Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of the Canonical Literature of the Jainas c5: Chapter I: Genesis of the Jaina Scriptures

A History of the Canonical Literature of the Jainas c5

Language
English

Chapter I: Genesis of the Jaina Scriptures

c5.1

It seems that every person, male or female, likes the idea of substantiating his or her views, secular or religious, by quoting some authority or other. This becomes almost a necessity especially for those persons who profess to follow some religion at least, and who are anxious to prove the validity and superiority of their religious beliefs. They naturally refer to the original works of their school as the best and final authority, and attribute their authorship either to God or to a human being free from any blemishes whatsoever.¹

c5.2

Humanity and religion practically go hand in hand. If so, it is no wonder, if we were to find that an enormously big number of religions has come into existence, and several of them have become a dead letter by this time so much so that in spite of the advance science can claim to have made, we are not in a position to give even a definite list of all these religions, leaving the question of their details apart.

c5.3

Out of the various religions that had their origin and development in India during the last several millenniums and that have not still disappeared, Jainism is here singled out for being treated at length, especially owing to its vast and varied literature.

c5.4

Such a human being in his own times or thereafter is looked upon as superhuman, and in course of time, miraculous and mysterious stories gather round his life.

c5.5

With these preliminary remarks, I shall now take up the question of the genesis of the *Jaina* scriptures.

c5.6

According to Jainism, the universe is uncreated and unending. It has neither a beginning nor an end, though it undergoes modifications in every *samaya*, the minutest division of time. Taking the entire universe into consideration, Jainism flourishes for ever, and so do the *Jaina* scriptures. But if we were to examine this topic from the stand-point of India, we shall find that such is not the case. Even during the present cycle of time known as *Huṇḍā avasarpiṇī*,¹ Jainism got completely wiped off seven times, and even its scriptures shared no better fate.² But this refers to a very very remote age; for, for the last hundreds of millenniums, Jainism has been existing in this land, and to express it definitely, it has not disappeared, once it here got promulgated by Lord Śāntinātha, the 16th *Tīrthaṅkara*, out of 24 who flourished during the present *avasarpiṇī* period.³ This does not mean that all the *Jaina* scriptures that were then composed or compiled still survive in words, though, of course, in spirit they do exist even now in some form or other. This is what the *Jaina* tradition says.

c5.7

1 *Avasarpiṇī* has for its counter-part *utsarpiṇī*, along with which it makes up a *kala-cakra* or the twelve-spoked wheel of time. This *kala-cakra* is the basis of law of time so far as 5 Bharata *kṣetras* (zones) and 5 Airāvata *kṣetras* are concerned. It is two-fold because of its division into *avasarpiṇī* and *utsarpiṇī*. There are six spokes in *avasarpiṇī* beginning with unadulterated happiness and ending in utmost misery. Reverse 's rather the case with *utsarpiṇī* which, too, has six spokes.

c5.8

2 Cf. the following lines occurring in *Viāhapaṇṇatti* (XX, 8):— “एएसु ण तेवीसाए जिणंतरेसु पुरिमपच्छिमएसु अद्धु २ जिणंतरेसु एत्थ ण कालियसुयस्स अवोच्छेदे प० मज्झिमएसु सत्तु जिणंतरेसु एत्थ ण कालियसुयस्स वोच्छेदे प० सव्वत्थ वि णं वोच्छिन्ने विट्ठिए।” (सू. ६७७) *Viseṣavaṇā* (v 103) of Jinabhadra Gaṇi Kṣamāśramaṇa, *Pavayaṇasāruddhāra* (v. 430-431) of Nemicandra Sūri and *Sattarisayatthāṇa* (v. 213) of Somatilaka Sūri may be consulted.

c5.9

3 “जंबुदीवे णं भंते! दीवे 'भारहे' वासे इमीसे ओसप्पिणीए कति तित्थगरा पण्णत्ता? गोयमा! चउवीसं तित्थगरा पण्णत्ता तं जहा-उसभमजियसंभव अभिणंदणं च सुमतिसुप्पभसुपासससिपुप्फदंतसीयलसेज्जंस-वाहुपुज्जं च विमलअणंतधम्मसंति कुंथुअरमल्लिमुणिसुव्वयनमिनेमिपासवद्धमाण २४।” (सू. ६७६) — *Viāhapaṇṇatti* (XX, 8)

c5.10

Jainism enunciates a rule that on the attainment of omniscience, a *Tīrthaṅkara* delivers a sermon,¹ and generally some persons do come forward to follow the noblest and highest path chalked out by him—technically speaking to take the *Jaina dīkṣā* and thus to form a class of the *Jaina* clergy.² Out of them, those who are going to be the greatest apostles, technically known as *Gaṇadharas* compose *dvādaśāṅgīs*, each of which forms a nucleus of the *Jaina* scriptures.

c5.11

¹ Kalikālasarvajña Hemacandra Sūri observes in his *Triṣaṣṭiśalākāpuruṣacaritra* (parvan X, sarga 5):— " न सर्वविरतेर्हः कोऽप्यत्रेति विदन्नपि । कल्प इत्यकरोत् तत्र निपण्णो देशनां विभुः ॥ १० ॥"

c5.12

² By clergy, I here mean both monks and nuns. These together with the *Jaina* laity comprising *Śrāvakas* and *Śrāvikās* form the fourfold church known as *caturvidha saṅgha* to whom even the *Tīrthaṅkara* pays due respect.

c5.13

Lord Mahāvīra had eleven *Gaṇadharas* Indrabhūti and others³ and each of them composed a *dvādaśāṅgī*. To enter into details, Indrabhūti after he had taken *dīkṣā*, bowed to Lord Mahāvīra and asked: "किं तत्" (what is the essence underlying the animate and inanimate objects)? The Lord replied: "उप्पन्नेइ वा" (everything has a creation). Thereupon, once more, Indrabhūti asked the same question; for, he could not believe that there was nothing else but creation, when, with his own eyes he could see destruction and permanence as well. The Lord replied: "विगमेइ वा" (everything perishes). This again led him to put the same question once more. This time the Lord replied: "धुवेइ वा" (everything is permanent). This final answer solved his doubts, and he could catch the real spirit of Jainism.⁴ For, all this while the answers had set him thinking, and as if by way of sudden realization, the ideas had rushed past in his mind in the following vein:—

c5.14

³ Bhadrabāhusvāmin says in his *Āvassayanijjutti*:— " पढमित्थ इंदभूई विइओ उण होइ अग्गिभूइ त्ति । तइए य वाउभूई तओ वियत्ते सुहम्मे य ॥ ५१३ ॥ मंडिय मोरियपुत्ते अकंपिए चेव अयलभाया य । मेयज्जे य पभासे गणधरा होंति वीरस्स ॥ ५१४ ॥"

c5.15

⁴ In this connection I may quote the following lines from Haribhadra Sūri's commentary (p. 277a) on *Āvassaya* and its *Nijjutti* (v.735):— " तत्र गौतमस्वामिना निपत्रात्रेण चतुर्दश पूर्वाणि गृहीतानि । प्रणिपत्य पृच्छा निपद्योये । गवांवाश्चष्टे-'उप्पन्नेइ वा विगमेइ वा धुवेइ वा' । एता एव तिस्रो निषद्याः, आसाभेव सक्षात् गणभृताम् 'उत्पादव्ययध्रौव्ययुक्तं सत्' इति प्रतीतितुपजायते, अन्यथा सत्ताऽयोगात् । ततश्च ते पर्वभन-भावितमतयो द्वादशाङ्गमुपरचयन्ति ।"

c5.16

"What can be the distinguishing feature of a substance (*dravya*)? Well, it must be *sat*, and what is *sat*? It is nothing but a simultaneous possession of birth, decay and permanence.¹ And what is permanence? It means indestructibility of the essence or quality of the substance, though accidental qualities of this substance can and do undergo a modification."²

c5.17

¹ Cf. "उत्पादव्ययध्रौव्ययुक्तं सत्", the 29th sūtra of *Tattvārthādhigamaśāstra* (adhyāya V) composed by Umāsvāti Vācaka:—

c5.18

² "तद्भावव्ययं नित्यम्।"—*Tattvārtha* (V, 30)

c5.19

This realization of facts spurred him on to compose a *dvādaśāngī*, an act evolving out of the fructification or operation of *Gaṇadhara-nāma-karman*.

