________________
XLII
PRAVACANASĀRA.
SEP
illuminates, at the same time, other objects as well; in fact it is the essential nature of the soul. The various activities of an omniscient do not involve any further karmic bondage ; at the termination of his age, with all the karmas tracelessly destroyed, the liberated soul shoots up to the top of the world (loka), where he halts eternally because of the absence of any cause for movement, and enjoys unparallelled eternal happiness (159-83). .. CRITICAL REMARKS ON NIYAMASĀRA.—That Kundakunda is the
author of Niyamasāra is accepted on the authority of Padmaprabha, the only . i known commentator of that work. The discussion of subject matter is quite
worthy of Kundakunda, and the whole atmosphere is quite in tune with other works of his. The exposition of the subject matter is very systematic, leaving
aside some traditional verses here and there, as it would be clear from my , analysis. For the division of the text into 12 s'rutaskandhas, Padmaprabhadeva;
the commentator, is responsible; with all due deference to his high-flowing spiritual muse I must say that this division has no sanction from the original text, nor does it facilitate the understanding of the text in any way; the author, it appears, never intended to have any divisions in his work. The composite character of the text, when read in the original, immediately impresses a reader; and in this respect it stands in contrast to Bharapāhuda. This work contains (some traditional gāthās which are found in his other works, and also in * Mulācāra. So far as I understand the discussion; Kundakunda's enumeration of Avas'yakas is thus : Pratikramana, Pratyākhyāna, Alocanā, Kāyotsarga, Sāmāyika and Paramabhakti; it is slightly different from the traditional enumeration, wherein Alocanā is absent, being possibly included in Pratikramana which it precedes in actual performance, and in place of Para: have Stuti and Vandanā. Kundakunda divides Paramabhakti into two types : nirvști and yoga-bhakti, wherein can be smelt the traces of Stuti and Vandanā. Either Kundakunda did not want to stick to the traditional enumeration because he was discussing the subject from nis'caya-naya, or he did not find any material difference between the two enumerations, or he incorporates, in this context, some early tradition. The phrase loya-vibhāgesu in gathā 17 does not refer, as I understand it, to any individual text but to a class of literature of Lokānuyoga group; while in gāthā 94 the author decidedly refers to a text Pratilcramana-sūtra by name.
· PAMCATTHIYA-SANGAHA or PAÑCĀSTIKĀTASĀRA4: It is the devotion towards the doctrine that has goaded the author to produce this
(Vis'estivas'yakabhüşya 3132 ff.) and a host of other S'vetāmbara authors, following their Canon, especially Nandi, Prajñāpani and other texts, say that jñāna and dars'ana in
a Kovalin are kramena, step by step, and not yugapat or simultaneously. Ji Mülācāra I, 22. 1/2 Aülācāra VII, 121 ff.
3 Padskamana-ramadhcye sutie jahā vannidam padilamanam / etc. 4 P. E. Pavolini: Il compendio dei cinque elementi-Pamcatthiyasamgahasıtlam in
Geornale della Societat asiatica italiana, vol. 14, pp. 1-40. Florence, 1901, with somo romarks on the language, metre and MSS. : we get here the text edited with a summary of contents of each verse following Amặtacapdra's commentary; Ed. with Amrtacandra's
