Nirgrantha-1

Author(s): M A Dhaky, Jitendra B Shah
Publisher: Shardaben Chimanbhai Educational Research Centre

Page 58

THE DATE AND AUTHORSHIP OF NYAYĀVATÄRA
M. A. Dhaky
The famous work on the Nirganthist logic, the Nyāyāvatāra, is traditionally held by the Svetāmbara church as the work of the illustrious hymnist, dialectician, and epistemologist, Siddhasena Divākara (c. first half of the 5th century A. D.)'. Several scholars who seriously had considered the works of Siddhasena or had a need to discuss, or an occasion to refer to his age in their writings, took it for granted that the Nyāyāvatāra was his work.
The Nyāyāvatāra is cast in the form of a dvātrimśikā, rendered in the Anustubh metre; it contains 32 kārikās in Sanskrit. It was first commented upon by Siddharşi of Nivrttikula (c. A. D. 870-920)?. Jineśvara sūri, later looked upon as the patriarch of the Kharatara-gaccha, had selected the opening kārikā of the Nyāyāvatāra for composing his ślokavārtika (better known as Pramá-lakṣma or Pramāņa-laksana) with an autocommentary early in the second quarter of the 11th century A. D.' Likewise, śānti sūri, a disciple of Vardhamana süri (probably of the Pūrņatalla-gaccha), also chose the same kārikā of the Nyāyāvatāra and composed his vārtikas with an auto-commentary in c. A. D. 1100-11104. And Devabhadra, disciple of acarya Hemacandra of Harsapuriya-gaccha, wrote the țippana on the vivrtti of Siddharsi in early 12th century A. D. All above-noted scholiasts had belonged to the Svetāmbara sect.
The Nyāyāvatāra, though attributed to Siddhasena Diväkara, contains in its fabric no indication as to its authorship, nor does its style in general accord with Siddhasena Divākara's as its comparison with his available 21 (out of the original 32) dvātrimśikās indicates. While the dvātrissikās uniformly betray the characteristic style of Siddhasena, the Nyāyāvatāra, in terms of cadence, phrasing, modulation, verve, and disposition looks not only different but also seems inferior in several respects. The verses in fact betray variability in quality as well as style. The work, as a whole, lacks the kick, power, and brilliance of Siddhasena's characteristic expression. The Digambara church was aware of a few of the Siddhasena Divākara's dvātrimśikās as well as his other famous work, in Prakrit, the Sammai-payarana (Skt. Sanmati-prakarana), but is completely ignorant of the Nyāyāvatāra. In point of fact, no quotations from this work are noticeable in the works of the Digambara commentators and scholiasts, nor was it commented upon by any Digambara writer of the past. As regards quotations, the situation is virtually the same with the Svetämbara church as well. The earlier Śvetāmbara writers, who were aware of Siddhasena Diväkara's works and had copiously cited from his several, failed to quote from the Nyāyāvatāra. Among them Mallavādi in his svopajña-bhāsya (autocommentary) on the kārikās of his Dvādaśāra-nayacakra (c. mid 6th century A. D.), Jinabhadra gani kşamāśramana in his incomplete) auto-commentary (c. A. D. 588 or
Jain Education Interational