The Doctrine of the Jainas, Described after the Old Sources c7.21

c7.21

§39. The gradual loss of the Puvvas, which must have happened according as an apology in general or in the shape taught by the Diṭṭhivāya was no longer necessary or desirable, has been copied by the Digambaras with regard to the Angas. They give the names of five patriarchs whom they say to have known 11 Angas, and of nine more who knew 10, 9, 8, 7 (?) and 1 Angas only, until eventually that too—the 1st—was lost. This report is based upon the Digambaras in very early times having become alienated from the collection of the Angas, from which it followed that they no longer acknowledged them as authoritative. Hence, for the Digambaras, the Angas of the Śvetāmbaras are younger productions, and when the latter give the number of words in them (Samav. 107 ff.; Nandi 209b ff.)¹, the former bring up other figures against them². To a certain degree it is justified to look upon the Angas as being of a younger age, since they have not come down to us in their original shape. This follows from comparing their present state with tradition and subjecting it to a critical view. As the saying goes, new wine has been poured into old bags. The method was to form a unit out of parts and fragments, to supply lost portions and even works, and, in many cases, to arrange the text suitably. It is probable that all this was the result of two councils,⁴ the one taking place at Mathurā, the other at Valabhī (Kathiawar), and both presided by Skandila and Nāgārjuna respectively. In the course of time the former must have gained the upper hand, for, when in one more Valabhī council Devarddhi undertook to lay down the wording of the text definitely, he gave the Nāgārjunīya pāṭhas not the first but the second place, even though he stood in the *paramparā* of their originator (s. b.), Devarddhi is reported to have got copies of the holy works multiplied with a view to provide with them as many communities as possible. Memorial verses serve to facilitate the survey of the contents for the monk students. This, of course, had to be preceded by collecting the works within reach.¹ Here we have the origin of the Canon. This event took place, according to Jiṇac. § 148, in 980 or 993 A.V.