Collected Research Papers in Prakrit and Jainology Vol 02

Author(s): Nalini Joshi
Publisher: University of Pune

Page 96

22nd Tīrthankara Aristanemi. Haribhadra, in his Dhūtākhyāna mentions, "HRETHRU yas' and not
otherwise.
2] Rāmāyaṇa (TRY)
Vimalasūri's Paumacariyam is the first Jaina version of Rāmāyaṇa (3rd 4th cen.A.D.). It means that DVG. knows Paumacariyam. Thus, the norms of mithyāśruta and samyak-śruta laid down by DVG., Vālmīki Rāmāyana is mithyāśruta but Vimala sūri's Rāmāyana is samyak-śruta.
3] Ābhītāsuraksa (Enthryce ?)
This name of the text is found in Anuyogadvāra (49), Nandi (72), Vyavahārabhāsya (part 3 132), Gommatasāra (Jivakānda p.117) and Lalitavistara (12.33 Yell--124, p.108) with a lot of variant readings viz. हंभीमासुरुक्कं, हंभीमासुरुक्खं, भीमासुरुत्तं, भीमासुरुक्खं, दंभीमासुरक्खं, भंभीयमासुरक्खं, आभीयमासुरक्खं etc. There is a lot of controversy about the Sanskrit version of the text. Dr.J.C.Jaina and Dr.Mohanlal Mehta explain it as, "a heretical (laukika) work by Bhimāsura."
I personally prefer the Skt. chāyā 317 tahita'. According to me it is probably the second version of Caraka Samhitā ascribed to Drdhabala, an Ayurvedic text which is based on the protection (raksa) of life (āsu) for them who are very anxious (ābhāta) about the well-being of their life.
In the whole Jaina Prakrit Literature, views about cikitsa and pañcakarma are reflected, in three stages - first the denial, then a little reconciliation and at the end Jainaification of Ayurvedic texts. In this perview 37144te' could be an Ayurvedic text.
4] Kauțiliya (wolfsu)
The name Kodillaya certainly suggests Kautilīya Arthaśāstra. DVG. generally prefers the name of the text and not the author. Here, it means, 'the science of crookedness i.e. the science of
polity'. We get ample references of Canakya in Jaina literature from 4" cen.A.D. upto 15" cen.A.D. Jainas generally prefer the name 'Cāņakya' and very rarely "Kautilya'. It is in real sense a śruta because the views of the predecessors are often mentioned in Arthaśāstra. At the time of DVG., the text was popular as Kautilyaka and not as Arthaśāstra.
Many Indologist and Sanskritists like Hivargaokar, R.D.Karmarkar and Durga Bhagvat have mentioned that a certain sense of censure or dishonor towards Cāņakya is seen from this passage of Nandi. If we scrutinize the Canakya-narratives in Jaina literature a high regard is seen towards Cāņakya especially for his Prāyopagamana death. If we interprete the mithyā-śruta-passage in the light of DVG.'s remarks, and Cānakya's esteemed position which is reflected in the narrative literature, we come to the conclusion that considering Cāņakya's attitude towards the larger good of the society, his text should not be totally dismissed as a mithyāśruta. Many of the Jaina Ācāryas
described Cānakya as +371472f4T
' - who achieved the highest goal of human life.”