History of Canonical Literature of Jainas

SR No.: 006541
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Hiralal R Kapadia, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: Prakrit Text Society Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2010
Total Pages: 322
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Agam, Canon, & History
File Size: 17 MB

Page 64

CLASSIFICATIONS OF THE ĀGAMAS
47 Usually the following works are designated as Mūlasuttas :1
(1) Uttarajjhayaņa, (2) Dasaveyāliya, (3) Āvassaya?, (4) Pindanijjutti and (5) Ohanijjutti.
Occasionally some mention even Pakkhiyasutta as a Mülasutta.3 It may be mentioned en passant that none however considers the number of Mülasuttas as five or six. Their number is either counted as 3 or 4. The Sthanakaväsins ignore Pindanijjutti and Ohanijjutti altogether; for, they do not look upon these works as those composed by Bhadrabahusvamin. So they fix 3 as the number of Mülasuttas. Prof. Weber and Prof. Bühler, too, mention this very number, but not for the same reason as advanced by the Sthānakavāsins. It may be that they may have been led to the same conclusion on the following understanding :
Pindanijjutti seems to be alluded to in the following verse of the Nijjutti on Dasaveyāliya (p. 161b) :
“भावस्सुवगारित्ता एत्थं दव्वेसणाइ अहिगारो। तीइ पुण अत्थजुत्ती वत्तव्वा पिंडनिज्जुत्ति ॥ २३९ ॥5 The earliest source I can mention in this connection at present is Bhävaprabha Sūri's com. (p. 94) on Jainadharmavarastotra (v. 30). There it is said: "379 उत्तराध्ययन १ आवश्यक २ पिण्डनियुक्ति तथा ओधनियुक्ति ३ दशवैकालिक ४ इति चत्वारि मूलसूत्राणि ।"
It seems that the word tathā is to be construed as “or”; if not, the number of the Mülasuttas will be five and not four. 2. In the introduction (p. III) to "The Dasaveyāliya Sutta” Prof. Schubring has made
an erroneous statement (this is probably his slip). For, instead of Āvassaya, he has mentioned Avassaganijjutti. The pertinent lines are as under :
“Together with the Uttarajjhāyā (commonly called Uttarajjhayana Sutta), the Āvassaganijjutti and the Pinda nijjutti it forms a small group of texts named
Mülasutta." 3. See A History of Indian Literature (Vol. II, pp. 430 and 471). 4. Some Sthānakavasins consider the following four works as mūlasuttas :
उत्तरज्झयण, दसवेयालिय, नन्दी and अणुओगदार. 5. While commenting upon this verse Haribhadra Sūri says on p. 162a and p. 162b :
“सा च पृथक्स्थापनतो मया व्याख्यातैवेति नेह व्याख्यायते." The editor of this work has written a foot-note on this as under:
"पिण्डनियुक्ते: पृथक्स्थापितत्वात् तत्र भद्रबाहुस्वामिनाऽर्थयुक्तिर्व्याख्यातेति नात्राध्ययनार्थाधिकारे तद्व्याख्यानम् । अन्यथा वाऽस्ति हरिभद्रसूरिकृता पिण्डनियुक्तिवृत्तिरिति तामाश्रित्यापि स्यादिदं वचः ।"