Vaishali Institute Research Bulletin 2

Author(s): G C Chaudhary
Publisher: Research Institute of Prakrit Jainology & Ahimsa Mujjaffarpur

Page 14

SATKHAŅDĀGAMA AND PRAJNĀPANĀSŪTRA
LATE DR. HIRALAL JAIN
In one of the sections of the Introduction (pp. 223 f.) of the Pappavaņā-sutta, there is a discussion comparing the Prajñā panā with the Satkhapdagama. It is pointed out that both these works have got significant similarities : (i) The subject matter of both of them is a doctrinal discussion about Jiva and Karman. (ii) The basic source for both of them is the Srutăuga Drstivada. (iii) They are compiled in the form of Sūtras. (iv) Here and there, in both the works, the Sutras assume the form of Gáthás. (v) Some Gathās are common to both; and they are found also in the Niryuktis and Višeşāvaśyakabhasya, etc. (vi) Both the works are of the nature of compilation and have common words and expressions. (vii) The topic Alpa-bahutva is almost identical and it is called Mahādandaka. (viii) In the discussion on Gatyāgati, there occur, in both, the discussions on the acquisition of the position of Tirthalikara, Cakravartin, Baladeva and Vasudeva. (ix) The topics or Padas (23-27 and 35) Karma, Karma-bandhaka, Karma. vedaka, Veda-bandhaka, Veda-vedaka and Vedana of the Prajñā pana remind us of the six Khapdas of the Satkhapdāgama, namely, Jivasthāna, Kşudraka-bandha, Bandha-svā mitva, Vedanā, Vargaņā and Mahabandha. These common points between the two works are undisputable; and they indicate a common tradition in view of their meaning and exposition.
Despite these common points, both the works possess many a speciality of their own. (i) The Prajñā panā contains 36 sections called Padas; and according to the subject matter, their sub-sections like Prajñā panā. Prar ûpapa, etc. But in the Satkhaņdāgama, the same six Khandas are there ; and under them, the fourteen Jiva-samāsas (Gupasthānas) and fourteen Mārgarā-sthānas are discussed at length, in their order; all this is completely absent in the Prajñāpanāsätra. (ii) The Prajñāpanā has single authorship, while it is accepted that Puspadanta and Bhūtabali are the authors of the Satkhapdāgama; and it might be inferred that many of its appendices (culikās) were added later on, as in the case of some canonical texts like the Daśavaikalika. (iii) The discussion of the subject matter in the Șatkhandagama is more detailed and profound, systematic and well-planned as against that in the Prajñapana. (iv) The question-and-answer style is employed more in the Prajñapanā than in the Satkhandagama. (v) The Prajñāpanāsūtra is written in the tyles of original Sūtra, while the Satkhaņdāgama