Disclaimer: This translation does not guarantee complete accuracy, please confirm with the original page text.
So far, everything that has been observed is after the tenth and eleventh cycles, and there seems to be no reliable evidence for them in the earlier texts. What is noteworthy is that the renowned Digambara commentators of the Tattvarthasutra from the fifth to the ninth cycles have not explicitly mentioned the Tattvarthasutra as composed by Umāsvāti in their interpretations, nor have they classified Umāsvāti as Digambara or Svetāmbara or neutral. Although in Svetāmbara literature, the text of the eighth cycle mentions the Tattvarthasutra as being authored by Umāsvāti, and it appears that the author considers Umāsvāti to be Svetāmbara, however, upon examining the subsequent Dharma Sāgara of the seventeenth cycle, there is no evident indication within any Svetāmbara texts or lists that the author of the Tattvarthasutra, the reader Umāsvāti, is a disciple of Shyāmācārya.
Despite the lack of doubt regarding the lineage of the reader Umāsvāti, who is attributed to the Tattvarthasutra, and the traditions of his forefathers and guru, the verses praising the Tattvarthasutra that have remained until today still do not have clear references concerning the mention made by him:
"तत्त्वार्थशास्त्रकर्तार गृध्रपिच्छोपलक्षितम्। वन्दे गणीन्द्रसंजातमुमास्वामिमुनीश्वरम्।"
This and other verses from Digambara quotations that carry similar meanings cannot be placed as final evidence since they lack reliable and ancient sources.
1. For further clarification, see the appendix at the end of this introduction. 2. See this introduction, page 20, note 1.