Sambodhi 2011 Vol 34

Author(s): Jitendra B Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 43

Mas
Vol. XXXIV, 2011 Musical Instruments in Nirgrantha Canonical Literature* 37 The instrument's appellation, like bhambhā, seems may be a children's handmade instrument. (Is it an early form of the snake charmer's mahīvar ?)
From this preliminary estimation of the music data, it is clear that many musical instruments were known in ancient India, some of which have not survived. A detailed study of the information on the musical instruments from the Nirgrantha āgamas vis-à-vis the texts on music on the one hand and the depiction in ancient carvings on the other is reserved for a future study.
Notes 1. The data though are rather preliminary. And the portion embodying musical text (svara
mandala i.e. sapta-svara) is rightly considered an interpolation by Pt. Dalsukh Malvania : (CA) Sthânănga-Samavāyānga (Gujarāti), Ahmedabad 1955, 879, 872. Howeßer, the date here suggested holds on the grounds of content and style of the work. The selfsame
material verbatim figures in the Sthānānga-sūtra. 2. Ed. Muni Jambuvijay, Āyāränga-suttam, Jaina-āgama-Granthamālā, Vol. 2 (1), Shri
Mahavira Jain Vidyalay, Bombay 1976, pp. 240-2. 3. Eds. Amaramuni and Muni Kanhaiyalal, Pt. IV, Agara, 1982, pp. 200-1. The Niśītha
sutra is ascribed to Viśākha gani who probably is Arya Viśākha. Several of its rules, including those on music, are based on, and are extensions of, those of the Acārārga
sūtra Book II. 4. A variant reading which might be more correct. 5. A variant reading is saduya. In neither case is it possible to cull out any meaning. 6. In the different published versions of the Nisītha-sūtra, kacchapi and mahati are wrongly
included under the ghana class. As is known from the Sanskrit works on music, both were
forms of vīņas or lutes, the kacchapi is assigned to Sarasvati and mahati to Närada. 7. This canon is not recognized by the Digambara Jainas. 8. Some of the passages in the Vyakhya-prajñapti (c. 2nd 3rd cent. A.D.) have at some stage
gone to the Prajñāpanā-sutra; while several that originally formed part of other agamas
have drifted to the Vyakhya-prajñapti. 9. Ed. Muni Kanhaiyalal and others, Beawar 1982, p. 104. 10. This výtti uses an earlier cūrņi commentary, seemingly not as yet published. 11. Ed. Muni Punyavijaya, Prakrit Text Society, Vol. IX, Ahmedabad 1966, p. 1. Also same work
with Haribhadra's vrtti, PTS, Vol. X, Ahmedabad 1966, pp. 2 and 99.