________________
English translation by George Baumann
extremes), there is usually the moderate (fraction of infinity), whereby (the well
known) six graduations can be differentiated. Where Sanghadāsa inserts the Nandi-passage almost verbatim, Jinabhadra renders it more systematically, particularly by his affixation of the summary gradation (minimal, moderate, maximal). Apparently, the conclusion of 496 is thought of as a commentarial addition of the (Nandi-) citation (cp. below, p. 48on.). Thus, it cannot be assumed that Jinabhadra had taken this gradation from the "Canon" (perhaps from the underlying Pūrva).*
Finally, two passages belong to the former sphere of thought that are important for the history of Jaina dogmatics as well as for the textual history of our Bhāsya.
The older Canon is fond of expressing something as completely as possible. For "teaching", e.g. there usually is a sequence of forms āghavei pannavei parūvei (ākhyāpayati prajñapo prarūp), which occasionally are further extended by damsei nidamsei uvadamsei. Correspondingly, one finds for "knows" the double expression jāņai pāsai, literally, "he knows and visualizes”, i.e. "he knows and clearly visualizes". Thus, knowledge and visualization combine here to a comprehensive term. On the other hand, understandably, knowledge and visualization are conceived also on their own and accordingly defined and classified independently of each other. In fact, the Canon distinguishes five types of knowledge and four types of visualization: I. ābhinibodhika- or mati-jñāna
1. cakṣur-darśana II. śruta-jñāna
2. acakşur-darsana III. avadhi-jñāna
3. avadhi-darśana IV. manahparyāya-jñāna V. kevala-jñāna
| 4. kevala-darśana In some cases later dogmatics have carried this contrast also into the mentioned collective term "knows and visualizes in such a manner that it attempts, in individual cases, partially to determine which visualizing might be meant; it also partially rejects visualizing completely and then places the negation na before pāsai (jāņai na pāsai). The older point of view is represented by the Bhagavatī, the younger by various authorities from Syāmārya up to Jinabhadra whose opinions are known to us through the Prajñāpanā, the Nandī-tradition and through the Višesāvaśyaka-bhāsya.
· The Bhagavatī (VIII 2 Ed. fol. 582-587) teaches: I. the abhinibodhikajñānin "knows and visualizes" āesenam savva-davvāim, etc. II. " attentive śrutajñānin
savva-davvāim, etc. III. - Avadhijñānin
jah. anantāim rūvi-davvāim, etc.
ukk. savvāim " " IV. " manahparyāyajñānin
anante anantapaesie khandhe, etc. V. " kevalajñānin
savva-davvāim, etc. In his chapter on "visualizing" (Prajñāp. XXX) Śyāmārya attributes visualizing only to the stages of knowledge II-V. From this, the Nandī, if not Syāmārya himself, draws the conclusion that jāņai na pāsai “knows but doesn't visualize” should be placed in I, and this Nandi-reading (Ed. p. 366 f.) is valid later on. In due course, [41] some also doubt the visualizing in II, and Jinabhadra has given this opinion more weight by adopting it so that the corresponding variant (jāņai na pāsai for jāņai pasai) in the Nandi and Bhagavatī commentaries has been fittingly noted (Nandi Ed., p. 502; Bhag. Ed. fol. 584").
* Of course, Hemacandra's paraphrase places the gradation at the citation! Silānka does not offer any explanation (below, 5232 .).
Cp. above, p. 23'n.
111
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
