________________
International Journal of Jaina Studies Vol. 1-3 (2005-2007).172-182
DIGAMBARA ATTITUDES TO THE ŚVETĀMBARA CANON*
Fujinaga Sin'
0. No one would deny the importance of anekāntavāda or the doctrine of multi-foldness in Jaina philosophy. This doctrine teaches us to observe an object from many points of view. Jain literature can also be viewed from many sides. In other words, Jaina literature itself has an anekänta aspect. The Digambara Jaina philosopher Samantabhadra says in his Svayambhūstotra that according to the teaching of Mahāvīra the doctrine of anekānta is also of an anekānta character when it is observed through pramāna and naya.? In this paper I shall point out an example of such a multi-pointed discussion on the Jain canon.
1. As is well known, the two main Jain sects, Digambara and Svetāmbara, have different attitudes toward the sacred texts. All Śvetāmbara sects accept the authority of Prakrit texts called āgamas, although the number and contents of the agamas accepted are not always the same, because of different sectarian views. The āgamas are divided into three groups of works, known as pūrva, anga and angabāhya (scriptures which are outside the angas). The last one has five subdivisions: upānga, chedasūtra, mülasūtra, prakirnakasūtra and cūlikāsūtra. Today, the Digambaras are generally said to deny the authority of the Svetāmbara canon. It is unknown, however, who was the first Digambara philosopher that aired the opinion that the Svetāmbara canon is not authentic. Moreover, some Digambara texts contain detailed information on the Svetāmbara āgamas when they deal with śruta, or scripture, as one of five kinds of knowledge. It is therefore interesting to examine Digambara views of the āgamas and compare them with those held by Śvetāmbaras.
International Journal of Jaina Studies (Online) Vol. 3, No. 5 (2007) 1-11
This paper is a revised version of my article 'Svetāmbara Canons in the Digambara Tradition which appeared in The Annals of the Research Project Center for the Comparative Study of Logic 3 (2005) 101105. Author's acknowledgment is due to Dr Hideyo Ogawa, editor of the journal, who was kind enough to invite me to write the original article.
2 Svayambhüstotra 103ab: anekānto 'py anekāntah pramānanayasādhanah.
172