________________
(inference) and Āgama (verbal testimony), refers to the old Šānkhya System. While mention of four Pramanas including Upamana (comparison) belongs to Naiyayikas. It clearly shows that by the end of c. 5th A.D. the concept of Pramana as an independent concept was not developed in Jainism. The first work which elaborately deals with the Pramanasastra is Siddhasena's Nyayavatara. The period of Siddhasena Divakara is fixed as c. 4th - 5th A.D. Nyayavatara mentions three Āgamic divisions of Pramana, i.e., perception, inference and verbal testimony (Agama). Though Siddhasena has expressed briefly the Jaina opinion on the Nyaya-sastra of Šānkhya and Nyaya but he has followed mostly the old tradition accepted by Jaina Āgamas. At some places he has only revised the definitions of Pramana of other schools on the basis of Jaina theory of non-absolutism (Anekāntavāda).
Nyayavatara clearly follows the Āgamic tradition, as far as the description of Pramana is concerned. It, nowhere, mentions the later developed concept of Smrti (memory), Pratyabhijna (recognition) and Tarka (indirect proof: Tarka is not by itself, a source of valid knowledge, though it is valuable in suggesting hypothesis which leads indirectly to right knowledge) as Pramana. This proves that Nyayavatara is undoubtedly an ancient text compiled by Siddhasena Divakara. After Nyayavatara, the literary works which discuss the concept of Pramana are Pujyapada's Sarvarthasiddhi (c.6thA.D.) of Digambara tradition, Siddhasenagani's commentary on Tattvārtha- Bhāsya(c. 7th A.D.) and Haribhadra's Anekāntajayapatakā (c. gth A.D.) of Svetambara tradition. In these works there is no trace of Pramana like Smriti etc. This concept is discussed for the first time in the works of Akalanka (c. 8th A.D.) and Siddharsi's commentary on Nyayavatara (c. 9th A.D.) of Digambara and Svetambara traditions, respectively.
177 Jainism and its History
