Madanrekha Akhyayika

SR No.: 002639
Original Sutra Author: Jinbhadrasuri
Author: Bechardas Doshi
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1973
Total Pages: 304
Language: Sanskrit, Hindi
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Literature
File Size: 15 MB

Page 16

(vl) Jinacandrasürl the disciple of Jineśvarasürt (or of his brother and co-disciple of Buddhisāgarasuri (V. Sam. 1080);86
(vii) Jinacandrasuri the elder brother of Abhayadevasūri; he completed his treatise entitled "Samvega-rangaśālā' in the year V. Sam. 1125 87
(viii) Jinacandrasürl of Kharatara-gaccha and preceptor of Guņasamțdhi Mahattarā, the authoress of Anjanasundari-cariya in Prakrit in V. Sam. 1406; 88
(ix) Jinacandrasuri, the presiding preceptor of Kbaratara-gaccha and the preceptor of Taruņaprabhasūri of Candra-gaccha (V. Sam. 1411);39
(x) Jinacandrasuri, the appointed successor to the preceptorial throne of Jinaharşasūri ; he completed his Vịtti on Sthāpānga in V. Sam. 1570 at Anahilapurapattana, 40
Further, there are references to about ten more Jinacandrasürls in JPPS, nine of which belong to the fourteenth and later centuries ; 4 and only one of them seems to have flourished in the thirteenth century of the Vikram Era.
Now, out of the ten Jinacandrasūris listed above, the ones at numbers one, four and five seem to be identical, since one and the same Jinacandra could have been a preceptor, either in capacity of an initiator or a simple teacher or one who conferred 'sūrihood', to different disciples like Municandrasūri, Nemicandrasüri, Amradevasűri and Sricandrasūri. This would fix this Jincandrasūri in V. Sam. 1190 as senior contemporary of his disciple Amradevasüri, the author of the celebrated Vștti on Nemicandra. sūri's AMK.
Although this chronological clue might tempt us to identify our Jina. candrasuri with the above one, there is a big hurdle in the way; the above Jinacandrasuri was the preceptor of our Municandrasūri while our was a disciple of the latter ! 48 Thus, they could not possibly be identical.
Jinacandrasuri listed at number three is out of question on the grounds both chronoligical and of his belonging to a different gaccha. The one listed at number six is also eliminated on chronological grounds. Similarly, the ones listed at numbers eight, nine and ten are easily ruled out on the
36. Ibid., p. 208. 37. Ibid., p. 217. 38. Ibid., p. 438. 39. Ibid., p. 446. 40. Ibid., p. 517. 41. Cf. JPPS, pp. 67, 88, 89, 127, 134, 137, 138, 148, 150. 42. Ibid., p. 10. 43. Cf. MRA, Intro. vs. 47.