c5.20

Before we proceed further and examine the question of other Gaṇadharas composing a *dvādaśāngī*, we may note that each of the three questions asked by Indrabhūti, is styled as *nisejjā* in Prākṛta³ and *niṣadyā* in Saṃskṛta.⁴ Furthermore, all the three questions are collectively known as *niṣadyātraya* in Saṃskṛta.⁵ Similarly every answer that the Lord gave, goes by the name of *pada* or *mātṛkāpada*⁶ in Saṃskṛta and all collectively, by the name of *tripadī* or *padatrayī* or the like.³

c5.21

³ The *Cuṇṇi* (p. 370) on *Āvassaya* and its *Nijjutti* (v. 735) may be here quoted as under:— "तं कहं गहितं गोयमसामिणा? तेविहं (? तीहिं) निसेज्जाहिं चोदस पुव्वाणि उत्पादिताणि। निसेज्जा णाम पणवतिऊण जा पुच्छा।"

c5.22

⁴ See p. 3, fn. 4.

c5.23

⁵ See p. 3, fn. 4. Also see the following (last) line of the 2nd verse of *Apāpapurisankṣiptakalpa* of Jinaprabha Sūri:— "जय-धुद्वादशाङ्गी भवजलधितरौ ते निषद्यात्रयेण" *Kalpakiraṇāvali* (p. 120b) of Dharmasāgara Upādhyāya may be also referred to.

c5.24

⁶ Haribhadra Sūri in his com. (p. 7a) on *Dasaveyāliya* and its *Nijjutti* (v. 8) says: "एकं मातृकापदं, तद् यथा-'उप्पन्नेइ वा' इत्यादि, इह प्रवचने दृष्टिवादे समस्तनयवादबीजभूतानि मातृकापदानि भवन्ति, तद् यथा-उप्पन्नेइ वा, विगमेइ वा, धुवेइ वा,"

c5.25

It appears that we have no means to know the number of *niṣadyās* pertaining to the remaining 10 *Gaṇadharas*; but it is certain that at least one of them had a recourse to fifteen *niṣadyās*.⁴ This shows that this particular *Gaṇadhara*, at least, was rather backward in intelligence as compared with Indrabhūti; or else why should he have been obliged to put such a big number of questions as 15? Furthermore, we do not know the actual answers given by Lord Mahāvīra by way of replies to these 15 *niṣadyās*; but it seems highly probable that *tripadī* might have played therein the main part, if not the sole part.

c5.26

⁴ The following lines from the *Cuṇṇi* (p. 337) on *Āvassaya* may be here consulted:— “जदा य गणहरा सव्वे पव्वजिता ताहे किर एगनिसेज्जाए एगारस अंगाणि चोदसहिं चोइस पुव्वाणि, एवं ता भगवतो अत्थो कहितो, ताहे भगवंतो एगपासे सुतं करंति, तं अक्खरेहिं पदेहिं वंजणेहिं समं”

c5.27

As already said on p. 3, on the whole, 11 *dvādaśāṅgīs* were composed by 11 *Gaṇadharas*, one by each of them. It, however, so happened that the *dvādaśāṅgīs* of the 8th and the 9th *Gaṇadharas* not only tallied in meaning, but even in the compilation of words, and so did the *dvādaśāṅgīs* of the 10th and the 11th *Gaṇadharas*.⁵

c5.28

⁵ Cf. *Triṣaṣṭi* (X, 5):— “एवं रचयतां तेषां सप्तानां गणधारिणाम्। परस्परमजायन्त विभिन्नः सूत्रवाचनाः॥१७३॥ अकम्पिताऽचलाद्यात्रोः श्रीमेतार्य-प्रभासयोः। परस्परमजायन्त सहक्षा एव वाचनाः॥१७४॥”

c5.29

1 See the following verse of Dhanapāla’s *Tilakamañjarī*:— “ नमो जगन्नमस्याय मुनीन्द्रयेन्द्रभूतये। यः प्राप्य त्रिपदीं वाचा विश्वं विष्णुविमानशे॥१९॥” Muniratna’s *Amamacaritra*, Devānanda Sūri’s *Gautamāṣṭaka* (v. 2), Lakṣmīvallabha’s *Kalpadrumakalikā* (p. 141ᵃ and p. 141ᵇ) and Vinayavijaya Upādhyāya’s *Subodhikā* (p. 118ᵃ) may be also consulted.

c5.30

2 See the following verse of *Triṣaṣṭi* (1, 3):— “उत्पादो विगमो ध्रौव्यमिति पुण्यां पदत्रयीम्। उद्दिश जगन्नाथः सर्ववाङ्मयमातृकाम्॥६५८॥” Devendra Sūri, too, has used this word in his com. (v. 1) on his own work *Kammavivāga* (v. 60).

c5.31

3 I do not remember to have noted a Prākṛta equivalent of *tripadī* like *tivai*, in the Jaina literature.

c5.32

This is rather a curious coincidence;¹ for, there is no wonder, if the underlying spirit of one *dvādaśāṅgī* does not differ from that of another, when each has the same basis viz. *tripadī* to fall back upon.

c5.33

¹ This coincidence led to the formation of 9 *gaṇas* (schools) instead of 11; for, otherwise there would have been 11 schools, one school for each *Gaṇadhara* out of 11. That only 9 schools came into existence is borne out by the following line occurring in the *Cuṇṇi* (p. 337) on the *Āvassaya*:— “अंकंपिय-अयलभातीणं एगो गणो, मेयज्ज-पभासाणं एगो गणो, एवं णव गणा होंति।”

c5.34

A *dvādaśāṅgī* means no doubt a collection of 12 *Aṅgas*. But it should be borne in mind that there is a difference of opinion regarding the order of these 12 *Aṅgas* which constitute a *dvādaśāṅgī*. Some believe that the 12 *Aṅgas* were composed in the following order:—

c5.35

(1) *Āyāra*, (2) *Sūyagaḍa*, (3) *Thāṇa*, (4) *Samavāya*, (5) *Viāhapaṇṇatti*, (6) *Nāyādhammakahā*, (7) *Uvāsagadasā*, (8) *Antagaḍadasā*, (9) *Aṇuttarovavāiyadasā*, (10) *Paṇhāvāgaraṇa*, (11) *Vivāgasuya* and (12) *Diṭṭhivāya*.²

c5.36

² These are the titles of 12 *Aṅgas*. *Aṅgas* 6 to 11 have their titles in plural; so some mention them in the nominative as *Nāyādhammakahāo*, *Uvāsagadasāo*, *Antagaḍadasāo*, *Aṇuttarovavāiyadasāo* and *Paṇhāvāgaraṇaṃ*. See *Samavāya* (s. 136) and *Nandī* (s. 45).

