hands, On p. 63 I have suggested that Hemacandra appears to have drawn some of his illustrative quotations from a tract of literature written in that Apabhramśa which was a predecessor of Old-Rajasthāni; say some earlier stage of Dingala; and in the foot-note I have quoted a verse from Rajasthāni which has close similarities with a quotation of Hemacandra. Prof. Svami has detected two more verses ( Rajasthanara Duha, Intro. p. 55) which I give below i) Hemacandra's quotation on VIII, iv, 395:
पुत्ते जाएँ कवणु गुणु अवगुणु कवणु मुएण । जा बप्पीकी भुंहडी चंपिज्जइ अवरेण ।। The present-day Rājasthāni Dohā runs thus:
बेटाँ जायाँ कवण गुण अवगुण कवण धि (मि?) येण। जाँ ऊभाँ घर आपणी गंजीजै अवरेण ॥ nonli's quotation on VIII, iv, 379:
जो भग्गा पारक्कडा तो सहि मज्झ पिएण । अह भग्गा अम्हहँ तणा तो ते मारिअडेण ॥ The present-day Rajasthāni Dohā runs thus :
जइ भग्गा पारक्कडा तो सखि मुज्झ पि येण । जो भग्गा अम्हेतणा तो तिह जुज्झ पडेण ॥
To these one more parallel might be added. The second line is almost identical. iii) Hema.'s quotation on VIII, iv., 335 :
गुणहिण संपइ कित्ति पर फल लिहिआ भुजंति । केसरि ण लहइ बोड्डिअ वि गय लक्खेहि धेप्पति ।।
A Dūhā from Khici Acaļadāsari Vacanaka (Samvat 1470) runs thus (Rajasthanarā Dūhā Intro. p. 38) :
एक्कइ वन्न वसंतडा एव्वड अंतर काइ । सिंध कवड्डी ना लहइ गयवर लक्ख विकाइ ।।
These verses are enough to indicate that Hemacandra is indebted to the province of Rajasthān for some of his quotations. If earlier works from Rajasthan and Gujarāt, written in the older stages of Rajasthāni and Gujarāti, are brought to light in plenty, they would shed much more light on the provenance of Hemacandra's quotations. ii) Additions : (1) On p. 55, paragraph iv: Hemacandra has a statement like this in his Chandonusasanam (Bombay 1912), p. 1: T-a ra yfstattfaazigraf I To अतीव्रप्रयत्नत्वं सयोगस्य गुरुत्वाभावे हेतुः । तीवप्रयन्ते तु भवत्येव गुरुः । यथा- 'बईभारेषु केशान्' इत्यादि ।
It may be inferred that Hemacandra has some other quotations in view than the one in the P.-prakasa. That is not in any way unlikely. This quotation, as it stands, presents some difficulties. The complete line is not quoted; as it is, it does not give any satisfactory meaning; and it may be even asked whether he is quoting simply two broken phrases to show that the vowel before dr is not metrically long, because it is a light conjunct

Page #148

Introduction
103
as distinguished from rh in the following sentence. Dr H. C. Bhayani writes to me thus in his letter dated 22-7-57: "In the new portion of the text Svayambhacchandas of Svayambha that has come to light, a stanza by one Viaddha has been quoted to support the rule that in Pk. a conjunct with r as its latter member is not position-making. The stanza is the stanza is the same as Paramatma-prakata 2. 117 but with this important difference that as in Hemacandra the form is vodraha-draha (1. e., with r intact) as it ought to be if it is to serve as an apt illustration." The verse in question, II 117, is not in Apabhramia; and Brahmadeva has introduced it with the phrase uktam ca. May be that Joindu himself has quoted it, because it is included even in the Shortest Recension.
(2) On p. 60, the word gurau:
Pt. Becharadasaji, Ahmedabad, writes to me thus in his letter, dated 23-11-40 "In Rajaputāna and Maravada, the Svetämbara Yatis (with parigraha) are known by the names 'guram', 'guramji', 'guramsa'. They occupy a respectable position in the society, and some of them are good physicians, some quite learned, and some of them of respectable conduct. It appears that Yogindra has this usage in view while using gura for a Svetämbara."
meaning a Bauddha,
(3) On p. 61. the word vaṁdau: The word vandaka, The word vandaka, is used by Amitagati in his Dharmaparikça, XV 75. (4) On p. 68, with reference to the sentence under ii), in the paragraph, Joindu's Claims, and a supplementary verse found at the close of Ms. Bha (after the concluding colophon) attributes the text to Yogindradeva'.
The verse in question runs thus:
मूलं योगीन्द्रदेवस्य लक्ष्मीचन्द्रस्य पञ्जिका वृत्तिः प्रभाचन्द्रमुनेर्महती तत्त्वदीपिका ॥
It is quite likely, in the absence of ca, that jogindra-davasya is merely an adjective of Laksmicandrasya, Lakṣmicandra being the author of the mala or the basic text; and the exhaustive pañjika-vrttiḥ, Tattva-dipika by name. belongs to Prabhacandra-muni.
(5) On p. 70, about Lakṣmicandra :
An Apabhrama Dahanupaha, in 47 verses, attributed to Kavi Laksmicandra is published in the Anèkanta, XII, 9, pp. 302-3.
(6) My friend Dr. V. Raghavan, University of Madras, Madras, has contributed a note on the date of Joindu; and it is being reproduced here:
"On page 66 of his introduction to the Paramatma-prakasa of Yogindu, edited by him as No. 10 of the Rayachandra Jaina Sastramāla, Dr. A. N. Upadhye says about the name of the author that Joindu or Jogindu or Yogindu is the correct name of the author and that, by a mistake, the Sanskrit form Yogindra had become popular.
On pp. 74-79, ibid, Dr. Upadhye discusses the date of Joindu and concludes that the date falls between those of the Samadhitataka and the

Page #149

104
Paramåtma-Prakasa
Prakrta Laksana. Since Joindu "closely follows Samadhišataka of Pujyapāda" and since "Pūjyapāda lived a bit earlier than the last quarter of the 5th cent. A.D.", the upper limit of the date of Joindu can be taken as the last quarter of 5th cent. A.D. The lower limit is furnished by Canda one of whose illustrative dohās in his Präkrta Laksana happens to be from Joindu's Paramätma-prakaša. Dr. Upadhye notes some want of settlement on the question of Canda's text and date and says in conclusion that the revised form (of Canda's work) can be tentatively placed about 700 A.D.
In view of the difficulties relating to this lower limit evidence, i.e, Canda's Prāksta Laksana, I may add here a note on what I take to be a reference to Joindu by an author of known date. If we leave Canda, the next limit suggested by Dr. Upadhye is Devasena who finished his Darsanasara in A.D. 933. This evidence rests on the similarities of some verses of Devasena and Joindu. If, on the other hand, there is a definite mention of the writer, it would be a more conclusive evidence. Such a mention, I think, is available.
Udayanācārya wrote his Laksanavali in A. D. 984. In his Atmatattvaviveka, Chowk. Skt. Series, 1940. p. 430, we read the following :
"'वेदविद्वषिदर्शनान्तःपातिपुरुषप्रणीतत्वात्' इति मा शङ्किष्ठाः, जिनेन्द्रजगदिन्दुप्रणीतेश्वप्यादरात् ।"
I think the name Jagadindu in the above passage is a slight corruption of Joindu or Yogindu.
If this suggestion is acceptable, Udayana's date will give a definite lower limit and will clearly prove the untenability of any later dates proposed for Joindu. (See Dr. Upadhye's Foot-note on p. 78 of the Intro. on the date proposed by Mr. M. C. Modi).” (7) Page 82, a Ms. of Brahmadeva's Vịtti of Dravyasaṁgraha :
A still earlier Ms. dated 1416 Samvat (i.e., c. A. D. 1357, is reported in the Rajasthānake Jaina sastra-bhandaroki Grantha-sūci, part III (Jayapur 1957), p. 180. This very Sūci reports (p. 193) a Ms. of the P.-prakåsa with the vrtti of Brahmadeva, dated Samvat 1489. (8) On p. 85, the verse jam allină etc.
This verse is practically identical with the Mülăcăra III. 8. (9) Page 86, on Adhyātmi Balacandra
My friend Prof D.L. Narasimhachar, Mysore, writes to me (1-8-1941) thus:
At the end of a Ms. called Tattvaratna-pradipika, a Kannada commentary on the Sutras of Umäsväti, written by Adhyatmi Balacandra, the following Prākrit stanza occurs :
सिद्धति-अभयचदो तस्स सिस्सो य होइ सुदभुणिणो । सब्वगुणे परिपुण्णो तस्सं सिस्सो य नागचंदो य ॥

Page #150

अंग्रेजी प्रस्तावनाका हिन्दी सार
१ परमात्मप्रकाश
परमात्मप्रकाशकी प्रसिद्धि – परमप्पयासु या परमात्मप्रकाश जैनगृहस्थों तथा मुनियोंमें बहुत प्रसिद्ध है। विशेषकर साधुओंको लक्ष्य करके इसकी रचना की गई है । विषय साम्प्रदायिक न होने से यद्यपि समस्त जैनसाधु इसका अध्ययन करते हैं, फिर भी दिगम्बर जैनसाधुओंमें इसकी विशेष ख्याति है । इसकी लोकप्रियता अनेक कारण हैं । प्रथम, इसका नाम ही आकर्षक है; दूसरे, पारिभाषिक शब्दों की भरमार न होनेके कारण इसकी वर्णनशैली कठिन नहीं है; तीसरे, लेखनशैली सरल है, और भाषा सुगम अपभ्रंश है । संसारके कष्टोंसे दुःखी भट्ट प्रभाकर में धार्मिकरुचि पैदा करनेके लिये इसकी रचना की गई थी । संसारके दुःखोंकी समस्या भट्ट प्रभाकरके समान सभी भव्यजीवोंके सामने रहती है, अतः परमात्मप्रकाश सभी आस्तिकोंको प्रिय है । कन्नड़ और संस्कृतमें इसपर अनेक प्राचीन टीकाएँ हैं, वे भी इसकी लोकप्रियता प्रदर्शित करती हैं ।
मेरा योगीन्दुके साहित्यका अध्ययन -- अपभ्रंश भाषाका नवीन ग्रन्थ 'दोहापाहुड' जब मुझे प्राप्त हुआ, तब मैंने उसके सम्बन्ध में 'अनेकान्त' में एक लेख लिखा । उपलब्ध प्रतिमें उसके कर्ताका नाम 'योगेन्द्र' लिखा था । उसपर टिप्पणी करते हुए पं० जुगलकिशोरजीने लिखा कि दोहापाहुडकी देहलीवाली प्रतिमें उसके कर्ताका नाम रामसिंह लिखा है । इसके बाद भाण्डारकर प्राच्यविद्यामन्दिर पूनासे प्रकाशित होनेवाली पत्रिकामें 'जोहन्दु और उनका अपभ्रंश साहित्य' शीर्षकसे मैंने एक लेख लिखा, उसमें मैंने जोइन्दु या योगीन्दुके साहित्यपर कुछ प्रकाश डाला था, और उनके समयके बारेमें कुछ प्रमाण भी संकलित किये थे । इस लेख के प्रकाशनसे काफ़ी लाभ हुआ; दो ग्रन्थ - दोहापाहुड़ और सावयवम्मदोहा - जिनसे अपने खेल में मैंने अनेक उद्धरण दिये थे, प्रो० होरालालजी द्वारा हिन्दी अनुवादके साथ सम्पादित होकर प्रकाशित हो गये । तथा मेरे लेखमें उद्धृत कुछ पद्योंका मराठी में भी अनुवाद किया गया ।
प्राच्य - साहित्य में परमात्मप्रकाशका स्थान - उत्तर भारतकी भाषाओंको, जिनमें मराठी भी सम्मिलित है, समृद्धि तथा उनके इतिहासपर अपभ्रंश भाषाका अध्ययन बहुत प्रकाश डालता है। अब तक प्रकाश में आये हुए अपभ्रंश - साहित्य में परमात्मप्रकाश सबसे प्राचीन है और सबसे पहले प्रकाशन भी इसीका हुआ था, किन्तु इसके प्रारम्भिक संस्करण प्राच्य विद्वानोंके हाथों में नहीं पहुँचे । जहाँ तक मैं जानता हूँ सबसे पहले पी० डी० गुणेने ही 'भविसयत्तकहा' की प्रस्तावना में इसे अपभ्रंशन्प्रन्थ बतलाया था । आचार्य हेमचन्द्रने अपने प्राकृत-व्याकरणमें परमात्मप्रकाशसे अनेक उदाहरण दिये हैं, अतः इसे हम हेमचन्द्र के पहले की अपभ्रंश भाषाका नमूना कह सकते हैं । भाषाकी विशेषताके अतिरिक्त इस ग्रन्थमें एक और भी विशेषता है । जैन साहित्यका पूरा ज्ञान न रहनेके कारण कुछ विद्वान् जैनधर्मको केवल साधु-जीवनके नियमोंका
१. परमात्मप्रकाशकी अंग्रेजी प्रस्तावना का यह अविकल अनुवाद नहीं है । किन्तु अंग्रेजी न जाननेवाले हिन्दी पाठकों के लिये उसके मुख्य मुख्य आवश्यक अंशोंका सार दे दिया गया है। दर्शन तथा भाषाविषयक मन्तव्य विशेषतः संक्षिप्त कर दिये गये हैं । विशेष जाननेके इच्छुक अंग्रेजी प्रस्तावनासे जान सकते हैं । - अनुवादकर्ता । २. पृष्ठ ५४४-४८ और ६७२ । ३ जिल्द १२, पृ० १३२-६३ । ४. मराठी - साहित्य - पत्रिका. १० १४

Page #151

परमात्मप्रकाश
शिक्षक कहते हैं; कुछ इसे मनोविज्ञान से शून्य बतलाते हैं। किन्तु परमात्मप्रकाश स्पष्ट बतलाता है कि आध्यात्मिक गूढ़वादका जैनधर्ममें क्या स्थान है और वह कैसे मनोविज्ञानका आधार होता है। यदि हम यह याद रक्खें कि जैनधर्म अनेक देवतावादी है और ईश्वरको जगतका कर्ता नहीं मानता, तो यह निश्चित है कि जैन गूढ़वाद सभीको विशेष रोचक मालूम होगा।
परमात्मप्रकाशके पहले संस्करण-सन १९०९ ई० में देवबन्दके बाबू सूरजभानुजी वकोलने हिन्दी अनुवादके साथ इस ग्रन्थको प्रकाशित किया था, और उसका नाम रक्खा था 'श्रीपरमात्मप्रकाश प्राकृत ग्रन्थ, हिन्दी-भाषा अर्थसहित । इस संस्करणमें मूल सावधानीसे नहीं छपाया गया था। प्रस्तावनामें प्रकाशकने लिखा भी था कि जैनमन्दिरोंसे प्राप्त अनेक प्रतियोंकी सहायता लेनेपर भी उसका शुद्ध करना कठिन था। सन् १९१५ ई० में इसका बाबू ऋषभदासजी बी० ए० वकीलका अंग्रेजी अनुवाद आरासे प्रकाशित हुआ । किन्तु यह अनुवाद सन्तोषजनक न था । सन् १९१६ ई० में रायचन्द्रजैनशास्त्रमाला बम्बई ब्रह्मदेवकी संस्कृतटीका और पं० मनोहरलालजीके द्वारा आधुनिक हिन्दी में परिवर्तित पं० दौलतरामजीकी भाषाटीकाके साथ इसे प्रकाशित किया। यद्यपि इसके मूल में भी सुधारकी आवश्यकता थो, फिर भी यह एक अच्छा संस्करण था।
वर्तमान संस्करण--यद्यपि रायचन्द्रजैनशास्त्रमालाके पूर्वोक्त संस्करणको हो यह दूसरी आवृत्ति है, फिर भी यह संस्करण पहलेसे परिष्कृत और बड़ा है, और इसकी यह भूमिका तो एक नई वस्तु है । प्रकाशककी इच्छानुसार मूल, ब्रह्मदेवकी टीकावाला हो दिया गया है, किन्तु हस्तलिखित प्रतियोंके आधारसे मूल तथा संस्कृतटीकाका संशोधन कर लिया गया है। इसके सिवा समस्त पदों के मध्यमें संयोजक चिह्न लगाये गये हैं, तथा अनुनासिक और अनुस्वारके अन्तरका ध्यान रक्सा गया है। संस्कृतछायामें भी कई जगह परिवर्तन किया गया है । हिन्दीटोकामें भी जहाँ तहां सुधार किया गया है।
मल और भाषा सम्बन्धी निर्णय-इस संस्करणमें मूल ब्रह्मदेवका ही दिया गया है अर्थात् संस्कृतटीका बताते समय ब्रह्मदेवके सामने परमात्मप्रकाशके दोहोंको जो रूपरेखा उपस्थित थी, या जिस रूपरेखाके आधारपर उन्होंने अपनी टीका रची थी, इस संस्करणमें भी उसीका अनुसरण किया गया है। किन्तु हमें यह न भूलना चाहिये कि ब्रह्मदेवके मूलवाली प्रतियोंमें भी पाठ-भेद पाए जाते थे। परमात्मप्रकाशके परम्परागत पाठको जानने के लिये भारतके विभिन्न प्रान्तोंसे मंगाई गई कोई दस प्रतियों को मैंने देखा है, और उनमेंसे चुनी हुई छः प्रतियोंके पाठान्तर अन्त में दे दिये हैं। अतः भाषासम्बन्धी चर्चा अनेक हस्तलिखित प्रतियोंके पाठान्तरोंके आधारपर की गई है।
परमात्मप्रकाशका मूल ब्रह्मदेवका मूल-ब्रह्मदेवने परमात्मप्रकाशके दो भाग किये है । प्रथम अधिकारमें १२६, और द्वितीयमें २१९ दोहे हैं । इनमें क्षेपक भी सम्मिलित हैं। ब्रह्मदेवने क्षेपकके भी दो भाग कर दिये हैं, एक 'प्रक्षेपक' ( जो मूलमें सम्मिलित कर लिया गया है ) और दूसरा 'स्थलसंख्या-बाह्य प्रक्षेपक' ( जो मूलमें सम्मिलित कर लिया गया है ) और दूसरा स्थलसंख्या-बाह्य-प्रक्षेपक' (जो मूलमें सम्मिलित नहीं किया गया है) उनका मूल इस प्रकार हैप्रथम अधिकार-मूल दोहे
११८ प्रक्ष पक स्थ० बा०प्र०

-

Page #152

प्रस्तावना
ماه
२१४
द्वितीय अधिकार-मूल दोहे
स्थ० बा० प्र०
५
२१९
इससे पता चलता है कि परमात्मप्रकाशको जो प्रति ब्रह्मदेवको मिली थी, काफी विस्तृत थी। जिन पांच दोहोंके ( १,२८-३२ ) योगीन्दुरचित होने में उन्हें सन्देह था, उनको उन्होंने अपने क्षेपक माना है। किन्तु जिन आठ दोहोंको उन्होंने मूलमें सम्मिलित नहीं किया, संभवतः पाठकों के लिये उपयोगी जानकर ही उन्होंने उनकी टीका की है। ब्रह्मदेवको प्राप्त प्रति कितनी बड़ी थी, यह निश्चित रीतिसे नहीं बतलाया जा सकता । किन्तु यह कल्पना करना संभव है कि उसमें और भी अधिक दोहे थे, जिन्हें ब्रह्मदेव अपने दोनों प्रकारके प्रक्षेपकोंमें न मिला सके।
बालचन्द्रका मूल-मलधारी बालचन्द्रने परमात्मप्रकाश कन्नड़ में एक टीका लिखी है। आरम्भ में वे कहते हैं कि मैंने ब्रह्मदेवकी संस्कृतटीकासे सहायता ली है। बालचन्द्र के मूलमें ६ पद्य अधिक है। ब्रह्मदेवका अनुसरण करनेपर भी बालचन्द्रको प्रतिमें ६ अधिक पद्य क्यों पाये जाते हैं ? इस प्रश्नके दो ही समाधान हो सकते है। या तो बालचन्द्र के बाद ब्रह्म देवकी प्रतिमेंसे टीकासहित कुछ पद्य कम कर दिये गये, या बालचन्द्र के सामने कोई अधिक पद्यवाली प्रति उपस्थित थी, जिससे उन्होंने अपनी कन्नड़ टीकामें ब्रह्मदेवकी संस्कृतवृत्तिका अनुसरण करनेपर भी कुछ अधिक पद्य सम्मिलित कर लिये । प्रथम समाधान तो स्वीकार करने योग्य नहीं मालूम होता, क्योंकि टीकासहित कुछ पद्योंका निकाल देना संभव प्रतीत नहीं होता । किन्तु दूसरा समाधान उचित जंचता है। वे ६ पद्य इस प्रकार है१-२-पहला और दूसरा अधिक पद्य २, ३६ के बाद आते हैं।
कायकिलेसें पर तणु भिज्जइ विण उवसमेण कसाउ | खिज्जइ । ण करहिं इंदियमणह णिवारणु उगतवो वि ण कोक्खह कारण ।।
अप्पसहावे जासु र णिच्चुववासउ तासु । बाहिरदव्वे जासु रइ भुक्खुमारि तासु ।। ३-यह पद्य २,१३४ के बाद 'उक्तं च' करके लिखा है
अरे जिउ सोक्खे मग्गसि धम्मे अलसिय । पक्खे विण केव उड्डण मग्गेसि मेंडय दंडसिय (? || ४-२,१४० के बाद यह दोहा आता है
पण्ण ण मारिय सोयरा पुणु छट्टउ चंडाल । माण ण मारिय अपप्णउ केव छिज्जइ संसारु ।। ५-२,१५६ के बाद यह दोहा 'प्रक्षेपकम्' करके लिखा है--
अप्पह परह परंपरह परमप्प उह समाणु । पर करि परु करि परु जि करि जइ इच्छइ णिव्वाणु ।। ६--२,२०३ के बाद, संभवतः असावधानोके कारण इसपर नम्बर नहीं डाला गया है, किन्तु टीका
की हैअन्तु वि गंतुवि तिहुवगहें सासयसोक्खसहाउ। तेत्थु जि सयलु वि कालु जिय णिवसइ लद्धसहाउ ।।
'त' 'क' और 'म' 'प्रति अन्य प्रतियोंकी अपेक्षा बहत संक्षिप्त है। ब्रह्मदेवके मूलके साथ उनकी तुलना करनेपर उनमें निम्नलिखित दोहे नहीं पाये जाते--
प्रथम अधिकारमें-२-११, १६, २०, २२, २८-३२, ३८, ४१, ४३, ४४, ४७, ६५, ६५*१, ६६, ७३, ८०, ८१, ९१, ९२, ९९, १००, १०४, १.६,१०८, ११०, ११८, ११९, १२१ १२३.२-३।

