Some Jaina Canonical Sutras c16.2

c16.2

The Paṇhā-Vāgarana Sūya¹ (Praśna-vyākarana sūtra) is counted as the tenth aṅga of the Śvetāmbara āgama. It is otherwise known as Praśna-vyākarana-daśā for the simple reason that it consists of ten lectures or chapters (ajjhayanas), the five of which are devoted to the topic of anhaa and the remaining five to that of samvara. Abhayadeva Sūri wrote an authoritative commentary on it. It has been edited along with the text. Winternitz points out that it is a purely dogmatic presentation, which does not correspond either to the title of the work or to the table of contents in the Thānamga 10 and in the Nandī. Schubring (Worte Mahāvīras, p. 13) says that a later work took the place of the old aṅga which is lost. The title of the sūtra, Praśna-vyākarana, implies at the first sight that the text is the catechism or book of questions and answers. But the text, as we now have it, is not of this nature. The contents of a Paṇhā-Vāgarana as given in the Sthānāṅga and Nandīsūtra presuppose a canonical work consisting of 108 praśnas, 108 apraśnas, 108 praśnapraśnas, vidyātisayas and discourses of saints with Nāgakumāras and other Bhavanapatis. The present text does not meet these requirements. On the other hand, it appears as a methodical and elaborate exposition of the two topics mentioned above. As such it may be judged as a learned dissertation on the subjects and as an important literary production of the scholastic age. Abhayadeva is compelled to explain the title of the present sūtra in a manner to suit its contents. He says, praśnānām vidyāviśesānām yāni vyākaranāni tesām pratipādanaparā daśā daśādhyāyana-pratibaddhāh granthapaddhataya iti Praśnavyākaranadaśāh. The Praśna-vyākaranadaśā is a treatise comprising ten lectures that establish the expositions of certain select topics. The methodical expositions are all ascribed to Sudharman the fifth gaṇadhara, who addressed them to his pupil Jambusvāmin. The two main topics dealt with in this treatise are anhaa and its anti-thesis samvara. The term anhaa is equated with Sanskrit āsnavah (āśravah)². Thus anhaa is taken to be the same as *āsrava* which goes to form an antithetical pair with *samvara*. The antithetical pair which occurs in the Pillar Edicts of Aśoka verbally corresponds with the *puṇya* and *pāpa* of Jainism. In these edicts *āsīnava* stands in contrast to *kayāna apāsīnave bahukayāne*¹ (Pillar Edict II). It would seem that the word *āsīnava* is employed there as a synonym of *pāpa* as opposed to *kalyāṇa* or *puṇya*. There is still a difference of opinion² as to whether the Asokan word *āsīnava* corresponds to the Ardhamāgadhī *aṇhaa* or to the Pāli and Sanskrit *ādīnava*. There is evidently no such Sanskrit word as *āsnava* used in the Brahmanical or Buddhist works. Here we have *ādīnava* in its place but the Asokan term *āsīnava* clearly presupposes a Sanskrit word like *āsnava* as suggested by the Jain scholiast. So far as the meaning of the two words *āsnava* and *ādīnava* is concerned, it is practically the same. Just as in Jain literature it has *āsrava* for its synonym, so in the *Amarakośa* the two synonyms suggested for *ādīnava* are *āsrava* and *kleśa*.³ It is important to note that *aṇhaa* is characterized in our text as *anādika* (*adivirahita*), 'beginningless', 'that of which the sinful action is the root cause', as explained by Abhayadeva. This suggests no doubt that our text is concerned not so much with the sins as 'with innate proneness to sin'.