________________
Pauma-Cariya of Vimala Suri
53
Muni Jinavijayaji' thinks that probably the work is not so ancient as it claims to be. He believes with Jacobi that Vimala's date 530 is not a regular Vira dale a that Vimalasuri is not later than the 3rd century AD
K. H. Dhruva was inclined to assign the Paümacariya to the preiod between 678 A D. and 778 A.D. He fixed the upper limit 678 A.D. on the ground that toe Paümacariya was, according to him, a Prakrit rendering of Ravişena's Padmacarita Purāņa 1078 A.D.). The lower limit is unassailable as Kuvalayamā ā (778 A.D.) mentio..s Vinaia. Dhruva advanced a few more arguments for dating it so late as that (1) Vimaa. sūri's use of some metres of comparatively later ongin such as Gahui, Sarabha ana Aryāskandhaka, (ii) the employment of Sragaharā at the end of a canto and of Yamaka in Giti and of the poet's own name Vimala as a key-word or catch woru in the concluding stanza of every canto, and the (111) comparatively modern Prakrit of Vimalasūri.
Pandit Paramanand Jain Shastrio points to the use of the word Siyambara (= Svetāmbara, Canto XXII 78 ) by Vimalasūri and opine; that its use suggests a late date. He fiods resemblance between four gāthās from Faumac.riya and the Carittapähuda (ard also one gathā, with slight variation, common to th: Paumacariya and the Pravacanasāra). He shows the great resemblance of ideas between some gathās of the Paumacariya and the Sūtras from the Tattvārthasūtra (Digambara recension in particular). He quotes the line an faqas gaaf glas Pc. CXVIII v. 102 (d) and interprets it to mean that the poet Vimala has versified the Sūtras from the Tattyārthasūtra.1 °He, therefore, holds that Vimalasūri must have flourished after Kundakunda and Umālāti.
7 In a personal discussion which I had with him recently he expressed this op nion. 8 Jain Yuga, Vol. I, rart 2, 1981 V.S. (pp. 68-69) and Vol. I, part 5, 1982 v. s. (pp. 180-182). 9 Anekanta (Kirana 10-11), 1942 : Paumacariyaka Antah-Pariksana, np. 337-344 (f. n. Büla
sudhara on p. 352). This article is quotec in full in the Hindi Introduct on to Padmapurana, Vol. I, Bharatiya Jina-pisha, Käsi, 1958, without correcting the mistake referred to in the
foot-note on p. 352 ! 10 This interpretation of the word 'Suttasahi an' is indeed extraordinary ! The expression
*Suttasahisar' in this stanza has nothing to do with the Tattvārthasūtra. In the opening canto the poet Vimalasuri describes the source of his work as the words of Lord MahaVira himself (Read in this connection, Paumacariya, I. 8-10, 13, 29-31, 33 and 90 and the title of the first Chapter 'Sutra-vidhana' and CXVII. 118), The word sutra in the title "Table of Contents", means 'Contents'. That the expressio.2 'sutta-sahiyam' means in accordance with the sacred texts (37=31117A) is quite c'car if we read t.e fo'low'ng Latha :
.
gaigarako (oata'?), 159 NIETE 91935014 faHST 947 e or faa 11 -Pc. I. 31
