________________
22
INTRODUCTION
From our point of view, it is significant that Muni-sundara, while mentioning the two important works of Gunaratna, referred also to Gunara. tna's vast learning and great skill in Tarkasastra (logic, Navya-nyaya) as well as in the art of philosophic debate (cf. pradadhatas Tarkeşu cacaryakam and Vade te 'tra jayanty in verse 83 above). It is also indicated that he overcame the pride of many orthodox (Vedic) logicians.
Our Guņaratna, commentator on the four chapters of NSD, must be identified with this third Gunaratna. The other two Gunaratnas apparently did not study any logic or Tarkasastra (or Vada-sastra ). Thus, it would be impossible for them to write a learned commentary on such a techni. cal text as the NSD.
Apart from the Gurvāvali account, there is also further evidence for the third Gunaratna's deep knowledge of Tarkasastra or Nayya-nyaya. Vadıpdra's Mahavidyāvidambana is undoubtedly a text belonging to the early period of Navya-nyāya. This is further proved by the fact that Manikantha, a reputed Navya Naiyāyika, devoted the last chapter of bis Nyāyaratna to the discussion of the Mahavidya type of inference. Vadındra of South India (1210-47 A. D.) mentioned also that Tärkikas (= Navya-naiyayikas) like Śivāditya Misra tried to establish the validity of the Mahavidya type of inference. It was Bhuvanasundara, a Jaina scholar and a pupil of our third Gunaratna, who wrote an excellent commentary on Vadjadra's Mahavidya-vidambana called Mahavidya-vidambana-tiku (printed along with Vadiadra's text in the Gaekwad Oriental Series no. 12). Bhuvana-Sundara referred to his teacher Gunaratna in the opening verses as follows:
“Tarkadigranthavişaye yatkiñcij jña yate mayal tatra Śri-Gunaratnahva-gurūnām vag-vijrmbhitam/" ("The little that I know about the texts on Tarka etc. is simply the verbal explantion of my teacher called Sri Gunaratna."
The learned commentary of Bhuvanasundara bespeaks of his excellent knowledge and understanding of the Navya-nyāya techniques and methodology. Thus, his teacher Gunaratna must certainly have been an expert on Navya-nyāya.
Gunaratna in his şad-darśanasamuccaya-tika supplied two independent lists of older Nyāya-Vaiścșika authors. It is significant that he mentio. ned neither Śaśadhara nor Gangesa in this connection. The latest important author he mentioned was Śri-va labhacārya, the author of N yayalilavati. This shows that in 1411 A. D. Gangesa's fame did not extend outside Mithila and Bengal. It is probable that Gunaratna studied Sasadhara and commented upon only four chapters of NSD after he finished his Şad-dars.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
