________________
and Sutrakritang, and Suttanipata. Moreover, Rishibhashit has mentioned the ideas as general principles propagated by different Rishis, but Buddhist Tripitak literature and later Jain works have tried to include these ideas as belonging to their own respective traditions. For example philosophical cultivation has been dealt with in Rishibhashit23 twice and once in Suttanipata24. Whereas in Suttanipat Buddha says that he does this type of philosophical cultivation, in Rishibhashit the Rishi says that whoever does this type of cultivation gets liberated irrespective of his cast and creed. Thus Rishibhashit is conclusively proved to be of an earlier period than that of Jain or Buddhist works except first Shrutaskandha of Acharanga.
Considering from the view point of language we find that Rishibhashit has, to a larger extent, maintained the most ancient form of Ardhamagadhi Prakrit. For example in Rishibhashit Atma has been mentioned as Ata but in Jain Anga literature Atta, Appa, Aada, Aaya, and other words have been used which are variations belonging to later periods. The free use of the consonant Ta conclusively puts this work in an earlier period than Uttaradhyayan as in Uttaradhyayan there is a tendency of avoiding this consonant. Rishibhashit also abundently uses word-forms like, Janati, Paritappati, Gachchhati, Vijjati, Vattati, Pavattati. This also confirms the antiquity of this work in context to both, subject and language.
The story of the serpent of Agandhan clan is found in Uttaradhyayan25, Dashvaikalik26 as well as Rishibhashit27. But examining all the three, it becomes evident that its mention in Rishibhashit is much older than the other two. Reason being that in Rishibhashit it has been quoted just as an example so that the mendicant does not stray from his path; but in Dashvaikalik and Uttaradhyayan it has been included as an incident in the life of Rajimati and Rathnemi.
As such Rishibhashit is older than Suttanipata, Uttaradhyayan and Dashvaikalik. That means it is of a period later than that of first Shrutask andha of Acharanga but an earlier work than all other Ardhamagadhi canonical literature. Also being earlier to Suttanipat it becomes earlier to all Pali Tripitak.
Rishibhashit: A Study 135