Prashamratiprakaran

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

Page 59

The same definition and classification of Jivas are accepted by Praga maratikära. (Pr. 194-5, 190-92). Again the definition, classification and functions of six substances (Pr. 207, 210, 213-218) are mainly drawn from Uttaradhyayana, Sthānanga, Anuyogadvāra and Vyākhyāprajñapati.107 Nine fundamental tattvas are mentioned in Uttarādhya yana and Sthanānga, which are accepted by our present author, 108 making no philosophical modification as done in Tattvārthasūtra.109 Classification of knowledge into direct and indirect and their sub-divisions (Pr. 224-5) are taken from Sthānānga, Bhagavatī, Anuyogadvāra and Nandisūtra.110 Bhāvas, i. e. characteristic conditions of the soul are counted as six in Sthānanga and Anuyogadvāra, 111 which are the basis of six kinds of bhāvas of Pragamarati (Pr. 196-97). Samavāyānga, Bhagavatī, Prajñāpanā and Uttaradhyayana are the main sources of conception of four types of Karmabandhas, eight kinds of karmas and their sub-divisions. 112 Again, conception of four main Kaşayas, eight kinds of prides (mada), six kinds of Leśyās, ten kinds of Dharma and five types of Caritra, are found in Bhagavati and Sthānānga, Prajñāpanā, Uttarādhyayana and Samayāyanga. 113 Twelve kinds of Bhāvanās or Anuprekşās scattered in various Agamas are collectively taken together, by our present author, 114 Three jewels are considered as the main path of liberation by almost all Agamas. 118
Process of Kevalisamudghāta (Pr. 272-74) is found in Sthānānga, Samavāyānga, Bhagavats and Prajñāpanā.116 Yoganirodha (Pr. 277-83) is given in Prajñāpānā. These comparative points clearly prove the profound influence of Agamas on Prasamaratiprakaraņa.
Umāsvāti was also influenced by some non-Jaina works. The characteristic modesty of the author, expressed in the beginning of this work (Pr. 3-7) reminds us of Kalidasas modesty, experessed in the beginning of Raghuvamsa, where he says that 'though possessed of scanty powers of speech, I shall describe the family of Raghus, driven as I am, by their virtues to an inconsiderable undertaking”. 117 Again, Umäsväti's request to the right-minded scholars to welcome his work by judging its merits that can be compared with the idea of Kalidasa expressed in Raghuvamsa, in which he calls upon the connoisseures to scrutinise his work, for, its goodness and badness is to be judged by their word of commendation or condemanation. 118 Again, Umäsväti's statement that it is the very nature of right-minded scholars to apprecicate the quality of the work, ignoring its defects (9), reminds us of Kalidāsa's statement in Mālavikāgnimitra, in which he says that sound critics welcome the one (old) or other (new), after proper examination, while a blockhead is guided by another's judgement. 119