________________
iv )
and of these those kevalins who establish new Tirthas are called Tīrthňkaras, while the rest simply Sāmānyakevalins; but both are necessarily called Jina. The use of the word Sāmānya-keyalin is not usually found anywhere excepting the Jain works; and so it is a technical term of Jainism. It is therefore possible to say that the author of the work might have been a Jain.
There is another reference which should also be considered. In verse 71 of the first Muktaka four meanings of the word · Jayanti' are given. Of these the first indicates a city, the second a kind of herb, the third a daughter of Indra and the fourth the · Anujā' of Cetaka. This last meaning has a special connection with Jain tradition and literature. According to these, Cetaka was the Gaņādhipati of Vaisāli of Videha and Jayanti was a follower of Bhagavān Mahāvīra. There are interesting references to Jayanti in the Jain Āgama and story literature. There is no reference whatsoever to Jayanti in any other Indian literature, However, there is a divergence in the relationship of Jayanti to Cetaka according to the Sabdaratnapra dīpa. Whether the author of this work had some other Jain tradition in view or whether he is erring we cannot say. Whatever that may be, this reference shows the author of our work familiar with Jain traditions, which was not usual in non-Jain writers. So this reference leads one to believe that the author of this work might have been a Jain.
The reference to Siva in the beginning is suggestive of Mangala and has a proper place in Jain tradition also.
At the time of printing the old original mss., out of which the copy was prepared, were not available and therefore a few readings have remained doubtful. As other mss. were also not available, these doubtful readings could not be amended.
Anekanta Vihar, Ahmedabad
25-9-56
Muni Jinavijaya
Hon. Director, Rajasthāna Purătattvänveşaņa-Mandira
JAIPUR