Page #153

परमात्मप्रकाश
द्वितीय अधिकारमें-१, ५-६, १४-१६, ४४; ४६* १, ४९-५२, ७०, ७४, ७६, ८४, ८६-८७.९९, १०२, १११ २-४, ११४-११६, १२८-१२९, १३४-१३७, १३७* ५, १३८-५४०, १४२, १४४-१४७, १५२-१५५, १५७-१६५, १६८, १७८-१८१, १८५, १९७, २००, २०५-२१२ ।
किन्तु इन प्रतियोंमें दोहे अधिक है, जो न तो ब्रह्मदेव की प्रतिमें पाये जाते है, और न बालचन्द्र की हो प्रतिमें, कुछ संशोधनके साथ दोनों दोहे नीचे दिये जाते हैं१-१, ४६ के बाद
जो जाणइ सो जाणि जिय जो पेक्खइ सो पेक्खु । अंतुबहुंतु वि जंपु चइ होउण तुहुँ णिखेक्खु ।। २-२, २१४ के बाद
भव्वाभव्वह जो चरणु सरिसु ण तेण हि मोक्खु । लद्धि ज भव्वह रयणत्तय होइ अभिण्णे मोक्खु ।
'त, क', और 'म' प्रतियाँ-इन प्रतियोंमें ब्रह्मदेवके मूलसे ( प्रक्षेपकसहित ) ११२ और बालचन्द्रके मूलसे ११८ पद्य कम है । मुझे ऐसा मालम होता है कि इन प्रतियोंके पीछे कोई मौलिक आधार अवश्य है, क्योंकि एक तो 'क' प्रतिको कन्नड़टीका ब्रह्मदेवकी टीकासे स्वतन्त्र है, और संभवतः उससे प्राचीन भी है। दूसरे इसमें ब्रह्मदेवका एक भी क्षेपक नहीं पाया जाता । तीसरे इसमें ब्रह्मदेव और बालचन्द्रसे दो गाथायें अधिक हैं। चौथे, ब्रह्मदेवने २,१४३ में 'जिणु सामिउ सम्मत्त' पाठ रक्खा है तथा टीकामें दूसरे पाठान्तर 'सिवसंगमु सम्मत्तु' का उल्लेख किया है। उनका दूसरा पाठान्तर 'सिवसंगम सम्मत्तु' इन प्रतियों के के 'सिउ संगम सम्मत्त' पाठसे मिलता है। किन्तु इन प्रतियोंमें अविद्यमान दोहोंका विचार करनेसे यही नतीजा निकला है कि ये प्रतियाँ परमात्मप्रकाश का संक्षिप्त रूप है। यह भी कहा जा सकता है कि इन प्रतियों का मूल ही परमात्मप्रकाशका वास्तविक मूल है, जिसे योगीन्दुके किसी शिष्य, संभवतः स्वयं भट्ट प्रभाकरने हो यह बताने के लिए कि गुरुने उसे यह उपदेश दिया था, वह बढ़ा दिया है । यद्यपि यह कल्पना आकर्षक है किन्तु इसका समर्थन करनेके लिए प्रमाण नहीं है । इन प्रतियों का आधार दक्षिण कर्नाटककी एक प्राचीन प्रति है, अतः इस कल्पनाका यह मतलब हो सकता है कि योगीन्दु दक्षिणी थे, और मूलग्रन्थ उत्तर भारतमें विस्तृत किया गया, क्योंकि ब्रह्मदेव उत्तर प्रान्तके वासी थे। किन्तु योगीन्दु को दक्षिणी सिद्ध करने के लिए कोई भी प्रमाण नहीं है। पर इतना निश्चित है कि परमात्मप्रकाशको 'त' 'क' और 'म' प्रतिके रूपमें संक्षिप्त करनेके लिए कोई कारण अवश्य रहा होगा। संभवतः दक्षिण भारतमें, जहाँ शंकराचार्य, रामानुज आदिके समयमें जैनोंको वेदान्त और शैवोंके विरुद्ध वाद-विवाद करना पड़ता था, किसी कन्नडटोकाकारके द्वारा यह संक्षिप्त रूप किया गया है।
जोइन्दुके मूलपर मेरा मत-उपलब्ध प्रतियोंके आधारपर यह निर्णय कर सकना असंभव है कि जोइन्दुकृत परमात्मप्रकाश का शुद्ध मूल कितना है ? किन्तु दोहोंको संख्यापर दृष्टि डालनेसे यह जान पड़ता है कि ब्रह्मदेवका मूल ही जोइन्दुके मूलके अधिक निकट है ।
संक्षेपमें परमात्मप्रकाशका विषय-परिचय सारांश-प्रारम्भके सात दोहोंमें पंचपरमेष्ठीको नमस्कार किया गया है । फिर तीन दोहोंमें ग्रन्थकी उत्यानिका है । पाँचमें बहिरात्मा, अन्तरात्मा और परमात्माका स्वरूप बताया गया है। इसके बाद दस दोहोंमें विकलपरमात्माका स्वरूप आता है। पांच क्षेपकों सहित चौबीस दोहोंमे सकलपरमात्माका वर्णन है। ६ दोहोंमें जीवके स्वशरीर-प्रमाणकी चर्चा है । फिर द्रव्य, गुण, पर्याय, कर्म, निश्चयसम्यग्दृष्टि, मिथ्यात्व

.

Page #154

प्रस्तावना
१०९
आदिकी चर्चा है । दूसरे अधिकारमें प्रारम्भके दस दोहोंमें मोक्षका स्वरूप, एकमें मोक्षका फल, उन्नीसमें निश्चय और व्यवहार मोक्षमार्ग तथा आठमें अभेदरत्नत्रयका वर्णन है। इसके बाद चौदहमें समभावकी चौदहमें पुण्य पापकी समानता की और इकतालीस दोहोंमें शुद्धोपयोगी के स्वरूपकी चर्चा है। अन्त में परमसमाधिका कथन है ।
परमात्मप्रकाशपर समालोचनात्मक विचार
रचनाकाल तथा कुछ ऐतिहासिक पुरुषोंका उल्लेख ब्रह्मदेवके आधारपर हम इस निर्णयपर पहुँचते हैं कि प्रभाकर भट्टके कुछ प्रश्नोंका उत्तर देने के लिए योगीन्दुने परमात्मप्रकाशकी रचना की थी। एक स्थलपर प्रभाकर भट्ट को उसके नामसे सम्बोधित किया गया है और 'वह' जिसका अर्थ ब्रह्मदेव 'वस' करते हैं, तथा 'ओइय' ( योगिन् ) शब्दके द्वारा तो अनेकबार उनका उल्लेख आता है। प्रभाकर भट्ट योगीन्दुके शिष्य थे; इसके सिवा उनके सम्बन्धमें हम कुछ नहीं जानते ! भट्ट और प्रभाकर ये दो पृथक् नाम नहीं है, किन्तु एक नाम है। संभवतः भट्ट एक उपाधि रही होगी; जैसे कि कन्नड़ व्याकरण 'शब्दानुशासन' ( १६०४ ई० ) के रचयिता अकलंक भट्टाकलंक कहे जाते हैं। भट्ट प्रभाकरके प्रश्न और योगीन्दुका उन्हें सम्बोधित करना बतलाते हैं कि वे योगीन्दुके एक शिष्य थे, और साधु थे, उनका प्रसिद्ध पूर्वमीमांसक प्रभाकर भट्ट ( लगभग ६०० ई० ) के साथ कोई सम्बन्ध नहीं है । योगीन्दु और प्रभाकर के नामके सिवा ग्रन्थ में किन्हीं आर्य शान्तिके मतका भी उल्लेख है । निःसन्देह इनसे पहले कोई शान्ति नामके ग्रन्थकार हुए होंगे, किन्तु विशेष प्रमाणों के अभाव में हम उन ज्ञान ग्रन्थकारोंके साथ इनकी एकता नहीं ठहरा सकते, जिनके नामके प्रारम्भमें 'शान्ति' शब्द आता है ।
ग्रन्थ-रचनाका उद्देश और उसमें सफलता —जैसा कि ग्रन्थमें उल्लेख है, प्रभाकर शिकायत करता है कि उसने संसार में बहुत दुःख भोगे हैं; अतः वह उस प्रकाशकी खोजमें है, जो उसे अज्ञानान्धकार से मुक्त कर सके। इसलिये सबसे पहले योगीन्दु आत्माका वर्णन करते हैं, आत्म-साक्षात्कारकी आवश्यकता बतलाते हैं, और कुछ गूढ़ आत्मिक अनुभवोंकी चर्चा करते हैं । इसके बाद वे मुक्तिका स्वरूप, उसका फल, और उसके उपाय समझाते हैं मुक्ति के उपायोंका वर्णन करते हुए वे नीति और अनुशासन सम्बन्धी बहुत-सी शिक्षाएं देते हैं। भट्ट प्रभाकरको जिस प्रकाशकी आवश्यकता यो बहुतसी आत्माएं उस प्रकाशकी प्राप्ति के लिये उत्सुक हैं, और जैसा कि ग्रन्थका नाम तथा विषय बतलाते हैं, सचमुच यह ग्रन्थ परमात्मा की समस्यापर बहुत सरल तरीकेसे प्रकाश डालता है ।
विषय वर्णनकी शैली -- जैसा कि ब्रह्मदेवके मूलसे मालूम होता है, स्वयं ग्रन्थकारने ही प्रभाकर भट्टके दो प्रश्नोंके आधारपर ग्रन्थको दो अधिकारोंमें विभक्त किया था। दूसरे भागकी अपेक्षा पहला भाग अधिक क्रमबद्ध है। कहीं कहीं ग्रन्थकारने स्वयं प्रश्न उठाकर उनका भिन्न-भिन्न दृष्टियोंसे समाधान किया है। इस प्रन्थ में शाब्दिक पुनरावृत्तिकी कमी नहीं है, किन्तु इस पुनरावृत्तिसे अन्धकार अनजान न था, क्यों कि वह स्वयं कहता है कि भट्ट प्रभाकरको समझानेके लिये अनेक बातें बार-बार कही गई है। आध्या त्मिक ग्रन्थोंमें किसी बातको बार बार कहनेका विशेष प्रयोजन होता है, वहाँ न्यायशास्त्र के समान युक्तियों का कोटिक्रम और उसके द्वारा सिद्धान्त निर्णय अपेक्षित नहीं रहता । वहाँ ग्रन्थकार के पास नैतिक और आध्यात्मिक विचारोंकी पूँजी होती है, और उसके प्रति पाठकोंको रुचि उत्पन्न करना उसका मुख्य उद्देश होता है, अतः अपने कपनको प्रभावक बनानेके लिये यह एक बाठको कुछ हेर-फेर के साथ दोहराता और २११ दो० २- देखो १.११ । ३-देखो २६१ ।
१- देखो १ अ० ८ दो० और २ अ० ३-देखो २ २११ ।

Page #155

११०
परमात्मप्रकाश
उपमाओंसे स्पष्ट करता है। ब्रह्मदेवने भी "अत्र भावनाग्रन्थे समाधिशतकवत् पुनरुक्तदूषणं नास्ति" आदि लिखकर पुनरुक्तिका समर्थन किया है।
उपमाएं और उनका उपयोग-अपने उपदेशको रोचक बनानेके लिये एक धर्मोपदेष्टा उपमा रूपक आदिका उपयोग करता है। यदि वे ( उपमा रूपक आदि ) दैनिक व्यवहारकी वस्तुओंसे लिये गये हों तो पाठकों और श्रोताओंको प्रकृत विषयके समझने में बहुत सुगमता रहती है। यही कारण है कि भारतीय न्यायशास्त्रमें दृष्टान्तको इतना महत्त्व दिया गया है। विषयकी गृढ़ताके कारण एक धर्मोपदेष्टा या ताकिक की अपेक्षा एक गूढ़वादीको इन सब चीजोंका उपयोग करना विशेष आवश्यक होता है। दृष्टान्त आदिकी सहायतासे वह अपने अनुभवोंको पाठकों तथा श्रोताओं तक पहुंचानेमें समर्थ होता है। गूढ़वादीकी वर्णनशैलीमें अन्य शैलियोंसे अन्तर होनेका यह अभिप्राय नहीं है कि उसके अनुभव अप्रामाणिक है, किन्तु इससे यही प्रमाणित होता है कि वे अनुभव शब्दों द्वारा व्यक्त नहीं किये जा सकते । अतः गढ़वादके ग्रन्थ उपमा रूपक आदिसे भरे होते हैं । 'योगीन्दु' भी इसके अपवाद नहीं हैं, उनके परमात्मप्रकाशमे दृष्टान्तोंकी कमी नहीं है। उनमेंसे कुछ तो बड़े ही प्रभावक है ।
परमात्मप्रकाशके छन्द---ब्रह्मदेवके मूलके अनुसार परमात्मप्रकाशमें सब ३४५ पद्य हैं, उनमें ५ गाथाएं एक स्रग्धरा और एक मालिनी है किन्तु इनकी भाषा अपभ्रंश नहीं है। तथा एक चतुष्पादिका और शेष ३३७ अपभ्रंश दोहे हैं। परमात्मप्रकाशमें कहीं भी 'दोहा' शब्द नहीं आया, किन्तु योगीन्दके दूसरे ग्रन्थ योगसारमें दो बार आया है । दोहेकी दोनों पंक्तियाँ बराबर होती हैं। प्रत्येक पंक्तिमें दो चरण होते हैं । प्रथम चरणमें १३ और दूसरे में ११ मात्राएँ होती हैं । किन्तु जब हम दोहेको पढ़ते हैं या उसे गानेकी कोशिश करते हैं, तो ऐसा मालूम होता है कि हमें १४ मात्राओंकी आवश्यकता है-प्रत्येक चरणको अन्तिम मात्रा कुछ जोरसे बोली जाती है। अतः यह कहना उपयुक्त होगा कि दोहेकी प्रत्येक पंक्तिके चौदह और बारह मात्राएं होती हैं किन्तु परमात्मप्रकाशके इकतीस दोहोंमें प्रत्येक पंक्तिके चरणमें अन्तिम वर्णका गुरु उच्चारण करनेपर भी तेरह मात्राएं ही होती हैं । दोहेकी प्रत्येक पंक्तिमें चौदह और बारह मात्राए होती है, यह बात विरहाङ्क' की निम्नलिखित परिभाषासे भी स्पष्ट है।
तिणि तुरंगा णेउरओ वि-प्पाइनका कण्णु । दुवहअ-पच्छद्ध वि तह वद लक्षण ण अण्णु ॥४, २७॥ तुरंग = ४ मात्राएँ, णेउर = १ गुरु, पाइक्क -४ मात्रा और कण्ण = २ गुरु, इस प्रकार एक पंक्तिमें
१२ मात्राएँ होती हैं। अपभ्रंश 'र' और 'ओ' प्रायः ह्रस्व भी होते हैं, अतः उक्त दहिके अक्षरशः विभाजन करनेसे प्रकट होता है कि १३ और ११ मात्राएँ होती हैं। कविदर्पण, प्राकृतपिंगल, छन्दकोश आदि छन्दशास्त्र बतलाते हैं कि दोहेकी प्रत्येक पंक्तिमें १३ और ११ मात्राएं होती हैं, किन्तु हेमचन्द्र १४ और १२ ही बताते हैं। सारांश यह है कि विरहाङ्क और हेमचन्द्र दोहाके श्रुतिमाधुर्यका विशेष ध्यान रखते है, जब कि अन्य छन्दशास्त्रज्ञ अक्षर गणनाके नियमका पालन आवश्यक समझते हैं । विरहाङ्कने दोहेका लक्षण अपभ्रंश-भाषामें रचा है, और रुद्रट कवि संस्कृत तथा अपभ्रंश भाषाके श्लेषोंको दोहाछन्दमें लिखते हैं, इससे प्रमाणित होता है कि दोहा अपभ्रंश भाषाका छन्द है।
यहाँ 'दोहा' शब्दकी व्युत्पत्तिके सम्बन्ध में विचार करना अनुपयुक्त न होगा। जोइन्दु इसे दोहा कहते हैं किन्तु विरहांक इसका नाम 'दुवहा' लिखते हैं। यदि दोहाका मूल संस्कृत है तो यह 'विषा' शब्दसे बना है, जो बतलाता है कि दोहाको प्रत्येक पंक्ति दो भागोंमें बँटी होती है, या दोहाछन्दमें एक ही पंक्ति दो बार आती है। विरहांकका 'दो पाआ भण्णइ दुवहउ' लिखना बतलाता है कि उसे
१. एच. डी. वेलनकर-विरहांकका वृचजाति समुच्चय'

.

Page #156

प्रस्तावना
दूसरा अर्थ अभीष्ट है। जहाँतक हम जानते हैं विरहाङ क-जिसे प्रो० एच० डी० वेलणकर ईसाकी नवमी शताब्दीसे पहलेका बतलाते हैं-दोहेकी परिभाषा करनेवालोंमें सबसे प्राचीन छन्दकार है । बादके छन्दकारोंने दोहेके भेद भी किये हैं।
आध्यात्मिक सहिष्णुता-अध्यात्मवादियोंमें एक दूसरेके प्रति काफी सहिष्णुता होती है, और इसलिये-जैसा कि प्रो० 'रानडेका कहना है-सब युगों और सब देशोंके अध्यात्मवादी एक अनन्त और स्वर्गीय समाजकी सुष्टि करते हैं। वे किसी भी दार्शनिक आधारपर अपने गढ़वादका निर्माण कर सकते है, किन्तु शब्दों के अन्तस्तलमें घुसकर वे सत्यकी एकताका अनुभव करते हैं। योगीन्दु एक जैन गूढ़वादी है, किन्तु उनकी विशालदृष्टिने उनके ग्रन्थमें एक विशालता ला दी है, और इसलिये उनके अधिकांश वर्णन साम्प्रदायिकतासे अलिप्त है। उनमें बौद्धिक सहनशीलता भी कम नहीं है। वेदान्तियोंका मत है कि आत्मा सर्वगत है, मीमांसकोंका कहना है कि मुक्तावस्थामें ज्ञान नहीं रहता; जैन उसे शरीरप्रमाण बतलाते हैं, और बोद्ध कहते हैं कि वह शून्यके सिवा कुछ भी नहीं । किन्तु योगीन्दु इस मतभेदसे बिल्कुल नहीं घबराते वे जैन अध्यात्मके प्रकाशमें नयोंकी सहायतासे शाब्दिक-जालका भेदन करके सब मतोंके वास्तविक अभिप्रायको समझाते हैं । यद्यपि अन्य दर्शनकार उनकी इस व्याख्याको स्वीकार न कर सकेंगे फिर भी यह शैली एक शान्त अध्यात्मवादीके रूपमें उन्हें हमारे सामने खड़ा कर देती है। योगोन्दु परमात्माकी एक निश्चित रूपरेखा स्वीकार करते हैं किन्तु उसे एक निश्चित नामसे पुकारनेपर जोर नहीं देते । वे अपने परमात्माको जिन, ब्रह्म, शान्त, शिव, बुद्ध आदि संज्ञाएं देते हैं । इसके सिवा अपना काम चलानेके लिये वे अजैन शब्दावलीका भी प्रयोग करते हैं । १ अ० २२ दो० में वे धारणा, यन्त्र, मन्त्र मण्डल मुद्रा आदि शब्दोंका उपयोग करते हैं और कहते है कि परमात्मा इन सबसे अगोचर है । १, ४१ तथा २, १०७ में उनकी शैलो वेदान्तसे अधिकतर मिलती है । २,४६१ जिसे ब्रह्मदेव तथा अन्य प्रतियाँ प्रक्षेपक बतलाते हैं, गीताके दूसरे अध्यायके ६९ वें श्लोकका स्मरण कराते है । २, १७० वें दोहेमें 'हंसाचार' शब्द आता है और ब्रह्मदेव 'हंस' शब्दका अर्थ परमात्मा करते हैं। यह हमें उपनिषदोंके उन अंशोंका स्मरण कराता है, जिनमें और परमात्माके अर्थमें हंस शब्दका प्रयोग किया है । सारांश यह है कि ग्रंथके कुछ भागको छोड़कर-जिसमें जैन अध्यात्मका पारिभाषिक वर्णन किया है-शेष भागको अध्यात्म-शास्त्रका प्रत्येक विद्यार्थी प्रेमपूर्वक पढ़ सकता है।
जैन-साहित्यमें योगीन्दुका स्थान-एक गूढ़वादीके लिये यह आवश्यक नहीं कि वह बहुत बड़ा विद्वान् हो, और न वर्षोंतक व्याकरण और न्यायमें सिर खपाकर वह सुयोग्य लेखक बननेका ही प्रयत्न करता है, किन्तु मानव-समाजको दुःखी देख, मात्म साक्षात्कारका अनुभव ही उसे उपदेश देने के लिये प्रेरित करता है, और व्याकरण आदिके नियमोंका विशेष विचार किये बिना जनताके सामने वह अपने अनुभव रखता है। अतः उच्चकोटिकी रचनाओंमें प्रयुक्त की जानेवाली संस्कृत तथा प्राकृत भाषाको छोड़कर योगोन्दुका उस समयको प्रचलित भाषा अग्नभ्रंशको अपनाना महत्त्वसे खाली नहीं है। महाराष्ट्रके ज्ञानदेव, नामदेव, एकनाथ, तुकाराम और रामदासने मराठीमें और कर्नाटक के बसवन्न तथा अन्य वीरशैव वचनकारोंने कन्नड़में बड़े अभिमानके साथ अपने अनुभव लिखे हैं, जिससे अधिक लोग उनके अनुभवोंसे लाभ उठा सकें। प्राचीन ग्रन्थकारोंने जो कुछ संस्कृत और प्राकृतमें लिखा था उसे हो योगीन्दुने बहत सरल तरीकेसे अपने समयकी प्रचलित भाषामें गंथ दिया है। प्राचीन जैन-साहित्यके अपने अध्ययनके आधारपर
१ वेलणकर और रानडे, भारतीयदर्शन का इतिहास जिल्द ७, महाराष्ट्रका आध्यात्मिक गूढ़वाद, भमिका पष्ठ २॥२ माझी मराठी भाषा चोखडो। परब्रह्मों फालली गाढी ॥ ३ ये वचन कन्नड़ गद्य के सुन्दर
नमूने है।

