Jain Agam Sahitya

SR No.: 001431
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: K R Chandra
Publisher: Prakrit Text Society Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1992
Total Pages: 330
Language: Prakrit, Hindi, Enlgish, Gujarati
Classification: Book_Devnagari, Philosophy, & agam_related_articles
File Size: 18 MB

Page 90

66
A Comparative & Critical Note
third Pariccheda, the characteristic feature of Samyakcāritra, its two fold divisions into Sakala and Vikala, the Śrāvakācāra with its divisions and sub-divisions, the Aticāras, list of persons known for their perfection in observing Pañcāņuvratas and also of those who committed sinful acts such as hiṁsā, etc., and finally names of astamalaguņas are related. In the fourth Chapter the characteristic feature of three Guņavraia, Digvrata, Aparthadanda-vrata, Bhogopabhoga-parimāņa-vrata are treated. In the fifth Pariccheda the four sikşāvrata in details namely Dešāvakäsika, Sāmāyika, Prosadhopavāsa and Vaiyyāvrtya are treated. Sallekhanā with its importance and exaltedness is described in the sixth Paricchcda. Finally in the Seventh Pariccheda characteristics of eleven Pratimās are related
A comparison of the terminology used in both Uvāsagadasão and R. K. Śrāvakācāra reveals how almost all the terminologies used in the latter are just the sanskritized forms or at least transformed forms of expressions in sanskrit of ihe terminologies found in the former one. It can be noted that though there is concordance in majority of the terminologies of Uvāsa gadasão and R. K, Śrāvakācāra, there are also notable differences. For instance, against the third and fifth Aņuvratas namely, Adinnādāna and Icchāvihiparimāņa of Uvāsagadasāo, R. K. Srāvakācāra is having Acauryānuvrata and Parigraha-parimāņa-vrata. Anarthadanda is having four divisions according to Uvāsagadasāo whereas according to R. K. Śrāvarkācāra it is having five divisions. Similarly many such notable differences between these two works can be put forward. By this it becomes evident that the author of R. K. Śrāvakācāra had some source other than Uvāsagadasāo and this source possibly was Uvāsayajjhayaņa that was available partially, as pointed out earlier; and also that the language and the subject matter of this work did not differ much from that of Uvāsagadasão
1. Uvāsayajjhayaņam nāma Angam ekkārasalakkha-sattari-sahassa
padehim damsaņavada......idi ekkārasa-viha upāsagāņam lakk• haņām ......vaņņedi.
șațkhaņņāgama, Part I, page 102. 2. R. K. Śravakācāra, Edited by Vardhamana Parshvanatha
Shastry, 3rd Edition, 1962.