Agam 39 Chhed 06 Mahanishith Sutra

SR No.: 001149
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Punyavijay, Rupendrakumar Pagariya, Dalsukh Malvania, H C Bhayani
Publisher: Prakrit Granth Parishad
Publication Year: 1994
Total Pages: 284
Language: Prakrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari, Agam, Canon, Ethics, & agam_mahanishith
File Size: 19 MB

Page 66

MAHĀNISĪHA STUDIES AND EDITION IN GERMANY
59
existences, and an inimaginable lengthy series of catch-words which emphasize their number. Limitless is, on the other hand, the gain won by the unconditional confession which is the Absolu'e Knowledge (kevala-jñāna). It is astonishing to observe, how, according to our text, a monk or a nun, just because of honest confession, equals a muni who, as the old texts describe, has to practice indescribable asceticism and deepest concentration to achieve kevala-jñana. 8.2.5 In another point, the compiler takes recourse to over-simplification. The protection of all living beings is naturally demanded [by Jainism), conspicuous in our text is the emphasis attached to the protection of souls in water- and fire-bodies. This may have been caused by a certain negligence which had spread in the Jaina sangha. Every now and then the water and fire (au + teu) are connected with mehuņa. Maithuna is namely an extraordinary case of prāņâtipāta. because in the yoni of a woman exist innumerable (to be precise 900.000) living beings (II. 822.5, B,p.45), and they are destroyed by the sexual activity. This is surely an invention of the compiler, may be inspired by the Prajñāpand-sūtra. 8.2.6 The legends in this text may be equally ascribed to the compiler, even when he is dependent on his source (Nandisena, Meghamālā), or when he completely borrows it (Rajjā). The Mahānisiha is in any case a conglomerate prepared intentionally as has been examined in detail and proved beyond doubt by us in MNSt.A. In this text inspired by the Canon, there is naturally Ardhamāgadhi to à considerable extent amongst the Jaina-Māhārāştri, and this is in a partly degenerated condition. The grammatical gender is mostly neglected, verbal forms are at places debased; the nom.sg.masc. ends, like that of pronouns, in -e. As there is no parallel case, we can regard all this as vagaries of the compiler, and we may add his numerous incorrect ślokas and his naiveté in matters of dogma. He is a learned deviant (Außenseiter) and his text is an Apocryph to the Canon (siddhānta). This text, to freely quote Martin Luther, "does not equal the Holy Script, still is useful and easy to read". 8.2.7 This was and is, however, not always the attitude towards the MNA. The Sthănakavāsi because of their orthodox position reject it, as the idols of the Jina are dealt with therein, and they reject also the temples where the idols are worshipped. Even earlier, before the period of a thousand years, the MNA, though included in the Canon had not been subjected to the well known successive stages of commentaries, (not a single ţikā is available). An anonymous complains about the miserable condition of the original he was copying, at the same time he defends the MNA. The name of Haribhadra included in this notice may be accepted, who, about the middle of the 8th century AD, might have held in his hands a copy of the text; but the revision of the text ascribed to Haribhadra. (III.825.10: 19.4) is not probable. According to the remarks in IV.818 (see 19.7) Haribhadra had his doubts about certain details in the narrative. He might have, therefore, put aside the whole text, as a result of which the Ms. suffered the