Who is Author of Pancasutra Cirantanacarya or Yakinisunu Haribhadra

Author(s): Shilchandrasuri
Publisher: Z_Nirgranth_Aetihasik_Lekh_Samucchay_Part_1_002105.pdf and Nirgranth_Aetihasik_Lekh_Samucchay_Part_2

Page 14

196
Acārya Vijayaśīlacandrasuri
Jambu-jyoti
discernible in other works of Haribhadrācārya and in the Pancasūtra, as also the similarity of linguistic usages involving संस्कृतसम and संस्कृतभव words as stated above, positively proves that the work in question is composed not in Ardhmagadhi but in Prakrit.
Also, the argument advanced by Kulkarni that "The treatise in question is in Ardhamāgadhi prose and so it is not written by Haribhadra sūri because his other treatises are in Prakrit" hold no water. Is it not possible that the same author can employ different languages and different dictions ? Is it not possible that the same author can write in versified form as well as in prose ? To the contrary, this situation indicates to a profound and highly erudite genius possessing the knowledge of several languages. If a competent Gujarātī or Mahārästrian poet / author can write prose / poetic literature in other languages such as Hindi, English, and so forth as he would in his own native tongue, then what obstacle lies in the way in believing that a master scholar like Haribhadra sūri can write works in different varieties of Prakrit ?
7. The second point of importance is that the Pañcasūtra probably is believed to have been the work of Cirantanācārya and until now the tradition continues that the name of the 'Cirantanācārya' is unknown. Now, a question arises : This Cirantanācārya is inevitably considered to be faced (ancient) for us even today and, therefore, we can take it for granted that, he perhaps may be believed to be unknown even in the past centuries. But how can it be believed that this Cirantanācārya and his name might be unknown to Acārya Haribhadra sūri ? Kulkarni believed that this Cirantanācārya might have flourished a century or more before Haribhadra sūriøs. And if we are to proceed on the line that the Pancasūtra is a postcanonical composition, we must accept the above inference of Kulkarni. Could it be consistently rational that the name of Cirantanācārya, who might have flourished a century or two before Haribhadra sūri may be an author unknown or unfamiliar to Haribhadra süri ? Definitely not. Like this work, its author also (if he were a different person) cannot be unknown to Haribhadra sūri and had he known the author of the original text, he would not have remained silent about his authorship and unhesitatingly revealed his name. This consideration once again leads us to believe that Haribhadra sūri himself was the author of the sutra-work.