History of Canonical Literature of Jainas

Author(s): Hiralal R Kapadia, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: Prakrit Text Society Ahmedabad

Page 220

THE CANONICAL EXEGETICAL LITERATURE
203 It may not be amiss to note that the three works viz. Ceiyavandanabhāsa, Guruvandanabhāsa and Paccakkhānabhāsa collectively known as Bhasyatraya and Ceïyavandanamahābhāsal are not commentaries, though the ending word Bhāsa occurring there seems to suggest that. It is however true that each of them is a small work written in Prakrta in gāthās.
As regards sīkās i.e. the Samskrta commentaries on the Āgamas, it may be said that there is at least one com. for almost every Agama. Further, all the Samskrta commentaries are not available now, and Haribhadra Sūri's commentaries are the first amongst the extant ones. That this Sūri had written two commentaries on Āvassaya and that the extinct com. was bigger than the available one, is an inference one can draw from its v. 2.2 He refers to one of these in his com. on Dasaveyāliya (pp. 2b, 4b, 9b, 15b, 19b, 20a etc.) as Avaśyakavišesavivarana. He has commented upon Jivājīvābhigama?, Paņņavaņā, Piņdanijjuttio, Nandi and Aņuogaddāra", too.
Next to him comes śīlānka Sūri (śīlācārya) alias Tattvāditya. He had commented upon the 1st 11 Angas as stated in Prabhāvakacaritra?,
1. This is a work by śānti Sūri who has not been identified up till now. 2. "Ef 2 78175: gitset fagfahrenia, H5214C I EFT EET: hud Tush I"
From this it follows that persons other than Haribhadra Sūri had cominented upon Avassaya. One of them is probably Jinabhata.
See Catalogue of Mss. at Jesalmere (p. 18). 4. See DCGCM (vol. XVII, pt. III, p. 484).
In the com. (p. 22) on this, Avasyaka vivarana and Nandivisesavivaraņa are
mentioned. These seem to be his own works. ___ “निर्वृतिकुलीनश्रीशीलाचार्येण तत्त्वादित्यापरनाम्ना वाहरिसाधुसहायेन कृता टीका परिसमाप्तेति"
-Ayāra with tīkā (p. 317a) Some identify this Tattvāditya with Tattvācārya, the dīksāguru of Uddyotana Sūri who completed Kuvalayamālā when one day of Śaka 700 was to elapse. This view is criticized by Anandasāgara Sūri in his Samskrta intro. (pp. 3-4) to Part II of
Visesão edited with Koryācārya's com. 7. See Abhayadevasūriprabandha (v. 104-105). This statement seems to be unreliable.
For, Abhayadeva Suri in his com. (p. 1) on Thāna says: "fafaeftatore tanierige futsal adiants qaynaut gaiso RUTGERI... PITTSRI...JAGUHETTO T " Besides Jinavallabha Sūri, too, says in Astasaptatikā that there are no commentaries on Thāna etc. composed by the Sūris of olden days.