________________
112
M. A. Dhaky
Jambū-jyoti
is indebted, mainly indeed, to the aforenoted work for its information on Bhadrabāhu namely the Kahāvali and, to some extent, to the Tirthāvakālika and the Avaśyaka-cūrni, though for a few details, Hemacandra also may have consulted one or two other concise textual sources, including perhaps a Southern one.
Southern Nirgrantha Sources on Bhadrabāhu Unlike Northern and, importantly, the Southern sources also include epigraphical. Among the literary works—what have been looked upon by Western (particularly German) scholars as secondary, substitute, or surrogate āgamas, theĀrādhanā of Śivārya (c. early 6th cent.)22, and the Tiloyapannatti, (Trilokaprajñapti, assigned to c. mid 6th cent. A.D.)23 are the earliest to have a bearing, in a small measure though, on Bhadrabāhu. Next comes the Harivamsa-purana of Jinasena of Punnāta Sangha (A.D. 783)24, the Dhavalā-tīkā of Svāmī Vīrasena of Pañcastūpānvaya (completed A.D. 816)25, as also the Ārādhanā-Kannada-tīkā (popularly known as Vadda Ārādhane26), now ascertained to be a work of Bhrājisnu (c. A.D. late 9th or early 10th cent.])27, and the Brhat-kathākośa (A.D. 931) of Harisena28 (who, too, like Jinasena, was a monk of the Punnāta Sangha29). All of these, in the Southern context, relatively are older and more useful among literary sources. Incidentally, also theBhāvasangraha of Pt. Vāmadeva (c. 16th cent.), the Bhadrabāhu-carita of Ratnanandi (c. 16th cent. A. D.) 30, the Munivamśābhyudaya of Cidānanda-Kavi (A. D. 1680), and the Ratnāvalīkathākośa of Devacandra (A. D. 1838)* which contain overtly sectarian material and which, from their particular standpoint, orientation in thinking, liking, and hence the attitude adopted and predilections set, has been considered authoritative and used by some Digambara Jaina scholars.
As for the the epigraphical domain, it is restricted exclusively to Karnataka and, the earlier records there, happen to be the inscription no. 1 (c. A. D.600)31 as well as no. 24 (c. mid 7th cent. A. D.) 32 at the Cikkabeta or Candragiri, Sravanabelgola, are more ancient and, to a large extent, also crucial. Also are the two inscriptions from some site in the Srirangapattanam taluq (c. A. D. * The first, the third, and the fourth work, all very late, were not available to me for
consultation. But, from their content known through others' writings, they all are, like Ratnanandi's work, highly sectarian.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