c5.37

Others maintain that 14 *Puvvas* which make up *Puvvagaya*, one of the ³five sections of *Diṭṭhivāya*, were first composed, and they were followed by the composition of the rest of the *dvādaśāṅgī*.⁴ There is no explicit statement, so far as I know,

c5.38

³ The pertinent portion in *Nandī* (s. 57) which mentions these five sections is:— “दिट्ठिवाए णं सव्वाभवपरूवण आघवइज्ज, से समासबो पंचविहे पणत्ते, तं जहा-परिक्कम्मे १ सुत्ताइ २ पुव्वए ३ अणुओगे ४ चूलिआ ५।”

c5.39

⁴ Cf. the following lines of the *Cuṇṇi* (pp. 56-57) on *Āvassaya*:— “से किं तं पुव्वगयं? कम्हा पुव्वगतं ति? उच्यते-जम्हा तित्थकरो तित्थपवत्तणकाले गणहरा सव्वसुत्ता-बारत्तणतो पुव्वं पुव्वगतसुत्तत्थं भासइ तम्हा ‘पुव्वं’ ति भणिता, गणहरा सुत्तरयणं करेन्ता आयाराइसयणं करेंति ठवेंति य, अण्णारियमतेणं पुण पुन्नगतसुत्तत्थो पुव्वं अरहता भासिया गणहरेहि वि पुव्वगयं चेव पुव्वं रइयं पच्छा आयाराइ, एवमुत्तो चोदक आह-णणु पुव्वावरविरुद्धं, कम्हा? आयारिणज्जत्तिए मणितं-‘सव्वेसिं आचारो०’ गाहा, आचार्य आह-सत्यमुत्तं किन्तु ठावणा, इमं पुण अक्खररयणं पडुच्च भणितं, पुव्वं पुव्वा कता इत्यर्थः।”

c5.40

Malayagiri Sūri has reproduced this very view in his com. (p. 240b) on *Nandī*. Abhayadeva Sūri, too, has done the same as can be seen from his which says that on 14 *Puvvas* being composed, the remaining portion of *Diṭṭhivāya* was composed, and then the 11 *Aṅgas* commencing with *Āyāra* and ending with *Vivāgasuya*. But this seems to be the natural course to have been followed; for, it is too much to believe that the composition of the 14 *Puvvas* was immediately followed by that of the 11 *Aṅgas*, thus leaving the remaining 4 sections of *Diṭṭhivāya* to be attended to, last.

c5.41

From the above survey we come to the conclusion that 12 *Aṅgas* were no doubt composed, but the difference of opinion exists with regard to their order of composition, some believing *Āyāra* to be the first and *Diṭṭhivāya* to be the last, whereas others believing *Diṭṭhivāya* to be the first and *Āyāra*, *Sūyagaḍa* and other *Aṅgas* as following it.

c5.42

This finishes the question about the composition of 12 *Aṅgas*, but there remains one more knotty problem to be tackled before we can finish the discussion about the genesis of the *dvādaśāṅgī*. It refers to the order of the composition of the various sections of *Diṭṭhivāya*. As already noted on p. 6, there are five sections of this *Diṭṭhivāya* viz. (1) *Parikamma*, (2) *Sutta* (at times used in plural), (3) *Puvvagaya*, (4) *Aṇuoga* and (5) *Cūliyā*. Now we find that these 5 sections are mentioned in two different orders in the religious works of the *Jainas*. For instance, *Nandī*, on one hand, mentions the five sections in the order noted above, whereas some works such as Hemacandra Sūri's *Abhidhānacintāmaṇi* (II, 160¹), Devendra Sūri's com. (p. 17)² on his own work com. (pp. 130b-131a) on *Samavāya*. Siddhasena Gaṇi has also endorsed this very view in his com. (p. 208b) on *Pavayaṇasāruddhāra*. In Siddhasena Gaṇi's *bhāṣyānusāriṇī ṭīkā* (p. 94) on *Tattvārtha* (1, 20) and in *Triṣaṣṭi* (X, 5, 172) only one view is mentioned i. e. to say 14 *Puvvas* were first composed. Anyhow we can see that there have been two views propounded in this connection at least as early as the date of the *Cuṇṇi* referred to on p. 4.

c5.43

¹ “परिकम्म-सुत्त-पुव्वाणुयोग-पुव्वगत-चूलिकाः पञ्च । स्युर्दृष्टिवादाभेदाः पूर्वाणि चतुर्दशापि पूर्वगते ।। १६० ।। ”

c5.44

² “ परिकम्म १ सुत्त २ पुव्वाणुओग ३ पुव्वगय ४ चूलिया ५ एवं । पण दिठ्ठिवायेभेया चउदस पुव्वाई पुव्वगयं ।। ”

c5.45

*Kammavivāya* (v. 6), Vinayavijaya Upādhyāya's *Lokaprakāśa* (III, 792¹) and Akalaṅka's *Tattvārtharājavārtika* (p. 51)² assign to *Puvvagaya*, the 4th place rather than the 3rd, and to *Aṇuoga*, the 3rd place instead of the 4th, the order of the rest being the same as before. This means that we have two orders as under:—

c5.46

¹ Herein there is the same verse as noted on p. 7, fn. 1.

c5.47

² "स पंचविधः परिकर्म सूत्रं प्रथमानुयोगः पूर्वगतं चूलिके चेति।"

c5.48

I (1) *Parikamma*, (2) *Sutta*, (3) *Puvvagaya*, (4) *Aṇuoga* and (5) *Cūliyā*.

c5.49

II (1) *Parikamma*, (2) *Sutta*, (3) *Aṇuoga*, (4) *Puvvagaya* and (5) *Cūliyā*.

c5.50

And hence the knotty problem before us. Is this difference really an outcome of some deliberate understanding or is it purely accidental, and as such it has no such significance as we may be inclined to attribute? In other words, did this difference arise because in course of enumerating the sections of *Diṭṭhivāya*, no special attention was paid to their order—the order being then looked upon as immaterial and enumeration the main goal to be achieved? I do not know, if there is any source which throws light upon this problem. So I may try to solve this problem, by assuming for the present that these orders represent two different views regarding the composition (*racanā*) and the subsequent arrangement (*sthāpanā*) of the five sections of *Diṭṭhivāya* with a view to facilitate their study. I have not come across any reference explicit or implicit wherefrom we can deduce that it was rather some other section of *Diṭṭhivāya* which was first composed and not *Puvvagaya* comprising 14 *Puvvas*. It is true that there is a possiblity to construe that the composition of the 14 *Puvvas* is not to be taken in quite a literal sense; but it, after all, refers to the composition of *Diṭṭhivāya* in its entirety, though 14 *Puvvas* are specifically

c5.51

Taking this reference together with those noted on p. 7, fn. 1-2, we see that instead of *Aṇuoga* (Sk. *Anuyoga*), we have its synonyms *Puvvāṇuoga* (Sk. *Pūrvānuyoga*) and *Prathamānuyoga* (Pr. *Paḍhamāṇuoga*).

