Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of the Canonical Literature of the Jainas c8: Chapter IV. The Extinct Agamas of the Jainas

A History of the Canonical Literature of the Jainas c8

Language
English

Chapter IV. The Extinct Agamas of the Jainas

c8.2

In each of the two cycles of *kālacakra*, *avasarpiṇī* and *utsarpiṇī* there flourish 24 *Tīrthaṅkaras* in this Bharata kṣetra and Airāvata as well. Moreover, an infinite number of *kālacakras* has elapsed by this time. Hence we can easily conclude that the number of the *Tīrthaṅkaras* that have flourished by this time is infinite. According to the traditional view of the *Jainas*, all the *Gaṇadharas* of each of these *Tīrthaṅkaras* composed *dvādaśāṅgis*. Furthermore, several direct or indirect disciples of every *Tīrthaṅkara*, who were endowed with four kinds of *mati* must have composed *Paiṇṇagas* as stated in *Nandī* (s. 44). Leaving aside the sacred literature that came into existence after the omniscience of Lord Mahāvīra, the preceding one seems to have been practically¹ irrevocably lost for ever. No record is available for it. This is perhaps natural; but it may appear certainly wonderful that there is no complete record to be found regarding the scriptures which were composed during a millennium beginning from 500 B. C. and ending with 500 A. D. Hereby I mean to suggest that we have no means to exactly point out all those scriptures which are now lost to us and of which

c8.3

I use this word to indicate the following items:—

c8.4

(i) Lord Mahāvīra while renouncing the world uttered the *Sāmāiyasutta*. Probably this very one is preserved in the *Avassaya*.

c8.5

(ii) He performed an *iryāpathikī kriyā*, after having crossed a river, prior to his attainment of omniscience. So on this occasion he may have uttered some sūtra similar to the *Iriyāvahiyasutta* occurring in the *Avassaya*.

c8.6

(iii) Some scholars believe that the 14 *Puvvas* belonged to a predecessor of Lord Mahāvīra, and at least some extracts from them are available at present.

c8.7

the composition does not go beyond 2550 years.¹ It is a pity that we do not possess even a list regarding the scriptures codified at the Valabhī council, convoked by Devarddhi Gaṇi. So our attempt, however serious and sincere it may be, to make a note of all these extinct works cannot yield the desired result. Even then it should be made so that we can have as least a glimpse of the works lost to us by this time. This endeavour of ours would have been surely facilitated, and the results we are going to arrive at would have been quite precise in case a scientific Catalogus catalogorum of *Jaina* manuscripts had been prepared and published by this time. In the absence of such a source, it now remains to examine the *Jaina* works wherein incidentally a loss of some work or works may have been noted; but owing to the want of sufficient time and free access to printed and unprinted works, a thorough investigation of these materials is not possible for the present writer. Even then an attempt is being made in this direction with the hope that it will act as a stimulus to others finally leading them to a complete success in view of the thorough investigation of this problem they may be inclined to carry out in near future.

c8.8

¹ That some portion is lost is certain; for, in the extant literature, there is no mention of an *āyāgapaṭa*. Further, there is no reference to Khā-ravela except in *Himavanta Therāvaḷi*.

c8.9

Broadly speaking we can divide the Āgamas into two groups: the *Aṅgas* and the *Paiṇṇagas*. The number of the former is fixed as 12; but such is not precisely the case with the latter, if the number 14000 is not taken to be correct. Anyhow the examination regarding the latter is more difficult than the former. We shall therefore proceed with the first group first. Therein we find that *Diṭṭhivāya* is lost, though not, all of a sudden. To be quite explicit, I may mention some of the details that throw light in this direction.

c8.10

It was in the time of Bhadrabāhusvāmin that Magadha had to face the calamity resulting from a twelve-year famine. This seriously affected the study of the *Jaina* saints who could hardly get sufficient alms even by begging from door to door. This resulted in their forgetting *Diṭṭhivāya*-a fact those saints became conversant with, when they assembled after *subhikṣā* had set in, and *durbhikṣā* had disappeared, Thereupon, they sent a pair of Munis, technically known as *saṅghāṭaka* to Bhadrabāhusvāmin who was practising *mahāprāṇa* in Nepal; for, he was the only one who was then in a position to remember and teach *Diṭṭhivāya*. He, however, declined to teach *Diṭṭhivāya* on the ground that he was then engaged in practising *mahāprāṇa*, a *dhyāna*, he could not attend to, during the twelve-year famine. The two Munis on their return informed the *saṅgha* accordingly. It thereupon sent another pair of Munis asking them to put a question to Bhadrabāhusvāmin as to the penalty prescribed for disobeying the order of the Jaina church, and to prescribe this very penalty to him for the same offence committed by him. The two Munis reached Nepal and asked the desired question to Bhadrabāhusvāmin. He answered: one who does not obey the order of the Jaina church deserves to be excommunicated. Thereupon, the two Munis said that the Jaina church assembled in Magadha, had prescribed this very penalty to him inasmuch as he had refused to teach *Diṭṭhivāya*. Bhadrabāhusvāmin quickly realized the situation and conditionally agreed to teach *Diṭṭhivāya*.¹ The underlying condition was that he would neither talk to the taught nor the taught should talk to him--exchange a single word with him when he was engaged in teaching or even otherwise, and that he would impart lessons by seven instalments during a day.² This being agreed upon, 500

c8.11

¹ 'तम्मि य काले बारसवरिसो दुकालो उवट्ठितो । संजता इतो इतो य समुद्दतीरे अच्छित्ता पुनरवि 'पाडलिल-पुत्ते' मिलिता । तेसिं अण्णस्स उद्देसो, अण्णस्स खंडं, एवं संघाहितेहिं एक्कारस अंगाणि संघाहिताणि, दिट्ठिवादो नत्थि । 'नेपाल'वत्तणीए य भद्दबाहुसामी अच्छंति चोदसपुव्वी, तेसिं संघेणं पथवितो संघाओ 'दिट्ठिवाइं वाएहिं' ति । गतो, निवेदितं संघकज्जं तं, ते भणंति-दुक्कालनिमित्तं 'महापाणं' न पविट्ठो मि, इयाणिं पविट्ठो मि, तो न जाति वायणं दातुं । पडिनियत्तेहिं संघस्स अक्खातं । तेहि अण्णो वि संघाओ विसज्जितो-जो संघस्स आणं अतिक्रमति तस्स को दंडो ? । ते गता, कहितं, तो अक्खाइ-उग्घाडिज्जइ । ते भणंति-मा उग्घाडेह, पेसेह मेहावी, सत्त पाडिपुच्छाणि देमि ।'—*Cuṇṇi* (pt. II, p. 187) on *Āvassaya*

c8.12

² *Pariśiṣṭaparvan* (IX, 68-69) and *Titthogāliya* (v. 736) seem to differ from each other so far as the periods for the *vācanās* are concerned. The pertinent portions are respectively as under:—

c8.13

"तत्रैकां वाचनां दास्ये भिक्षाचर्यत आगतः । तिसृषु कालवेलासु तिस्रोऽन्या वाचनास्तथा ॥ ६८ ॥
सायाहप्रतिक्रमणे जाते तिस्रोऽपराः पुनः । सेत्स्यत्येवं सङ्ककार्य मत्कार्यस्याविबाधया ॥ ६९ ॥"
"पारियकाउस्सग्गो, भसट्ठितो व अहव सेज्जाए । निंतो व अइंतो वा एवं भे वायणं दाहं ॥७३६॥"

c8.14

Jaina Sādhus with two attendants for every one of them, came to Nepal and tried to prosecute their studies. But all except Sthūlabhadra left the place as they could not face this situation.¹ He (Sthūlabhadra), too, could not completely master all the 14 *Puvvas* as for some reason or other Bhadrabāhusvāmin withheld the meaning of the last four *Puvvas* from him. Thus the meaning of the last 4 *Puvvas* got lost in *Vira Samvat* 170, the year in which Bhadrabāhusvāmin died. Later on, with the death of Sthūlabhadra, even the verbal embodiment of these four *Puvvas* came to an end, as he was debarred from teaching them to others.² Then, for some time at least, there flourished persons who were conversant with the first ten *Puvvas*, Vajrasvāmin being the last in the lot. After his *svargagamana*, there remained none who knew all the ten *Puvvas* in toto. Āryarakṣita Sūri³ who survived him, knew at least 9 *Puvvas* plus 24 *javiyas* of the 10th⁴

c8.15

¹ > "उज्जुत्ता मेहावी, सद्धाए वायणं अलभमाणा ।

c8.16

² > "अह भणइ थूलभद्दो अण्णं रूवं न किंचि काहामो ।

c8.17

³ For his life see *Āvassayacuṇṇi* (pt. I, pp. 397-415). He died in *Vira Samvat* 584, the very year when a schism named "Abaddhadiṭṭhi" arose in Dasapura. But according to *Valabhī Therāvalī*, he died in *Vira Samvat* 597. It may be noted in passing that this furnishes us with an example of the difference of 13 years in calculations in the case of the Skāndilīya and Nāgārjunīya schools. See p. 63.

