________________
VI ]
THE CANONICAL EXEGETICAL LITERATURE
195
rence to games viz. atthāvaya and caiiranga, to gambling, and to samāsa, paheliyā and kuhedaga. So far as the date of this Cunni is concerned, only its lower limit can be fixed; for, Śricandra Sūri', devotee of Dhanesvara Sūri, pupil of Silabhadra Sūri has composed a com. on it in Samvat 12272. As regards its upper limit, it is certainly posterior to the date of the composition of Jīyakappa by Jinabhadra Gaņi.
As regards the remaining Cunnis, I may simply say that those on Āyāra, Sūyagada and Pañcakappa are described by me in D. C. J. M. (vol. XVII) whereas the Cunnis on Jīvājīvābhigama, Ohanijjutti and Pakkhiyasutta are noted in Jaina Granthāvalī etc., and one on Mahānisīha in Catalogue of Mss. at Jeselmere (p. 23).
It may be remarked that the Cunnis on various Agamas are said to be belonging to a period running from the 4th century to the 8th of the Vikrama era.
Before dealing with Tīkā we may note that out of the terms Nijjutti, Bhāsa and Cunni, the first does not appear to have been used for a com. on any one of the non-Āgamika works. Such is not however the case with the terms Bhāsa and Cunni; for, they are used for other works, too, though seldom. As the typical examples may be mentioned the following works for which Bhāsa is composed:
(1) Kammatthaya, (2) Sadasīi, (3) Sayaga, (4) Sāddhasayaga and (5) Sittari.
Out of these works, there is a Cunni for all except the first and the second. Further there are Cunnis for Kammapayadi, Samanovāsagapadikkamaņa3 etc. Thus it will be seen that the non-Agamika works of which the commentaries are styled as Bhāsa and Cunni are few and far between, and at least, so far as the Svetāmbara literature is concerned, these terms seem to have been used for works of sufficient antiquity.
1 Before he became Sūri, he was known as Pārsvadeva Gani. 2 See its printed edition (p. 59). 3 See D. C. J. M. (vol. XVII, Pt. III, pp. 290-293).
