________________
80
INTRODUCTION is said to be the commentator of Akalanka sutras. 5th and 10th hold one and the same Anantavirya mentioned in No. 4. He was the junior colleague of Sțipāladeva, the great grand teacher of Vādirāja. Vādirāja belongs to the period of 1025 A.D. His teacher might have been just fifty years before that is, 975 A.D. and to this period only Anantavirya must have belonged No. 1 refers to one Anantavirya as the grand disciple of Virasena-Siddhantādeva and disciple of Gonaśena. The names of the latter two Ācāryas are not found in the list of Krānūragana. Hence it appears that this Anantavirya belonged to Drāvidasamgha and not to Krānāragaña. This Anantavīrya
is not different from the one mentioned in No. 4, 5 and 10. (ii) Anantavirya belonging to the Sūrasthagana, is referred to as
adicăritrabhūdhara in No. 7. This Anantavirya cannot be the
commentator of Akalarkasutras because of different lineage. (iii) No. 6, 8 and 9 refer to one Anantavirya of Krānūragana. No.
2 and 3 also refer to Anantavirya belonging to Yāpāniyasamgha. Therefore, it can be said that this Anantavīrya is identical with Anantavirya of Krānūragana.
As we have already stated that Anantavīrya, the author of SVT is mentioned as 'Ravibhadrapādopajīvi', i.e. the pupil of Ravibhadra ; further this Anantavirya has referred to the other Anantavīrya, who commented on SV of Akalanka prior to him, thus we have two commentators of SV of the same name. . But from the inscriptions, as stated just before, we have information about three different Anantaviryas. The problem of identification of these two commentators with the three referred to in above inscriptions remains to be solved. For the sake of differentiation we will refer to the first Anantavīrya as vrddha Anantavirya and the second simply as Anantavīrya. Anantavirya referred to in No. 4 as the Vrttikära of Akalarka can be identified with Vrddha Anantavirya and also with Anantavīrya the author of the SVT assuming that he had two preceptors, one being Ravibhadra. It cannot be ascertained definitely as to which Anantavirya the Humach inscription refers to. It will be proved in the following pages that Anantavirya, the author of the present commentary SVT must have belonged to a peroid later than 959 A.D. and earlier than 1025 A.D. As the identification is doubtful, we have to rely upon other evidences for fixing the date of Anantavirya.
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