c8.18

⁴ In *Āvassayacuṇṇi* (pt. I, p. 404) it is said:—

c8.19

अह ते थोवा थोवा, सव्वे समणा विनिस्सरिया ॥ ७४१ ॥
एको नवरि न मुंचति, सगडालकुलस्स जसकरो धीरो ।
नामेण थूलभद्दो, अविहीसाधम्मद्दो त्ति ॥ ७४२ ॥"—*Tit'hogaliya*

c8.20

इच्छावि जाणिउं जे अहं चत्तारि पुव्वाइं ॥ ८०० ॥
नाहिसि तं पुव्वाइं सुयमेत्ताइ विमुग्गहा हिंति (?)
इस पुण ते अणुजाणे जाण पण्हाई चत्तारि ॥ ८०१ ॥
एतेण कारणेण उ पुरिसजुगे अट्ठम्मि वीरस्स ।
सयराहेण पण्हाई जाण चत्तारि पुव्वाइ ॥ ८०२ ॥"—*Ibid.*

c8.21

"अचिरेण नव पुव्वाणि अहिताणि, दसम्मादत्तो घेतुं, ताथे अजवइहरा भणंति-जवियाइं करेहि, एयं परिकम्भमेयस्स, ताणि य सुहुमाणि, गाढं गणिते तं सुहुमं, चउवीसे जविया, सो वि ताव तं अजझाइ ।"

c8.22

Cf. the following lines occurring in Hemacandra's com. (p. 1003) on *Visesāvassayabhāsa* (v. 2509):—

c8.23

"शेषस्तु आर्यवैरस्वामिनः समीपेधीतो यावत् नव पूर्वाणि, तथा चतुर्विंशतियविकानि ।"

c8.24

In *Prabhāvakacarita* (II, v. 117), there is mention of nine and a half *Puvvas*, and this very thing is noted there in the case of Āryānandila, too.

c8.25

but he did not master the 10th completely. It appears that since his time the knowledge of the *Puvvas* went on getting curtailed so much so that by *Vīra Saṃvat* 1000, all the *Puvvas* got forgotten, and thus *Diṭṭhivāya* became extinct.¹

c8.26

¹ “जंबुद्दीवे णं दीवे भारहे वासे इमीसे ओसप्पिणीए देवाणुप्पियाणं एगं वाससहस्सं पुव्वए अणुसज्जिसति।”

c8.27

It may be noted that in this cycle of time, there is no intermediate stage so far as the reduction of the knowledge from 14 *Puvvas* to 10 *Puvvas* is concerned. For, there has flourished none who knew 13, 12 or 11 *Puvvas*. So says Droṇa Sūri in his com. (p. 3ᵃ)² on *Ohaṇijjutti*.

c8.28

² See p. 17, fn. 1.

c8.29

Some believe that Nāgahastin or his contemporary knew five *Puvvas*, and that Skandila, Himavanta, Nāgārjuna, Govinda Vācaka, Saṃyamaviṣṇu, Bhūtadinna, Lohitya Sūri, Dūṣya Gaṇi and Devarddhi Gaṇi Kṣamāśramaṇa and several *Cūrṇikāras*, knew at least the first *Puvva*, over and above the 11 *Aṅgas*.³

c8.30

³ See Muni Darśanavijaya’s article entitled as “दिगम्बर शास्त्र कैसे बने?” and published in *Jainasatyaprakāśa* (I, I, p. 15).

c8.31

It may not be amiss if we were to take a note of what the *Digambaras* say regarding the gradual loss of the 14 *Puvvas*. There is no unanimity of opinion in this connection; for, different versions are given in different works. Śubhacandra’s *Aṅgapaṇṇatti*, Brahma-Hemacandra’s *Suyakkhandha*, Indranandi’s *Śrutāvatāra*, Jinasena’s *Adipurāṇa*, *Uttarapurāṇa*, *Harivaṃśapurāṇa* and some of the *Digambara Paṭṭāvalīs* in Prākṛta may be cited as instances. This is not the place where I can try to examine each of them separately and come to any definite conclusion by attempting reconciliations where possible. I shall therefore remain contented by giving only one version in this connection—the version noted in *Jainasatyaprakāśa* (I, 7, pp. 213-214). Therein it is said: In *Vīra Saṃvat* 62, Jambūsvāmin attained liberation. He was the last *kevalin*. Viṣṇukumāra, Nandimitra, Aparājita, Govardhana and Bhadrabāhusvāmin I were conversant with 14 *Puvvas*. This brings us down to a period upto *Vīra Saṃvat* 162. Then came the era when we had persons who knew only 10 *Puvvas*. Their names are: Viśākha, Proṣṭhila, Kṣatriya, Jaya, Nāgasena, Siddhārtha, Dhṛtisena, Vijaya, Buddhilla, Deva (Gaṅgadeva) and Dharmasena. This covers a period upto *Vīra Saṃvat* 345. In *Śrutāvatāra* it is said that in the time of Nāgahastin, some one knew at least five *Puvvas*. Ācārya Dharasena is said to be conversant with two *Puvvas*. As a passing reference, I may add that amongst persons who knew only 11 *Aṅgas* and who were thus not conversant with any one of the *Puvvas*, are mentioned Nakṣatra, Jayapāla, Pāṇḍu, Dhruvasena and Kaṃsa. The last died in or about *Vīra Saṃvat* 565. Then we come across the names of persons who knew *Āyāra*, the 1st *Aṅga* only. They are: Subhadra, Yaśobhadra, Bhadrabāhu II and Lohārya. This brings us down to *Vīra Saṃvat* 683. The end of this year marked the extinction of the *Jaina Āgamas* in their entirety. This view, strange as it is, is advocated by some of the *Digambaras*, and it has led some of the *Śvetāmbaras* to question the very authority of the *Digambara* extant works.

c8.32

From this exposition it must have been seen that one and all the 14 *Puvvas* were not simultaneously lost or forgotten, but that their knowledge gradually dwindled so that by *Vīra Saṃvat* 1000, the *Puvvagaya* became extinct.

c8.33

This finishes the discussion about the loss of the main section of *Diṭṭhivāya*. So it now remains to note the stages about the loss of its remaining four sections. But as it requires an investigation about their contents, I defer its treatment for the time being, and in the meanwhile I note the various reasons assigned by modern scholars for the loss of *Diṭṭhivāya* in general and the 14 *Puvvas* in particular.

c8.34

Prof. Jacobi in his intro. (p. XLVI) to *S. B. E.* (vol. XXII) observes:

c8.35

“Professor A. Weber assigns as the probable cause of the *Driṣṭivāda* being lost, that the development of the Śvetāmbara sect had arrived at a point where the diversity of its tenets from those embodied in that book became too visible to be passed over. Therefore the *Driṣṭivāda*, which contained the Pūrvas, fell into neglect. I cannot concur in Professor Weber’s

c8.36

opinion seeing that the Digambaras also have lost the Pūrvas, and the Aṅgas to boot. It is not probable that the development of Gainism during the two first centuries after the Nirvāṇa should have gone on at so rapid a pace that its two principal sects should have been brought to the necessity of discarding their old canon. For, as stated above, after the splitting of the church in these two sects the philosophical system of the Gainas remained stationary, since it is nearly the same with both sects. As regards ethics, both sects, it is true, differ more. But as the extant canon of the Svetāmbaras is not falling into neglect, though many practices enjoined in it have long since been abandoned, it is not more probable that they should have been more sensible on the same score at the time when the Pūrvas formed their canon. Besides, some of the Pūrvas are said to have continued to be extant long after the time which we have assigned for the formation of the new canon. At last they disappeared, not by an intentional neglect, I presume, but because the new canon set into clearer light the Gaina doctrines, and put them forward more systematically than had been done in the controversial literature of the Pūrvas."

c8.37

The latest information we can gather on this point is to be found in L. Alsdolf’s article *A new version of the Agaḍadatta story* published in "New Indian Antiquary" (vol. I, No. 5, August 1938). There on p. 287 it is said:

c8.38

"I must confess that I do not believe in the legendary and biographical contents of the fourth part of the *Dṛṣṭivāda* but regard the Jaina tradition on this point as unfounded. I agree with Schubring (*Lehre der Jainas*, § 38) who has made it at least very probable that the real contents of the *Dṛṣṭivāda*, consisted of an exposition and refutation of heretical doctrines, and that this was the reason of its loss: it was thought undesirable to preserve these old discussions because their study could lead to a revival of heretical views and actions¹. The four parts of the *Dṛṣṭivāda*², viz. *parikamma*, *suttaim*, *puvvagaya*, and *anuyoga*, contained the "introductions", the "teachings" and the "*pūrva-paksa*" (this, and not "old texts" being the real meaning of "*puvva*”!) which were refuted by the "investigation" (*anuyoga*). This well-nigh excludes the possibility of legendary and biographical contents of the *Aṇuoga*; and I think the reason why such contents were ascribed to it later is not difficult to find. It is certain that, though the traditional subdivision of the *Dṛṣṭivāda* is probably genuine, the detailed tables of contents given in the *Nandī* and in the 4th Aṅga are entirely fantastic because at the time when they were composed

c8.39

¹ If this view is accepted, how is it possible to account for the several heretical doctrines one comes across in *Sūyagaḍa*?