Page #157

११२
परमात्मप्रकाश
मेरा मत है कि योगीन्दु कुन्दकुन्द और पूज्यपादके ऋणी है। योगीन्दुकृत तीन आत्माओंका वर्णन (१,१२१ ४) मोक्खपाहुड़ (४-८) से बिल्कुल मिलना है । सम्यग्दृष्टि और मिथ्यादृष्टिकी परिभाषाएँ भी ( १,७६७७) साधारणतया कुन्दकुन्दके मोक्खपाहुड़ ( १४-५ ) में दत्त परिभाषाओं जैसी ही है, और ब्रह्मदेवने इन दोहों की टीकामें उन गाथाओंको उद्धृत भी किया है । इसके सिवा नीचे लिखी समानता भी ध्यान देने योग्य है-मो० पा० २४ और प० प्र० १, ८६; मो० पा० ३७ और प० प्र०२, १३; मो० पा० ५१ और प. प्र० २, १७६ ७५; मो० पा० ६६-६९ और प० प्र० २, ८१ आदि। मोक्खपाहुड़ आदिको संस्कृतटीकामें श्रुतसागरसूरिका परमात्मप्रकाशसे दोहे उद्धृत करना भी निरर्थक नहीं है। इस प्रकार सक्ष्म छानबीनसे यह स्पष्ट हो जाता है कि योगीन्दुने कुन्दकुन्दसे बहुत कुछ लिया है।
पूज्यपादके समाधिशतक और परमात्मप्रकाशमें घनिष्ठ समानता है। मेरे विचारसे योगीन्दुने पूज्यपादका अक्षरशः अनुसरण किया है। विस्तारके डरसे यहाँ कुछ समानताओंका उल्लेखमात्र करता है। स० श० ४-५ और प० प्र० १.११-१४; स. श० ३१ और प० प्र० २, १७५, १. १२३*२; स० श० ६४६६ और प० प्र०२, १७८-८०; स० श० ७० और प० प्र० १,८०, स० श० ७८ और प० प्र० २, ४-६*१; स० श० ८७-८८ और १० प्र० १, ८२ आदि । इन समानताओंके सिवा इन दोनों में विचारसाम्य भी बहुत है किन्तु दोनोंकी शैली में बड़ा अन्तर है। वैयाकरण होनेके कारण 'अर्द्धपात्रालाचवं पुत्रोत्सवं मन्यन्ते वैयाकरणाः' के अनुसार पूज्यपादके उद्गार संक्षिप्त, भाषा परिमार्जित और भाव व्यवस्थित है, किन्तु योगीन्दुकी कृति-जैसा कि पहले कहा जा चुका है-पुनरावृत्ति और इधर उधरको बातोंसे भरी है। पूज्यपादको शैलीने उनकी कृतिको गहन बना दिया था, और विद्वान् लोग ही उससे लाभ उठा सकते थे, संभवतः इसो लिये योगोन्दुने समाधिशतकके मन्तव्योंको प्रचलित भाषा और जनसाधारणको शैलीमें निबद्ध किया था। योगीन्दुकी इस रचनाने काफी ख्याति प्राप्त की है, और जयसेन, श्रुतसागर और रत्नकीति सरीखे टीकाकारोंने उससे पद्य उद्धृत किये थे ।
देवसेनके तत्त्वसार और परमात्मप्रकाशमें भी काफी समानता है। देवसेनके ग्रन्थोंपर अपभ्रंशका प्रभाव है; अपने भावसंग्रहमें उन्होंने कुछ अपभ्रंश पद्य भो दिये हैं, और 'बहिरप्पा' ऐसे शब्दोंका प्रयोग किया है । इन कारणोंसे मेरा मत है कि देवसेनने योगीन्दुका अनुसरण किया है।
योगीन्दु, काण्ह और सरह-काण्ह और सरह बौद्ध-गूढ़वादी थे। उनके ग्रन्थ उत्तरकालीन महायान सम्प्रदायसे खासकर तंत्रवादसे सम्बन्ध रखते है, और शेव योगियों के साथ उनकी कुछ परम्पराएँ मिलतीजुलती है। काण्हका समय डा० शाहीदुल्ला ई० ७०० के लगभग और डा० एस० के० चटर्जी ईसाकी बारहवीं शताब्दीका अन्त बतलाते हैं। सरह ई० १००० के लगभग विद्यमान थे। इन दोनों ग्रन्थकारोंके दोहाकोशोंका विषय परमात्मप्रकाशके जैसा हो है। यद्यपि उनके ग्रन्थोंका नाम 'दोहा-कोश' है, किन्तु परमात्मप्रकाशकी तरह उनमें केवल दोहा ही नहीं हैं, बल्कि अनेक छन्द हैं। प्रान्त-भेदके कारण उत्पन्न कुछ विशेषताओंका छोड़कर उनकी अपभ्रंश भी योगीन्दुके जैसी ही है। गढ़वादियोंके विचार और शब्द प्रायः समान होते हैं, जो विभिन्न धर्मोंके गढ़वादके ग्रन्थों में देखनेको मिलते हैं। काण्ह और सरहने अपने पद्योंमें प्रायः अपने नाम दिये हैं, पर योगोन्दुने ऐसा नहीं किया । तुकाराम आदि महाराष्ट्र सन्तोंने भी अपनी रचनाओं में अपने नाम दिये हैं ओर कर्नाटकके शव वचनकारोंने अपनी मुद्रिकाओंका उल्लेख किया है। उदाहरणके लिये 'वसवण्ण' को मुद्रिका 'कूडल-संगम-देव' है, और गङ्गम्माकी 'गङ्गेश्वरलिङ्ग'। विशेषकर सरहके दोहा-कोशके बहतसे विचार, वाक्याश, तथा कहनेकी शैलियाँ परमात्मप्रकाशके जैसी ही हैं।

Page #158

प्रस्तावना
परमात्मप्रकाशके दार्शनिक मन्तव्य और गढ़वाद ।
व्यवहार और निश्चय - भारतीय साहित्य के इतिहास में यह एक निश्चित सिद्धान्त है कि ग्रन्थका शुद्ध अर्थ करनेमें प्रायः टीकाकार प्रमाण माने जाते हैं। ऋग्वेदके व्याख्याकार सायन के सम्बन्ध में जो बात सत्य है, परमात्मप्रकाशके टीकाकार ब्रह्मदेव के सम्बन्ध में वह बात और भी अधिक सत्य है । ग्रन्थको व्याख्या करते हुए, ब्रह्मदेवने बार बार निश्चयनय और व्यवहारनयका अवलम्बन लिया है । यह बहुत संभव है कि उन्होंने कुछ अत्युक्ति की हो, किन्तु ग्रन्थके कुछ स्थलोंसे स्पष्ट है कि ये दोनों दृष्टियाँ जोइन्दुको भी इष्ट थीं । अतः परमात्मप्रकाशका अध्ययन करते समय हम इन दोनों नयोंकी उपेक्षा नहीं कर सकते ।
११३
इस प्रकारके नयोंकी आवश्यकता - भारतवर्ष में एक ओर धर्म शब्दका अर्थ होता है -कठोर संयमके धारी महात्माओं के आध्यात्मिक अनुभव, और दूसरी ओर उन आध्यात्मिक सिद्धान्तोंके अनुयायी समाजका पथ-प्रदर्शन करनेवाले व्यावहारिक नियम । अर्थात् घर्मके दो रूप हैं एक संद्धान्तिक या आध्या त्मिक और दूसरा व्यावहारिक या सामाजिक | इन दो रूपोंके कारण ही इस प्रकारके नयोंकी आवश्यकता होती है; और जैनधर्ममें तो — जहाँ भेदविज्ञान के बिना सत्यकी प्राप्ति ही नहीं होती — अपना खास स्थान रखते हैं । व्यवहारनय वाचाल है और उसका विषय है कोरा तर्कवाद, जब कि निश्चयनय मूक है, और उसका विषय है अन्तरात्मासे स्वयं उद्भूत होनेवाले अनुभव जैनधर्मानुसार गृहस्थधर्म और मुनिधर्म परस्पर में एक दूसरे के आश्रित हैं, और मोक्षप्राप्तिमें एक दूसरेकी सहायता करते हैं । यही दशा व्यवहार और निश्चयकी है; जैसे प्रत्येक गृहस्थ संन्यास लेता है, और अपने आत्मिक लक्ष्यको पहचानता है, उसी तरह व्यवहारनय निश्चयकी प्राप्ति के लिये आत्मसमर्पण कर देता है।
I
अन्य शास्त्रोंमें इस प्रकारको दृष्टिय - मुण्डकोपनिषद् ( १, ४-५ ) में विद्याके दो भेद किये हैं- अपरा और परा । पहलीका विषय वेदज्ञान है, और दूसरोका शाश्वत ब्रह्मज्ञान । ये भेद सत्यके तार्किक और आनुभविकज्ञानके जैसे ही हैं, अतः इनका व्यवहार और निश्चय के साथ तुलना की जा सकती है । बौद्धघमें भी सत्यके दो भेद किये हैं संवृतिसत्य या व्यवहारसत्य और परमार्थसत्य । शङ्कराचार्य भी व्यवहार और परमार्थं दृष्टियों को अपनाते हैं । धर्मको कुछ आधुनिक परिभाषाओं में भी इस प्रकारके भेदकी झलक पाई जाती हैं, जिनमें से विलियम जेम्स 'सामाजिक और व्यक्तिगत' इन दो दृष्टियोंको मानते हैं ।
नयोंका सापेक्ष महत्त्व - व्यवहारनय तभीतक लाभदायक और आवश्यक है जबतक वह निश्चय की ओर ले जाता है | अकेला व्यवहार अपूर्ण है, और कभी पूर्ण नहीं हो सकता। बिल्लोकी उपमा तभोतक काम दे सकती है, जबतक हमने शेर को नहीं देखा। दोनों नयोंका सापेक्ष महत्व बतलाते हुए अमृतचन्द्र लिखते हैं--व्यवहार उन्होंके लिये उपयोगी हो सकता है जो आध्यात्मिक जीवनको पहली सीढ़ीपर रेंग रहे है । किन्तु, जो अपने लक्ष्यको जानते हैं और अपने चैतन्य स्वरूपका अनुभव करते हैं, उनके लिये व्यवहार बिल्कुल उपयोगी नहीं है ।
आत्माके तीन भेद - आत्माके तीन भेद हैं, बहिरात्मा, अन्तरात्मा और परमात्मा । शरीरको आत्मा समझना अज्ञानता है, अतः एक ज्ञानी मनुष्यका कर्तव्य है कि वह अपनेको शरीरसे भिन्न और ज्ञानमय जाने, और इस तरह आत्म ध्यान में लीन होकर परमात्माको पहचाने । समस्त बाहिरी वस्तुओंका त्याग करने पर अन्तरात्मा ही परमात्मा होजाता है ।
१ समयसार गाथा १२ समयसार कलश ।
५० १५

Page #159

परमात्मप्रकाश
आत्माके भेद और प्राचीन ग्रन्थकार-सबसे पहले योगीन्दुने ही इन भेदोंका उल्लेख नहीं किया है। किन्तु उससे पहले कुन्दकुन्दने ( ईस्वी सन् का प्रारम्भ ) अपने मोक्खपाहुड़में और पूज्यपादने ( ईसाकी पांचवीं शताब्दीके अन्तिम पादके लगभग ) समाधिशतकमें इनकी चर्चा की है। जोइन्दुके बाद अमृतचन्द्र, गुणभद्र, अमितगति आदि अनेक ग्रन्थकारोंने आत्माकी चर्चा करते समय इस भेदको दृष्टिमें रक्खा है ।
अन्य दर्शनोंमें इस भेदकी प्रतिध्वनि-यद्यपि प्राथमिक वैदिक साहित्यमें आत्मवादके दर्शन नहीं होते किन्तु उपनिषदों में इसकी विस्तृत चर्चा पाई जाती है। उस समय यजन-याजन आदि वैदिक कृत्यमें संलग्न पुरोहितोंके सिवा साधुओंका भी एक सम्प्रदाय था, जो अपने जीवनका बहुभाग इस आत्मविद्याके चिन्तनमें ही व्यतीत करता था। उपनिषदों तथा बादके साहित्यमें इस आत्म-विद्याके प्रति बड़ा अनुराग दर्शाया गया । तैत्तिरीयोपनिषद्। पाँच आवरण बतलाये है-अन्नरसमय, प्राणमय, मनोमय, विज्ञानमय और आनन्दमय । इनमेंसे प्रत्येकको आत्मा कहा है । कठोपनिषद्- आत्माके तीन भेद किये है-ज्ञानात्मा, महदात्मा और शान्तात्मा । छान्दोग्य ३०८, ७-१२ को दृष्टिमें रखकर डॉयसन ( Deusson ) ने आत्माकी तीन अवस्थाएँ बतलाई है-शरीरात्मा, जीवात्मा और परमात्मा। अनेक स्थलोंपर उपनिषदोंमें आत्मा और शरीरको जुदा जुदा बतलाया है । न्याय-वैशेषिकका जीवात्मा और परमात्माका भेद तो प्रसिद्ध ही है। इसके बाद, रामदास आत्माके चार भेद करते हैं-१ जीवात्मा, जो शरीरसे बद्ध हैं, २ शिवात्मा, जो विश्वव्यापी है, ३ परमात्मा जो विश्वके और उससे बाहर भी व्याप्त है, ४ और निर्मलात्मा, जो निष्क्रिय और ज्ञानमय है। किन्तु रामदासका कहना है कि अन्ततोगत्वा ये सब सर्वथा एक ही है।
आत्मिक-विज्ञान-आत्म-ज्ञानसे संसार भ्रमणका अन्त होता है। आत्मा उसी समय आत्मा कहा जाता है, जब वह कर्मों से मुक्त हो जाता है। शुद्ध आत्माका ध्यान करनेसे मुक्ति शीघ्र मिलती है । आत्मज्ञानके बिना शास्त्रोंका अध्ययन आचारका पालन आदि सब कृत्य-कर्म बेकार हैं।
आत्माका स्वभाव-यद्यपि आत्मा शरीरमें निवास करता है, किन्तु शरीरसे बिल्कुल जुदा है। छः द्रव्यों में केवल यही एक चेतन द्रव्य है, शेष जड़ है। यह अनन्त ज्ञान और अनन्त आनन्दका भण्डार है। अनादि और अनन्त है; दर्शन और ज्ञान उसके मुख्य गुण हैं: शरीरप्रमाण है। मक्तावस्थामें उसे शुन्य भी कह सकते हैं, क्योंकि उस समय वह कर्मबन्धनसे शून्य ( रहित ) हो जाता है । यद्यपि सब आत्माओंका अस्तित्व जुदा जुदा है, किन्तु गुणोंकी अपेक्षा उनमें कोई अन्तर नहीं है; सब आत्माएं अनन्तज्ञान, अनन्तदर्शन, अनन्तसूख और अनन्तवीर्यके भण्डार हैं । अशुद्ध दशामें उनके ये गण कर्मोसे ढंके रहते हैं।
परमात्माका स्वभाव-तीनों लोकोंके ऊपर मोक्ष स्थानमें परमात्मा निवास करता है । वह शाश्वत ज्ञान और सुखका आगार है, पुण्य और पापसे निलिप्त है। केवल निर्मल ध्यानसे ही उसकी प्राप्ति हो सकती है। जिस प्रकार मलिन दर्पणमें रूप दिखाई नहीं देता, उसी तरह मलिन चित्तमें परमात्माका ज्ञान नहीं होता। परमात्मा विश्वके मस्तकपर विराजमान है, और विश्व उसके ज्ञानमें, क्योंकि वह सबको जानता है। परमात्मा अनेक है, और उनमें कोई अन्तर नहीं है । वह न तो इन्द्रि यगम्य है, और न केवल शास्त्राम्याससे ही हम उसे जान सकते हैं। वह केवल एक निर्मल ध्यानका विषय है। ब्रह्म, परब्रह्म, शिव, शान्त आदि उसीके नामान्तर है ।....
कर्मोंका स्वभाव-राग, द्वेष आदि मानसिक भावोंके निमित्तसे जो परमाणु आत्मासे सम्बद्ध हो जाते हैं, उन्हें कर्म कहते हैं। जीव ओर कर्मका सम्बन्ध अनादि है। कर्मों के कारण हो आत्माकी अनेक दशायें

Page #160

प्रस्तावना
होती है; कर्मोके कारण ही आत्माको शरीरमें रहना पड़ता है। ये कर्म-कलङ्क ध्यानरूपी अग्निमें जलकर भस्म हो जाते हैं।
आत्मा और परमात्मा-आत्मा ही परमात्मा है, किन्तु कर्मबन्धके कारण वह परमात्मा नहीं बन सकता। ज्यों ही वह अपनेको जान लेता है, परमात्मा बन जाता है। स्वाभाविक गुणोंकी अपेक्षासे आत्मा और परमात्मामें कोई अन्तर नहीं है। जब आत्मा-कर्मबन्धनसे मुक्त हो जाता है, उसके आनन्दका पारावार नहीं रहता।
उपनिषदोंमें आत्मा और ब्रह्म-उपनिषदोंमें ब्रह्म एक विश्वव्यापी तत्त्व माना गया है; समस्त जीवात्माएं उसीके अंश है । बहुतसे स्थलोंपर आत्मा और ब्रह्म शब्दका एक ही अर्थमें प्रयोग किया है। जैसे लोहेका एक टुकड़ा पृथ्वीके गर्भ में दब जानेके बाद पृथ्वीमें हो मिल जाता है, उसी तरह प्रत्येक जीवात्मा ब्रह्ममें समा जाता है। अविद्याके प्रभावसे प्रत्येक आत्मा अपनेको स्वतन्त्र समझता है, किन्तु वास्तवमें हम सब ब्रह्मके ही अंश है । प्रारम्भमें यह ब्रह्म एक शक्तिशाली ऋचाके रूपमें माना जाता था, किन्तु बादमें यह उस महान् शक्तिका प्रतिनिधि बन गया, जो विश्वको उत्पन्न करती और नष्ट करती है। यद्यपि बार बार ब्रह्मको निर्गुण कहा है किन्तु इसमें सन्देह नहीं कि उसे एक स्वतन्त्र अनन्त और सनातन तत्त्वके रूपमें माना है, जिससे प्रत्येक वस्तु अपना अस्तित्व प्राप्त करती है। इस तरह उपनिषदोंमें ब्रह्म ही आत्मा है ।
योगीन्दुके परमात्माकी उपनिषदोंके ब्रह्मसे तुलना-'ब्रह्म' शब्द वैदिक है, और उपनिषदोंमें ब्रह्मको एक और अद्वितीय लिखा है। जोईन्दुने इस शब्दको वैदिक साहित्यसे लिया है, और अपने ग्रन्थमें उसका बार बार प्रयोग किया है “अहिंसा भूतानां जगति विदितं ब्रह्म परमम्" लिखकर स्वामी समन्तभद्रने भी 'ब्रह्म' शब्दका व्यापक अर्थ में प्रयोग किया है। उपनिषदोंमें परमात्माकी अपेक्षा ब्रह्म शब्द अधिक आया है यद्यपि 'नृसिंहोत्तरतापनी' आदिग्रन्थों में दोनोंको एकार्थवाची बतलाया है । उपनिषदोंका ब्रह्म एक है किन्तु, जोईन्दु बहुतसे ब्रह्म मानते हैं। जैनधर्मके अनुसार परमात्मा कृतकृत्य हो जाता है. और उसे कुछ करना शेष नहीं रहता; वह विश्वको केवल जानता और देखता है, क्योंकि जानना और देखना उसका स्वभाव है। किन्तु, उपनिषदोंका ब्रह्म प्रत्येक वस्तुका उत्पादक और आषय है। यद्यपि उपनिषदोंके ब्रह्म और जैनों के परमात्मामें बहुतसो समानताएं हैं, किन्तु उनके अर्थमें भेद है। उदाहरण के लिये, उपनिषदोंमें 'स्वयंभ' शब्दका 'स्वयं पैदा होनेवाला' और 'स्वयं रहनेवाला' है, किन्तु जैनधर्मके अनुसार 'स्वयं परमात्मा होनेवाला' है।
योगीन्दुको एकता-योगीन्दुके परमात्मा और उपनिषदोंके ब्रह्ममें उपर्युक्त अन्तर होते हुए भी, योगीन्दु बिल्कुल उपनिषदोंके स्वरमें परमात्माओंके एकत्वकी चर्चा करते हैं. और परमात्मपदके अभिलाषियोंसे निवेदन करते हैं कि वे परमात्माओंके भेद-कल्पना न करें क्योंकि उनके स्वरूपमें कोई अन्तर नहीं है। परन्तु उपनिषदोंका एकत्व वास्तविक है, और जोईन्दुका केवल आपेक्षिक । किन्तु जब योगीन्दु आत्मा और परमात्मा के एकत्वकी चर्चा करते हैं तो वे उसका पूर्णतया समर्थन करते हैं, क्योंकि जैनधर्मके अनुसार आत्मा परमात्मा है; कर्मबन्धके कारण उसे परमात्मा न कहकर आत्मा कहते हैं । सम्पूर्ण आत्माओंकी यह समानता जैनधर्मके प्राणिमात्र प्रति मानसिक, वाचनिक और कायिक अहिंसावादके बिल्कुल अनुरूप है, इस प्रसंगमें सांख्योंकी तरह जैनौको भी सत्कार्यवादी कहा जा सकता है। उपनिषदोंका ब्रह्म सर्वथा एक और अद्वैत है, किन्तु जैनोंके परमात्मामें यह बात नहीं है। जैनधर्म संसारको भेददृष्टिसे देखता है, और उसका आत्मा तप और ध्यानके मार्गपर चलकर परमात्मा बन जाता है, किन्तु उपनिषद् संसारको एक ब्रह्मके रूपमें ही देखते हैं।

