________________
KĀRTIKEYANUPREKSA
The Bhavani-ramadhi prakaruna? is a short Apabhrama poem in six Kadavukas dealing with 12 Bhāvanās or Anuprekşiis. The author is Jayadevamani, the first pupil of Sivudevusūri; his age is not known, but it is highly probable tlıat he is later than Homacandra. His style is normal, now and then heavy with long compounds. He adds references to standard stories and illustrations from earlier literature (especially ten Drştāntas about the rurity of human life. The exposition is not quite systematie. In the first
davace 12 h oida Xhared, and then follow the illustrations and recounting of miseries in different births etc.
) USE OF THE TERM BHAVANA
The term bacorezi is nsed in various contexts in Jaina terminology; and it is interesting to note bow it cane to be used gradually in the sense of antprekci which it has practically replaced in later literature, especially in Hindi and Gujarāti.
In the carcina, II, 3rd Cilikā, the 15th lecture is called by the name Bhāvanā (which Jacobi translates us clauses and explains that they are sub-divisions of the five great rows). Every Mahávrata is attended by five Bhāpanās which more or less go to stabilise the practice of it. They are found in the Panha-vägarandim also; but the two accounts are not the same: here and there some differences are scen. Kundakunda gives these Bhāvanās in his Cáritbapchuda, associating the mainly with the Mabávratas. In the Muläcēra of Vaakera as well these Bhāvanās are mentional (V. 140 ete. ): the minor discrepancies in detail need some scrutiny. Valtakeru appeuls to the ponk to cultivate these bhāvanas vigilently so that the vows become perfect and without any breach (V. 146). In the 1.-sätra (VII, 3), they accompany Vratas in general: this usage continues in later literature.
1) Amula of the B. O. R. I, XI. 1, October, 1929.
2) The Editor, H. C. Modi, remarks thos: The Bharanga have been described as 12 in Āyaramanredit rataskand , Cülika ). But I have not been able to trace them there, The verses quoted by him are identical with those in the Propositoddham, 572-73.
3) A. C. SIN: A Critical Introduction to the Panditexigaranciana ( Würzburg 1936), pp. 18 ff, Dr. Ben obwerves thus in conclusion: The Bhāvanā mentioned by our text differently from the Ayära could not have been its own ortation but must have been current as such in the community, for otherwise the Panhay. would not have crijaved any authority. The introduotion #nd seceptance of gucl alterations in the rule of weeduct suurest some lapse of time since the age of the Ayāra. It may be that our text incorporates the details noi 49 enjoined scripturally but as understool popularly, in that case the luter date of these injunctions would be all the more evidenti' p. 32. It is vecessay lo study these lists frore various sources comparatively.
4) The ninth chapter of the Mütācira igaulled Anavara-bhāvanadbikára. It disousses ten topics which are not merely tupics of reflectiou but of practica as well.
