Sruta Sarita

SR No.: 001940
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Jitendra B Shah
Publisher: Shardaben Chimanbhai Educational Research Centre
Publication Year: 2001
Total Pages: 310
Language: English, Prakrit, Hindi
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Articles
File Size: 18 MB

Page 70

PRAJÑĀPANĀ AND SATKHANDĀGAMA
in verses instead of in prose17. And these verses occur even in the Uttaradhyayana-sūtra and Niryukti. From this it is proved that these verses are not added in the Prajñāpanāsūtra atfer its compilation but they are included by the compiler himself while compiling the work. So, we can definitely say that Prajñāpanā is later than Uttaradhyayanasutra. It is interesting to note that Niryukti gāthās occur in Mūlācāra and Saṭkhaṇḍāgama. Hence it is very difficult to decide as to who-Junior or Senior Bhadrabahu-composed them. But many of them seem to be samgrahaṇī gāthās, current in the tradition, which afterwards, were included in the Niryukti by the author himself. Thus the problem of the date of the Niryuktis has its own difficulty. And according to scholars, Uttaradhyayanasūtra has gradually assumed its present form. The narrative storypart, the didactic-part and the philosophical part-these three parts are noticeable in the Uttaradhyayanasutra. Scholars are of the opinion that these three parts are composed at different periods of time. But it is generally held that it assumed its present form in 3rd-4th Century B. C. And Prajñāpanā, being composed after Uttaradhyayana, should be of a later date, than that of Uttaradhyayana. Moreover, this much we can definitely hold that the gathäs contained in the Acaranga-Niryukti (Refer to Prajñāpană Sū. p. 14, Note 1) are preserved in their original form. It is so because therein the mention is made of the 36 names of Pṛthivi (earth) and the number of these names is really 36. These very gathās occur in the Uttaradhyayanasutra. There too 36 names are hinted at in the phrase "bheya chattisamāhiyā". In spite of this hint or reference it enumerates 40 names (or types) of Pṛthivi. Hence the question arises as to when these four types were conceived and added to the 36. The four types were included in the gathā but the original reference to 36 remained there side by side. Ac. Silanka has explained only the 36 divisions mentioned in the AcarangaNiryukti. But the Acarangacurņi enumerates 40 divisions. This clearly proves that the additional four divisions came to be included in the 36 after the composition of the Niryukti. The structure of the concerned gathā shows that it is a sangrahanī gāthā. In spite of this, some may raise a question as to whether this sangrahaṇī gāthā is from the pen of the author of Niryukti or it is a traditionally current gāthā which he included in the Niryukti. The possible answer to this question is that he included the traditionally current gāthā in his work, the reason being that it is found in the Uttaradhyayana too.
61
To sum up, if Prajñāpanā were composed after Uttaradhyayana, then we can conclude that it is a work belonging to the period of time later than 3rd-4th Century B. C.; that is, in that case we cannot assign it to an earlier date.
Tradition believes, on the basis of the identical meaning of the two names