Tarkatarangini

SR No.: 002581
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Gunratna, Vasant G Parikh
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2001
Total Pages: 306
Language: Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Philosophy
File Size: 15 MB

Page 11

10
catalogue of the British Museum it is shown that the Ms. of Tt. is unique.? However, there also exists another Ms. of this work at the Oriental Institute, Baroda.
Gn. had written Tt. for the use of the students especially for his petstudent Ratnaviśäla. The author has, therefore, like a sincere teacher, made it exhaustive and simple. Almost all the important problems of Nyāyavaiseșika metaphysics are discussed in this work. Gv. the writer of Tpk., occasionally uses the terminology of Navya-Nyāya, but Gn. in Tt. displays remarkable influence of Navya-Nyāya. However the language of the work generally maintains the simplicity that is rare in some of the later NavyaNyāya works. (2) The date of Gunaratna Gaņi
Personal History and date From the colophon of the Tt. we know that Gn. was a disciple of Vinayasamudra gani, a disciple of Jinamānikyasūri, who was a contemporary of Jinacandrasūri. Jinacandrasūri was contemporary of Hīravijayasuri and lived in the time of the Mogul Emperor Akabara. Gn. completed a big commentary consisting of 10,500 s’loka measure on the Kävyaprakāśa, on the 7th day of the black-half of Jyestha in V. S. 1610, i.e., 1553 A. D. The commentary was written for his pupil Ratnaviśāla. 10
Gv.'s date re-considered Though the date of Gn. seems to be certain from the above-mentioned reference, it creates the necessity to re-consider the date of Gv. Prof. Paranjapel followed by Keith 2 puts Gv. about the end of 16th century A. D.. because Gv. was the son of Balabhadra and the younger brother of Padmanābha, who is known to have written a Virabhadra Campu in praise of a king Virabhadra, in the year A. D. 1578. N. Bhattācārya thinks that Balabhadra, the author of Balabhadrasandarbha, a commentary on SP., is the same Balabhadra, and flourished in the 17th century A. D. 13
The acceptance of these dates creates a new problem of putting Gn. either earlier than Gv., or at least his senior contemporary, which may not be the case.