c5.52

mentioned¹ in virtue of their importance and the consequent unique position they hold, not only so far as the 12th *Aṅga* is concerned but all the 12 *Aṅgas* are concerned. But even this construction does not at all improve our situation.

c5.53

¹ This so to say furnishes us with an example of the figure of speech known as 'synecdoche'.

c5.54

It appears that looking to the nature of the five sections, they must have been composed in the very order in which they are mentioned in *Nandī*, and that the other order only reflects the attitude that can be taken regarding the study and teaching of *Aṇuoga*, the 4th section of *Diṭṭhivāya*. To put it explicitly, on seeing that *upakrama*, *nikṣepa*, *anugama* and *naya* form the four entrances to *aṇuyoga* or exposition, one may be inclined to believe that the *Aṇuoga* in question, too, is associated with these four entrances. If this is correct, it may be added that it is an open secret that one has to go through the first two entrances before studying a scripture (strictly speaking its portion), and the last two entrances are resorted to, after one has been initiated into the portion concerned. Some may therefore look upon the first two entrances as the main ones; for, it is after mastering them that the study of the portion concerned is commenced, whereas others may attach more importance to the last two as they help in cultivating and culminating the real study. It is this difference of opinion which may lead to the change in the assignment of the orders for *Puvvagaya* and *Aṇuoga*. For, those who hold the first view may assign to *Aṇuoga*, a place prior to that meant for *Puvvagaya*, whereas those who hold the second view may place *Puvvagaya* ahead of *Aṇuoga*. This means that some may believe that the right place for *Aṇuoga*, is just where it is first made use of, whereas some may believe that the initial stage is not so important as the culminating one, and that the latter follows the initiation of the work in question, and hence it cannot be assigned a place prior to that work but only one following it.

c5.55

This is what can be roughly said by taking into account the subject-matter of *Anuogaddāra* and the etymology¹ of the word '*anuyoga*'. But it may be argued that this is not the correct view; for, the nature of *Anuoga* as expounded in the sacred works of the Jainas hardly warrants or justifies this state of affairs.² On the contrary, the two main divisions of *Anuoga* viz. *Mūlapadhamānuoga* and *Gaṇḍiyānuoga*³ and their contents lead us to

c5.56

In the *Cuṇṇi* (p 58) on *Nandī* (s. 57) we have:—

c5.57

‘अणुयोगो त्ति अनुयोग इत्येतत्, अनुरूपो योग अनुयोग इत्येवं सर्व एव सूत्रार्थो वाच्यः, इह जन्मभेद-पर्यायशिक्षादियोगः त्रिविशिताऽनुयोगो वाच्यः, स च द्विविधो मूलपढमाणुयोगो गंडिकाविशिष्टश्च।’

c5.58

Malayagiri Sūri observes while commenting upon this sūtra:—

c5.59

“अथ कोऽयमणुयोगः ? अनुरूपोऽनुकूलो वा योगोऽनुयोगः सूत्रस्य स्वेनाभिधेयेन सार्थमनुरूपः सम्बन्धः।”

c5.60

Hemacandra Sūri has said the same thing almost *ad verbatim* in his com. (p. 105) on *Abhidhanacintāmaṇi* (III, 160).

c5.61

See the ending portion of the *Cuṇṇi* quoted here in fn. 1. The lines that follow it may be also noted:

c5.62

“तथ मूलपढमाणुयोगे त्ति, त्द मूलभावस्तु तीर्थकरः, तस्स प्रथमं पूर्वभवादि अथवा मूलस्स पढमा-णुयोगो एत्थ तित्थगरस्स अनीतभवभावा वट्टमाणवयजम्मादिया भावा कहेज्जंति, अहवा जे मूलस्स भावा ते मूलपढमाणुयोगो, एत्थ तित्थगरस्स जे भावा पभूतास्ते परियायपुरिसत्ताइ भाणियव्वा; गंडियाणुयोगो त्ति इक्सुमादिपर्वकडिकावत् एकाधिकारस्ततो गंडियाणुयोगो भण्णति, ते च कुलकरादियातो विमलवाहणादि-कुलकराणं पुव्वभवजम्मणम्प्पमाण० गाहा, एवमादि ज किंचि कुलकरस्य वत्तव्वं तं सव्वं कुलकरगंडियाए भणितं, एवं तित्थगरादिगदियासु वि”

c5.63

From this it can be seen that the *Cūrṇikāra* interprets *Mūlapadhamānuoga* in three ways while commenting upon the following portion of *Nandī* (s. 57):—

c5.64

“मूलपढमाणुओगं अरहंताणं भगवंताणं पुव्वभवा आउं चवणाई जम्मणाइं अभिसेआ रायवरसिरीओ पव्वज्जाओ नवा य उग्गा केवलनाणुप्पयाओ तित्थपवत्त०ाणि अ सीसा गणा गणहरा अज्जपवत्तिणीओ भवस्स चउव्विहस्स जं च रिमाणं जिणमणपज्जवबोहिणाणी सम्मतसुअणाणो अ बाई अणुत्तरगई अ उत्तरवेउव्विआ अ मुणिणा जत्तिआ सिद्धा सिद्धीपहो जह देसिओ जच्चिरं च कालं पाभो-वगया जे जहिं अत्तिआई भत्ताइ छेत्ता अंतगदे मुणिवरुत्तमे तमरओधविप्पमुक्के मुक्खसुहम्मणुत्तरं च पत्ते एवमन्ने अ एवमाइभावा मूलपढमाणुओगे कहिआ, सेतं मूलपढमाणुओगे।”

c5.65

This consists of several kinds of *gaṇḍiyās*. One of them is *Cittantaragaṇḍiyā* and is described in the *Cuṇṇi* (pp. 58-61) on *Nandī* (s. 57) as under:—

c5.66

‘चितंतरगंडिय’ त्ति, चित्ता इति अनेकार्थाः अंतरे इति उसभअजियंतरे वा दिठ्ठा, गंडिका इति खंडं अतो चित्तरे गंडिका दिठ्ठा, तो तेसिं परूवणा पुव्वायरिपहिं इमा दिठ्ठा—

c5.67

आदिज्जसादीण उसभस्स पओप्पर गरवतीणं। सगरसुयाण सुबुद्धी इणमो संखं परिकेइ ॥१॥
चोदस लक्खा भिद्वा णिवडंगं य होति सव्वट्ठे। एवेक्केके ठाणे पुरिसगुणा होंतडसंखेज्जा ॥२॥
पुणरवि चोदस लक्खा भिद्वा णिवदीण दोण्णि सव्वट्ठे। जगठाणे वि असंखया पुरिसजुगा होंति णाियव्वा ॥३॥
जावय लक्खा चोदस भिद्वा पण्णाम होंति सव्वट्ठे। पण्णासठाणे वि य पुरिसजुगा होंतिडसंखेज्जा ॥४॥

c5.68

assume that this *Aṇuoga* deals more or less with the biographies of the *Tīrthaṅkaras*, the *Kulakaras*¹ (patriarchs²), the *Gaṇadharas* and several other persons who attained liberation or were born in the *Anuttara vimānas* during the period that began with the life of Lord Ṛṣabha and ended with the birth of Jitaśatru, father of Lord Ajita. In short, *Aṇuoga* is *dharmakathānuyoga* which consists of *kathās* having mostly for their central figures, persons who attained liberation or who were about to attain liberation in the next birth or so. Relying on this view, one may try to explain as under, the difference in the orders of the 3rd and 4th sections of *Diṭṭhivāya*:—

