Dvadasharnaychakram Part 4

Author(s): Mallavadi Kshamashraman, Labdhisuri
Publisher: Chandulal Jamnadas Shah

Page 61

10
There is the following inscription on a 'panca tirtha metallic image in the temple of Lord Candraprabha in Jesalmere :
__ " श्री नागेन्द्रकुले श्रीसिद्धसेनदिवाकरगच्छे अस्माच्छुप्ताभ्यां कारिता संवत १०९६.
From this we learn (I) a 'Gaccha' named after 'Siddhasena Divakara Suri', was prevalent and (Il ) this 'gaccha' has arisen from 'Nagendra' (Naila ) Kula. It is natural that this image inscription may be lacking in names such as 'Vidyadhara' 'Vamsa 'Vidyadhara Kula' or "Vidyadhara gaccha. For a 'gaccha' named after "Siddhasena Divakara Suri' had become prevalent. Even then it is not probable that well-known Siddhasena Divakara may have flourished in the 'Nagendra' kula, since 'Kodiya' (koti) 'gana had started from 'Arya susthita Suri' and in his succession Naila branch (sakha) originated from 'Arya Nagila", pupil of 'Vajrasena'. pupil of Vajrasymin,
The author of 'Prabhavakacarital informs us that Nagendra' gaccha' had started from pupil of 'Nagendra'. In the 'sthaviravali (Pr. theravati, list of sthaviras) of Nandi 'Arya Skandia' is said to be pupil of 'Simahasuri of Brahamadipika' Sakha. This branch started from Aryasamita Suri who flourished in Vira Samyat' 584 and who was a maternal uncle of 'Vajrasvamin'. In his connection the author of 'Prabhavakacarita' remains silent after that this Samita Suri' belonged to the Vidyadhara amnaya'.
Looking to all this, a question arises, how can ‘anuyogadhara Skandila Suri of Brahamadipika branch be grand teacher of Divakara Suri? No author has said that Siddhasena Divakara Suri' or his guru 'Vrddhavadin Suri' belongs to to the Brahamadipika branch,
Pannyasa Kalyanavijayaji has said that Padalipta Suri' belongs to the Vidyadhara' kula named after Vidyadhara, pupil of Vajrasena'. But it is reasonable to believe that 'Sthavira Nagahastin' belongs too 'Vidyadhara' branch which originated from Vidyadhara Gopala.' pupil of
Susthika' and 'Supratibaddha', a couple of pupils of Arya Suhastin. Ancient S'akhas have been named in course of time as Kulas and Kulas as 'Gacchas, This very things has occurred even in the case of Vidyadhara''gaccha' of 'Nagahastin Suri. Consequently there seems to be no harm in case 'Padalipta Suri' is said to belong to 'vidyadhara' kula or Vamsa. Hence there is no ground for doubting the following statement occuring in a colophon of Girar, dated as Vikrama Samvat 150:
Vrdhavadin Suri flourished in the ‘amanya' (Vamsa) of Padalipta Suri.
The author of Prabhavakacarita has cited this very colphon as an authority. So it is not justifiable to doubt it. Another point is that Nagarjuna who is a layman pupil of Padalipta Suri and who is well-known as 'Yogasiddha is different from Nagarjuna mentioned in the Sthaviravali of Nandi. How can (the name of) a householder be mentioned in Sthaviravali ?
The 'Guru' of venerable Padalipta Suri, is not Nagahastin but he is none else but Arya Khaputa Suri. Padalipta Suri is referred to as 'Vacaka' in the Curni (Caruni) of Kalpa' sutra). Further in Nandi it is said that Nagahastin belongs to "Vacaka vamsa. So Padalipta Suri must be pupil of Nagahastin. An attempt is (no doubt) made to prove that Padalipta Suri is pupil of Nagahastin, by citing Nandi' as an authority. But this attempt is unwarranted. For the meaning of the following sentence occuring in Nandi' (V. 30) is simply this that Nagahastin Suri belongs to 'Vacaka' vamsa and not that this 'vamsa originated from him :