Disclaimer: This translation does not guarantee complete accuracy, please confirm with the original page text.
"52
It is clear that the place used is not of the Gandhahastipada, hence the Gandhahasti of Shilanka is not Divakara. Based on the above reasoning, the decision I made ten years ago has now been fully substantiated by the ancient evidence mentioned. This evidence was written by the disciple of Hasyajidra's incomplete text, Yashobhadrasuri. It goes as follows:
Sūriyashobhadrasya (hi) śiṣyeṇa samuddhṛtā svabodhārtham. Tattvārthasya hi ṭīkā jaḍakāyārjanā dhṛtā yātyāṃ nṛdhṛtā ॥ (0 Yajurune dhṛtāntyāṁ) ॥ 1 ॥
Haribhadrācāryeṇārabdhā vivṛtārdhaṣaḍadhyāyaṃśca.
Pūjyaiḥ punaruddhṛteyaṃ tattvārthārddhasya ṭīkāntyā ॥ 2 ॥
Ruti ॥ Etaduktaṃ bhavati - Haribhadrācāryeṇārdaśaṇṇāmadadhyānāṃ ṭīkā kṛtā, bhagavatā tu gandhahastinā siddhasenena navyā kṛtā tattvārthṭīkā navyairvādasthanairvyākulā, tasyā eva śeṣaṃ uddhṛtaścaācāryeṇa (śeṣaṃ mayā) svabodhārtham. Sātyantagurvī ca dupadupikā niṣpannetyalam" – p. 521. The entire commentary composed by the Shvetambara Acharya on the Tattvārthī Bhashya is now available. There is one major and one smaller commentary. The author of the major commentary, Siddhasena, is presented here. This Siddhasena is a disciple of the teacher Singh Sarana in the lineage of Dīna Gaṇana.
Siddhasena
1. "J.G.E., Gujarati Tattvārth Vivechan-Parichay, p. 36 (First Edition.)
2. The same Singh Surī is the commentator of Nayanachakra. See, Ātmānanda Prakāśa 45-10, p. 191."