c8.40

² This has 5 parts in all, *Cūliyā* being the last.

c8.41

the text was already lost and its contents were no longer known¹. Now when the real contents of the *Dṛṣṭivāda* had been forgotten, this text became a convenient place where everything could be located which it was thought desirable to invest with canonical authority. And since a continuous and systematic account of the Jaina mythology and hagiology, the "History of the 63² Great Men", was not found in the existing canon, it was attributed to the last part of the *Dṛṣṭivāda*. The *Vasudevahiṇḍī*, too, solemnly professes to be derived from the *prathamānuyoga* portion of the *Dṛṣṭivāda*, but it need hardly be pointed out that the Jain version of the *Bṛhatkathā* is not likely to have formed part of one the oldest works of the Jain canon."

c8.42

In my humble opinion, *Diṭṭhivāya* got lost as its major portion *Puvvagaya* was extremely difficult to be remembered and studied in view of its *gamas*³ and *bhaṅgas*⁴, the latter requiring a great deal of the mathematical ability to grasp them. In short, this 12th *Aṅga* was a hard nut to crack.

c8.43

With this digression, if it can be so called, I shall once more take up the thread of the *Śvetāmbara* trend of thought and notice what it has to say regarding the loss of works other than *Diṭṭhivāya* already referred to. Turning to *Āyāra* we find that out of the nine *ajjhayaṇas*⁵ which form its first *suyakkha-*

c8.44

1 It is not a rule that on a work being lost, its contents get forgotten. 2 It appears that originally we had 54 *uttama-puruṣas* as is borne out by *Samavāya* (s. 54) and Śīlācārya's *Caüpanna-mahāpurusacariya* (composd in *Saṃvat* 933), and it is Hemacandra Sūri who was probably the 1st to have dealt with 63 *śalākāpuruṣas* by adding 9 *Prativāsudevas* to the list of 54 great men viz., 24 *Tīrthaṅkaras*, 12 *Cakravartins*, 9 *Baladevas* and 9 *Vāsudevas*. 3 Cf. "से किं तं गमं? २ दिट्ठिवाओ, अगमिअं कालिअं सुयं"-*Nandi* (s. 44). In this connection, in *Nandicuṇṇi* (pp. 46-47) it is said: "आदिमज्झावसाणे वा किंचि विसेस-जुतं सुत्तं दुगादिसतगसो पदिज्जमाणं गमिअं भण्णति, तं च एवंविहं उस्सण्णं दिट्ठिवाए." 4 See my intro. (p. xiii) to *Gaṇitatilaka* published along with Siṃhatilaka Sūri's com. in G. O. Series as vol. LXXVIII. 5 Cf. the following verses occurring in the *Āyāraniijjutti*:-

c8.45

"सत्यपरिण्णा १ लोगविअओ २ य सीओसणिज्ज ३ सम्मत्तं ४ ।
तह लोगसारनामं ५ धुयं ६ तह महापपरिण्णा ७ य ॥ ३१ ॥
अइमए य विमोक्खो ८ उवहाणसुयं ९ च नवमंगं भणियं ।
इच्चेसो आयारो आयारगाणि सेसाणि ॥ ३२ ॥"

c8.46

ndha, Mahāpariṇṇa, its seventh ajjhayaṇa¹ is lost at least by the time of Śīlāṅka Sūri; for, he has mentioned this loss as a reason as to why he is not commenting upon it.² It is rather strange that at least some of the verses, if not all, which form a part of the Āyāranijjutti and which are said to pertain to this Mahāpariṇṇa, are preserved and are seen printed in the editions of Āyāra containing its Nijjutti and Śīlāṅka Sūri's com. It is difficult to say for certain as to when this Mahāpariṇṇa, got lost. It seems to be extant at least in the time of Vajrasvāmin; for, he restored the extinct³ ākāśagāminī vidyā from this ajjhayaṇa.⁴ The second suyakkhandha of Āyāra now-a-days consists of the four Cūlās viz. (1) Piṇḍesaṇāi⁵, (2) Sattasattikkagā, (3) Bhāvaṇā and (4) Vimutti, and it had one more Cūlā viz. Nisīha, in the time of Bhadrabāhusvāmin.⁶ Out of them, the 2nd Cūlā has been evolved out of this Mahāpariṇṇa as stated in Āyāranijjutti (v. 290)⁷; but

c8.47

1 See p. 77, fn. 5. It is however the 9th ajjhayaṇa according to Samavāya (s. 9). From Ind. Stud. (vol. XVI, p. 251 seq.) we learn that Nandi, Avassayanijjutti and Vidhiprapā, too, say so—S. B. E. (XXII, intro. p. XLIX).

c8.48

2 “अधुना सप्तमाध्ययनस्य महापरिज्ञाव्यस्थावसरः, तच्च व्यवच्छिन्नमिति कूस्वादतिलध्याध्ययनस्य सम्बन्धो वाच्यः।”

c8.49

3 Cf. “महापरिण्णाए विज्जा पमुट्ठआ आसी सा पदाणुसारिणा तेणुद्धरिता” —Avassayacuṇṇi (pt. I, p. 394)

c8.50

4 See the following 769th verse of Āvassayanijjutti:— “जेणुद्धरिआ विज्जा भागासगमा महापरिण्णाओ। वंदामि अज्वइहरं अपच्छिमो जो अ सुबहराण॥७६९॥”

c8.51

5 It seems that there is no specific name for the 1st Cūlā. So I have suggested this to facilitate the discussion.

c8.52

6 This is corroborated by the following verse of Āyāranijjutti:— “णवबंभचेरमइओ अठ्ठारसपयसहस्सिभो वेओ। हवइ य सपंचचूलो बहुबहुतरओ पयग्गेणं॥११॥”

c8.53

From this verse, it may be inferred that the name of each of the ajjhayaṇas at least of the first suyakkhandha is Bambhacera, and that the entire work is styled as Veä (Veda). Śīlāṅka Sūri, while commenting upon this verse has said: “पञ्चमी निशीथाध्ययनं, ‘बहुबहुतरओ पयग्गेणं’ति तत्र चतुः श्लौकारमकद्वितीयश्रुतस्कन्धपक्षेपाद् बहुः, निशीथाख्यपञ्चमूलिकापक्षेपाद् बहुतरः”

c8.54

A question may here arise as to who incorporated Nisīha in Āyāra and who again separated it and restored it to a position of a separate treatise.

c8.55

7 See Chap. V.

c8.56

according to *S. B. E.* (vol. XXII, intro. p. 1)¹, all the *Cūlās*. The ending portion of the *Nijjutti* on *Mahāparinṇā* explains the meanings of the two words which make up *Mahāparinṇā* from the standpoint of the four *nikṣepas*, whereas its 34th verse² says that it deals with *pariṣahas* and *upasaryas*, the outcome of infatuation. It may be added that *Mahāparinṇā* is a *sātiśaya adhyayana*. So says Malayagiri Sūri in his com. (p. 46) on v. 146 of *Kappanijjutti*.

c8.57

¹ Here ‘sāisayattaṇeṇa’ is wrongly translated as ‘superfluous’.

c8.58

² “निस्संगा य छ्हे ६ मोहसमुत्था परीसहवसग्गा ७ । निज्जाणं अट्ठमए ८ नवमे य जिणेण एवं ति ९ ॥ ३४ ॥” This verse along with the 33rd throws light on the subject-matter of *Āyāra*. So it may be here noted as under:— “जिभसंजमो १ अ लोगो जह बज्झइ जह य तं पजहियव्वं २ । सुहदुक्खतितिक्खा विय ३ सम्मत्तं ४ लोगसारो ५ य ॥ ३३ ॥”

c8.59

By taking into account the description of *Nāyādhammakahā* as given in *Nandī* (s. 51), we may infer that the portion of this *Aṅga* which exists now is practically a drop in the ocean. For, hundreds of *ākhyāyikās*, *upākhyāyikās* and *ākhyāyikopākhyāyikās* are lost. All these seem to have been extinct at least by the time of Malayagiri Sūri, if not by the time of Jinadāsa Gaṇi. *Aṅgas* 7 to 11 are said to have *saṅkhyeya pada*-*sahasras* (vide *Nandī* s. 52-56). So it may be that they, too, are not available in *toto*.

c8.60

If we examine the extant *Paṇhāvāgaraṇa*, in the light of the contents of the 10th *Aṅga* noted in *Nandī* (s. 55), we are led to either of the two conclusions:—

c8.61

(i) The old 10th *Aṅga* is altogether lost, and one similar in name is substituted for it by some one who flourished prior to Abhayadeva Sūri.

