Studies In Umasvati And His Tattvartha Sutra

Author(s): G C Tripathi, Ashokkumar Singh
Publisher: Bhogilal Laherchand Institute of Indology

Page 27

The Works of Vācaka Umāsvāti 17
followed the text inherited by the śvetāmbara sect.) The Sūtra and the bhāsya quotations begin to appear in the Svetāmbara commentaries etc. from circa the last quarter of the sixth century. (In the Digambara as well as the available Yāpanīya sources, those from the Sūtra alone appear and these, too, at a somewhat later date. However, one of the end-kärikäs of the Tattvārthādhigama-bhāsya, the eighth one, has been oftener quoted, particularly in several Śvetāmbara commentarial works, in fact also in the Tattvārtha-vārtika of Akalanka-deva.) Likewise, the kārikās of the Praśamarati-prakaraņa also figure in good number in the Svetambara ägamic and other commentaries from at least the last quarter of the seventh century. From that source, it may be called out that the following two kārikās were oft-quoted; the earliest, for instance in the Uttarādhyayana-cūrņi, the Sūtrakstāngacūrņi, and the commentary on the Viseșāvaśyaka-bhāsya by Koārya gani (c. AD 700–725): (i) Naivāsti rājarājasya tat-sukham naiva devarājasya/
yat-sukham-ihaiva sādhor-loka-vyāpāra rahitasya//128// (ii) Nirjita-mada-madanặnăm vẫk-kaya-mano-vikāra-rahitặnăm/
vinivstta-parāśānām-ih-aiva mokşah suvihitānām//238// And Gandhahasti Siddhasena ganī as well as Haribhadra Sūri not only cited from the Praśamarati but also explicitly attributed its authorship to Umāsvāti in their respective commentaries on the Tattvārthādhigama. A few decades earlier to his Tattvārthādhigama commentary, Haribhadra Sūri cited a couple of kārikās (172, 175) also in his Nandi-vrtti (C. AD 750). Also, Jayasimha Sūri of Krsnarsigaccha in his Dharmopadeśamālā-vivarana (AD 859) cites one kārikā (119) in the name of Vācaka-mukhya'. Subsequent writers, till the end of the Middle Ages, continue to quote from it. Haribhadra Sūri of Brhad-gaccha even commented upon this prakarana in ad 1129 wherein he states to have consulted some earlier commentaries on
that work. 25. While I have worked out a separate paper on this subject, I would
here notice one significant fact deduced from two consecutive verses figuring there. These lead us to understand that Umāsvāti believed in the simultaneity (yugpat occurrence) of omnicognition (kevalajñana) and omni perception (kevala-darśana): Tasya hi tasmin samaye kevalaṁ utpadyate gata-tamaskam/ jñānam ca darśanam-cavarana-dvaya-samksaya-cchuddhař// Citram citrapaanibhaṁ trikāla-sahitam tatah salokam-imam/