Agam 30 Prakirnak 07 Candavejjhayam Sutra

Author(s): D S Baya
Publisher: Agam Ahimsa Samta Evam Prakrit Samsthan

Page 64

Anuyogadvāra, seem to have been quoted from elsewhere. It is so, because the relevant text or the chapters, containing these verses, are in prose while these verses are in poetry. Therefore, it would be proper to take these verses as quoted from other works. Many verses have been quoted in the canonical works by dubbing them as 'gāhā'. Another possibility is that these verses have been taken into Chandravedhyaka and other canonical texts from some other ancient works such as the purvas.
PREFACE : LXIII
As far as the question regarding the verses of Candravedhyaka found in the niryukti literature is concerned, first of all we will have to decide as to the period of composition of the niryuktis. If the niryuktis are considered to be the works of Bhadrabahu II, it is possible that these verses might have gone into them from the prakīrṇakas. But, some scholars are of the opinion that some niryuktis are older and are the compositions of Bhadrabāhu I. In such a case, there is a possibility that these verses have gone from the niryuktis into Candravedhyaka.
Within the prakīrņakas themselves, there are many verses which are available, in identical form, in different prakīrṇakas. On the basis of these identical verses, it is very difficult to decide as to which verse found its way from which prakīrṇaka to which other prakīrṇaka. Even if we leave out the more recent prakīrņakas and consider only those ones mentioned in the Nandīsūtra, we donot get any clues which enable us to decide as to which particular verse of a particular prakīrņaka has gone into which other particular prakīrṇaka.
As far as the question of works like Mūlācāra and Bhagavatī Ārādhanā is concerned, it can be said with surety that these verses have been taken into these works from the prakīrṇaka literature only, because in Mūlācāra the complete Āturapratyākhyāna prakīrņaka has been inserted. About the