Dhurtakhyan

SR No.: 001861
Original Sutra Author: Haribhadrasuri
Author: Jinvijay
Publisher: Saraswati Pustak Bhandar Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2002
Total Pages: 160
Language: Sanskrit, Prakrit, Gujarati
Classification: Book_Devnagari, Story, Literature, P000, & P030
File Size: 14 MB

Page 23

XVI]
HARIBHADRA:
his work Uddyotana mentions Haribhadra as his teacher in philosophy, praising him as the author of a great many books, the latter statement puts it beyond doubt that the great Haribhadra is the person intended.' The first who rightly understood the passage in question and recognised its chronological bearing, was Muniraj Shri Jinavijaya. In his article "The date of Haribhadrasüri," road at the First Oriental Conference, November 1919, Poons, and published under the title "S'ri Haribhadracaryasya Samayanirnayah" in the Jaina Sahityasams'odhaka Granthamala, Poona, he discusses the whole question, examines the evidence, and puts his case in the clearest light. The following remarks are chiefly based on his paper.
We cannot make out from Uddyotana's remark whether Haribhadra was still alive or not, when it was written; some twenty or thirty years before that date, however, he must have been actually teaching Uddyotana. We may, therefore, take that epoch, say, 750 A. D. or later, as the time of his literary activity, which considering the extraordinary number of prakaranas he wrote must have extended over twenty years at least. He quotes many authors, Brahmanical, Buddhist, and Jaina; a list of them containing thirty names has been drawn up by Jinavijaya, L. c., p. 11. From among them the following may be mentioned as interesting from a chronological point of view: Dignaga, Dharmakirti, Bhartṛhari (author of the Vakyapadiya, about 650 A. D.), and Kumarila. Haribhadra quotes, in his Vivarana of the Nandisutra, several passages from the Carni of that Sutra by Jinadasagani-mahattara without mentioning his name. The Curni was finished in the S'aka-year 598-677 A. D. To about the same time belongs Siddhasenadivakara whom Haribhadra quotes; for he uses, no doubt, Dharmakirti, though he does not name him. We thus see that Haribhadra quote l many of the celebrities who flourished in the century preceding his own. On the other hand he does not quote Sankara who rose so high above all his contemporaries that Haribha Ira could not have ignored him if he had lived at or after his time. We, therefore, conclude that the tradition of S'ankara's school is right, or at least not far wrong, in placing his life in 788-820 A. D. Nor does Haribhadra, as Jinavijaya states (L. e., p. 13), discuss the Mayavada. He knows the Advaitavada, and refutes two or three different branches of it in his S'astravarttasamuccaya VIII, 1 ff, but none of them can be identified with the Māyāvāda.
1 The passage in which Haribhadra is referred to is corrupt as is shown by the metre. In the MS. of the Deccan College, the only one that seems to be available, it runs thus : सो सिद्धंतगुरु पमाणनाएण जस्स हरिभदो बहुग्गंथसत्थवित्थरपयडसच्चत्था || Munirāj Jinavijaya has satisfactorily emended the text and supplied the missing syllables as follows: T सिद्धंतम्मि गुरु पमागनाथ व जस्त हरिभदो बहुवसत्यचित्रपट Tha Best pada is connected with the preceding verse which eulogises Uddyotana's teacher Virabhadra; and the following verse names his father Vateśvara who was a Ksatriya and became a Kṣamāśramana. [It is interesting to note that my emendations have been lately confirmed by the readings of the Jessalmer Ms. Jinavijaya.]
2 Dharmakirti qualifies pratyaksa as abhränta (and Dharmottara expressly says bhräntam hy anumanam while Siddhasenadivakara in Nyayavatara 5 ff claims abhräntata for pratyaksa as well as anumana; similarly he extends the distinction of svartha and parärtha, which properly applies to anumana only, to pratyaksa also, ibidem 12f. Apparently he thought to improve on Dharmakirti by a wholesale generalisation of nice distinctions! He is different from Siddhasenagani the author of the Tattvärtha-vrtti, because the latter quotes ad. II 25 from Haribhadra's commentary on the Nandisütra, see Kalyanavijaya, 1, e., p. 29; Haribhadra, therefore, intervenes between both Siddhasenas. It may be mentioned that the younger one quotes ad. I, 10 a verse by Arya-Siddhasena, who may or may not be Siddhasenadivākara.
3 We should like to know more details about these early Vedanta schools than Haribhadra gives in the work quoted in the text; perhaps he may have given them in his avopajña-vitti to the passage in question. But the vṛtti is not available to me.