________________
I SIDDHASENA DIVĀKARA
57
language. There is another point of difference between these two Ācāryas and it is this that while Kundakunda's work is composed entirely in verse, Umāswāti's work is composed both in verse and in prose. In both the works of these two authors the tradition of Jaina scriptures has been scrupulously maintained and to corroborate it some arguments with the help of Jaina logic have been advanced. Umāswăti does not repeat one thing again and again while Kundakunda does so in many cases. Umāswāti along with his mastery over Samsksta language had received a legacy of the ancient systems of philosophy. Like Umāswāti Siddhasena also is an anthor of a very great eminence but his peculiarity is this that while he is perfectly at home in Samsksta as well as in Prăkřta he has taken to verse in his works. Siddhasena is a very clever logician. He takes his clue from the Jaina scriptures no doubt, but he enters into hair-splitting details and tries to prove everything written in scriptures on the strength of his convincing logic. His' style, therefore, is more that of a logician than of an author relying on the authority of tradition. The style of Samantabhadra strikingly resembles that of Siddhasena. Between Umāswāti and Kundakunda on one hand and Siddhasena and Samantabhadra on the other there is a period of nearly 200-100 years. During this period there was a remarkable development of Indian logic and it is this development which is responsible for the logical method which is in evidence at every step in works of Siddhasena and Samantabhadra. It is this
1 For instance Sanmati 2. 18. and onward.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