c8.62

(ii) The extant *Paṇhāvāgaraṇa* is a fragment of the old one of which the contents have not been fully noted in *Nandī*.

c8.63

³ I do not know if there is any Śvetāmbara source which defines *pada*. But in *The Sacred Books of the Jainas* (vol. II, p. 29), a *madhyama-pada* is said to consist of 16, 34, 83, 07, 888 letters, and on pp. 29-31, are given the specific numbers of these *madhyamapadas* for one and all the 12 *Aṅgas*.

c8.64

This finishes a rough survey about the loss pertaining to the *dvādaśāṅgī* of Sudharman.¹ As regards the 12 *Uvaṅgas*, it is doubtful how far the *Candapaṇṇatti* available at present is genuine; for, it almost tallies with *Sūriyapaṇṇatti* ad verbatim.² So if this is genuine, it must be looked upon as lost.

c8.65

So far as the 6 *Cheyasuttas* are concerned, some portion of *Mahānisīha* must have been lost in the days Haribhadra Sūri tried to restore it, when several leaves of its Ms. got decayed.³ As stated in its 3rd *ajjhayaṇa*, by this time several *Nijjuttis*, *Cuṇṇis* and *Bhāsas* composed to explain *Pañcamaṅgalasuyakkhandha* had become extinct. This *Pañcamaṅgalasuyakkhandha* was once a separate work by itself, and was later on incorporated in a *mūlasutta* by Vajrasvāmin, who had a *padānu-sāriṇī labdhi*.⁴

c8.66

1 He outlived the rest of the *Gaṇadharas*, and as explained in *J. S. E.* (pp. 204-205), only his *gaṇa* continued. So the *dvādaśāṅgis* of the other *Gaṇadharas* practically came to an end by the time they took up *anaśana*, and handed over their pupils to him.

c8.67

2 Cf. the following 26th verse of *Siddhāntāgamastava*:—

c8.68

“प्रणमामि चन्द्रसूर्यप्रज्ञप्ती यमलजातंके नब्ये ।
गुम्फवपुषैव नवरं नातिभिदाऽर्थामनाऽपि ययोः ॥ २६ ॥”

c8.69

3 “एत्थ य नत्थ जत्थ पणणगुलगं सुत्तालवगं न संपज्जइ । तत्थ तत्थ सुयहरेहिं कुलिट्ठि य दोसो न दायव्वो त्ति । किंतु जो सो अयस्स अचिंतचिंतामणिकप्पभूयस्स महानिसीहसुयक्खंधस्स पुव्वाय रिसो आमि तहेव खंडाखंडीए उदेहियाइपहिं हेउंर्हि बहवे पत्तगा परिसदिया तहावि अंचतसुहमत्थाइसं त्ति । इमं महानिसीह-सुयक्खंधं कसिणपवयणस्स परमसारभूयं परं ततं महत्थं ति कलिऊण ॥ पययणवच्छलते (त्ते) णं बहुभव्वसतो-(त्ता)वयारयं च काउं तदा य आयहियाठयाए आयरियहरिभदेण ज ततायरिसे दिद्वं त (तं) सव्वं समतीए साहिऊणं लिहियं ति ॥ अत्रेहिं पि सिद्धसेणदिवाअर-हुहुवाइ-जक्खसेण-देवगुत्त-जसवद्धण-खमासमणसीसरविगुत्त-णेमिचंद-जिणदासगणिलमगसव्वरिस(? सव्वसिरि) पमुहेहिं कु(जु)गप्पहण-सुयहरेहिं बहुमन्नियमिणं ति”—*D. C. J. M.* (vol. XVII, pt. II, pp. 32-33)

c8.70

4 “एथं तु जं पंचमंगलसुयक्खंधस्स वक्खाणं तं मह्या पबंधेणं अणंतगमपज्जवेहिं सुत्तस्स य पिहम्भूयाहि निज्जुत्ती-भास-चुण्णीहिं तहेव अणंतनाणदंसणधरेहिं तित्थयरेहिं वक्खाणि(यं) तहेव समासओ वक्खाणिज्जतं आसि । अहन्नया कालपरिहाणोदिसेणं ताओ निज्जुत्ती-भास-चुण्णीओ बुच्छिन्नाओ इउ (? ओ) य वचंतेणं कालसमणं महिद्धीपत्ते पयाणुसारी वयरसामी नाम दुवालसंगसुयहरे समुप्पन्ने तेणेयं पंचमंगलमहासुय-क्खंधस्स उद्धारो मूलसुत्तस्स मज्झे लिहियो मूलसुत्तं पुण सुत्तत्ताए गणहरेहिंअथत्ताए अरहंतेहि भगवंतेहि धम्म-तित्थयरेहिं तिलोगमहिपहिं वीरजिणिंदेहिं पण्णवियं ति । एस बुद्धसंपयाओ।”—*Ibid.*, p. 32

c8.71

In *Jaina Granthāvalī* (p. 16) it is said that there were 3 *vācanās* of *Mahānisīha*. Out of them only the *bṛhadvācanā* is available now.¹

c8.72

¹ “બૃહદટિપ્પનિકામાં એની લઘુવાચના, મધ્યમ વાચના અને બૃહદવાચના એમ ત્રણ વાચના અનુક્રમે શ્લો. ૩૫૦૦-૪૫૦૦-૪૫૪૮ ની નોંધ છે, પણ હાલમાં એની બૃહદવાચના જ ઉપલબ્ધ થાય છે.”

c8.73

So far as *Pañcakappa* is concerned, it is not available now; but its *Cuṇṇi* and *Bhāsa* exist.

c8.74

Turning to *Paiṇṇagas* we find that only very few are available at present. For, firstly, out of 14,000 *Paiṇṇagas*, only 60 have been specifically mentioned in *Nandī*, and so probably a majority of them were lost in those days. Secondly, out of these 60 works, 12 *kāliya* works are lost. Their numbers are 11, 12, and 16-25.² The following 5 additional *kāliya* works noted in *Pakkhiyasutta* are also lost:—

c8.75

² For their names see p. 25.

c8.76

*Āsīvisabhāvaṇā*, *Diṭṭhivisabhāvaṇā*, *Cāraṇabhāvaṇā*, *Mahāsumiṇabhāvaṇā* and *Teyaganisagga*.

c8.77

Turning to *Nandī*, we find that 14 *ukkāliya* works are lost by this time. Their numbers are 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 17, 18, 19, 21 and 23-27.³ From *Pakkhiyasutta*, no additional information can be had. Thus, in all 17 *kāliya* works and 14 *ukkāliya* works are lost so far as *Nandī* and *Pakkhiyasutta* are concerned. Taking *Vavahāra* (X) into account, we find that *Uṭṭhāṇapariyāvaṇiya* and *Thimiṇabhāvaṇā*⁴

c8.78

³ See p. 26.

c8.79

⁴ “૨૦ તિવાસપરિયાયરસ સમણસ્સ નિમન્થસ્સ કપ્પઇ આયરપકપ્પે નામં અજ્ઝયણે ઉદ્દિસિત્તએ । ૨૧ ચઉદાસપરિયાએ કપ્પઇ સૂયગડે નામં અજ્એ ઉદ્દિસિત્તએ । ૨૨ પન્નવાસપરિયાએ કપ્પઇ દસ-કપ્પ-વવહારે ઉદ્દિસિત્તએ । ૨૩ અઠવાસપરિયાએ કપ્પઇ ઠાણ-સમવાએ ઉદ્દિસિત્તએ । ૨૪ દસવાસપરિયાએ કપ્પઇ વિયોહે નામં અજ્એ ઉદ્દિસિત્તએ । ૨૫ એકારસવાસપરિયાએ કપ્પઇ ખુડ્ડિયાવિમાણપવિભત્તી મહલ્લિયાવિમાણપવિભત્તી અઙ્ગચુલિયા વગ્ગચુલિયા વિયાહચુલિયા નામં અજ્ઝયણે ઉદ્દિસિત્તએ । ૨૬ બારસવાસપરિયાએ કપ્પઇ અહણોત્તવાએ ગરુલોવવાએ ધરણોવવાએ વેસમણોવવાએ વેલંધરોવવાએ નામં અજ્ઝયણે ઉદ્દિસિત્તએ । ૨૭ તેરસવાસપરિયાએ કપ્પઇ ઉઠ્ઠાણપરિયાવણિએ સમુદ્ધઠાણણુએ દેવિન્દોવવાએ નાગપરિયાવણિએ નામ અજ્ઝયણે ઉદ્દિસિત્તએ । ૨૮ ચોદસવાસપરિયાએ કપ્પઇ દ્વિમિણભાવણા નામં અજ્ઝયણે ઉદ્દિસિત્તએ । ૨૯ પન્નરસવાસપરિયાએ કપ્પઇ ચારણભાવણા નામં અજ્ઝયણં ઉદ્દિસિત્તએ । ૩૦ સોલસવાસપરિયાએ કપ્પઇ આસીવિસભાવણા નામં અજ્ઝયણે ઉદ્દિસિત્તએ । ૩૧ સત્તરસવાસપરિયાએ કપ્પઇ દ્વિઠ્ઠિવિસભાવણા નામં અજ્ઝયણે ઉદ્દિસિત્તએ । ૩૨ એગુણીસવાસપરિયાએ કપ્પઇ દ્વિઠ્ઠિવાએ નામં અજ્એ ઉદ્દિસિત્તએ । ૩૩ વીસવાસપરિયાએ સમણે નિગ્ગન્થે સબ્બસુયાણુવાઈ ભવઇ ।”

c8.80

Instead of giving the pertinent portion, I have here given the entire *sūtra* as it throws light as to what works were known and probably even existed at least when *Vavahāra* was composed; for, they form a curriculum.

