________________
108
JAINA GAZETTE.
Do not again say, “If so, why do you not begin to write a Prakaran, (8) like Akalanka, (9) Dharmakïrti, (10) etc.? What is the use of this vanity of yours to become a writer of aphorisms?" for men are of different inclinations and there is no law promulgated by the people or the king to restrain one's wish (like this). Therefore this is a trifling objection (11).
Therefore the Acharya has composed this Shastra consisting of five chapters, containing Ahnikas which again are divided into Prakaranas inade up of aphorisms which constitute of words which latter again are made up of letters.
(8) Prakaran is a kind of work corresponding to a monograph on a certain subject. While the oarlier writers composed their works in short aphorisms so that these may be easily remembered when printing was unknown and manuscripts were scarce, the later authors invariably wrote in elaborate verse or prose, for in their day's writing and copying manuscripts were more frequently practised. Prakarans are works of the latter kind written in a lucid style in verse or prose on particular subjects to make these clear as it was not easy to grasp the sense of the brief aphorisms of the earlier writers.
(9) Bhatta Akalanka Deva was a celebrated Jain author. The most well-known works of his are Tattvartha-raja-vârtika, & com nentary in aphorisms on Tattvarthâdhigama Sutra, and Ashta-sati, a commentary on Apta-inimāmgā of Samanta-bhadra. Akalanka is said to have flourished between the end of the 8th or the beginning of the 9th century A. D.
(10) Dharmakirti was a celebrated Buddlist philosopher. He is mentioned by the Jain writer Vidyânandi Swami in Ashta-Sahasri and Patra-pariksha. He is said to have flourished in the seventh century A.D.
(11) The first objection is that there being other works on similar subjects, how can the author of this work say that this is my composition there being no originality as far as the subject-matter is concerned. The reply is that knowledge is eternal and the oldest writers whom we know were also preceded by others who treated the same subject and therefore though there is no originality in the subject-inatter, there is originality in fi": mde of treatment. For this originality in treatident later writers iry called the authors of certain works, the subjectinatter of which is already been treated of by preceding writers in their works. Thus though there were works on Grammar, Prosody and Philosophy before Panini, Pingala and Kania, etc., these latter are called the authors of several works on these subjects from their original method of treatment. In the same manner Hemachandra calls himself the author of this work, though there were many writers before bim who treated of the same subject, viz., Pramanas.
The second objection is that ancient writers composed their works in aphorisms for the eak of brevity, so that there inay not be too much burden on the memory of the learner who in those days had to commit the whole work to memory, but in these days when writing and copying inanuscripts are by no means unusual what is the use of composing a work in aphorisms which being brief are difficult to understand ?
The answer which we must confess is not very happy is that every writer is free to follow his own inclination, there being no rule to force an author to adopt a particular method.
Printed by M. L. Bharga ra on 10.5-15 at the N. K. Press, Lucknow. Shree Sudharmaswami Gyanbhandar-Umara, Surat
www.umaragyanbhandar.com