Page #161

११६
1
उपनिषदोंके आत्मा से योगीन्दुके आत्माकी तुलना - जैनधर्म में आत्मा और पुद्गल दोनों वास्तविक हैं, आत्माएं अनन्त हैं और मुक्तावस्था में भी प्रत्येक आत्माका स्वतन्त्र अस्तित्व रहता है । किन्तु उपनिषदों में आत्माके सिवा को कि ब्रह्मका ही नामान्तर है, कुछ भी सत्य नहीं है। जैनधर्म में उपनिषदोंकी तरह आत्मा एक विश्वव्यापी तत्त्वका अंश नहीं है-किन्तु उसके अन्दर परमात्मस्वके बीज वर्तमान रहते हैं और जब वह कर्मबन्धन से मुक्त हो जाता है, तब वह परमात्मा बन जाता है। उपनिषद् तथा गीतामें बुरे और अच्छे कायको कर्म कहा है, किन्तु जैनधर्म में यह एक प्रकारका सूक्ष्म पदार्थ ( matter ) है, जो आत्माकी प्रत्येक मानसिक, वाचिक और कायिक-क्रियाके साथ आत्मासे सम्बद्ध हो जाता है और उसे जन्म-मरणके चक्रमें घुमाता है । जैनधर्मंके अनुसार आत्मा और परमात्मा एक ही हैं, क्योंकि ये एक ही वस्तुकी दो अवस्थाएं हैं, और इस तरह प्रत्येक आत्मा परमात्मा है । तथा संसार अनादि है, और अगणित आत्माओं की रंगभूमि है । किन्तु वेदान्तमें आत्मा परमात्मा और विश्व एक ब्रह्मस्वरूप ही है।
दो विभिन्न सिद्धान्त - आत्मा और ब्रह्म सिद्धान्तको मिलाकर उपनिषद् एक स्वतन्त्र अद्वैतवादकी सृष्टि करते हैं। वास्तवमें आत्मवाद और ब्रह्मबाद ये दोनों ही स्वतन्त्र सिद्धान्त हैं और एकसे दूसरेका विकास नहीं हो सकता । प्रथम सिद्धान्त के अनुसार अगणित आत्माएं संसार में भ्रमण कर रही हैं; जब कोई आत्मा बन्धनसे 'मुक्त हो जाता है परमात्मा बन जाता है । परमात्मा भी अगणित है, किन्तु उनके गुणोंमें कोई अन्तर नहीं है; अतः वे एक प्रकारकी एकताका प्रतिनिधित्व करते हैं। ये परमात्मा संसारकी उत्पत्ति, स्थिति और लयमें कोई भाग नहीं लेते । इसके विपरीत, ब्रह्मवादके अनुसार प्रत्येक वस्तु ब्रह्मसे ही उत्पन्न होती है, और उसीमें लय हो जाती है; विभिन्न आत्माएँ एक परब्रह्मके ही अंश है। जैन और सांख्य मुख्यतया आत्मवादके सिद्धान्तको मानते हैं, जब कि वैदिक धर्म ब्रह्मवादको किन्तु उपनिषद् इन दोनों सिद्धान्तोंको मिला देते हैं, और आत्मा और ब्रह्मके ऐवयका समर्थन करते हैं ।
परमात्मप्रकाश
J
संसार और मोक्ष -- संसार और मोक्ष आत्माकी दो अवस्थाएं हैं विरुद्ध हैं। संसार जन्म और मृत्युका प्रतिनिधि है, तो मोक्ष उनका विरोधी चंगुल में फँसा रहता है, और नरक, पशु, मनुष्य और देव इन चारों गतियोंमें घूमता फिरता है, किन्तु मोक्ष उससे विपरीत है, उसे पचमगति भी कहते हैं। जब आत्मा चौदह गुणस्थानोंमेंसे होकर समस्त कर्मको नष्ट कर देता है, तब उसे पञ्चमागतिकी प्राप्ति होती है। संसार दशामें कर्म आत्माकी शक्तिको प्रकट नहीं होने देते । किन्तु मुक्तावस्था में, जहाँ आत्मा परमात्मा बन जाता है, और अनन्तज्ञान, अनन्तदर्शन, अनन्तसुख, अनन्तवीर्यका धारक होता है, वे शक्तियां प्रकट हो जाती है ।
मोक्षप्राप्तिके उपाय - व्यवहारनयसे, सम्यग्दर्शन, सम्यग्ज्ञान और सम्यक्चारित्र, ये तीनों मिलकर मोक्ष के मार्ग हैं, इन्हें 'रत्नत्रय' भी कहते हैं; और निश्चयनयसे रत्नत्रयात्म आत्मा ही मोक्षका कारण है, क्योंकि ये तीनों ही आत्माके स्वाभाविक गुण हैं ।

,
महासमाथि - इस प्रन्यमें पारिभाषिक शब्दों की भरमारके बिना महासमाधिका बड़ा ही प्रभावक वर्णन है, जो ज्ञानार्णव, योगसार तत्वानुशासन आदिमें भी पाया जाता है। उस ध्यानको प्राप्तिके लिये जिसमें आत्मा परमात्माका साक्षात्कार करता है, मनकी स्थिरता अत्यन्त आवश्यक है । उस समय न तो इष्ट वस्तुओंके प्रति मनमें राग ही होना चाहिए और न अनिष्टके प्रति द्वेष तथा मन वचन और काय एकाप्र होने चाहिए, और बात्मा आत्मामें लीन होना चाहिए। इस सिलसिले में दो अवस्थाएं उल्लेखनीय है--एक सिद्ध और दूसरी महंत समस्त कर्मका नाश करके प्रत्येक आत्मा सिद्धपद प्राप्त कर सकता है, किन्तु मत्पद केवल तीर्थकर ही प्राप्त कर सकते है। तीर धार्मिक सिद्धान्तोंके प्रचारकमें अपना कुछ
और दोनों एक दूसरे से बिल्कुल संसार दशामें आत्मा कर्मक

Page #162

प्रस्तावना
११७ समय देते हैं, किन्तु सिद्ध सदा अपने में ही लीन रहते हैं। अतः समाजके लिये, तीर्थङ्कर विशेष लाभदायक होते हैं।
गूढ़वादको कुछ विशेषताएँ-गढवाद या रहस्यवादकी व्याख्या कर सकना सरल नहीं है। यह मनकी उस अवस्थाको बतलाता है, जो तुरन्त निर्विकार परमात्माका साक्षात् दर्शन कराती है। यह आत्मा और परमात्माके बीचमें पारस्परिक अनुभूतिका साक्षात्कार है, ओ आत्मा और अन्तिम सत्यकी एकताको बतलाता है । इसमें जीव अपनी पूर्णता और स्वतन्त्रका अनुभव करता है। दूसरे, इसका अनुभव करनेके लिए ऐसी आत्माको आवश्यकता है, जो अपनेको ज्ञान और सुखका भण्डार समझे तथा अपनेको परमात्म पदके योग्य जाने । तीसरे, यदि गढ़वाद आध्यात्मिक और धार्मिक हो तो धर्मको ध्येय और ध्यातामें एकत्व स्थापित करनेका उपाय अवश्य बताना चाहिए। चौथे, गूढ वाद साधारणतया संसारके सम्बन्धमें और विशेष- . तया सांसारिक प्रलोभनोंके सम्बन्धमें स्वाभाविक उदासीनता दिखाता है। पांचवें गढ़वादने उस सामग्रीकी प्राप्ति होती है जो लौकिकज्ञानके साधन मन और इन्द्रियोंकी सहायताके बिना ही पूर्ण सत्यको जान लेती है । छठे, धार्मिक गूढवादमें कुछ नैतिक नियम रहते हैं, जो एक आस्तिकको अवश्य पालने चाहिए। सातवें, गूढ़वादसम्बन्धी रहस्योंका उपदेश करनेवाले गुरुओंका सम्मान करना भी एक गूढवादीका कर्तव्य है।
जैनधर्ममें गूढ़वाद-क्या जैनधर्म सरीखे वेदविरोधी धर्ममें गढ़वादका होना संभव है ? कुन्दकुन्द और पूज्यपादके ग्रन्थों के अवलोकनसे उक्त शंका निराधार प्रमाणित होती है। यहाँ यह अधिक युक्तिसङ्गत होगा कि प्राचीन जैनग्रन्थोंसे कुछ बातें (Data ) सङ्कलित की जावें, और देखा जावे कि जैनधर्मने गूढवाद को कौन-सी मौलिक वस्तु प्रदान की है, और वेदान्तके गढ़वादसे उसमें क्या समानता या अन्तर है ? ऋषभदेव, नेमिनाथ, पार्श्वनाथ, महावीर आदि जैनतीर्थङ्कर संसारके गिने चुने गढ़वादियोंमेंसे हैं। जैनधर्मके प्रथम तीर्थङ्कर श्रीऋषभदेवके सम्बन्धमें प्रो० रानडे ने ठीक ही लिखा है, कि वे एक भिन्न ही प्रकारके गढवादी थे, उनकी अपने शरीरके प्रति अत्यन्त उदासीनता उनके आत्मसाक्षात्कारको प्रमाणित करती है। पाठकोंको यह जानकर प्रसन्नता होगी कि भागवतमें प्राप्त ऋषभदेवका वर्णन जैन पौराणिक वर्णनोंसे बिल्कूल मिलता है।
जैनधर्ममें गूढ़वाद-सम्बन्धी सामग्री-ईश्वरवादियोंके अद्वैतवादसे कहीं अधिक अद्वैतवाद और ईश्वरवादको गूढ़वादका आधार माना जाता है । अनुभवकी श्रेष्ठ दशामें आत्मा किसी दैवी शक्ति के साथ एकताका अनुभव करता है। विलियम जेम्सका कहना है कि मनकी गूढ़ वृत्तियाँ प्रत्येक मात्रामें सर्वदा नहीं तो प्रायः अद्वैतवादका समर्थन करती हैं, जैसा कि इतिहाससे प्रदर्शित होता है । अतः गढ़वादमें अद्वतवाद के लिए पर्याप्त स्थान है, और जैसा कि ऊपर कह आये हैं। वेदान्तमें तो ब्रह्म ही सब कुछ है। किन्तु, ज्ञानदेवका आध्यात्मिक गढ़वाद अद्वत और द्वतको मिला देता है क्योंकि उनमें एकत्व और नानात्व, दोनोंको ही स्थान दिया है। जैन गढ़वाद दो तत्त्वोंपर अवलम्बित है। वे दो तत्त्व है-आत्मा और परमात्मा। किन्तु परमात्मासे मतलब ईश्वर है, न कि जगन्मियता । जैनदृष्टिसे आत्मा और परमात्मामें कोई अन्तर नहीं है, केवल संसार अवस्थामें आत्मा कर्मबन्धनके कारण परमात्मा नहीं हो सकता। कर्मोंका नाश करके गूढवादी इस एकता या समानताका अनुभव करता है। जैनधर्मकी परमात्मा सम्बन्धी मान्यता आत्मकैवल्य ( Personal absolute ) से कुछ मिलती-जुलती है। जैनधर्म में आत्मा परमात्मा हो जाता है, किन्तु वेदान्तियोंकी तरह ब्रह्ममें लीन नहीं होता। जैनधर्ममें आध्यात्मिक अनुभवसे मतलब एक विभक्त
१ महाराष्ट्रमें गुढ़वाद, पृ० ९।

Page #163

परमात्मप्रकाश
आत्माका एकत्वमें मिल जाना नहीं है, किन्तु उसका सीमित व्यक्तित्व उसके सम्भावित परमात्माका अनुभवन करता है । कम्मपर्याड, कम्मपाहुड़, कसायपाहुड़, गोम्मटसार आदि प्राचीन जैनशास्त्रोंमें बतलाया है कि किस तरह आत्मा गुणस्थानोंपर आरोहण करता हुआ उन्नत, उन्नतर होता जाता है और किस तरह प्रत्येक गुणस्थानमें उसके कर्म नष्ट होते जाते हैं । यहाँ उन सब बातोंका वर्णन करनेके लिये स्थान नहीं है । वास्तव में जैनधर्म एक तपस्याप्रधान धर्म है । यद्यपि उसमें गृहस्थाश्रमका भी एक दर्जा है, किन्तु मोक्षप्राप्ति के इच्छुक प्रत्येक व्यक्तिको साधु-जीवन बिताना आवश्यक एवं अनिवार्य होता है । साधुओंके आचार विषयक नियम अति कठोर हैं; वे एकाकी विहार नहीं कर सकते, क्योंकि सांसारिक प्रलोभन सब जगह वर्तमान है । वे अपना अधिक समय स्वाध्याय और आत्म ध्यानमें ही बिताते हैं; और प्रतिदिन गुरुके पादमूलमें बैठकर अपने दोषोंकी आलोचना करते हैं, और उनसे आत्म-विद्या या आत्म-ज्ञानका पाठ पढ़ते है । इन सब बातों से यह स्पष्ट है कि जैनधर्म में गूढ़वादके सब आवश्यक अंग पाये जाते हैं ।
पुण्य और पाप - मानसिक, वाचनिक और कायिक क्रियासे आत्माके प्रदेशोंमें हलन चलन होता है, उससे, कर्म - परमाणु आत्माकी ओर आकर्षित होते हैं । यदि क्रिया शुभ होती है, तो पुण्यकर्मको लाती है, और यदि अशुभ हो तो पापकर्मको । किन्तु पुण्य हो या पाप, दोनोंकी उपस्थिति आत्माको परतंत्रताका कारण है । केवल इतना अन्तर है, कि पुण्य कर्म सोनेकी बेड़ी है और पापकर्म लोहेकी । अतः स्वतंत्रता के अभिलाषी मुमुक्षु दोनों ही से मुक्त होने की चेष्टा करते हैं ।
परमात्मप्रकाशकी अपभ्रंश और आचार्य हेमचन्द्रका प्राकृत व्याकरण
'है' या 'हुँ' और 'हे'
कम उच्चारण होता
अपभ्रंश और उसकी विशेषता - अपभ्रंक्षका आधार प्राकृत भाषा है । यह वर्तमान प्रान्तीय भाषाओं से अधिक प्राचीन है । उपलब्ध अपभ्रंश - साहित्य के देखनेसे मालूम होता है कि जनसाधारण में प्रचलित कविता के लिये इस भाषाको अपनाया गया था, इसीसे इसमें प्रान्तीय परिवर्तनोंके सिवा कुछ सामान्य बातें ( Common characteristics ) भी पाई जाती हैं। हेमचन्द्रने अपनी अपभ्रंशमें प्राकृतकी कुछ विशेषताओं को भी अपवादरूपसे सम्मिलित कर लिया है। उन्होंने उदाहरण के लिये अपभ्रंश-पद्य उद्धृत किये हैं, एक- आघ शब्द या रूपको छोड़कर उनसे कुछ पद्य बिल्कुल प्राकृत में हैं । कुछ बातोंसे यह स्पष्ट है कि प्राकृतको सरल करनेके लिये अपभ्रंशमें अनेक उपाय किये गये हैं । उदाहरण के लिए, १ अपभ्रंश में स्वरविनिमय तथा उनके दीर्घ या ह्रस्व करनेकी स्वतंत्रता है, जैसे एक ही कारकमें 'हु' प्रत्यय पाये जाते हैं; और 'ओ' प्रत्ययकी जगह में 'उ' आता है । २ 'म' का बहुत है, क्योंकि इसके स्थान में प्रायः 'व' हो जाता है । ३ विभक्तिके अन्त में 'स' के स्थान में 'ह' हो जाता है। और इससे अनेक विचित्र रूप समझ में आ जाते हैं । यथा, मार्कण्डेय तथा अन्य लेखकोंके द्वारा प्रयुक्त 'देवहो' वैदिक 'देवास:' से मिलता जुलता है । इसी तरह 'देवहँ' प्राकृतके 'देवस्स' से 'ताहँ' तस्स से 'तहिँ ' 'तंसि' से और 'एहु' 'एसो' से लिया गया है । अवेस्ता तथा ईरानी भाषाओं में भी परिवर्तन हो जाता है । वर्तमान गुजराती में भी कभी कभी 'स' का 'ह' हो जाता है । बनाने के लिये प्राकृतको सन्धियाँ प्रायः शिथिल कर दी गई हैं । ५ कभी कभी कर्ता, कर्म और सम्बन्ध कारकमें प्रत्यय नहीं लगाया जाता । ६ शब्दोंके रूपोंपर स्वरपरिवर्तनका प्रभाव पड़ता है । ७ अव्ययों में इतना अधिक परिवर्तन हो गया है कि उनका पहचानना भी कठिन है; उनमें से कुछ तो सम्भवतः देशो भाषाओंसे आये हैं । ८ अनेक शब्दों में 'क' 'ड' 'ल' आदि जोड़ दिये गये हैं । ९ और देशी शब्दोंका भी काफी बाहुल्य है ।
संस्कृत 'स' का 'ह' में
४ उच्चारणको सरल

Page #164

प्रस्तावना
११९
अपभ्रंश भाषाकी मोहकता - अपभ्रंश पद्य कोमलता और माधुर्यं से परिपूर्ण होते | अपभ्रंश में नये नये छन्दोंकी कमी नहीं है, किन्तु ये छन्द मात्रा छन्द होते हैं, और सरलतासे गाये जा सकते हैं । अतः अधिक नहीं तो छठी शताब्दी में, अपभ्रंशका जनसाधारणकी कविताका माध्यम होना कोई अचरजकी बात नहीं है । यह कहा जाता है कि वलभीके गृहतेनने, ई०५५९ से ५६९ तकके जिनके स्मारकलेख पाये जाते हैं, संस्कृत, प्राकृत और अपभ्रंश में पद्य रचना की थी । उद्योतनसूरि ( ७७८ ई० ) ने भी अपभ्रंशका बहुत कुछ गुणगान किया है, और भाषाओंके सम्बन्ध में उनकी आलोचना एक महत्त्वको वस्तु है । उनके विचार से लम्बे समास, अव्यय, उपसर्ग, विभक्ति, वचन और लिङ्गकाठिन्यसे पूर्ण संस्कृतभाषा दुर्जनके हृदयकी तरह दुरूह है, किन्तु प्राकृत, सज्जनोंके वचनकी तरह आनन्ददायक है । यह अनेक कलाओंके विवेचनरूपी तरंगों से पूर्णं सांसारिक अनुभवों का समुद्र है, जो विद्वानोंसे मथन किये जानेपर टपकने वाली अमृत की बूँदोंसे भरा है । यह ( अपभ्रंश ) शुद्ध और मिश्रित संस्कृत तथा प्राकृत शब्दोंका समानुपातिक एवं आनन्ददायक सम्मिश्रण है । यह कोमल हो या कठोर, बरसाती पहाड़ी नदियोंकी तरह इसका प्रवाह बेरोक है, और प्रणय-कुपितानायिकाके वचनों की तरह यह शीघ्र ही मनुष्य के मनको वशमें कर लेती है । उद्योतनसूरि स्वयं उच्चकोटिके ग्रन्थकार थे, उन्होंने जटिलाचार्य, रविषेण आदि संस्कृतकवियोंकी बड़ी प्रशंसा की है, अपभ्रंश भाषाके प्रति उनके ये उद्गार स्पष्ट बतलाते हैं कि ईसाको आठवीं शताब्दीतक वह पद्य रचनाका एक आकर्षकमाध्यम समझी जाती थी ।
परमात्मप्रकाशके ऋणी हेमचंद्र- - उपलब्ध प्राकृत व्याकरणोंमें, हेमचन्द्रके व्याकरणमें अपभ्रंशका पूरा विवेचन मिलता है। उनके विवेचनकी विशेषता यह है कि वे अपने नियमोंके उदाहरण में अनेक पद्य उद्धृत करते हैं। बहुत समयतक उनके द्वारा उद्धृत पद्योंके स्थलोंका पता नहीं लग सका था। डॉ० पिशलका कहना था कि सतसई जैसी पद्य संग्रहसे वे उद्धत किये गये हैं । किन्तु पद्योंको भाषा और विचारोंमें अन्तर होनेसे यह निश्चित है कि वे किसी एक ही स्थानसे नहीं लिये गये हैं। मैंने यह बतलाया था कि हेमचन्द्रने परमात्मप्रकाशसे भी कुछ पद्य लिये हैं । वे पद्य निम्न प्रकार हैं ।
१. सूत्र ४-३८९ के उदाहरण में
संता भोग जु परिहरइ तसु कंतहो बलि कीसु । तसु दइवेण वि मुंडियउँ जसु खल्लिहडउँ सीसु ॥ परमात्मप्रकाश में यह पद्य ( २-१३९ ) इस प्रकार हैं
संता विसय जु परिहरइ चलि क्रिज्जउ हउँ तासु । सो दइवेण जि मुंडियउ सीसु खडिल्लउ जासु ॥
यदि सूत्र और उसकी व्याख्याको देखा जावे तो 'किजजउ' के स्थान में 'किस' का परिवर्तन समझमें ठीक ठीक आ जाता है । क्योंकि 'किज्जउँ' एक वैकल्पिक रूप है, और उसका उदाहरण दिया गया है“बलि किज्जउँ सुअणस्सु ।"
२. सूत्र ४-४२७ में -
भिदि नायगु वसि करहु जसु अघिन्नइँ अन्नई । मूलि विठ्ठइ तुंबिणिहे अवर्से सुक्कहिं पण्णइ ॥ कुछ भेदोंके होते हुए भी, इसमें कोई सन्देह नहीं कि यह दोहा परमात्मप्रकाशके २ - १४० ही रूपान्तर है, जो इस प्रकार है
पंचहँ णायकु वसु करहु जेण होंति वसि अण्ण । मूल विणट्ठह तरुवरहँ अवसइँ सुक्कहिँ पण
इस दोहे में कुछ परिवर्तन तो सूत्र के नियमोंके उदाहरण देनेके लिये लिये गये हैं । तथा परमात्मप्रकाशमें इन दोनों दोहोंकी क्रमागत संख्या भी स्खलित नहीं है, और यदि इससे कोई नतीजा निकालना संभव { fl वह यह है कि हेमचन्द्र परमात्मप्रकाशसे ही इन पद्योंको उद्धृत किया है ।