c8.81

are extinct, and looking to *Thāṇa* (X, s. 755) *Dogiddhidasā* and portions of some of the remaining 9 *dasās*¹ are extinct. Over and above these works, 147 *adhyayanas* recited by Lord Mahāvīra at the time of his *nirvāṇa* are lost, with the exception of those that may have been existing in the available *Āgamas*.

c8.82

¹ See p. 55, fn. 3.

c8.83

These are the extinct works I have been able to trace up till now. So I shall now try to give details about them as far as possible and shall accordingly commence with *Diṭṭhivāya*.

c8.84

*Diṭṭhivāya* holds a unique place in the *Jaina* canon for several reasons, some of which are as under:—

c8.85

(1) It is the first work composed by each of the *Gaṇadharas*.²

c8.86

² For a difference of opinion see pp. 6-7.

c8.87

(2) According to the opinion of Bhadrabāhusvāmin³ and others⁴, females owing to some of their weaknesses⁵ are not entitled for its study. Thereby it is suggested that it is not within the reach of one and all, but it is meant for the deserving few.⁶

c8.88

³ "तुच्छा गारवबहुला चलिन्दिया दुब्बला धिईए य । इति अइसेसज्झयणा भूयावाओ य नो त्थीणं ॥ १४६ ॥"—*Kappanijjutti* This very verse occurs in *Visesāvassayabhāsa* as v. 552.

c8.89

⁴ By others I mean Jinabhadra Gaṇi, Koṭyācārya, Maladhārin Hemacandra, Malayagiri Sūri, Jinadāsa Gaṇi Mahattara and Haribhadra Sūri.

c8.90

⁵ See fn. 3 and *J. S. E.* (p. 289).

c8.91

⁶ In *Avassayacuṇṇi* (pt. I, p. 35) it is said:— "बहवे दुम्मेधा असत्ता दिठ्ठिवायं अहिज्जिउं अप्पाउयाण य आजयं ण पहुप्पति, इत्थियाओ पुण पाएण तुच्छाओ गारवबहुलाओ चलिन्दियाओ दुब्बलधिईओ, अतो एयासिं जे अतिसेसज्झयणा अणोववाय-णिसीहमाइणो दिठ्ठिवातो य ते ण दिज्जंति ।"

c8.92

(3) There is not a single subject or a topic which does not come within its compass. It deals with *mantras*, *tantras*, and *yantras*, too.

c8.93

(4) It has got ten significant names, and thus it forms a glaring exception to the rest of the *Jaina* scriptures.

c8.94

(5) It is the very first work lost by the *Jainas*.

c8.95

(6) Its contents are so to say preserved by the Śvetāmbaras and the Digambaras as well, though they differ in some of the details.

c8.96

(7) It is a splendid example of the *gamika śruta*.¹

c8.97

(8) It abounds in *bhaṅgas*²

c8.98

(9) Some of the works³ either partially or wholly are extracted from this *Diṭṭhivāya*.

c8.99

³ For their list see pp. 88, 89 and 96.

c8.100

As already noted on p. 6, *Diṭṭhivāya* is divided into five sections viz., (1) *Parikamma*, (2) *Sutta*, (3) *Puvvagaya*, (4) *Aṇuoga* and (5) *Cūliyā*, out of which at least the 1st two had become extinct at least by the time Jinadāsa Gaṇi Mahattara wrote his *Cuṇṇi* on *Nandi*.⁴

c8.101

⁴ See p. 84, fn. 1 and 2.

c8.102

*Parikamma*-Just as it is necessary to know fundamental operations such as addition, subtraction etc., before one can solve arithmetical problems, so one should study *Parikamma* before one can commence the study of *Sutta*, *Puvvagaya* etc.⁵ Thus *Parikamma* is a stepping-stone for further study. It is of seven kinds: (1) *Siddhaseṇiā-parikamma*, (2) *Maṇussaseṇiā-pari°*, (3) *Puṭṭhaseṇiā-pari°*, (4) *Ogāḍhaseṇiā-pari°*⁶, (5) *Uvasampajjaṇaseṇiā-pari°*, (6) *Vippajahaṇaseṇiā-pari°* and (7) *Cuācuāseṇiā-pari°*. Each of these kinds has sub-varieties which, in all, come to 83. *Siddhaseṇiā-pāri°* has 14 sub-varieties: *Māugāpaya*, *Egaṭṭhiyapaya*, *Aṭṭhapaya*⁷, *Pāḍhoāmāsapaya*⁸, *Keubhūā*, *Rāsibaddha*, *Egaguṇa*, *Duguṇa*, *Tiguṇa*, *Keubhuā*, *Paḍiggaha*, *Samsārapaḍiggaha*, *Nandāvatta* and *Siddhā-vatta*.⁹ *Maṇussaseṇiā°*, too, has 14 sub-varieties. Out of them the names of 13 are practically the same as those noted for *Siddhaseṇiā°*, the 14th being *Maṇussāvatta*. *Puṭṭhaseṇiā°* has 11 sub-varieties. The names of them are *Pāḍhoāmāsapaya* upto *Nandāvatta* as noted before, the 11th being Puṭṭhāvatta. Each of the rest has 11 sub-varieties. The names of the 1st 10 of them are the same as noted for Puṭṭha-seṇiā°, while the respective names for the 11th are: Ogāḍhāvatta, Uvasampajjaṇāvatta, Vippajahaṇāvatta and Cuācuāvatta. See Nandī (s. 57). Practically we know next to nothing about all these 83 sub-varieties.¹ Even there is no explanation given as to why Keubhñā is mentioned twice, while enumerating the 14 sub-varieties of Siddhaseṇiā°.

c8.103

1-2 See p. 77.

c8.104

⁵ Cf. "परिक्कम्म त्ति जोगकरणं, जथा गणितस्स सोलस परिक्कमा तग्गहितसुतत्यो सेसगणितस्स जोगो भवति, एवं गहिदपरिक्कम्मसुत्तत्थो सेससुत्ताइदिद्विवादसुतस्स जोगो भवति"—*Nandicuṇṇi* (p. 55).

c8.105

6-9 In *Samavāya* (s. 147) we have *Ogāhaṇaseṇiā-pari°*, *Padoṭṭhapaya*, *Agāsa-paya* and *Siddhabaddha* respectively.

c8.106

¹ "तं च परिक्म्मं सिद्धसेणित्तपरिक्म्मादिथूलभेदयो सत्तविभं उत्तरभेदयो तेसीतिविभं मातुअपदादी, तं च सव्वं मूलुत्तरभेदं सुत्तत्यो वोच्छिण्णं जधागतसंपदातं वा वच्चं"—Nandīcuṇṇi (p. 55)

c8.107

Out of these 7 kinds of Parikamma, the first six which refer to svasamaya, come within the range of the 4 nayas viz. Saṅgaha, Vavahāra, Rjusutta and Saddāi. Negama is of two kinds: Saṅgahiya and Asaṅgahiya. The former is included in Saṅgaha, and the latter in Vavahāra. The Saddāi nayas which are 4, are to be counted as one. So says the Nandīcuṇṇi (p. 106). It further says: All the 7 kinds are accepted by the Ājīvagas, and they are propounded by Gosāla, and they are looked at in three ways. It seems Jinadāsa Gaṇi, the author of this Nandīcuṇṇi makes no difference between the followers of Gosāla, the Ājīvagas and the Terāsiyas.

c8.108

Sutta—This term is explained as one suggesting the meaning of all drayas, paryāyas and nayas.² There are 22 Suttas as under in this section:—

c8.109

² "सुत्ताइं ति उज्जुसुहताइयां बावीसं सुत्ताइं, सव्वदव्वाण सव्वपज्जवाण सव्वणयाण सव्वभंगविकप्पणोब-दंसगाणि, सव्वस्स णय(? पुव्व)गतस्स यट्ठस्स य सयग त्ति सूयणतो सुत्ता भणिता जथाभिहाणत्याते, ते य इदाणिं सुत्तत्थतो वोच्छिण्णा, जहागतसंप(प)दायतो बोद्धव्वा"—Ibid., (p. 56).

