Nyayavatara and Nayakarnika

Author(s): Siddhasena Divakar, Vinayvijay, A N Upadhye
Publisher: Jain Sahitya Vikas Mandal

Page 25

xxiv
number of reasons. By being over-dogmatic and assertive one only blocks the channels of further research.
i) The Prabandha sources which include the Nyāyāvatāra among the Drā.s cannot help us on the common authorship of the Sanmati and Nyāyāvatāra, because they do not mention at all the former in the traditional account about Siddhasena Divākara.
ii) Pt. MALAVANIA informs me that Haribhadra, in his Așțaka, quotes the Nyāyāvatāra, 2, by referring to its author as Mahāmati. Elsewhere, however Haribhadra speaks plainly about the author of the Sanmati as Divākara and Srutakevalin.
iii) There is a commentary of Haribhadra on the Nyāya-pravesa (of Dinnāga) and there is a Țippaņa of Devabhadra on the Nyāyāvatāra, but the said-to-be existing commentary of Haribhadra on the Nyāyāvatāra has not come to light. The evidence put forth, in this regard, is very much undermined, if critically scrutinised: its granthāgra, given by the Brhatsippaņaka, namely, 2073 Ślokas, is identical with that of the Vivrti (in its printed eidition) of Siddharși. These Mss. of the Vivrti belong to Pattan, where, as claimed, the Mss. of Haribhadra's commentary are not traced.
iv) The Nyāyāvatāra, Nos. 4 and 9, are common with the Şaļdarsanasanuccaya (No. 56) and Ratnakarandaka (No. 9). Here the question is not so much of chronological priority of one author over the other as that of genuineness of these verses in the respective texts based on Mss. evidence and the context in discussion. If at all these are interpolations, the claim of the Nyāyāvatāra being a Dvā gets shaken.
v) The opinions of JACOBI and VAIDYA on the age of the Nyāyāvatāra are not fully met with: what is