Prashamratiprakaran

Author(s): Umaswati, Umaswami, Yajneshwar S Shastri
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 26

9
and it seems that no Digambara has commented upon it. Except for these two commentaries, unfortunately, other commentaries are not available at present, but their existence is inferred from the colophon
42
given at the end of Haribhadrasuri's commentary on Prasamarati. But no special profoundity is found in these two existing commentaries. The essential qualities of a genuine commentary especially, critical insight of textual explanation, alternative interpretations, the supplimentary discussions, standard quotations and similies are absent in these commentaries.
COMMENTATOR HARIBHADRASŪRI: (12 A. D.)
This Haribhadrasuri is not the same individual as the distinguished erudite writer, known as Yakinisūnu Haribhadra, who flourished in circa 8th Century A. D. He is also different from that Haribhadra (1216 V. S. 1160 A.D.) who is the author of Neminahacariu in Prakrit, and who belonged to Vadagachha and was a pupil of Sricandrasuri. The colophon (1-2) given at the end of the commentary on Prasamarati by Haribhadra himself tells us that le was a pupil of Jinadeva who was a disciple of Devasuri and this commentary is composed after going through all other commentaries existing before him, during the king Jayasimha
43
deva's rule at Aṇahilapura Patan in V. S. 1185. From this colophon we learn that this commentator Haribhadra flourished in the first half of the 12th Century A. D. and there were many commentaries on Prasamarati already composed prior to the period of this commentator.
At the beginning of his commentary Haribhadra gives most valuable information about the author of Prasamarati by stating that Umāsvāti was a great logician, Acarya, Vacakamukhya, author of five hundred treatises and glory of the entire Svetambara family. His father's name This commentator divides this was Svati and Uma was his mother. book into 22 chapters according to the subject-matter treated in it.
44
Haribhadra's commentary is very lucid and simple, but satisfied with giving only the literary meaning of the verses. There are no additional philosophical discussions which can be distinguishedly pointed out nor are there any standard quotations from earlier works. Very few passages from Agamas are quoted, here and there, and the commentator's aim seems to be limited to giving literary meaning of the texts. COMMENTARY BY AN UNKNOWN AUTHOR :
Yet another commentary with Avacurņi by an unknown author appears to be older than Haribhadra's commentary and is more elabo rate in its nature. This commentary, in addition to verbal explanations