Nandisutt and Anuogaddaraim

Author(s): Devvachak, Aryarakshit, Punyavijay, Dalsukh Malvania, Amrutlal Bhojak
Publisher: Mahavir Jain Vidyalay

Page 213

... [68]...
Thus we find some points of similarity between the Vedic system of exposition and the Jaina system of exposition (anuyoga). But when we compare the Jaina system of exposition with the Buddhist one (aṭṭhakatha), we find many points of similarity between the two. As we have already seen (sū. 604), the upodghataniryuktyanugama consists of 26 dvāras-points to be discussed. Similarly, the mātikā occurring in the beginning of an aṭṭhakatha enumerates many of these points which the author is required to discuss. The mātikā in question is as follows.
vuttam yena yadā yasmā dhâritaṁ yena cābhatam / yatthappatiṭṭhitam cetametam vattvä vidhim tato //47
The Buddhists apply the term bahirnidäna-katha to that part of exposition wherein the discussion is conducted taking each and every term from this mātikā. As a matter of fact it is here that the upodghata of the work is set out. That is, regarding the adivakya of the śăstra, it clearly answers the questions as to who preached it, as to when he preached it, as to why he preached it, etc.48 And we know that the answers to the questions of this type are found in the upodghataniryukti, a constituent of anuyoga (the Jaina method of exposition). The Jaina and Buddhist commentarial literature follows the method of explaining the sutrartha only after the upodghāta of this type has been written down.49 Moreover, we find in the Buddhist system of exposition the practice of classifying the Buddhist scriptures,50 Similarly, in the Jaina system of exposition they follow the practice of classifying the śruta at the outset and also that of determining the place of the concerned sutra in the total field of Śruta. After having classified the Buddhist scriptures, the Samantapāsādikā, which is a commentary on the Vinayapitaka, etymologically explains the term 'vinaya' (p. 18) and demonstrates as to how it is compounded with the term 'piṭaka' (p. 20). In other words, it explains the title of the sastra which it is going to expound and explain. This same method has been followed by the author of the Anuyogadvarasutra when he, in the beginning, discusses the various senses (nikṣepas) of the title Avaśyakaśrutaskandha (Anuyogasū. 7). Again in the Anuyogadvära we meet with the three divisions of the Agama, viz. sūträgama, arthāgama and tadubhayāgama (su. 170). Similarly, a päli aṭṭhakatha mentions four divisions of the Buddhist scriptures, viz. dhamma, attha, desanã and pațivedha. They are explained as follows:
47. Samantapāsādikā, p. 6
48. इदं वचनं केन वुत्तं, कदा वुत्तं, कस्मा वुत्तं ।
49. Anuyoga Su. 605 ff.; Samanta., p. 92
50. Samanta. p. 16