Pravachanasara

SR No.: 003289
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: A N Upadhye
Publisher: Shrimad Rajchandra Ashram
Publication Year: 1964
Total Pages: 612
Language: Hindi, Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari
File Size: 16 MB

Page 68

Introduction
35
is meant to be an independent treatise. Each pähuda has a significant title which substantially indicates the main current of the subject matter, though, as usual in traditional texts, there is (p. 37:) always scope for side-topics. In some of them like Cārittaand Bodha-pähuda the exposition of the subject matter is very systematic, while in others like Sutta- and Bhāva-pāhuda the contents appear to be merely compiled; that is why perhaps the ascetic emblem prescribed for women is included in Suttapāhuda. The same topic, in these pāhudas, appears in places more than one: the discussion about linga is found in Bhāva-pāhuda and in Limga-pāhuda Bhāvapāhuda is extensively varied in its contents, and it is important from various points of view: so many Jaina technicalities are simply referred to, and the author takes it for granted that his hearers are already acquainted with them; the dogmatic property of Jainism must have been quite systematically arranged in numerical groups before the days of Kundakunda, otherwise his off-hand introduction of technical terms would be meaningless; the legendary references found in Bhāva-pāhuda indicate to the presence of many Jaina mythological stories already current at the beginning of the Christian era. The manner of exposition, in all these pāhudas, is narrative and dogmatic, and the author never feels the necessity of logical defence of the principles he is enunciating; sometimes he takes resort to similes to make his appeal effective.
I am perfectly aware that it is only on the ground of current tradition that Kundakunda is accepted as the author of these pāhudas, and no evidence is coming forth, nor there is anything in these texts, taken as a whole, which should preclude us from taking Kundakunda as the author of these works. The texts of these pāhudas as utilised by me, could not be claimed to be critical; so there is every probability of omissions and commissions of gāthās especially in such traditional texts. W. Denecke doubts Kundakunda's authorship, but he gives no definite reasons. Dialectally he finds that six pāhudas are younger than Samayasära etc.; but this cannot be a safe guide, unless we are guided by critical editions. The reason for the presence of Apabhramsa forms in these pāhudas, as compared with Pravacansāra, I have explained in my discussion on the dialect of Pravacansāra. It is imaginable that traditionally compiled texts might be attributed to Kundakunda because of his literary reputation; but to prove this we must have some strong evidence potent enough to cancel the current tradition. In conclusion I would say that these pāhudas contain many ideas, phrases and sentences which are quite in tune with the spirit and phrasiology of Pravacansāra.
These pāhudas have left great impression, a fact not unknown even to Śrutasāgara, on some of the later writers. Pūjyapāda has composed his Samādhisataka1 in a systematic manner and with a stronger metaphysical tone mainly based on Mökkhapāhuda. Joindu also shows, in his compositions, his close acquaintance with these pāhudas. Many verses of Amộtacandra remind us of the gāthās from these pāhudas from which he quotes also. Guņabhadra, in his Ātmānuśāsana, 2 follows closely many gāthās from Bhāva-pähuda etc.
1 2
Published in Sanātana Jaina Granthamālā (SJG), Vol. I, Bombay 1905. Ibid, pp. 52 etc.