c5.69

A student of Jainism knows it full well that there are four *anuyogas*³ viz. (1) *dharmakathānuyoga*, (2) *gaṇitānuyoga*, (3) *dravyānuyoga* and (4) *caraṇakaraṇānuyoga* permeating⁴ the entire sphere

c5.70

एगुत्तरा दुल्लक्खा सव्वठाणे य जाव पण्णासा। एकेकुत्तरठाणे पुरिसजुगा होंतिगवेज्जा ।। ५ ।। विपरीयं सव्वट्ठे नोदस लक्खा य णिवुओ एगो। मच्चेव य परिवाडी पण्णामा जाव सिद्धीए ।। ६ ।। तेण परं लक्खादि दो दो ठाणा य समग वच्चंति। णिव्वतिसब्बट्ठेहिं णामि तासिं विही होइ ।। ७ ।। दो लक्खा सिद्धीए दो लक्खा णरवदीण मव्वट्ठे। एवं तिलक्खणउ पंच जाव लक्खा अभेलेज्जा ।। ८ ।। सिवगतिसव्वट्ठेहिं चित्ततरगंडिता ततो णउरो। एगा एगुत्तरिया एगादि वितिउत्तरा तड्या ।। ९ ।। ततिएगादि तिओत्तर णगपादि ओत्तरा चउत्थे य। पढमाए सिद्धीको दक्खिण य मव्वट्ठिद्धंमि ।। १० ।। तत्तो तिण्णि णरिंदा सिद्धा चत्तारि होंति सव्वट्ठे। इय जाव अमवेज्जा सिवगतिमव्वट्ठ सिद्धेहिं ।। ११ ।। ताए बिउत्तरा सिद्धेको तिण्णि होंति सव्वट्ठे। एवं पंच य मत्त य जाव अमवेज्ज दो तिण्णि ।। १२ ।। एग चउ सत्त दसगं जाव असेलेज्ज होंति दोतिण्णि। सिवगतिसव्वट्ठेहिं तिउत्तरा एत्थ णेयव्वा ।। १३ ।। ताहे तियगादिबिउत्तराए अऊणतीसं तु तियग ठावेउं। पढमे उ णत्थि खेवो सेमेसु इमे भवे खेवा ।। १४ ।।

c5.71

In all, there are 32 verses; but I have here given only 14.

c5.72

1 For the lives of 7 *Kulakaras* the reader should refer to *Samavāya* (s. 157), *Paumacariya* (III, 50-58) and *Triṣaṣṭi* (I, 2, 137-206).

c5.73

2 This is, of course, a rough rendering.

c5.74

3 Cf. the following lines occurring in Śīlāṅka Sūri's com. (p. 1ᵇ) on *Ayāra*:— "अतः प्रारभ्यतेऽर्हन्ननुयोगः, स च चतुर्धा, तद् यथा-धर्मकथानुयोगो गणितानुयोगो द्रव्यानुयोगश्चरण-करणानुयोगश्चेति, तत्र धर्मकथानुयोग उत्तराध्ययनादिकः, गणितानुयोगः सूर्यप्रज्ञप्त्यादिकः, द्रव्यानुयोगः पूर्व्वाणि सम्मत्यादिकश्च, चरणकरणानुयोगश्च आचारादिकः, म च प्रधानतमः, शेषाणां तदर्थत्वात्" For further references and some details about 4 *anuyogas*, see Maladhārin Hemacandra Sūri's com. (pp. 931-932) on *Viseśāvassayabhāsa* (v. 2295), Śānticandra Upādhyāya's *Prameyaratnamañjūṣā*, a com. (pp. 2ᵃ-2ᵇ) on *Jambuddīvapaṇṇatti*, etc.

c5.75

4 *Avassayanjjutti* (v. 227), *Avassayabhāsa* (v. 774) and *Viseśāvassayabhāsa* (v. 2288) bear testimony. All these three verses are identical, and the first of them is reproduced in the latter two works *ad verbatim* as under:—

c5.76

of the *Jaina* scriptures. Furthermore, he must be aware of the fact that it is possible to say that *kathānuyoga* is more beneficial and more appealing than *dravyānuyoga* so far as laymen are concerned. So it is not unnatural if one assigns to *Aṇuoga*, a place prior to *Puvvagaya*, on the ground that *Aṇuoga* is mostly, if not entirely, associated with *dharmakathānuyoga* (probably of a higher type), and *Puvvagaya*, with *dravyānuyoga*¹, which is, in a way, subordinate to *kathānuyoga*. Similarly one who may be attaching the greatest importance to *dravyānuyoga* in preference to any of the rest of the *anuyogas*, may very well turn the tables against *Aṇuoga* and assign to it a place next to *Puvvagaya*, and not ahead of it.

c5.77

These are the only solutions I can think of, at present. Consequently I shall not now any more dwell upon this problem.

c5.78

This finishes a rough survey of the genesis of the *dvādaśāṅgī*; but that does not mean the termination of the topic of this chapter. For, there are a good many *Jaina* scriptures besides the *dvādaśāṅgī*, though they are practically evolved² out of this *dvādaśāṅgī*,

c5.79

“देवंदवंदिपहिं महाणुभावेहिं रक्खियज्जेहिं । जुगमासज्ज विभत्तो अणुओगो तो कओ चउहा ॥ २२७ ॥”

c5.80

The following verses of the *Āvassayanijjutti* may be also consulted:—

c5.81

“जावंति अज्जणइरा अपुहुत्तं कालियाणुओगस्स । तेणारेण पुहुत्तं कालियसुय दिट्ठिवाए य ॥ २२५ ॥
अपुहुत्ते अणुओगे चत्तारि दुवार भासइ एगो । पुहुताणुओगकरणे ते अत्य तओ वि वोच्छिन्ना ॥ २२६ ॥”

c5.82

These very verses occur in *Āvassayabhāsa* as v. 763 and 773 and in *Visesāvassayabhāsa* as v. 2284 and 2286. It may be noted that it is only *kāliya suya* which is mentioned here. This has been done with a view to show that it is *mukya* (principal), and that *ukkāliya suya* is *gauṇa* (subordinate). So says Hemacandra Sūri in his com. (p. 928) on *Visesāvassayabhāsa* (v. 2289).

c5.83

1 Cf. the following verse of the *Āvassayamūlabhāsa*:—

c5.84

“कालियसुयं च इसिभासियाइं तइआ य मरपन्नत्ती ।
सव्वो य दिट्ठिवाओ चउत्थओ होइ अणुओगो ॥ १२४ ॥”

c5.85

. This very verse occurs in *Visesāvassayabhāsa* as v. 2294.

c5.86

2 So far as this *dvādaśāṅgī* is concerned, its 12 *Aṅgas* are evolved out of *Diṭṭhivāya* also known as *Bhūyāvāya*. So says the following verse of *Visesāvassayabhāsa*:—

c5.87

“जइ वि भूयावाए सव्वस्स वओमस्स ओयारो । निज्जूहण तहावि हु दुम्मेहे पप्प इत्थी य ॥ ५५१ ॥”

c5.88

and that they are not the immediate compositions just coeval with the establishment of the *tīrtha* by the *Tīrthankara* in question. This means that I should, first of all, define the phrase "Jaina scriptures" and then indicate the scriptures which are not included in the *dvādaśāṅgī*.