c8.110

(1) Ujjusuya, (2) Pariṇayāpariṇaya, (3) Bahubhaṅgiā, (4) Vijayacariya, (5) Aṇantara, (6) Parampara, (7) Māsāṇa, (8) Sañjūha, (9) Sambhiṇṇa, (10) Āhavvāya, (11) Sovatthiāvatta, (12) Nandāvatta, (13) Bahula, (14) Puṭṭhāpuṭṭha, (15) Viāvatta, (16) Evambhūā, (17) Duyāvatta, (18) Vattamāṇappaya, (19) Samabhirūḍha, (20) Savvaobhadda, (21) Passāsa and (22) Duppaḍiggaha. See Nandī (s. 57).³

c8.111

³ In Samavāya (s. 147), the 4th, 7th, 10th and 21st Suttas are named-as Vippaccaiya, Samāṇa, Ahāccaya, and Paṇāma respectively.

c8.112

No information is available regarding the contents of any one of these. We may however note that herein we find names which remind us of the two nayas viz. Evambhūta and Samabhirūḍha.

c8.113

The 22 Suttas are chinnacchedanayika for svasamayikas whereas they are acchinnacchedanayikas for the Ājīvagas. Further, they are trikanayikas for the Terāsiyas, while they are catuṣkanayikas for svasamayikas. According to the chinnacchedanaya, all the sūtras of the Āgamas are independent of one another i. e. to say the preceding one has nothing to do with the subsequent one or ones nor has the subsequent one anything to do with the preceding one or ones. Reverse is the case according to the acchinnacchedanaya which believes that the preceding and following sūtras are inter-connected i. e. to say they are not independent of one another.

c8.114

The four view-points from which 22 Suttas can be seen and which are just mentioned, give us 88 varieties of this section in all.

c8.115

Puvvagaya-This is fourteen-fold inasmuch as it consists of the following 14 Puvvas :-

c8.116

(1) Uppāya, (2) Aggāṇīya, (3) Vīriü, (4) Atthinathippavāya, (5) Nāṇappavāya, (6) Saccappavāya, (7) Āyappavāya, (8) Kammappavāya, (9) Paccakkhāṇappavāya, (10) Vijjāṇuppavāya¹, (11) Avañjha, (12) Pāṇäü, (13) Kiriāvisāla and (14) Lokabindusāra.

c8.117

¹ For a variant see p. 90.

c8.118

These names are here given according to the Nandī (s. 57). In Pavayaṇasāruddhāra (dvāra 92), we come across almost these very names except that for Kammappavāya, we have Samayappavāya and for Lokabindusāra, Bindusāra. For contents according to the Śvetāmbara point of view, one may refer to the Cuṇṇi (pp. 57-58) on Nandī, Abhayadeva Sūri's com. (p. 131ᵃ and p. 131ᵇ) on Samavāya, Siddhasena Gaṇi's Ṭīkā (pp. 207-208) on Pavayaṇasāruddhāra etc.² From these sources we learn: The 1st Puvva deals with the origin of all the dravyas and paryāyas; the 2nd, with their measurements (parimāṇa); the 3rd, with the potentialities-powers of the animate and inanimate objects; the 4th, with the existence and non-existence of objects from the stand-points of *dravya*, *kṣetra*, *kāla* and *bhāva*; the 5th, with five kinds of knowledge; the 6th, with *saṃyama* and truth and their opposites; the 7th, with an exposition of *ātman* from various stand-points; the 8th, with eight kinds of *karman* and their sub-divisions; the 9th, with *pratyākhyāna*; the 10th, with *vidyās*-miraculous lores; the 11th, with merit and demerit and their fructifications; the 12th, with 10 types of *prāṇa* and various kinds of *āyuṣya*; the 13th, with activities pertaining to *saṃyama* etc.; and the 14th, with a subject not mentioned.

c8.119

² A list of the names of the 14 Puvvas along with their contents is found in the Digambara works, too, e. g. in Tattvārtharājavārtika (pp. 51-53).

c8.120

In the *Cuṇṇi* (pp. 57-58) on *Nandī*, in Malayagiri Sūri’s com. on it and in *Pavayaṇasāruddhāra* (*dvāra* 92), the number of the *padas* each *Puvva* consists of, is given; but some times, they differ. c. g. in the case of the 1st, 7th, 8th and 10th *Puvvas*.

c8.121

Incidentally it may be noted that as stated in *Subodhikā*, the quantity of ink required for writing the 1st *Puvva* equals the volume of one elephant, that for the 2nd, that of 2, for the 3rd, that of 4 and so on in G. P. so that for the 14th it equals that of 2¹³ i. e. 8192 elephants.

c8.122

Quotations from the *Puvvas*-Maladhārin Hemacandra Sūri in his com. on *Viseṣāvassayabhāsa* has at times given the *ālāvagas* etc., from the *Puvvas*.¹ He believes that v. 117 of this *Visesā* which runs as under belongs to *Puvvagaya*:-

c8.123

¹ It seems in doing so, he has probably followed Koṭyācārya’s com. on *Visesā*.

c8.124

“सोइंदिओवलद्धी होइ सुयं सेसयं तु मइणाणं।
मोत्तूणं दव्वसुयं अक्खरलंभो य सेसेसु ॥ ११७ ॥”

c8.125

He ends the explanations of this verse with the words “इति पूर्वगतगाथासङ्क्षेपार्थः ”²

c8.126

² In Koṭyācārya’s com. (p. 53) we have: “इति पूर्वगतगाथाक्षरार्थः”

c8.127

That this v. 117 belongs to a *Puvva*, is corroborated by the words “तत्प्रतिपादिका चेयं पूर्वागतगाथा” occurring in Devendra Sūri’s *vivṛti* on *Kammavivāga* (v. 4). These words are followed by the 117th verse noted above.

c8.128

Maladhārin Hemacandra while commenting on v. 128 (“बुद्धिद्वे०”) identifies it as a gāthā from a *Puvva*. While commenting on v. 2335 of *Visesā* he observes on p. 946:- “आत्मप्रवादनाकं पूर्वमधीयानस्य तिष्यगुप्तस्यायं सूत्रालापकः सा(? स)मायास्तत् यथा- “एगे भंते! जीवपएसे जीवे त्ति वत्तव्वं सिया? । नो इणट्ठे समट्ठे । एवं दो, तिन्नि, जाव दस, संखज्जा, असंखेज्जा भंते! जीवपएसा जीव त्ति वत्तव्वं सिया? । नो इणट्ठे समट्ठे, एगपएसे वि णं जीवे नो जीवे त्ति वत्तव्वं सिया। से केणं अट्ठेणं? । जम्हा णं कसिणे पडिपुन्ने लोगासपएसतुल्ये जीवे त्ति वत्तव्यं सिया, से तेणं अट्ठेणं” इति।”¹

c8.129

¹ Cf. Koṭyācārya's com. (p. 687).

c8.130

In the com. (p. 960) on v. 2390 of *Visesā*° he says:-

c8.131

“तत्र निच्छन्नच्छेदकनयवक्तव्यतामालापकाः समायाताः, तद् यथा-“पडुप्पन्नसमयनेरइया² सव्वे वोच्छिञ्जिस्संति, एवं जाव वेमाणिय त्ति, एवं बीयाइसमएसु वि वत्तव्वं”।”

c8.132

² In Koṭyācārya's com. (p. 699) we have a variant “पढमसमयउप्पन्ना” for this. It appears that the entire *ālāvaga* is not given here.

c8.133

Abhayadeva Sūri in his com. (p. 9ᵃ) on *Pañcāsaga*, notes the following verse as occurring in *Puvvagaya*:-

c8.134

“जारिअओ अइमेओ जह जाइइ जह य तत्थ दोसगुणा। जयणा जह अइयारा भंगो तह भावणा नेया॥”

c8.135

For, there he says: “न चेयं गाथा न प्रमाणं, पूर्वान्तर्गततयाऽस्याः प्रतिपादनात्।”

c8.136

Vinayavijaya in *Lokaprakāśa* (III, v. 803 f.) says on p. 51ᵇ: “उक्तं च भाष्यकृता-

c8.137

“सदसदविसेसणाओ भवहेउजहिच्छओबलंभाओ। नाणफलाभावाओ मिच्छदिट्ठिस्स अण्णाणं॥”³ -पूर्वान्तर्गतयं गाथा।”

c8.138

³ This very verse occurs four times in *Visesā*° as v. 115, 319, 521 and 2844.

c8.139

So this gāthā, too, belongs to some *Puvva*.

