________________
Introduction
established the scripture or the sacred knowledge in Bharata. Then, in verses six to nine, are glorified Samantabhadra and Simhanandi. Further, in the tenth verse, some facts about Vakragriva are given: he was a great sage; he was endowed with forceful eloquence that had routed bands of disputants, and the same could not ade quately be praised even by Nagendra of one thousand mouths; he received regard from Sasana-devatās; before him the necks of disputant-devils were bent with shame; and he briefly expounded the meaning of the word atha for six months.1 Thus this inscription paints the saint Vakragriva as a learned and polemic logician endowed with winning delivery. The way in which he is mentioned and described in the inscription clearly shows that he is a different individual from Kundakunda and appears to have flourished possibly after Kundakunda. Besides, there are other inscriptions of 1137, 1158 and of 1168 A.D. in which Vakragrivacārya is referred to;2 but nowhere are we informed that he was identical with Kundakunda,3 In all these inscriptions, wherever there is any mention of sangha, gana and anvaya, we find Vakragriva associated with Dravida-sangha, Nandi-gana and Arungalanvaya. So, I think, Vakragriva was an independent teacher quite distinct from Kundakunda.
3
ELACARYA AS A NAME OF KUNDAKUNDA DISCUSSED.-Coming to the name Elācārya, I am aware of one dateless inscription, that of Chicka Hanasoge, in which one Elācārya of Desi-gana and Pustaka-gaccha is mentioned; but I do not get any clue as to his identity or otherwise with Kundakunda. From the prasasti of Dhavală commentary we learn that there was one Elacarya, from whom Virasena, the author of that commentary, received instructions in the Siddhäntas and there are indications in the body of Jayadhavala commentary that he had possibly an explanation of his on a section at least of the Siddhänta." This Eläcārya, being a teacher of Virasena, must have flourished at the close of the eighth century A.D. It is to this Elācārya that Indranandi refers, when he says, in his Srutavatära," that Elacārya, a resident of Citrakutapura, was well-versed in the Siddhanta; and [p. 4:] it is from him that Virasena studied the Siddhanta, and returning to Vatagrama from Citrakūta, composed the commentary that came to be called Dhavala. This Elacarya cannot be the same as Kundakunda, because in some of the preceding verses namely 160-61, Indranandi refers to Padmanandi of Kundakundapura, who I think is the same as our Kundakunda, that he wrote an exhaustive commentary, Pari
1 atha-sabda-vacyam avadan māsān samāsena ṣat. Perhaps Lewis Rice read it as Nava-s'abdavacyam etc., and accordingly he took Navas'abdavacya as the name of a work; see his Mysore and Coorg from Inscriptions, p.197.
2 E. C., V, Belur No. 17; Ididem Arsikere No. 141; Ibid No. 1.
3 See also E. C., IV, Nagamangala No. 100, and E. C., VI, Kadur No. 69 where also the name of Vakragriva occurs.
4 E. C., IV, Yedatore No. 28.
Jain Education International
5 mahum so Eläirio pasiyaй vara-Virasenassa, second line of the first verse.
6 I find a passage like this in Jayadhavala-tika: tado puvvuttam Elayi(i)riya-Bhaḍāraena uvaitṭha-vakkhanameva pahāna-bhāvena ettha ghettavvam, p. 199 of Sholapur MS. of Jayadhavala.
7 Śrutāvatāra, published in Māņikachandra Digambara Jaina Grantha-mālā (MDJG) vol. XII, see verses 177-82
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
