Scientific Contents in Prakrta Canons

SR No.: 001670
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: N L Jain
Publisher: Parshwanath Vidyapith
Publication Year: 1996
Total Pages: 608
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Science, & Religion
File Size: 9 MB

Page 89

Prākrta Canons : 67
in comparison to contents. Despite large amount of similarity in contents like purity of foods and practical conduct, Mūlācāra seems to be quite advanced in systematisation, classification and descriptions suggesting its late composition. There are also many topics which are either non-existing or elementarily mentioned in primary canons. Moreover, Digambara early texts do not contain legendary, didactic biographies and religious stories (though mention of some story characters are made in Bhagavati Arādhanā ). However, other contents in these procanons are as varied as the other canons. Despite the dominance of the theme of five-fold practices for spiritual development, there is a good amount of material relating to physical world which could be classified in the forementioned categories with similar approximate proportion of contents as given below :
(i) Satkhandāgama -- Nearly 2 section out of 5. (ii) Mülācāra -- 3 sections out of 12.
(iii) Bhagavati Arādhanā - app. 400 gāthās out of 2170.
(iv) Prābhrta-traya - app. 300 gāthās out of 885.
However, the Digambara pro-canons have scientific contents mainly relating to three fields : (i) Physics, (ii) Chemistry, (iii) Biology. Other sciences find occasional and analogical mention.
The stretching of Digambara pro-canonical literature upto that composed till about tenth century or later, containing even books on logical subjects and biographies, does not appeal to reason because of their complexity and intellectualism. Linguistic Compositions of Digambara Pro-canon
The Digambara canon-like texts are mostly written in Sauarseni Prākrta and were composed by authors mostly of south and north ( Mathurā ) during 35 B. C. to 250 A. D. It might be possible that the older oral traditions were prevalent there, but textual compositions were none.
in contrast, the Svetāmbara tradition, permitting composition of books in Aryarakṣita days, got its canon in writing in