Date of Kundakundacharya

Author(s): M A Dhaky
Publisher: Z_Aspect_of_Jainology_Part_3_Pundit_Dalsukh_Malvaniya_012017.pdf

Page 14

200
M. A. Dhaky
largely of the cursory observations made by pioneering German writers on Jaina canonical literature. In the Chronology" section placed at the end of his booklet, The Religion of the Jainas (English version of the original by A. Sena, Calcutta Sanskrit College Research Series No. LII, Studies No. 31, Calcutta 1966, p. 36), he placed Kundakunda in the 2nd-3rd cent. A.D. Had Schubring investigated the problem in depth, his conclusion would have been very, very different.
4. Śramana Bhagavān Mahavira (Hindi) Jalor 1941, pp. 303-306. Also cf. his “Ācārya Kundakunda kā Sattā-Samaya", (Hindi), Sri Pattāvali Parāgasaṁgraha, Jalor 1966, pp. 100-107; and "Adhunika Digambara Samāja ke Saighataka Ācārya Kundakunda aur Bhattāraka Virasena," ibid., pp. 110-114.
5. "Introduction" (Hindi), Sanmati-prakarana, Ahmedabad 1963, middle portions.
6. My personal discussions with him. Also his long and penetrating discussion in his introduction (Hindi) to the Nyāyāvatāravārtika-vítti, Singhi Jain Series, Vol. 20, Bombay 1949, pp. 117-141. Therein he has demonstrated that the context of Kundakunda's works, when compared to Umāsvāti's is more advanced in terms of concepts as well as exposition. Upadhye, significantly, ignores these findings and in his own write up avoids all such engaging discussions, dismissing them all as cross-currents of thoughts of little chronological value (cf. his p. 122). Upadhye gives neither real reasons nor cites valid examples which would allow such a dismissal. Content is an important category of evidence.
7. Jaina Ontology, Lalbhai Dalpatbhai Series No. 31, Ahmedabad 1971, pp. 89, 95-97, & 132-135. Diksit was not only a very perceptive, but also an articulate among the Indian authors who discussed Jaina philosophy, ontology and metaphysics.
8. The lower limit for the date of Siddhasena Divakara depends on the date of Umāsvāti who apparently had flourished in the latter half of the fourth century A.D.
9. I have discussed and fixed the date of Samantabhadra in detail. The paper in Gujarāti will shortly appear in a separate congratulatory volume for Pt. Malvania containing all articles in Gujarati and to appear from Ahmedabad.
10. Pt. Sukhlal Sanghvi, Pt. Nathuram Premi, Pt. Yudhisthir Mimamsaka, and Pt. Kailashchandra Shastri date him to the fifth century. I have, at some length, discussed the "fifth century date" and shown it to be improbable in my paper "The Jaina Jinendra-buddhi," Indian History and Epigraphy, Delhi 1990, pp. 152-158.
11. For the discussion on the date of Akalankadeva, cf. Pt. Mahendra Kumar Shastri, "Introduction", Siddhiviniscaya-tika, Part 1, Kashi 1959, p 62. Before him