Book Title: Jambu Jyoti
Author(s): M A Dhaky, Jitendra B Shah
Publisher: Kasturbhai Lalbhai Smarak Nidhi Ahmedabad

Previous | Next

Page 207
________________ Acārya Vijayasilacandrasūri discernible in other works of Haribhadrācārya and in the Pañcasūtra, as also the similarity of linguistic usages involving संस्कृतसम and संस्कृतभव words as stated above, positively proves that the work in question is composed not in Ardhmägadhi but in Prakrit. 196 Jambu-jyoti Also, the argument advanced by Kulkarni that "The treatise in question is in Ardhamägadhi prose and so it is not written by Haribhadra süri because his other treatises are in Prakrit" hold no water. Is it not possible that the same author can employ different languages and different dictions? Is it not possible that the same author can write in versified form as well as in prose ? To the contrary, this situation indicates to a profound and highly erudite genius possessing the knowledge of several languages. If a competent Gujarāti or Mahārāṣṭrian poet/ author can write prose/poetic literature in other languages such as Hindi, English, and so forth as he would in his own native tongue, then what obstacle lies in the way in believing that a master scholar like Haribhadra sūri can write works in different varieties of Prakrit ? 7. The second point of importance is that the Pañcasūtra probably is believed to have been the work of Cirantanācārya and until now the tradition continues that the name of the 'Cirantanäcärya' is unknown. Now, a question arises: This Cirantanācārya is inevitably considered to be f (ancient) for us even today and, therefore, we can take it for granted that, he perhaps may be believed to be unknown even in the past centuries. But how can it be believed that this Cirantanācārya and his name might be unknown to Acarya Haribhadra sūri? Kulkarni believed that this Cirantanācārya might have flourished a century or more before Haribhadra sūri65. And if we are to proceed on the line that the Pañcasutra is a postcanonical composition, we must accept the above inference of Kulkarni. Could it be consistently rational that the name of Cirantanācārya, who might have flourished a century or two before Haribhadra sūri may be an author unknown or unfamiliar to Haribhadra süri ? Definitely not. Like this work, its author also (if he were a different person) cannot be unknown to Haribhadra sûri and had he known the author of the original text, he would not have remained silent about his authorship and unhesitatingly revealed his name. This consideration once again leads us to believe that Haribhadra sūri himself was the author of the sutra-work. Jain Education International For Private & Personal Use Only www.jainelibrary.org

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448