Page #165

१२.
परमात्मप्रकाश
३. सूत्र ४-३६५ में
आयहो दढ्ढकलेवरहो जं वाहिउ तं सारु । जइ उट्ठभइ तो कुहइ अह डज्झइ तो छारु ॥ परमात्मप्रकाशमें यह दोहा (२-१४७ ) इस प्रकार है
बलि किउ माणुस-जम्मडा देक्खंतह पर सारु । जइ उट्ठभइ तो कुहइ अह उज्झइ तो छारु ॥ दोनोंकी दूसरो पंक्ति बिल्कुल एक है, किन्तु सूत्रका उदाहरण देनेके लिये पहलीमें परिवर्तन किया गया है। ४. सूत्र २-८० के उदाहरणमें, हेमचन्द्र एक छोटासा वाक्य उद्धृत करते हैं---
'वोद्रहद्रहम्मि पडिया' । यह परमात्मप्रकाशके दोहा (२-११७) का अंश है, जो इस प्रकार हैते चिय घण्णा ते चिय सप्पुरिसा ते जियतु जियलोए । वोद्दहदहम्मि पडिया तरंति जे चेव लीलाए ।
हेमचन्द्रने रकारका प्रयोग किया है, किन्तु परमात्मप्रकाशको किसी भी प्रतिमें हेमचन्द्रका पाठ नहीं मिलता । इस पद्य की भाषा अपभ्रंश नहीं है और यह गाथा भी 'उक्तं च' करके है, अतः इसके परमात्मप्रकाशका मूल पद्य होने में सन्देह है। मेरा विचार है कि स्वयं जोइन्दुने ही इसे अपने ग्रन्थमें सम्मिलित किया होगा, क्योंकि परमात्मप्रकाशकी कमसे कम पद्यसंख्यावाली प्रतियोंमें भी यह पद्य पाया जाता है।
हेमचन्द्रकी अपभ्रंश-हेमचन्द्रने अपभ्रंशकी उपभाषाओंका वैसा स्पष्ट निर्देश नहीं किया, जैसा मार्कण्डेय तथा बादके ग्रन्थकारोंने किया है। उनके नियमोंका सावधानोके साथ अध्ययन करनेसे पता चलेगा कि उनकी अपभ्रंश एक ही प्रकारकी नहीं है, किन्तु कई उपभाषाओंका मिश्रण है। हेमचन्द्रके कथन "प्रायो ग्रहणाद्यस्यापभ्रंशे विशेषो वक्ष्यते तस्यापि क्वचित् प्राकृतवत् शौरसेनीवच्च कार्यं भवति ।" (४-३२९ ) से यह स्पष्ट है कि वे अपनी अपभ्रंशके दो आधार मानते हैं, एक प्राकृत और दूसरा शोरसेनी । चतुर्थपादके सूत्र ३४१, ३६०, ३७२, ३९१, ३९३, ३९४, ३९८, ३९९, ४१४, ४३८ आदि तथा उनके उदाहरण अपभ्रंशके जिन तत्वोंको बतलाते हैं, वे उसीके अन्य सूत्रोंसे मेल नहीं खाते। हेमचन्द्रकी प्राकृत भाषाओंके साथ जब हम उनकी कुछ विशेषताओंका अध्ययन करते हैं, तो वे आपसमें इतनी विरुद्ध जान पड़ती हैं कि एक भाषामें उनकी उपस्थिति संभव प्रतीत नहीं होती।
परमात्मप्रकाशको अपभ्रंशके साथ हेमचन्द्र को अपभ्रंशकी तुलना-हेमचन्द्रका सुत्र "स्वराणां स्वराः प्रायोपभ्रंशे" स्वर-परिवर्तनके लिये कोई आवश्यक नियामक नहीं है। किन्तु इसका केवल इतना ही अभिप्राय है कि हेमचन्द्रकी अपभ्रंशमें स्वर-परिवर्तन काफी स्वतंत्र है। परन्तु परमात्मप्रकाशमें हम इस प्रकारको स्वतंत्रता नहीं देखते । व्यञ्जनोंके परिवर्तनके सम्बन्धमें हेमचन्द्र कहते हैं (४-३९६ ) कि असंयक्त 'क' 'ख' 'त''थ' 'प' और 'फ' के स्थानमें क्रमश: 'ग' 'घ' 'द' 'ध' 'ब' और 'भ' होते हैं, किन्तु हेमचन्द्र के उदाहरणोंमें प्रयुक्त कुछ प्रयोग उनके इस नियमको भंग कर देते हैं। परमात्मप्रकाशमें भी इस नियमका अनुसरण नहीं किया गया है, किन्तु हेमचन्द्रने प्राकृत भाषाके लिये व्यञ्जनोंके सम्बन्धमें जो नियम निर्धारित किया है कि असंयुक्त 'क' 'ग' 'च' 'ज' 'त' 'द' 'प' 'य' और 'व' का प्रायःलोप होता है (१-१७७) परमात्मप्रकाश उससे सहमत है। अनुनासिफ अक्षरोंके सम्बन्धमें, हेमचन्द्र के व्याकरणके अनुसार शब्दके आदिमें 'न' हो तो वह कायम रहता है तथापि अपभ्रंश पद्योंके अपने नवीन संस्करणमें पिशेलने आदिम तथा मध्यम 'न' के स्थानमें 'ण' को ही रक्खा है। परमात्मप्रकाशमें भी सर्वत्र 'ण' ही आता है, केवल 'ब' प्रतिमें कहीं कहीं 'न' पाया जाता है। कन्नड़ प्रतियोंमें सर्वत्र 'ण' ही है। इसके सिवा भी दोनों ग्रन्थोंको अपभ्रंशमें कई विशेषताएँ हैं, जो अंग्रेजी प्रस्तावनासे जानी जा सकती हैं।
तलनाका निष्कर्ष-परमात्मप्रकाशकी अपभ्रंश सर्वत्र एकसी है; जब कि हेमचन्द्रकी अपभ्रंशमें

Page #166

प्रस्तावना
१२१
कमसे कम दो उपभाषाएं मिश्रित है। कुछ हेर-फेरके साथ हेमचन्द्रने परमात्मप्रकाशसे बहुतसे दोहे उद्धृत किये हैं, और अपने व्याकरणके लिये उससे काफी सामग्री भी ली है। स्वर और विभक्ति सम्बन्धी छोटे मोटे भेदोंको भुलाकर भी परमात्मप्रकाश और हेमचन्द्र के व्याकरणको अपभ्रंशों में काफी मौलिक अन्तर पाया जाता है । हेमचन्द्रका अपभ्रशका आधार शौरसेनीका परमात्मप्रकाशमें पता भी नहीं मिलता। इसके सिवा हेमचन्द्र अपभ्रंशको और भी बहतसी बातें परमात्मप्रकाशमें नहीं पाई जाती।
२ परमात्मप्रकाशके रचयिता जोइन्दु
योगीन्द्र नहीं, योगीन्दु जोइन्दु और उनका संस्कृत नाम-यह बड़े ही दुःख की बात है कि जोइन्दु जैसे महान् अध्यात्मवेत्ताके जीवनके सम्बन्धमें विस्तृत वर्णन नहीं मिलता। श्रुतसागर उन्हें 'भट्टारक' लिखते हैं, किन्तु इसे केवल एक आदरसूचक शब्द समझना चाहिये। उनके ग्रन्थोंमें भी उनके जीवन तथा स्थानके बारेमें कोई उल्लेख नहीं मिलता। उनकी रचनाएँ उन्हें आध्यात्मिक राज्यके उन्नत सिंहासनपर विराजमान एक शक्तिशाली आत्माके रूपमें चित्रित करती हैं। वे आध्यात्मिक उत्साहके केन्द्र हैं। परमात्मप्रकाशमें र नाम जोइन्दु आता है । जयसेन तथा योगीन्द्र देवैरप्युक्तम्' करके परमात्मप्रकाशसे एक पद्य उद्धृत करते है। ब्रह्मदेवने अनेक स्थलोंपर ग्रन्थकारका नाम योगीन्द्र लिखा है । 'योगीन्द्रदेवनाम्ना भट्टारकेण' लिखकर श्रतसागर एक पद्य उद्धृत करते हैं। कुछ प्रतियों में योगेन्द्र भी पाया जाता है। इस प्रकार उनके नामका संस्कृतरूप योगीन्द्र बहुत प्रचलित रहा है। शब्दों तथा भावोंको समानता होनेसे योगसार भी जोइन्दुकीरचना माना गया है। इसके अंतिम पद्यमें ग्रंथकारका नाम जोगिचन्द्र लिखा है, किंतु यह नाम योगीन्द्रसे मेल नहीं खाता । अतः मेरी रायमें योगीन्द्रके स्थानपर योगीन्दु पाठ है, जो योगिचंद्रका समानार्थक है । ऐसे अनेक दृष्टांत हैं, जहां व्यक्तिगत नामों में इंदु और चंद्र आपसमें बदल दिये गये हैं जैसे-भागेंदु और भागचंद्र तथा शुभेदु और शुभचंद्र । गलतीसे जोइंदुको संस्कृत रूप योगीन्द्र मान लिया गया और वह प्रचलित हो गया। ऐसे बहतसे प्राकृत शब्द हैं जो विभिन्न लेखकों के द्वारा गलतरूपमें तथा प्रायः विभिन्न रूपोंमें संस्कृतमें परिवर्तित किये गये हैं। योगसारके सम्पादकने इस गलतीका निर्देश किया था, किंतु उन्होंने दोनों नामोंको मिलाकर एक तीसरे 'योगीन्द्रचंद्र' नामको सृष्टि कर डाली, और इस तरह विद्वानोंको हँसनेका अवसर दे दिया। किंत, यदि हम उनका नाम जोइन्दु = योगीन्दु रखते हैं, तो सब बातें ठीक-ठीक घटित हो जाती है।
योगीन्दुकी रचनाएँ परम्परागत रचनाएँ-निम्नलिखित ग्रंथ परम्परासे योगोन्दुविरचित कहे जाते हैं-१ परमात्मप्रकाश ( अपभ्रंश), २ नौकारश्रावकाचार (अप०), ३ योगसार ( अप०), ४ अध्यात्मसंदोह (सं०), ५ सुभाषितंत्र (सं०), और ६ तत्वार्थटीका ( सं०)। इनके सिवा योगीन्द्र के नामपर तीन और ग्रंथ भी प्रकाशमें आ चुके हैं-एक दोहापाडुड़ ( अप०), दूसरा अमृताशीति ( सं० ) और तीसरा निजात्माष्टक (प्रा.), इनमें से नम्बर ४ और ५ के बारेमें हम कुछ नहीं जानते और नं० ६ के बारेमें योगदेव, जिन्होंने तत्त्वार्थ-स्त्रपर संस्कृतमें टोका बनाई है, और योगीन्द्र देव नामोंको समानता संदेहमें डाल देती है।
परमात्मप्रकाश परिचय-इस भूमिकाके प्रारंभमें इसके बारेमें बहुत कुछ लिखा जा चुका है। इसके जोइंदुविरचित होनेमें कोई संदेह नहीं है। यह कहना कि उनके किसी शिष्यने इसे संग्रहीत किया था, ऊपर
५०१६

Page #167

१२२
परमात्मप्रकाश
किया जा चुका है । इस ग्रन्थमें जोइन्दु अपना नाम देते हैं और लिखते हैं कि भट्ट प्रभाकरके लिये इस ग्रन्थकी रचना की गई है। तथा श्रतसागर, बालचन्द्र, ब्रह्मदेव और जयसेन जोइन्दुको इस प्रन्थका कर्ता बतलाते हैं। यथार्थमें यह ग्रन्थ जोइन्दुकी रचनाओंमें सबसे उत्कृष्ट है, और इसीके कारण अध्यात्मवेत्ता नामसे उनकी ख्याति है।
योगसार परिचय-योगसारका मुख्य विषय भी वही है जो परमात्मप्रकाशका है। इसमें संसारकी प्रत्येक वस्तुसे आत्माको सर्वथा पृथक् अनुभवन करनेका उपदेश दिया गया है। ग्रन्थकार कहते हैं कि संसारसे भयभीत और मोक्षके लिये उत्सुक प्राणियोंकी आत्माको जगाने के लिये जोगिचन्द साधुने इन दोहोंको रचा है । ग्रन्थकार लिखते हैं कि उनने ग्रन्थको दोहोंमें रचा है, किन्तु उपलब्ध प्रतिमें एक चौपाई और दो सोरठा भी है, इससे अनुमान होता है कि संभवतः प्रतियाँ पूर्ण सुरक्षित नहीं रही हैं। अन्तिम पद्यमें ग्रन्थकर्ताका नाम जोगिचन्द (जोइन्दु = योगीन्दु) का उल्लेख, आरम्भिक मङ्गलाचरणकी सदृशता, मुख्यविषयकी एकता, वर्णनकी शैली, और वाक्य तथा पंक्तियोंकी समानता बतलाती है कि दोनों ग्रन्थ एक ही कर्ता जोइन्दुकी रचनाएं हैं। योगसार माणिकचन्द्रग्रन्थमाला बम्बईसे प्रकाशित हुआ है, किन्तु उसमें अनेक अशुद्धियां हैं। यदि उसके अशुद्ध पाठोंको दृष्टिमें न लाया जाये तो भाषाकी दृष्टिसे भी दोनों ग्रन्थोंमें समानता है। केवल कुछ अन्तर, जो पाठकके हृदयको स्पर्श करते हैं, इस प्रकार है-योगसारमें एक वचनमें प्रायः 'हु' और 'ह' आता है किन्तु परमात्मप्रकाशमें आता है। योगसारमें वर्तमानकालके द्वितीय पुरुष एकवचनमें 'ह' और 'हि' पाया जाता है, किन्तु परमात्मप्रकाशमें केवल 'हिं आता है । पञ्चास्तिकायको टीकामें जयसेन योगसारसे एक पद्य भी उद्धृत किया है।
सावयधम्मदोहा परिचय-इस ग्रन्थमें मुख्यतया श्रावकोंके आचार साधारण किन्तु आकर्षक शैलीमें बतलाये गये हैं । उपमाओंने इसके उपदेशोंको रोचक बना दिया है और इस श्रेणीके अन्य ग्रन्थोंके साथ इसकी तुलना करनेपर इसमें पारिभाषिक शब्दोंकी कमी पाई जाती है । विषय तथा दोहाछंदके आधारपर इसका नाम श्रावकाचारदोहक है। प्रारम्भके शब्दोंके आधारपर इसे नव ( नौ ) कार श्रावकाचार भी कहते हैं । प्रो० हीरालालजीने बहुत कुछ ऊहापोहके बाद इसका नाम सावयषम्मदोहा रक्खा है।
इसका कर्ता-जोइन्दु सम्बन्धो अपने लेखमें मेंने बतलाया था कि जोगेन्द्र, देवसेनी और लक्ष्मीचन्द्र या लक्ष्मीधरको इसका कर्ता कहा जाता है, उसके बाद इसकी लगभग नौ प्रतियाँ प्रकाशमें आई हैं। अपनी प्रस्तावनामें इसके कर्ताके सम्बन्धमें प्रो० हीरालालजीने विस्तारसे विचार किया है किन्तु उनका दृष्टिकोण किसी भी तरह स्वीकार नहीं किया जा सकता । अतः उसपर विचार करना आवश्यक है।
जोइन्दु-जोइन्दुको इसका कर्ता दो आधारपर माना जाता है, एक तो परम्परागत सूचियोंमें जोइन्दुको इसका कर्ता लिखा है, दूसरे 'अ' प्रतिके अन्तमें इसे 'जोगेन्द्रकृत' बतलाया है, और 'भ' प्रतिके एक पूरक पद्य में योगीन्द्रदेवके साथ इसका नाता जोड़ा गया है। जोगेन्द्र और योगीन्द्रसे परमात्मप्रकाशके कर्ताका ही आशय मालूम होता है। किन्तु परमात्मप्रकाश और योगसारकी तरह इस ग्रन्थमें जोइन्दु ने अपना नाम नहीं दिया; दूसरे, जोइन्दुके उन्नत आध्यात्मिक विचारोंका दिग्दर्शन भी इसमें नहीं होता, तथा श्रावकाचारके मुख्य विषयकी तान रहस्यवादी जोइन्दुके स्वरसे मेल नहीं खाती। तीसरे, प्रो० हीरालालजीके मतसे जोइन्दुको अन्य रचनाओंकी अपेक्षा इसकी कविता अधिक गहन है तथा उनका यह भी कहना है कि यह जोइन्दुकी वावस्थाकी रचना नहीं है । चौथे, कुछ सामान्य विचारोंके सिवा, इसमें और परमात्मप्रकाशमें कोई

Page #168

प्रस्तावना
१२३
उल्लेखनीय शाब्दिक समानता भी नहीं है । पाँचवें, सावयधम्मदोहामें पञ्चमो और षष्ठोके एक वचनमें 'हु' आता है, जब कि परमात्मप्रकाशमें एकवचन और बहुवचन दोनोंमें 'है' आता है। अतः इस ग्रंथको जोइन्दुकृत मानने में कोई भी प्रबल प्रमाण नहीं है। संभवतः इसकी भाषा तथा कुछ विचारोंकी साम्यताको देखकर किसोने जोइन्दुको इसका कर्ता लिख दिया होगा।
देवसेन-निम्नलिखित आधारोंपर प्रो० होरालालजीका मत है कि इसके कर्ता देवसेन है। १ 'क' प्रतिके अन्तिम पद्यमें 'देवसेनै उवदिट्ठ' आता है। २ देवसेनके भावसंग्रह और सावयधम्मदोहामें बहुत कुछ समानता है।
३ देवसेनको 'दोहा' रचनेकी बहुत चाह थो । और संभवतः उस समय छन्दशास्त्रमें यह एक नवीन आविष्कार था।
किन्तु उनके उक्त आधार प्रबल नहीं हैं । प्रथम, 'क' प्रति विश्वसनीय नहीं है, क्योंकि अन्य प्रतियोंको अपेक्षा उसमें पद्यसंख्या सबसे अधिक है, तथा वह सबके बादकी लिखी हुई है। इसके सिवा, जिस दोहेमें देवसेनका नाम आता है, वह केवल सदोष ही नहीं है किन्तु उसमें स्पष्ट अशुद्धियाँ है। उसका 'देवसेने' पाठ बड़ा ही विचित्र है, और पुस्तकभरमें इस ढंगका दूसरा उदाहरण खोजनेपर भी नहीं मिलता । छन्दशास्त्रकी दृष्टिसे भो उस दोहेकी दोनों पंक्तियाँ अशुद्ध हैं, और सबसे मजेकी बात तो यह है कि प्रो० होरालालजीने स्वसम्पादित सावयधम्मदोहाके मूलमें उसे स्थान नहीं दिया। अतः इस प्रकारके अन्तिम दोहेका सम्बन्ध सावयधम्मदोहाके कर्ताके साथ नहीं जोड़ा जा सकता, और हम यह विश्वास नहीं कर सकते कि दर्शनसारके
यिता देवसेनने इसे रचा है। देवसेनके चार प्राकृत ग्रंथोंका निरीक्षण करनेपर हम देखते है कि भावसंग्रहमें वे अपना नाम 'विमलसेनका शिष्य देवसेन' देते है; आराधना सारमें केवल 'देवसेन' लिखा है। दर्शनसारमें 'धारानिवासी देवसेन गणी' आता है, और तत्त्वसारमें 'मनिनाथ देवसेन' लिखा है। किन्तु सावयधम्मदोहामें इनमेंसे एकका मी उल्लेख नहीं है। अतः पहलो युक्ति ठोक नहीं है।
यह सत्य है कि भावसंग्रह और सावयधम्मदोहाकी कुछ चर्चाएँ मिलती जुलती है, किन्तु प्रो० हीरालालजीके द्वारा उद्धृत १८ सदृश वाक्योंमेंसे मुश्किलसे दो तीन वाक्य आपसमें मेल खाते है । परम्परागत शैलीके आधारपर रचे गये साहित्यमें कुछ शब्दों तथा भावोंकी समानता कोई मूल्य नहीं रखती । भावसंग्रहमें कुछ अपभ्रंश पद्य पाये जाते है, और सम्पादकने लिखा है कि भावसंग्रहको प्रतियोंमें देवसेनके बादके ग्रंथकारोंके
भी पद्य पाये जाते हैं, अतः यह असंभव नहीं है कि किसी लेखककी कृपासे सावयधम्मदोहाके पद्य उसमें जा मिले हों।
तीसरे आधारसे भी कोई बात सिद्ध नहीं होती है. क्योंकि दोहाछंद कब प्रचलित हुआ यह अभीतक निर्णीत नहीं हो सका है। कालिदासके विक्रमोर्वशीयमें हम एक दोहा देखते है; रुद्रटके काव्यालङ्कारमें दो दोहे पाये जाते है, और आनंदवर्धन ( लगभग ८५० ई० ) ने भी अपने ध्वन्यालोकमें एक दोहा उद्धृत किया है । रुद्रटका समय नवीं शताब्दीका प्रारम्भ समझा जाता है। यदि यह मान भी लिया जावे कि देवसेनको दोहा रचनेकी बहुत चाह थी, तो भी उनका सावयधम्मदोहाका कर्ता होना इससे प्रमाणित नहीं होता।
लक्ष्मीचन्द्र-'प' 'भ' और 'भ ३' प्रतियाँ इसे लक्ष्मीचन्द्रकृत बतलाती हैं। श्रुतसागरने इस ग्रंथसे नौ पद्य उधत किये है, उनमेंसे एक वह लक्ष्मीचन्द्रका बतलाते हैं, और शेष लक्ष्मीधरके; अतः श्रुतसागरके उल्लेखके अनुसार लक्ष्मीचंद उपनाम लक्ष्मीषर सावयधम्मदोहाके कर्ता है। किंतु निम्नलिखित

