Ratnakarandaka Shravakachara

SR No.: 010669
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Jugalkishor Mukhtar
Publisher: Manikchand Digambar Jain Granthamala Samiti
Publication Year: 1982
Total Pages: 456
Language: Hindi, Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari
File Size: 7 MB

Page 254

१६६
स्वामी समंतभद्र ।
'समयसारप्राभूत' की प्रस्तावनामें, अपना यह मत पुष्ट करनेके लिये उद्धृत किया है कि कुन्दकुन्दका उत्पत्तिसमय वि० सं० २१३ से पहले बनता ही नहीं; और साथ ही यह प्रतिपादन किया है कि उसे स्वीकार कर लेनेमें कोई भी हानि नहीं है * | परंतु हमें तो उसके स्वीकारनेमें हानि ही हानि नजर पड़ती है-लाभ कुछ भी नहीं और वह जरा भी युक्तियुक्त प्रतीत नहीं होता । इस मतको मान लेनेसे समन्तभद्र तो समन्तभद्र पूज्यपाद भी कुन्दकुन्दसे पहलेके विद्वान् ठहरते हैं; और तब कुन्दकुन्दके वंशमें उमास्वाति हुए, उमास्वातिने तत्त्वार्थसूत्रकी रचना की, उस तत्त्वार्थसूत्र पर पूज्यपादने 'सर्वार्थसिद्धि' नामकी टीका लिखी, इत्यादि कथनोंका कुछ भी अर्थ अथवा मूल्य नहीं रहता, और पचासों शिलालेखों तथा ग्रंथादिकोंमें पूज्यपाद तथा उनसे पहले होनेवाले कितने ही विद्वानोंके विषयमें जो यह सुनिश्चित उल्लेख मिलता है कि वे कुंदकुंदके वंशमें अथवा उनके बाद हुए हैं मिथ्या और व्यर्थ ठहरता है। ___ * २१३ तमवैक्रमसंवत्सरात्पूर्व तु साधयितुमेव नार्हति भगवत्कुन्दकुन्दोत्पत्तिसमयः ।'............
'ततो युक्त्यानयापि भगवत्कुन्दकुन्दसमयः तस्य शिवमृगेशवर्मसमान. कालीनत्वात् ४५० तम शकसंवत्सर एव सिद्धयति स्वीकारे चास्मिन् क्षतिरपि नास्ति कापीति ।'
। उदाहरण के लिये देखो मर्कराका ताम्रपत्र जो शक संवत् ३८८ का लिखा हुआ है और जिसमें कुन्दकुन्दाचार्यके वंशमें होनेवाले आचार्योंका उल्लेख निम्न प्रकारसे पाया जाता है
'.......श्रीमान् कोंगणि-महाधिराज अविनीतनामधेयदत्तस्य देसिगगणं कौण्डकुन्दान्वय-गुणचंद्रभटार-शिष्यस्य अभयणंदिभटार तस्य शिष्यस्य शीलभद्रभटार-शिष्यस्य जनाणदिभटार-शिष्यस्य गुणणंदिभटार-शिष्यस्य वन्दमन्दिभटारगर्गे अष्ट अशीति-त्रयो-शतस्य सम्वत्सरस्य माघमासं......"
-कुर्ग इन्स्क्रिप्शन्स ( E. C. I.)

Translation AI Generated

166
Swami Samantabhadra, in the introduction of 'Samayasara Prabhut', has cited this opinion to strengthen his argument that the time of Kundakunda's birth cannot be before 213 CE. He also argues that there is no harm in accepting this. However, we see only harm in accepting it - no benefit at all, and it does not seem reasonable at all. Accepting this opinion would mean that Samantabhadra, as well as Pujyapada, were scholars before Kundakunda. Then, the statements that Umasvati came in the lineage of Kundakunda, that Umasvati composed the Tattvarth Sutra, that Pujyapada wrote a commentary called 'Sarvarth Siddhi' on the Tattvarth Sutra, etc., would have no meaning or value. And the definite mention found in dozens of inscriptions and texts about Pujyapada and many other scholars who came before him, stating that they were in the lineage of Kundakunda or came after him, would become false and meaningless.

* 'The time of Bhagavan Kundakunda's birth cannot be established before the 213th Vikram Samvat.'............
'Therefore, even by reasoning, the time of Bhagavan Kundakunda is established as the 450th Saka Samvat, because he was contemporary with Shiva Mrigesha Varma. And there is no harm in accepting this.'
For example, see the copper plate inscription of Merkara, which was written in the 388th Saka Samvat, and in which the lineage of Acharyas in the lineage of Kundakunda Acharya is mentioned as follows:
'.......Sriman Kongani-Mahaadhiraj Avinita-namadheyadatta's Desiggana, Kaundakunda-anvaya-guna-chandra-bhatar-shishya's Abhayanandi-bhatar, his shishya's Shilabhadra-bhatar-shishya's Janaanndi-bhatar-shishya's Gunanandi-bhatar-shishya's Vandamandi-bhatar-garge, eighty-three hundred years, Magha month......"
- Kurga Inscriptions (E.C.I.)