Medieval Jainism

SR No.: 011082
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Bhasker Anand Saletore
Publisher: Karnataka Publishing House
Total Pages: 448
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 27 MB

Page 253

238
MEDIÆVAL JAINISM ginal Mula sangha was the work of Ardhabali ; that the Drāvida sangha was a sub-division of the Nandi sangha which was most famous of the four sanghas, that the prosperity of the Drāvida sangha is to be attributed to the activities of the two disciples of Ardhabali--Bhūtabali and Puşpadanta ;' and that the establishment of the Drāvida sangha at Madura was the work of Vajranandi in the last quarter of the ninth or in the first quarter of the tenth century A.D.2
Two other names are associated with the spread of Jainism in the Tamil land-Kanakasena and Gunasena. Kanakasena was connected with Dharmapuri (Tagļūr in the Salem district). A stone inscription dated śaka 815 (A.D. 893) relates that a nobleman in the reign of Mahendrarājādhirāja Noļamba gave a grant to the basadi at Dharmapuri and to Kanakasena Bhattāraka. A Gunasena also figures in the
1. E. C. II, 67. p. 26 ; Pathak, J. Bom. R. A. S., XVIII, p. 232.
2. On Vakragriva, the predecessor of Vajranandi, read E. C, II, 67, p. 26; IV. Ng. 100, pp. 139-141, V. Bl. 17 p. 51 ; Ak. 1, p. 112; Ak. 141, p. 175 ; VI. Kd. 69, p. 13; M.A.R., for 1926, p. 51. A disciple of Vajranandi by name Mugulina Pārsvadeva is mentioned in a record the cyclic year of which cannot be determined. E.C., V. Hn. 128, p. 8. (translit.) These conclusions based upon epigraphic records invalidate the assertion made in the Digambara Darśana (J. Bom. R. A. S., XVII. p. 74) that Vajranandi founded the Dramila sangha at Madura in Vikrama year 526 (A.D. 470). This has been implicitly followed by Ramaswami, Studies, p. 52: P. T. Srinivasa Aivangar, History of the Tamils, p. 247 ; Ramachandra Dikshitar, Studies in Tamil Lit., pp. 21-22. Further we may note that the assertion made in the Digambara Darsana that Vajranandi was the disciple of Pūjyapāda is altogether unsupported by the many epigraphic records which we have examined in detail.
3. 304 of 1901; Rangacharya, Top. List, II, p. 1211. See also 61 & 63 of 1900 ; Rangacharya, ibid., II, 990, 1003.