________________
...[424].... COMMENTARIES ON PRAJNĀPANĀSUTRA
(1) Pradeśa-vyakhyā by Ac. Haribhadra?
This Pradeśa-vyakhyā is written by Ac. Haribhadra who was well known by the name 'Bhavavirahasūri.' It opens with the words : prajñāpanākhyopangapradeśānuyogaḥ prārabhyate.' This clearly points to its scope. It intends to explain some portions of Prajñāpanā. Thus it is not a running and continuous commentary. Ac. Haribhadra considers Prajñāpanā to be an Upānga. But unlike Āc. Malayagiri he does not state that it is an Upānga of Samavāyānga. So, we cannot but conclude that the arrangement that a particular Upanga is attached to a particular Anga took place in the period of time that intervened between Ac. Haribhadra and Ac. Malayagiri.
We can call this commentary by a generic name 'avacūrnika' It is so because at one place Ac. Haribhadra says, 'alam atiprasangena avacūrņikāmätram etad iti'. (p. 28, 113).
There might have existed a commentary-short or long whatever it may be-even before Ac. Haribhadra wrote his Pradeśavyākhyā. And this commentary2 might be of the form of cūrņi. This surmise is made on the basis of the following observation. In Pradeśa-vyākhyā the explanatory passages that commence with the phrases like 'etad uktam bhavati', 'kim uktam bhavati', 'ayam atra bhāvārthah', 'idam atra hrdayam', 'etesim bhavana' are mostly couched in Prakrit and occasionally in Sanskrit also.
It is very difficult to determine as to who had written that cūrni. But it is possible that the author of that cūrni might have been Haribhadra's spiritual teacher. It is so because in the Pradeśavyākhyā we come across the expressions like 'evam tavat pūjyapădă vyācakṣate' (p. 75), 'guravas tu' (p. 118), 'iha tu pūjyāḥ' (p. 122), 'atra guravo vyācakşate' (p. 141, 147), 'guravo vyāvarnayanti' (p. 152).
Again, this much is certain that there existed before Āc. Haribhadra one or more commentaries besides this cūrni. This can be deduced from the fact that at so many places Ac. Haribhadra has recorded the explanations offered by others. Of course, we do not rule out the possibility, in some cases, of these explanations being quotations from commentaries on the works other than Prajñāpanā. But there are certain explanations which are definitely quotations from commentaries on Prajñāpanā. For this
1. For the detailed account of Āc. Haribhadra one may refer to 'Sama
darsi Ācārya Haribhadra.' 2. Ac. Malayagiri also mentions the Curņi, folios 269, 271
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
