________________
INTRODUCTION."
traditionally received the knowledge of the Siddhanta consisting of Karmaand Kaşaya-prabhṛta, and he wrote a huge commentary on half of the Satkhandagama.
iv. Kundakunda, on the authority of Jayasena and Balacandra, is said to have been a contemporary of one S'ivakumara Mahārāja.
v. Kundakunda is the author of the Tamil classic Kural. We shall scrutinise these points serially and then see what other evidences are available for the date of Kundakunda.
XV
KUNDAKUNDA'S POSTERIORITY TO S'VETA. AND DIGA. DIVISION.-As to the posteriority of Kundakunda to the division of the Jaina church into Digambaras and S'vetambaras, there cannot be two opinions, because he attacks here and there the doctrinal positions, which, in later literature, are decidedly the opinions of the S'vetambara persuasion, such as the liberation for women, utility or futility of clothes for a monk to attain liberation etc.1 The seeds of this division, so far as I have been able to comprehend the currents of the history of Jainism, go back as early as the days of Bhadrabahu S'rutakevalin, if not earlier, who migrated to the South with a band of monks at the time of a severe famine in Magadha. The famine and migration must have been facts, because both S'vetambaras and Digambaras are agreed on these points. Comparing the post-Mahāvīra hierarchical lists preserved by both the sects, the last teacher who is commonly acknowledged is Bhadrabahu; that is, a clear indication that the main stream might have branched into two streams from his time. Circumstantial evidences gleaned from the after-effects of the famine are also favourable for such a division in the Jaina church. So the definite seeds of this division must have been sown in the days of Bhadrabahu, contemporary of Candragupta Maurya, say about in the 3rd century B. C. The later traditions that the S'vetambaia sect, according 12 to the statement of Digambaras, arose in 136 years after the death of Vikrama and that the Digambara sect, according to the statement of S'vetambaias, arose in 139 years after Vikrama, merely show that the doctrinal differences, by
A
1 Sutta-puhuda 17-26; Pravacanasara III, 8-9, 20 *3-5, 24 *6-14.
2 L. Rice: Mysore and Coorg from Inscriptions, chapter I; V. Smith: Early History of India (Third Ed.), pp. 146, 440; M. S. R. Ayyangar: Studies in South Indian Jainism, chapter 2 etc.; Banarasidasa: Ardhamugadhi Reader, p. xlu; Cambridge History of India, i I, p. 165.
For Digambara lists see Harivans'a etc. noted above; for S'vetämbara lists see Kalpasitra (S. B. E. XXII), p. 286 etc. and the opening verses of Nandisutra. As a matter of appearance the traditional lists of teachers belonging to these two sects agree only upto Jambu, then there is difference, and again Bhadrabahu is common to both. I think, in early days, before the time of Kundakunda, these schismatic divisions might not have been very acute, since Arya Manksu and Nagahasti, who studied Kasaya-prabhṛta from Gunadhara and also taught the same to Yatıvṛsabha, as stated in Srutavatāra and confirmed too by the opening verses of Jayadhavala Tikā, figure also in the S'vetämbara Sthaviravalı, as given in Nandisutra verses No. 28-30 (Agamodayasamiti Edition), as Arya Mangu and Arya Nagahasti almost contemporaries; Arya Marksn' is an attempt at sanskritisation of 'Ajja Mamgu'.
Dars'anasara gatha 11 etc. and Pt. Premi's notes thercon in Jarna Hitaishi XIII, pp. 52, 265 etc.
i
