Parmatmaprakasha and Yogsara

SR No.: 001876
Original Sutra Author: Yogindudev
Author: A N Upadhye
Publisher: Paramshrut Prabhavak Mandal
Publication Year: 2000
Total Pages: 550
Language: Sanskrit, Hindi, English
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Literature
File Size: 13 MB

Page 101

76
Paramatma-prakasa
not settled as yet. Oral tradition recorded by Pannalal says that Kumāra flourished some two or three centuries before the Vikrama eral, and the views of even some modern scholars appear to be influenced by this tradition.2 The only available Sk. commentary on this work is that of Subhacandra who composed it in A. D. 1556;3 as yet no references to Kumāra in earlier commentaries are brought to light; the order of enumeration of 12 Anupiekşas followed by Kumāra is that of Tattvarthasūtra which is slightly different from that adopted by Vattakera, śivārya and Kundakunda. These points militate against the high antiquity claimed for Kumāra by tradition, There is no critical edition of Kattigdyanuppåkkha, but as the text stands the dialectal appearance is not so old as that of Pravacanasara. The reference to kşetrapala in verse No. 25 shows that Kumāra belonged perhaps to the South where the worship of Kșetrapala has been more popular. In the South some monks bearing the name Kumārasena have flourished. In the Mulagund temple inscription (earlier than 903 A. D.) one Kumārasenā is mentioned; then one Kumārasyāmi is mentioned in an inscription at Bogadi of 1145 A.D.S; but mere similarity of name is not enough for identification. With these facts in view I do not want to assign Kumāra to any definite period, but what I want to point out is that the high antiquity traditionally claimed for Kumāra is not proved as yet; and there are sufficiently weighty reasons to doubt it. As to the relative periods of Joindu and Kumāra, the former in all probability is earlier than the latter.
vill) Canda quotes the following dohā in his Prakrta-laksanam to illustrate his sūtra: 'yatha tatha anayok sthanë jima-timau :
कालु लहेविण जोइया जिम जिम मोहु गलेइ ।
तिम तिम दंसणु लहइ जो णियमें अप्पु मुणेइ । is the same as I. 85 of P.-Prakasa with the difference that our text reads jimu and timu for jima and tima, and jiú for jo in the second line. It is a sad tale that the text of Canda's grammar is not well preserved. 'The whole work has the appearance of half-arranged, miscellaneous jottings for
1 Ibidem Intro. 2 "The 'twelve Anuprekshas' are a part of Jaina faith. Svami Kartikeya seems to be
the first who wrote on them. Other writers have only copied and repeated him. Even the 'Dvadasanupreksha' of Kundakundacharya seems to have been written on its model. No wonder, if Svåmi Kärtikeya preceded Kundakundacharya. Any way, he is an ancient writer".- Catalogue of Sk. and Pk. Mss. in the C. P. and Berar, p. xiv;
also Winternitz: A History of Indian Literature, Vol. II. p. 577. 3 Annals, Vol. XIII, I., pp. 37, etc. 4 Journal of the Bombay Branch R. A. S. X, pp. 167-69. 190-93. 5 Epigraphia Carnatica IV, Nagamangala No. 100. 6 Ed. by A. F. Rudolf Hoernle, Part I, Calcutta 1880.