History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c93.131

v7.c93.131

Prabhākara differed from Kumārila on numerous points ¹⁹⁴³ The divergence starts from the very first sūtra of the P. M S (as the note below will show ¹⁹⁴⁴). Prabhākara is called guru' by Śālikanātha in many places in the Prakaraṇapañcikā (*vide* first Intro verse and pp. 17, 32 &c.) There is a very great divergence of views about the relative chronological position of Kumārila and Prabhākara Vide 'the Prābhākara School' (1911) by M. M. Ganganath Jha, A B Keith's '*Karmamīmāṁsā*' (1921) pp 9-11, Pro. of 2nd All India O. Conf pp. 408-412 and Pro. of 3rd All I. O. Conference pp. 474-481 (both by Prof Kuppuswami Sastri), J. O. R. Madras, vol I pp 131-144 and 203-210. The fundamental question is whether Śālikanātha was a direct pupil of Prabhākara or only a later follower. From several considerations the present writer holds that Śālikanātha was a direct pupil of Prabhākara Śālikanātha not only speaks of Prabhākaraguru, but in one place states 'our teacher does not tolerate this'.¹⁹⁴⁵ Śālikanātha in his Prakaraṇapañcikā quotes several verses of the Ślokavārtika (e. g. on p. 5 he quotes and criticizes verse 11 of Ślokavārtika quoted in n 1916 above, on p. 122 quotes Ślokavārtika v. 28 of abhāva-pariccheda and on p. 114 verse 21 of arthāpatti-pariccheda). Maṇḍanamiśra wrote several works on PM viz. Vidhi-viveka (published at Benares with Nyāyakanikā of Vācaspati), Bhāvanāviveka (with com of Umbeka, edited in S. B series), Vibhramaviveka and Mīmāṁsānukramaṇī (Chow. S. S.). The Śāstradīpikā (on PMS II. 1. 1) cites Maṇḍana's explanation of Kumārila's verse¹⁹⁴⁶. Therefore, Maṇḍana is later than Kumārila or was a younger contemporary of Kumārila and flourished about 690 to 710 A. D. Śālikanātha quotes Vidhiviveka of Maṇḍana (pp. 243, 302) in Prakaraṇapañcikā p 178 and Brahmasiddhi in Ṛjuvimalā (p 30). Moreover, Śāntarakṣita in his Tattvasaṅgraha (GOS) frequently criticizes the kārikās of Kumārila (without naming him) and his pupil Kamalaśīla names Kumārila many times. Śāntarakṣita does not name or quote Prabhākara. He flourished between 705–762 A. D. (vide Foreword to Tattvasaṅgraha p XVI, GOS). Therefore, Kumārila must be placed about 650-700 A. D. As Śālikanātha quotes the Ślokavārtika and Maṇḍana's works he would have to be placed between 750–800 A. D. If Śālikanātha was a direct pupil of Prabhākara it follows that the latter (who appears to be unknown to Śāntarakṣita, should have been a contemporary (i. e. should be held to have flourished nearly between 700-760 A D. or a little later) and was later than Kumārila. There is a tradition that Prabhākara was a pupil of Kumārila. Traditions (such as of the nine gems at the court of Vikramāditya) often arise without much evidence to support them; they should not, however, be summarily rejected but should be tested by other available evidence.