________________
THE AGE OF LOGIC
159
alamārtanda was a commentary on Parikṣāmukha which in its turn was a systematic summary in an aphoristic form of the whole of Akalanka's teaching on the questions of epistemology. Vadideva himself wrote the corresponding aphorisms, calling them Pramānanayatattvaloka, and of course the commentary thereon, calling it Syadvādaratnakara. This stylistic similarity between Prameyakamalamārtanda and Syadvādaratnakara is as significant as was between Nyāyakumudacandra and Sanmatitikā. For it indicates that the Svetambaras were now not content with a piecemeal borrowing of the contemporary Digambara achievements in the field of philosophy. And that is of immense value. For as a result of a performance like that of Vadideva the whole of the Jaina camp could now speak an essentially identical language on the questions of philosophy. Of course Vadideva had studied not only Prabhācandra but also Vidyānanda as is evident from his borrowing of certain discussions directly from Vidyānanda. Moreover, he had made an independent study of important non-Jaina philosophies as is evident from his frequent quoting from them directly. As a result of a close study of Syādvādaratnakara it should be possible to determine as to how far the unique features of this text owe their origin to a reading of Prabhācandra, how far to that of Vidyānanda and how far to that of non-Jaina philosophers. But that will be a secondary piece of research work. For the most striking thing in this connection is the essential identity of the general framework used by Prameyaka malamārtanda and Syadvadaratnākara for arranging their respective materials. And not only that, even the materials in question are essentially identical. The result was that from now onwards there was going to be no discrepancy between a Svetāmbara author and his Digambara counter-part so far as their consideration of the contemporary philosophical problems was concerned. As has already been hinted now was the period when the Digambaras were a comparatively declining sub-sect of the Jainas while the Svetāmbaras a comparatively rising sub-sect. Hence Vadideva's wholesale borrowing of the Digambara philosophical achieveme opened the possibility of their enrichment in an atmosphere that was con. genial for such an enrichment. This was more or less evident in the case of all svetāmbara authors coming after Vadideva but it was most evident in that of Yasovijaya, the last of them. For through a mere study of Syadvā. daratnākara Yašovijaya was in a position to get at whatever there was of value in the Digambara masterpieces of the preceding centuries. Of course Yašovijaya was not content with just what Syadvādaratnākara provided him. For he also made an independent and thorough study of the pre-Vadideva Ŝvetāmbara authors, the series going as far back as the author of Apuyo. gadvarasūtra. This enabled him to incorporate in his writings a discussion of even such questions as were important and were discussed in early texts but were absent in Syādvādaratnākara simply because the Digambaras had no tradition of taking them up. But all this is a different matter. For what
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