c5.89

To begin with, I may note the various meanings of the word 'scripture' as given in *The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English* (p. 1072 of the new edition revised by H. W. Fowler). They are: "The Bible with or without the Apocrypha' (usually without article; also Holy scripture or the Ss.; a doctrine not found in S. or the Ss.); a or the quotation from the Bible; (attrib) taken from or relating to the Bible (a s. text, lesson; cf. scriptural); sacred book of non-Christian community; (archaic) inscription."

c5.90

From this it follows that leaving aside the archaic meaning of the word 'scripture' viz. 'inscription', it signifies a sacred book of any community, Christian or non-Christian. So one may naturally take the phrase 'Jaina scriptures' to mean sacred books of the *Jainas*. This view is correct, but I may add that the phrase can be interpreted in another way, too. In order that this may be easily realized, I shall give here two definitions, of *sammasuya* (Sk. *samyak-śruta*), and two of *micchāsuya* (Sk. *mithyā-śruta*), as well. According to the 1st definition the *dvādaśāṅgī* and other scriptures based upon it-the works which are composed by the Jaina saints of a very high calibre are classed as *sammasuya* whereas the works composed by the non-*Jainas* who are wanting in right knowledge are classed as *micchāsuya*.¹ According to the 2nd definition, all the works included in these two classes are *sammasuya* so far as a *samyagdṛṣṭi* (one having a right sort of faith) is concerned, whereas they are *micchāsuya* so far as a *mithyādṛṣṭi* (one having wrong faith) is concerned.² Consequently, according to this second definition, any and every sacred work, *Jaina* or non-*Jaina* is a *Jaina* scripture to a *samyagdṛṣṭi*.³ But I here do not use the phrase ‘Jaina scriptures’ in this wide sense but in the previous sense—the restricted sense. That is to say, I interpret ‘Jaina scriptures’ as authoritative works⁴ composed by eminent *Jaina* saints such as the *Gaṇadharas*, *Śrutakevalins*, *Daśapūrvadharas*, *Pratyekabuddhas* and the like. To be explicit, I should now enumerate these works.

c5.91

¹ The meanings of Apocrypha are given in this Dictionary on p. 50. They are "Books of old Testament included in Septuagint and Vulgate, but not originally written in Hebrew, nor counted genuine by Jews, and excluded from Canon at Reformation. In order that we can follow this, we may note the meanings of Septuagint and Vulgate. They are respectively as under:— "Greek version of O. T. including the apocrypha said to have been made about 270 B. C. by seventy translators." "Latin version of the Bible prepared by Jerome te in the 4th c."

c5.92

¹ “जे इमं अण्णाणपिहं मिच्छादिट्ठिहिं सच्चंत्थबुद्धिमविगप्पियं तं जहा-भारहं रामायणं भीमाहक्खं कोडिलयं सगडभद्दिआओ खोड (? वोडग) मुहं कप्पासिअ नागसुहुमं कणगसततरी वस्सेसियं बुद्धवयणं नेरामिअं कावालिअं लोगाययं सट्ठितंतं मादरं पुराणं पायंजली पुस्सदेवयं लेहं गणिअं-सउणरुअं नाड्याइं, अहवा बावतंरि कलाओ चत्तारि अ वेआ भंगोवंगा, एआइं मिच्छदिट्ठिस मिच्छत्त-परिग्गहाआइं मिच्छासुअं, एआइं चेव मम्मसिट्ठिस सम्मतपरिग्गहाआइं सम्मसुअं, अहवा मिच्छदिट्ठिस वि एआइं चेव सम्मसुअं, कव्हा? सम्मतहेउत्तणओ, जम्हा ते मिच्छदिट्ठिआ तेहिं चेव ममण्हिं चोइआ समाणा केइ मपक्सदिट्ठिओ चयंति, से तं मिच्छासुअं।”—*Nandi* (s. 42).

c5.93

² “जं इमं अरहंतेहिं ... पणीअं दुवालसंगं गणिपिडगं ... चोदसपुव्विस सम्मसुअं अभिण्णदसपुव्विस मम्मसुअं, तेण परं भिण्णेसु भयणा, से तं सम्मसुअं”—*Nandi* (s. 41). See also fn. 1.

c5.94

³ This is true in the case of some of the *mithyādṛṣṭis* too, in case works like the *Vedas* lead them to the right path and thus enable them to leave the non-*Jaina* fold and to become followers of Jainism. See the concluding lines of fn. 1.

c5.95

⁴ In this connection, I may quote the following verse:—

c5.96

Bhadrabāhusvāmin⁵ is the last i. e. the 5th *Śrutakevalin*, in case we use this word *Śrutakevalin* in the strictest sense;⁶ if not,

c5.97

⁵ He died in *Vira Samvat* 170. So says Hemacandra Sūri in his *Pariśiṣṭaparvan* (IX, 112).

c5.98

⁶ The strictest sense means to use the word ‘*Śrutakevalin*’ for one who is conversant with all the 14 *Puvvas*, both in words and meanings.

c5.99

“अर्हत्प्रोक्तं गणधरद्रव्यं प्रत्येकबुद्धच्च । स्थविरग्रथितं च तथा प्रमाणभूतं त्रिधा सूत्रम् ॥”

c5.100

This is quoted by Droṇa Sūri, in his com. (p. 3a) on *Ohanijjutti* in support of his statement as under:—

c5.101

“अर्थतस्तीर्थकरप्रणीतं सूत्रतो गणधरनिबद्धं चतुर्दशपूर्वधरोपनिबद्धं दशपूर्वधरोपनिबद्धं प्रत्येकबुद्धोपनिवद्धं च ।”

c5.102

This idea can be seen in the following verse of Vaṭṭakerasvāmin’s *Mūlāyāra* (V), too:—

c5.103

“सुतं गणधरकथिदं तहेव पतेयबुद्धकथिदं च । सुदकेवलिणा कथिदं अभिण्णदसपुव्वकथिदं च ॥८०॥”

c5.104

he is last but one, and Sthūlabhadra¹ is the last. All the 11 Gaṇadharas of Lord Mahāvīra were Śrutakevalins, and there were other saints of His, 289 in number, who, too, were Śrutakevalins. They were followed by Jambūsvāmin² and 4 Śrutakevalins viz. (1) Prabhavasvāmin, (2) Śayyambhava Sūri, (3) Yaśobhadra Sūri and (4) Sambhūtivijaya. Out of all these Śrutakevalins, we have already dealt with Gaṇadharas and 12 Aṅgas composed by each of them. It is said that Āvassaya is composed by Indrabhūti, the very 1st Gaṇadhara; but since the opinions differ in this connection and since the question of its genesis requires a lot of space, I reserve it for subsequent treatment. As regards 289 Śrutakevalins, we do not know, if any one of them had composed any work. The same is the case with Jambūsvāmin and Prabhavasvāmin. Śayyambhava Sūri, a junior contemporary of Prabhavasvāmin and a predecessor of Bhadrabāhusvāmin, has at least one work viz. Dasaveyāliya attributed to him. This and the two Cūliyas³ associated with it, I shall deal with, in due course. As regards Yaśobhadra Sūri and Sambhūtivijaya, we are again in the dark. Then comes the case of Bhadrabāhusvāmin. He is an author of ten Nijjuttis.⁴ Over and above that, he is looked upon as the author of Pajjosaṇākappa, the 8th chapter of Dasāsuyakkhandha and other Chedasūtras¹ viz. Vavahāra and Kappa,² and that he is said to be an author of Piṇḍanijjutti and Ohanijjutti as well.

