________________
Paramåtma-prakāša
I. 8, 11, 104, II. 1, 211 in TKM we lose all direct and indirectre references to Bhatta Prabhākara. Then some of the verses so absent mention non-Jaina deities like siva, Hari, Hara, Brahman, see for instance : 1.1 6, 108, 110, 118-119, 121, II. 99, 142, 145-6 & 200. I should not, however, ignore the fact that there are a few verses which have names of non-Jaina deities as above and are still retained by TKM-group, see for instaece : I. 109, II. 141. Some of the verses so left have a strong smell of non-Jaina doctrines, see for instance : I. 22 (Tântricism). I 41 (Vedānta), I. 65-66 (Sāmkhya) II, 99 (Vedānta) etc., though the application of various Nayas, i.e., the points of view, can explain them in accordance with Jaina tenets. Then some of the absent verses are extremely spiritual (I. 80-1, an attack on caste-exclusion; II. 84, futility of scriptures) and philosophical (I. 99-100) some-times to the extent of ignoring practical effects. Some of them are deeply mystical (II. 76, 157-65) and some highly cryptic (I. 43, 47, II. 44) Then some apparent repetitions and mechanical compositions that could be left without much loss of contents are also absent, for instance : I. 2-11, II. 49-52, II. 205-12. Some verses might have slipped through haplographical error, for instance I. 20. In spite of all these explanations there remain still many verses (I. 38, 44, 73, 91-2, 106, II. 5-6, 14-16, 70, 74, 86-7, 102, 114-16, 128-29, 134, 135-37, 138-40, 144 147, 152-55, 168, 178-81 185 & 197) for the absenee of which no apparent reason could be given. Some of these verses (1 33, 11.5-6, 114-16, 136, 139-40, 137, etc.) would bring credit to any spiritualistic poet. From all this survey I am inclined to believe that TKM-recension is a mutilated version, though the presence of some two additional verses shows some genuineness behind it. Perhaps a scrupulous commentator, possibly the author of our postulate K', rather of strong Jaina inclinations and poor mystic equipments prepared a personal digest of P.-prakaša now represented by TKM-group, by avoiding repetitions that were meant for Bhatta Prabhākara, by excluding verses containing references to non-Jaina deities and by ignoring extremely spiritualistic, mystical and cryptic verses. No doubt, Yogindu's Text has suffered inflation like anything; but it is impossible to believe that TKM-text is the same as that of Joindu, because TKM-group shows the absence of some nice verses and some highly mystical and above-sectarian utterances worthy of Joindu. That they are worthy of Joindu is quite clear from his another work, viz., Yogasāra where he uses the names of non-Jaina deities for his Paramāt. mana, and many of the ideas dropped by TKM-recension are expressed by Joindu3 in that work. 1 I, 138 and 168 do not suit the spiritualistic atmosphere of P-prakāša. 2 See Yogasära 9, 104 3 I have used both the forms of his name Joïn du and Yogindu. 4 Compare for instance, P.-prakasa II. 84 with Yogasära 52 etc.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
