Arya Bhadrabahu

Author(s): M A Dhaky
Publisher: Z_Nirgranth_Aetihasik_Lekh_Samucchay_Part_1_002105.pdf and Nirgranth_Aetihasik_Lekh_Samucchay_Part_2

Page 16

Arya Bhadrabāhu
123
now lost?2, of the Church of Arhat Pārsva rather than of Arhat Vardhamāna and adopted for the composition of the Kalpa. Bhadrabāhu, it must be remebered, knew by heart the Pūrva texts of the Church of Arhat Pārsva as per the tradition.
Looking now at the mode of expression of the Vyavahāra, it is, in point of fact, and visibly, different from that of the Kalpa, although Bhadrabāhu is claimed to be the author of both the works. It also largely differs from the style of the agamas of the first three phases73. Moreover, the Vyavahāra, both in style and content, is heterogeneous in character, with chapters possibly of differing dates, details, and perceptions,
The text of the Kalpa as well as that of the Vyavahāra conceivably may have been modified at a few places and augmented or added to, or subtracted at some points of time in the past?5, a possibility which cannot be ruled out. Since both works also were included in the sacred treatizes of the Yāpaniya Sect, it may be concluded that they already were known and recognized as an authoritative part of the canon before the 2nd cent. A.D. in the Northern Nirgrantha Church?6. Supposing it can be established that the earliest portions of the two texts are indeed datable to the Maurya period, it would then raise some serious questions :1) Was Bhadrabāhu their author ? 2) If he were, did he lean toward the monastic discipline of the Church of Pārsva or, alternatively, did he sanction generous concessions for accommodating the mendicants and nuns of the Church of Parśva who, assumably, may have been progressively joining the Church of Arhat Vardhamana ? Since, as is believed in the tradion, he had mastered the 14 Purvas-arguably the āgamic books of the Pārsva's sect--there is a possibility that he was fully conversant with the Pārsvian monastic disciplinary code and, as a result, may have been influenced by it. If this surmise is accurate, it may, in turn, compel us to revise our views on Bhadrabāhu. The present discussion perhaps opens a door to what seemingly is an entirely unsuspected and uncharted area of investigation”. Of course, it will all depend on the definitive evidence, besides the presently known post-Gupta tradition, that the Kalpa and (the parts of) the Vyavahära were authored by Bhadrabahu.
The third work, namely the Daśāśrutaskandha olim Acāradaśā, both from the standpoint of style and content, is far more heterogeneous in composition and in content: and, for the style of a few of its chapters,