History of Canonical Literature of Jainas

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

Page 80

REDACTION OF THE JAINA CANON
63
scriptures of the non-Jainas who were the co-inhabitants of the Jainas ?
Without any further dilation, I may add that this idiosyncrasy to which some of the Digambaras seem to have fallen a prey-the view that the lamp of the Jaina canon ceased to burn and illuminate from Vira Samvat 683 or so is a thing I shudder at. It has deprived us of the valuable legacy we could have got, by way of the preservation of at least some part or parts of the Jaina canon and its enrichment by way of its exposition at the hands of eminent Digambara scholars like Akalanka and others.
As regards the allegations viz. (1) that the Svetāmbara canonical literature is a patch-work and (2) that it is not genuine, I do not think it worth while to refute them; for, it appears that Vincent Smith's The Jaina Stūpa and other Antiquities of Mathurā and the learned opinions of Indologists can very well serve the necessary purposel. Moreover, I do not intend to enter into a controversy in this connection; but at the same time I am prepared to hear convincing arguments that may be advanced to support the allegations, and if satisfied, I shall identify myself with persons making these allegations. But, at least for the present I hold a contrary view, though I admit that some passages here and there appear to wear a colour of a patch-work. Under these circumstances, I shall therefore sum up this discussion by quoting the following lines from the late Prof. Jacobi's introduction to The Sacred Books of the East (vol. xxii, p. xxxix) :
“Devarddhi's position relative to the sacred literature of the Gainas appears therefore to us in a different light from what it is generally believed to have been. He probably arranged the already existing MSS, in a canon, taking down from the mouth of learned theologians only such works of which MSS were not available. Of this canon a great many copies were taken, in order to furnish every seminary with books which had become necessary by the newly introduced change in the method of religious instructions. Devarddhi's edition of Siddhânta is therefore only a redaction of the sacred books which existed before his time in nearly the same form. Any single passage in a sacred text may have been introduced by the editor, but the bulk of Siddhânta is certainly not of his making. The text of the sacred books, before the last redaction of the Siddhânta did not exist in such a vague form as it would have been liable to if it were preserved by the memory of the monks, but it was checked by MSS."
1. Cf. A His. of Ind. Lit. (vol. II, pp. 434-435).