________________
162
SACRED LITERATURE OF THE JAINS
dasā, kappa and vavahara are treated of together, parcakappa and jiakappa not being mentioned, mahānisiha is disposed of at another place, viz. :-at the end of the entire jogavihi after the painnas. V. agrees herein with Svi. completely, with the exception that, as Avi., it adds pascakappa and jiakappa to nistha, dasā, k. and vay. In the metrical portion at the close, the jogavihana-pagarana, however, the first four are treated of either as to be learned together in 30 days or as 'savvāni vi cheasuttani' v. 22. In the next verse (23) there are statements concerning jlyak. and parcak. (mahānistha is not discussed till vv. 63,64). In the Vicārāmstas. the cheasuam is called nisiha-m-diyam--on jitak., pamcak. see p. 430—; and in the commentary on the frāddhajitakalpa -see below -sri niśithadi chedagranthasūtra is spoken of. We find that this agrees with Bühler's list (above, p. 226).
Besides this arrangement which places nišitha at the head we meet with statements in modern sources in which the number composing the series varies in many ways. The series, as we have seen above, was never fixed, continually varying between 4 and 7 members.
(449] In the Ratnasagara (Calc. 1880) we find the following arrangement : vyavahāravshatkalpa, daśāśruta, niíitha, mahānisitha, jitakalpa. These names are the same with an exception in the case of jitakalpa (Bühler has pancakalpa ; Āvi. has both names). The arrangement of Raj. L. Mitra and after him that of Pandit Kashinath Kunte, taking its rise from the Siddhantadharmasara, is very remarkable. See my remarks on p: 227.
The uncertainty of modern tradition may, it is true, create an impression unfavourable to the age of the chedasūtra texts which we possess. On the other hand, there are sufficient arguments which permit us to ascribe a relatively ancient date to the chief group at least, i.e. the three texts : dasă-kappa-vavahārā. The order which I have here followed is, without doubt, the old arrangement, though, for convenience sake, I adopt that of Bühler from this point on : vavahāra, dasă, kappa. We must here consider the statements of tradition in reference to the origin and composition of these texts.
Haribhadra, on Āvasy. 6,88, explains the third of the three forms of the samăcarl which are mentioned in the text: ohe dasaha payavibhdge, the padavibhagasămåcårt by chedasūtrani, and, as we have seen above, p. 357, he states that this is chedasūtralak sanān navamapūrvåd eva nirvyūdha. On Avasy. 7,64 he limits the equalization of the padavi°cdri to