c5.105

¹ He completely knew the meaning of the 1st 10 Puvvas only, though he had studied all the 14 Puvvas in words.

c5.106

² He is the last of the persons to have attained omniscience in this avasarpiṇī. No doubt, he, too, is a Śrutakevalin. But as Gaṇadharas are usually styled as Gaṇadharas and not Śrutakevalins, as the former designation is superior to the latter, similarly it is more consistent to say that Jambūsvāmin is kevalin than to address him by an inferior designation of Śrutakevalin. In short, the word Śrutakevalin is generally used for such persons who do not attain omniscience during their life but at the same time master the complete śruta-jñāna. This will explain why I have separately mentioned Jambūsvāmin.

c5.107

³ There are two Cūliyas in the case of Āyara, too, as we shall see hereafter.

c5.108

⁴ This is what Bhadrabāhusvāmin has himself said in the following verse of his Avassayanijjutti:— “आवस्सयस्स दसकालियस्स तह उत्तरज्झमायारे। मयगंड निज्जुत्ति नोच्छामि तहा दसाणं च ॥ ८२ ॥ कप्पस्स य निज्जुत्ति ववहारस्सय परमनितुणारम। मरियपण्णत्तीए वोच्छं इसिभासियाणं च ॥ ८३ ॥”

c5.109

¹ In all, there are, roughly speaking, six Chedasūtras viz., (1) Nisīha, (2) Mahānisīha, (3) Vavahāra, (4) Dasāsuyakkhandha, (5) Kappa and (6) Pañcakappa or its substitute Jiyakappa.

c5.110

² Cf. the following verse of Pañcakappabhāsa composed by Saṅghadāsa Kṣamāśramaṇa: —

c5.111

The ten Nijjuttis here referred to, are versified commentaries in Prākṛta on the following 10 works: —

c5.112

(1) Āvassaya, (2) Dasaveyāliya, (3) Uttarajjhayaṇa, (4) Āyāra, (5) Sūyagaḍa, (6) Dasāsuyakkhandha, (7) Kappa, (8) Vavahāra, (9) Sūriyapaṇṇatti and (10) Isibhāsiya.

c5.113

Out of these ten works, we had an occasion to mention (1), (2), (4) and (5) up till now. As regards (3), it appears that it is not a work of one single author, though Prof Banarasidas in his Ardhamāgadhī Reader (p. 45) attributes its authorship to Bhadrabāhusvāmin. Works (6), (7) and (8) come under the class of works known as Chedasūtras, and they are said to be the compositions of Bhadrabāhusvāmin. Works (9) and (10) are rather anonymous, and out of them, the last is said to be a work consisting of 45 ajjhayaṇas narrated by 45 Pratyekabuddhas, one by each of them.³

c5.114

³ Cf. the following lines occurring in Yaśodeva Sūri's com. (p. 67ᵃ) on Pakkhiyasutta: —

c5.115

Before proceeding further, I may mention that all these 10 works which are commented upon by Bhadrabāhusvāmin, a Śrutakevalin, deserve to be included in the list of Jaina scriptures (and I accordingly do so), though a work like Sūriyapaṇṇatti is anonymous. For, its author, whoever he was, must have been an outstanding personality, and this work of his must have been

c5.116

“वंदामि भद्दबाहुं पाईणं चरिमसयलमुयणाणं। सुत्तत्थकारगमिमं दसाण कप्पे य ववहारे॥”

c5.117

For this verse see pp. 259 and 67 of Descriptive Catalogue of Jaina Manuscripts (vol. XVII of Des. Cat. of the Govt. collections of Mss. deposited at Bhandarkar O. Research Institute), and Peterson, Report IV, p. 100.

c5.118

“इसिभासियाइं ति इह रूपयः प्रत्येकबुद्धसाधवस्ते चात्र नेमिनाथतीर्थवर्तिनो नारदादयो विंशतिः, पार्श्वनाथतीर्थवर्तिनः पञ्चदश, वर्द्धमानस्वामितीर्थवर्तिना दश ग्राह्याः, तैर्भाषितानि पञ्चचत्वारिंशत्संख्यान्यध्ययनानि श्रवणाधिकार (भ) वन्ति ऋषितानि।”

c5.119

of a very high order as not only to attract the attention of a *Śrutakevalin* but to lead him to comment upon it.

c5.120

To this list of the *Jaina* scriptures so far enumerated, may be added works composed by Sthūlabhadra. But we do not know whether he at all composed any work. This finishes the enumeration of the works of one and all the *Śrutakevalins*. Now we may turn to the works of *Daśapūrvadharas*.¹ Vajrasvāmin is said to be the last in the lot.² We do not know if he or any other *Daśapūrvadharas* except Śyāma Sūri who preceded him, ever composed any work. *Paṇṇavaṇā* is said to be the work of this very Śyāma Sūri.

c5.121

¹ This is due to the fact that in this *avasarpiṇī*, there has not flourished any such saint who knew 13, 12 or 11 *Puvvas*. The following lines from Droṇa Sūri's com. (p. 3ᵃ) on *Ohaṇijjutti* may be quoted in this connection :— "अस्यामवसर्पिण्यां चतुर्दशपूर्वनन्तरं दशपूर्वधरा एव सजाता न त्रयोदशपूर्वधरा द्वादशपूर्वधरा एकादशपूर्वधरा वा"

c5.122

It may be added in this connection that some of the *Saṅgrahaṇis* on *Upāṅgas* are compositions of some of the *Daśapūrvadharas*; for, this is what we learn from Droṇa Sūri's com. (p. 3²)³ on *Ohaṇijjutti*.

c5.123

² In *Subodhikā* (p. 169b) it is said:— "महागिरिः १ सुहस्ती च २ सूरिः श्रीगुणसुन्दरः। श्यामार्यः ४ स्कन्दिलाचार्यो ५ रेवतीमित्रसूरिराट् ६॥ श्रीधर्मा ७ भद्रगुप्तश्च ८ श्रीगुप्तो ९ वज्रसूरिराट्। युगप्रधानप्रवरा दर्शते दशपूर्विणः॥"

c5.124

³ The pertinent line is as under:— "दशपूर्वधरा अपि शासनस्योपकारका उपाङ्गादीनां सङ्ग्रहण्यूपरचनेन हेतुना"

c5.125

This means that it now remains to examine the question of the works of the *Pratyekabuddhas*. Some of the *ajjhayaṇas* of *Uttarajjhayaṇa* are said to be the works of some of the *Prateyakabuddhas*. Moreover, some of the works known as *Prakīrṇakas* are attributed to them about which we shall refer to, hereafter.

c5.126

This rough discussion about the works that can be termed as *Jaina* scriptures, gives us an idea as to the number of works of which the genesis remains to be attempted. They are:—

c5.127

(1) *Āvassaya*, (2) *Dasaveyāliya*, (3) *Uttarajjhayaṇa*, (4) *Dasāsuyakkhandha*, (5) *Kappa*, (6) *Vavahāra*, (7) *Sūriyapaṇṇatti*, (8) *Piṇḍanijjutti*, (9) *Ohaṇijjutti*, (10) *Cūliyās* and (11) *Paṇṇavaṇā*.

