________________
72
INTRODUCTION
logician. It is quite possible that Mallavādi referred to in his commentary on Sanmati by Abhayadeva (see page 608) is same Mallavādi who is considered as an advocate of the doctrine of simultaneity of Kevalopayoga. At present there is no complete work found written by Mallavádī. To establish, therefore, the identity of Mallavādi referred to by Hemcandra and the one referred to by Abhayadeva is not possible at the present stage. Hari Bhadra in his works Anekānta Jayapatākā, and Yasoyija vaji in his commentary of Astasahasri mentioned Mallavādī as the commentator of Sanmati'. This Mallavádi and our present Mallavādi are one and the same person. The Jaina tradition also corroborates this statement of ours. The commentary of Mallavādi is not available at present, but then the author of Bșhat Tippani mentions this commentary as having a bulk of 700 verses. If the time of Mallavādi's victory over the Bauddha opponents as suggested in the Prabbandas is correct, and if this Mallavādi be the commentator of Sanmati, it is an easy matter to fix the relative time of Siddhasena and Mallavādi. It is probable that Siddhasena and Mallavādī were contemporaries and one might have written the commentaries on the works of another, even in their life-time. If no conclusive relation between these two persons can be established, at least this can be taken for granted that Mallavádī may be a disciple of Siddhasena in matter of learning. Nothing definite can further be stated at present on this point.
1 See p. 10 note 1 of this intro.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