c8.140

Before we proceed further we may note that in *Visesā*° (v. 2513), its author alludes to *Kamappavāya Puvva*. The pertinent verse is as under:-

c8.141

“कम्मप्पवायपुव्वे बद्धं पुट्ठं निकायं कम्मं। जीवपएसेहिं समं सुईकलावोवमाणाओ॥ २५१३॥”

c8.142

*Extracts*⁴ *from the Puvvas*:-According to the Jaina tradition the *Dasapūrvadharas* extract portions from the *Puvvas* necessarily and the *Caturdasapūrvadharas*, if a special occasion arises. This is what we learn from the following line occurring in Haribhadra Sūri’s com. (p. 12ᵃ) on Dasaveyāliya:—

c8.143

⁴ The Prākṛta word for this is *nijjuhaṇā* whereas the Saṃskṛta one, *niryūhaṇā*. The former occurs in *Visesā*° (v. 551), and there it means “composition” (*racanā*). The words निज्जुहं, निज्जूहगं and निज्जूहिया are found in verses 12, 14 and 15 of

c8.144

“चउहसपुब्बी कन्हि वि कारणे समुप्पने णिज्जूहति, दंसपुब्बी पुण अपच्छिमो भवस्स-मेव णिज्जूहइ.” — Cf. Dasaveyāliyacuṇṇi (p. 7)

c8.145

I may give below the names of works along with those of the Puvvas from which they are extracted:—

c8.146

(I) Uvasaggaharathotta, some Puvva;¹ (II) Ohanijjutti, Paccakkhāṇappavāya²; (III) Kammapayaḍi, Karmaprakṛti Prābhṛta;³ (IV) Pratiṣṭhākalpa, Vijjappavāya;⁴ (V) Sthāpanākalpa, Paccakkhāṇappavāya;⁵ (VI) Siddhaprābhṛta, Aggāṇīya; (VII) Pajjosanākappa, Paccakkhāṇappavāya;⁶ (VIII) Dhammapannatti, Ayappavāya⁷; (IX) Piṇḍesaṇā, Kummappavāya;⁸ (X) Vakkasuddhi, Saccappavāya;⁹ (XI) the rest of the ajjhayaṇas of Dasaveyāliya; Paccakkhāṇappavāya;¹⁰ (XII) Parīsahajjhayaṇa; Kammap-

c8.147

Dasaveyāliyanijjutti. Haribhadra Sūri in his com. on this work says: “णियुं पुर्व्वगतादुद्धृत्य विरचितं” (p. 9ᵇ) and “णियुंहेकं पूर्व्वगतार्थविरचनाकर्त्तारं” (p. 10ᵇ). The editor of this work observes: “यूहे उद्धरण इत्यागमिको धातुरिति न्यायसङ्ग्रहः” (p. 12, fn.). In spite of these explanations, it remains to be ascertained whether nijjuhaṇā means a re-production ad verbatim or that of an essence embodied in words by the author concerned.

c8.148

1 See Rājasekhara Sūri’s Caturviṃśatiprabandha (my edn., p. 7).

c8.149

2 See Malayagiri Sūri’s com. (p. 341ᵇ) on Āvassayanijjutti (v. 665), Hemacandra Sūri’s com. (p. 842) on Visesa° (v 2040) and Droṇa Sūri’s com. (p. 1ᵇ) on Ohanijjutti. In this last com. it is said: “ओघसामाचारी-ओधनियुक्तिः, दशा सामाचारी ‘इच्छामिच्छेत्यादि, पत्रविभागसामाचारी-कल्प-व्यवहारः। तत्र ओघसामाचारी च नवम-पूर्वान्तर्वर्त्ति यत् तृतीयं सामाचारीवस्त्वस्ति तत्रापि विंशतितमात् प्राभृतात् साध्वनुग्रहार्थं भद्रबाहुस्वामिन। नियूढा, दशाधा पुनरुत्तराध्ययनैभ्यो नियूढा इच्छामिच्छेत्यादिका”

c8.150

3 See Malayagiri Sūri’s com. (p. 220ᵃ) on Kammapayaḍi.

c8.151

4 See Sakalacandra Gaṇi’s Pratiṣṭhākalpa.

c8.152

5 See Yaśovijaya Gaṇi’s Sthāpanākulakasvādhyāya published in Pañcapratikramaṇa at Mhesana.

c8.153

6 See Subodhikā (p. 7ᵃ).

c8.154

7-10 “आयप्पयायपुव्वा णिज्जूढा होइ धम्मपन्नत्ती। कम्मप्पयायपुव्वा पिंडस्स उ एसणा तिविहा॥ १६॥ सच्चप्पयायपुव्वा णिज्जूढा होइ वक्कसुद्धी उ। अवेसा णिज्जूढा नवमस्स उ तइयवत्थुओ॥ १७॥”

c8.155

pavāya;¹ (XIII) Pañcakappa, a Puvva;² (XIV-XVI) Dasā-suyakkhandhā³, Kappa⁴ and Vavahāra⁵, Paccakkhāṇappavāya; (XVII) Mahākappa, a Puvva;⁶ (XVIII) Nisīha, Paccakkhāṇap-pavāya;⁷ (XIX) Nayacakra, Nāṇappavāya;⁸ (XX) Sayaga, a Puvva;⁹ (XXI) Pañcasaṅgaha, a Puvva;¹⁰ (XXII) Sattariyā, a Puvva;¹¹ (XXIII) Mahākarmaprakṛtiprābhṛta, a Puvva;¹² (XXIV) Kaṣāyaprābhṛta, a Puvva¹³ and (XXV) Jīvasamāsa, a Puvva (?).¹⁴

c8.156

The language of the Puvvas—This is usually supposed to be Saṃskṛta and not Prākṛta. This view is probably based upon the following references:—

c8.157

(i) Vijayānanda Sūri in his Tattvanirṇayaprasāda (p. 412) quotes the following verse, with “यत उत्तमागमे”¹⁵ prefixed:—

c8.158

“मुत्तूण दिट्ठिवायं कालिय-उक्कालियंगसिद्धंतं ।
थी-बालत्रायणत्थं पाइयमुइयं जिणवरेहिं ॥”¹⁶

c8.159

¹⁶ As stated in the upodghāta (p. 9) to Pāiyasaddamahaṇṇava (pt. iv), this verse is quoted in Ācāradinakara by Vardhamāna Sūri.

c8.160

(ii) Prabhācandra Sūri in his Prabhāvakacarita (Vṛddhavā-diprabandha, v. 114) observes:—

c8.161

“चतुर्दशापि पूर्वाणि संस्कृतानि पुराऽभवन् ॥ ११४ ॥”

c8.162

1 See Vādivetāla Śānti Sūri’s com. (p. 5ᵇ) on Uttarajjhayaṇa where the following verse from it is quoted:—

c8.163

“कम्मप्पवायपुव्वे सत्तरसे पाहुडम्मि जे सुत्तं ।
सयणं सोदाहरणं तं चेव इहं पि णायव्वं ॥ २-६९ ॥”

c8.164

2 See D. C. J. M. (vol. XVII, pt. II, p. 257).

c8.165

3 Ibid., p. 60. 4-5 Ibid., p. 239.

c8.166

6 See Hemacandra Sūri’s com. (p. 932ᵇ) on Visesā° (v. 2295).

c8.167

7 Cf. “आयारपक्प्पो पुण पब्वक्खाणस्स तइयवत्थुओ । आयारनामधिज्जा वीसइमा पाहुडच्छेया ॥ २९१ ॥” —Ayāranijjutti

c8.168

8 See Prabhāvakacarita (Mallavādiprabandha, v. 14).

c8.169

9 See the Hindī prastāvanā (pp. 16-17) to Devendra Sūri’s Kammavivāga published by “Śrī Ātmānanda Pustakapacāraka Maṇḍala in A. D. 1918. There it is said:—

c8.170

“श्वेताम्बर-सम्प्रदाय में १ कर्मप्रकृति, २ शतक, ३ पञ्चसंग्रह, और ४ सप्ततिका ये ४ ग्रन्थ और दिगम्बर-सम्प्रदाय में १ महाकर्मप्रकृतिप्राभृत तथा २ कषायप्राभृत ये दो ग्रन्थ पूर्वोद्धृत माने जाते हैं।”

c8.171

10-18 See fn. 9. 14 See Jīvasamāsa (v. 285).

c8.172

15 Up till now I have not been in a position to trace this Āgama.

c8.173

(iii) Some of the Śvetāmbaras of the present days state that the following 3 works written in Saṃskṛta have been extracted from Puvvagaya :—

c8.174

(1) Namo'rhat, (2) Namo'stu Vardhamānāya and (3) Viśālalocana.

c8.175

While trying to verify this statement, I find that in Hirapraśna also called Praśnottarasamuccaya (prakāśa III, p. 28b) it is stated that Namo'rhat is extracted from a Puvva.

c8.176

It may be however noted that the quotations from the Puvvas given on pp. 86-87 suggest that the Puvvas were composed in Prākṛta, in case these are reproductions ad verbatim.

