Jambu Jyoti

SR No.: 006503
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: M A Dhaky, Jitendra B Shah
Publisher: Kasturbhai Lalbhai Smarak Nidhi Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2004
Total Pages: 448
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Philosophy, & Religion
File Size: 21 MB

Page 283

272
Nalini Balbir
Jambū-jyoti
-A2 : manuscript No. 6198 kept in the L.D. Institute of Indology, Ahmedabad; 20 pages; pañcapātha-type?.
The identical commentary they contain, although apparently based on the avacūri found in the printed edition, is sometimes more detailed or clearer in its wording. It was written by a certain Punyasāgara in [V.]Sam. 1644 (= A.D. 1587).
The popularity of Jinavallabha's work is demonstrated by the rather larger number of available manuscripts, the fairly good number of commentaries it has given birth to, as also by the fact that some of his riddles have been borrowed by Jain writers (see below $ 3: JP 31).
1.2. The Prašnāvali ( = P), edited along with Jinavallabha's work (p. 55a-58b), is a short set of 15 Sanskrit riddle-verses followed by an avacūri. There is no mention of the author in the printed edition, but the text is usually ascribed to Municandra, a famous Jain author and commentator of the late 11th and early 12th century (he died in [V.] Sam. 1178 A.D. 1122). See further § 4 below.
1.3. Mahākavi Ajitasena's Alaskāracintāmani (=AC) is a fullfledged work on poetics in Sanskrit verses. The system of exposition is what we expect in an alaskāraśāstra : definitions followed by illustrations. There has been some discussion about the date of its composition, which has been reasonably ascribed to the last quarter of the 15th century by Dr. Nemi Chandra Shastri, the editor of the text, and by A. N. Upadhye. All the available manuscripts, which are not very numerous, are written in Kannada script and housed in the libraries of Karnataka (Moodbidri); none seems to hail from North India. The second chapter (pariccheda), where the author states his wish to tackle the subject of sabdālaskāra (vs. 1), is in fact mostly devoted to a detailed treatment of praśnottaras and citrabandha. As is wellknown, the position of these two varieties of literary compositions is somewhat ambiguous: they are considered as attractive and striking because of their peculiarities and the great amount of virtuosity they require, but, at the same time, they are said to represent poetry of inferior quality (adhamakāvya), especially by the strong advocates of the dhvani-theory.*
Ajitasena's work, coming rather late in the rich Indian tradition on poetics, is naturally indebted to the authors who have preceded him. It is
* Like Anandavardhana (c. 9th cent.). -Editors.