________________
II]
For instance, there were 84000 Painnagas in the tirtha of Lord Rṣabha, sankhyāta in the Tirthas of subsequent 22 Tirthankaras, and 14000 in the tirth of Lord Mahavira; or in every tirtha the number of the Painnagas was as many thousands as the number of pupils endowed with four types of mati, a Tirthankara had. At the time when Nandi was composed, the names of 60 (31+29) Painnagas were noted while at the time Pakkhiyasutta was composed, the names of 655 (37+28) Painnagas were noted. But at least since the time of Bhavaprabha Suri, the number of Painnagas is fixed as ten. In his com. (p. 94) on Jainadharmavarastotra (v. 30) the 10 Painnagas are mentioned as under:
Ι
2
CLASSIFICATIONS OF THE AGAMAS
Here, through over-sight, one Painnaga is left out. Probably it is Mahapaccakkhana.
49
Though the number of the Painnagas has been fixed as ten at least for the last 200 years, there is no uniformity as to which works are to be so looked upon. However, in Weber's Verzeichniss der
5
7
" अथ चउसरण पयन्नु २ आउरपच्चक्खाण ३ भक्तपरिज्ञा ४ तंदुलवियालियं ५ चंदाविजय ६ गणविजा ७ मरणसमाहि ८ देवेन्द्रसूत्र ९ संस्तारक १० इति दश प्रकीर्णकाणि । "
7
3 See pp. 25 and 26.
1
Its date is to be settled, but it is certainly prior to Samval 1180, the year in which Yasodeva Suri commented upon it.
See pp. 25 and 26.
6 See p. 37.
This is borne out by Jaina Granthavali where three different sets of 10 Painnagas are mentioned as under:
( i ) चतुःशरण, आतुरप्रत्याख्यान, भक्तपरिज्ञा, संस्तारक, तंदुलवैचारिक, चंद्रवेध्यक, देवदस्तव, गणिविद्या, महाप्रत्याख्यान and वीरस्तव - pp. 44-46
See p. 24, fn. 3.
This cannot be dated later than the date of the redaction of the canon which is either Vira Samvat 980 or 993.
(ii) अजीवकल्प, गच्छाचार, मरणसमाधि, सिद्धप्राभृत, तीर्थोद्वार, आराधनापताका, द्वीपसागरप्रज्ञप्ति, ज्योतिष्करंडक, अंगविद्या and तिथिप्रकीर्णक mpp. 62-64
(iii) पिंडविशुद्धि, सारावलि, पर्यंताराधना, जीवविभक्ति, कवचप्रकरण, योनिप्राभृत, अंगचूलिया, बंगचूलिया, वृद्धचतुः शरण and जंबूपयन्नो - pp. 64-68
On p. 72, all these three sets are given; but through over-sight Pindaniryukti is mentioned there, instead of Pindavićuddhi.