Aspect of Jainology Part 3 Pandita Dalsukh Malvaniya

Author(s): M A Dhaky, Sagarmal Jain
Publisher: Parshwanath Vidyapith

Page 356

Reflections on the Jaina Exegetical Literature
satisfied by merely giving a very brief summary of the narratives, or rather by merely quoting the concerned Niryukti verses containing catch words of the respective narratives. For example, after mentioning in v. 3332 (which also happens to be the Niryukti verse No. 865) the eight names of religious heroes to be exemplified in respect of samayika, the Vifesa Avafyaka-bhasya disposes off the eight narratives in just 17 verses (3333-3349). The narrative of Cilatiputra is given here in just four verses (3341-3344), which, also, happen to be the Niryukti verses 872875.18 On the other hand, in the Avafyaka-cürgi the tale of Cilatiputra is fully and beautifully told in Prakrit prose on pp. 497.498, and this prose narration is followed by the same Niryukti verses (872-875) by way of its closure with an apt quotation.10 Hence the Vifes Avafyaka-bhagya cannot be said to be a mere versification of the prose tradition represented by the Avafyaka-curni. Second, the Vifes - Avasyaka-bhasya comprises Mulabhäşya, Bhāṣya and Višesabhäşya verses. Such composition cannot be said to be a single (planned) attempt at representing the old prose tradition. Third, when we go to extend such comparison of Bhasya and Cūrņi to some other similar cases, we find that the comparison does not stand at all The Dasaveyaliya-bhasa comprises 63 verses 30 and the Uttarajjhayaṇa-bhäsa comprises just 45 verses;21 how, then, can these stand comparison with the corresponding Cūrṇis which are pretty bulky prose texts? Hence Bhāṣyas cannot be said to be mere versification of the prose tradition represented by Cornis.32
Further, we can also say that Ţika and Bhasya cannot represent two parallel developments: Because, we have just seen in the foregoing how the Bhasya type of exegetical literature emerged and now it is essential to note that Tika changes. the Prakrit language of the Carni (already in prose) to Sanskrit as per the need of the time, which fact has been already indicated by the mixture of Sanskrit with Prakrit appearing in the Cūrai itself. And one's viewing in the Bhasya an attempt at continuing the old Prakrit tradition in a new form, applies only to the extraordinary commentaries, like the Vises Avasyaka-bhāṣya.
31
I find that the history of the genesis and growth of these four layers of exegetical literature that developed around the Jaina canonical texts, pemains condensed in a single aphoristic observation of Schubring 28: "The commentaries on the canonical texts represent the apprehensions of their time", on which I would com. ment as follows: An early nucleus of the canonical texts was provided with the Niryuktis-comprising memorial verses with catch words, leaving the other explanatory and instructional matter to the teacher. These Niryukti verses, along with the canonical Sutras, later required to be further explained, leading as it did to the composition of Bhasyas. Some Bhāṣyas, like the Avassaya (Avafyaka), the Kappa (Kalpa), and the Nisiha (Nifitha) had to indulge in further detailed explanations of philosophical, dogmatical and disciplinary matter and, consequently, they swelled to considerable size. The Cargis embarked on the prose style, almost assuming the written form for the old full oral exegetic tradition, which earlier was