Tattvartha Sutra

SR No.: 006796
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Sukhlal Sanghavi, K K Dixit
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2000
Total Pages: 596
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Tattvartha Sutra, & Tattvarth
File Size: 10 MB

Page 61

44
TATTVĀRTHA SŪTRA
whole of this scripture to fade away. When the party of no-clothing could keep intact so vast expanse of the scriptural texts composed by its leaders like Kundakunda, Pūjyapāda, Samantabhadra etc. then there is no reason why it could not do the same in relation to some section of the Angic scripture. And leaving aside the Angic scripture, even when we cast a glance at the Anga-bāhva texts the question arises as to why the small texts like Daśavaikälika and Uttarādhyayana-texts referred to by Pūjya-pāda—could disappear from among the scripture pertaining to the party of no-clothingthis at a time when even bigger texts remained intact with this party. Considering all this I have arrived at the definite conclusion that the flow of the original Angic scripture, even while subject to the strokes of inevitable change, has been yet current and is to-day totally accepted by the Śvetāmbara sect though totally rejected by its Digambara counterpart.
In connection with this problem of the scripture the attention of the historical minded scholars ought to be drawn towards one question. Pūjyapāda and Akalańka refer to Daśavaikālika and Uttarādhyayana. Not only that, so far as Daśavaikālika is concerned even a commentary on it was composed by Aparājita-Acārya, a supporter of nakedness. He has also composed a commentary on Bhagavati-ārādhanā. Inspite of all this how did it come about that Daśavaikālika and Uttarādhyayana ceased to remain current within the Digambara sect? And when we find that numerous texts like Mülācāra and Bhagavati-ārādhanā which by way of exception recommend for a monk external possessions like clothes etc., which even expound a code of conduct appropriate to nuns, and whose practical recommendations for a monk are in no way severe than those of Daśavaikālika and Uttarādhyayana are unanimously accepted by the Digambara sect and have commentaries in Sanskrit and vernacular (Hindi) composed on them by famous Digambara scholars—then the question just posed by us becomes still more
1. See Bhagavati-Ārādhanā, p. 1196; also 'Anekānta', Vol. 2; no. 1, p. 57.