________________
Paramåtma-prakaša
are many striking agreements such as almost identical passages, the same quotations, similar illustrations and parallel method of discussion. So there is no doubt that the same Brahmadeva has commented on these two works. Brahmadeva always gives a literal explanation of the dohās sometimes without repeating the words of the text. His aim is to explain the contents, and in only one or two places he explains grammatical forms.? After the literal explanation, he gives some additional discussion rather in a heavy style; and here and there he quotes early. authors. He is quite at home in the application of various Nayas or view-points: and his enthusiasm for Niscaya Naya and naturally spiritual knowledge is very great. The commentary on P.-prakasa is not heavily loaded with technical details about Jaina dogmas like that on Dravyasangraha, whose contents were mainly responsible for this. But for this commentary of Brahmadeva. P-prakasa would not have been so popular.
Jayasena and Brahmadeva-The analysis, introductory remarks, the closing discussions and some other features of Brahmadeva's commentary remind us of Jayasena's commentaries. Brahmadeva closely follows Jayasena with whose commentaries he appears to be thoroughly conversant. Some discussions in the commentary of P.-prakasa are almost the same as those in the commentary of Jayasena on Pancastikaya; compare, for instance, P.-prakasa on II. 21 with Pañcastikaya on 23ff; Pp. on II 33 with P. on 152; and Pp. on II. 36 with P. on 146.
Brahmadeva's Date-Nowhere Brahmadeva informs us the age when he composed his works. 1) Daulatarāma (2nd half of the 18th century A.D.) bases his Hindi commentary on Brahmadeva's Sk. ka, il) Javaharlal has noted that śubhacandra, in his commentary on Kattigeyanuppěkkha (A.D. 1556 borrows much from Brahmadeva's Vștti of Dravyasaṁgraha. iil) Balacandra Maladhāre plainly refers to Brahmadeva's commentary; but the date of Balacandra cannot be settled on independent grounds, iv) in the Jesalmere3 Bhaņdāra there is a paper Ms. of Brahmadeva's Vitti of Dravyasamgraha copied in samvat 1485, i.e., A.D. 1428, at Mandāva in the reign of Rāj śri Cāndarāya. Thus these external evidences put a later limit to his period that he flourished earlier than 1428 A.D. We shall now see what chronological material we get from his works. i) Taking a review of the various quotations 1 Compare, for instance, Dravya-sangraha-vptti, pp. 53-54 etc., with P. prakasa com
mentary on II. 21; Ds. p. 63 with Pp. on II. 23; Ds. p. 129 with Pp. on 1. 9; Ds.
pp. 213-14 with Pp. on I 68; Ds. p. 216-16 with Pp. on II. 99, also II. 94. 2 For instance see his commentary on II. 25.
Catalogue of Mss. at Jeselmere, (p. 49. No. 15), G.O.S. Vol. XXI, Baroda 1923. There are some 92 quotations (only a few mentioning either the author or the work) of which I have been able to trace the sources of some 50. I am very thankful to my friend Pt. Jugalkishore who kindly traced for me about a dozen quotations. A list of these quotations is given in the Appendix.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