Page #169

१२४
परमात्मप्रकाश
कारणोंसे प्रो० हीरालालजीने लक्ष्मीचन्द्रको इसका कर्ता नहीं माना। १ 'भ' प्रतिके अन्तिम पद्यमें लिखा है कि यह ग्रन्थ योगीन्द्रने बनाया है, इसकी पञ्जिका लक्ष्मीचन्द्रने और वृत्ति प्रभाचन्द्रने । २ मल्लिभूषणके शिष्य लक्ष्मण ही लक्ष्मीधर हैं। ३ 'प' प्रतिका लेख 'लक्ष्मीचन्द्रविरचिते' लेखककी भूलका परिणाम है उसके स्थानपर 'लक्ष्मीचन्द्रलिखिते' या 'लक्ष्मीचन्द्रार्थलिखिते' होना चाहिए था। ४ लक्ष्मीचन्द्ररचित किसी दूसरे ग्रन्थसे हम परिचित नहीं हैं। इसका समाधान निम्न प्रकार है-१'भ' प्रतिका अन्तिम पद्य बादमें जोड़ा गया है, क्योंकि वह अन्तिम सन्धि 'इति श्रावकाचारदोहकं लक्ष्मीचन्द्र विरचितं समाप्तम्' के बाद आता है
और उसका अभिप्राय भो सन्धिसे विरुद्ध है। २ '' प्रतिके अन्त में लिखे लक्ष्मण और लक्ष्मीचन्द्र एक ही व्यक्तिके दो नाम नहीं हैं, क्योंकि पहले "इति उपासकाचारे आचार्य श्रीलक्ष्मीचन्द्रविरचिते दोहकसूत्राणि समाप्तानि" लिखा है, और फिर लिखा है कि सम्वत् १५५५ में यह दोहाश्रावकाचार मल्लिभूषणके शिष्य पं० लक्ष्मणके लिये लिखा गया। इससे स्पष्ट है कि सन्धिमें ग्रन्थकारका नाम आया है और बादकी पंक्ति लेखकने लिखी है। ३ जब लक्ष्मीचन्द्र और लक्ष्मणकी एकता हो सिद्ध नहीं हो सकी तो 'प' प्रतिके पाठमें सुधार करनेका कारण ही नहीं रहता। ४ अन्तिम आधार भी अन्य तीन आधारोंपर ही निर्भर है, अत: उसके बारेमें अलग समाधान करनेको आवश्यकता नहीं है। इस तरह लक्ष्मीचन्द्रके विरुद्ध प्रो० हीरालालजीको आपत्तियां उचित नहीं है और उनका दावा कि देवसेन इसके कर्ता है, प्रमाणित नहीं हो सका, अतः श्रुतसागरके उल्लेख तथा अन्य प्रमाणों के आधारपर लक्ष्मीचन्द्रको ही सावयधम्मदोहाका कर्ता मानना चाहिये । यह लक्ष्मीचन्द्र श्रुतसागरके समकालीन लक्ष्मीचन्द्रसे जुदे हैं। जहाँतक हम इनके बारेमें जानते हैं, श्रुतसागर और ब्रह्म नेमिदत्त (१५२८ ई०) दोनोंसे यह अधिक प्राचीन है।
दोहापाहुड परिचय-इस ग्रन्थकी उपलब्ध दो प्रतियोंमेंसे एकमें इसका नाम दोहपाहुड़ लिखा है, और दूसरीमें पाहुड़दोहा । प्रो० होरालालजीने इसकी प्रस्तावनामें इसके नामका अर्थ समझाया है, और उनके बतलाये अर्थके अनुसार भी ग्रन्थका नाम दोहापाहुड़ होना चाहिये । परमात्मप्रकाशकी तरह यह भी एक आध्यात्मिक ग्रन्थ है, इसमें ग्रन्थकारने आत्मतत्त्वपर विचार किया है। इसकी उपलब्ध प्रति अपनी असली हालतमें नहीं है; उसके अन्तमें दो पद्य संस्कृतमें है, और दोहा नं०:११-जिसमें रामसिंहका नाम आता है, जो एक प्रतिके अन्तिम वाक्यके अनुसार ग्रन्थके रचयिता है-के बाद दो गाथाएँ महाराष्ट्रीमें हैं।
जोइन्दु-'क' प्रतिको अन्तिम सन्धिमें इसे योगेन्द्रकी रचना बतलाया है, और इसके बहुतसे दोहे परमात्मप्रकाश और योगसारसे मिलते जुलते भी हैं । किन्तु निम्नलिखित कारणोंसे इसको योगीन्द्रकी रचना मानना साधार प्रतीत नहीं होता-१ परमात्मप्रकाश और योगसारकी तरह इसमें उन्होंने अपना नाम नहीं दिया, जबकि पद्य नं० २११ में रामसिंहका नाम आता है। २ दोहापाहुड़में अकारान्त शब्दके षष्ठीके एकवचवमें 'हो' और 'हूँ' प्रत्यय आते हैं, किन्तु परमात्मप्रकाशमें केवल 'है' ही पाया जाता है, तथा तुहारउ, तुहारी, दोहिं मि, देहहंमि, कहिमि आदि रूप परमात्मप्रकाशमें नहीं पाये जाते । ३ 'द' प्रतिके अन्तिम वाक्य में रामसिंहको इसका कर्ता बतलाया है, जिसका नाम पद्य नं० २११ में भी आता है। प्रारम्भमें मुझे सन्देह था कि परमात्मप्रकाशके 'शान्ति' को तरह क्या रामसिंह भी कोई प्राचीन ग्रन्थकार है ? किन्तु दोहापाहुड़की गहरी छानबीनके पश्चात मैं इस परिणामपर पहुंचा हैं कि इसके जोइन्दुकृत होने में कोई प्रबल प्रमाण नहीं है । कुछ पद्योंकी समानता और अपभ्रंश भाषाको लक्षमें रखकर किसीने इसकी सन्धिमें योगीन्द्रका नाम जोड़ दिया है, जबकि ग्रन्थमें रामसिंहका नाम आता है।

Page #170

प्रस्तावना
१२५ रामसिंह-दोहापाहड़के रामसिंह रचित होनेमें दो प्रमाण है. एक तो इसकी उपलब्ध दोनों प्रतियोंमें ग्रन्थके अन्दर उनका नाम आता है, दूसरे, एक प्रतिकी सन्धिमें भी उनका नाम आया है। उनके विरुद्ध केवल एक ही बात है कि अन्तिम पद्य में उनका नाम नहीं आया । किन्तु मैं ऊपर लिख आया हूँ कि उपलब्ध प्रति अपनी असली हालतमें नहीं है, और २११ के बाद बहुतसे पद्य बादके मिलाये जान पड़ते हैं । अतः उपलब्ध सामग्रीके आधारपर रामसिंहको ही इसका कर्ता मानना चाहिये। रामसिंह योगीन्दुके बहुत ऋणी हैं, क्योंकि उनके ग्रन्थका एक पञ्चमांश-जैसा कि प्रो० हीरालालजो कहते हैं-परमात्मप्रकाशसे लिया गया है। रामसिंह रहस्यवादके प्रेमी थे, और संभवतः इसीसे प्राचीन ग्रन्थकारोंके पद्योंका उपयोग उन्होंने अपने ग्रन्थमें किया है। उनके समयके बारेमें केवल इतना ही कहा जा सकता है कि जोइन्दु और हेमचन्द्रके मध्यमें वे हुए हैं। श्रुतसागर, ब्रह्मदेव, जयसेन और हेमचन्द्रने उनके दोहापाहुड़से कुछ पद्य उद्धृत किये हैं। दोहापाहुड़ और सावयधम्मदोहामें दो पद्य बिल्कुल समान है। किन्तु एक तो देवसेन सावयधम्मदोहाके कर्ता प्रमाणित नहीं हो सके, दूसरे, प्रक्षेपकोंसे पूर्ण दोहापाहुड़की प्रतिके आधारपर उसकी आलोचना भी नहीं की जा सकती। अतः नई प्रतियाँ मिलनेपर इस समस्यापर विशेष प्रकाश डाला जा सकेगा।
अमृताशीति और निजात्माष्टक
अमृताशीति-यह एक उपदेशप्रद रचना है। इसमें विभिन्न छन्दोंमें ८२ पद्य हैं और जैनधर्मके अनेक विषयोंको उनमें चर्चा है। हम नहीं जानते कि इसमें सन्धिस्थल सम्पादकने जोड़ा है, या प्रतिमें हीथा ? अन्तिम पद्य में योगीन्द्र शब्द आया है, जो चन्द्रप्रभका विशेषण भी किया जा सकता है। परमात्मप्रकाशके कर्ताके साथ इसका सम्बन्ध जोड़नेके लिये कोई प्रमाण नहीं है । इस रचनामें विद्यानंदि, जटा सिंहनंदि, और अकलंकदेवके भी कुछ पद्य हैं। कुछ पद्य भर्तहरिके शतकत्रयसे मिलते हैं। पद्मप्रभमलधारिदेवने अपनी नियमसारको टीकामें इससे तीनपद्य (नं० ५७.५८, और ५९) उद्धृत किये हैं। उसी टीकाम निम्नलिखित एक अन्य पद्य भी उद्धृत है
तथा चोक्तं श्रीयोगीन्द्रदेवैः । तथाहि मुक्त्यङ्गनालिमपुनर्भवसौख्यमूलं
दुर्भावनातिमिरसंहतिचंद्रकीतिम् । संभावयामि समतामहमुच्चकैस्तां
या सम्मता भवति संयमिनामजस्रम् ॥ किन्तु यह पद्य अमृताशीतिमें नहीं है। प्रेमीजीका अनुमान है कि सम्भवतः यह पद्य योगीन्द्ररचित कहे जानेवाले अध्यात्मसंदोहका है।
निजात्माष्टक-इसकी भाषा प्राकृत है; इसमें स्रग्धरा छन्दमें आठ पद्य है, और उनमें सिद्धपरमेष्ठीका स्वरूप बतलाया है। किसी भी पद्य में रचयिताका नाम नहीं दिया, किन्तु संस्कृतमें रचित अंतिम वाक्यमें योगीन्द्रका नाम आया है। परन्तु परमात्मप्रकाशके कर्ताके साथ इसका सम्बन्ध जोड़नेके लिये यह काफ़ी प्रमाण नहीं है।
निष्कर्ष-इस लम्बी चर्चाके बाद हम इस निर्णयपर पहुंचते हैं कि जिस परम्पराके आधारपर योगीन्द्रको उक्त ग्रन्थोंका रचयिता कहा जाता है, वह प्रामाणिक नहीं है। अतः वर्तमानमें परमात्मप्रकाश और योगसार ये दो ही अन्य जोइंदुरचित सिद्ध होते हैं।

Page #171

१२६
परमात्मप्रकाश
जोइन्दुका समय
समयका विचार -- जोइंदुके उक्त दोनों ग्रंथोंसे उनके समय के बारेमें कुछ भी मालूम नहीं होता । अतः अब हमारे सामने एक हो मार्ग शेष रह जाता है, और वह है जोइन्दुके ग्रंथसे उद्धरण देनेवाले ग्रंथों का निरीक्षण | निम्नलिखित प्रमाणों के आधार पर हम जोइन्दुके समयकी अंतिम अवधि निर्धारित करनेका प्रयत्न करते है
१ श्रुतसागर, जो ईसाकी सोलहवीं शताब्दी के प्रारम्भ में हुए हैं, षट्प्राभृतकी टोकामें परमात्मप्रकाशसे ६ पद्य उद्धृत करते हैं ।
२ परमात्मप्रकाशपर, मलधारि बालचंद्रने कनड़ी में और ब्रह्मदेवने संस्कृत में टीका बनाई है, और उन दोनोंका समय क्रमशः ईसाको चौदहवों और तेरहवीं शताब्दी के लगभग है ।
३ जयसेन, जिन्होंने कुंदकुंदके पञ्चास्तिकाय, प्रवचनसार और समयसारपर संस्कृत में टीकाएँ रची हैं, जोइन्दु और उनके दोनों ग्रंथोंसे अच्छी तरह परिचित हैं । समयसारको टीका में वे परमात्मप्रकाशका उल्लेख करते हैं, और उससे एक पद्य भी उद्धृत करते हैं । पञ्चास्तिकायकी टीका में भी वे एक पद्य उद्धृत करते हैं, जो योगसारका ५६ वाँ पद्य है । जयसेनका समय ईसाकी बारहवीं शताब्दी के उत्तरार्द्धके लगभग है ।
४ ऊपर यह बतलाया है कि हेमचंद्र परमात्मप्रकाशसे परिचित हैं, उन्होंने परमात्मप्रकाशसे कुछ सामग्री ली है; और अपने अपभ्रंश-व्याकरणके सूत्रोंके उदाहरणमें, थोड़े बहुत परिवर्तन के साथ परमात्मप्रकाशसे कुछ दोहे भी उद्धृत किये हैं । हेमचंद्र १०८९ ई० में पैदा हुए और ११७३ ई० में स्वर्गवासी हुए। किसी भाषा इतिहास में यह कोई अनहोनी घटना नहीं है कि साहित्यिक रूपमें अवतरित होनेके बाद ही - चाहे वह साहित्यिकरूप परम्परागत स्मृति रूपमें रहा हो या पुस्तकरूपमें — उस भाषा के विशाल व्याकरणकी रचना होती है | अतः इस कल्पनाके लिये पर्याप्त साधन नहीं हैं कि हेमचंद्र के द्वारा निबद्ध अपभ्रंश ही उस समयकी प्रचलित भाषा थी । यह कहना अधिक युक्तिसंगत होगा कि अपने व्याकरणके द्वारा उन्होंने अपभ्रंशके साहित्यिक रूपको निबद्ध किया है, और यह रूप उनके समयमें प्रचलित भाषाके पूर्वका या उससे भी अधिक प्राचीन रहा होगा । क्योंकि व्याकरणका आधार केवल बोलचालकी भाषा नहीं होती । अतः हेमचंद्रसे कमसे कम दो शताब्दी पूर्व जोइंदुका समय मानना होगा ।
५ प्रो० हीरालालजीने बतलाया है कि हेमचंद्रने रामसिंहके दोहापाहुड़से कुछ पद्य उद्धृत किये हैं और रामसिंहने जोइंदुके योगसार और परमात्मप्रकाशसे बहुतसे दोहे लेकर अपनी रचनाको समृद्ध किया है । अतः जोइंदु हेमचंद्र के केवल पूर्ववर्ती ही नहीं है किंतु उन दोनोंके मध्य में रामसिंह हुए हैं ।
६ ऊपर में बतला आया हूँ कि देवसेनके तत्त्वसारके कुछ पद्य परमात्मप्रकाशके दोहोंसे बहुत मिलते हैं। यह भी संभव हो सकता है कि दोनोंके रचयिताओंने किसी एक स्थानसे उन्हें लिया हो। किंतु पद्योंकी परिस्थिति और ऊपर बतलाये गये कारणोंको दृष्टिमें रखते हुए मेरा मत है कि देवसेनने योगीन्दुका अनुसरण किया है । अपनी रचनाओंमें देवसेन ने अपने पूर्ववर्ती ग्रंथोंका प्रायः उपयोग किया है। उन्होंने वि० सं० ९९० (९३३ ई०) में अपना दर्शनसार समाप्त किया था ।
७ नीचेके दो पद्य तुलनाके योग्य हैं
१ योगसार, ६५ -

विरला जाहिं तत्तु बुहु विरला णिसुनहिं तत्तु । विरला झायहिं तत्तु जिय विरला धारहिं तत्तु ॥

Page #172

२ कत्तिगेयाणुप्पेक्खा, २७९
प्रस्तावना
विरला णिसुणहि तच्च विरला जाणंति तच्चदो तच्चं । विरला भावहि तच्च विरलाणं धारणा हादि ॥
कुमारकी कत्तिगेयाणुपेक्खा अपभ्रंश भाषामें लिखी गई है, अतः वर्तमानकाल तृतीयपुरुषके बहुवचनके रूप 'णिसुणहि' और 'भावहि' उसमें जबरन घुस गये हैं, किन्तु योगसारमें वे ही रूप ठीक हैं । दोनों पद्योंका आशय एक ही है, केवल दोहेको गाथा में परिवर्तित कर दिया है, किन्तु यह किसी लेखककी सूझ नहीं है, बल्कि, कुमारने ही जान या अनजान में, जोइन्दुके दोहेका अनुसरण किया है। कुछ दन्तकथाओंने कुमारके व्यक्तित्वको अन्धकारमें डाल दिया है, और उनका समय अभीतक भी निश्चित नहीं हो सका है । मौखिक परम्पराओंके आधारपर यह कहा जाता है कि विक्रमसंवत्से कोई दो या तीन शताब्दी पहले कुमार हुए हैं, और ऐसा मालूम होता है कि आधुनिक कुछ विद्वानोंपर इस परम्पराका प्रभाव भी है । कुमारकी कत्तिगेयाणुपेक्खाकी केवल एक ही संस्कृतटीका उपलब्ध है, जो १५५६ ई० में शुभचन्द्रने बनाई थी । किन्हीं प्राचीन टीकाओंमें कुमारका उल्लेख भी नहीं मिलता । कुमारने बारह अनुप्रेक्षाओंकी गणनाका क्रम तत्त्वार्थसूत्र के अनुसार रक्खा है, जो वट्टकेर, शिवार्य और कुन्दकुन्दके क्रमसे थोड़ा भिन्न है । ये सब बातें कुमारकी परम्परागत प्राचीनता के विरुद्ध जाती हैं । यद्यपि कत्तिगेयाणुप्पेक्खाका कोई शुद्ध संस्करण प्रकाशित नहीं हुआ है, किन्तु गाथाओं के देखने से पता चलता है कि उनकी भाषा प्रवचनसारके जितनी प्राचीन नहीं है । २५ वीं गाथा 'क्षेत्रपाल' शब्दसे अनुमान होता है कि कुमार दक्षिणप्रान्तके निवासी थे, जहाँ क्षेत्रपालकी पूजाका बहुत प्रचार रहा है । दक्षिण में कुमारसेन नामके कई साधु हुए हैं । मुलगुन्द मंदिरके शिलालेखमें, जो ९०३ ई० से पहले का है, एक कुमारसेनका उल्लेख है; तथा ११४५ ई० बोगदीके शिलालेख में एक कुमारस्वामीका नाम आता है । किन्तु एकता के लिये केवल नामकी समता ही पर्याप्त नहीं है । अतः इन बातोंको दृष्टिमें रखते हुए मैं कुमारका कोई निश्चित समय ठहराना नहीं चाहता, किन्तु केवल इतना ही कहना है कि परम्पराके आधारपर कल्पित कुमारकी प्राचीनता प्रमाणित नहीं होती तथा उसके विरुद्ध अनेक जोरदार युक्तियाँ मोजद
हैं । मेरा मत है कि जोइन्दु और कुमारमेंसे जोइन्दु प्राचीन हैं ।
९ प्राकृतलक्षणके कर्ता चण्डने अपने सूत्र " यथा तथा अनयोः स्थाने" के उदाहरणमें निम्नलिखित दोहा उद्धृत किया है

कालु लहेविणु जोइया जिम जिम तिम तिम दंसणु लहइ जो नियमें
मोहु गलेइ । अप्पु मुणेइ ॥
१२७
यह परमात्मप्रकाशके प्रथम अधिकारका ८५ वां दोहा है । दोनोंमें केवल इतना ही अन्तर है कि परमात्मप्रकाशमें 'जिम' के स्थानपर 'जिम' 'तिम' के स्थानपर 'तिमु' तथा 'जो' के स्थानपर 'जिउ ' पाठ है, किन्तु चण्डका प्राकृत व्याकरण अपनी असली हालत में नहीं है । यह एक सुव्यवस्थित पुस्तक न होकर एक अर्धव्यवस्थित नोटबुकके जैसा है' । १८८० ई० में जब प्राकृतका अध्ययन अपनी बाल्यावस्थामें था, और अपभ्रंश - साहित्यसे लोग अपरिचित थे, हॅन्लें (Hoernle ) ने इसका सम्पादन किया था । उनके पास साधनों की कमी थी, और केवल पालीभाषा तथा अशोकके शिलालेखोंपर दृष्टि रखकर उसका व्यवस्थित संस्करण सम्पादित कर सकना कठिन था । हॅलेंने उसके सम्पादनमें बड़ी कड़ाईसे काम लिया है,
१ दलाल और गुणे लिखित 'भविसयत्तकहा' की प्रस्तावना, पृ० ६२ ।
आदि ।
२ हर्ले की प्रस्तावना, पृ० १,२०,

Page #173

१२८
और ऐसी कड़ाई के लिये उन्होंने कैफियत भी दी है किन्तु पिशेल तथा गुणे इसकी शिकायत करते हैं । इसी कड़ाईने उनसे उक्त सूत्र तथा उसके उदाहरणको मूलसे पृथक् कराके परिशिष्ट में डलवा दिया है । हॅर्लेका कहना है लेखकों की कृपासे यह सूत्र मूलमें आ मिला है । वे कहते हैं कि व्याकरणके जिस प्रसंग में उक्त सूत्र अपने उदाहरण के साथ आता है, वह व्यवस्थित नहीं है। उनके इस मतसे हम भी सहमत है। किन्तु इस बातका स्मरण रखते हुए कि सूत्रोंके क्रम में परिवर्तन किया गया है, हम उसकी मौलिकताको अस्वीकार नहीं कर सकते । चण्ड एक अपभ्रंश भाषासे परिचित हैं, जिसमें र, जब वह किसी शब्द में द्वितीय व्यञ्जनके रूपमें आता है, सुरक्षित रहता है । अभ्रंश भाषा में यह बात पाई जाती है; हेमचन्द्रके कुछ उदाहरणोंमें तथा रुद्रटके श्लेय-पद्योंमें भी इस बातको चित्रित किया गया है। हमें आशा है कि केवल एक सूत्र के द्वारा चष्टने अपभ्रंशका पृथककरण न किया होगा अतः अन्य सूत्रों को भी चण्डकृत स्वीकार करनेपर अपभ्रंशके सम्बन्धमें अधिक जानकारी हो जाती है । यह स्वाभाविक है कि अपने सूत्रोंके उदाहरणमें वैयाकरण काव्य-ग्रन्थोंसे पद्य उद्धृत करते हैं । हेमचन्द्र व्याकरणमें उक्त पद्यका न पाया है यह इस बातका निराकरण करता है कि हेमचन्द्र के व्याकरणसे लेकर लेखकोंने उसे यहाँ मिला दिया होगा। गुणेका कहना है कि यह सूत्र मूल ग्रन्थका ही है और हम इससे सहमत हैं
।
जाना निरर्थक नहीं
+
चण्डके समय के बारेमें अनेक मत हैं । हॅन्लेंका कहना है कि ईसा से तीन शताब्दी पूर्वके कुछ बाद और ईस्वी सन्के प्रारम्भसे पहले चण्डका व्याकरण रचा गया है। हॅग्लॅके अनुसार उक्त सूत्र तथा उसके उदाहरण वररुचिसे भी बादमें ग्रन्थ में सम्मिलित किये गये हैं किन्तु कितने बाद में सम्मिलित किये गये हैं, यह वह नहीं बताते हैं। वररुचिका समय ५०० ई० के लगभग बतलाया जाता है। गुणे का कहना है कि चण्ड उस समय हुए हैं, जब अपभ्रंश केवल आभीरोंके बोलचाल की भाषा न थी बल्कि साहित्यिक भाषा हो चुकी थी, अर्थात् ईसाकी छट्ठी शताब्दी के बादमें । इस प्रकार चण्डके व्याकरण के व्यवस्थित ( revised ) रूपका समय ईसाकी सातवीं शताब्दी के लगभग रखा जा सकता है, अतः परमात्मप्रकाशको प्राकृतलक्षणसे पुराना मानना चाहिये ।
परमात्मप्रकाश
जोइन्दु समयकी आरम्भिक अवधि - ऊपर यह बताया गया है कि जोइन्दु, कुन्दकुन्दके पाद और पूज्यपाद के समाधिशतकके बहुत ऋणी है। वास्तवमें परमात्मप्रकाश में समाधितक के कुछ तात्त्विक विचारोंको बड़े परिश्रम से निबद्ध किया है। कुन्दकुन्दका समय ईस्वी सन्के प्रारम्भके लगभग है. और पूज्यपादका पाँचवीं शताब्दी के अन्तिम पादसे कुछ पूर्व इस चर्चा के आधारपर में परमात्मप्रकाशको । समाधिशतक और प्राकृतलक्षणके मध्यकालकी रचना मानता हूँ। इसलिये जोइन्दु ईसाकी छट्ठी शताब्दी में ये है ।
१. अपभ्रंग पाटावली में थी. एम. सी. मोदीने परमात्मप्रकाशसे भी कुछ पद्य संकलित किये है। उनपर टिप्पण करते हुए उन्होंने मेरे 'जोइन्दु' विषयक लेखका उल्लेख किया है, और लिखा है कि यद्यपि जोइन्दुको हेमचन्द्रका पूर्वज कहा जा सकता है किन्तु उन्हें वि. सं. की दसवीं या ग्यारहवीं शताब्दोंसे भी पहलेका बतलाना ठोक नहीं है। श्री मोदीके निष्कर्ष निकालने ढंगको देखकर मुझे मोक्षमूलरके एक वाक्यका स्मरण आता है - "ऐतिहासिक व्यक्तियोंका समय जाननेकी विद्या केवल रुचिकी बात नहीं है, जो केवल स्मरणके प्रभावसे ही निश्चित की जा सके। अपभ्रंश स्वरोंका विचार करनेवर 'अण्णु' और 'अणु' समय निर्णय करने में सहायक नहीं हो सकते । यद्यपि ब्रह्मदेवने 'जवला' का अर्थ 'समीपे' किया है किन्तु यह अर्थं बिल्कुल अप्रासङ्गिक हैं । यह संस्कृत के 'यमल' शब्द से बना है, जिसका अर्थ 'जोड़ा' होता है । 'जवल' शब्द श्वेताम्बर आगमोंमें भी आता है । अपभ्रंश में 'म' का 'व' हो जाता है ।

.

