________________
CHAPTER 35]
• ICONOGRAPHY except the following, were golden in complexion : Candraprabha and Puspadanta were white, Suparsva and Päráva were greenish (harita), Munisuvrata and Neminátha were dark-blue and Padmaprabha and Vasupujya were red like coral or lotus. The same view is expressed by the Svetāmbara Avasyaka-Niryukti, and it may be safely presumed that this tradition dates at least from before the age of final separation between the two texts regarding image-worship
The different Tirtharikaras are identified with the help of lanchanas carved on or below their seats. Both the sects give lists of these recognizing symbols. However, they are not available in any early texts. None of the Aagams, por even the Kalpa-sūtra which gives the lives of the Jinas, the Niryuktis and the Cūrnis give a list of these cognizances. The Vasudevahindi (circa A.D. 500 or a little earlier), which gives accounts of several Tirtbankaras, makes no mention of these cognizances. Amongst the Digambaras, earlier works like the Varänga-carita (sixth century), the Adi-puräna of Jinasena (circa 750-830), the Uttara-purāņa of Guņabhadra (840), the Padmacarita of Ravişeņa (676), etc., do not give these lists. The Tiloya-pannatti does give a list, but the text, as it is available today, seems to have been tampered with by later authors.
A comparison of list of lanchanas of both sects shows that the points of difference are with regard to the cognizances of (1) the fourteenth Jina Ananta, who has the falcon-symbol according to Hemacandra but the bear according to the Digambaras, (2) of the tenth Jina Sitala, who has the srivatsa (Hemacandra) but the svastika (Tiloya-pannatti) or the śri-druma (Pratishasäroddhāra) according to the Digambaras, and (3) of Aranātha, the eighteenth Jina, who has the fish-symbols according to the Digambaras but the nandyävarta
Avašyaka-Niryukri, gdthās 376-377, Abhidhana-cintamani, 1, 49. The apparent difference in the complexions of Munisuvrata and Neminātha who are dark according to the Svetambara view and of Supäršva and Pārsva who are dark-blue according to the same sect is, to my mind, a negligible one since in different paintings the sbades selected differed, and the dark-blue of the Ay-Nir. could be harita in the Digambara sect, or dark could be dark-blue. As I have shown in my paper Vršākapi in the Rgveda', Journal of the Oriental Institute, VII, 1958-59, haria was used for various shades and the terminology for various finer shades was not known.
• The occurrence of the name of Bālacandra Saiddhantika at one place is one of the reasons for holding this view.
Tagara-kusumd according to the Tiloya-pannatti, 4, 605, tagara according to the Pratıştha-sároddhára. The editors of the former text have takep tagara-kusuma to mean 'fish' which is supported by the table of symbols based on the Kannada Digambara sources pubhished by T.N. Ramachandran, Tiruparuttikunram and its Temples, Bulletin of the Madras Government Museum, New Series, General Section, 1, 3, Madras, 1934, pp. 192-94.
469
