Agam 17 Upang 06 Chandra Pragnapti Sutra Chandapannatti Terapanth

Author(s): Tulsi Acharya, Mahapragna Acharya
Publisher: Jain Vishva Bharati

Page 60

angabāhya. The former is again twofold- Āvasyaka and Avasyaka-yyatirikta.
'The latter is again classificd as kálika and utkalika. Thus Pannavanā is Angabahya, Āvaśyaka-vyatirikta and Utkāliku. Nandi does not contain any reference to Ariga and Angubahya. In the latter part of the Agama age the interrelation between Ariga and Angabahya was determined. Accordingly, Prajñāpanā turns to be the upanga of Samayāyanga. On what basis this interrelationship was determined is a matter of research. It would have been all the more intelligible if Prajñāpanā had been recognised as Upanga of Bhagavati. Autbor and the Period of Composition
Pannavaņā is the sum and substance (nihsyanda) of Drslivada. We can thus infer that its subject matter has been derived from Drspivāda. Its author is Arya Syāma ? l!e was the 23rd in lineage from Acārya Sudharmásvámi He was a powerful våcaka in the tradition of the lineage of vacakas. He flourished in the 4th century of Vira-nirvana.
The date of composition of Pannavanā is probably between the year 335 and 375 of Vira-nirvana. Nandi mentions the 'Maháprajñāpanâ' which is now extinct. Both Mahaprajñāpanā and Prajñāpană are independent works. It cannot be said definitely whether the former is the progenitor of the latter or the latter contains any new topic. Among the twelve upângas, Prajñāpanā holds a unique position. We can guess from this that it was composed at the period when the Purvas were passing into oblivion and their remaining portions alone were in memory Satkhaņdāgama too came into existence at such a period. The remaining upāngas were composed in the period subsequent to the composition of Prajñāpanā. All this conjecture has been made on the basis of their subjectmatter. Umāsvāti flourished in 5th century of Vira-nirvana. His Tattvärthasutra mentions the sūtra "äryä mlecchāśca", 3 which must be based on the first 'pada' of Prajñāpanā. The clearcut idea and definition of 'arya' and 'mleccha' appearing there is not to be found elsewhere. On this basis Pannavaņā precedes the period of Umāsvāti.
Commentaries Many commentaries of Pannavaņā are available. They are as follows :Commentaries Granthāgra Autbor
Date 1. Pradeśa-commentary
3728 Haribhadrasūri 8th Cen. 2 Trriya-pada-Sangrahani 133 Abhayadevasúti First half of
12th Cen.
gautama.
1. Nandi, 73-77 2. Prajñāpana Vr. patra, 47/1, aryašvāmo yadeva granthàntareşu asaligă pratipadakam praśnabhagavannirvacanarūpam sūtramasri taderāgama bahumängtah pathati.
Prajnåpana Vr. Patra, 72; bhagavān dryasyamo'pi itthameya satram racayati. 3. Tattvärthasútra, 3/36