Book Title: Jain Legend Vol 2
Author(s): Hastimal Maharaj, Shuganchand Jain, P S Surana
Publisher: Hastimal Maharaj Shugan C Jain P S Surana
View full book text
________________
c rya Bhadrab hu only. Though there was no mention of the author anywhere in Cheda S tra, at the beginning, middle or at the end, yet on the basis of the writings of the succeeding authors, it is evident from their commentaries that the author of the Cheda S tra s is undoubtedly the Caturda a Prvadhara crya Bhadrab hu only.
The commentator of Da a ruta Ska dha at the beginning of the commentary wrote “I salute the author of Da a ruta Ska dha, Kalpa and Vyavah ra S tra, who is the last rutakeval Mah i Bhadrab hu of congregation Gotra”.
Both the authors of Niryukti and Pamcakalpa Mah bh ya, described
c rya Bhadrab hu as the author of Da a ruta, Kalpa and Vyavah ra S tra s. In the Pancakalapa Bh ya, he was credited with the writing of even c rakalpa i.e. Ni tha S tra.
Thus, it is evident that the last rutakeval c rya Bhadrab hu, without any doubt, was the author of the Cheda Stras.
rutakeval Bhadrab hu is not the author of Niryukti
Now the foremost question arises whether rutakeval c rya Bhadrab hu was the author of the ten Niryuktis or was it some other c rya by the same name.
As a matter of fact, the seventh pontiff of the Jain order, Caturda a Prvadhara crya Bhadrab hu is different from Naimitik Bhadrab hu, the author of presently available Niryuktis. To prove that these two different great personalities are one and the same, few scholars cited the references of the ancient c ryas. Except for nt c rya, the scholars who considered that Caturda a Prvadhara crya Bhadrab hu was the author of Niryuktis did not present any argument in support of their stand. They simply stated that Caturda a Prvadhara crya Bhadrab hu Swm was the author of Niryuktis.
nt c rya, supporting his standpoint that only Caturda a P rvadhara Bhadrab hu was the author of Niryukti, put forward the argument that Bhadrab hu in his commentary of Uttar dhyayana mentioned the names and events of great souls of much later period. Based on the above, one should not have misgivings that the commentary on Uttar dhyayana was
146
