Kalplata Vivek

Author(s): Murari Lal Nagar, Harishankar Shastry
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 26

17 Prof. Kapadia actually takes him for a Jain as is clear from his mention of Kalpalata-viveka along with other Jain Sanskrit works. This is natural, as he acquiesces in this attribution. If we do not find positive grounds for accepting Vibudha-mandira-gani to be the author of Viveka, we have to depend on other available evidence. Generally the prefatory mangala verse of a work provides a clue to the creed of its author. Unfortunately, Viveka does not have its separate mangala, as already pointed out. Viveka quotes (at P. 1, l. 16 ) a Prakrit verse 2 extoling Jainism, which may prima facie indicate that the author of Viveka was a Jain. It is possible that he was one; yet the following facts should be noted : (i) He quotes illustrations from Mimamsa every now and then, even where several "Brahmin commentators on K. P. under similar circumstances do not do so.3 (ii) While explaining the Mimamsa Sutra, "gunanan ca pararthatvat asambandhah samatvat syat," he quotes illustrations from $abarabhasya. He differs here from Hemacandra, who does not even quote this sutra, in the same context, even though he generally borrows from Mammata. He gives another rule to the same effects which does not even smack of Mimamsa.6 (iii) The ill. of Agama-viruddha' in Bbamaha's Kavyalamkara offends against Brahmana Agama, which prohibits drinking of Soma for all other castes than Brahmins. This ill, is not found in Viveka, yet it should not be an indication of its author's religious creed inasmuch as Viveka merely comments on Kalpalata, whose author, as noted above, was mostly a Jain. These are some of the points worth considering before we come to any definite decision. Yet it is quite probable that he was a Jain. A Survey of the Contents : It has been already pointed out that Kalpalata is divided into four chapters or sections (paricchedas): 1. Though this is not always a conformatory test. In the case of Bhamaha, for instance, the mangala verse, is a subject of controversy. According to some it refers to the Buddha, according to others to Lord Siva. Probably he extols Siva here. 2. जिणधम्मो मोक्खफलो सासयसोक्खो जिणेहि पन्नत्तो / PHTEES sustai fafaqad a 11 ( Viveka P. 1, 1. 16). 3. e. g, while explaining a fagyit &c. (P.3, 1. 2 ff.), (P.235, 1, 11 ff.), & so on. 4. 319133 areas of Jaimini. (vide Viveka P. 19, 1. 25). 5. 'अङ्गाङ्गिनोरेव हि यत्तदर्थयोः सम्बन्धो न स्वङ्गानां यदर्थानामन्योन्यम् ' इति नियमेन / H. K. S. A, C. P. 233; 1. 22. 6. Contrast also माणिक्यचन्द्र' संकेत (P. 147) where मीमांसा is not even referred to. 7. at dagtatai 5271527 Tahta fagarg etc. 1 B. K, L, IV. 49. 3