History of Canonical Literature of Jainas

Author(s): Hiralal R Kapadia
Publisher: Shardaben Chimanbhai Educational Research Centre

Page 165

148
A HISTORY OF THE CANONICAL LITERATURE OF THE JAINAS
their 6 Argas,' some of them cannot be at all identified. Further the dates of the rest are not still finally fixed. So I shall make a tentative suggestion in this connection as under :
By Bhāraha and Rāmāyana* are meant the two well-known Indian epics viz. Mahābhārata and Rāmāyana. It seems at the time of the composition of Anuogaddāra, the former was known as Bharata which later on went on increasing in size on account of the various verses interpolated therein from time to time and which finally received the name of Mahābhārata. As stated in Anuogaddāra (s. 25) Bhāraha was read and heard in the morning and Rāmāyana in the afternoon.
Bhīmāsurukka orokkha2 may be taken to be Bhimăsura or Bhimăsurākkhyāna. Its subject and authorship are not known up till now.
Kodillaya is equated with Kautilya's Arthaśāstra. Its date is not fixed. Some take it to be 326 B.C. and some even suppose it to be so very late as 400 A.D.
Ghodayamuha? is supposed to be some work on kāmaśāstra by Ghotakamukha, a predecessor of Vātsyāyana.
Sagadabhaddiyā stands for śakațabhadrikā. Nothing can be said about this work except that its title is in plural.
Kappāsia can be rendered as Kārpāsika or Kalpasika in Samskrta. In the former case it may be a work dealing with cotton and in the latter case with permissible food etc.
Nāgasuhuma stands for Nāgasūksma. It may have something to do with serpents or the Nāga tribes. Its date etc. are unknown.
Kanagasattari (Sk. Kanakasaptati) can be equated with īśvarakrsna's Sankhyakārikā which is also known as Sankhyasaptati. It is based upon
1. Hemacandra Sūri in his com. (p. 36") on Anuogaddāra (s. 41) says :
"चत्वारश्व वेदाः सामवेद-ऋग्वेद-यजुर्वेदाऽथर्वणवेदलक्षणाः साङ्गोपाङ्गाः, तत्राङ्गानि शिक्षा १ कल्प २ व्याकरण ३
छन्दो ४ निरुक्त ५ ज्योतिष्कायन ६ लक्षणानि षट्, उपाङ्गानि तद्व्याख्यानरूपाणि तैः सह वर्तन्ते इति साङ्गोपाङ्गाः।" 2. See p. 12 fn. (here filiftsi is a misprint; it should be draftsi) 3. In p. 12 fn. and in D. C. J. M. (vol. XVII, pt. II, p. 292), too, there is mention of
Khodamuha instead of Ghodayamuha. So it may be some unknown work. 4. He is referred to in Arthaśāstra. 5. There is a variant fufiri in D. C. J. M. (vol. XVII, pt. II, p. 292). * See page 211 of addition. 4 See page 211 of addition.