A History of the Canonical Literature of the Jainas c6.129

c6.129

From this it follows that these two commentators look upon the 2nd and 1st *Uvaṅgas* as *Upāṅgas* and include some more works in the same group; but unfortunately we do not know as to what they are. One more point worth noting in this connection is that the order of the 1st two *Uvaṅgas* as mentioned by both of these commentators of *Tattvārtha*, differs from that noted before. Can we therefore infer that here the order is immaterial and enumeration, the main object? Or is it that in the time of these commentators, *Rājaprasenakiya* was looked upon as the 1st *Uvaṅga* and *Aupapātika* as the 2nd, and subsequently³ the order was reversed? I am not in a position to give a final answer to these questions at present. So leaving them aside I may note that at least by the time the *Bhāṣya* on *Tattvārtha* was composed, a certain class of works was no doubt designated as *Upāṅga*,⁴ and the same was the case at least by the time when *Nirayāvalisuyakkhandha* was composed.⁵