Page #174

प्रस्तावना
१२९
३ परमात्मप्रकाशको टीकाएं
'क' प्रतिकी कन्नडटीका बालचन्द्रको टोका और 'क' प्रतिको कन्नड़टीका-यह लिखा जा चुका है अध्यात्मी बालचन्द्रने जिनने कुन्दकुन्दत्रयीपर कन्नडटीका बनाई है, परमात्मप्रकाशपर भी एक कन्नडटीका रची है। परमात्मप्रकाशको 'क' प्रतिमें एक कन्नड़टीका पाई जाती है। किन्तु यह नहीं कहा जा सकता कि यह टीका बालचन्द्रकी ही है क्योंकि 'क' प्रतिसे इस सम्बन्धमें कोई सूचना नहीं मिलती और म० आर० नरसिंहाचार्यने बालचन्द्रको टीकाका कुछ अंश नहीं दिया, जिससे 'क' प्रतिकी टीका मिलाई जा सके ।
कन्नड़टीकाका परिचय-'क' प्रतिकी कन्नड़टीकामें परमात्मप्रकाशके दोहोंकी व्याख्या बहुत अच्छे रूपमें की गई है, जहाँतक मैंने इसे उलट-पलट कर देखा अपभ्रंश शब्दोंका तुल्यार्थक संस्कृत शब्द कहीं भी मेरे देखनेमें नहीं आया, केवल कन्नड़में उनके अथं दिये हैं । अनुवाद के कुछ अंश टीकाकारके भाषापाण्डित्य
परिचय देते हैं। मझे कुछ ऐसे शब्द भी मिले. जिनके ठीक ठीक अर्थ टीकाकारने नहीं किये हैं। टीक सरल और सादी है, और दोहोंका अर्थ करने में काफी सावधानीसे काम लिया है। ब्रह्मदेवकी संस्कृतटीकाके समान न तो इनमें विशेष दार्शनिक विवेचन ही है, और न उद्धरण ही ।
इसकी स्वतन्त्रता-ब्रह्मदेवकी संस्कृतटीकाके साथ मैंने इसके कई स्थलोंका मिलान किया है, और मैं इस नतीजेपर पहुँचा हूँ कि टीकाकार ब्रह्मदेवको टीकासे अपरिचित है। यदि उनके सामने ब्रह्मदेवकी टोका होती तो उनके समान वे भी अपभ्रंश शब्दोंके संस्कृत रूप देते और विशेष विवेचन तथा उद्धरणोंसे अपनी टीकाकी शोभा बढ़ाते । इसके सिवा दोनोंमें कुछ मौलिक असमानताएँ भी है। ब्रह्मदेवको अपेक्षा 'क' प्रतिमें ११३ पद्य कम है । तथा अनेक ऐसे मौलिक पाठान्तर और अनुवाद है,जो ब्रह्मदेवकी टीकामें नहीं पाये जाते।
'क' प्रतिको टीकाका समय-इस टीकाके गम्भीर अनुसन्धानके बाद मैंने निष्कर्ष निकाला है कि न केवल ब्रह्मदेव टीका से, बल्कि परमात्मप्रकाशकी करीब करीब सभी टीकाओंसे यह टीका प्राचीन मालूम होती है।
ब्रह्मदेव और उनकी वृत्ति ब्रह्मदेव और उनकी रचनाएं-अपने टीकाओंमें ब्रह्मदेवने अपने सम्बन्धमें कुछ नहीं लिखा है । द्रव्यसंग्रहकी टीकामें केवल उनका नाम आता है । बहदद्रव्यसंग्रहकी भमिकामें पं. जवाहरलालजीने लिखा है कि ब्रह्म उनकी उपाधि थी, जो बतलाती है कि वे ब्रह्मचारी थे, और देवजी उनका नाम था। यद्यपि आराधनाकथाकोशके कर्ता नेमिदत्तने और प्राकृत श्रुतस्कंधके रचयिता हेमचन्द्रने उपाधिके रूपमें ब्रह्म शब्दका उपयोग किया है किन्तु ब्रह्मदेव नाममें 'ब्रह्म' शब्द उपाधिसूचक नहीं मालूम देता, कारण, जैनपरम्परामें ब्रह्ममुनि, ब्रह्मसेन, ब्रह्मसूरि बादि नामोंके अनेक प्रन्थकार हुये हैं तथा देव कोई प्रचलित नाम भी नहीं है किन्तु प्रायः नामके अन्त में आता है अतः ब्रह्मदेव एक ही नाम है। परम्पराके अनुसार निम्नलिखित रचनाएँ ब्रह्मदेवकी मानी जाती है
१-परमात्मप्रकाशटीका २–बृहद्रव्यसंग्रहटीका ३-तत्त्वदीपक ४-ज्ञानदीपक ५-त्रिवर्णाचारदीपक ६-प्रतिष्ठातिलक ७-विवाहपटल और ८-कथाकोश । जबतक ग्रन्थ न मिलें, तबतक नम्बर ३, ४ और ७ के विषयमें कुछ नहीं कहा जा सकता। संभवतः नामके आदिमें ब्रह्म शब्द होनेके कारण ब्रह्मनेमिदत्तका कथाकोश और ब्रह्मसूरिके त्रिवर्णाचार (दीपक) और प्रतिष्ठातिलकको गलतीसे ब्रह्मदेवके नामके साथ

Page #175

परमात्मप्रकाश
जोड़ दिया है । अतः ब्रह्मदेवकी केवल दो ही प्रामाणिक रचनाएँ रह जाती है। एक परमात्मप्रकाशवृत्ति और दूसरी द्रव्यसंग्रहवृत्ति ।
परमात्मप्रकाशवृत्ति-परमात्मप्रकाशकी वृत्तिमें ब्रह्मदेवजीने अपना नाम नहीं दिया । बालचन्द्र ब्रह्मदेवकी एक संस्कृतटीकाका उल्लेख करते हैं, दूसरे, दौलतरामजी संस्कृतवृत्तिको ब्रह्मदेवरचित कहते हैं, तीसरे, परमात्मप्रकाशकी वृत्ति द्रव्यसंग्रहकी वृत्तिसे, जिसमें ब्रह्मदेवने अपना नाम दिया है, बहुत मिलती जुलती है । अतः इसमें कोई सन्देह नहीं है कि दोनों वृत्तियाँ एक ही ब्रह्मदेवकी है। ब्रह्मदेवकी व्याख्या शुद्ध साहित्यिक व्याख्या है, वे अर्थपर अधिक जोर देते हैं, इसलिये व्याकरणकी गुत्थियां एक दो स्थानपर ही सुलझाई गई हैं । सबसे पहले वे शब्दार्थ देते हैं, फिर नयोंका-खासकर निश्चयनयका अवलम्बन लेते हुए विशेष वर्णन करते हैं। किन्तु उनके ये वर्णन द्रव्यसंग्रहकी टीकाके वर्णनोंके समान कठिन नहीं है । यदि यह टीका न होती तो परमात्मप्रकाश इतना प्रसिद्ध न होता; उसकी ख्यातिका कारण यह टीका ही है ।।
जयसेन और ब्रह्मदेव-पदच्छेद, उत्थानिका, प्रकरणसंगत चर्चा तथा ब्रह्मदेवकी टोकाकी कुछ अन्य बातें हमें जयसेनको टोकाकी याद दिलाती है। ब्रह्मदेवने जयसेनका पूरा पूरा अनुकरण किया है । परमात्मप्रकाशकी टीकाकी कुछ चर्चाएँ जयसेनके पञ्चास्तिकायकी टीकाकी चर्चाओंके समान है। उदाहरणके लिये परमात्मप्रकाश २-२१ और पञ्चास्तिकाय २३. प. प्र. २-३३ और पंचा० १५२, तथा प्र. प. २-३६ और पंचा०१४६ की टीकाओंको परस्परमें मिलाना चाहिए।
ब्रह्मदेवका समय-ब्रह्मदेवने अपने ग्रन्थोंमें उनका रचना-काल नहीं दिया है । पं० दौलतरामजी (ई. १८ वीं शताब्दीका उत्तरार्ध) कहते हैं कि ब्रह्मदेवकी संस्कृतटीकाके आधारपर उन्होंने अपनी हिन्दीटीका बनाई है । पं. जवाहरलालजी लिखते हैं कि शुभचन्द्रने कत्तगेयाणुप्रोक्खाकी टीकामें ब्रह्मदेवकृत द्रव्यसंग्रहवृत्तिसे बहुत कुछ लिया है। मलधारि बालचन्द्र ब्रह्मदेवकी टीकाका स्पष्ट उल्लेख करते हैं, किन्तु बालचन्द्रका समय स्वतन्त्र आधारोंपर निश्चित नहीं किया जा सकता । जैसलमेरके भण्डारमें ब्रह्मदेवकी द्रव्यसंग्रहवत्तिकी एक प्रति मौजद है जो संवत् १४८५ (१४२८ ई०) में माण्डवमें लिखी गई थी, उस समय वहाँ राय श्रीचान्दराय राज्य करते थे । इस प्रकार इन बाहिरी प्रमाणोंके आधारपर ब्रह्मदेवके समयकी अन्तिम अवधि १४२८ ई० से पहले ठहरती है । अब हम देखेंगे कि उनकी रचनाओंसे उनके समयके सम्बन्धमें हम क्या जान सकते हैं ? परमात्मप्रकाशकी टोकामें ब्रह्मदेवने शिवार्यकी आराधनासे, कुन्दकुन्द (ई० को प्रथम श०) के भावपाहुड, मोक्खपाहुड, पञ्चास्तिकाय, प्रवचनसार और समयसारसे, उमास्वातिके तत्त्वार्थसूत्रसे, समन्तभद्र (दूसरी शताब्दो) के रत्नकरण्डसे, पूज्यपाद (५वीं शताब्दी के लगभग) के संस्कृत सिद्धभक्ति और इष्टोपदेशसे, कुमारकी कत्तिगेयाणुष्पेक्खासे, अमोघवर्ष (ई० ८१५ से ८७७ के लगभग) को प्रश्नोत्तररत्नमालिकासे, गुणभद्रके (जिनने २३ जून ८९७ में महापुराण समाप्त किया) आत्मानुशासनसे, संभवतः नेमिचन्द्र (१० वीं श०) के गोम्मटसार जीवकाण्ड और द्रव्यसंग्रहसे अमृतचन्द्रके (लगभग १० वों श० को समाप्ति) पुरुषार्थसिद्धयुपायसे अमितगति (लगभग १० वीं श• का प्रारम्भ) के योगसारसे, सोमदेवके (९५९ ई०) यशस्तिलकचम्पूसे, रामसिंह (हेमचन्द्रके पूर्व) के दोहापाहुडसे, रामसेन (आशाधर-१३ वों श० का पूर्वार्द्धसे पहिले) के तत्त्वानुशासनसे और पद्मनन्दिकी (पद्मप्रभ-१२ वीं श० का अन्तके पहिले) पञ्चविंशतिकासे पद्य उद्धृत किये हैं । उद्धरणोंकी इस छानबीनसे हम निश्चित तौरपर कह सकते हैं कि ब्रह्मदेव सोमदेवसे (१० वीं श० का मध्य) बादमें हुए हैं । द्रव्यसंग्रहवृत्तिको आरम्भिक उत्थानिकामें ब्रह्मदेव लिखते हैं कि पहले नेमिचन्द्रने लधुद्रव्यसंग्रहकी रचना की थी, जिसमें केवल २६ गाथाएँ थीं। बादको मालवदेशेकी धारानगरीके राजा भोजके आधीन मण्डलेश्वर श्रीपालके कोषाध्यक्ष, आश्रमपुर निवासो सोमके लिये इसे बढ़ाया गया । यतः सामयिक प्रमाणोंसे इस बातकी पुष्टि नहीं होती, अतः हम न तो नेयिचन्द्रको धाराके राजा भोजका समकालीन ही मा ने

Page #176

प्रस्तावना
सकते हैं, और न लघुद्रव्यसंग्रहका बृहद् व्यसंग्रह के रूप में परिवर्तन ही स्वीकार किया जा सकता है। किन्तु एक बात सत्य है कि ब्रह्मदेव धाराके राजा भोजसे , जिसे वे कलिकाल चक्रवर्ती बतलाते हैं, बहुत बादमें हुए हैं। इसमें कोई सन्देह नहीं है कि ब्रह्म देवके भोज मालवाके परमार और संस्कृत-विद्याके आश्रयदाता प्रसिद्ध भोज ही है। भोजदेवका समय ई० १०१८-१०६० है । ब्रह्मदेवका यह उल्लेख बतलाता है कि वे ११वीं शताब्दीसे भी बहुत बादमें हुए हैं।
ऊपर यह बतलाया गया है कि जयसेनकी टीकाओंका ब्रह्मदेवपर बहत प्रभाव है । जयसेन ईसाकी बारहवीं शताब्दोके उत्तरार्द्धके लगभग हुए हैं। अतः ब्रह्मदेव बारहवीं शताब्दीसे बादके है । इन आभ्यन्तर और बाहिरो प्रमाणोंके आधारपर ब्रह्मदेव सोमदेव (९५९ ई०), धाराके राजा भोज (ई० १०१८-६०). और जयसेन (१२वीं शताब्दीके लगभग) से बादमें हुए है, अतः ब्रह्मदेवको १३वीं शताब्दीका विद्वान् कहा जा सकता है।
मलधारि बालचन्द्रको कन्नडटीका मलधारि बालचन्द्र और उनकी कन्नड़टीका-परमात्मप्रकाशकी 'प' प्रतिमें एक कन्नडटीका पाई जाती है, उसके प्रारम्भिक उपोद्घातसे यह स्पष्ट है कि इस टीकाका मुख्य आधार ब्रह्मदेवकी वृत्ति है । तथा इस बातके पक्ष में भी काफी प्रमाण है कि उसके कर्ताका नाम बालचन्द्र है। संभवतः अपने समकालीन अन्य बालचन्द्रोंसे अपनेको जदा करने के लिए उन्होंने अपने नामके साथ, 'कुक्कुटासन मलपारि' उपाधि लगाई है।
ब्रह्मदेवको टीकासे तुलना-बालचन्द्र लिखते हैं कि ब्रह्मदेवकी टीकामें जो विषय स्पष्ट नहीं हो सके हैं, उन्हें प्रकाशमें लानेके लिये उन्होंने यह टोका रची है । यह स्पष्ट उक्ति बतलाती है कि उन्होंन ब्रह्मदेवका अनुसरण किया है। किन्तु ब्रह्मदेवके मूलकी अपेक्षा बालचन्द्रके मूलमें ६ दोहे अधिक है। कुछ भेदोंको छोड़कर, जो अन्य कन्नड़ प्रतियोंमें भी पाये जाते हैं, दोहोंकी अपभ्रंशभाषाके सम्बन्धमें दोनों एकमत है । किन्तु बालचन्द्रने ब्रह्मदेवके अतिरिक्त, वर्णनोंको संक्षिप्त कर दिया है। दोहोंके प्रत्येक शब्दको व्याख्या करना ही बालचन्द्र का मुख्य लक्ष्य मालूम होता है, उन्होंने ब्रह्मदेवकी तरह भावार्थ बहुत ही कम दिये है । ब्रह्मदेवके उद्धरणोंको भी उन्होंने छोड़ दिया है, किन्तु कुछ स्थलोंपर कन्नड़-पद्य उद्धत किये हैं । ग्रन्थके अन्तमें ब्रह्मदेवके अतिरिक्त वर्णनोंकी उपेक्षा करके उन्होंने केवल शब्दशः अनुवादकी ओर ही विशेष ध्यान दिया है । 'पंडवरामहि' आदि पद्य के बाद बालचन्द्र एक और पद्य देते हैं, जो इस प्रकार है
जं अल्लीणा जीवा तरंति संसारसायरमणतं ।
तं भव्वजीवसज्झं गंदउ जिणसासणं सुइरं ॥ बालचन्द्र नामके अन्य लेखक-कन्नड़-साहित्यमे बालचन्द्र नामके अनेक टीकाकार तथा ग्रन्थकार हुए हैं, और उनके बारेमें जो सूचनायें प्राप्त होती है, उनके आधारपर एकको दूसरेसे पृथक करना कठिन है । म० आर० नरसिंहाचार्य बालचन्द्र नामके चार व्यक्तियोंको बतलाते हैं । अभिनवपम्पके गुरु बालचन्द्र मुनिके बारेमें लिखते हुए श्री एम्० गोविंद पै लगभग नौ बालचन्द्रोंका उल्लेख करते हैं । किन्तु 'कुक्कुटासन मलघारि' पदवा के कारण यह बालचन्द्र अन्य बालचन्द्रोंसे जुदे हो जाते है । अपने समाननामा अन्य व्यक्तियोंसे अपनेको जुदा करनेके लिये कुछ साधुजन अपने नामके साथ मलधारि विशेषण लगाते थे। श्रवणबेलगोलाके शिलालेखोंमें ऐसे मुनियोंका उल्लेख मिलता है, जैसे, मलधारि मल्लिषेण, मलपारि रामचन्द्र, मलधारि हेमचन्द्र और दिगम्बर और श्वेताम्बर दोनों ही सम्प्रदायके मुनिजन इस पदवीका उपयोग करते थे। श्वेताम्बर सम्प्रदायमें भी एक मलधारि हेमचन्द्र हए हैं, जो प्रसिद्ध हेमचन्द्रसे जुदे हैं।