c8.177

The study of the Puvvas—A Caturdaśapūrvadhara can go through all the 14 Puvvas, both in word and meaning in a muhūrta¹, in case he has practised ‘mahāprāṇa² dhyāna’. This is what is said in Pariśiṣṭaparvan (IX, 62³). Padmamandira Gaṇi, however, in his com. (p. 183b)⁴ on Dharmaghoṣa Sūri’s Ṛṣimaṇḍala-prakaraṇa (v. 181) observes that in virtue of this dhyāna having been practised, a Caturdaśapūrvadhara can in an antarmuhūrta⁵ have the guṇana of all the Puvvas from the beginning to the end and in the reverse order to boot.

c8.178

¹ This is the 80th part of a day, and practically it equals 48 minutes.

c8.179

² This is alluded to in the following verse of Sirisirivalakahā:— “महपाणज्झायदुवालसंगसुत्तत्थतदुभयरहस्सो। सज्झायत्तणरप्पा एसप्पा चेव उवज्झाओ ॥ १३३०॥”

c8.180

³ “महाप्राणे हि निष्पन्ने कार्ये कस्मिंश्चिदागते। सर्वपूर्वाणि गुण्यन्ते सूत्रार्थाभ्यां मुहूर्तः ॥ ६२॥”

c8.181

⁴ “पूर्णे तस्मिन् महाप्राणे पूर्वाणि गुणयेत् किल। आदितोऽन्तं यावदन्तादादि चान्तमुहूर्तः ॥ १८८॥”

c8.182

⁵ This means a period which ranges from 9 samayas to a muhūrta less by one samaya, as can be seen from the following verse of Lokaprakāśa (III):— “समयेभ्यो नवभ्यः स्यात् प्रभृत्यन्तमुहूर्तकम्। समयोनमुहूर्तान्तमसङ्ख्यातविधं यतः ॥ ३४॥”

c8.183

Vatthus—The 14 Puvvas have sections known as Vatthus. Their numbers are respectively 10, 14, 8, 18, 12, 2, 16, 30, 20, 15, 12, 13, 30 and 25 (vide Nandī s. 57⁶). In all, they come to 225.

c8.184

⁶ “दस चोदस अट्ठ(स)दारसेव बारस दुवे अ वत्थूण। सोलस तीसा वीसा पण्णरस अणुप्पवायम्मि ॥ बारस इकारसमे बारसमे तेरसेव वत्थूण। तीस पुण तेरसमे चोदसमे पण्णवीसाओ ॥” From this it follows that the 10th Puvva is here named as Aṇuppavāya instead of Vijjāṇuppavāya.

c8.185

Nowhere I have come across the names of all these *Vatthus*. Only the name of the 3rd *Vatthu* of the 9th *Puvva* is mentioned as *Sāmāyārī* in Droṇa Sūri’s com. (p. 1b) on *Ohanijjutti* and that of a *Vatthu* of the 10th as *Neuṇiya* in *Visesa* (v. 2390).

c8.186

The *Pāhuḍas*

c8.187

In *Kammavivāga* (v. 7) we find twenty varieties of *suya-ṇāṇa* referred to. Out of them *Pāhuḍapāhuḍa*, *Pāhuḍa* and *Vatthu* and each with the word ‘samāsa’ added it deserve to be here noted. Devendra Sūri in his com. (p. 19) on *Kammavivāga* (v. 7) explains them as under:—

c8.188

“प्राभृतान्तर्वर्ती अधिकारविशेषः प्राभृतप्राभृतम् १३ । तद्द्यादिसमुदायस्तु प्राभृतप्राभृत-समासः १४ । वस्त्वन्तर्वर्ती अधिकारविशेषः प्राभृतम् १६ । तद्द्यादिसंयोगस्तु प्राभृतसमासः १६ । पूर्वान्तर्वर्ती अधिकारविशेषो वस्तु १७ । तद्द्यादिसंयोगस्तु वस्तुसमासः १८ ।”

c8.189

Siddhasena Gaṇi’s com. (p. 94) on *Tattvārtha* (I, 20) also throws light on this topic. There it is said: “वस्तूनि पूर्वस्यैवाषोडल्पः, वस्तुनः प्राभृतमल्पतरं, प्राभृतात् प्राभृतप्राभृतमल्पतरं, ततोऽप्ययनं ग्रन्थतोऽल्पतरं, तत् उद्देशतोऽल्पतर इति ।”

c8.190

From this it follows that *Vatthu* (Sk. Vastu) is a section of a *Puvva*, and *Pāhuḍa* (Sk. *Prābhṛta*) is a sub-section of this section.¹ This *Pāhuḍa* has sections each known a *Pāhuḍapāhuḍa*. *Vatthu* is bigger than *Pāhuḍa* and *Pāhuḍa* is bigger than *Pāhuḍapāhuḍa*.²

c8.191

¹ It may be noted that this *Pāhuḍa* has nothing to do with the 20 *pāhuḍas* of *Sūriyapaṇṇatti* and 21 *pāhuḍas* of *Joīsakaraṇḍaga*.

c8.192

² There seems to be no such work which mentions either the number or the names of the *Pāhuḍas* of each *Vatthu*. From p. 89, fn. 7, we learn that the 3rd *Vatthu* of the 9th *Puvva* has at least 20 *Pāhuḍas*, and that the name of this 20th is *Āyāra*. From p. 89, fn. 2, we learn that the 8th *Puvva* has at least 17 *Pāhuḍas*, and from p. 92, fn. 1, we see that the 5th *Vatthu* of the 2nd *Puvva* has 20 *Pāhuḍas*, and its 4th *Pāhuḍa* is named as *Kammapayaḍi*.

c8.193

The Digambaras believe that Kundakunda Ācārya has composed 84 *Pāhuḍas* out of which 8 are available at present; but, herein I am not dealing with any one of them; for, I am here concerned with the Śvetāmbara literature on this point; and, moreover, these 8 extant *Pāhuḍas* do not form a part of the canonical literature. I may say that in this literature, nowhere a list of all the *Pāhuḍas* is given; but we can surely collect the stray references which give us the names of the following *Pāhuḍas*:—

c8.194

(1) Āyārapāhuḍa, (2) Kappapāhuḍa, (3) Kammapayaḍi-pāhuḍa, (4) Jayapāhuḍa, (5) Joṇipāhuḍa, (6) Dukkhmāpā-huḍa, (7) Nāḍayavihipāhuḍa, (8) Nimittapāhuḍa, (9) Païṭṭhā-pāhuḍa, (10) Vijjāpāhuḍa, (11) Viṇṇāṇapāhuḍa¹, (12) Sadda-pāhuḍa, (13) Sarapāhuḍa and (14) Siddhapāhuḍa.

c8.195

¹ This is mentioned in the intro. (p. 6) to Nirvāṇakalikā.

c8.196

Out of these, Āyārapāhuḍa (Ācāraprābhṛta) is mentioned by Bhadrabāhusvāmin whereas Kappapāhuḍa (Kalpaprābhṛta) and Vijjāpāhuḍa (Vidyāprābhṛta) by Jinaprabha Sūri in his Vividha-tīrthakalpa on pp. 5 and 6 respectively. Kammapayaḍipāhuḍa (Karmaprakṛtiprābhṛta) is similarly mentioned by Malayagiri Sūri in his com. (p. 219)² on Kammapayaḍi (v. 474) and Joṇipāhuḍa (Yoniprābhṛta) by Kṣemakīrti Sūri in his com. (p. 401) on Kappa (I). Jinadāsa Gaṇi, too, has mentioned Joṇipāhuḍa in his Visehacuṇṇi where Nimittapāhuḍa (Nimittaprābhṛta) is referred to. Bhadreśvara Sūri in his Kahāvalī, has mentioned Joṇipāhuḍa and Nimittapāhuḍa as well as Vijjāpāhuḍa and Siddhapāhuḍa (Siddhaprābhṛta) while narrating the life of Pādalipta in the section known as “Pālittacarīta”. Saddapāhuḍa (Śabdaprābhṛta) is noted by Siddhasena Gaṇi in his ṭīkā (p. 50) on Tattvārtha (I, 5). The pertinent line is:-“प्राभृत इति शब्दप्राभृतं तच्च पूर्वैदस्तित यत इदं व्याकरणमायातं, ततः शब्दप्राभृतं को जानाति स प्राभृतज्ञो ब्रवीति द्रव्यमिति।” Sarapāhuḍa (Svaraprābhṛta) is mentioned by Abhayadeva Sūri in his com. (p. 395ᵇ) on Ṭhāṇa (VII, s. 553). Similarly Nāḍayavihipāhuḍa (Nāṭyavidhiprābhṛta) is referred to by Malayagiri Sūri in his com. (p. 52ᵇ) on Rāyapaseṇiya (s. 23). Dukkhamāpāhuḍa is mentioned by Devendra Sūri in his yantra viz. Dvisahasrayugapradhānasvarūpa where he attributes this work to Bhadrabāhusvāmin. See D. C. J. M. (No. 828 of 1895-1902). Païṭṭhāpāhuḍa is alluded to by Ratnaśekhara Sūri in his com. on Śrāddhavidhi. See (p. 95).

First 195 of 363 passages. Read on

Linked texts (89)