Canonical Literature Of Jainas

SR No.: 022774
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: H R Kapadia
Publisher: Hindi Granth Karyalay
Publication Year: 1941
Total Pages: 286
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 26 MB

Page 56

11 ]
CLASSIFICATIONS OF THE ĀGAMAS
43
In Jaina-tattva-prakāśa (p. 218) the significance of this term Mülasūtra is explained as under:
If the root of a tree is strong, that tree can last long and can have a number of branches etc. Similarly the class of treatises which when studied can strengthen the root of the tree of samyaktra and make it develop into the form of the ten-fold religion for the clergy, can be designated as Mülasūtra.
These are the various explanations. My personal view is the same as one expressed by Prof. Schubring' and mentioned on p. 42.
Usually the following works are designated as Mīlasuttas:-?
(1) Uttarajjhayana, (2) Dasaveyaliya, (3) Avassaya?, (4) Pindanijjutti and (5) Ohanijjutti.
Occasionally some mention even Pakkhiyasutta as a Mülasutta.4 It may be mentioned en pressant that none however considers the number of Mūlasuttas as five or six. Their number is either counted as 3 or 4. The Sthānakavāsins ignore Pindanijjutti and Ohanijjutti altogether; for, they do not look upon these works as those composed by Bhadrabāhusvāmin. So they fix 3 as the number of Malasuttas. Prof. Weber and Prof. Biihler, too, mention this very number, but not for the same reason as advanced by the
1
2
It may be noted that Prof. Schubring has ollered another explanation for Mülasutta (vide p. 36). But there I liffer from him. The earliest source I can mention in this connection at present is Bhāvaprabha Sūri's com. (p. 94) on Jainadharmavarastotra (v. 30). There it is said: "अथ उत्तराध्ययन १ आवश्यक २ पिण्डनियुक्ति तथा ओघनियुक्ति ३ दशवकालिक ४ ईति
3
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. In the introduction (p. III) to “Dasaveyaliya Sutta” Prof. Schubring has made an erroneous statement (this is probably his slip). For, instead of Avassaya, he bas mentioned Avassaganijjutti. The pertinent lines are as under:
"Together with the Uttarajjhāyā (commonly called Uttarajjhayana Sutta), the Avassaganijjutti and the Pindanijjutti it forms a small group of texts named Mülasutta.” See A His of Ind. Lit. (vol. II, pp. 430 and 471).
4