Page #177

१३२
परमात्मप्रकाश
मलधारि बालचन्द्रका समय-अपनेको 'कुक्कुटासन मलधारि' लिखनेके सिवा इन बालचन्द्रने अपने बारेमें कुछ भी नहीं लिखा। अतः इनका समय निश्चित करना विशेष कठिन है। श्रवणबेलगोलाके शिलालेखों में व्यक्तिगत नामोंके रूपमें 'मलधारिदेव' और 'कुक्कुटासन मलघारिदेव' शब्द आते हैं किन्तु इसमें सन्देह नहीं कि यह हमारे बालचन्द्रको पदवी है । संभवतः यह किसी प्रसिद्ध आचार्यका नाम था, और उनकी परम्पराके साधुगण इसे पदवीके तौरपर धारण करते थे। शक सं० १२०० (ई० १२७८) के अमरपुरम् समाधि-लेखमें, जिसमें एक जैनमन्दिरको कुछ दान देनेका उल्लेख है, बालेन्दु मलधारिदेवका नाम आता है । यद्यपि नामोंमें इन्दु और चन्द्रका परस्परमें परिवर्तन देखा जाता है फिर भी वह बालेन्दु हमारे बालचन्द्र नहीं हो सकते, क्योंकि उनके नामके साथ कुक्कुटासन उपाधि नहीं है, तथा उनका समय भी हमारे टीकाकारसे पहले जाता है। हमारे टीकाकारके बारेमें इतनी बात निश्चित है कि वे ब्रह्मदेवके बादमें हुए हैं क्योंकि उन्होंने ब्रह्मदेवकी टोकाका अनुसरण किया है, और जांच-पड़ताल करनेके बाद हमने ब्रह्मदेवका समय ईसाकी तेरहवीं शताब्दी निर्णीत किया है। बालचन्द्र कर्नाटकी थे, सम्भवतः श्रवणबेलगोलाके निकट किसी स्थानपर वे रहते थे। किन्तु ब्रह्मदेव उत्तरप्रान्तके वासी थे अतः दोनों टीकाकारोंके बीच में कमसे कम आधी शताब्दीका अन्तर अवश्य मानना होगा, क्योंकि उस समयको यात्रा आदिकी परिस्थितियोंको देखते हुए, दक्षिण प्रान्तवासी बालचन्द्रके हाथमें उत्तर प्रान्तवासी ब्रह्मदेवकी टीकाके पहुंचने में इतना समय लग जाना सम्भव है । अतः बालचन्द्रको ईसाकी चौदहवीं शताब्दीके मध्यका विद्वान् माना जा सकता है ।
अध्यात्मी बालचन्द्रको टीका-म० आर० नरसिंहाचार्यका कहना है, कि अध्यात्मी बालचन्द्रने भी परमात्मप्रकाशपर कन्नड़ीमें एक टीका बनाई थी, किन्तु इन तीनों कन्नडटीकाओंमेंसे कोई भी उनकी नहीं है। उन्होंने मुझे सूचित किया है कि कविचरितके उल्लेखोंको छोड़कर उनके पास इस सम्बन्धमें कोईभी अन्य सामग्री नहीं है । यद्यपि यह कोई अनहोनी बात नहीं है कि अध्यात्मी बालचन्द्रने कुन्दकुन्दके प्राकृत ग्रन्थोंपर अपनी कन्नडटीकाओंकी तरह परमात्मप्रकाशपर भी टीका लिखी होगी किन्तु निश्चयपूर्वक कुछ कहना कठिन है, क्योंकि एक तो कविचरितेका उल्लेख बहुत कमजोर है, दूसरे यह भी सम्भव है कि गलतीसे बालचंद्र मलपारिके स्थानमें बालचंद्र अध्यात्मी लिखा गया हो ।
और एक कन्नडटीका परमात्मप्रकाशपर दूसरी कन्नड़टीका-यहां परमात्मप्रकाशकी दूसरी कन्नड़टीकाका परिचय दिया जाता है । "इस टीकाके समय तथा कर्ताक बारेमें हम कोई बात नहीं जान सके। प्रतिके अंतमें लिखा है-"मुनिभद्रस्वामीके चरण शरण है।" इससे इतना पता चलता है कि इस कन्नड़टीकाका रचयिता या इह प्रति अथवा इस प्रतिको मूल प्रतिका लेखक मुनिभद्रस्वामीका शिष्य था।
इस टीकाका परिचय-'क' टीकाकी तरह इस टोका भी दोहोंका केवल शब्दार्थ दिया है। किन्तु इस टीकाको अपेक्षा 'क' टीकामें मूलका अनुसरण वगैरह अधिक तत्परतासे किया गया है। बिना नामकी इन टीकाओंके देखनेसे पता चलता है कि धार्मिक जनसाधुओं और गृहस्थोंमें परमात्मप्रकाश कितना अधिक प्रसिद्ध था। ऐसा मालूम होता है कि बहतसे नये अभ्यासी अपने अध्यापकसे दोहोंका अर्थ समझ लेनेके बाद अपनी मातभाषामें उनके शब्दार्थ सिख लेते थे।
अन्य टोकाओंके साथ इस टीकाको तुलना—'क' प्रतिकी टीका, ब्रह्मदेवकी संस्कृतटीका और मलधारि बालचंद्रकी कन्नड टीकाके साथ इसकी तुलना करनेपर मैं इस निर्णयपर पहुँचा हैं कि यद्यपि इसके पाठ 'क' टीका आदिके पाठोंसे बहुत मिलते जुलते हैं तथापि यह टीका ब्रह्मदेवकी बहुत कुछ ऋणी है। यतः इस टीकामें केवल शब्दार्थ दिया है, अतः ब्रह्मदेवके अतिरिक्त वर्णन इसमें नहीं मिलते।'' टीका

Page #178

प्रस्तावना
और इस टीकाकी समानताको देखते हुए यह संभव है कि इस टीकाके कर्ताने 'क' टीकासे भी सहायता ली हो। मैंने इस टीकामें ऐसी कोई मौलिक अशुद्धियाँ और पाठान्तर नहीं देखे, जिनके आधारपर इसे ब्रह्मदेवकी संस्कृतटीकासे स्वतंत्र कहा जा सके।
इस टीकाका समय-ऊपरकी तुलनासे यह स्पष्ट है कि यह टीका ब्रह्मदेवसे और संभवतः मलधारि बालचन्द्रसे भी बादकी है । यदि इसके कर्ता मुनिभद्रके शिष्य हैं, और यदि यह मुनिभद्र वही है जिनकी मत्यका उल्लेख ई० सन १३८८ के लगभगके उद्री शिलालेखमें पाया जाता है। तो इस टीकाकी रचना ईसाकी १४ वीं शताब्दीके अन्तिम भागमें हो सकती है। ऐसा मालूम होता है कि मुनिभद्रके अनेक प्रसिद्ध शिष्य थे, जिनकी मृत्युका उल्लेख कुछ शिलालेखोंमें पाया जाता है।
पं० दौलतरामजीकृत भाषाटोका पं० दौलतरामजी और उनको भाषाटीका-पं० दौलतरामजीकी भाषाटीका, जो इस संस्करणमें मुद्रित है, उनकी भाषा आधुनिक हिन्दी में परिवर्तित रूप है। दौलतरामजीकी भाषा, जो संभवतः उनके समयमें उनकी जन्मभूमिमें प्रचलित थी, आधुनिक हिन्दीसे भिन्न है । इस विचारसे को कई जैनगृहस्थों और साधुओंको यह विशेष उपयोगी होगी। पं० मनोहरलालजीने उसे आधुनिक हिंदीका रूप दे दिया है । मामूली संशोधनके साथ यही रूपान्तर इस दूसरे संस्करणमें छपा है। यहाँ मैं दौलतरामजीके अनुवादका कुछ अंश उद्धृत करता हैं, इससे पाठक उनको भाषाका अनुमान कर सकेंगे
"बहरि तिनि सिद्धिनिके समूहिकं मैं बन्दू हूँ। जे सिद्धिनिके समूहि निश्चयनयकरि अपने स्वरूप विष तिष्ठे है, अरि विवहारिनयकरि सर्व लोकालोककू निसंदेहपण प्रत्तक्ष देखे है। परन्तु परिपदार्थनि विष तन्मयी नाहीं, अपने स्वरूपविष तन्मयी है। जो परपदार्थनिविर्ष तन्मयी होई तो पराए सुख दुखकर आप सुखी दुखी होई, सो कदापि नाहीं । विवहारिनयकरि स्थूल सूक्ष्म सकलि कू केवलिज्ञानि करि प्रतक्ष निसन्देह । जाने हैं। काह पदार्थसु रागि द्वेष नाहीं। रागिके हेतुकरि जो काहुँको जाने तो राग द्वेषमई होय, सो इह बड़ा दूषण है। तातें यही निश्चयभया जो निश्चयकरि अपने स्वरूप विष तिष्ठं हैं, पर विर्षे नाहीं । अरि अपनी ज्ञायक शक्ति करि सबिकं प्रतक्ष देखे हैं जान है। जो निश्चयकर अपने स्वरूप विष निवास कया सो अपना स्वरूपही आराधिवे योग्य है यह भावार्थ है ॥५॥"
सोलापुरकी एक नई प्रतिसे मैंने यह अंश उद्धृत किया है, और बम्बईकी एक प्राचीन प्रतिके सहारे श्री प्रेमीजीने इसका संशोधन किया है। पं० प्रमीजीका कहना है कि कुछ अन्य प्राचीन प्रतियोंके साथ इसका मिलान करनेपर अब भी भाषासम्बन्धी कुछ भेद निकल सकते हैं। क्योंकि इसे प्रचलित भाषामें लाने के लिये नकल करते समय शिक्षित लेखक यहाँ-वहाँ भाषासम्बन्धी सुधार कर सकता है। अपभ्रंशसाहित्यके विद्याथियोंको इससे एक अच्छी शिक्षा मिलती है और अपभ्रंश ग्रन्थोंकी विभिन्न प्रतियोंमें जो स्वरभेद देखा जाता है, उसपर भी प्रकाश पड़ता है।
टीकाका परिचय-इस टीकामें कोई मौलिकता नहीं है । ब्रह्मदेवकी संस्कृत टीकाका यह अनुवादमात्र है । ब्रह्मदेवके कुछ कठिन पारिभाषिक शब्दोंको हिंदी में सुगमतासे समझा दिया है। ब्रह्मदेवके समान दौलतरामजीने भी पहले शब्दार्थ दिया है, और बादको ब्रह्मदेवके अनुसार ही संक्षेपमे भावार्थ दिया है। इस बातको कोई अस्वीकार नहीं कर सकता कि इस हिंदी अनुवादके ही कारण जोइन्दु और उनके परमात्मप्रकाशको इतनी ख्याति मिल सकी है। परमात्मप्रकाशके पठन-पाठनमें दौलतरामजीका उतना ही हाथ है, जितना समयसार और प्रवचनसारके पठन-पाठनमें राजमल्ल और पाण्डे हेमराज का ।

Page #179

परमात्मप्रकाश
पं० दौलतरामजीका समय-दौलतरामजी खण्डेलवाल थे. उनका गोत्र काशलीवाल था। उनके पिता आनन्दराम थे, जन्मभूमि बसवा थी किन्तु वे जयपरमें रहते थे. तथा राजाके प्रधान कर्मचारी थे । उनकी रचनाओंको देखनेसे मालूम होता है कि वे संस्कृतके अच्छे विद्वान थे, और अपनी मातृभाषासे भी बहुत प्रेम करते थे। सम्बत् १७९५ में जब उन्होंने अपना क्रियाकोश समाप्त किया, वे किसी जयसुत राजाके मंत्री थे, और उदयपुरमें रहते थे। अपने हरिवंशपुराणमें वे लिखते हैं कि जयपुरके दीवान प्रायः जैनसम्प्रदायके होते हैं। उनके समकालीन दीवान रतनचंद्र थे। उन्होंने सं० १७९५ में क्रियाकोश समाप्त किया, और १८२९ में हरिवंशपुराण, अत: उनका साहित्यिक कार्यकाल ई० की १८वीं शताब्दीका उत्तरार्द्ध जानना चाहिये।
उनकी रचनाएँ-उनके क्रियाकोशका उल्लेख पहले कर चुके हैं। जयपुरके एक धार्मिक गृहस्थ रायमल्लकी प्रार्थना पर उन्होंने सम्वत् १८२३ में पद्मपुराणकी हिन्दीटीका की थी, इसके बाद १८२४ में आदिपुराण की, १८२९ में हरिवंशपुराण और श्रीपालचरित्रका हिन्दी-गद्य में अनुवाद किया, इसके बाद ब्रह्मदेवकी संस्कृतटीकाके आधारपर परमात्मप्रकाशकी हिंदी टीका की। इसके बाद सं० १८२७ में उन्होंने पं० प्रवर टोडरमल्लजी रचित पुरुषार्थसिद्धयुपायकी अपूर्ण हिन्दीटीकाको पूर्ण किया। प्रेमीजीका मत है कि पुराणों के इन हिन्दी-अनुवादोंने जैनपरम्पराका केवल रक्षण और प्रचार ही नहीं किया किन्तु जैनसमाजके लिये ये बहुत लाभदायक सिद्ध हुए ।
४ इस ग्रन्थके सम्पादन में उपयुक्त प्रतियोंका परिचय 'ए' प्रति-यह प्रति भाण्डारकर प्राच्यविद्यामन्दिर पूनासे प्राप्त हुई थी। इसमें १२४ पृष्ठ और प्रत्येक पृष्ठमें १३ लाइनें हैं । दोहोंके नीचे ब्रह्मदेव की संस्कृतटीका है जो बिल्कुल शुद्ध है। इस संस्करणकी सं० टीकाका इसीके आधारसे संशोधन किया है।
'बी' प्रति-सदलगानिवासी मेरे काका स्वर्गीय बाबाजी उपाध्येके संग्रहसे यह प्रति प्राप्त हुई थी। 'अ' प्रति की तरह यह भी देवनागरी अक्षरोंमें लिखी है। किन्तु यह अच्छी हालतमें नहीं है। यह कमसे कम २०० वर्ष प्राचीन है। मध्यमें दोहोंकी क्रम-संख्या में कुछ भूल हो गई है । अन्तिम दोहेपर ३४२ नम्बर पड़ा है।
'सी' प्रति-यह प्रति भाण्डारकर प्राच्यविद्यामन्दिर पूना की है। इसमें २१ पृष्ठ और हरएक पृष्ठमै ९ लाइनें हैं, सुन्दर देवनागरी अक्षरों में लिखी हुई है। इसमें केवल दोहे ही हैं, जो शुद्ध हैं । किन्तु लेखककी भूलसे कुछ अशुद्धियाँ रह गई हैं।
'पी' प्रति-यह प्रति जैनसिद्धान्त भवन आरा की है। इसपर लिखा है-'परमात्मप्रकाश कर्नाटक टीकासहित'। यह कन्नड़ अक्षरोंमें लिखी गई है, इसमें कुक्कुटासन मलघारि बालचन्द्रकी कन्नडटीका है, यह कोई ५० वर्ष पूर्वकी लिखी हुई है । ब्रह्म देवके मूलसे इसमें ६ पद्य अधिक है।
'क्यू' प्रति-यह प्रति भी आराके भवनकी है, इसमें भी एक कर्नाटकवृत्ति है, और लिखी भी कन्नड़ अक्षरोंमें है। यह ताड़पत्रपर है, इसके प्रारम्भका एक पत्र खो गया है ।
'आर' प्रति-यह भी ताड़पत्रपर है, और आराके भवनकी है, इसमें केवल मूल परमात्मप्रकाश है । और अक्षर कन्नड़ हैं।
'एस' प्रति-जै. सि. भ. आराकी ताड़पत्रकी इस प्रतिपर 'योगीन्द्र गाथा' लिखा है, यह करीब ७५ वर्ष पुरानी है। इसमें कन्नड़ी अक्षरोंमें केवल दोहे ही लिखे हैं।

Page #180

प्रस्तावना
१३५ 'टी' प्रति-यह प्रति ताड़पत्रपर है। और यह श्रीवीरवाणीविलास-भवन मुडबिद्रीसे प्राप्त हुई थी। यह पुराने कन्नड़ी अक्षरों में लिखी हुई है । इसमें केवल दोहे ही हैं ।
'के' प्रति-यह भी मडबिद्रीके. वीरवाणीविलास-भवनकी प्रति है। हस्तक्षरोंकी समानतासे यह स्पष्ट है कि 'टी' और 'के' प्रति एक ही लेखकको लिखी हुई है । इसकी लिपि पुरानी कन्नड़ी है ।
'एम' प्रति-इसमें भी केवल मल ही है। इसका लेखक ताडपत्रपर लिखने में प्रवीण नहीं था। इसमें नं०१६ से २३ तक केवल आठ पत्र हैं। पहले पत्र में 'मोक्षप्राभ' पर बाल चन्द्र की कन्नड़टीका है उसके बाद बिना किसी उत्थानिकाके परमात्मप्रकाशका दोहा लिखा है।
इन प्रतियोंका परस्परमें सम्बन्ध-जोइंदुके मूलके दो रूप है, एक संक्षिप्त और दूसरा विस्तृत । 'टी' 'के' और 'एम' प्रति उसके संक्षिप्त रूपके अनुयायी है, और 'पी' 'ए' 'बी' 'सी' और 'एस' उसके विस्तृत रूप के। 'क्य' प्रति 'ए' प्रति से मिलती है, किन्तु उस पर 'टी' 'के' और 'एम' के भी प्रभाव हैं। 'आर्' प्रतिपर 'ए' 'पी' 'टी' 'के' और 'एम्' का प्रभाव है।
५ योगसारको प्रतियाँ योगसारको प्रतियोंका तुलनात्मक वर्णन-इस संस्करण में मुद्रित योगसारका सम्पादन नीचे लिखी प्रतियोंके आधारपर किया गया है।
'अ'-५० के० भजबलि शास्त्रीकी कृपासे जैनसिद्धान्त भवन आरासे यह प्रति प्राप्त हुई थी। इसमें दस पत्रे हैं, जो दोनों ओर लिखे हए है, केवल पहला और अन्तिम पत्र एक ओर ही लिखा है । सम्वत् १९९२ में देहलीके किसी भण्डारकी प्राचीन प्रतिके आधारपर आधुनिक देवनागरी अक्षरों में यह प्रति लिखी गई है । इसमें दोहे और उनपर गुजराती भाषाके टब्बे हैं, इसमें अशुद्धियाँ अधिक हैं।
प'-मुनि श्रीपुण्यविजयजी महाराजको कृपासे पाटनके भण्डारसे यह प्रति प्राप्त हुई थी। इसमें भी दोहे और उनका गुजराती अनुवाद है । यह अनुवाद 'अ' प्रतिके अनुवादसे मिलता जुलता है । यह प्रति बिल्कुल शुद्ध है और 'अ' प्रतिको अशुद्धियोंका शोवन करने में इससे काफ़ी सहायता मिली है, गुजराती अनुवाद (टब्बे) में इसका लेखन-काल सम्वत् १७१२ चैत्र शुक्ल १२ दिया है ।
'ब'-बम्बईके पं० नाथरामजी प्रेमीसे यह प्रति प्राप्त हुई थी। इसमें केवल दोहे ही है. देवनागरी अक्षरोंमें लिखे है। यह प्रति प्रायः शुद्ध है। इसके कमज़ोर पत्रों और टूटे किनारोंसे यह प्रति संपादनमें उपयुक्त चारों प्रतियों में से सबसे अधिक प्राचीन मालूम होती है मालूम हुआ है कि मणिकचन्द्रग्रन्थमालामें मुद्रित योगसारका सम्पादन इसी प्रतिके आधारपर किया गया है।
'झ'--पं० पन्नालालजी सोनीकी कृपासे झालरापाटनके श्रीऐलक पन्नालाल दि० जैन सरस्वती भवन से यह प्रति प्राप्त हुई थी। इसमें केवल दोहे ही हैं। इसकी लिपि सुन्दर देवनागरी है। इसमें अशुद्धियाँ अधिक है। इसके कुछ खास पाठ मा० जैनग्रंथमालामें मुद्रित योगसारसे मिलते हैं।
ये चार प्रतियाँ दो विभिन्न परम्पराओंको बतलाती हैं, एक परम्पराम केवल 'ब' प्रति है, और दूसरीमें 'अ', 'प' और 'झ' । 'अ' और 'प' का उद्गम एक ही स्थानसे हुआ जान पड़ता है, क्योंकि दोनोंका मुल और गुजराती अनुवाद एकसा ही है। किन्तु 'अ' प्रतिसे 'प' प्रतिके गुजराती अनुवादकी भाषा प्राचीन है। 'ब' प्रतिके विरुद्ध जो कि सबसे प्राचीन है, 'अ' और 'प' में कर्ता कारकके एकवचनमें 'अ' के स्थानमें उ पाया जाता है । अनुस्वारकी ओर बिल्कुल ध्यास नहीं है, और 'अर' के स्थानमें प्रायः ओ लिखा है ।

Page #181

१३६
परमात्मप्रकाश
योगसारका प्राकृत मूल और पाठान्तर - योगसारके सम्पादन में परम्परागत मूलका संग्रह करनेको ओर ही मेरा लक्ष्य रहा है । अपभ्रंश ग्रन्थका सम्पादन करनेमें, विशेषतया जब विभिन्न प्रतियों में स्वरभेद पाया जाता हो, लेखकोंकी अशुद्धियोंके बीचमेंसे मौलिकपाठको पृथक् करना प्रायः कठिन होता है । स्वरोंके सम्बन्ध में मैंने 'प' और 'ब' प्रतिका ही विशेषतया अनुसरण किया है। आधुनिक प्रतियोंमें इ और हमें घोखा हो जाता है, अतः मैंने मूलमें कुछ परिवर्तन भी किये हैं, और उनके लगा दिये हैं । मैंने बहुतसे पाठान्तर केवल मूलके पाठ-भेदोंपर काफ़ी प्रकाश डालनेके लिये ही दिये हैं । किन्तु माणिकचन्द्रग्रन्थमाला में मुद्रित योगसारके पाठान्तर मैंने नहीं दिये, क्योंकि जिस प्रतिके आधारपर इसका मुद्रण हुआ बताया जाता है, उससे मैंने मिलान कर लिया है; तथा किसी स्वतंत्र एवं प्रामाणिक प्रतिके आवारपर उसका सम्पादन होने में मुझे सन्देह है, जैसा कि उसमें प्रतियोंके नामके बिना दिये गये पाठान्तरोंसे मालूम होता है ।
सामने प्रश्नसूचक चिह्न
संस्कृतछाया - निम्नलिखित कारणोंसे अपभ्रंश ग्रन्थ में संस्कृतछाया देनेके में विरुद्ध हूँ । प्रथम यह एक गलत मार्ग है, जो न तो भाषा और न इतिहास की दृष्टिसे ही उचित है । दूसरे, छाया भद्दी संस्कृतका एक नमूना बन जाती है । क्योंकि अपभ्रंशने वाक्य विन्यास और वर्णनकी शैलीने उन्नति कर ली है, जो प्राचीन संस्कृत में नहीं पाई जाती। तीसरे, उसका दुष्परिणाम यह होता है कि बहुतसे पाठक केवल छाया पढ़कर ही सन्तोष कर लेते हैं । प्राकृत ग्रन्थोंमें संस्कृतछाया देनेकी पद्धतिने भारतीय भाषाओंके अध्ययनको बहुत हानि पहुँचाई है । लोगोंने प्राकृत के अध्ययनकी ओरसे मुख फेर लिया है, मृच्छकटिक और शाकुन्तल सरीखे नाटक केवल संस्कृतके ग्रंथ बन गये हैं, जब कि स्वयं रचयिताओंने उनके मुक्य भागोंको प्राकृत में रचा था; परिणामस्वरूप आधुनिक भारतीय भाषाएं प्राकृतका भुलाकर केवल संस्कृत शब्दोंसे अपना कलेवर पुष्ट कर रही हैं । तथापि प्रकाशकके आग्रहके कारण मुझे छाया देनी पड़ी है । छाया में अपभ्रंश शब्दोंके संस्कृत शब्द देते हुए कहीं कहीं उनके वैकल्पिक शब्द भी मैंने ब्रैकेट ( कोष्टक ) में दे दिये हैं । संस्कृतका एक स्वतंत्र वाक्य समझकर छायाका परीक्षण न चाहिये, किन्तु स्मरण रखना चाहिये कि यह अपभ्रंशकी केवल छाया मात्र है । पाठकों की सुविधाके लिये सन्धिके नियमोंका ध्यान नहीं रखा गया है । अनेक स्थलोंपर मा० जैनग्रन्थमालामें मुद्रित योगसार की छायासे मेरी छायासे मेरी छाया में अन्तर है ।
}
श्रीस्याद्वाद महाविद्यालय, काशी भाद्रपद शुक्ल ५ दशलाक्षण महापर्व, वीर सं० २४६३

हिन्दी अनुवादकर्ता - - कैलाशचन्द्र शास्त्री

Page #182
For Private & Personal use only www.jainelibrary.