________________
96
Pravacanasära
inscriptions known to me. It is seen above that he quotes carana etc., without mentioning the source, from Sanmati-prakarana of Siddhasena; it is possible that it might, along with another gāthā nicchaya etc. on the next page, turn out to be a traditional gathā current long before Siddhasena even like the gāthās jāvadiyā etc., şiddhassa şiddhena etc. In case he quotes from Siddhasena, he cannot be earlier than 7th century A.D., which is the latest period assigned to Siddhasena, 1 though it is possible that Siddhasena might have flourished at least a couple of centuries earlier.2 So this does not help us to put a definite earlier limit. In the opening remark on gāthā 27 of Pañcāstikāya Amộtacandra says: Bhatta-matānusāri-sisyam prati Sarvajña-[p. 101:] siddhih/. It is quite plain that he is referring to the view of Bhatta Kumārila on omniscience to which reference is already made. The date of Kumārila was once uncertain, but Santara kşita's attack on Kumārila would put Kumārila in the last quarter of the 7th century A.D.3 So this forms the earlier limit for the period of Amộtacandra, and he is thus later than 7th century A. D.4 As to the later limit he is quoted by Āsādhara (first half of the 13th century A.D.), by Jayasena (c. middle of the 12th century A.D.) and by Padmaprabha (middle of the 12th century). Thus this much can be definitely said that Amrtacandra flourished between the 7th and the 12th century A. D. There are other probabilities to narrow down this period: he appears to have quoted from Gommațasāra compiled by Nemicandra (circa 10th century A. D.); he might be the author of Dhādasıgātha in which reference is made to Nih piccha-sangha (the same as Māthura-sangha) which was founded in 896 A.D. according to Darsanasāra of Devasena, and lastly he appears to be acquainted with Ālāpapaddhati of Devasena.5 These probabilities taken together might indicate that Amrtacandra flourished somewhere about the close of the 10th century A.D.: that is only a tentative suggestion. The traditional Pattāvalis put Amrtacandra at the beginning of the 10th century A.D.
1 On the date of Siddhasena various scholars have written. I can give only some select
references within my reach: Vidyabhushana puts him about 480-550 A.D. (Indian Logic p. 173); Jinavijaya puts him earlier than 5th century A. D. (Jaina Sahitya Samsodhaka Iii, p. 82 foot-note, also his Introduction to his ed. of Jitakalpa, Ahmedabad 1926: on Siddhasena see his article Jaina Hitaishi, Vol. 12, pp. 22 etc. Vol. 14, pp. 52, 131,153); Dr. Jacobi puts Siddhasena in the last quarter of the 7th centry A.D. (Samarāiccakaha, Intr. p. iii.). See Pt. Jugalkishore's discussion in Svāmī Samantabhadra pp. 128 etc.; Dr. Vaidya puts him about 700 A.D. (Nyāyāvatāra Intro. p. 21, Bombay 1928); Pt. Sukhalal places him in the 5th century of the Vikrama era (See his Gujarati Intro. to Sanmatiprakarana pp. 35 etc.); Winternitz: Indian Literature Vol. II, p. 477 foot-note
2; see also Hiralal: Catalogue of Sk. and pk. MSS. in C. P. & Berar, p. xii. 2 In saying thus I have in view Pūjyapāda's reference to Siddhasena in his Sk. grammar,
and that he quotes partly a verse from the Stuti of Siddhasena (see Sarvärthasiddhi VII, 13); I am aware, however, that there have been many authors bearing the name Siddha
sena. 3 See Dr. Bhattacharyya's Intro. to Tattvasamgraha, G.O.S. p. 82. 4 I have shown elsewhere that Akalanka cannot be later than the last quarter of the 7th
century A.D. (Annals of the B.O.R. I. XIII, ii, p. 164 foot-note). Amộtacandra is de
cidedly later than Akalanka who flourished earlier than Kumārila. 5 Compare p. 112 of Pravacanasära.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