c5.128

It may be noted that out of these 12 works, the first three along with the 8th and the 9th form a group known as *Mūlasūtra*. The 4th, 5th and the 6th are classed under the name of *Chedasūtra*, while the 7th and the 11th, under the name of the *Upānga*. This will show that over and above the *Jaina* scriptures noted up till now, there are some more *Jaina* sacred works; for, the number of the *chedasūtras* as already stated is 5 or 6, and that of the *Upāngas* 12. No doubt, almost all of these works are anonymous, and it is very very difficult to ascertain their dates of composition. Even then an attempt must be made to examine their genesis, too; for, they are also after all, *Jaina* scriptures, though perhaps not in the strictest sense. But as this chapter has already out-swollen in size, I have to reserve this topic for subsequent treatment. I may therefore conclude this chapter by mentioning only two facts as under:—

c5.129

(1) There are works known as *Prakīrṇakas*. They were composed by the 14,000 disciples¹ of Lord Mahāvīra-the disciples who were endowed with four types of *mati-jñāna*. These disciples, as some say, are not necessarily the *Pratyekabuddhas*;¹ but whatever it may be, we have no means to know exactly which works were composed by them. The works styled as *Prakīrṇakas* and enumerated under the two groups known as *kāliya-suya*² and *ukkāliya-suya*³ are perhaps some of the works composed by these *Pratyekabuddhas*. Whether it is so or not, their genesis will be taken up hereafter.

c5.130

¹ There is a difference of opinion as to whether these are the direct pupils of Lord Mahāvīra or the indirect ones, and as such they are not necessarily contemporaneous with Lord Mahāvīra. In this connection I may reproduce the following lines from Malayagiri Sūri's com. (p. 208b) on *Nandi*:— “एके सुरयः प्रज्ञापयन्ति-इदं किल चतुरशीतिसहस्रादिकं ऋषभदीनां तीर्थकृतां श्रमणपरिमाणं प्रधानसूत्र-विरचनसमर्थान् श्रमणानधिकृत्य वेदितव्यं, इतरथा पुनः सामान्यश्रमणाः प्रभूततरा अपि तस्मिन् २ ऋषभ-दिकाले आसीरन्, अपरे पुनरेवं प्रज्ञापयन्ति-ऋषभआदीर्थकृतां जीवतमिदं चतुरशीतिसहस्रादिकं श्रमण-परिमाणं प्रवाहतः पुनरैकस्मिन् तीर्थे भूयांसः श्रमणा वेदितव्याः, तत्र ये प्रधानसूत्रविरचनशक्तिसमन्विताः सुप्रसिद्धतदग्रन्था अतत्कालिका अपि तीर्थे वर्तमानास्तथाधिकृता द्रष्टव्याः, एतदेव मतान्तरमुपदर्शयन्नाह- 'अथवे'त्यादि, अथवेति प्रकारान्तरपदर्शने, यस्य ऋषभआदीर्थकृतो यावन्तः शिष्यास्तीर्थे औत्पत्तिक्या वैनयिक्या कर्मजया पारिणामिक्या चतुर्विधया बुद्ध्या उपेताः-मन्विता आसीरन् तस्य-ऋषभआदेस्तावन्ति प्रकीर्णक-सङ्ख्याण्यभवन्, प्रत्येकबुद्धा अपि तावन्त एव, अत्रैके व्याचक्षते-इह एकैकस्य तीर्थकृतस्तीर्थेपरिमाणानि प्रकीर्णकानि भवन्ति, प्रकीर्णककारिणामपरिमाणत्वात्, केवलमिह प्रत्येकबुद्धरचितान्येव प्रकीर्णकानि द्रष्टव्यानि प्रकीर्णकपरिमाणेन प्रत्येकबुद्धपरिमाणप्रतिपादनात्, स्यादेतत्-प्रत्येकबुद्धानां शिष्यभावो विरुध्यते, तदेतद-समीचीनं, यतः प्रव्राजकाचार्यमेवाधिकृत्य शिष्यभावो निषिध्यते, न तु तीर्थकरोपदिष्टशास्त्रप्रतिपत्तृत्वेनापि, ततो न कश्चिद् दोषः, तथा च तेषां ग्रन्थः-इह तीर्थे अपरिमाणा पइन्ना, पइन्नगासामिअपरिमाणत्तओ, किंतु इह सुत्ते पत्तेयबुद्धपणीयं पइन्नगं भणियव्वं, कन्हा?, जम्हा पइण्णगपरिमाणेन चेव पत्तेयबुद्धपरिमाणं कीरइ, (इति) भणियं 'पत्तेयबुद्धा वि तत्तिया चेव' ति, चोयग आह-'नणु पत्तेयबुद्धा सिरसाभावो वि विरुद्धए' आयरिओ आह-'तिथयरपणीयमाणपडिवन्नओ तस्सीसा हवंती'ति, अन्ये पुनरेवाहुः-'सामान्येन प्रकीर्ण-कैस्तुल्यत्वात् प्रत्येकबुद्धानामभिधानं, न तु नियोगतः प्रत्येकबुद्धरचितान्येव प्रकीर्णकानीति'।”

c5.131

¹ See the ending portion of fn. 1 of p. 18. 2-3 See pp. 23-24. 4 The pertinent lines are as under:— “छेठ्ठणं भतेणं अपाणएणं साइणा नक्खत्तेणं जोगमुवागएणं पच्चूसकालसमयंसि संपकिअंकणिसण्णे पणपन्नं अज्झयणाई कलाणफलविवागाई पणपन्नं अज्झयणाई पावफलविवागाई छत्तीसं च अपुह-वागरणाई वागरित्ता पहाणं नाम अज्झयणं विभावेमाणे २ कालए” 5 They are— “कल्याणफलपाकानि पञ्चपञ्चाशतं तथा। तावन्त्यधविपाकानि जगादध्ययनानि तु ॥ २२३॥ षट्त्रिंशतमप्रश्न्याकरणान्यभिधाय च। प्रधानं नामाध्ययनं जगदुत्तरभावयत् ॥ २२४॥” 6 One may be tempted to belive that some of the *ajjhayaṇas* of *Vivāgasuyu*, the latter portion of *Ovavāiya* and the like may have something to do with some of these 110 *adhyanas*. 7 This is explained in *Subodhikā* (p. 125b) as below:— “प्रधान नाम एकं मरुदेवध्ययनं”

c5.132

(2) As stated in *Pajjosaṇākappa* (s. 147)⁴ and in *Triṣaṣṭi* (X, 13, v. 223-224⁵); Lord Mahāvīra when he was about to attain *nirvāṇa*, recited 55 *adhyayanas* dealing with the fructification of *puṇya* (merit), 55 pertaining to the fructification of *pāpa* (demerit),⁶ 36 though unasked, and one more named as *Pahāṇa*⁷ (*Sk. Pradhāna*). We do not know whether he did or did not inform the audience as to whose compositions they were. Hence the problem before us, of deciding their authorship. Roughly speaking, we may attribute the authorship of all these 147 *adhyayanas* to Lord Mahāvīra; but even then the question as to whether any one of these *adhyayanas* is incorporated in the existing canon, remains practically unsolved.

Linked texts (23)