Sacred Literature of Jains

SR No.: 006969
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Ganeshchandra Lalwani, Satyaranjan Banerjee
Publisher: Jain Bhawan
Publication Year: 1999
Total Pages: 250
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 22 MB

Page 17

SACRED LITERATURE OF THE JAINS
but in the Nandisutra, a work that is probably a production of Devarddhigani himself. See below. In this work the sacred texts are divided into two groups; (1) the angapavittha, i. e, the 12 angas, and (2) the anangapavittha texts. A further subdivision shows that under anangap, there are 60 single texts enumerated, 27 of which prove to be names of existing parts of the Siddhānta ; the other names appear either to be merely titles of sections of single texts of this number [223) or, and this is the majority of cases are not found in the Siddhānta, though anga 3, 10 is acquainted with some few of them. A repetition of this enumeration in the Pākṣikasūtra27- adds at the end to the latter category four28* additional texts, the former existence of which can be proved from another source. Inasmuch as this proof is as entirely free from suspicion as it is surprising I deem it fit to discuss this matter already here in some detail.
In the Vihimaggapavā, called briefly Vidhiprapā, that is to say, in a sāmāyāri of Jiņapahamuni (Jinaprabha in Kosalā ; likewise author of the Samdehavişauşadhi) composed Saṁvat 1363 (A.D. 1307) in Prakrt, the above mentioned enumeration of the anangapavittha texts is found with the addition of the same four names as in the Pākṣikasūtra. To these four there are added two more names. On this occasion we now find there, inserted between angas and upāngas, the following remarkable statements in reference to that state of advancement in which the student is to study the single texts. The statement occurs in a passage where the author describes in detail the diurnal occupation necessary to learn the single texts of Siddhānta. The passage is as follows:
itthà ca dakkha29 pariyāyeņa tivāso āyārapakappaṁ vaḥijjā vāijja ya, evaṁ cauvāso sūyagadań, pamcavāso dasākappavvavahāre, atthavā so thāṇasamavāe, dasavā so bhagavai (vaiṁ), ikkārasavāso khuddiyāvimāņāi ('nādini) pasca 'jjhayane, vārasavāso arunovavāyāi (ādini) [224] pamca
jjhayaņe, terasavāso utthāņasuya (yādini) caurajjhayaņe, cauddasāiatthārasamtavāso kameňa a siviśabhāvana-ditthivisabhāvaņā-cāra-ṇabhāvaņā-mahāsumiņabhāvaņā-teyanisagge, egūņavişavāso dițțhivā yam, sampunnavisavāso savvasuttajogo tti. The same statements recur in an older form (cf. the name vivāha for anga 5 and not bhagavai) in Śànticandra's
27 Where the texts in question are called angabahira. 28*Or 'five'? they seem to have been mentioned also by the original MS. commented
on by the bhāsā of the Calcutta edition of the Nandis ; see the explanation of the
five names in that edition p. 418 (after Vanhidasão).-L. 29 The MS has dakkhah. But visarga is of course here inappropriate. Is dikkha
(diksa') the correct reading ?