Critical Study Of Paumacariyam

SR No.: 022643
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: K R Chandra
Publisher: Research Institute of Prakrit Jainology and Ahimsa
Publication Year: 1970
Total Pages: 672
Language: English, Sanskrit
Classification: Book_English & Book_Devnagari
File Size: 18 MB

Page 39

10
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
mentioning of Paumacariyaṁ such as by the author of Kuvalayamala. We shall critically examine the statement of the author about the date, the views of other scholars, external and internal evidences to find out the correct date of the work. Author's Statement :
The Prasasti appended to the Paumacariyan states that the work was composed 530 or according to another manuscript> 520 years after the emancipation of Lord Mahāvīra. These dates come to 4 A. D. or 6 B. C, and according to Jacobi's date of Vira-nirvāna, to 63 or 53 A. D. Prof. Leumanno regards 4 A. D. as incontestible date but the history of the advent of monastic lineage of Vimalasūri goes against it. Vimalasūri states that he belonged to the Năilavamsa and addresses his preceptor Vijaya as Nāilakulavassanandiyara. 4 The Nandisūtra Patļāvali (Su 38-39) refers to Bhūtidinna, the pupil of Arya Nagarjuna with the same epithet. Nagarjuna's time is fixed at about 356 V. S. It shows that the Năilakulavamsa was in existence during the last quarter of the 3rd century A. D. The Kalpasūtrasthavirāvali mentions that the Nailasākhā originated with a disciple of Vajrasena. Dr. Jacobi places Vajrasena at about 580-600 A. V. and states that Vimalasūri was, therefore, removed from the founder of the Nailasākha by some generations and he cannot have lived before the later part of the 7th century A. V. i. e. 2nd century A. D. In the colophon at the end of the Paumacariyaṁ, Vimalasūri is called a "Pūrvadhara (Puvvaharena) but the Nandisūtra, the Avacūrni of Oghaniryukti and the Anuyogadvārasūtra have no reference to any Vimalasūri as a Purvadhara. Different dates of composition of Paumacariyaṁ given in the manuscripts, the late origin of Năilasākhā and the absence of any reference to Vimalasûri as a Pūrvadhara create suspicion about the authenticity of the colophon and the statement about Vim alasūri's date given in the Prasasti. Therefore, we shall examine external and internal evidences to find out the probable date of Paumacariyan. External Evidences :
The Kuvalayamālā of Uddyotanasūri of 778 A. D. is the first work which? refers to Paumacariyam of Vimalasuri. It shows that the
1. See U pamitibhava prapancakatha Preface p. 10 2. See HIL Vol.II, p 477, f. n. 3. 3. See PCV's Colophon. 4. PCV, 118.117. 5. See Parisista parvan, Int. p. xix. 6. See Int. of Paumacariyam chs. 27-28 ed. by S. C. Upadhyaya 1934. 7. p. 3, b. 27; see also S1, p. 88.