________________
used. The stand of Abhedavāda obviously distinguished Divakara from the two other schools, Digambara and Svetāmbara.
xvi
iv) Divākara's reference to the wedding of Mahāvīra (found in one of the Stuties) cannot exclusively prove that he was Svetambara, because the Kalpasūtra, as noted above, was acceptable to the Yapanīyas. v) Some of the views expressed by Siddhasena show minor doctrinal differences (as in the Niscayadvā); the sectarian zeal, therefore, has branded Siddhasena as dvesya-sitapata.
It need not be denied that Siddhasena was primarily a logician, Tārkika and Vadin. If he differs from tradition, it may not necessarily mean that he was progressive; but some of the deviations might be traced back to the Yapanīya creed the study about which is not fully carried out.
The South, especially the Karṇāṭaka, being the home of the Yāpanīyas, Siddhasena, as endorsed by the statement of a later Prabandha, must have belonged to the South, before he migrated to Ujjain, where he got the royal patronage. That he belonged to the South or Karṇāṭaka is further confirmed by some other indications.
1) The term Sanmati, another name of Mahāvīra and therefore rightly used in the title of the Sanmatitarka or -sutra, is found in the Namamālā of Dhanañjaya which is more popular in the South, especially Karṇāṭaka.
2) Siddhasena's Sanmati-tarka has close similarities with the Pravacanasăra of Kundakunda and has many ideas and expressions common with Samantabhadra. It has some Gāthās common with the Mūlācāra (at
(1
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
